AdamCrock
Polish Pirate
humans are obsoleted 
One should only focus on non-organic sentience xD hehe 
One should only focus on non-organic sentience xD hehe 
Civ 4 Rants Thread
- Thread starter Jatta Pake
- Start date
noto2
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,715
Sure, it would take more resources to give the leaders a different theme for each era, but I really think that is essential to a game of civ. The entire game is about leading a civilization from 4000 BC to modern times. Your farms and mines and architecture changes appearance through the ages, so too should the leaderheads. When I meet Lincoln in 3600 BCE he should be wearing animal furs, and when I meet Ghengis in 1980 CE he'd better have some swag - you know, a pimp suit and sunglasses, is that too much to ask?
Yes.
Its already been pointed out the cost of doing so, would you rather have the departments focus MORE resources on graphics/animations, and in the process fail to test/balance stuff to the extent that we're left with a Civ 5 vanilla level?
Its already been pointed out the cost of doing so, would you rather have the departments focus MORE resources on graphics/animations, and in the process fail to test/balance stuff to the extent that we're left with a Civ 5 vanilla level?
Spoiler :
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
noto2
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,715
There's no excuse. My friend could design era based leaderheads for every leader in Civ 4 in about a week, and she works for $75/hour, so we're talking a few thousand dollars to get it done. It has nothing to do with cost, it's just that they didn't think of it, they don't care. The real problem is that it was in the previous game - Civ 3. Therefore Civ 3 has features that Civ 4 lacks. That's not good.
RadonDioxide
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2013
- Messages
- 2
They could just get people who resemble the various leaders, dress them up and film them. Much less work required with coding, and vastly superior graphics quality - it'll look like an actual person rather than a computer generated image.
Mec AntiKythera
King
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2010
- Messages
- 980
Film that.
mynystry
jaguar warrior from hell
Oh, poor Jatta, you're the only one ranting in the Civ4 Rant Thread... Nothing like the Civ5 Rant Thread and its 120 pages of RANTING!!
Actually I would like to rant a little about civ4. Don't get me wrong, it's a great game but some things just annoy the hell out of me. The implementation of vassals and colonies are clear failures. Vassals go around and capture cities for themselves. Yeah right. We all know how Moldavia, when a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, gained Moldavian colonies here and there all over the balkans, northern africa and the middle east. The very least they could do is make any territorial gains made by vassals part of their masters empire to gift, liberate or keep.
Small icelands half a world away ofcourse cannot gain independence but two cities on the opposite ends of a huge continent naturally belong to the same colony. And if you have vassals at the same continent as colonies you cannot gift back your vassal the territory that is rightfully theirs to begin with. Also these colonies are forever grateful slaves of their former masters. We here ofcourse have the real-world example of the United States with everything from NY to LA belonging to a country forever in grateful servitude of their british overlords.
Finally I want to complain about the graphics. It's nice with 3D-graphics but the focus on it is on the expense of game itself. It's because of 3D-graphics that mods with alot of content takes forever to load and lag on anything but a supercomputer stolen from a lab somewhere in russia. What does it add to gameplay to have some cartoonish upper body do some weird gestures? Who in their right mind have battle scenes and unit movement turned on in the late game when it would mean that a single turn could take 2 hours? Which is more important: that a worker can be viewed making movements in 3D as if it's working, or that you can automate a worker without having it doing ******** things like replacing a goldmine with a cottage? I could go on all day with examples of firaxis appearantly prioritizing eye-candy and ear-candy over more important aspects of gameplay such as AI behavior, automation, balance, diplomacy e.t.c.
Small icelands half a world away ofcourse cannot gain independence but two cities on the opposite ends of a huge continent naturally belong to the same colony. And if you have vassals at the same continent as colonies you cannot gift back your vassal the territory that is rightfully theirs to begin with. Also these colonies are forever grateful slaves of their former masters. We here ofcourse have the real-world example of the United States with everything from NY to LA belonging to a country forever in grateful servitude of their british overlords.
Finally I want to complain about the graphics. It's nice with 3D-graphics but the focus on it is on the expense of game itself. It's because of 3D-graphics that mods with alot of content takes forever to load and lag on anything but a supercomputer stolen from a lab somewhere in russia. What does it add to gameplay to have some cartoonish upper body do some weird gestures? Who in their right mind have battle scenes and unit movement turned on in the late game when it would mean that a single turn could take 2 hours? Which is more important: that a worker can be viewed making movements in 3D as if it's working, or that you can automate a worker without having it doing ******** things like replacing a goldmine with a cottage? I could go on all day with examples of firaxis appearantly prioritizing eye-candy and ear-candy over more important aspects of gameplay such as AI behavior, automation, balance, diplomacy e.t.c.
I think that's more that overseas cities can't rebel (which would give an additional incentive to vassalise and free them first), and that kind of thing in general is more in the scope of LoR. The USA wasn't peacefully created.
Odin2006
Apolytonian
Bad graphics is relative, the game is 6 years old we old timers remember posting about how awesome Civ4's graphics were.
His argument against stacking units is hilarious. If you can't imagine a easy and logical way to fit 400 tanks in 50 square miles of land, then something is wrong with your brain. They don't have to be physically stacked on top of each other.
If they not stand on top of each other, whats the point of stacking then????!??
I mean, I can see a clear advantage of stacking on top of each other :
1) Shoot longer. with gravity and all, getting higher up will lead to longer cannonfire.
2) Intimidation factor. You put 400 tanks next to eachother, or even in a line. not very scary. But if u put 400 tanks on top of each other.. damn thats a scary sight. also just the fear of the "tower" tilting and hitting you on top of the head with a M1A1 Abrams. Im mean, they weigh something like 61.3 tons or around there.
3) Space elevator. No longer needed. 400 tons on top of each other will most likely reach all the way to the moon. 4000 and it will reach Alpha Centauri for sure.
4) Practicallity (is that even a word?) A whole lot easier to find parking spot for such a tanktower. Besides it could be quite difficult to find space for putting them on a 50 square mile block. I mean, have you seen the size of the mines, windmills, workshops etc. not much space left.
So I DEMAND that all tanks and the like should be visibly stacked on top of each other in future versions of Civ!!! Otherwise it wouldnt make any sense at all!!!
ston
Warlord
There are only three regular polygons which can tessellate the Euclidian plane and the square is one of them. Further, computers really do not like dealing with the number 3, which the other two polygons rely upon (e.g. it is not possible to draw pixel-perfect hexagons). It is also somewhat more difficult to optimise a game engine to deal with hexagon tiles than square ones; neither Civ IV or V are particularly well optimised, but I know which one takes longer to process the AI turns. Also, the last time I checked, chess was a turn-based strategy game...guess what Civ IV is?
That argument might make some kind of sense if Civ IV's squares weren't drawn at a slightly skew angle with perspective, so aren't pixel-perfect either. Might.
... and it's also perfectly clear that has absolutely nothing to do with the hex-based map.
Agreed with damerell. Hexes vs. squares is irrelevant for turn times. The two biggest factors for the difference between civ4 and civ5 turn times are: 1UPT and code optimisation.
Similar threads
- Locked
