Leaders talking to each other, not the player

[Gorbles]

I don't have much criticism for the leaders, but it's not super clear which side you're meant to be on (other than defaulting to the left), and it seems pretty "plain".

Then again a lot of the UI I've seen shown is pretty flat, so maybe there's time to work on it. Or maybe I'm just hoping

It's not a dealbreaker for me, at least. Never met a diplomatic issue I couldn't solve with a nuke. That's a lie, I meant a fleet of destroyers. Nukes cause too much collateral damage.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I do hate the way it looks, but I hate it most of all because of those... Quirky animations. People just don't do that do they? They don't wave their hands about and like strike weird 2.5D poses.
I'm not quite sure what's the point of this?

 

[Core Imposter]

As hard as it is to believe, not everyone has the same priorities. I have a hard time believing anyone cares about how combat works beyond "Unit A bonks Unit B," yet some people do.

I did know a guy once who had a beautiful chess set, carved out of ivory I think it was, and loved to invited people to play. But he really didn't understand the way the game was played. So, okay.

 

[Zaarin]

I do hate the way it looks, but I hate it most of all because of those... Quirky animations. People just don't do that do they? They don't wave their hands about and like strike weird 2.5D poses.
I'm not quite sure what's the point of this?

It seems they want realistic models with over-the-top animations, and the combination is unpleasant. They need to pick one or the other.

I did know a guy once who had a beautiful chess set, carved out of ivory I think it was, and loved to invited people to play. But he really didn't understand the way the game was played. So, okay.

It's fine if you don't care about how the game looks, but some people do.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Fair. I find the choice very off-putting and cheap looking, though.

I wonder if it feels so off-putting because the leaders are facing each other or because the leader graphics are so poor or both?

If the leader graphics were better, I think it might be more acceptable.

 

[Zaarin]

I wonder if it feels so off-putting because the leaders are facing each other or because the leader graphics are so poor or both?

The leaders face the camera in their intros, and they look significantly better. Still not great, but better than when they're about to go Mortal Kombat on each other. I think better lighting would do wonders, for starters.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I wonder if it feels so off-putting because the leaders are facing each other or because the leader graphics are so poor or both?

If the leader graphics were better, I think it might be more acceptable.

They're not facing each other, they're facing at 2.5D angle, so basically, it's like they're performing for an audience (half towards each other and half towards the camera)

I did know a guy once who had a beautiful chess set, carved out of ivory I think it was, and loved to invited people to play. But he really didn't understand the way the game was played. So, okay.

This sounds offhandedly rude...
A chess set made of ivory implies a beautiful game that's visually stunning. But you're missing the point because it's more like a chess set made of paper mache... The game might be good but there's some issues with the visuals.

 

[Core Imposter]

This sounds offhandedly rude...
A chess set made of ivory implies a beautiful game that's visually stunning. But you're missing the point because it's more like a chess set made of paper mache... The game might be good but there's some issues with the visuals.

I can assure you I did not mean to be rude. I sincerely apologize if I was offensive.

 

[Potworny]

I wonder how much better the leaders can look with finished art passes. While Tecumseh looks alright, Benjamin Franklin on the Steam page didn't really strike me as a next gen model. It's good that more resources have been put into the map, and less cost demanding leaders mean they will be easier to make, not only by the devs but also by the modders, but someone said that they look like second tier RPG characters in terms of importance and it's hard not to agree. I don't mind the 45 degree angle they are facing the camera at, I don't mind the Mortal Kombat diplomacy screen. Even the over the top theatrical animations themselves are a good thing in my opinion. But I hope there will be some improvement with skin details, lighting and maybe hair and eyes. And luckily some improvement seems to be on the way, compare the promo material of Tecumseh, and work in progress Amina from the game:

Spoiler :

 

[Zaarin]

I wonder how much better the leaders can look with finished art passes. While Tecumseh looks alright, Benjamin Franklin on the Steam page didn't really strike me as a next gen model. It's good that more resources have been put into the map, and less cost demanding leaders mean they will be easier to make, not only by the devs but also by the modders, but someone said that they look like second tier RPG characters in terms of importance and it's hard not to agree. I don't mind the 45 degree angle they are facing the camera at, I don't mind the Mortal Kombat diplomacy screen. Even the over the top theatrical animations themselves are a good thing in my opinion. But I hope there will be some improvement with skin details, lighting and maybe hair and eyes. And luckily some improvement seems to be on the way, compare the promo material of Tecumseh, and work in progress Amina from the game:

Spoiler :

View attachment 700471View attachment 700472

Yes, Tecumseh looks better than some others. Still a little bland, but better. I really do think that something better than a solid neutral fill light would do wonders for these models. Amina actually looks quite good in the details of her turban and tunic, for example. And the leaders look much better facing the camera than in the weird stagey diplomacy screen.

 

[Potworny]

Yes, Tecumseh looks better than some others. Still a little bland, but better. I really do think that something better than a solid neutral fill light would do wonders for these models. Amina actually looks quite good in the details of her turban and tunic, for example. And the leaders look much better facing the camera than in the weird stagey diplomacy screen.

Actually, AriochIV posted another screenshot where Tecumseh actually looks worse in terms of skin detail I think? Something is off anyway, maybe the geometry, maybe the textures, or it's just a placebo or whatever it's called. May be a little bit of compression too, but I really hope it will look better half a year from now... (The clothing's very much fine at least)

Spoiler :

 

[AriochIV]

The leaders face the camera in their intros, and they look significantly better. Still not great, but better than when they're about to go Mortal Kombat on each other. I think better lighting would do wonders, for starters.

Yes, I think it's the zoomed-out full-body animations that are the problem here.

 

[Zaarin]

Actually, AriochIV posted another screenshot where Tecumseh actually looks worse in terms of skin detail I think? Something is off anyway, maybe the geometry, maybe the textures, or it's just a placebo or whatever it's called. May be a little bit of compression too, but I really hope it will look better half a year from now... (The clothing's very much fine at least)

I think it's the compression. Also it looks like some of the normals may be inverted, which is causing the strange shadows. Those things can be ironed out with an art pass.

 

[Morningcalm]

Finally! Extreme Diplomacy Game Mode!

View attachment 700456

I thought of this when I saw how they did the leader screens in the Civ 7 gameplay preview. I was so shocked. But I also laughed.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Finally! Extreme Diplomacy Game Mode!

View attachment 700456

I was just about to go scrounging in my saved photos for that. Thanks for saving me an hour or so. For those who don't recognize it, it was an April Fools day joke Firaxis released in the build-up to...Civ 5, maybe?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I was just about to go scrounging in my saved photos for that. Thanks for saving me an hour or so. For those who don't recognize it, it was an April Fools day joke Firaxis released in the build-up to...Civ 5, maybe?

Yes. It was actually 2011, though. It was after Civ V came out, presented as a DLC.

 

[bbbt]

Agreed. This is the closest thing to a deal breaker that I've seen.

One of the streamers I watched - boesthius I think - thought it would be the biggest issue he'd seen, more than the civ switching.

It's not something I care about personally (I'm someone who turns the animations off immediately, and would happily skip the leader screens entirely).

But it definitely seem likes an odd choice given how much they've built up the leader personalities.

ie would Civ 6 had so many memes about "brogamesh" and gilgabro if Gilgamesh was allying with your leader avatar and telling them they were a good ally, rather then addressing the player directly?

It seems like they are killing an aspect that really does play to a certain portion of their player base.

 

[Zaarin]

One of the streamers I watched - boesthius I think - thought it would be the biggest issue he'd seen, more than the civ switching.

It's not something I care about personally (I'm someone who turns the animations off immediately, and would happily skip the leader screens entirely).

But it definitely seem likes an odd choice given how much they've built up the leader personalities.

ie would Civ 6 had so many memes about "brogamesh" and gilgabro if Gilgamesh was allying with your leader avatar and telling them they were a good ally, rather then addressing the player directly?

It seems like they are killing an aspect that really does play to a certain portion of their player base.

Yeah, I skipped over a lot of Boesthius' rants, but that one I felt in my soul. I know it's not important to everyone, but it's important to me--and the strangest part is that it really seems to highlight their models' flaws, too, which is a double loss.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I didn't like this aspect either. I liked that the interaction happened over the map rather than an entirely separate screen, but the two leaders facing each other felt off to me.

 

[Turrdy]

Players when they see CivVI leaders: "It's too cartoony! Make it more realistic"
Players when they see CivVII leaders: "It's too dull and boring!"

I guess in conclusion we figuered out that real life is dull and boring?!

Jokes aside. I support this concern and I think this is also one thing that is not helpful for immersion.