I think Civ4 has retired my Civ career
- Thread starter astralis
- Start date
MeteorPunch
#WINNING
On the "childhood magic" subject: It's true that we were more impressed the crappy graphics and features at the time of say, Civ 1 and 2, because those games were revolutionary...at their time. With civ 4 they did not try to revolutionize, they just made little changes here and there, change to 3D, and sell it as a "new product."
The Civ 4 designers lacked forsight and innovation, choosing to stick with an old formula which is good and "safe." The game industry is becoming like the movie industry, trying to make the big thing that appeal to everyone in lieu of innovation.
Civ 4 is a good game, but not a great game.
The Civ 4 designers lacked forsight and innovation, choosing to stick with an old formula which is good and "safe." The game industry is becoming like the movie industry, trying to make the big thing that appeal to everyone in lieu of innovation.
Civ 4 is a good game, but not a great game.
MeteorPunch said:
A sequel is not designed to be a totally different game, but to take an already existing game and to add/correct some things.
Of course, a new concept become old ten years later
.If you want a totally "new" game, try other good series, such as total war and so on.
I don't think the base formula of the game is really the problem overall. I still think that building a civilization from the ground up and leading the world is fun and exciting. What I love about Civilization and am glad about in Civ IV is that each new rendition introduces something new. In Civ III, culture was added and while it wasn't perfect, I loved building culture and striving for diplomatic, cultural, and technology victories. It was certainly a flawed game but it added something new.
Civ IV adds even more and I am enjoying my discovery of all of the new additions. However, I am extremely disappointed with the graphics and the interface. I find this makes the game distracting, boring, and work like. I don't feel emersed in the world but rather bombarded by it. People argue that gameplay, not graphics, are they key. I couldn't agree more. However, while good graphics mixed with good gameplay make the game even better, terrible graphics (and I don't mean the old graphics from Civ I) can make a good game painful at times. This is what I am experiencing with Civ IV.
I am probably one of the few who loved the Civ III graphics and animations. I thought they were absolutely brilliant. I also love adding in flavour units and changing the terrain subtlely to improve it. I don't think I will care much about adding flavour units to Civ IV as I can't stand the units to begin with. After playing hours upon hours of this game, I find I get terrible headaches from staring at it. It destroys the magic that the concept brings.
Ultimately I agree, Civ will have to move on to be more dynamic in the future. I think that the programmers should take a serious look at the work of the excellent modders of Civ III in regards to a new timing system for technology and units (longer delays between new gunpowder units for example), and other such changes as these make a great game that much better. I would also like to see cultural and national flavour units, buildings, etc. In otherwords, I want to see the game more dynamic with more options so that I am not restricted to some of history but to remaking all of history. Civ IV is a great step in this direction but more will be needed to keep my interest into the future.
On a semi-related note, I completely agree with the person who argued that making a game both strategic and tactical makes the strategic useless in the long run. I learned this lesson from Rome Total War. No matter how high a difficulty I played it on so that the odds were so overwhelming against me it was silly, I could still defeat the mass computer armies on the battle field with combat tactics. The only strategic moves that were important was ensuring that I kept a bridge or some narrow area between myself and the enemy army. No matter what the size, it will always fail if it attacks on such a battlefield. After a while, it just gets ridiculous.
Civ IV adds even more and I am enjoying my discovery of all of the new additions. However, I am extremely disappointed with the graphics and the interface. I find this makes the game distracting, boring, and work like. I don't feel emersed in the world but rather bombarded by it. People argue that gameplay, not graphics, are they key. I couldn't agree more. However, while good graphics mixed with good gameplay make the game even better, terrible graphics (and I don't mean the old graphics from Civ I) can make a good game painful at times. This is what I am experiencing with Civ IV.
I am probably one of the few who loved the Civ III graphics and animations. I thought they were absolutely brilliant. I also love adding in flavour units and changing the terrain subtlely to improve it. I don't think I will care much about adding flavour units to Civ IV as I can't stand the units to begin with. After playing hours upon hours of this game, I find I get terrible headaches from staring at it. It destroys the magic that the concept brings.
Ultimately I agree, Civ will have to move on to be more dynamic in the future. I think that the programmers should take a serious look at the work of the excellent modders of Civ III in regards to a new timing system for technology and units (longer delays between new gunpowder units for example), and other such changes as these make a great game that much better. I would also like to see cultural and national flavour units, buildings, etc. In otherwords, I want to see the game more dynamic with more options so that I am not restricted to some of history but to remaking all of history. Civ IV is a great step in this direction but more will be needed to keep my interest into the future.
On a semi-related note, I completely agree with the person who argued that making a game both strategic and tactical makes the strategic useless in the long run. I learned this lesson from Rome Total War. No matter how high a difficulty I played it on so that the odds were so overwhelming against me it was silly, I could still defeat the mass computer armies on the battle field with combat tactics. The only strategic moves that were important was ensuring that I kept a bridge or some narrow area between myself and the enemy army. No matter what the size, it will always fail if it attacks on such a battlefield. After a while, it just gets ridiculous.
Eigenvector
Molekh has nothing on me!
I am with the original poster to some degree. I do find that this game is exactly the same as the original. Sure they added some other aspects, but it is the same game fundamentally. However, I enjoy it for the same reason why I enjoy every other FPS that I own - the overall concept is fun. I don't find the graphics to be a distraction at all, I rather prefer them to the old Civ I style. I very much dislike the cutsey comments and inside jokes they added to the game - the first time you hear them its nice, but they get stale real fast.
One thing that has always bothered me about this simulation. Why can't they go ahead and combine the concepts that the original poster layed out? If I'm not mistaken Sid Meier developed SimCity. Why not combine Civilization with SimCity and provide the player with a TRULY different experience by giving them the chance to actually simulate the city as well as the simulation? It could be the next great online gaming experience - SimCity + Civilization + The Sims. Something like that could be earthshaking to the community, an epic truly integrated simulation. Why this rehash of stale material known as Civ4?
One thing that has always bothered me about this simulation. Why can't they go ahead and combine the concepts that the original poster layed out? If I'm not mistaken Sid Meier developed SimCity. Why not combine Civilization with SimCity and provide the player with a TRULY different experience by giving them the chance to actually simulate the city as well as the simulation? It could be the next great online gaming experience - SimCity + Civilization + The Sims. Something like that could be earthshaking to the community, an epic truly integrated simulation. Why this rehash of stale material known as Civ4?
DrewBledsoe
Veteran QB
Psyringe said:Well written post, although I don't agree with the final verdict.
To be blunt, I don't think that any reinvention of the game would save it for you, because ... well ... you seem to be looking for some "childhood magic" that you just can't get any more as an adult. That's not meant to be offensive, it's something that I've experienced myself on a number of occasions.
When Civ1 came out 15 years ago, I was much, much easier to impress (and to satisfy). For example, I played it for years before I even noticed how horribly the AI was cheating, and even when I found out, I just shrugged. For Civ4, I find myself designing testbeds with the world builder to see whether the AI plays fair. I know much more about computers, games, game design etc. now than I did 15 years ago. The AI didn't *feel* like a cheating idiot back then because I didn't know how to unmask it. Today, I see behind the mask. Playing Civ1 isn't much fun any more for me.
I think the same happened to you. When you first encountered Civ1, it didn't *feel* like a giant database because you didn't have enough knowledge to spot the database behind the mask. But every strategy game is such a database at heart. There's no way for you to "unlearn" your knowledge, and there's no way how any game can ever bring you back the magic of the days when you couldn't see behind the mask.
In a way it's a Santa Claus effect - as a child, not knowing the truth behind the mask, you can experience the magic. But after learning that it's just your uncle in strange clothing, there's no way going back. You may still enjoy the performance for what it is, but the magic will be gone.
I think you've just grown up.
Personally, I don't think I'll ever grow up this way. I know that games are just numbers and databases. But I still have no difficulties immersing myself in a game's world. I think I'll never stop playing these games.
What ? Santa Claus isnt real ..nooooooooooo.....
Fieryphoenix
Not a halibut
Civilization is in essence a terrific computer-moderated boardgame with AI so you don't have to play with other people. Your complaint falls along the lines of "Chess is too boring. All the games are the same, it's just a whole lot of knights jumping and castling and crap."
And, you're right. You're bored by it. But that's not a problem with the game... it's a feature! It's possible to make a different style of game and give it the Civilization Brand Name... but it would be a little dishonest. Rather than encourage that to happen, just do what you're already doing: leave Civ behind for as long as it bores you, and explore other varieties of game!
And, you're right. You're bored by it. But that's not a problem with the game... it's a feature! It's possible to make a different style of game and give it the Civilization Brand Name... but it would be a little dishonest. Rather than encourage that to happen, just do what you're already doing: leave Civ behind for as long as it bores you, and explore other varieties of game!
xyourxmomxcorex
Pwnage
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 275
Thats how i feel. When i first got civ, i completly did not understand the game, but it was FUN AS HELL. Then as i got better, and understood, it became much more monotounus. Fun, but not as before.Psyringe said:Well written post, although I don't agree with the final verdict.
To be blunt, I don't think that any reinvention of the game would save it for you, because ... well ... you seem to be looking for some "childhood magic" that you just can't get any more as an adult. That's not meant to be offensive, it's something that I've experienced myself on a number of occasions.
When Civ1 came out 15 years ago, I was much, much easier to impress (and to satisfy). For example, I played it for years before I even noticed how horribly the AI was cheating, and even when I found out, I just shrugged. For Civ4, I find myself designing testbeds with the world builder to see whether the AI plays fair. I know much more about computers, games, game design etc. now than I did 15 years ago. The AI didn't *feel* like a cheating idiot back then because I didn't know how to unmask it. Today, I see behind the mask. Playing Civ1 isn't much fun any more for me.
I think the same happened to you. When you first encountered Civ1, it didn't *feel* like a giant database because you didn't have enough knowledge to spot the database behind the mask. But every strategy game is such a database at heart. There's no way for you to "unlearn" your knowledge, and there's no way how any game can ever bring you back the magic of the days when you couldn't see behind the mask.
In a way it's a Santa Claus effect - as a child, not knowing the truth behind the mask, you can experience the magic. But after learning that it's just your uncle in strange clothing, there's no way going back. You may still enjoy the performance for what it is, but the magic will be gone.
I think you've just grown up.
Personally, I don't think I'll ever grow up this way. I know that games are just numbers and databases. But I still have no difficulties immersing myself in a game's world. I think I'll never stop playing these games.
I couldn't disagree more with astralis. I am also an old gamer - started playing Civ1 in th 90s. Civ4 is by far thae best game from Firaxis and Sid Meier. Almost all that was wrong in Civ3 is repaired in Civ4. In Civ3 you had to micromanage every turn and control the scientific rate most of the time. Also the AI was Stupid. The only reason I play Civ3 now is the Warhammer mod which hasn't come to Civ4.
Vanilla Civ has always bored me. But the Mods for each Civ title is what kept me playing all these years. Civ 4 has so much potential in this regard and SDK should be out fairly soon.
Take a break for a few months, then come back when more quality mods are released.
Take a break for a few months, then come back when more quality mods are released.
You know... that's exactly what I do at work.
(toss in .NET applications, and you're there). If you want to go the philosophical route, then yeah, all programs, including games, have their similarities. (you're essentially working with a huge database, checking numbers, etc. In the end, it's nothing but bits and pixels.) The meaning of cyberlife, perhaps? I have played all civs until now and the revolution is in its online multiplayer games. You seem to have reduced the game to a solo computer game (with scripts, fake AI,....). It seems that this game was built for an online gameplay.
I do like this game because i can finish it in 24hours (or a week end). I am sadly not good enough to play it with a team.
But i do think that you should join a league and do some challenges against real people.
I do like this game because i can finish it in 24hours (or a week end). I am sadly not good enough to play it with a team.
But i do think that you should join a league and do some challenges against real people.
Eigenvector
Molekh has nothing on me!
The online community is for 12 to 16 year olds that don't have social lives/skills. Unless you're prepared to duke it out with some punk who has an uber-win cheat sheet in his hand don't bother.
Small WAN play groups among friends is the real way to go.
Small WAN play groups among friends is the real way to go.
Eigenvector said:
This is exactly why I played all of three or so multiplayer Civ III games before calling it quits. I cannot stand the vulgar, immature, punks who simply ruined the gaming experience. I want to play with people of all skill levels who don't just know how to play but want to enjoy the experience of building an empire. Too many thought Civ III online was something like Age of Empires. In addition, I also cannot stand the filth they spew constantly and their method of speaking; I believe it is called "leet" speak? Whatever it is, it is rubish.
Which leads me to an idea. Is it possible for a forum to be established where people who want to enjoy an intelligent and relaxed (not pacifist but relaxed in the sense that people enjoy the game and aren't openly hostile and rude) game of Civ IV can try to arrange some? I feel this might be the only way that I find some quality games with polite, intelligent people who are playing for the experience.
Asterothe
Warlord
If you compare other type of games to Civ and think that Civs are
database manupulation mAybe you don't like this genre anymore. After
all all the games are database manupulation.
database manupulation mAybe you don't like this genre anymore. After
all all the games are database manupulation.
Very well written message.... I disagree though, IMO Civ4 reduced micromanagement because it added more features to customize your civ, and took away city sprawl and pollution and whatnot. I couldn't play CivIII BECAUSE of the micromanagement, but I am a civ4 addict.
If you play too much of any type of game it can get boring. I've played MMOs for 2 years and I'm in dire need of a break... so tired of grinding.
If I were you I'd set the game down for a few months, play other games and come back with a fresh new look at the game, with a subjective and fair look at it. I see alot of people complaining about civ4 because it's not what they get used to, you are entitled to dislike the game, but please give it an honest try before tossing it aside ^^
And I agree... the graphics are under par. I try to go for gameplay over graphics though... and there are some interesting details in Civ4...
If you play too much of any type of game it can get boring. I've played MMOs for 2 years and I'm in dire need of a break... so tired of grinding.
If I were you I'd set the game down for a few months, play other games and come back with a fresh new look at the game, with a subjective and fair look at it. I see alot of people complaining about civ4 because it's not what they get used to, you are entitled to dislike the game, but please give it an honest try before tossing it aside ^^
And I agree... the graphics are under par. I try to go for gameplay over graphics though... and there are some interesting details in Civ4...
Cataphract887
Prince
Some of you seem to be missing the OP point, or what i percieved it as. the game not being civilization but instead a manipulation of 1's and 0's, in the form of boring gameplay. This has ruined a number of games for me, as i cannot immerse myself due to a extremely competitive nature. however,some games have gotten the magic back a little. serious sam, a cheapie game, really was a blast to play, and i had done UT etc for years. i think the declining nature of the gaming industry( side note:see the scratchware manifesto anyone?) is to blame for much of this. my favourite game of the moment, Enemy Territory (a mod for Wolfenstien) has been a fun enough game that i havnt bothered to watch the stats like i normally do, and still played it to win. I think the people blaming the original poster are way off target. awesome gaming experiances are still out there,past the copy protection, 3D, and shallow gameplay infested games being poured out on the market.
I agree 99% with the original post. i never sneaked civ1 in, but i did play it in '94 when i was just 7 years old(!) infact i just played a game of civ2 3 hours ago, so saying ''if you went back, you would realize how weak it was'' argument wouldnt seem to have merit with me. however, that experiance is still weakened by my ability to see the man behind the curtain. i am sure that magic experiance is possible, as ive had it playing other non strategy games, like Call of Duty or medal of honor. those games were awesome!! why cant Civ ante up? is it because current gaming industry CEO's quiver in their boots at the thought of a risky and table-turning game?
I agree 99% with the original post. i never sneaked civ1 in, but i did play it in '94 when i was just 7 years old(!) infact i just played a game of civ2 3 hours ago, so saying ''if you went back, you would realize how weak it was'' argument wouldnt seem to have merit with me. however, that experiance is still weakened by my ability to see the man behind the curtain. i am sure that magic experiance is possible, as ive had it playing other non strategy games, like Call of Duty or medal of honor. those games were awesome!! why cant Civ ante up? is it because current gaming industry CEO's quiver in their boots at the thought of a risky and table-turning game?
Similar threads
