Yeah, I hate having to lie to everybody saying why I need such a "powerful" computer back at home saying it's " 'cause of work I take home" when the truth is that I bought it just to play Civ, oh well, I'm a civ-addict.
First Civ 4 Screenshots!
- Thread starter Jon Shafer
- Start date
dh_epic
Cold War Veteran
I don't really mind if it looks like warcraft...
So long as it doesn't PLAY like warcraft.
(e.g.: The only reason you make buildings is to support your army. Control more territory to support a bigger army. Eradicate the other guy and win.)
So long as it doesn't PLAY like warcraft.
(e.g.: The only reason you make buildings is to support your army. Control more territory to support a bigger army. Eradicate the other guy and win.)
Abaddon
Deity
so is there anywhere i can still get the pictures.. ive scrolled right through the thread and couldnt find a link thats still "up"
Micaelis Rex
Prince
Abaddon
Deity
aha thankyou!
MY GOD! am i dissapointed, sure its only early days... but it looks like everythings gone very "cute" much like the new Link games on the gamecube! EUGH, i dont want cuty-lil-spear men, i want fearsome warriors!
MY GOD! am i dissapointed, sure its only early days... but it looks like everythings gone very "cute" much like the new Link games on the gamecube! EUGH, i dont want cuty-lil-spear men, i want fearsome warriors!
brinko
witness of the past
i did the same thing to man, dont feel bad...played civ 2 first on playstation, it was really hard waiting for 5 minutes till it load up the next turn nearing the end of a 10 hour game... so i promised myself when civ 3 came out, i would cash in some rrsp's and buy a machine that could house 100's of cities without the aggrevating load time.
now that civ 4 is coming out, i have choosen to sell my machine, in hopes i could get more for it now then later.
128bit geforce 4
512 ram
1.6 amd
40 gig all for 300$, its sad thinking what i originally paid for it, but o well...it didnt include the games...
anyways civ 4 gets a new computer for me, so i hope they dont get shy on the graphics.
now that civ 4 is coming out, i have choosen to sell my machine, in hopes i could get more for it now then later.
128bit geforce 4
512 ram
1.6 amd
40 gig all for 300$, its sad thinking what i originally paid for it, but o well...it didnt include the games...
anyways civ 4 gets a new computer for me, so i hope they dont get shy on the graphics.
Tomoyo
Fate
The graphics aren't as much "cute" as they are "cartoony". Cute is different.
The Fjonis
Prince
Ugh, that looks weird... What's the point in multiple figure units anyway? Fill up a lot of space + look ugly + no point really, as a "unit" is still only an indication of what type of guys you have - there is still going to be more than four warriors in a "unit", so I don't see what's the point in having four figures rather than one..
Hope it improves..
Hope it improves..
I'm sure multifigure units would look nice and all when animated but chances are I'm just going to shut off animations shortly after getting into the game in order to speed up the process of finishing a game so that I can start a new one.
Im just hoping the music is good, long and varied. I can't stand the music from Civ2 or Civ3 it drives me up the wall if I play longer then an hour.
Im just hoping the music is good, long and varied. I can't stand the music from Civ2 or Civ3 it drives me up the wall if I play longer then an hour.
Zenon_pt
Civing on the real world
I didn't see yet PC-Gamer. Portugal is an annormal country...
No commets.
No commets.
BkGreatWarnut
aka "Brian the Great"
Albow said:
I agree with that statement. That is what Civ is about... Diplomacy, Economy, Production and of course Warfare.
M-Unit said:
It would be more realistic then requiring you to blockade every last harbor...or airport for that matter...
Tomoyo said:
A realistic northpole wrap and southpole wrap...it was done in Civ2: Call to Power. Like if you go across the Northpole 1/4 the way along the top you appear 3/4 of the way on the top...
StabbingNirvana said:
Zooming out would be quite useful...going across an ocean to another continent? Seeing the general relation of each country to other countries.
CurtSibling said:
AGREED!!!
kryszcztov said:
Bombardment and destroying imprvovements mayb be poorly implemented, but I feel that they are necessary elements.
Gnome Slayer said:
I kind of like this "Great People" notion...not sure exactly what it means, but have some ideas...
Also, concerning the use of enemy roads, this is something I like. However, railroads would have to be changed... I'm thing roads=2 movement, railroads=4, and highways=6; or even 3, 6, 9... If you don't want an enemy using your roads you have to block them!!!
Just my thoughts and opinions after looking at the thread...
This reminds me of people's reason for not liking Civ2:Test of Time: lousy graphics. Even now, many dislike ToT for that reason, even though its just the artwork that they don't like and not the engine that uses sprite files for the unit animations.
How the graphics look should be completely irrelevant to you (i.e. you civers); look is to attract non-civers (the equivilant of making the storefront look nice in order to attract cusomers). What you should be worried about is what effect this 3-D bull$hit will have on modding (i.e. Civ3's 2-D units are a sinch to create in comparison to 3-D models and even then, the Civ3 modding has had to become specialized in that area). And for those who say modding is not important, I see you enjoy downloading a wide variety of mods/scens and playing them at no cost...
3-D graphics will also have a devastating effect on medium-level systems. A lot of your system's resources will go to showing you a group of 3-D Warriors with full skeletal wrap that you can zoom in on 'til you can see the whites of their eyes. Meanwhile the features that do matter will be necessarily limited in order to prevent turn rate from lagging too much.
3-D graphics reasoning simply put:
Reasons (for marketing):
- Attract the RTS gamers to the TBS genre...and maybe a few suckers that have no idea about strategy gaming but think they should finally try it and hey, why not buy the box with the coolest pictures on the back because its the only criteria for game quality they're aware of.
- Play along with the market trend of forcing players to continuously upgrade in order to play something that is only slightly better than the previous installment in terms of graphics (which is practically irrelevant when speaking of startegy gaming--especially turn-based stategy gaming).
Reasons (for you):
- You get to admire the amazing graphics...while waiting 10 minutes for your next turn.
- You get to pay extra money to see cool graphics that have no (practical) effect on gameplay.
Not that you can tell any of this from the screen shots, but here's what concerns me: No mention of logistics. This is a big one and I seriously think they're going to leave this out in their quest for 'simplicity.' Something like that is usually mentioned very early on. This one element has always made Civ second-rate IMO simply because it makes unlimitd warfare anywhere on the map (i.e. at any distance) for an infinite duration. Not to bring up realism but it is a strategy game after all and strategy implies logistics.
Man, that water looks so 3-D fluid-like I'm sure those Warriors can see their reflection in it.
How the graphics look should be completely irrelevant to you (i.e. you civers); look is to attract non-civers (the equivilant of making the storefront look nice in order to attract cusomers). What you should be worried about is what effect this 3-D bull$hit will have on modding (i.e. Civ3's 2-D units are a sinch to create in comparison to 3-D models and even then, the Civ3 modding has had to become specialized in that area). And for those who say modding is not important, I see you enjoy downloading a wide variety of mods/scens and playing them at no cost...
3-D graphics will also have a devastating effect on medium-level systems. A lot of your system's resources will go to showing you a group of 3-D Warriors with full skeletal wrap that you can zoom in on 'til you can see the whites of their eyes. Meanwhile the features that do matter will be necessarily limited in order to prevent turn rate from lagging too much.
3-D graphics reasoning simply put:
Reasons (for marketing):
- Attract the RTS gamers to the TBS genre...and maybe a few suckers that have no idea about strategy gaming but think they should finally try it and hey, why not buy the box with the coolest pictures on the back because its the only criteria for game quality they're aware of.
- Play along with the market trend of forcing players to continuously upgrade in order to play something that is only slightly better than the previous installment in terms of graphics (which is practically irrelevant when speaking of startegy gaming--especially turn-based stategy gaming).
Reasons (for you):
- You get to admire the amazing graphics...while waiting 10 minutes for your next turn.
- You get to pay extra money to see cool graphics that have no (practical) effect on gameplay.
Not that you can tell any of this from the screen shots, but here's what concerns me: No mention of logistics. This is a big one and I seriously think they're going to leave this out in their quest for 'simplicity.' Something like that is usually mentioned very early on. This one element has always made Civ second-rate IMO simply because it makes unlimitd warfare anywhere on the map (i.e. at any distance) for an infinite duration. Not to bring up realism but it is a strategy game after all and strategy implies logistics.
Man, that water looks so 3-D fluid-like I'm sure those Warriors can see their reflection in it.
Zenon_pt
Civing on the real world
for what i saw, isn't so great the graphics!!!
deo
Emperor
I don't care about grapics just because i think after a month of the Civ IV release there will be something like a "Snoopy's terrain graphics", what i like to have in civ 4 is 3D
W.i.n.t.e.r
Frozen!
I am more concerned with the units in 3d - Firaxis ought to include either a paperdoll editor, allowing changing clothes, equipment, armament as well as colours, and/or a way of utilizing other, non 3d units such as fake 3d flicster ones)deo said:
You actually want 3D? Aside from slowing your game down and looking pretty (potentially), what good does it do? (Keep in mind graphics have ABSOLUTELY NO EFFECT ON GAMEPLAY...NONE...NADA.)
[BTW, those of you who keep going on about the graphics not looking nice: that has nothing to do with the graphics engine.]
[BTW, those of you who keep going on about the graphics not looking nice: that has nothing to do with the graphics engine.]
W.i.n.t.e.r
Frozen!
I never said I wanted any 3d (in fact I don't and must say you are fully right in every respect!!! Yoshi)- but then again Firaxis seems to have taken a decission already- so IF we are getting 3d, I want to timely advert the makers not to produce something that lacks the editors needed... as the greatest factor Firaxis has shown to be lacking is hardly graphical esprit: its vision!
W.i.n.t.e.r, that post was directed at deo's and previous comments. Sorry for the confusion.
As for your comments: Definitely. But I remember talking about a graphics editor for Civ3 a while ago and supposedly it has more to do with development time and sales rather than vision.
Considering Civ3 didn't offer any static animation options (a la ToT), I doubt this is of much concern over there. But since you're asking for that, might as well put the pressure on (assuming anyone's listening) for resolution options.
Civ3's graphics engine is already pushing it IMO but it's still nothing compared to 3D animations; I shudder at the thought of this. Hopefully it's just units that are 3D, can you imagine the load on system resources for a later game on 250x250 map...in 3D!? (I can hear my PC screaming hysterically already.)
Where vision is concerned, IMO Firaxis should have forseen a lot of the 'bugs'--many of which have never been addressed--in Civ3 and acted accordingly, which they didn't. I fear a whole new set of problems in this release.
The thing that gets me is this: most if not all Firaxians are gamers right? Strategy gamers to be precise. That means they're fully aware of what I said above. Why the 3D then? The only thing that comes to mind are the reasons I gave earlier. IMO this is not a lack of vision but rather a sever case of selling out to an increasingly primitive market. The worst part is that the civ franchise probably has THE most solid, loyal, even fanatical--consider how often do you hear 'I will buy it no matter what it's like' around here-- consumer base in the history of gaming. This attempt to dig into other parts of the market is just lame IMO.
The other thing is, WE, THE LOYAL CIVERS, ARE PAYING FOR THIS 3D CRAP!!!
As for your comments: Definitely. But I remember talking about a graphics editor for Civ3 a while ago and supposedly it has more to do with development time and sales rather than vision.
Considering Civ3 didn't offer any static animation options (a la ToT), I doubt this is of much concern over there. But since you're asking for that, might as well put the pressure on (assuming anyone's listening) for resolution options.
Civ3's graphics engine is already pushing it IMO but it's still nothing compared to 3D animations; I shudder at the thought of this. Hopefully it's just units that are 3D, can you imagine the load on system resources for a later game on 250x250 map...in 3D!? (I can hear my PC screaming hysterically already.)
Where vision is concerned, IMO Firaxis should have forseen a lot of the 'bugs'--many of which have never been addressed--in Civ3 and acted accordingly, which they didn't. I fear a whole new set of problems in this release.
The thing that gets me is this: most if not all Firaxians are gamers right? Strategy gamers to be precise. That means they're fully aware of what I said above. Why the 3D then? The only thing that comes to mind are the reasons I gave earlier. IMO this is not a lack of vision but rather a sever case of selling out to an increasingly primitive market. The worst part is that the civ franchise probably has THE most solid, loyal, even fanatical--consider how often do you hear 'I will buy it no matter what it's like' around here-- consumer base in the history of gaming. This attempt to dig into other parts of the market is just lame IMO.
The other thing is, WE, THE LOYAL CIVERS, ARE PAYING FOR THIS 3D CRAP!!!
greenman1234
Usless Information King
yoshi where are they
anyone out there
anyone out there
deo
Emperor
Ok ok! Than don't include 3D. I just said i like to see 3D in civ 4 but if it slows down the game a bit, why not including it? For example I know only one friend that realy likes Civ 3 and the others say it's **** just because of the graphics. If Civ IV will have 3D than it will be truly beautiful and we will have more members here! 
Similar threads
