Little things you'd like to see in Civilization VII

[AffineConstant]

The more I think about this idea (changing backgrounds), the more I like it. Yes, Civ6 put a lot of effort into animating the leader's head/face/body for different interactions -- declaration of war, denouncing, making a deal -- and the background is very plain. Nothing changes to indicate whether the civ is at war, nearly broke / swimming in gold, has prosperous cities or down to its last city.
For my personal tastes, I would be satisfied with less movement in the leader's body animations and instead show some changes in the background to reflect changes in the civ's current state. I have a vague recollection of the background for Askia (leader for Songhai) in Civ5 changing; I remember seeing more fire in the background when they were at war and less when they were at peace. Perhaps 3 static backrounds behind the leader: standard/normal, opulent or decorated when the empire is prospering, with happy people behind, ripped/bare/trashed when the empire is in trouble.
To be honest, I enjoyed the changes in the Civ3 leader *heads* with the four eras. Yes, they were simple changes, with much less of the leader to show, and they were not dynamic or animated. But I liked them. I like them more than having the Exact. Same. Interaction. with a leader in 500 BCE, 1000 CE, and 1500 CE. I didn't play Civ1 though I watched people play, looking over their shoulder. I remember seeing the advisors in the background reflect a more military government or democratic peace. Having minor changes in the background to reflect the current state in that Civ's government, era, or prosperity, would appeal to me.

Just go with both, Civ sells quite the amount every mainline title and spends a relatively tiny amount on art as it is. The series doesn't have the problem most big recognizable franchises have of needing to make a game 10x bigger and 10x more detailed every sequel, they can certainly afford to put a bit more into the presentation where the leader screen are concerned.

 

[luca 83]

The more I think about this idea (changing backgrounds), the more I like it. Yes, Civ6 put a lot of effort into animating the leader's head/face/body for different interactions -- declaration of war, denouncing, making a deal -- and the background is very plain. Nothing changes to indicate whether the civ is at war, nearly broke / swimming in gold, has prosperous cities or down to its last city.
For my personal tastes, I would be satisfied with less movement in the leader's body animations and instead show some changes in the background to reflect changes in the civ's current state. I have a vague recollection of the background for Askia (leader for Songhai) in Civ5 changing; I remember seeing more fire in the background when they were at war and less when they were at peace. Perhaps 3 static backrounds behind the leader: standard/normal, opulent or decorated when the empire is prospering, with happy people behind, ripped/bare/trashed when the empire is in trouble.
To be honest, I enjoyed the changes in the Civ3 leader *heads* with the four eras. Yes, they were simple changes, with much less of the leader to show, and they were not dynamic or animated. But I liked them. I like them more than having the Exact. Same. Interaction. with a leader in 500 BCE, 1000 CE, and 1500 CE. I didn't play Civ1 though I watched people play, looking over their shoulder. I remember seeing the advisors in the background reflect a more military government or democratic peace. Having minor changes in the background to reflect the current state in that Civ's government, era, or prosperity, would appeal to me.

There is no point in animating leaders if in a modern gamepla Moderna are contemplated dynasties , and republics . They can change the animations of governments , or ambassadors, according to the eras and governments

 

[Caesar of Bread]

There is no point in animating leaders if in a modern gamepla Moderna are contemplated dynasties , and republics . They can change the animations of governments , or ambassadors, according to the eras and governments

But look at all the hot leaders we got (Lady Six Sky, Matthias Corvinus, Victoria, Gilgamesh, Seondeok)

 

[reddishrecue]

I mean when I used to see a new civilization back in the day, I would be like... dang that's a challenge if they were strong since the civ would come aggressive towards me and having that background filled with people made it seem much more interesting. Seeing them ask for peace as less people would leave the background used to be one of those eye candies that used to be part of the game.

 

[luca 83]

But look at all the hot leaders we got (Lady Six Sky, Matthias Corvinus, Victoria, Gilgamesh, Seondeok)

The various personalities should be chosen according to the governments . it makes no sense to have victory at the head of a communist government , or Stalin at the head of a democracy , every leader and son of his own time of his own time !

 

[aieeegrunt]

Any increase in the art budget should first go to a Civ2 style Advisor council, followed by Cave Man Abraham Lincoln

 

[Patine]

The various personalities should be chosen according to the governments . it makes no sense to have victory at the head of a communist government , or Stalin at the head of a democracy , every leader and son of his own time of his own time !

You keep repeating this notion. Hasn't the lack of agreement, consideration, or even acknowledgement, save to remind the thing I'm sayng here, shown a lack of support for your idea that's not likely to change? Have you not picked up on this yet? You're kind of blowing in the wind here.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Any increase in the art budget should first go to a Civ2 style Advisor council, followed by Cave Man Abraham Lincoln

The thing about Cave Man Abraham Lincoln is that we would lose the unique ethnic outfits of most leaders, and end up in the Modern Era with everyone decked in suits and office dresses, something that happened in the real world due to Western hegemony, but would make no sense in my game where the pre-eminent powers of the Modern Era are the Inca, Zulu, Egyptians and Koreans.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The various personalities should be chosen according to the governments . it makes no sense to have victory at the head of a communist government , or Stalin at the head of a democracy , every leader and son of his own time of his own time !

Actually, Harry Turtledove wrote an entire 'alternate history' novel: Joe Steel, based on the premise that Iosif Stalin's parents migrated to the USA so that he was born in the USA, became president in the 1930s and took Roosevelt's place as US leader in WWII. It is a chilling exercise in how totalitarianism and totalitarian practices are not incompatible with a democratic government at all, a premise that will come as no surprise to the Japanese-American population as of 1942 . . .

 

[luca 83]

You keep repeating this notion. Hasn't the lack of agreement, consideration, or even acknowledgement, save to remind the thing I'm sayng here, shown a lack of support for your idea that's not likely to change? Have you not picked up on this yet? You're kind of blowing in the wind here.

The thing about Cave Man Abraham Lincoln is that we would lose the unique ethnic outfits of most leaders, and end up in the Modern Era with everyone decked in suits and office dresses, something that happened in the real world due to Western hegemony, but would make no sense in my game where the pre-eminent powers of the Modern Era are the Inca, Zulu, Egyptians and Koreans.

I rely on history it makes no sense to have Napoleon king of France when two dynasties the Valois , the Bourbons and before the Capetians had ruled France . Ditto for England ask yourself why is it like and ascended victory to the throne ? The restoration and the glorious revolution . If you ignore the basic principles of the story you and the other 3 users it's not my fault

 

[Patine]

The thing about Cave Man Abraham Lincoln is that we would lose the unique ethnic outfits of most leaders, and end up in the Modern Era with everyone decked in suits and office dresses, something that happened in the real world due to Western hegemony, but would make no sense in my game where the pre-eminent powers of the Modern Era are the Inca, Zulu, Egyptians and Koreans.

Though, properly, Xerxes should have been dressed in the robes and turban of an Islamic Republic Ayatollah, or the dressed up military uniform of a Pahlavi Shah in the modern era, as just one example.

 

[Patine]

I rely on history it makes no sense to have Napoleon king of France when two dynasties the Valois , the Bourbons and before the Capetians had ruled France . Ditto for England ask yourself why is it like and ascended victory to the throne ? The restoration and the glorious revolution . If you ignore the basic principles of the story you and the other 3 users it's not my fault

Again, might I suggest a different 4X game (or designing your own) that cleaves closer to historical accuracy than the Civ series.

 

[luca 83]

Actually, Harry Turtledove wrote an entire 'alternate history' novel: Joe Steel, based on the premise that Iosif Stalin's parents migrated to the USA so that he was born in the USA, became president in the 1930s and took Roosevelt's place as US leader in WWII. It is a chilling exercise in how totalitarianism and totalitarian practices are not incompatible with a democratic government at all, a premise that will come as no surprise to the Japanese-American population as of 1942 . . .

It is not an exercise in alternative history ,ind One should simulate dynasties otherwise how to explain the civil wars , English, for example of the two roses,or the wars of succession , European?

 

[luca 83]

Though, properly, Xerxes should have been dressed in the robes and turban of an Islamic Republic Ayatollah, or the dressed up military uniform of a Pahlavi Shah in the modern era, as just one example.

Congratulations discussing uniforms will definitely improve the game dynamics ! And it's intellectually stimulating

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

It is not an exercise in alternative history ,ind One should simulate dynasties otherwise how to explain the civil wars , English, for example of the two roses,or the wars of succession , European?

It is ALWAYS an exercise in Alternate History, because no three historians can agree on what the actual history really was for any historical event: causes, consequences, narrative events, personalities - they've been arguing about it ever since Herodotus.

If you check the publisher's lists in any year, the majority of historical non-fiction are New Looks, Re-Interpretations or Newly Discovered documents, findings or accounts of historical events. If you really want to recreate 'real' historical events in any game, you will be dealing with Interpretations, not Reality, because the Reality can only be agreed on until the next historian's book comes out on the subject.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Congratulations discussing uniforms will definitely improve the game dynamics ! And it's intellectually stimulating

Do you what the title of this thread is

 

[Evie]

Congratulations discussing uniforms will definitely improve the game dynamics ! And it's intellectually stimulating

If you're not interested in a conversation, you don't have to participate in it.

Just because something doesn't interest you, doesn't mean others have to avoid talking about it. Or that there's anything wrong with the people who like to talk about it.

I get that you'd like people to discuss the kind of improvement you'd like to see in the game, but at some point - you cannot demand that people spend their time discussing a vision of the game they are not particularly interested in.

 

[luca 83]

Do you what the title of this thread is

Yes and talk about dynamics, you miss talking about unnecessary details and do not talk about the new possibilities of AI and game mechanics

 

[luca 83]

It is ALWAYS an exercise in Alternate History, because no three historians can agree on what the actual history really was for any historical event: causes, consequences, narrative events, personalities - they've been arguing about it ever since Herodotus.

If you check the publisher's lists in any year, the majority of historical non-fiction are New Looks, Re-Interpretations or Newly Discovered documents, findings or accounts of historical events. If you really want to recreate 'real' historical events in any game, you will be dealing with Interpretations, not Reality, because the Reality can only be agreed on until the next historian's book comes out on the subject.

I agree simulating cities, dynasties , empires , rise , and fall , remains essential, beyond. , historical interpretation

 

[luca 83]

So come on, let's talk about the sails of the triremes , and the hair of Alexander the Great, you will see what a beautiful game will come!

If you're not interested in a conversation, you don't have to participate in it.

Just because something doesn't interest you, doesn't mean others have to avoid talking about it. Or that there's anything wrong with the people who like to talk about it.

I get that you'd like people to discuss the kind of improvement you'd like to see in the game, but at some point - you cannot demand that people spend their time discussing a vision of the game they are not particularly interested in.