Little things you'd like to see in Civilization VII

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Why not? even with 3d treatment? are you more with Disney style instead?

I dislike both, but if the alternative were anime I'd take Disney style anytime

 

[pokiehl]

Why not? even with 3d treatment? are you more with Disney style instead?

What does Disney have to do with anything? Your statement implies a false dilemma of "anime vs Disney-style" for the game's art. I don't think that's true at all. I don't think Civ 6 looks like Disney, and I absolutely don't think any prior game did either.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Redcoats shown here all wear Mid 18th Century uniforms. only three wears historically matched. one with Shako is sorely mismatched. I don't recall anyone in the world wearing mismatched uniforms with fallcollar coats of 18th Century and Visored shako of Early 19th Century.

Wow you were born early... maybe it is supposed to represent their commander ?

 

[spacedinosaur]

I would really like to bring back the Capitol building &/or palace. Adding new elements to the palace was fun back in the day.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

2. Anime style arts. 2 or 3d. Disney style doesn't appeal to me much.

How about realistic looking leaders like Civ 5, but with Civ 6 animations? Leave Anime style to games that should be Anime.

 

[BuchiTaton]

I would seriously prefer 2D static images like a classic VN than the exaggerated 3D cartoons animations. Just by looking at CIV6's leaders concept arts they look way better, the 3D animation turned them into Grubhub's ad like characters

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

How about realistic looking leaders like Civ 5, but with Civ 6 animations? Leave Anime style to games that should be Anime.

Maybe but why are you all detests Anime style arts for American made games? I actually really fond of that too bad

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

How about realistic looking leaders like Civ 5, but with Civ 6 animations? Leave Anime style to games that should be Anime.

sorry fam but anime art style came from the west. it would just return the anime art style to the west.

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

also 60s-80s anime art style is much closer to its origin (disney) and thus much more appealing to the western eye, I would not be opposed to any of these art styles

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

also 60s-80s anime art style is much closer to its origin (disney) and thus much more appealing to the western eye, I would not be opposed to any of these art stylesView attachment 665460

I would.
- And not because they are aethetically displeasing, or 'bad art' (whatever that means), but because they distract from the game that the developers are trying to portray.

As many have remarked, Civilization is NOT a historical game - the fantasy elements are many and continuous from start to finish.
But.
The game is presented with a veneer of history: historical Civilizations, Leaders, Great People, Cities, City States, Wonders, Natural Wonders, Unique Units, Buildings, Districts, etc. It is marketed as a historical game; and I quote:

"Build a Civilization to stand the test of time"

Not build a Fantastic Civilization, or a Cartoon Civilization.

So, using any cartoon style, from classic Disney to Anime to animated Asterix the Gaul simply distracts and detracts from the 'historical flavor' the game is veneered with. It also distracts from the game mechanics: see an anime version (or Disney version) of T. Roosevelt, and one expects him to act like a cartoon character surrounded by cartoon elements. Next thing you know you are looking for a road runner being chased by a coyote between the American cities, or a skunk chasing a cat through Eleanor's Paris.

This is also why, for me, Zombies and Vampires have no place in the regular game: they distract from the basic flavor. IF people desire to play with them, or with cartoon graphics and characters, then a Fantasy Civ DLC would be appropriate, and you could throw in all the other historical fantasy elements like Atlantis, Noble Savages, a free democratic Russia or Trump winning the 2020 election.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I would.
- And not because they are aethetically displeasing, or 'bad art' (whatever that means), but because they distract from the game that the developers are trying to portray.

As many have remarked, Civilization is NOT a historical game - the fantasy elements are many and continuous from start to finish.
But.
The game is presented with a veneer of history: historical Civilizations, Leaders, Great People, Cities, City States, Wonders, Natural Wonders, Unique Units, Buildings, Districts, etc. It is marketed as a historical game; and I quote:

"Build a Civilization to stand the test of time"

Not build a Fantastic Civilization, or a Cartoon Civilization.

So, using any cartoon style, from classic Disney to Anime to animated Asterix the Gaul simply distracts and detracts from the 'historical flavor' the game is veneered with. It also distracts from the game mechanics: see an anime version (or Disney version) of T. Roosevelt, and one expects him to act like a cartoon character surrounded by cartoon elements. Next thing you know you are looking for a road runner being chased by a coyote between the American cities, or a skunk chasing a cat through Eleanor's Paris.

This is also why, for me, Zombies and Vampires have no place in the regular game: they distract from the basic flavor. IF people desire to play with them, or with cartoon graphics and characters, then a Fantasy Civ DLC would be appropriate, and you could throw in all the other historical fantasy elements like Atlantis, Noble Savages, a free democratic Russia or Trump winning the 2020 election.

Then art style should revert to realistic scale Civ5? (and Humankind)

And about Redcoats in Civ6 wearing mismatched uniform. what's your view regarding to this picture?

Note that a soldier to the middle lower wears mismatched headdress. NO ARMY in the world matches 18th Century fallcollar frock coats with Napoleonic visored Shako. (unless there is indeed a an illustration of that uniform components are put together that way) however Napoleonic tailcoats with standing collars and tricone doesn't considered mismatched. surprise?

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

For me the greatest drawback of Civ6's cartoonish style is that it detracts heavily from the gravity of several situations. A heroic defense doesn't feel like a heroic defense when all the soldiers are going around 'bonking' each other like the legionaries from Asterix, a dramatic offensive doesn't feel like a dramatic offensive when all your troops seem equipped for a water fight, and the game's overall tone combined with the cartoonish animations makes it hard to feel any emotional response when a horrific Natural Disaster occurs, which almost defeats the entire purpose of having Natural Disasters in the game.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Wow you were born early... maybe it is supposed to represent their commander ?

It is supposed to represent 19th Century Redcoats.
but Mismatch is mismatch.
Commander would wear more elaborate uniform. instead he might wear either tricorne or bicorne.
but with uniform using standing collars not fallcollars.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Military costume ("uniforms") reflect Fashion, either copying from civilian fashion or other (usually more successful) military. In the largely 18th century 'Redcoats' shown, you can match the individual collar, distinctives, cut of coat and headgear almost to individual decades - and putting them all in the same unit makes a mockery of the entire idea of 'uniforms'

But this is to be expected from Civ VI.

Remember, when the game came out each unit was expected to last for two Eras, so the graphics attempted to show the versions of the unit that existed for a long time. Leaving us with illustrations of 100 - 150 years' worth of uniforms all in the same 'unit' and a nonsensical cartoon of a military unit.
Be thankful that they didn't also show, in the same unit, a pith-helmeted Redcoat from Rourcke's Drift (1879) at one end of the line and a 'red cassock' from Cromwerll's New Model Army (1645) at the other end!

 

[Patine]

sorry fam but anime art style came from the west. it would just return the anime art style to the west.

Actually, not quite true. Manga traces it's origins, ultimately, to the the panel-based-Kanto-character-descrided aspects of Traditional Japanese Painting (Kaiga or Gado), going as far back in that form as the 12th to 14th Centuries. It began to move to it's more, "cute and cartoonish," form, though not completely so, by the early 1920's - about 5 years before Steamboat Mickey, and 15 years before Action Comics #1. Japanese and Western comic and animated styles did bleed into each other as influences (though it was CERTAINLY NOT just a one-way flow). However, though I am making this noted correction, it does not mean I am endorsing the animation style in Civ.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Military costume ("uniforms") reflect Fashion, either copying from civilian fashion or other (usually more successful) military. In the largely 18th century 'Redcoats' shown, you can match the individual collar, distinctives, cut of coat and headgear almost to individual decades - and putting them all in the same unit makes a mockery of the entire idea of 'uniforms'

But this is to be expected from Civ VI.

Remember, when the game came out each unit was expected to last for two Eras, so the graphics attempted to show the versions of the unit that existed for a long time. Leaving us with illustrations of 100 - 150 years' worth of uniforms all in the same 'unit' and a nonsensical cartoon of a military unit.
Be thankful that they didn't also show, in the same unit, a pith-helmeted Redcoat from Rourcke's Drift (1879) at one end of the line and a 'red cassock' from Cromwerll's New Model Army (1645) at the other end!

This is why I prefer to use units and their appearance based in the middle point of each era, by natural development the middle point tends to be more representative or at least close to both earlier or later forms of the same unit.

By the way if CIV6's Redcoat is supposed to be Victoria's UU, so why they didnt stick to victorian uniforms?

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

I would.
- And not because they are aethetically displeasing, or 'bad art' (whatever that means), but because they distract from the game that the developers are trying to portray.

As many have remarked, Civilization is NOT a historical game - the fantasy elements are many and continuous from start to finish.
But.
The game is presented with a veneer of history: historical Civilizations, Leaders, Great People, Cities, City States, Wonders, Natural Wonders, Unique Units, Buildings, Districts, etc. It is marketed as a historical game; and I quote:

"Build a Civilization to stand the test of time"

Not build a Fantastic Civilization, or a Cartoon Civilization.

So, using any cartoon style, from classic Disney to Anime to animated Asterix the Gaul simply distracts and detracts from the 'historical flavor' the game is veneered with. It also distracts from the game mechanics: see an anime version (or Disney version) of T. Roosevelt, and one expects him to act like a cartoon character surrounded by cartoon elements. Next thing you know you are looking for a road runner being chased by a coyote between the American cities, or a skunk chasing a cat through Eleanor's Paris.

This is also why, for me, Zombies and Vampires have no place in the regular game: they distract from the basic flavor. IF people desire to play with them, or with cartoon graphics and characters, then a Fantasy Civ DLC would be appropriate, and you could throw in all the other historical fantasy elements like Atlantis, Noble Savages, a free democratic Russia or Trump winning the 2020 election.

Very fair counterpoint.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Military costume ("uniforms") reflect Fashion, either copying from civilian fashion or other (usually more successful) military. In the largely 18th century 'Redcoats' shown, you can match the individual collar, distinctives, cut of coat and headgear almost to individual decades - and putting them all in the same unit makes a mockery of the entire idea of 'uniforms'

But this is to be expected from Civ VI.

Remember, when the game came out each unit was expected to last for two Eras, so the graphics attempted to show the versions of the unit that existed for a long time. Leaving us with illustrations of 100 - 150 years' worth of uniforms all in the same 'unit' and a nonsensical cartoon of a military unit.
Be thankful that they didn't also show, in the same unit, a pith-helmeted Redcoat from Rourcke's Drift (1879) at one end of the line and a 'red cassock' from Cromwerll's New Model Army (1645) at the other end!

So you don't consider Redcoats uniform mix and matchings 'mismatched' at all? Napoleonic Shakoes still acceptable with 7-Years War Coats that uses fallcollars and not standing ones?
nah. give them standing collars match BOTH situations better..

Unless there's indeed units that did match visored shakoes with fallcollar tunics of 18th C.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

This is why I prefer to use units and their appearance based in the middle point of each era, by natural development the middle point tends to be more representative or at least close to both earlier or later forms of the same unit.

By the way if CIV6's Redcoat is supposed to be Victoria's UU, so why they didnt stick to victorian uniforms?

Redcoat being Vicky's UU is also wrong. her UU should instead be any kind of steam powered warship.
I KNOW that Redcoat uniform model seen in this game is FALLCOLLARS is that it shown up in Asset Editor this way.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

So you don't consider Redcoats uniform mix and matchings 'mismatched' at all? Napoleonic Shakoes still acceptable with 7-Years War Coats that uses fallcollars and not standing ones?
nah. give them standing collars match BOTH situations better..

Unless there's indeed units that did match visored shakoes with fallcollar tunics of 18th C.

IF you read my original post, I thought I made it clear that mismatched and mixed 'uniform' representations are exactly what we can expect from Civ VI, with its cartoon-style of graphics in the first place and its attempt to have a single, graphically-singular Unit cover more than one Era.

Historically, they are ghastly. But it's not a precisely historical game, and more importantly, the graphics are just window-dressing and have no effect on play of the game at all.

In the case of the Red coat, which was the official British uniform color from 1645 until 1902*, and unofficially from 1581 (English troops described as "red cassocks" in Ireland on that date). That's over 350 years of uniform variations to choose from: they could have a Unit of 20 figures with each of them in a slightly different 'redcoat'.
Alternatively, but no more accurately, they could pick a single date or period and put the entire unit in that uniform, but whatever they picked would be wrong for the rest of the period, and usually wrong within 20 - 25 years or 1 - 5 turns of play. Short of changing uniform graphics in the units during a game, there's no good answer once you've set up a game system in which one Unit represents 350 years of versions of that unit. - Not even mentioning the fact that during those centuries, not only the uniform changed, but also the weapons and tactics used, from pikes and matchlocks to flintlock muskets, rifled muskets, breechloading black powder rifles to Enfield magazine rifles, so you would not only hav to change uniform graphics, but also combat factors even more profoundly affecting game play.

* = and to this day as ceremonial uniform for the Guards