E3 2007: Civilization Revolution First Look @ PC.IGN

[bonafide11]

Another thought: If Civ Revolution succeeds, which I could see it doing, I think we can see two distinct Civilization series. I doubt Firaxis would stop making the PC game, and the fact they are calling this Civ Revolution instead of Civ IV or Civ V indicates they are imagining it as a different game. Eventually we may see a Civ V for the PC and Civ Revolution II for the Console. I believe they will become two distinctly different series, both fun in their own right.

 

[Sub]

I don't think it will succeed.

 

[CoryB]

If it meant there were a sophisticated resource system, with quantities and conversions and trade markets, I would gladly let the city-tile management become simplified. The same thing for other features, like improved diplomacy, or new warfare features.

This gives me a vision of the resource tiles almost working with the cottage improvement does now where after it is worked for so many turns it would increase the amount of the resource it is generating.

Add in an anonymous market where you could sell or buy a resource in a stock market type setting with the resource going to the highest bidder over a set number of turns. ie I will buy 1 copper for 10 gold per turn for 10 turns.

Add in these:

I would also be in approval if some of the new features like diverse barbarians, reworked diplomacy, the economic victory (another thing we somehow lost after Alpha Centauri), and some of the army stuff made its way into the core game via another expansion. Compliment it as much as possible; just don't get rid of the stuff we already have.

Add in some new leaders, maybe a new trait or two, some new scenarios and we are well on are ay to the basis of a third expansion pack.

I really think the expansion pack could include the CivRev style of play as well as an opitional feature...

 

[Catharsis]

I surely hope that this cartoonish an childish style wont pass on towards an eventual civ5

Me too. Civ 4 was cartoonish enough for me.

I dont like it, cartoonish and scaled down is not my cup of tea.

That's right. It LOOKS TERRIBLE. If the games are gonna look like this, I quit right away. It puts me off. This game is for 5 years old ! What I want is realistic not cartoonish graphics.

You have to get used to graphics like that in an American consol game. Unfortunately most American consol developers assume they have to make the games dumbed down, and sexed up to be able to attract the "younger male audience" that plays consol games in their minds...

Hopefully some of these companies will eventually wake up and realize more than 10 year old males play games. But it won’t happen any time soon.

"Civilization: Revolution does away with many of the negative concepts and micromanagement aspects of the PC game".

Those . .. .. .. .. . at IGN should realise that some of us like the "negative concepts" of the PC version. I hope Civ 5 PC is nothing like Revolution.

Hmm... some interesting links between 'cartoon-like graphics', 'less micromanagement' and 'stupid childish game for 3-year-olds and morons'.

Can we even call ourselves 'civ fanatics' anymore? We seem to have developed an attack culture: one wrong move from the developers - some 'cartoony' graphics, or a light-hearted joke from Caesar, or maybe they've left your country of origin out of the game - and we're calling for Sid's head and burning Jeff Briggs in effigy.

The reason for CivRev is this: to open up the exclusive Civ club to today's fast-paced console gamer, and by extension, to widen the target market for the PC game, which means more money for Firaxis. If you don't like it, then you're probably not the target audience.

 

[toft]

I think it is...I think the PC really limits what he can do graphically, plus I think the simplified nature of it makes it more of a board game, which is what he likes.

I think it looks cool, the global nature of the map is cool, rather than the flat gameplay screen. So what if they simplified it, its a different game. The graphics don't bug me at all. There's a stylized, artistic aspect to it, which I enjoy. I think the detail and differences between civs will be great.

Plus no one has seen the game in action yet, so don't knock it till you see it. Sounds pretty fun to me.

I couldnt disagree more with you

Civilization shouldnt have an emphasism on graphics and on pushing the limits of graphical achievements IMO. Its all about gameplay, gameplay and gameplay. And seeing how much trouble the civ4 engine had - then I'm honestly hoping that they emphasize on gameplay and less on graphics. Afterall, I would rather play a funny and addictive game on a gigantic map that runs smooth than I would have the newest DX10 graphics and play on a small map that crashes after 40 turns

Graphics sell when standing in the store and looking at the back of the game, but gameplay makes you wanna continue playing the game after the first week. And CIV has been equal to GAMEPLAY so far. Its the gamplay of previous versions that makes me buy Civ without a hesitation - but if they start loosing the gameplay and emphasize on graphics like many other games lately... then its just another game like the rest.

 

[AntoninusPius]

I can't really add new arguments. All is said.

Let's hope that it is just a new game series, that has little to do with our beloved game.

The guys of Firaxis read our posts in this forum and that's why it would not be amiss if people expressed their desire for a Civ V in the good old style here!

 

[bonafide11]

I think we - the consumers - decide the future of the Civilization series. After Firaxis sees how BTS sells, why wouldn't they continue the Civ PC series? I think there's no reason to worry about the future of Civ because this is a different series that can coexist with the current Civ game.

 

[Vael]

Just saw an interview with Sid Meier about the game on Gamespot:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6174680.html

 

[dutchking]

One Question: Is this Princess Leia or Joan de Arc?

http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/947/947168/img_4700739.html

It's not Joan d'Arc because they have Napoleon. I think it's either Catherine or Isabella.

 

[Somnabulist]

It's not Joan d'Arc because they have Napoleon. I think it's either Catherine or Isabella.

I think it's Isabella, her costume looks like the one Rachel Weisz wears in "The Fountain", in which she play queen Isabella.

 

[Thorburne]

I couldnt disagree more with you

Civilization shouldnt have an emphasism on graphics and on pushing the limits of graphical achievements IMO. Its all about gameplay, gameplay and gameplay. And seeing how much trouble the civ4 engine had - then I'm honestly hoping that they emphasize on gameplay and less on graphics. Afterall, I would rather play a funny and addictive game on a gigantic map that runs smooth than I would have the newest DX10 graphics and play on a small map that crashes after 40 turns

Graphics sell when standing in the store and looking at the back of the game, but gameplay makes you wanna continue playing the game after the first week. And CIV has been equal to GAMEPLAY so far. Its the gamplay of previous versions that makes me buy Civ without a hesitation - but if they start loosing the gameplay and emphasize on graphics like many other games lately... then its just another game like the rest.

I couldn't agree... and disagree... with you more. First, I think what TobyWanKenobi was getting at was that with the PC, which is often hailed as the most powerful "console", it is often limited graphically as developers are after the most common denominator. Pushing the limits of the PC often results in what you describe. PC's are too different and very expensive to constantly upgrade. With consoles, you don't have that issue as all of the hardware runs the same.

I do agree with what you say about putting gameplay above graphics. I long for the day when I can play on a ginormous map with all of the civs that will be available in BTS (perhaps with a few more modded in), at least 5 more religions, buku resources, and tons of units and be able to make it through to the end with hardly a glitch in the system. Unfortunately, with the largest mod I was able to find, (Amra's Mod) I can't even make it to the middle ages.

That said, I do like what I see with Civ Rev. Sure, it may be a bit more simplified compared to what I would like to play in standard Civ, but it would be a nice way to introduce the franchise to my friends and family who would be too intimidated by the complexity in Civ IV. Thus, they would be able to learn the basics... then eventually take the next step onto the PC side.

My wonder is how will it play on the Wii. My prediction is that it will be the best version of the game. I have yet to see a strategy game do well with a standard console controller.

 

[Andy_Candy]

is it just me or it looks a bit like heroes of might and magic V?

Yep, it looks more like a fantasy adventure than a CIV game.....

But as long this is not showing the direction for the PC game, I don't care. let the small children have some console fun, but if they try to steal our great PC CIV experiences away, making it look like this, then a real revolution will break out!

 

[pinjerro]

THEY REMOVED IMPROVEMENTS!!!
this is a game for civfans UNDER SIX YEARS OLD!!! I like the ideas of the advisors, elite units and special abilities. But i won't buy it, it's not me when they removed improvements

 

[Andy_Candy]

THEY REMOVED IMPROVEMENTS!!!
this is a game for civfans UNDER SIX YEARS OLD!!! I like the ideas of the advisors, elite units and special abilities. But i won't buy it, it's not me when they removed improvements

Well, it's obvious this game is not for us hardcore fans. If I tried to play this I would get bored after 10 minutes, regreting buying it, and start missing my good old PC CIV.

 

[Shigga]

LOL civ for dummies cartoon-style. Micromanagement even more nerfed. Why don't ppl get that mm is fun and only the wrong (uncomfortable) handling spoils the fun? It's a way of experiencing self-effectiveness, speaking in psychological terms.

The only things that seem worthwhile to include in ciV are the climatebarbs (lol) and the visible promos.

I hope they will never ever make ciV a PC game for dummies. The biggest satisfaction in civ comes from the fact that you manage to keep a complex system in balance with countless variables changing constantly. You've got to work yourself into the game (mechanics). I'd bet most ppl enjoy the intellectual challenge most, regardless if they are builders or conquerors.

 

[Luckystrike77]

LOL civ for dummies cartoon-style. Micromanagement even more nerfed. Why don't ppl get that mm is fun and only the wrong (uncomfortable) handling spoils the fun? It's a way of experiencing self-effectiveness, speaking in psychological terms.

The only things that seem worthwhile to include in ciV are the climatebarbs (lol) and the visible promos.

I hope they will never ever make ciV a PC game for dummies. The biggest satisfaction in civ comes from the fact that you manage to keep a complex system in balance with countless variables changing constantly. You've got to work yourself into the game (mechanics). I'd bet most ppl enjoy the intellectual challenge most, regardless if they are builders or conquerors.

I really agree with you. It's not too much micromanagement now, and the mm we have is fun actually. You make some really good and important points here. The MM is one of the great things that makes me love turn based strategy games over all other genres!

 

[darko82]

Graphics sell when standing in the store and looking at the back of the game, but gameplay makes you wanna continue playing the game after the first week. And CIV has been equal to GAMEPLAY so far. Its the gamplay of previous versions that makes me buy Civ without a hesitation - but if they start loosing the gameplay and emphasize on graphics like many other games lately... then its just another game like the rest.

Come on. They can't make a serious game as Civilization seem to look so silly and stop saying that graphics is not so important. Where is the match between the seriousness of the game and its appearance.

They will not make Civilization look so silly. If they want to make something for the small kids, then they should make another game, maybe some kind of simplifed version of Civ if that pays off at all ? or forget about the current fans and making the new ones - if that want they want. Whatever .

 

[seZereth]

Interesting, if you want great (non cartoonish, still dark fantasy) graphics, intense gameplay, endless replayability and 21 distinct civs... why not play Fall from Heaven II
We had trophy halls and stuff before them

And about CIV being so slow is not connected with the graphics, but the huge amount of moddability especially python. Putting all the stuff into the c++ code, making it unmodable for a average player gives you... Kaels Speedmod, with almost no delays

Civ Rev will definitely widen the Audience and that is good.

 

[AriochIV]

.....Ninja Legions?

 

[brianshapiro]

There's only so much you can do to target other audiences. People who want to see a sexed-up dumed-down game aren't going to look to buy a historical strategy game in the first place. Sid Meier is really narrowing the market he'll get by producing this.

And I don't think it will be good for introducing people to the game either. There have been other computer games that have been ported to consoles in dumbed down versions, and those were the only versions many people saw, so when they heard me talk about the game they told me it was "dumb", only having played the dumb version.

Plus, I think something Sid Meier has to realize is that if the game is made with a lot of depth and atmosphere, its likely to attract more people than turn them away. Think about it; people go to see movies, to be drawn into whats happening, and historical movies to be drawn into the time period. When historical movies fail to get popular appeal, its because they've been made too dry and slow, not because they've been made realistic. Being drawn into something because of its depth is part of the fun, whether you're a geek or not.