E3: Firaxis Announced 2nd Civ3 Expansion!

[anarres]

Dunno, but Amazon.com was not shipping PTW outside the US.

 

[Louis XXIV]

They mentioned "fixed Diplomacy" which implies "editor"

I have a strong hunch that they won't add any new traits (which might not be a bad thing, as it might require a LOT of balance)

They would probably use the traits PTW didn't use (ind-exp, mil-sci, etc)

 

[Mercade]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
About the overseas releases...why can't you just order the North American release from Amazon or something? As long as you know English, wouldn't it work?

Buying by mail from the US adds significant mail/courier charges. We have shops here too. I expect the product to be on the shelf instead of having to go through some trans atlantic website. And apart from the practical problems mentioned by Anarres (and indeed Amazon UK didn't sell PtW until the EU release was made, and that was pushed back several times as well) in obtaining an US release, that isn't really the point, is it?

The point is that many non-US have been seriously disappointed in the product they have been sold for good money. A product that has the 1.04 patch available for download the day it is released indicates to me it is rushed. Why should it takes months to make an EU release if they don't even translate American to English or incorporate the 1.04 patch? Instead they add some incompatible CD-protection scheme that prevents non-US customers from enjoying the patches on the buggy release in the first place. And 1.21 was released in February. Since March the non-US 1.21 patch is supposedly in testing. What's there to test about an incompatible CD-protection scam? It's nearly three months now.

So, while people may be enthusiastic about some of the new changes, they are justifyably sceptical about the way the product will be released. It's how non-US customers have been treated the last year, so why should they be exuberant at the sight of 8 new leaderhead?

 

[Amadan]

Originally posted by LouLong
First this is BIG NEWS.

New terrain (Swamps ???? great ) , new resources, buildings, wonders : nice bonus.

Unless I missed something, it was new terrain *features*, not new terrain. (i.e. artillary craters)

Overall, it does sound interesting, esp. fixed diplomatic states for senarios.

 

[thestonesfan]

I don't think they are trying to scam anyone, Mercade. You have to expect some kind of delay since it is produced here, not there. I suppose the alternative is producing only an English version to be shipped worldwide and not to worry about the profitability of producing other versions.

 

[Louis XXIV]

They said they would add new terrain resources and features (crators)
They didn't mention actual new terrains, but we can hope

 

[Zukatah]

I'm very skeptical about this expansion. So they'll add 8 more civs (they won't invent new traits....), they'll fix multiplayer (hopefully, is it ironic how you sell a product with multiplayer and then another with a fixed multiplayer?) and we'll get cute graphics and a couple of new wonders. The new editor will probably be great for people interested in making scenarios and the new diplomacy looks promising though I'll wait until the price tag is acceptable for such improvements. I've bought Civ3 the day it came out and was very satisfied. With PTW I was let down and I'll make sure it doesn't happen again....

 

[Deathwalker]

Is this going to be ported to the Mac

 

[Louis XXIV]

^
Hopefully

 

[Ebomb808]

Originally posted by whb


Of course, some might say that is what the testing team are for (who being professional and organised should be much more efficient at picking up bugs than the random splatter-gun that is the public).
Platform issues (exotic graphics cards, driver issues, etc.) should perhaps be picked up in a private beta, rather than the public release. There is a large proportion of the casual game-playing public who are not online, or are not entirely net-savvy, and will never apply a patch to the game once they have purchased it. It seems a little churlish to suggest they should have to suffer critical bugs because the software company didn't want the hassle of a private beta.

Yes that is what a private beta test is for, but so manhy people buy computer junk, that their is no way to test for errors on every PC manufacture with every hardware configuration. Also if you dont have the internet and arent net-savvy than why the heck do you buy the multiplayer edition of the game. Almost all games have patches released at some point in time. To single out Civ as the worst of the worst is wrong. How many not net-savvy people use a computer to play games, most unsavvy computer users only use a computer when they have to.

 

[ststeven11]

I wonder how leaderheads and UUs will be addressed in the new XP's "scenarios?" Specifically: will we see Hitler's mug on foreign advisor screen in the proposed WWII conquest game? Historically it would be accurate, but some will certainly find it offensive, and justifiably so. "Uncle Joe" Stalin was certainly no saint either, but he should be represented for the sake of accuracy, IMHO.

I also wonder if there will be any tinkering with already existing UUs in the scenarios? I will use the WWII scenario again as an example, since I'm not as familiar with the others. The Panzer is a no-brainer, but will the other civs have updated UUs for the sake of balance? For the Americans, the P-51 Mustang instead of the F-15? For the English, a cheaper or A/D/M altered battleship instead of the (useless) MoW? T-34s for the Soviets? An updated Japanese UU? Etc.

This may have already been stated, but I'm assuming that "locked alliances" means something along the lines of "Axis vs. Allies" type of alliances which are unbreakable during wartime. I wonder how this will be implemented, and I wonder if it is only being utilized in the scenarios, or if it will be incorporated into regular games as well. I always seem to get tangled up in convoluted alliances where there is much "in-fighting." I would like to see the occasional slogging match between evenly matched "super-alliances," i.e. if A is allied with B, and C is allied with B, then A and C are allied. Alas, this may be too difficult to code or too unbalancing.

Any thoughts?

 

[Padma]

I would classify myself as "cautiously optimistic".

I loved Civ3 when it came out (Never even noticed most bugs until they were patched. )

I loved PTW when it came out - worth every penny I spent. (I still don't play MP - except PBEM. I don't have the huge blocks of online time available to pursue such a course. To me, playing a TBS game in online MP mode is anyway! )

C3:C sounds like it will also be worth my money. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting, but I will certainly pick it up once it hits the store shelves.

As for the "nattering nabobs of negativity" posting in this thread, it is far too early to rant about what's wrong with C3:C. Everything we know is still rather "fuzzy". We know the names of a few new civs/leaders/units. Do we know their stats, yet? Do we know anything solid about them at all? I'll wait for more information before I make any judgement, either way.

I *hope* that Soren has been able to tweak the AI a little more. For those who want an AI that will play as well as a human: Have any of you ever programmed a complex AI? Or even a simple "Expert System"? And made it work in anything like "real-time" on a 300MHz PII w/32MB RAM? I'm happy the AI is as smart as it is!

Call me a "fanboy" if you will, but I'm a true CivFanatic. What many call "disastrous", I shrug off as inconsequential. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Mercade]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
I don't think they are trying to scam anyone, Mercade. You have to expect some kind of delay since it is produced here, not there. I suppose the alternative is producing only an English version to be shipped worldwide and not to worry about the profitability of producing other versions.

Between PtW as sold in the US and the UK, the only difference is the CD protection system. They did not translate the American to English, and I'm sure this commercial organisation, as Infogrames/Atari is, didn't make a French or German language version out of the goodness of their heart. If you design a product well, it doesn't take 3 months just to change the language.

Mind you, I like Civ3 a lot, and think that PtW is a good expansion pack and I play PtW not vanilla (mostly in SP anyway). I'm just concerned about the way the product and related service are provided to non-US customers. Anyway, I'll shut up about it. Padma calls himself "cautiously optimistic" and that seems a good way to put it.

 

[ltccone]

Originally posted by Padma


I loved PTW when it came out - worth every penny I spent. (I still don't play MP - except PBEM. I don't have the huge blocks of online time available to pursue such a course. To me, playing a TBS game in online MP mode is anyway! )

I'm also surprised by the PTW bashing. I LOVE PTW. I don't play on-line, but PBEM with "normal" rules + accelerated production. I'm even in a PBEM league. After playing "real" people playing the AI is almost boring. Human players are NOT predictable.

I can't wait for C3C

 

[ststeven11]

Padma, I will second your "cautious optimism." I just picked up on something. Read the Civ3 site again. It reads, "Civ fans will discover intriguing new civilizations, units, wonders, technologies, and abilities to help them triumph IN eight professionally designed conquests throughout history." That sounds to me like that the new civs will be playable ONLY in the "conquests," i.e. existing civs have been modded. If this is true, I wonder how many of the added features apply solely to the conquest scenarios? If you'll look at the information we have so far, it makes sense. We know that the Hittites, Sumerians, Incas and Mayans have been "added." The former two would have to be offered to play a scenario for domination of early Mesopotamia; the latter two to play a scenario in the Americas. In Civ2, you could play as the Confederates in the Civil War scenario, but you couldn't play as them otherwise without modding.

I really hope I'm wrong about this.

 

[Colonel Kraken]

I was excited when I first heard of the new expansion pack, but when I viewed the list of things they added I just . :yawn:

I will definitely wait until I have more information before I even think about buying it (duh). What I mean is, as soon as PtW was announced I knew I was going to buy it.

With this new expansion pack, I really don't find much to get excited about. Maybe the new governments and diplomacy options, but whoopdi-do. Until I find out there is going to be more meat than fluff, I won't be considering buying it.

Sad for Firaxis . . . because I'm a CivIII fan. If they can't get me excited, they've got a problem.

 

[shirleyrocks]

If diplomacy is being improved, then I just want to see one thing...the ability of nuclear states to proclaim:

Our words are backed with nuclear weapons!

 

[Ebomb808]

Some of you people are wierd, i mean you like Civ3 enough to spend your free time in a chat room that is all about the game. Then they announce an expansion to the game, and everybody disses it. At the most the expansion will be $30. How many people are so frugal that they can't invest another $30 into a hobby that has them arguing about how good a game is going to be based on paragraph of information.

 

[OneFastWarrior]

So, On natural Disasters, do you think there will be hurricanes or tornadoes and earthquakes? and will we be able to set them like we do the barbs?

that would be so cool

 

[Louis XXIV]

I know about Volcanoes
I hope there are floods
The rest would be nice

Setting them would be great (events editor, maybe?)