Civ5 discussion

[Philips beard]

I hope they don't take out pollution, corruption/waste, rioting, and maintience. Just put those in as an on/off option or slider so you can control how bad it actually it is.

Yeah, let us keep pollution, corruption and waste, these are great balancers of the game. Pollution is a great problem for early industrialized civs, and the corruption speaks for its self.

Just because they give negative effects on your empire, we must not just take 'em out of the game. This is serious issues every country is dealing with in the real world, and I cant even think of a CIV-game without these effects included....

 

[CiverDan]

I assume this thread is tongue and cheek, given that Civ4 is still in development. As much as I like new civ games, sometimes u can get too much of a good thing...

 

[Philips beard]

I assume this thread is tongue and cheek, given that Civ4 is still in development. As much as I like new civ games, sometimes u can get too much of a good thing...

Never.....!

 

[bluebox]

as far as the summary on the main page goes, it seems they are trying to produce a game that has no negative sides. high challenge but no rage about things that don't go your way, control about everything if you want to, but no micro managing needed, random fights that are completely predictable, new features about which noone will find anything to complain about and so on and so forth ....... the only negative thing you will say about civ4 (or civ5) is that it has no negative sides.

 

[one_man_assault]

How bout CIV 5 being compatable with a holographic monitor?

 

[Commander Bello]

How bout CIV 5 being compatable with a holographic monitor?

That is already in their planning... but you will need a nano-computer for it

 

[dh_epic]

I do realize you're joking, but in a presentation where they even SUGGEST "jumping genres", and mention the dangers of growing cynicism in the fanbase and the dangers of releasing the same game with more units ...

I think Civ 4 might be a lot more different than people expect, but not in any way that we've really thought of.

I think the biggest problems with most peoples' suggestions is that they go against their mantra of "simplify, simplify, simplify".

 

[Commander Bello]

[...] but in a presentation where they even SUGGEST "jumping genres", and mention the dangers of growing cynicism in the fanbase and the dangers of releasing the same game with more units ...
[...]

I guess, the mentioning of the "jumping genres" was meant as a indication that a good game concept will survive any technological advances. But a bad concept can't be saved even with a super-computer in the background...

 

[one_man_assault]

yea...but come now Civ 5 wont be out for another half decade whos going to remember let alone implement what we might say....NO ONE lets concentrate on CIV4 which is gonna come out in 05 the latest...

 

[warpstorm]

I will. And if I liked it, I'll remind them of it.

 

[Masquerouge]

I think its also dangerous to give in every time players complain something is too 'unfun' because a lot of times they say its unfun just because it makes the game more difficult and challenging; if they listened to every complaint like this, it would be impossible to lose a game because losing is 'unfun',ie dont have the computer start aggression towards you because its 'unfun'.
As for corruption there has to be something like it so it makes it difficult to maintain empires, but it should be easier to manage; my suggestion was to make corruption controlled by culture, so if you have a city with high culture it reduces corruption in surrounding cities; plus corruption should be tied to unhappiness and revolts more directly

I entirely agree. Corruption, Pollution and Waste are not here to be fun ; they're here to balance some excessive behaviours, mainly having too large an empire and producing too much.

If you could spread as much as you'd like and produce like there's no tomorrow, what fun would it be to play a game of Civ ?

Sure, it's tedious to remove pollution and it's annoying to have size 12 cities producing 1 shield per turn, but hey, it reminds you that everything has a price, and that you must be careful when you expand !

Seriously, the so-called "not fun" aspects of the game are in fact necessary because it's the most fun to overcome them ! Just look at the numbers of threads on "Corruption", "Pollution" and "Waste", and the related topics, strategy articles, discussions... If it was just not fun, there would be no debate

 

[Philips beard]

I entirely agree. Corruption, Pollution and Waste are not here to be fun ; they're here to balance some excessive behaviours, mainly having too large an empire and producing too much....

....Seriously, the so-called "not fun" aspects of the game are in fact necessary because it's the most fun to overcome them ! Just look at the numbers of threads on "Corruption", "Pollution" and "Waste", and the related topics, strategy articles, discussions... If it was just not fun, there would be no debate

I totally agree! These people complaining usually don't come up with good ways to balance the game themselves. They should shut up, or start being constructive...

 

[Chieftess]

Who knows... maybe Civ4 will be a "shell", whereas all the programming will go into the scripting engine (most provided by Soren Johnson) like the corruption engine, AI, etc.

 

[thestonesfan]

I entirely agree. Corruption, Pollution and Waste are not here to be fun ; they're here to balance some excessive behaviours, mainly having too large an empire and producing too much.

But it turns out to be an annoyance, not a balance. The civ with the most territory is almost always the most powerful.

That said, I think corruption should certainly be part of the game. But I think it should work with tax revenue, not shields.

If you could spread as much as you'd like and produce like there's no tomorrow, what fun would it be to play a game of Civ ?

Keep in mind, everyone else can to. It wouldn't necessarily make the game any easier.

Sure, it's tedious to remove pollution and it's annoying to have size 12 cities producing 1 shield per turn, but hey, it reminds you that everything has a price, and that you must be careful when you expand !

Nonetheless, you STILL expand. It's still better than the alternative, which is not expanding. I dislike the current corruption model because it takes the fun away from establishing far-off colonies, which you need to be able to do to keep the game flowing.

Seriously, the so-called "not fun" aspects of the game are in fact necessary because it's the most fun to overcome them ! Just look at the numbers of threads on "Corruption", "Pollution" and "Waste", and the related topics, strategy articles, discussions... If it was just not fun, there would be no debate

Oh, there will always be debate. It's CFC.

 

[Rusty Nail]

Imagine Rise of Nations as a turn-based game with simultaneous movements between turns as now but with a more civ-like structure. Actually RoN is very close to doing this with the current engine, if they only introduced a minor change, namely a user-based fixed time interval between automatic pauses. I think this could be a real innovation that could unite the two genres and add a new dimension to both.

 

[Blackbird_SR-71]

hi everyone and i think you may be underestimating Civ4.

its still not out and if you noticed they have said some good ideas like civics and religion which could be replacements for corruption, and pollution as ballancers, who knows

any ways i heard somewhere that Firaxis and Microsoft are going to work together to combine aspects of Microsofts game Age of Mythology or something like that and Civilization 3 to make Civ4. Both games are alike in many factors so its not surprising that they may or are working together to create Civ4. I'm not sure if the game is called Age of Mythology but the game starts with Age of xxxxx. but both games are alike each other

just a note to everyone and also great ideas everyone keep coming up with these and hopefully some wil be implented in Civ4.

 

[warpstorm]

Firaxis is not working with Microsoft. Soren is a fan of Age of Mythology.

 

[MummyMan]

I dunno about removing the "unfun" parts of the game. It seems that if the ones listed are taken away the game would be too easy and lose a lot of its depth as game, making it just about dominating the world and not mastering it in all aspects.

 

[Ant509y]

Ahh, but they took away unfun parts of the game last time as well, Mummyman. IT's mentioned in Soren's presentation. And since I've played Civ 2 as well, I know what he means. OF course they're not going to literally take away the things like corruption, they're going to change them! And to Phillips: Look at the Again, Provinces thread. The province system could deal with corruption, easily. It's part of the idea, in fact. There's constructive for ya!

 

[dh_epic]

Ahh, but they took away unfun parts of the game last time as well, Mummyman. IT's mentioned in Soren's presentation. And since I've played Civ 2 as well, I know what he means. OF course they're not going to literally take away the things like corruption, they're going to change them! And to Phillips: Look at the Again, Provinces thread. The province system could deal with corruption, easily. It's part of the idea, in fact. There's constructive for ya!

Yeah, you nailed it, in my mind. I think we have to expect a certain amount of change for the next game. But we shouldn't be so rash as to think they'd do anything to make the game worse, or unbalance the game. Any device in the game to balance it that's also unfun should (hopefully) be replaced by something equally effective.

I myself am a big fan of provinces (and breakaways) as a more interesting alternative to corruption. Rather than a nuisance, it gives you the feeling as though you're living out history.