Lord_Sidious
No Fun At All
I agree with you
Do you guys want civ 4 to be more realistic?
- Thread starter Veteranewbie
- Start date
Yes I want it to be more realistic.
But - we have a marketing problem here. If it is to be more realistic and therefore (maybe!!) to difficult to play, how do we get people to buy it?
OK - we could have an option in a preferences menu - that allows more complicated game play options. That would probably be best.
But we have to remember that the producers of a new upgraded game, want to sell it to new players also, not just existing players to upgrade to.
That is the problem. -
As far as CIV4 is concerned - I may be wrong here, but I think they are starting from a clean sheet.
CIV3 - was modelled on an old game engine - "Gettisburg" - I think. (I again, may be wrong but it was a game produced in the same time frame.)
So what ever occurs - CIV4 - should rock:
But - we have a marketing problem here. If it is to be more realistic and therefore (maybe!!) to difficult to play, how do we get people to buy it?
OK - we could have an option in a preferences menu - that allows more complicated game play options. That would probably be best.
But we have to remember that the producers of a new upgraded game, want to sell it to new players also, not just existing players to upgrade to.
That is the problem. -
As far as CIV4 is concerned - I may be wrong here, but I think they are starting from a clean sheet.
CIV3 - was modelled on an old game engine - "Gettisburg" - I think. (I again, may be wrong but it was a game produced in the same time frame.)
So what ever occurs - CIV4 - should rock:
civ4 will be a stand alone game- not a mere expansion to civ3 
as such, just about anything can be implemented as a part of the full game, and all of it bundled as a final, stand alone product- perfectlly availible, and attractive to new playersd, as well as vet sof previous civ games
as such, just about anything can be implemented as a part of the full game, and all of it bundled as a final, stand alone product- perfectlly availible, and attractive to new playersd, as well as vet sof previous civ games Originally posted by Xen
civ4 will be a stand alone game- not a mere expansion to civ3
I agree with you on this.
It should be a new game that does not need the older versions. But it should also have greatly improved graphics (3D probably) and game play options. For instance the old city view option should be visible on the game map.
Also maybe a unit should be able to be selected to give a visual view of the landscape.
If CIV4 is to be released in say 4 years time, they can program it to work on systems that are not yet designed, or are currently considered top of the range. Intel etc. are always improving CPU- Motherboard designs. So 4 years from now current systems will be thought of as being obsolete.
Trade-peror
UET Economist
Hmm... so should Civ 4 should be a fundamentally different game, but still be recognizable as the next generation of Civ?
While I agree, I can see how that would become quite a balancing act for the developers!
Therefore, should a choice need to be made, which objective should have a greater priority?
While I agree, I can see how that would become quite a balancing act for the developers!
Therefore, should a choice need to be made, which objective should have a greater priority?
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
No, 3D graphics are a bad idea. The further you move from simple graphics, the more you lose the customability, and that was one of the greatest points explaining why Civ II lasted. Civ III already stepped far enough there, but to go full 3-D would be a terrible msitake going along these lines.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
I agree with the statement that 3D-graphics should be avoided.
I also disagree with the asking for making Civ4 something like a SimCiv+SilentService+TankCommander+InfantryUnitEgoShooter or whatever. To put to many different concepts in one game never paid off in the history of computer games. It didn't pay off in the history of other games, either.
And about the statement that, when Civ4 will be released, computers will be far more developed than they are today, I agree to this.
Nevertheless, a "good" game should be provided to support those most modern top of the list computers, but it should not require them!
As far as I see it, a Civ4 should even run on a 666MHz Pentium II system. Of course, it would run only slowly, ok, that would be the price to be paid.
BUT, it should run on a 12.3GHz PV with 2.34Ghz frontside bus (and so on...) system as well. It should run even better on such a system. It should provide support for new 64bit systems (for instance, by avoiding the current hardcoded limits as city and unit limits).
AND, it should still allow to mod it with the least effort possible. You shouldn't require any 1000bucks 3D-graphics programs to add the art for a modded unit to it.
It should even be easier to add things to it.
Obvioiusly, at the moment the tables used for civilisations, improvements, units, whatever are restricted in space. That should be avoided in the next version.
Why not allowing a ressources table which would be able to keep 1024 (at least) different ressources? This in no way would mean that all those 1024 ressources are in the original game. But it would allow for almost unlimited modding.
I also disagree with the asking for making Civ4 something like a SimCiv+SilentService+TankCommander+InfantryUnitEgoShooter or whatever. To put to many different concepts in one game never paid off in the history of computer games. It didn't pay off in the history of other games, either.
And about the statement that, when Civ4 will be released, computers will be far more developed than they are today, I agree to this.
Nevertheless, a "good" game should be provided to support those most modern top of the list computers, but it should not require them!
As far as I see it, a Civ4 should even run on a 666MHz Pentium II system. Of course, it would run only slowly, ok, that would be the price to be paid.
BUT, it should run on a 12.3GHz PV with 2.34Ghz frontside bus (and so on...) system as well. It should run even better on such a system. It should provide support for new 64bit systems (for instance, by avoiding the current hardcoded limits as city and unit limits).
AND, it should still allow to mod it with the least effort possible. You shouldn't require any 1000bucks 3D-graphics programs to add the art for a modded unit to it.
It should even be easier to add things to it.
Obvioiusly, at the moment the tables used for civilisations, improvements, units, whatever are restricted in space. That should be avoided in the next version.
Why not allowing a ressources table which would be able to keep 1024 (at least) different ressources? This in no way would mean that all those 1024 ressources are in the original game. But it would allow for almost unlimited modding.
I have always been a Civ3 critic but I give Firaxis credit for keeping tile management in the game. People say micro-management is bad. This is not true if the little things really matter in the scope of gameplay, which they should. Moo3 is an example of what happens when you take control out of the hands of the players. Awful.
IMO, anything that could be done on a standard 3D graphics maker, liek the ones employed by our own communities unitmakers is good as far as graphic updateing goes
there are possibilities for [v]VERY[/b] detailed units using the same materials as what goes into the standard civ3 units- inb fact, it has taken a great effort ot tone down the quaity of many unit makers units to fit the civ3 standard
DaviddesJ
Deity
I think you can give players stuff to do in the early game when they have one or two cities, without penalizing them so heavily for not doing it when they have 10 or 20 cities. For example, I agree that tile management is a worthwhile part of the game, but there could be a much better interface for allocating tiles between cities when the city radii overlap. And there's no reason to have such unintuitive rules for tile allocation (e.g., the rule that when your population increases, you get shield production the new tile on that same turn, which leads to bizarre tile micromanagement schemes). And allowing carryover production would greatly reduce the need for micromanagement: there's no logical or simulation reason for 20-shield cities to be so much better at building 40-shield units than 19-shield units are, or for players to have to go around and short-rush every other turn in the latter.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
I don't think fully-fledged 3D graphics would be a very good idea, but I do very much want to see a more detailed approach to terrain. Instead of essentially representing hills with "hill icons" like they do now I would like to see beautiful realistic landscapes (while still retaining the current functionality i.e. still have a "hill tile", but make it meld seamlessly into the surounding terrain).
Similarly, instead of a "city icon", I'd love to see semi-realistic cities that don't all look identical. They should develop aesthetically throughout the game based on your city management with a random element thrown in, so that you can really be proud at your creation.
Units couldn't hurt with a touch-up, but the modding community absolutely must not be frozen out due to excessively detailed unit graphics.
Realism doesn't have to interfere with gameplay simplicity, and where it does it should be considered superfluous, but there are many enhancements that could be made to deepen the positive aspects of realism in Civ without turning it into a boring hyper-detailed simulation.
Similarly, instead of a "city icon", I'd love to see semi-realistic cities that don't all look identical. They should develop aesthetically throughout the game based on your city management with a random element thrown in, so that you can really be proud at your creation.
Units couldn't hurt with a touch-up, but the modding community absolutely must not be frozen out due to excessively detailed unit graphics.
Realism doesn't have to interfere with gameplay simplicity, and where it does it should be considered superfluous, but there are many enhancements that could be made to deepen the positive aspects of realism in Civ without turning it into a boring hyper-detailed simulation.
Veteranewbie
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 402
Another thing I want - I want they have different graphics for different cultural units i.e. Asian spearman will be different to American spearman. And then Middle East Medieval Infantry is different to an European Medieval Infantry.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
1)Because that's what mostly everyone is used to for Civ.
2)Because what works for wargame doesn't necessarily work for Civ.
3)Becasuse it'S a HUGE lot easier to program desktop shortcut for a system that allow you to move in EIGHT separate direction (just use the numeric keypad) than for a system that allow you to move in SIX (hexes). Essentialy you'd be forced to move your units with the mouse if Civ used an hexes system. And I know many people who'd rather use keyboards arrows.
4)Because it lets you move in more directions.
5)Becasuse these directions happen to correspond to the compass points, which an hexes system wouldn't allow.
2)Because what works for wargame doesn't necessarily work for Civ.
3)Becasuse it'S a HUGE lot easier to program desktop shortcut for a system that allow you to move in EIGHT separate direction (just use the numeric keypad) than for a system that allow you to move in SIX (hexes). Essentialy you'd be forced to move your units with the mouse if Civ used an hexes system. And I know many people who'd rather use keyboards arrows.
4)Because it lets you move in more directions.
5)Becasuse these directions happen to correspond to the compass points, which an hexes system wouldn't allow.
Lord_Sidious
No Fun At All
Of course
Lord_Sidious
No Fun At All
1)Because that's what mostly everyone is used to for Civ.
2)Because what works for wargame doesn't necessarily work for Civ.
3)Becasuse it'S a HUGE lot easier to program desktop shortcut for a system that allow you
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
There are pros and cons for both.
Although I agree with the fact that squares allow for intuitive use of the numeric keyboard, hexes would make distance calculation easier.
Otoh, whatever they will use for Civ4, it seems to have little impact on the game.
In the case of multiple covered tiles I would like if the tile would be automatically made available, if I would choose to put a worker on it while being in city view for city A. The corresponding worker of city B should then be removed to another tile according to the improved micro-management rules. This would enhance micro-management especially when making use of governors.
Similar threads
