Huge New CIV Update, Largest to Date

[oldStatesman]

And let's hope scripted events make a comeback. They were the worst loss from Civ2.

They used scripts in Civ2? Interesting...used judiciously they could help alleviate some of the issues the AI has in higher levels....I guess I've only really played Civ3 and it does not seem to have scripted events so far in my limited experience.

 

[ComradeDavo]

The following information comes from the German magazine Computerbildspiele.
<snipped>

Wow, this sounds amazing! I can't wait Am so going to have get another job to buy a new computer to play it though!

I'm liking the sound of 85 techs as well...lots of variation hopefully

 

[Volstag]

Nothing is safe when it comes to the concept of Religion. Millions have died over history because of Religious wars, some fought over the tiniest thing such as the meaning of one word or line of scripture.

This will sound trite, but: If you don't like the implementation of religion in Civ, don't buy it, don't play it. To me it's no different than the "Last Temptation of Christ" or "The Passion of the Christ" -- everyone, initially, is fussin' and snortin', but after a couple months, no one cares anymore (because, ultimately, it's inconsequential).

-V

 

[oldStatesman]

This will sound trite, but: If you don't like the implementation of religion in Civ, don't buy it, don't play it.

I'm sure Firaxis will like that ...don't buy it if you don't like one thing about it. ... unfortunately if enough people come to feel that way there will be no more Civ...In the end I may not buy it or play it...or I may. Depends on the overall product.

As far as I know Civ4 is not even ready yet...and I thought the point of these discussions is to voice our views on what may make it a better game...in the hope that by hearing our ideas the programmers/designers/bean-counters will be helped to make it attractive to more people not less. If I am wrong I will not waste anymore time here and will stop posting.

 

[Slax]

What religion is founded when the technology "Giant Death Robots" are discovered?

 

[dh_epic]

Religion was already in the game in the form of Temples and Cathedrals and Monotheism and so on. It's not a question of whether religion should be in, but to what degree. Obviously it's a vital part of history, but so is eating. In theory, eating is in the game, since you can assume that's part of unit upkeep fees. Should they flesh out religion and eating as two new killer features for Civ 4? My answer, on both, is that there are better features to focus on.

I agree with oldStatesman. They could have implemented a culture-based system of "convert and divide" without ever explicitly referring to religion. You would have gotten MORE out of it since it would apply to all ages, rather than religion which changes its function from era to era.

But they decided to flesh out religion. That's that. And I think they're intelligent enough to dodge that stuff. They already said they've dodged traits, and thus they've dodged the contraversy of trying to distill thousands of years of religious legacy to "who's more commercial? who's more militaristic?"

Hopefully they won't have holy wars, let alone create little Jesuses and Buddhas that can walk around killing each other.

 

[oldStatesman]

What religion is founded when the technology "Giant Death Robots" are discovered?

That would be the Butlerian's.

 

[Philips beard]

My apologies if I offended you, I have my views and will continue to express them in a reasonable and polite manner. Isn't that what this forum is for? To discuss the features we are hearing about, to hear different views? If you disagree, post your reasons; I truly want to understand them. Debate is the purest form of education...

Hehe, I'm sorry if I was to rude in my attitude!

I can be a bit harsh sometimes, especially when my fotball team back in Norway is doing badly! But this evening they won! O yeah! I love ya' all, fans of Civilizaton!

 

[Yuri2356]

That would be the Butlerian's.

*whispers* I don't they've read Dune...

 

[oldStatesman]

Hehe, I'm sorry if I was to rude in my attitude!

I can be a bit harsh sometimes, especially when my fotball team back in Norway is doing badly! But this evening they won! O yeah! I love ya' all, fans of Civilizaton!

No problem.

Ahhh, sweet victory on the pitch can do wonders for attitude...hey maybe they can implement some form of real sport in Civ5 ... A World Cup victory condition!

 

[Praetorian]

so your character will get upset at you?

I alway thought that when I started a game and the chose a nation, for example the mongols with GK as the leader, I was 'assuming the role of GK' - role playng?.

So If, as GK, I wish to be nice and humane , I will become angry with myself? Will this lead to suicidal tendincies :suicide: ?

 

[ybbor]

I think i intepreted they're stance on religon very differantly than you guys did. they said each religon would have the same generic abilities. I take that to mean they do exactly the same thing. It's like they're alliances. you align yourself with one religon and all leaders of that same religon like you more. same with the people in your cities. i don't think it's going to work like a trait (which is what i wish they would have done)

 

[Praetorian]

Argh! Stop being so political correct in everything! Religion must in, because it has played a vital part in human history, and that's final!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't know, he has a valid point. But, on the other hand it is a game and all the real life add-ins to the fantasy environment seems to spice things up. The real question is, are we intelligent enough to differentaite between real life and a game?

 

[covenant]

Well I am actually alot more nervous about this game now. For all the good they have thrown in, it seems they ignored the two worst problems in civ 3, the victory conditions and diplomacy, and have introduced a new one, religion.

If the victory conditions are the same, there is no reason to play the game differently then it is now in Civ3, where territory is the only important thing. For all the good some of these great sounding features can bring, if it still comes down to territory the game fundementally stays the same, and therefore will have the exact same problems as civ 3 a good but fundementally flawed game.

And nothing, not a hint about dimplomacy except the lame-arse UN victory. God if diplomacy is not improved in Civ4, I dont care how good the game looks, its not for me. Diplomacy is probably the most important interaction in human history, deciding everything under the sun. It scares me that nothing has been mentioned about that.

And religion. Why implement an evolving non-named government system and not an evolving non-named religious system that avoids names all together. Its the names people get stuck on. Why not stick to generic names like monotheism, polythesism, totem, fundamentalism, etc. The game is not even out and people are already arguing in this thread about religion.

Please please please to god (opps, that is a generic non faith god) let them be working on diplomacy now, and the reason we have heard nothing is that it is still being put together.

Again alot of this stuff sounds awesome, and I cant wait to see a double your pleasure mod to bring the techs up to a decent number... but I am not sold yet on this game.

 

[Chazbagel]

I like your style.

 

[oldStatesman]

If the victory conditions are the same, there is no reason to play the game differently then it is now in Civ3, where territory is the only important thing. For all the good some of these great sounding features can bring, if it still comes down to territory the game fundementally stays the same, and therefore will have the exact same problems as civ 3 a good but fundementally flawed game.

And nothing, not a hint about dimplomacy except the lame-arse UN victory. God if diplomacy is not improved in Civ4, I dont care how good the game looks, its not for me. Diplomacy is probably the most important interaction in human history, deciding everything under the sun. It scares me that nothing has been mentioned about that.

Great observations.

 

[Micaelis Rex]

8 new screenshots are now online at my site. You can find all 24 released screenshots at MRex Online, which you can get to through the link in my signature.

 

[Commander Bello]

They look pretty interesting, Micaelis Rex!
But still, units look much too big compared to the environment :-(

 

[Yuri2356]

If the victory conditions are the same, there is no reason to play the game differently then it is now in Civ3, where territory is the only important thing. For all the good some of these great sounding features can bring, if it still comes down to territory the game fundementally stays the same, and therefore will have the exact same problems as civ 3 a good but fundementally flawed game.

The ends are the same, but that dones't mean the means are unchanged. Just look back at Civ2, it had a spaceship win and a conquest win, but if you tried to reach those victories in Civ3 with Civ2 methods, you would fail horribly. It's the same goal, but on a whole new playing field.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

You know, Covenant, you have managed to express ALL of my key concerns-so far-about this game. The lack of mention of diplomacy-and trade-seems like a 'tacit' admission that they have done precious little to improve these still very lacking components of the game (strange given the excellent template they have in SMAC).
In addition, it feels like with victory conditions they have just gone 'what victory conditions should we add? Oh, what the hell, lets just get all the ones from Civ3 and tack them on to the end of the game!' This is especially frustrating given their claim that this version was being built 'from the ground up'-a PERFECT opportunity to introduce lots of new and exciting victories which totally 'broke the mould' of previous civ games. Also, the fact the victories are the same also suggests that the way you achieve them will be the same too-i.e. the amount of land you have, rather than the quality of the land and/or how you use it.
As for religion, I definitely feel it lacks 'bang for the buck'. It seems like little more than a label which has an effect on happiness and diplomacy-all things which could have been done within the existing culture system. Not to blow my own trumpet, but I put forward a VERY simple, yet effective-IMHO-model for religion which was generic, but could have a MAJOR impact on overall victory and the way in which you played the game-whilst also leaving players with the maximum of choices!
I have to say that-on what I know right now-I am more likely to not buy this game than to buy it-which will be the first for me in the ENTIRE franchise ! I just hope that a lot of the info here is either wrong-or in its infancy-and that closer to the date I will start to hear stuff about the game which can REALLY grab my interest and attention!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.