First Civ 4 Screenshots!

[W.i.n.t.e.r]

More members? I doubt so- perhaps more people requesting units for fewer people to make them...

 

[Admiral8Q]

Where are the screenies of Civ4?

I can't find them on the CivFanatics homepage...

 

[Zeekater]

They have been taken off due to copyright laws.

Somebody had them on his homesite IIRC, it should be in this thread somewhere

 

[deo]

More members? I doubt so- perhaps more people requesting units for fewer people to make them...

And i thought the units were made first 3D and than converted to fcl.

 

[fe3333au]

Links to the screenshots
http://mrex.org/images/Boxart.jpg
http://mrex.org/images/Cologne.jpg
http://mrex.org/images/Cologne2.jpg
http://mrex.org/images/Countryside.jpg

I agree with the previous comments regarding the '3D-cartoony' look of the game. This is somewhat disturbing.

I hope that it is still turn-based because real-time play would, in my opinion, totally destroy the game. The shop assistant at my local computer store hinted that this may be the case ... I'm hoping that he is misinformed

 

[deo]

Links to the screenshots
http://mrex.org/images/Boxart.jpg
http://mrex.org/images/Cologne.jpg
http://mrex.org/images/Cologne2.jpg
http://mrex.org/images/Countryside.jpg

I agree with the previous comments regarding the '3D-cartoony' look of the game. This is somewhat disturbing.

I hope that it is still turn-based because real-time play would, in my opinion, totally destroy the game. The shop assistant at my local computer store hinted that this may be the case ... I'm hoping that he is misinformed

Civ and real time? I must only laugh

 

[yoshi]

yoshi where are they

You mean where are the loyal civers? [] if I know.

If Civ IV will have 3D than it will be truly beautiful and we will have more members here!

Okay, how many f-ing times do I have to say this? When people say they don't like the graphics, they mean they don't like the artwork NOT, I repeat, NOT the GRAPHICS ENGINE: what your friends don't like is the funny-looking default IMAGES--units that look like CGI cartoons, terrain that looks like it's based on the landscape in the Dragonball Z series, Advisors and Leaders that look...uh...idiotic...********...moronic...constipated, that ship with the game. Tell you friends to try a good C3C WW2 mod with realistic-looking graphics and see if they still think it's ****.

The 3D engine on the other hand, will slow down the game A LOT not a bit (unless you have a high-end system and I’d guess that a majority of civers do not—hence the reason why many did not make the transition from Civ2 to Civ3). Think about it this way: 200+ 3D units running around (possibly simultaneously) on a large map with plenty of cities building stuff in a game with more (mechanics) features then Civ2 and Civ3 combined (hopefully)—hence putting a greater strain on system resources. I want more features because they add more interesting and fun stuff to the game. Your system resources should go to running that, not unnecessary 3D $hit.

[To add to my comment on features: the more moddable features there are, the easier it is for players to make up for anything lacking in the vanilla version (modding is not just about scenarios).]

3D is good if you need it, like in FPS where you need to be able to gauge distances and such. Then it makes sense since the point is to make the environment as visually immersive as possible. In a strategy game—especially TBS—where the immersive effect is mostly intellectual (i.e. you deal with information in numerical (abstract) form—x number of food/shields/commerce, x number of units, x number of hitpoints, x number of turns, etc.—as opposed to graphics-based information as in FPS or even RPG formats), graphics just add to the ‘feel’ of the game (i.e. makes the numerical information easier to look at for hours). Other than that, it serves no purpose…to the player that is. To those selling the game, graphics are initially more important than gameplay (as I said, it’s what consumers see first—how many gamers actually read reviews?). Additionally, there is market pressure to keep the hardware industry going, not just the software industry. Usually, another reason is competition: your average gamer given the choice between two strategy games that are relatively similar, will go for the one with the coolest-looking graphics—again, they make the mistake of confusing artwork for the engine itself. So usually, simple competition is a good reason, from the marketing perspective, to go the distance where graphics are concerned because it will pay off in the end. The thing with the Civ franchise is…THERE IS NO COMPETITION! The Civilization franchise is like the Microsoft of the TBS genre: it’s as close to a monopoly as you can get in the gaming world, and it is deservedly so considering its fan following (who do not need much convincing to get the next installment).

Supposedly the Civ franchise is not doing as well as one would think, but sales for Civ3 were massive (putting aside the XPs). So say this is due to hype at finally getting a new Civ. Again, no competition to fill the void; CTP doesn’t really count as competition and Civ2:ToT had lousy sales because who wants to buy the same game only with…wait for it…BETTER GRAPHICS (i.e. unit and resources animations powered by a outdated but effective graphics engine that uses sprite files)?!

And now my point: if Civ3’s success was due to hype over a game that was essentially not a great leap from Civ2—in fact most of the innovations (i.e. new air unit mechanics, bombardment, new resource/diplomacy-based trade system, new system of espionage, culture/borders, new unit upkeep system…great Editor—that last one doesn’t matter to most civers unfortunately) were mostly things that should have been in Civ2—but looked nicer, then isn’t there the danger that Firaxis go by the logic that what worked then will work now? If so, they will just give us yet another Civ that doesn’t really innovate and, contrary to what they have said, will be littered with ‘hard-coded’ features. Then, what it lacks will just be glossed over with 3D graphics (that look better than those ridiculous screenshots I assume) and other useless eye candy. Question is, are you willing to pay for mostly pretty pictures? (Maybe you are and then one could argue that had ToT had better graphics (i.e. nicer looking units), the game would have had better sales.)

(As my personal note, I think it’s pretty lame that they have to resort to eye candy even when, as I said, the franchise has something like a monopoly in this area so they don’t have to follow market trends as strictly as most of the other genres.)

...perhaps more people requesting units for fewer people to make them...

As if you don't get enough requests already...

When Civ4 modding becomes popular, he that has the software will be king, heh, heh.

 

[dh_epic]

I'm not opposed to 3D graphics, but Yoshi does point to a larger point... that a prettier version of Civ 3 isn't gonna cut it.

 

[W.i.n.t.e.r]

And i thought the units were made first 3D and than converted to fcl.

Only a handfull of people made 3d units- I have been around for several years and seen more ugly c&p units in several forums to know that when a new standard is introduced this means people will use the trial and error principle- 3d began with Kinboat, Boulboulgadol and Smoking Mirror only by the end of 2002, a few years after civ3 hit the shelfs. With new 3d-ware most 3d creators will need to adapt to totally new processes and it is likely to take years before unit making is mastered well enough and in sufficient numbers and quality.

btw. most people think 3d equals 3d- well, surprise: There are plenty of rival programs on the market, most subject to differing compatibility standards (i.e. if the 3d engine isn't compatible with the programs our present unit makers are using, that renders theses peoples' talents obsolete). Its like trying to build a Toyota engine into a Volkswagen- if its not meant to fit from start-on it will never do so.

 

[warpstorm]

All the units made by Firaxis and Breakaway for Civ3 were done in 3D and then converted to flc. The artists hated that part of the process as it is very tedious cleaning the animations up that worked fine in Max and looking like crap when turned into a flc. It often took longer than making the 3D model and animating it in the first place.

This change to 3D is in part to cut the costs for the developer. I'll let you in on a dirty little secret. These days, 3D is cheaper to do than 2D if you have a lot of animations.

Contrary to what W.i.n.t.e.r. says, there are a few standards in 3D that all games companies use behind the scenes. Both we and Firaxis use 3DS Max for all of our modelling and then convert it to whatever format the engine prefers. If I were interested in building 3D models for units, buildings, and terrain features, I'd learn Max now. (If you are a Maya fan, that can easily be converted to the formats that Firaxis uses also, it's just that they use Max.)

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

Interesting, I can't wait to see how in depth this game will be.

 

[W.i.n.t.e.r]

@Warpstorm: When mentioning C&P units I am obviously speaking about the gaming community and custom units ! !

Both we and Firaxis use 3DS Max

Contrary to what you say I haven't seen ANY unit U made for Civ3- there should be lots, right ?!?!? None ? How come ?

How many people in this forum have used 3d programs to make units in the past 3+ years, and just how many years did it take the first one to make a 3d unit for the game ??? Almost about two years, and its not even a full dozen of people who ever did so, and only three or four have created the whole lot of newest units, while hundreds over hundreds made their requests without making a single unit.

So now everybody knows- learn to use 3d programs or die - and pray to god the game makers don't use FSDS2/Multi instead of Gmax

edit: if I may just quote one of the most notorious and controversial civ3 unit creators (who, by the way, uses 3d animation, including 3dMax- I'm sure every modder has added one of his hundreds of planes or some of his great ships) who recently, after hearing the next Civ installment will feature 3d gave the following statement:

"I won't make **** for Civ IV !!!"

I'd say, that kinda reflects the way 3d creators feel about Firaxis changing their standards...

 

[Aeon221]

Woah! This thread got HEATed!

I love the reason yoshi's post got edited: " Reason: bypassing auto-censor"

hahaha ;p

I wonder if they will offer the option of locking the camera etc like in Dawn of War so as to prevent needless strain on the operating computer.

Also, maybe the combat will look really really cool! Lets get positive! Sid has done good by us in the past, and I am hopeful that he and the crew will pump out something pretty, well designed, and fun (although maybe not in that order).

I mean seriously, how many companies have you heard of that actively talked to members of the online communities to find out what they wanted in the next version?

The biggest problem with 3 was the intolerably bad multiplayer. And they fixed it... eventually... for some serious $$$ ;p

Besides, have you guys tried Pirates yet? The graphics AND the engine are quite nice there (although the city combat is tiresome, snail-like, and ridiculously easy to win...), and they are apparently using the same system for 4. Plus, my four year old laptop (which was never top of the line) is able to run the game quite well.

Take heart, oh yea of little faith! ;p

 

[player1 fanatic]

The advantage of having 3D-unit models is that is makes easier modifing already done units.

You can for example just reskin exsiting unit and get something completly different.

Or just remove one weapon and add another (while keeping rest same).


P.S.
I've seen a lot of this in NwN mods.

 

[warpstorm]

Contrary to what you say I haven't seen ANY unit U made for Civ3- there should be lots, right ?!?!? None ? How come ?

Could be because I have absolutely no interest in making them. Could be because I'm not an artist.

Incidentally, I've never requested one either.

 

[dexters]

The 3-D graphics have a very claymation/stopmation look to them. They aren't cartoony, just very different.

I think given what Firaxis is aiming for, this look is the best way to go, as a realistic graphics set would likely be far more taxing on all CPUs.

I like it.

 

[Civrules]

Civ and real time? I must only laugh

True. The devs think that games are much better and involve much more strategy if they are turn-based.

The land battle portion of Pirates! was originally planned to be Real Time, but just months before release of the game, Sid (and probably other staff) was not happy about it still, and they scrapped it with a much, much better turn-based mode.

Shows two things:
1. They aren't afraid to change things in the name of fun
2. Civ will never be RTS. Hell, that's what has established Civ's name, the turn based portion of it!

 

[W.i.n.t.e.r]

The advantage of having 3D-unit models is that is makes easier modifing already done units.

You can for example just reskin exsiting unit and get something completly different.

Or just remove one weapon and add another (while keeping rest same).


P.S.
I've seen a lot of this in NwN mods.

True, that's why I voiced interest in a Firaxian 3d Paperdoll Editor for civ iv:

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

For Warpstorm is very right; the tediousness of making units the c&p way makes one lose interest pretty fast. Exactly the reason Paperdoll's'd be the only best option in a 3d Civ IV modding world- cuz the 3d creators are scarce in this forum (the great Civ2 Site, Apolyton for instance failed to atract flicster artists to its site, thus became obsolete once Civ3 arrived- its gonna be a whole new world...and "we" are still not used to it)

 

[Aeon221]

I kinda hope they dont add a paperdoll modeler, because 1) that will probably up the price a bit, considering how much Poser costs, and 2) I just paid for Poser and I would really like to get more than 5-6 months of use out of it ;p

However, the ease of making changes to existing units because of 3Dness is something I hadnt considered. That would make life so so so much easier!

Have there been any other GOOD 3D TBS games? Or any others period? I wonder how that has turned out in other franchises?

 

[yoshi]

This change to 3D is in part to cut the costs for the developer. I'll let you in on a dirty little secret. These days, 3D is cheaper to do than 2D if you have a lot of animations.

So that's it...and stupid me thought it was the company giving in to market pressure.

I mean seriously, how many companies have you heard of that actively talked to members of the online communities to find out what they wanted in the next version?

Very few. Hence the state of the industry (aside from shooters where it doesn't take much to figure out what players want). Even so, how much of that player input actually makes it to the beta stage? Very little that wouldn't have even without player input (just look at Civ3).
Market forces are what drive any company, regardless of the good intentions some within the company may have; shareholders don't REALLY have much of a say and we aren't even that!

About Pirates and Civ4: Pirates doesn't have the level of complexity that Civ does so it's not a fair comparison.


BTW, just to be clear:

I don't care about the look (and if I did, it can be modded). What I care about is the wasting of system resources on graphics when they could go to other things that will make for more interesting play.

I'm a strategy gamer (aside from occasonally indulging in some FPS carnage to let off some steam ) so as far as I am concerned, they can use still pics of stick men as units for all I care as long as the startegy element is ripe for in-depth play (i.e. a brain-stimulating challenge).

If 3D costs no more system resources than 2D, then so be it...but that isn't the case.

Just look at the difference between Warcraft 2 and Warcraft 3: the latter's a byte-guzzler that does nothing but gobble down your system's resources only to give you stupid 3D scenes and practically the same play you had in the previous installment. (In fact, the only thing that justifies it--in Warcraft but not in Civ--is that you can rotate the view to see behind stuff.)

Now, based on what warpstorm said, you'd think using 3D will cut costs so they can spend less time on graphics (units at least) and more time on the game itself, but AFAIK all this means is that they will save money, period (i.e. cutting costs doesn't necessarily mean that what they save will then go to work on the game).

And again, cutting costs when you have what comes out to be a monopoly (i.e. a unique niche in the market that you alone are free to exploit) is plain cheap IMO.

If the guys at Firaxis are so into this genre, why don't they just cut the crap and make a solid game that gives everybody what they want (within reason), make gaming history (again...but really this time) and be done with it already. Why keep us always waiting to see what slightly new, glossed over change we can pay through the nose for, naively hoping that the next Civ will finally be what we've been asking for all this time?


And now, the hyterical rant you've all come to love and cherish:

I DON'T GIVE A CRAP ABOUT GRAPHICS AND IF YOU'RE REALLY A STRATEGY GAMER NEITHER SHOULD YOU!

I WANT SOMETHING REALLY WORTH SPENDING TIME PLAYING: FULLY-FUNCTIONAL AI, LOGISTICS, INTERNAL UPRISINGS, POPULATION MOVEMENT, CHANGING WEATHER CONDITIONS THAT HAVE AN EFFECT ON PRODUCTION AND COMBAT, CLASS DIVISIONS, NATIONAL POPULATION MOOD, FLEXIBLE DIPLOMACY, BE ABLE TO TRADE ANY ITEM, AN REAL COMBAT SYSTEM, HAVE A FULLY-INTEGRATED SCRIPTING LANGUAGE AND SO MUCH F-ING MORE...BE ABLE TO MOD EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING (INCLUDING THE AI), BE ABLE TO ADD ANY AMOUNT OF ITEMS TO ANY TYPE...AND NO HARD-CODED B.S.!

(And yes, I am aware that Civ4 may--MAY--include some of the features mentioned above.)

Give me that and I will shut up forever...or at least a few years....months......weeks.