IGN Article" How Civ6 will redefine art design"

[dexters]

Have you "Civ VI is a simple game for mobiles" ever looked at any of the FEATURES the game will have?
If mobile games are that epic and feature-rich, damn tell me some good ones I want to play them.

If looking just the graphic side of things, we will have different units for cultures, day and night cycle, more details when zooming and probably much more.
I launched Civ V, and after 2000+ hours, daaaamn that game looks static and moldy compared to what we have seen of Civ VI so far.

These internet "George Luca$$ raped my childhood with Jar Jar" -complainers sometime feel like they are just on bandwagon.

But George did all that and he traveled back in time aND did it again. ��

In all fairness we've all seen 3 screens so far and it is not unfair to say they've been underwhelming.

I'm glad they are going for a living world and more variation. But I can't judge any of it until we see more screens and footage

 

[MosheLevi]

Yes, there is no reason it *couldn't* work, but there are probably reasons why the art designers decided against it. Maybe very good ones. But the article didn't go in depth as to why the artists didn't use every particular solution. I don't think any of us (people who didn't design the art) can come up with all the reasons why the artists would decide not to use a certain solution, so I don't think it's reasonable to extrapolate from their decisions to explain why they made them.

Oh yes, they had very good reason to go with cartoony graphics - they wanted to have the same game engine for PC and for tablets.
Realistic graphics like in Civ 5 won't work on tablets because they require good video card.

So I guess that is fine by me, I will buy Civ 6 for my tablet for $10 instead of paying $60 for the PC version.

 

[nyyfootball]

The problem is your logic doesn't hold up, because by that logic the art style you wanted for Civ VI was "a little big bigger version of" CiV. That's what you would've preferred, right?

I would love it if Civ VI would have been a bigger version of CiV, instead of a bigger version of Civ Revolution.

I think Firaxis misunderstand what it is about Civilization that appeals to people. People like the simulation aspects of the game as much if not more than the board game aspects. The Eternal War is an excellent example of this phenomenon.https://www.reddit.com/comments/uxpil/ive_been_playing_the_same_game_of_civilization_ii/

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy board games, Risk and Settlers of Catan are both great board games, but they are just that, board games. Civilization is more than just a board game, it is simulation of the progress of human civilization and a means to explore the possibilities of human civilization and to educate on subjects ranging from history, literature and art, to international relation, economics and sociology. In fact, Civ is used a teaching tool quite often. http://www2.css.edu/app/depts/his/historyjournal/index.cfm?cat=5&art=147 http://www.gamification.co/2014/04/16/how-a-teacher-used-civilization-iv-to-teach-roman-history/ http://www.e-ir.info/2012/06/18/how-civilization-became-a-course/ https://paxsims.wordpress.com/2014/09/07/teaching-international-relations-through-popular-games-culture-and-simulations-part-1/ http://www.iar-gwu.org/content/using-videogames-teach-international-relations


Civilization is not supposed to be mindless. It supposed to be a game which stimulates your mental faculties and hopefully makes you think and learn. Whether you are more interested in grand strategy, empire building, economic simulation, or international relations simulation, the player should feel like they learned something and didn't just randomly and cartoonishly blow stuff up.

 

[ldvhl]

Civilization is not supposed to be mindless. It supposed to be a game which stimulates your mental faculties and hopefully makes you think and learn. Whether you are more interested in grand strategy, empire building, economic simulation, or international relations simulation, the player should feel like they learned something and didn't just randomly and cartoonishly blow stuff up.

Do you have an inside source at Firaxis that let you test their current build? How do you know anything you're claiming about CiVI?

 

[bjbrains]

It's hard to take that kind of claim seriously when all the interviews with Ed Beach and others are about how they want to make you think more and have fewer 'automatic' decisions.

 

[hugojackson18]

Spoiler :

HAHAHA now THAT's a screenshot! Where did you get that from? xD I love the touch of the Pyramids in the sea...

 

[nyyfootball]

I can NEVER understand why people push Civ 5 to be a realistic game when it has NEVER been ever about realism and has always sacrificed realism for gameplay. (For crying out loud the leaders are immortal!)

I didn't say anything about Civ 5 being any more of less realistic than this new game. Read one of my previous posts from a few years ago. I have the habit of changing my leader's names and qualities periodically throughout the game to enhance the illusions of temporal change. I have always been an advocate of dynamic system of government in Civilization games.

I think the "desire to have fancy graphics" is a shallow need that makes absolutely no pint. Graphics rarely define the game, there's countless of games that are amazing who have had bad graphics. Graphics aren't that bad to begin with.

My issue is with the visual aesthetic, not the quality of the graphics. For Civ, the visual presentation is central to the gameplay. The core mechanics of happiness and well being are all dependent on access to improvements. My virtual citizens shouldn't have to drive 100 miles just to go to school every day or to visit the theater.

Civ 6 relies on visual language.

I understand this. That is why it is so important to present the visuals in a manner which reflects the nature of the gameplay and not the other way around.

They want you to know where your units are and what those units are.

There are more efficient graphical ways to do with. Total War's and Cities: Skyline scaling is an excellent example of this. Kerbal Space Program also does an excellent job which graphical representations of scaling.

The big wonders are to pin point that the AI/you have an important thing that you could potentially conquer and gain, where a small size Pyramids would have you scratching for which city to actually conquer.

The physical size does not need to equal strategic importance. Especially considering the pyramids, which in reality were extremely big grave sites, which served no function to society expect to invoke civic pride and religious unity. If the Hittites invaded Egypt, the Pyramids would have been the least of their worries.

The color coordinated districts are also a rather obvious.

Color coordinated? The districts are on distinct tiles completely separate from the city itself.

Spoiler :

And now that we have the annoucement of a time cycle means we can play around with lighting and I'm sure there's going to be mods fairly quickly that bypass all of that.

The day-night cycle does not appear to serve any game play function. Civ isn't supposed to be a real time game anyway.

To me makes no sense to judge a game purely by graphics as opposed to gameplay. It's like dissing someone saying they're not attractive enough without getitng to know their personality.

Read my objections to the new district system in the other thread. Firaxis appears to have taken one big step away from reality with this.

Not to mention that the simple graphics are undoubtedly going ease the specs fo the game.

I thought that's what Civ Revolution was for? Or why just make a game natively that can cater to that specific demographic instead of dumbing down the game?

 

[nyyfootball]

Do you have an inside source at Firaxis that let you test their current build? How do you know anything you're claiming about CiVI?

I am basing my opinions on the several press releases and interviews which have been released.

 

[Haig]

Oh yes, they had very good reason to go with cartoony graphics - they wanted to have the same game engine for PC and for tablets.
Realistic graphics like in Civ 5 won't work on tablets because they require good video card.

So I guess that is fine by me, I will buy Civ 6 for my tablet for $10 instead of paying $60 for the PC version.

I'm sorry mate but what are you trying to say? Realistic graphics, no matter how static or simple are more demanding?

From everything I have read and seen on VI, it will be more demanding on the computer, Civ V has very little movement beside the resource animals moving around, and the improvements have way less details than the ones in VI screenshots.

I don't want to insult you but it seems almost as if you have made your mind about this being very simple graphics that will work on my android phone like some Angry Birds game, and can't give the game a chance or wait at least for, say, gameplay video.

 

[nyyfootball]

It's hard to take that kind of claim seriously when all the interviews with Ed Beach and others are about how they want to make you think more and have fewer 'automatic' decisions.

There's a difference between micro-managing and creative thought.

The new AI, which appears to be a kind of deep learning AI, is a major step in the right direction. I am wondering, however, if the AI's education is maintained over several games, or if it restarts after every game. I would love to play an AI like AlphaGO in Civilization and see how it creatively and intuitively reacts to my actions.

 

[shaglio]

I wonder if the new Fog of War, with it's hand-drawn map, will mean a return to the Civ 1-4 style of mystery surrounding newly buit cities. In Civ 5, when an AI built a new city, it just instantly poppod up on your map. But in Civs 1-4, you had no idea that I new city was founded until you re-explored the area.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

When has this game EVER BEEN ABOUT REALISM?

This game has NEVER been about realism

Your leaders are immortal beings who live from 4000! It's like.. you want things that don't make sense!?

That's what I don't get.

"Color coordinated? The districts are on distinct tiles completely separate from the city itself. "

So that you can distinguish from a glance which district is what.

"My issue is with the visual aesthetic, not the quality of the graphics. For Civ, the visual presentation is central to the gameplay. The core mechanics of happiness and well being are all dependent on access to improvements. My virtual citizens shouldn't have to drive 100 miles just to go to school every day or to visit the theater. "

Umm, this isn't an "empire simulation" it's a "turn-based empire strategy" game. It's not even Grand Strategy like Europa Universalis. Hence the misporportions. This game doesn't need them.

This isn't a simulation, it has never been a simulation, and likely will never be a simulation.

This game, correct me if I'm wrong is originally BASED off a BOARD GAME.

"There are more efficient graphical ways to do with. Total War's and Cities: Skyline scaling is an excellent example of this. Kerbal Space Program also does an excellent job which graphical representations of scaling. " Both Total War and City Skyline are real time and hence need to be somewhat realistic, not to mention that Skylines is a completely different genre. I'm sure Civ Rome was more porpotionate than Civ itself.

"The physical size does not need to equal strategic importance. Especially considering the pyramids, which in reality were extremely big grave sites, which served no function to society expect to invoke civic pride and religious unity. If the Hittites invaded Egypt, the Pyramids would have been the least of their worries. "

Except this isn't real history, it's Civilization. The Pyramids offer a bonus I might want, so I'd personally WANT to see which city posses the Pyramids.

 

[Haig]

I'm really bothered that my titanic, skyscraper-size archers looming over cities are wearing too bright capes.

 

[ferenginar]

Wow, they're binging back the wonder movies. I hope they're also bringing back the option to click out so that you didn't have to sit through the stupid waste of time over and over again.

 

[dexters]

You mean you don't like kaiju movies and Pacific Rim? Gypsy Danger is totally to scale as a robotic infantry in my game of Civ

 

[ldvhl]

I am basing my opinions on the several press releases and interviews which have been released.

So, in other words, you're guessing based on limited information.

 

[civvver]

The only thing that civ5 did graphically that was really backwards from civ4 was rivers. They still look horrid, civ4 rivers a lot better. Otherwise everything was cleaner, a good improvement. Some of the resources still look silly but the did in civ4 as well. I'd imagine civ6 will just clean things up even more. Not that worried about it. The art direction seems fine. Don't really care if it's borderline cartoon as long as it plays well.

 

[nyyfootball]

When has this game EVER BEEN ABOUT REALISM?

This game has NEVER been about realism

Realism or at least simulation is one of the main appeals of this game for many people. The Eternal War is an excellent example of this. Also, my examples of Civ being used a teaching tool for a variety of subject is also evidence of this appeal.

Your leaders are immortal beings who live from 4000! It's like.. you want things that don't make sense!?

That's what I don't get.

Read my comments on this older post. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=563692

"Color coordinated? The districts are on distinct tiles completely separate from the city itself. "

So that you can distinguish from a glance which district is what.

The "campus district", the "holy site district" and the "theatre district" are all pretty easy to distinguish in the screenshots and do not appear to be melded with the cities themselves, but instead resemble improvements.

Umm, this isn't an "empire simulation" it's a "turn-based empire strategy" game. It's not even Grand Strategy like Europa Universalis. Hence the misporportions. This game doesn't need them.

This isn't a simulation, it has never been a simulation, and likely will never be a simulation.

This game, correct me if I'm wrong is originally BASED off a BOARD GAME.

Actaully the board game came in 2002, long after the original game came out. The completely unrelated board game from 1980 just also happened to be entitled Civilization, a fact which Sid Meier was unaware of until it was pointed out to him, thus requiring him to by the rights to the name "Civilization" from Avalon Hill. Sid Meier's Civilization has always been a computer game and should always be.

Both Total War and City Skyline are real time and hence need to be somewhat realistic, not to mention that Skylines is a completely different genre. I'm sure Civ Rome was more porpotionate than Civ itself.

City building and urban planning would be a great addition to Civ and would greatly richen the gameplay experience. One of my constant complaints from previous Civ games is that the cities arbitrarily grow out from a center of mass or origin point in example the same dimensions in every direction. I would love to see organic urban sprawl and I see the new district system as a stepping stone towards this.

Except this isn't real history, it's Civilization. The Pyramids offer a bonus I might want, so I'd personally WANT to see which city posses the Pyramids.

Many people play Civ because they enjoy the historical aspects of the game.

I don't disagree that building should not be visible to the player. My issue is with scaling. Having a pyramid be the same size as an entire city is kind of ridiculous.

Also, I agree that the pyramids should carry some sort of bonus, preferably to civic pride or happiness. I don't believe that it makes sense that the pyramids would be so valuable as to resort to violence in order to control them.

 

[nyyfootball]

So, in other words, you're guessing based on limited information.

My opinions are very limited. I am asking a lot of questions.

I do not know exactly how the gameplay will actually work. I can only infer at this point.

 

[Haig]

Posted this on another topic too, but can't resist putting it here, some reactions to the first screenshots from Civ IV(go to Civ IV forums and to the very first pages):

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!

*

The graphics aren't as much "cute" as they are "cartoony". Cute is different.

*

-has anyone seen the January PC Gamer? they have some screens from Civ 4 and, phew, THEY ARE UGLY! i really hope this is just a prototype that Sid's banged together to test things. hopefully his art department will freak out and set him straight.

*

It really does look a lot like Heroes IV at the moment. And that's not a good thing. But we'll see what happens.

*

Whoa! That looks weird. I definately hope the graphics are changed before the game comes out.

*

I don't really mind if it looks like warcraft...

So long as it doesn't PLAY like warcraft.