Learn from other's mistakes, Sid...(sensible suggestions)

[misterhamtastic]

There are a number of "Civ 5 needs to be bigger, better, faster, have more crap!" threads. I mean for this to be the antithesis of those.

One of the best things about civ 4 is the fact that someone who had played a game of civ 1 and that's it would find the game somewhat familiar. Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the mods which make civ have 500 techs 300 civs and such. I would have had a hard time liking the game at first, however, had it been that way. It would have been information overload.

Any fans of MOO out there? MOO2 is much beloved, right? What went wrong with MOO3, then? Don't get me wrong, MOO3 is a great game, but I'd have liked it more had it been named something else completely. It just wasn't really MOO.

I would hate for Civ to go the same way. When the activision version came out, I was horrified. "This is NOT the civ I know." was my thought. Hell, I know people who don't want to play civ because they didn't like it when the orientation of the tiles changed or changed back.

The fact is, Civ has to be a fun, sellable product with a suitable learning curve which is familiar. The growth of Civ as a franchise needs to be evolutionary and not revolutionary.

Because of all of this, my suggestions will be limited. If you have a suggestion besides "more!" or "make it completely different!" then post it here, please. Otherwise, go to one of the other threads, 'k?

 

[misterhamtastic]

My major suggestions-
1. General AI improvements-this may be an industry problem, but the AI is pretty psychotic. Perhaps some way to be more "human" would be interesting, I think.

2. A new battle option-Played Pirates? How about Master of Magic? The tactical battle is not something you MUST do, but it adds an entertaining twist.

3. Use what is out there now-This might require some legality, but just imagine if Sid could take one of the big mods and make it more efficient with more thorough everything. It could be expansions of the game if they wanted, perhaps a past, future, sci-fi, and a fantasy expansion. Perhaps planning on these things beforehand will fix potential issues early.

4. Include a few different terrain palette choices in-game. Without mods, maybe I want to be a peaceful nation, and want the interface and terrain to be "happier", or perhaps I want to be evil... see what I mean?

I personally don't see them needing to make 5 for a while. I doubt there will be sufficient technology to make a "better" civ for a number of years.

 

[rysmiel]

T
One of the best things about civ 4 is the fact that someone who had played a game of civ 1 and that's it would find the game somewhat familiar. Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the mods which make civ have 500 techs 300 civs and such. I would have had a hard time liking the game at first, however, had it been that way. It would have been information overload.

You say best, I say worst; a game that big is what I would want Civ 5 to be, definitely.

The fact is, Civ has to be a fun, sellable product with a suitable learning curve which is familiar.

Familiar to whom ?

If you've already played and mastered a lot of Civ versions, a step up in complexity should not be an issue.

If you haven't, there's always CivRev.

 

[Hail]

Sid moved onto consoles and strongly thinks "about making a MMO". so he is not the man, who will make decisions about civ5.

as to your suggestions:
1) agree, but no one will bother. investing in eye-candy will yield more profit.
2) disagree. what's the point? to turn this feature off after 20 minutes of adoring? however, if the "autoresolve" thingy will behave "strangely", i will be forced to play out every single battle. that would make games way too long for my liking.
3) agree
4) disagree

 

[pesgores]

1)no cultural borders flipping lol

 

[misterhamtastic]

You say best, I say worst; a game that big is what I would want Civ 5 to be, definitely.



Familiar to whom ?

If you've already played and mastered a lot of Civ versions, a step up in complexity should not be an issue.

If you haven't, there's always CivRev.

You make a good point. How about a compromise? Chieftain level has just the basics, with more complexity available as you play the higher levels. That way new players wouldn't be overwhelmed, and experienced players would be more engaged.

 

[misterhamtastic]

Sid moved onto consoles and strongly thinks "about making a MMO". so he is not the man, who will make decisions about civ5.

as to your suggestions:
1) agree, but no one will bother. investing in eye-candy will yield more profit.
2) disagree. what's the point? to turn this feature off after 20 minutes of adoring? however, if the "autoresolve" thingy will behave "strangely", i will be forced to play out every single battle. that would make games way too long for my liking.
3) agree
4) disagree

Sid Meier is head of Firaxis. He's probably touched everything before it goes out.

1) both would be nice
2) If you know that "on average" all results are the same, and you have to face an apparently close fight, then you'll be more tempted. I'm thinking that if the odds are closer than 2 to 1 in either's favor, it could automatically filter to auto-fights.
2a)Reminds me:Alpha Centauri had a nice feature of showing odds. That would be nice.
3) Civ:Fantasy a la FFH2 and FF and such as a commercial product would be probably quite impressive. Civ4:Col is not that far from a straight up mod, from what I see.
4) Here's where I was talking eye-candy. I mean, graphics as a whole would evolve to something even better, of course. I dunno, I sort of liked GC2's use of this feature. Throw in the different "feel" of Vanilla vs FFH or Ice age terrain graphics, and you'd have a potentially major feature.

 

[rysmiel]

1)no cultural borders flipping lol

Au contraire; not only should culture flip cities, it should also be possible to use it to flip invading units.

 

[rysmiel]

You make a good point. How about a compromise? Chieftain level has just the basics, with more complexity available as you play the higher levels. That way new players wouldn't be overwhelmed, and experienced players would be more engaged.

In theory, I like this as an idea, and I have some ideas as to what I would include at what levels.

In practce, getting the balance right at each complexity level seems to be about as much work as doing a new game in each case, so I doubt it's likely to happen.

 

[echosfolly]

I think an expansion using existing mods,if a little more polished, for civ 4 would be a great idea.
BAT,VD and blue Marble should have already been included.
I think its to early for a civ 5. im not sure it would be anything more than just an expansion.
it would have to include a more polished and slimeline version of the exisiting game from
vanilla thru bts anyway and then add concepts or players would think their getting ripped
ofcoarse I'd like to see improved AI and a better developed and playable navy.
Im just not sure how you can talk about CIV 5
without talking about "bigger,better,faster and have more crap"

 

[Gamemaster77]

OMG. ARE YOU SERIOUS? It'S BEEN 5 YEARS!

 

[echosfolly]

OMG. ARE YOU SERIOUS? It'S BEEN 5 YEARS!

It hasnt been 5 years since BTS came out

interesting signature.

 

[deanej]

I have to disagree with the people who say "FFH is very complex so civ 5 can be that complex". Guess what, FFH takes advantage of the fact that people playing it already know civ4 (or should know civ4) to add more complexity than otherwise could be added. And even given that people new to FFH in theory know civ4 well already, it's still information overload.

 

[rysmiel]

I have to disagree with the people who say "FFH is very complex so civ 5 can be that complex". Guess what, FFH takes advantage of the fact that people playing it already know civ4 (or should know civ4) to add more complexity than otherwise could be added.

Which suggests that there are people who find Civ 4 as is lacking in sufficient complexity, no ?

And do we think most people who buy Civ 5 will be familiar with Civ 4 ? Will be familiar with the idea of strategy games ? Will be complete newbies ?

And even given that people new to FFH in theory know civ4 well already, it's still information overload.

You talk about extra complexity as if it inherently entailed an impossibly steep learning curve. Why this assumption ?

 

[deanej]

Which suggests that there are people who find Civ 4 as is lacking in sufficient complexity, no ?

Once they are familiar with civ4, yes.

And do we think most people who buy Civ 5 will be familiar with Civ 4 ? Will be familiar with the idea of strategy games ? Will be complete newbies ?

The majority would likely be complete newbies, as with any game. People on this site are not representative of the general population; most people just move from game to game. When I bough civ4, I had never even heard of Civilization before. Thankfully I started with vanilla.

You talk about extra complexity as if it inherently entailed an impossibly steep learning curve. Why this assumption ?

Because it is a LOT of stuff to keep track of when the game is new. After the a person is familiar with the game it can be a lot of fun, depending on how well it's done. But initially it's just more stuff to keep track of.

 

[rysmiel]

When I bough civ4, I had never even heard of Civilization before. Thankfully I started with vanilla.

I would have thought the number in the title was something of a clue, myself.

Because it is a LOT of stuff to keep track of when the game is new. After the a person is familiar with the game it can be a lot of fun, depending on how well it's done. But initially it's just more stuff to keep track of.

Seriously, the solution to this is a well-constructed tutorial.

 

[Hail]

[...] You talk about extra complexity as if it inherently entailed an impossibly steep learning curve. Why this assumption?

it's an axiom, that adding more concepts to the gameplay will increase the steepness of the learning curve and learning time. after a certain point, the game will start to loose potential buyers. this is inherently a bad thing, unless complexity is one of the key game features . reading through a 50 A4 page civilopedia or a pdf manual is not fun.

i would not expect vanilla civ5 to be more complex than civ4:BtS.

civ5 would probably be insanely modable, so there will be mods out there that increase the complexity of the game.

this is as good as it gets

P.S. civ5 definitely needs to be bigger, better, faster, have more crap!

 

[deanej]

I would have thought the number in the title was something of a clue, myself.

Well, I knew their had to be earlier versions based on the title, but I honestly had never heard of the Civilization series before seeing the ad for civ4 in Discover magazine. Maybe that's because I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I honestly can't believe that I'm the only person like that with civ4 (well, maybe on these forums...).

 

[Mutant]

I like this thread Firstly, I don't think tactical battles are necessary - they're a nice touch, but an unnecessary layer, and if your trying to keep Civ V from being 'bigger, better, faster and with more crap', they'd be more in the crap pile for me. I'd say leave the tactical battles to the total war games out there. Secondly, I don't think you need to worry. If we look back at how the original Civ III, and Civ IV games came out, the original versions were generally very streamlined, with each introducing one or two big concepts (Civ III had its borders, Civ IV brought religions). The expansions then expanded on each of these adding all the new buttons and features, that were then streamlined in the next version... In that respect I think Civ V will be a graphical overhaul (like Civ III and IV) with one or two big new ideas (I've got my fingers crossed for empire management, civil wars and revolutions ).

Otherwise, I like your other points!

 

[_random_]

I think a good idea would be to look at some of the popular mods (like Rhye's and Revolution) and try to strip them down to their essence, so that new players won't be weighted down with a series of complex rules, and serious gamers can still get their added layer of accuracy and fun. (Not to say that they shouldn't come up with innovations of their own.)