IGN First Trailer breakdown with Ed Beach and Dennis Shirk

[cpm4001]

Pretty sure we see the pyramids in the screenshots so it's in the game. Sphinx might be a unique building

Guess I wasn't clear enough - I know the Pyramids have been confirmed in-game, and I think we're pretty much all certain they're a wonder. What I was observing is that, while we know the photos of the Sphinx, the Forbidden Palace, the Colosseum, and the Great Wall in the trailer correspond to "two unique improvements and two wonders", we don't know if the picture shown in the trailer actually 'counts' as the Sphinx or if counts as the Pyramids (as technically both are visible in the photo).

Ergo, the question remains: if the Sphinx is being referenced, I think it's safe to assume that it's an Egyptian UI and the Great Wall is a wonder, while if the Pyramids are being referenced, then they're the second wonder and the Great Wall is a Chinese UI. There seems to be little doubt that the Forbidden Palace is a wonder and the Colosseum a Roman UI, but that's only half of the statement 'decoded'.

 

[Ryuu Falconwing]

But I'm pretty sure they have already described the pyramids as a wonder, just like they have always been.

 

[cpm4001]

But I'm pretty sure they have already described the pyramids as a wonder, just like they have always been.

Yes - I'm saying that, if Beach and Shirk were referring to the Sphinx (and not the Pyramids) as one of the "two improvements and two wonders" in the trailer, then the fact that the Pyramids are in the same photo is utterly meaningless and ergo we'd actually know three Civ VI wonders (the Pyramids, confirmed in the screenshots, and the Forbidden Palace, and the Great Wall from the trailer). On the other hand, if they were talking about the pyramids, then the Sphinx is meaningless in regards Civ VI.

Evidently, however, I'm just muddying the waters further by attempting to explain my logic, so I apologize.

 

[Toulouse]

The fog of war that looks like an ancient hand drawn map would seem to clash with the "cartoony" look of the actual game map. But maybe that is on purpose. The fog war depicts what he think the world might look like, unknown, dark, lifeless, uncertain and then as you uncover the map, you discover a world that is vibrant and full of life, as depicted by the vivid colors.

Vivid colors sure. "Full of life," no absolutely not. Shiny and fake=devoid of life, lifeless, hollow, candy-coated, empty.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Vivid colors sure. "Full of life," no absolutely not. Shiny and fake=devoid of life, lifeless, hollow, candy-coated, empty.

I am not saying I agree with it. I personally think the screenshots look cartoony. I am just trying to explain what the devs might be going for.

 

[cairnsy44]

Guess I wasn't clear enough - I know the Pyramids have been confirmed in-game, and I think we're pretty much all certain they're a wonder. What I was observing is that, while we know the photos of the Sphinx, the Forbidden Palace, the Colosseum, and the Great Wall in the trailer correspond to "two unique improvements and two wonders", we don't know if the picture shown in the trailer actually 'counts' as the Sphinx or if counts as the Pyramids (as technically both are visible in the photo).

Ergo, the question remains: if the Sphinx is being referenced, I think it's safe to assume that it's an Egyptian UI and the Great Wall is a wonder, while if the Pyramids are being referenced, then they're the second wonder and the Great Wall is a Chinese UI. There seems to be little doubt that the Forbidden Palace is a wonder and the Colosseum a Roman UI, but that's only half of the statement 'decoded'.

I wonder (no pun intended) if the Forbidden Palace IS a world wonder. It could be a unique improvement replacing the palace. It could give a better bonus than your standard one and only China could build it. I see that building and I think China. A wall is a wall, no matter how great it is.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I wonder (no pun intended) if the Forbidden Palace IS a world wonder. It could be a unique improvement replacing the palace. It could give a better bonus than your standard one and only China could build it. I see that building and I think China. A wall is a wall, no matter how great it is.

Palaces are typically buildings, not improvements, and they specifically said improvements.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Great wall is not a wall that is built around a city, it is more like a wall built around a civilization. To me the Great Wall would work well as a unique improvement that replace the fort.

If the Sphinx is in it could also work as a unique tile improvement that maybe give culture in the early game and tourism in the late game and can be built upon desert tiles.

 

[dexters]

I took Ed's comment to mean sonething slightly different. Wars in the early game will be similar to what we see in Civ today, perhaps with even less controls. When you first meet a civ you only agree to peace if not fighting but no treaty is ever formalized. There may be no 10 turn cool downs after a war. Extracting huge concessions from AI in the early game may no longer be possible as there are no peace treaties. Declaring war on someone may mean you have to be st war for an extended duration

As time goes (likely tied to techs) on war and peace becomes more formalized and we a see peace treaties and play in diplomatic conditions we are more used to. In the late game I assume the world Congress will become involved.

On a purely speculative level I feel like Ed and his team are taking the inflection point concepts in BNW and running with it. The AI may well be programmed to look at war and peace differently on the early game vs. The middle and late game

 

[cairnsy44]

Palaces are typically buildings, not improvements, and they specifically said improvements.

Excellent point. Just tried to see it from another angle, but it's probably not the right one.

 

[cairnsy44]

I took Ed's comment to mean sonething slightly different. Wars in the early game will be similar to what we see in Civ today, perhaps with even less controls. When you first meet a civ you only agree to peace if not fighting but no treaty is ever formalized. There may be no 10 turn cool downs after a war. Extracting huge concessions from AI in the early game may no longer be possible as there are no peace treaties. Declaring war on someone may mean you have to be st war for an extended duration

As time goes (likely tied to techs) on war and peace becomes more formalized and we a see peace treaties and play in diplomatic conditions we are more used to. In the late game I assume the world Congress will become involved.

On a purely speculative level I feel like Ed and his team are taking the inflection point concepts in BNW and running with it. The AI may well be programmed to look at war and peace differently on the early game vs. The middle and late game

I am fascinated to see how this plays out.