• Civ7 is already available! Happy playing :).

Leader Switching

Civ2 is the first Civ game I played, but my memories before Civ4 are pretty hazy. And since Civ4 there has definitely been an increasing focus on the leader.
All Civ games (except for Civ2) put major focus on the leader, though with increments. Civ3 debuted (hilariously ugly) animated leaderheads, Civ4 added body language, Civ5 voice acting.

If I'm honest, I kind of prefer the Civ1 style of diplomacy?
1735921447530.png


There is something very charming and authentic about 2D Cutscenes, flanked with lofi soundtrack. If someone were to design a Civ-like with similar pixellated leaders + midi jingles diplomacy screens in this present-day and age, i'd be inclined to buy it on charm alone.
 
There is something very charming and authentic about 2D Cutscenes, flanked with lofi soundtrack. If someone were to design a Civ-like with similar pixellated leaders + midi jingles diplomacy screens in this present-day and age, i'd be inclined to buy it on charm alone.
I've been suggesting traditionally animated leaders for a while. It will never happen and wouldn't actually be less work than the 3D leaders, but I can dream. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: j51
I've been suggesting traditionally animated leaders for a while. It will never happen and wouldn't actually be less work than the 3D leaders, but I can dream. :D
Something like what Paradox used for Stellaris could work well. It's very moddable, has some movement for the characters, and has some variation between them. Could open up more capability to have "ministers" who are unique to a Civ (i.e., Hamilton, Dulles, Mahan, etc.).

But, I really don't understand why the 3D leader models are as labor-intensive as they are made out to be. It's not like creating a video game character that needs to be capable of a wide variety of unscripted movements and potentially have thousands of lines of dialog.
 
Eh.

In Civ2 you interacted with the Ambassador, with the leader's painted portrait visible in the background.
Well, some of those leaders were completely fictional characters, like Shakala, so maybe generic ambassadors were the way to go for that game? :mischief:
 
Something like what Paradox used for Stellaris could work well. It's very moddable, has some movement for the characters, and has some variation between them. Could open up more capability to have "ministers" who are unique to a Civ (i.e., Hamilton, Dulles, Mahan, etc.).

But, I really don't understand why the 3D leader models are as labor-intensive as they are made out to be. It's not like creating a video game character that needs to be capable of a wide variety of unscripted movements and potentially have thousands of lines of dialog.
Civ leaders aren't designed like RPG characters where they have a single skeleton or low-poly body. All of the animations have to be created individually (I'm not sure if they're motion captured or not).
 
The only 'customization' I require at Release is the ability to rename any Leader or Civ that I play. I can squint and pretend that Augustus is the Scipio Apricatus that I've renamed him, and that 'Rome' is now Slobbovia or the Free State of Gorgonzola.

Any features or 'bonuses' associated with Leaders and Civs are rarely so specific they cannot be conceptually applied to others, and the costumes the leaders are wearing are rarely accurate enough to make any difference to me.

Let me play as anyone I choose, including Odius Asparagus or Great Ydvig, the Jewish viking leading Civs like Phoeniocopia the trading state or Vespucciland the Misnamed and I'm happy . . .
 
Civ leaders aren't designed like RPG characters where they have a single skeleton or low-poly body. All of the animations have to be created individually (I'm not sure if they're motion captured or not).

Really? This is news to me actually. Why not?
 
Really? This is news to me actually. Why not?
Because every leader is unique and doesn't have to use stock animations or interact with each other like in, say, Skyrim. (This is actually becoming more common in general games as motion capture becomes more common--e.g., the main characters in the Jedi games or God of War have unique skeletons because they're motion captured by their respective actors. But, as I said, I'm not sure if Civ leaders are motion captured or animated by hand; either way, they don't use the same skeletons. This was part of what stood out about the NFP leader: they reused previous leaders' skeletons. If Lady Six Sky looks like Amanitore or Ambiorix resembles Shaka...that's why.)
 
Last edited:
they reused previous leaders' skeletons. If Lady Six Sky looks like Amina or Ambiorix resembles Shaka...that's why.)
And they took an incredible amount of flack for simply reusing idle animations.

I know a lot of people here say they’d be fine with simple 2D pictures for leaders, but I think the broad fan base expects AAA quality animated leaders. I agree—it’s this level of production and polish that differentiates Civ from its lower budget competitors.
 
Civ leaders aren't designed like RPG characters where they have a single skeleton or low-poly body. All of the animations have to be created individually (I'm not sure if they're motion captured or not).
They're not motion-captured. Team members record the planned interactions themselves, which they then send to the animating team to recreate.

(I remember a teaser for R&F that featured Carl(?) acting out Shaka's(?) stances with a mop and bucket)
 
They're not motion-captured. Team members record the planned interactions themselves, which they then send to the animating team to recreate.

(I remember a teaser for R&F that featured Carl(?) acting out Shaka's(?) stances with a mop and bucket)
I didn't think they were, but I wasn't 100% certain. Thanks for the confirmation.
 
It is better that leaders change according to the events of civilization, and of the world: a country at war will have military leaders, spiritual leaders, religious leaders, but deeply tied to narrative events.
 
Top Bottom