Civ 5 announced!

[Slade19]

<deleted>
Third:

While I understand where you are all coming from with the 2D thing... you have to understand that 3D development opens up so many doors that would otherwise be closed. This relates not only to sales and thus franchise sustainability, but content as well. We have absolutely no idea what the content updates will be for the next classic Civ style game. But I guarantee you that when it does come out, there will be core foundational aspects of the game that would have been impossible to implement or severely limited without a 3D engine.

Could Civ IV have been done without all the particles and 3D graphics? Probably... but it would have lost a lot of flavor, and I'm sure the changes in the next installment will be just as sweeping as the change from C3 to C4. Not enough people will buy C5 if it's just a 2D version of C4 with bug fixes that make late-game turns take less time to play out.

 

[MetHimPikeHoses]

Yep, 2D sucks. I demand that Sid remake civ3 in 3D. Civ2 can be in 2D since it's 2. But 3 needs to be in 3D. +1 D for every expansion.

I agree. Civ4 should be in 4D.

If you think Civ should be in 2D, you should go back to your cave with your Pentium 90. But... there must be a way to implement 3D without the huge slowdowns, tho.

Long live Civ4 , and may the expansion come soon. Or another patch. Something...

 

[madviking]

Yep, 2D sucks. I demand that Sid remake civ3 in 3D. Civ2 can be in 2D since it's 2. But 3 needs to be in 3D. +1 D for every expansion.

I sure everybody that still plays Civ1 would like playing with a line.
====
I agree going to 2d is better, 3d only makes it harder to see. The Civ series is a board game, not a sphere.

 

[Smidlee]

I sure everybody that still plays Civ1 would like playing with a line.
====
I agree going to 2d is better, 3d only makes it harder to see. The Civ series is a board game, not a sphere.

I usually play board games with both eyes open so to give me a 3-D prospective.

I doubt many gamers will be happy paying full price for a PS3 or Xbox 360 game that looks as if it could run on PS1. The same with most serious PC gamers don't like paying top dollar for games that looks it could run on a 10 year old computer.

 

[T.A JONES]

Yep, 2D sucks. I demand that Sid remake civ3 in 3D. Civ2 can be in 2D since it's 2. But 3 needs to be in 3D. +1 D for every expansion.

Well truly that is a good comprimise so I agree. Give us the full source code and bring on the 3d. CAll it CIv5 it will be vast improvment over the sequal and the CIv4 fans and Civ3 haters will have to love it.

 

[druidravi]

Hmm as I posted earlier it could have an option of playing in 2d or 3d. We can be given an entry in .ini file which changes whether civ starts in 2d or 3d.

 

[Padma]

Moderator Action: French-bashing (and related) spam cleaned up. Carry on....
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Mano3]

I doubt they'll go back to 2D. I think it's too soon for a new game and that an expansion is on the way.

Maybe it will be aimed for the peaceful builders?

 

[Gumbolt]

I should think a final expansion pack. To make a new civ 5 would need a lot more ideas. Frankly i would rather have them fix the memory leaking issue on civ 4 first. cant see it happening soon (

I do feel civ 4 is very limited in some terms of game play. EG you destroy 2-3 civs on your island and wait for the conquest of another continent. The game can become static or repetitive when you play with a strategy you know works. Then again not played online yet.

Still Its a step forward from the civ 3 days when a continent would require a stack of 100+ units to survive a few turns to secure a base against a developed civ once you are at war.

I still feel civ 4 has far more to offer if tweaked and civ 5 so early might be a mistake. The wording used by take 2 / firaxis made it far from clear.

 

[The Navy Seal]

If they released civ5 say this year it would be very uncomplete so I think its not coming for quite a while.

 

[Bushface]

Ah, Civ5 ! 317 technologies, some of which you don't need unless you're going for a Financial or Religious victory or whatever. Unit stacks which show as stacks, not just the top unit. Unit banners which don't merge invisibly into the terrain background. Irrigated deserts. Defenders who don't rush out of their cities when attacked. Defences which don't need exactly the same bombardment to destroy 20&#37; as 125%. 32 civilizations, each with a wide choice of leader, with some traits predetermined, some random, and some acquired as the game progresses. Lots more different resources, some of which can be spread during play. Aircraft which can actually kill the enemy. Artillery which can keep up with tanks, and attack at a distance. Forts with a zone of control. Unit strengths increasing gradually with experience, not in steps. Realistic combat animation. Trading food and production between cities.
And of course a 4-core 10GHz processor with 4GB RAM and a 2GB video card.

 

[sabo]

And yes, go back to 2D for God's sake!

And here I thought it was only me who disliked 3d, Now I don't feel so bad knowing most others don't like it either

 

[Civinator]

And here I thought it was only me who disliked 3d, Now I don't feel so bad knowing most others don't like it either

I don&#180;t like that 3d either. And it costs a lot of processor power and ram and gives no adequate output in gameplay (at least not on my pc)...

What i would like in the next version of Civ is, that it operates with two graphic engines: The 3d engine for computer magazines and kiddies and the 2d graphic engine of Civ 3 (as there thousands of well made units still exist) for people who a more interested in better game performance and deeper gameplay.

 

[grumbler]

I don´t like that 3d either. And it costs a lot of processor power and ram and gives no adequate output in gameplay (at least not on my pc)...

What i would like in the next version of Civ is, that it operates with two graphic engines: The 3d engine for computer magazines and kiddies and the 2d graphic engine of Civ 3 (as there thousands of well made units still exist) for people who a more interested in better game performance and deeper gameplay.

2D = deeper gameplay?

 

[gamedude107]

i can play earth map (huge with max CIVs) on my PC no problem, i got this PC for £600 and i already have half taht money!

AND IM ONLY 13!!!! (im RICH!!!!!! )




(£300 whole pounds! in £20's!)

anyway 3D is better than rubbish 2d most people have been saying it adds nothing, well it adds Realism!

and other things...

 

[Civinator]

2D = deeper gameplay?

Yes, you can invest the cpu-power that you don&#180;t need any longer for these not necessairy (and in my eyes mostly ugly) 3d graphics for doing a lot of other things with the game (more in-deep combat or better worldmaps par example).

Btw:: You should do something with these eyes. May be, this is a symptom of playing to much in 3d

 

[Bongo-Bongo]

anyway 3D is better than rubbish 2d most people have been saying it adds nothing, well it adds Realism!

3D doesn't always add realism. Sure, for games such as Rome: Total War, PES, Call Of Duty etc. I'd be dissapointed if the next installments of these series used 2D graphics.

But what realism has 3D graphics added to Civ? None what so ever. I understand the reasons for progressing to 3D, and that it's not really feasible to go back to 2D graphics. If 3D added something to the gameplay of Civ, I'd have no problem, but as, if anything, it detracts from the gameplay for many, having 3D graphics is just not needed at the moment in the Civ series.

 

[GVBN]

Who needs graphics anyway. I want a text-based Civ5!

 

[the Intricacy]

you know... about this 2D/3D thing. I wonder how difficult it would be to produce a "scalable" 2D AND 3D game?

Let's assume for a sec that the 3D models will be improved and more detailed for Civ V. Is it really that big a expenditure of dev time to take screenshots of the model, place them as sprites, and make it an option of gameplay? I dunno about the rest of you, but I think Civ IV made a big mistake on limiting it's potential customers with it's steep requirements. Probably. Since in the end of the day, the 3D was appreciated in my eyes, but it was mostly just eye candy, except for the zooming part, which i miss sorely whenever I play a 2D civ. Anyway, I suppose this thought could also apply to a potential DS or PSP (or cellphone) port.

Also given this article:
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3157879

I wonder how a MMO version of Civ could work? Would it?

 

[toft]

If I had to choose between 3D vs Stability and speed - Then stability and speed would be my choice without any hesitation for a second.

I have no interest in playing civ4, when it doesnt support or run maps of certain sizes including some mods. I got a pc that rocks every other game than this one - the programming must be bad... very bad. It shouldnt be this consuming - after all, its just an advanced "boardgame".

I think the 3D is very nice and all, but it should, in no way, interfere with the gameplay performance.