Don't change the structure!

[The Omega]

. begin sarcasm:
Wouldn't an adventure Civ game be cool? You would become your king, and run through the tunnels of some far off land, collecting city tokens, each giving you a new city at some random location, unit tokens, each giving you a random unit or tech tokens, each giving you a random tech. Wars would be fought by you calling on your units when you stand before your enemy king, and they would take completely random actions until their HP ran out. Culture would be accumulated by filling your culture meter, which when it got full, you would be awarded with special powers, like levitation!
end sarcasm

for some strange reason, this is appealing to me for civ4...

Smilies!

 

[masterofdragons]

Wow, we all love our Civ game, myself included. But RTS can still happen (were it up to me ). Tiles can still exist for all the other purposes, with cultural borders and so on... Nothing changes except you get to keep moving, ordering, delegating attacking, diplomasizing(?Bushism?), etc... without having to sit there and wait, "ARE YOU DONE YET?!" wait some more, "ARE YOU DONE YET?!"; fine, I will go get a drink, come back, now everybody waiting on you and wondering what you are doing taking so long?.... Sound familiar?

 

[sir_schwick]

You probably already knew this, but I was not supporting making Civ 4 more like MTW. The Total War series lends itself to simulating very specific periods of time in incredible accuracy. An epic game the size of Civ would be very poorly modeled by the Total War system.

The reason I said SMAC was hardcore was based on the Civ 3 power-point Soren did on marketing. I'm not sure how well it sold perosnally, because I bought it for $5 at Wal-Mart in the bargain bin. That is how I buy most of my games. Actually, all the Civ 3 Gold, C3C and MTW were the first games I ever bought near retail price.

 

[dh_epic]

Civ, in spite of its cult following, has never had a breakthrough like a Starcraft or a Quake. But it's not the genre that defines their success...

I think you'll sooner see Civ embrace a military-only turn based game than see Civ 3 as a full fledged RTS. And frankly, I think the latter would be less insulting to the game's legacy. But hopefully we'll never see either one.

 

[sir_schwick]

I think you'll sooner see Civ embrace a military-only turn based game than see Civ 3 as a full fledged RTS. And frankly, I think the latter would be less insulting to the game's legacy. But hopefully we'll never see either one.

Exactly, Civ 4 should stay in the format it is currently. Besides, Brian Reynolds created a good RTS version of Civ in Rise of Nations. If you want RTS Civ, then play Rise of Noations.

 

[Jon Shafer]

As WS said, Soren already stated that CIV will be turn-based, so what's all the hubub about?