Graphics Modding in Civ4: Looking to the future

[Dom Pedro II]

Of course they started with the graphics and the engine as with every game you need to start off with the engine cuz that is the core of the game. I said priority: I.e. how much effort will be spent on making the graphics- this is what is pissing me off- not what they start with phyisicaly (I know, the way I wrote about it isn't the most straighforward one). but what seems to be their priority in putting effort into.

I meant in concept work... like you did.

Exactly because most "little people out there" (hi kids ) care more about the looks and if their favourite leaderhead will be in. Those don't really matter, may they be 3d or whatever. But I want a game that has at least similar ammount of effort put into gameplay and depth. While I agree with your statement that combat is NOT oversimplified, I must disagree in other areas, namely when intercting with global effects such as corruption, luxuries, pollutions, unhappyness, et al. The wrote themselves they were removing these in their prior incarnation as "so many people could not cope" with these. Well then maybe those people were either playing the wrong game for themselves or perhaps too young, or what do I know... fact is that at that stage, with Civ4 being announced for launch within this year it is a bit late behind the priority schedule to not having more than a vague idea how to re-implement these in a good fashion... its such slip-ups that discourage me, as Firaxian history has shown that great ideas, if not able to be implemented as they were envisioned will end up being left out entirelly and without replacement...

Go back and read the documentation again... these things have been remodeled, not removed. I don't really consider the health system they've laid out to be simplistic compared to pollution. Pollution was overly simplistic... It seemed to me that they had this all worked out, they were just not disclosing it. Again, go back and read the documentation and see how much more all of that is fleshed out vs. say five or six months ago.

Less Units is another issue- since you seem to claim they are going customer oriented in chosing the engine and all, and I see proove in the fact they are aiming at remodeling the global effects in a more "less-depth" manner for even simpler minds to be able to have fun, why aren't we given, as in EVERY other 3d game, Civ-Specific units?... or at least a simple paperdoll editor :| I can tell you why (hey, I always knew my studies would pay off someday): They want to make money out of selling us uni updates And this is where Firaxis remains traditionaly cheap.

What are you talking about?! There are unique units.

 

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

EDIT: One per Civ... We'll be playing with Russian Legions and German Indian Scouts?? Please

Dom- I never said REMOVED- I indeed wrote "remodeled"- so why can't you read what I wrote?

 

[Dom Pedro II]

I dunno... I'm hearing a lot of contradictions here... "It's too flashy" then "It's not flashy enough"... I think what I'm really hearing is people who need to gripe about something

 

[El Justo]

You know it seems like you want there to be something wrong... like you want Civ4 to be bad...

Global scenarios are doomed??? Have you ever played a Civ2 scenario compared to Civ3? It's Civ3 scenarios that were doomed... doomed because they didn't have the event language of Civ2. And Civ4, with it's XML-based scripting abilities, will have something that will even make Civ2's script look inflexible by comparison. Civ2 scenarios cannot be touched by Civ3 scenarios and they only had seven civs playable at once.

And there's only 18 civs in the game... it doesn't say that only 18 civilizations can be used at once... and besides, what about Civ3? It started out with 16!

I mean, considering all of the new features, less civs available is really a small price to pay... I mean, what you're demanding is that in addition to all of the new stuff... building a game from scratch, you want new city styles, new leaderheads, new units, new flags... as if they do not already have enough stuff to do. I am SURE we will be quite capable of tossing new civs in there as we please.

in no way do i want to see civ 4 turn out poorly. no way...i'd be a fool to think that. however, i want to see them build on what civ 3 is, not deconstruct the hog in an effort to appeal to a new 3D fan base. that's silly and to me, it seems driven by $$$$, which is a shame.

it's been quite some time since i played a civ 2 scenario but i can tell you that i have had absolutely no difficulties whatsoever 'timing' or 'scripting' in civ 3 conquests. granted, it's not xml or anything but i've worked w/in the parameters of what the editor allows. is it a pain in the ass to assign unresearchable techs, create new resources and make certain pre-placed wonders pre-reqs for certain 'scripted' and/or 'timed' autopro'ing wonders? sure is. no doubt about that. however, it's a farce to compare civ2 scenarios to civ3 scenarios.

the bottom line for me is that it seems that while firaxis or whomever opened the door for a variety of very appealing options, they clearly skimped or left out altogether in a bunch of other areas. i guess one can't get everything they wish for.

i remain skeptical but hopeful at the same time (if there is such a thing).

 

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

Thank you but I have been following that thread since it's been up... talking contradictions, Firaxis have mentioned those aspects on the side, not gone into any detail- on one side you clain anti-civ ivers being supersticious, and that I should go re-read the articles and then you claim that they seem to have it "pretty much fleshed out" when there isn't any information on the topic except what they wrote those ominious months ago. yeah, lets all get a gripe (whats a gripe ? LoL)

Jeez, this is going too fast for people to read are they ate typing (talking for myself here, of course no wonder we are not getting the details)

Edit: Between 'Flashy' and 'Too Flashy' lays 'Balance', that is what I would like for Civ4: To be a balanced game, without being too flashy to the far right and poorly done to the centre-left bit...

 

[Kinboat]

Well I for one won't really be sorry to lose all the work I put into making units for Civ3... But maybe that's just me. First, I'm tired of the same old thing over and over... Second I was doing it more for the fun of doing it than the fun of using the units in a mod. So once I've finished the unit I didn't really care much if anyone ever used it, I had gotten what I wanted out of it.
And there are still people playing Civ1 for crying out loud. So I'm sure people will still be playing Civ3 for quite some time.
For the most part this comparison of civ3 to civ4 is unfair until you have both games in front of you. That's like riding by a half built car on your horse and telling the mechanic to just give up and get a horse. You need to see both finished products before passing judgment. I was a little unsure of the graphics in the first previews but I think in the end it will be fine. And the scripting format (while involving some programing skills) looks to be a major plus to modders.
Obviously there are people who won't switch over, but than there will be others coming from other 3D games with modding experience...

 

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

Well I for one won't really be sorry to lose all the work I put into making units for Civ3... But maybe that's just me. First, I'm tired of the same old thing over and over... Second I was doing it more for the fun of doing it than the fun of using the units in a mod. So once I've finished the unit I didn't really care much if anyone ever used it, I had gotten what I wanted out of it.
And there are still people playing Civ1 for crying out loud. So I'm sure people will still be playing Civ3 for quite some time.
For the most part this comparison of civ3 to civ4 is unfair until you have both games in front of you. That's like riding by a half built car on your horse and telling the mechanic to just give up and get a horse. You need to see both finished products before passing judgment. I was a little unsure of the graphics in the first previews but I think in the end it will be fine. And the scripting format (while involving some programing skills) looks to be a major plus to modders.
Obviously there are people who won't switch over, but than there will be others coming from other 3D games with modding experience...

I do hope so...

 

[Dom Pedro II]

in no way do i want to see civ 4 turn out poorly. no way...i'd be a fool to think that. however, i want to see them build on what civ 3 is, not deconstruct the hog in an effort to appeal to a new 3D fan base. that's silly and to me, it seems driven by $$$$, which is a shame.

Of course it's driven by money... everything in entertainment is driven by money. Don't be naive to think otherwise.

it's been quite some time since i played a civ 2 scenario but i can tell you that i have had absolutely no difficulties whatsoever 'timing' or 'scripting' in civ 3 conquests. granted, it's not xml or anything but i've worked w/in the parameters of what the editor allows. is it a pain in the ass to assign unresearchable techs, create new resources and make certain pre-placed wonders pre-reqs for certain 'scripted' and/or 'timed' autopro'ing wonders? sure is. no doubt about that. however, it's a farce to compare civ2 scenarios to civ3 scenarios.

Your limitations in civ3 scenarios are tight compared to civ2. The timing that's possible is at best imprecise and heavily based on players dancing the way you want them to. Indeed, compare the Eastern Front scenario for Civ3 with the one made by Captain Nemo for Civ2. Simply put, there's no comparison. Nemo's is better. And it's not better because the scenario makers here were less competent. Indeed, they did a magnificent job with what they had, but Civ2 was just simply more modder-friendly.

Really, the only things lacking from a ToT scenario than a Civ3 scenario are borders and resources. Are those important? Sure... but neither one of those problems have anything to do with comparing the modding capabilities of the two games. If you had the MACRO language of ToT at your disposal for Civ3, you'd be singing a different tune... I assure you.

the bottom line for me is that it seems that while firaxis or whomever opened the door for a variety of very appealing options, they clearly skimped or left out altogether in a bunch of other areas. i guess one can't get everything they wish for.

Something does have to give, yes. Rest assured at least that there will be people who will make sure there are future civs added in later.

Thank you but I have been following that thread since it's been up... talking contradictions, Firaxis have mentioned those aspects on the side, not gone into any detail- on one side you clain anti-civ ivers being supersticious, and that I should go re-read the articles and then you claim that they seem to have it "pretty much fleshed out" when there isn't any information on the topic except what they wrote those ominious months ago. yeah, lets all get a gripe (whats a gripe ? LoL)

Civ4 info

Edit: Between 'Flashy' and 'Too Flashy' lays 'Balance', that is what I would like for Civ4: To be a balanced game, without being too flashy to the far right and poorly done to the centre-left bit...

It's fundamentally different to argue that something should be between something and something else than to say that something is both mutually-exclusive extremes at the same time.

 

[El Justo]

The timing that's possible is at best imprecise and heavily based on players dancing the way you want them to.

oh no...this is not the case. i can assure you of that. i've seen it (and created it) in my TCW scenario. there's no dancing...you give the AI or the human player enough incentive to build it and they certainly will.

anyway, i won't be able to convert my TCW scenario over into civ4 b/c of the limit on the civs. this is another reason i'm skeptical.

(note: not pessimistic)

 

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

Civ4 info

Excuse me, I have told you already twice that I have read it, why are you continuing to direct me to it? I know where it is located. So roll yer eyes at someone else if you must.

It's fundamentally different to argue that something should be between something and something else than to say that something is both mutually-exclusive extremes at the same time.

Yes!- and no!- your point being? Is it time for philosophy now already or do you want to continue talking about Civ4 and how you try to 'peek' into the future?

 

[Plotinus]

I think Kinboat injected a bit of common sense into this discussion.

In the meantime, is it the case that Civ4 will be unable to have a mod with more than 16 civs, or is it only that it comes with just 16 civs? After all, you can have a PTW mod with 31 civs if you add the extra ones yourself.

 

[Dom Pedro II]

Excuse me, I have told you already twice that I have read it, why are you continuing to direct me to it? I know where it is located. So roll yer eyes at someone else if you must.

W.i.n.t.e.r I referred you to it because if you've read it, you're surely not paying attention to it. It lays out quite clearly all of the stuff you describe as amorphous and incomplete... you make reference to statements made months ago and then graft it onto this current info.


[/quote]Yes!- and no!- your point being? Is it time for philosophy now already or do you want to continue talking about Civ4 and how you try to 'peek' into the future?[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, but you're the one who's talking like you've been sitting on the development meetings with the team. The only thing I have been saying is that the doom-sayers' arguments are unfounded. It's not a declaration that Civ4 will absolutely great.



So look, this is about people who want to actually make something from Civ4 and not just cry and say how much it's going to suck... so if you fellas want to stick with Civ3, then stay out of this thread.

 

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

I think Kinboat injected a bit of common sense into this discussion.

In the meantime, is it the case that Civ4 will be unable to have a mod with more than 16 civs, or is it only that it comes with just 16 civs? After all, you can have a PTW mod with 31 civs if you add the extra ones yourself.

That's pretty much one of the things I'd like to know as well, Civ4 will ship with 18 Civs and there is word that this shall be expandible, though no word as to where the limit will be.

[My guess is that we will definitly see 32 civ mods in the long run, as Firaxis has always left space for customization in this area. My wish would be a game with up to twice as many possible civs as we had in Civ3.]

Also there was official, yet so far uncomfirmed say that about 12 players will be able to civ in a multiplayer game. While this sounds pretty good there was no word on wether this includes the AI.

[My personal analysis says: Yes! Considering the full number of possible civs (18) and subtracting the players (12) that leaves us with 6 AI Civs. Remembering the Diplomatic screem of Civ3 it seems that the minimum multiplayer setting would allow 8 leaderhead spaces similar as in Civ3: 2 Human Players, and 6 AI Civs. Though this may well just be my very own wishful thinking]

 

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

W.i.n.t.e.r I referred you to it because if you've read it, you're surely not paying attention to it. It lays out quite clearly all of the stuff you describe as amorphous and incomplete... you make reference to statements made months ago and then graft it onto this current info.

I'm sorry, but you're the one who's talking like you've been sitting on the development meetings with the team. The only thing I have been saying is that the doom-sayers' arguments are unfounded. It's not a declaration that Civ4 will absolutely great.

So look, this is about people who want to actually make something from Civ4 and not just cry and say how much it's going to suck... so if you fellas want to stick with Civ3, then stay out of this thread.

You may be deaf on that particular ear, and apparently blind on that particular eye as well, who knows, however I am getting a bit tired to reapeating myself over and over again in saying that I expect Civ4 to be a good game and am not one of your "Doomsayers". Please quit putting my persona in one of your pre-set drawers. And please stop assuming what I know and what I don't know.

It is your right to look into the future and paint it any way you like, fair enough, I don't have anything against that, it however seems that you are taking this topic far too serious and personal by putting people off if they don't see it the way you see it. If you think we are stupid and only you hold the flame of wisdom, fair enough too, but do it in a polite way!

And you also don't have a say who posts here and who doesn't- this is Thunderfall's turf! This said, I have requested this thread to be moved- this thread should not be in the Civ3 section at all!

 

[El Justo]

Dom Pedro II,

everybody is entitled to their opinions. don't crucify someone if they do not agree w/ you.

condescension isn't really appreciated either...we're all adults here you know.

 

[Dom Pedro II]

No, El Justo... my problem is people coming into a thread that isn't "what do you think about Civ4?" but is about what we can do with Civ4 and start complaining about how bad it is.

W.i.n.t.e.r has spun around and around and around trying to rephrase his arguments each time when I have a rebuttal. I'm not the one who started talking about Civ4 like it's the freaking apocalypse... No, that was wholly you guys.

 

[Dom Pedro II]

For some reason, some of you think everybody has a right to their own opinion as long as it's just like yours.

Well, I'm sorry... but time and time again, W.i.n.t.e.r ignored what I said, ignored what Firaxis said, and opted to draw his own conclusions based on what he is so sure is going on behind the scenes but has absolutely no proof of. He created a fictitious back-tracking on Firaxis's part about the newly implemented features (I guess because they didn't make it public enough and fast enough for his liking) and has shifted his argument almost exclusively to be in opposition to whatever I'm saying. I mean, he started out saying that he was looking forward to Civ4 and has thrown that at me repeatedly and then turns around and says the exact opposite in his explanations...

the simple fact is that he's being contrary for the shear sake of being contrary in a thread that is not meant for this debate anyway

 

[ainwood]

Moderator Action: We have a good discussion here, and the potential for it to continue if you can do it in a mature way.

If you can't, then we'll be forced to close it down. Please be a little more polite in making your points.

 

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

Any news about the way one will be able to block trade lanes?

 

[Kal-el]

I believe it was mentioned that there could be up to 12 players in MP. I could be wrong though, I don't really pay MP much and so I have failed to maintain as close an eye on that aspect of the game as I should be. Limited time, and all that.

Seriously, folks. It's pretty cool. Like I said, they're still working on it, but what they have so far is far better than CIII. If you don't like the look of the game, well, you can change it. It's all moddable. Even the graphics, it's just a matter of having the tools at your disposal to do it. And there will be people with the tools, and people who get the tools simply so they can make the adjustments as needed, as there always is and always has been. From a modders point of view, I can't wait.