In Sid We Trust?

[Louis XXIV]

I trust Sid, because I have an idea of his background. Unfortunately, Sid isn't involved really.

I don't know about Shafer. I have to say I do not trust him.

I trust him somewhat because I've interacted with him in the past. I know Soren Johnson would be involved in chats here or at Apolyton on occasion, but always as a representative of Firaxis. Jon Shafer was a poster. I remember him being an OK Civ3 player and I have no idea about Civ4 as a player. But I do remember that he was really involved with modding. I know the guy knows history. I'm trying to remember which scenarios he did with the Civ4 expansions, but I think I remember that they tried to do a little bit different using some extra coding.

Honestly, my biggest concern with him would be that he's been too involved with Civ. A lot of times, fans of the series feel that it's perfect, it just needs added complexity. Thankfully, the early previews seem to indicate that he's not doing this. He seems to continue Soren's philosophy of Add 1/3, remove 1/3, and keep 1/3 the same (not sure the math actually works there, but I believe that's how he presented it).

 

[civ_king]

A computer wont be able to be a competent Dungeon Master for a while,


Player "I try to open the wooden door"
DM "you see it's locked"
Player "I back up 60 feet, then catch my breath, then I use my entire turn as a move action and run at the door doing a backflip off the dwarf head and attempt to kick down the door"
DM "okay what's your acrobatics"
Player "12" (backflip achieved) [DM rolls d20]
DM "your weight?"
Player "230lbs" (with gear
DM [figures out if it is enough to break the door: either a) "you plow through the rotten door crushing the orc behind it and scaring the two other orcs" or b) "you fail to break the door, okay your acrobatics is 12?"
a) Combat!
b) Player: yes
b) DM: you manage to recover but not without some pain; three very angry looking orcs open the door and attack; FIGHT!


Player "I back up 60 feet, then catch my breath, then I use my entire turn as a move action and run at the door doing a backflip off the dwarf head and attempt to kick down the door"
Computer DM "Error, not legitimate maneuver"



which is more fun?

 

[CHEESE!]

how do you make the best PC series ever have a decent console version for console players?

I must be off on the opinion trend. I thought that CivRev was the worst game ever produced and a shame to the name of Civ.

My opinion compass is broken.

 

[Thormodr]

Apparently Sid is involved now in ciV as a programmer. Sounds good.

 

[civ_king]

I must be off on the opinion trend. I thought that CivRev was the worst game ever produced and a shame to the name of Civ.

My opinion compass is broken.

my point is if you are familiar with the PC variety of Civ that CivRev would likely suck

 

[frekk]

I must be off on the opinion trend. I thought that CivRev was the worst game ever produced and a shame to the name of Civ.

It doesn't bother me ... it's not part of the main line of the franchise, it wasn't called civ5, it was some other thing off to the side. It probably helped to finance the development of civ5. I don't care if they have to make and sell other products bearing the name to make money, so long as they don't contaminate "proper" civ.

 

[frekk]

I trust him somewhat because I've interacted with him in the past. I know Soren Johnson would be involved in chats here or at Apolyton on occasion, but always as a representative of Firaxis. Jon Shafer was a poster. I remember him being an OK Civ3 player and I have no idea about Civ4 as a player. But I do remember that he was really involved with modding. I know the guy knows history. I'm trying to remember which scenarios he did with the Civ4 expansions, but I think I remember that they tried to do a little bit different using some extra coding.

Honestly, my biggest concern with him would be that he's been too involved with Civ. A lot of times, fans of the series feel that it's perfect, it just needs added complexity. Thankfully, the early previews seem to indicate that he's not doing this. He seems to continue Soren's philosophy of Add 1/3, remove 1/3, and keep 1/3 the same (not sure the math actually works there, but I believe that's how he presented it).

Well that explains alot. I kind of wondered what was going on, because I got the impression alot about the game was being targetted at diehard fans. Hexes, for instance - that's been a long-running and much debated idea around here. And diehard fans aren't really a lucrative market. That worries me a little, too.

You're right about added complexity. Complexity is good for serious fans, we all want it. But the vanilla game should probably not be terribly more complex than previous editions, or it will be too intimidating to new players. High complexity is best left to mods.

 

[-FC-Commando]

I must be off on the opinion trend. I thought that CivRev was the worst game ever produced and a shame to the name of Civ.

My opinion compass is broken.

In my opinion Civ 3 is the worst episode in the series. Ive played CivRev on the NDS when im on the road and really like it. Don't expect much complexity from a limited system.

And don't forget that console's are made for simple people not Pc gamers.

 

[Ozymandias]

I trust civ Sid to make Civ V at least as good as Civ IV

For some of us, that's called, "Damning with faint praise."

-Oz

 

[civ_king]

For some of us, that's called, "Damning with faint praise."

-Oz

I don't understand, please explain

 

[Gliese 581]

I don't understand, please explain

I second this motion.

 

[Thyrwyn]

It means to offer criticism in the appearance of praise; or, to offer a only slight compliment thereby implying that is the best that can be said. In this case, the original post is only as complementary as the poster's opinion of Civ IV

 

[civ_king]

I found Civ III good and Civ IV better,

 

[frekk]

I found civ4 better than 3 but only for one reason - the level of modability.

The vanilla games, well ... civ4 introduced some absurdities like suicide catapults that I could never truly stomach. Plus I found the graphics too busy and gaudy, the leaderheads cartoonish (just compare Cleo and Gandhi in the two versions), the implementation of religion awkward and inelegant (Buddhist Vikings?).

 

[civ_king]

maybe for Civ V we even get the EXE code (built specifically for Civ V apparently)

 

[Ozymandias]

I don't understand, please explain

Thyrwyn nailed the literal meaning.

But, apologies, I should have held my tongue (fingers?) in this forum as I am one of those trogoldytes who view C4 as a net step back from C3.

... I shall now return to the silence of a Zen monk ...

,

Oz

 

[Civinator]

I am one of those trogoldytes who view C4 as a net step back from C3.

You are not the only one. Civ 4 in my eyes was a big step backward compared to Civ3 considering the tiny worlds and ugly 3d unit graphics of Civ 4. Unfortunately it seems, that the units in Civ 5 are as ugly as these of Civ 4 and the worlds are not getting bigger.

Civ 5 also missed the chance to get rid of the immortal leaders, that haunt the civ series since the days of Civ 1.

 

[Thormodr]

In my opinion, Civ 3 was by far the worst Civ. It was really blah.
cIV was the best, at least after it got to BTS and was all patched up. So many annoying problems were eliminated.

Test of Time was close though. I really enjoyed multi-level maps and the fantasy scenario.

I think ciV has a good possibility of being the best Civ ever after all the expansions and patches.

 

[kivanc]

well. a combo of smac/ctp/civ4 would be the best.
civ4 had a few good steps from civ3 like GPs, health and change on resources. in civ3 resources gave no extra to all empire cities. mods of civ4 were also fine but i never installed any.
land improvements w/o worker, work hour/fee arrangements, empire production pool etc. of ctp were fine. unit workshop, governments, terraforming of smac were fine.
there were many small good features in every one of them but i just don't wanna count'em all now. i also liked civ1 and civ2. civ2 was the one i played most, mostly because i was a new college student at that time. i had so much free time.

civ4 also had some stepbacks. they decreased the world size from civ3 but the game still ran slower inspite of smaller world sizes. that is a big shame really. civ3 was the one that i played the least, so i don't remember much more stepbacks now.

civ4's 3d gfx is fine but useless. i prefer a faster running game. some could say a fast pc runs it well but a fast pc would run a fast running game even faster, clearly.

 

[frekk]

civ2 was the one i played most, mostly because i was a new college student at that time.

I think civ2 was probably the best entry in the franchise. It definately had alot of flaws that most players today would find unacceptable, but it was the biggest improvement over its predecessor while introducing the least new flaws. Civ3 and civ4 made some good improvements over their respective predecessors, but both of them also introduced a host of new problems (eg the SOD) or new absurdities (eg suicide catapults or Confucian Vikings).