Message to Firaxis

[TETurkhan]

It is my view that Civ3 flirts with being one of the greatest games of all time, but is not quite there yet. I have been a Civilization fan from the beginning and in a sense feel like I am part of the success of the game – word of mouth is a powerful thing, especially with someone that has a big mouth like me

Anyhow, I think it would be wise for Firaxis to carefully read over the threads listed in this forum, they contain varying opinions, some full of praise some more critical – but all very useful if taken into consideration.

Here are some points I would like to add to the mix, they are not overly complicated or technical, instead I think they are basic and thus easy for Firaxis to implement and include in “Play the World” due to be released later this year.

• Add more cultures
• Include music for the different cultures, and make the music specific to that culture.
• More Civilizations than 8, if anything is clear, it is the fact that people want more Civilizations. Yes, there will be an editor to help in this regard, but I think it would make for better PR if Firaxis threw in some “Surprise” Civilizations.
• Many people have been disgruntled about the lack of editor support for the game. What better way to appease them than to give them units graphics, sounds, more resources etc to work with.
• Wonder Movies. For the hardcore player this might seem almost irrelevant, but my younger cousins whom I introduced to Civ2, they absolutely loved the movies. I would even say it was one of the main highlights of the game for them – and for me as well and it’s a great way to change the pace of the game, gives people an opportunity to sit back, relax and watch.


I think Firaxis would be wise to give consumers more than what they are expecting this fall. Throw in some surprises and make sure the game is solid in every aspect. Maybe I am in the minority for wanting so much, possibly I should be happy with what I got in my original purchase, but I am not – and unlike the past I have not referred the game to anyone and I will bet I am not alone in this regard. In my view, Civ3 has great potential to be one of the greatest strategy games ever, but next release will be the determining factor for this.

Just my view.

 

[sumthinelse]

Originally posted by teturkhan
More Civilizations than 8, if anything is clear, it is the fact that people want more Civilizations.

I don't understand this comment. I am playing a civ3 game right now with 16 civs.

But, all other things being equal, more would be better.

 

[TETurkhan]

what I meant was that this fall there are suppose to be an additional 8 civilizations added to the game.... for a total of 24, which is a fair amount, but I was just saying that if Firaxis threw in a few more it would better - surprise people

 

[damunzy]

Originally posted by teturkhan
• Add more cultures
• Include music for the different cultures, and make the music specific to that culture.
• More Civilizations than 8, if anything is clear, it is the fact that people want more Civilizations. Yes, there will be an editor to help in this regard, but I think it would make for better PR if Firaxis threw in some “Surprise” Civilizations.
• Many people have been disgruntled about the lack of editor support for the game. What better way to appease them than to give them units graphics, sounds, more resources etc to work with.
• Wonder Movies. For the hardcore player this might seem almost irrelevant, but my younger cousins whom I introduced to Civ2, they absolutely loved the movies. I would even say it was one of the main highlights of the game for them – and for me as well and it’s a great way to change the pace of the game, gives people an opportunity to sit back, relax and watch.

1. What do you mean by more cultures?
2. I agree with more music....also allow the music to be selectable...that would be nice.
3. More than 8 civs? Are you meaning extra that are being added in PTW? It takes a good amount of play testing to make sure that the new civs are balanced....hidden civs that you had to unlock in some way would be cool 'easter eggs'.
4. Look for an improved editor in June.
5. Not very important in IMO, but they would be nice....better splash screens for the wonders would be great...I personally don't like the idea of wonders though.

 

[TETurkhan]

civilizations belong to certain cultures in the game (american, european, middle eastern etc)...

I just felt there weren't enough... Zulus for example do not fit in any of them... there should be one for Africa, central asia and so on...

 

[Higher Game]

I'm sick of Civ 3's sick fascination with those stupid desert civs. Let's name em.

Eygpt (desert civ. Uses war chariots. Same as horsemen, but look cooler)
Persia (same as Eygpt except with extremely powerful swordsmen.)
Babylon (same as Persia, except have bowmen)
Ottoman (same as Babylon)
Arabs (same as Ottoman. Uses camels. So exciting...)
Carthage (I think I see a pattern here!)

6 of the 24 civs are just about the same. I am so sick of it. I want more depth than this. Where is the Byzantine Empire? They chose the Ottoman Empire over the Byzantine Empire? That is just wrong.

Africa gets Eygpt, Carthage, and the Zulu. Personally, I wanted Ethiopia. Too much north Africa here.

North America is represented too much. Iroquios, Aztecs, and America. Ugh...

What about Brazil or the Incas? In fact, there isn't a single South American civ at all

If they want to put so many junk desert civs in the game, I want Ottomans replaced with Israel. How could they make the Arabs a civ but ignore Israel? Israel has too much culture to be ignored. Stupid Ottomans, Arabs, Persians, blah. They are all about the same.

Who else thinks that the Mongol horseman's 4/2/2 is just a little too powerful? Hmmm.....

 

[Graeme the mad]

Eygpt (desert civ. Uses war chariots. Same as horsemen, but look cooler)
Persia (same as Eygpt except with extremely powerful swordsmen.)
Babylon (same as Persia, except have bowmen)
Ottoman (same as Babylon)
Arabs (same as Ottoman. Uses camels. So exciting...)
Carthage (I think I see a pattern here!)

Errmm okay then you are really stupid do you know that.

France (plain civ uses axes)
Germans (same as France but uses swords)
English (same as Germans but use boats)
Greeks (Same as English uses philopsophers)
Romans (same as greek but have powerful swordsmen)
Spanish (same as all of them but have dogs)

Where is the Byzantine Empire? They chose the Ottoman Empire over the Byzantine Empire? That is just wrong.

The byzantine Empire for game purposes can be considered Greece - it occupies the same place. The Ottoman Empire was far more powerful than the Byzanties. It is not plain wrong - the way you say its like - byzantines are definetley better (did byzanties take over most of persia, turkey, north africa, middle East, Eastern Europe?)

As for your other thing:

How could they make the Arabs a civ but ignore Israel? Israel has too much culture to be ignored.

Well arabs have at least as much culture as Israel (its a very hard thing to define) and in civ terms would have much more (a lot more cities)

Continuing my European metaphor its like saying - How can you make a rome (arab Empire as big as Roman) a civ but not bulgaria?? I mean what gives firaxis

 

[Quentin]

Adding all those would make the game more than just any game, it would be a GREAT game. The people at Firaxis just don't seem to understand that the people want more than what they say they want. Its always like that.

I think they didn't put the Byzantine because they took after the Romans, but then why add the Ottomans since those are even worse, I've never heard of them.

 

[Higher Game]

The Ottoman Empire quietly died after WWI, I think. No one cared back then and no one cares now. They are the same as the Arabs, really. And they definately are not like the Greeks.

 

[God]

Originally posted by Higher Game
The Ottoman Empire quietly died after WWI, I think. No one cared back then and no one cares now. They are the same as the Arabs, really.

How can they be the same as Arabs if they are Turks? You don't even know anything about these civilizations and empires.

Do you know why the Crimean War was fought? Do you know what a power vacum is? Do you know the "Sick man of Europe". Do you know anything about how much the Europeans cared about the Ottoman empire's existence, in order to control Russia?

I'm sick of Civ 3's sick fascination with those stupid desert civs. Let's name em.

I'm sick of Civ 3's sick fascination with those stupid forest civs. Let's name em...England, Germany, France, and so on. You make no point. So much of the world is covered by desert anyways.

And what about Israel. That would be a desert civ.

I think they didn't put the Byzantine because they took after the Romans, but then why add the Ottomans since those are even worse, I've never heard of them.

I assume you have been living under a rock. The Ottomans had a massive empire, started from the 1400's to early 1900's. At their height they had all of Anatolia, Israel, North Africa was under them, so was eastern Europe (Balkans), and into modern day Iraq and Armenia. They were more powerful then most of Europe combined at their height. Infact they could have probably taken Europe, if they hadn't lost at Vienna, and that was because of the bad roads which slowed down their artillery.

Africa gets Eygpt, Carthage, and the Zulu. Personally, I wanted Ethiopia. Too much north Africa here.

FYI Zulus were in southern Africa. And Ethopia isn't exactly central Africa either. They're close to the Egyptians.

6 of the 24 civs are just about the same. I am so sick of it. I want more depth than this. Where is the Byzantine Empire? They chose the Ottoman Empire over the Byzantine Empire? That is just wrong.

Oh god, 7 of the civs are from Europe. They're all the same. 4 of the civs are from Americas they are all the same. What a waste in putting real important and influential civs. They're all the same. (Sarcasm)

North America is represented too much. Iroquios, Aztecs, and America. Ugh...

I know. Lets just add 10 more civs to Europe, and put 1 civ in North America, even though North America is sooo much larger than Europe and has 3 civs to crowd it.

 

[philippe]

and what about indonesia?
and south america?
and CUBA!
i want to play with fidel castro!
or canada?and please remove france.they didnt gave us points in the euro song festival
and a australian?

 

[Higher Game]

Ottomans did control the Balkans. But their culture is mainly from Turkey, which is just another Arab country. They were supported by the rest of Europe just because no one likes Russia.

Yugoslavia should have been in there if I wanted a Balkan country. Ottomans are just the same as Arabs, and are really just Persians+2000 years when you get down to it.

 

[God]

How are the Turks the same as Arabs? They come from central Asia. By the time of the Ottomans they were a bit more mixed, but are still very different from the Arabs. The Ottomans did start off in Anatolia, and were more mixed.

But saying their Persians+2000 years is probably the dumbest thing you've said so far. The English are Germans+1500 years. Everybody in the world is African +100,000 years.

Again you make no sense, and prove you no nothing about Ottomans, or most of the world history.

 

[Higher Game]

Wrong again. The English are called Anglo-Saxons because they came from 2 tribes called the Angles and Saxons.

Germany came from tribes called Germanic tribes, like the Gauls. The Gauls also occupied France.

If warping time ahead in the same country makes a totally new civ, then Italy should be a civ. But people say we already have Rome. There is no difference between that situation and the one with Persia/Ottomans.

Italy is more deserving than Ottomans, ok?

Galileo, Columbus, the Mafia, Pasta, Pizza, the list goes on. Italian culture has changed the world more than Ottoman culture, you must admit that.

 

[alver]

Higher Game: It's just a game! If the choices of civilizations are not perfect for you, you'll have to edit them. But they are certainly not as bad as you claim.

 

[God]

There was a third German tribe too, if you want to be specific, Forget the name right now. Then the Normans that make a little bit of the English people. Ofcourse now everybody's really mixed.

I agree that Italian culture is far more prevalent in the Western world.

But we can't use the same nation again in the game. We don't have Italy as in Rome, and then Italy as in Renaissance. Or we don't have France under Napoleon and France during the 100 years war.

We don't have the Safavid Empire because we already have the Persians who are ancient version of a similar empire.

Persia and Ottomans have nothing to do with each other. They hated each other. The Safavids and Ottomans fought brutal wars against each. The only common trait is that they were both Muslim Empires, and that they both originated from Central Asia.

But there they are different too. The Ottomans are Turks, closely related to the Mongols, and they came from there later in history, during the Huns. The Persians are an Aryan tribe from Central Asia, like many other Aryan tribes, such as Celts or those that conquered India.

Anyway Italy didn't exist as a nation until 1870s when Sardina brought peninsula under her control. Before it was divided states.

The Ottomans aren't Persians. They never came from there. The first big Turkish empire during the Middle Ages, the Seljuks. They were brought as a slave army by the Abbasids too fight the Shia Muslims in Egypt. They rebelled, and destroyed the Abbasis and made their own empire. They conquered all the way to Constantinople which was the extent of their empire. The Ottomans were started by Osman 1, and that started in Anatolia, and his people were remnants of the Seljuks from a few centuries earlier.

They aren't Persians. Persians are an Aryan tribe from Central Asia that migrated several thousand years ago. Turks are from further east, and moved west to near the Caspian. Arabs are another lot. They have been living in there for a lot longer.

 

[cracker]

Each time this discussion comes up in its various forms it only serves to illustrate how really stupid WE are as human beings when we fail to first realize the limitations of the game engine we are dealing with.

These are not civilizations at all, they are just graphics wrappers that get overlayed across a limited set of mathematical options in the game.

The Zulus could be the Martians and it wouldn't make them play any different. You could add a new civ called the Eskimos and if their traits were set to be the same as the existing English then the would just be English is Seal Skin wrappers with the Kayaks-o-war.

The are currently only 6 civ specific traits (industrious, etc) and they are assigned to civs 2 at a time, so that gives a maximum of 15 possible trait combinations. After 15 civs, the combinations just repeat.

Each civ also has a UU that can help to differentiate them from the other civs but we should remember that the AI views these units as packets of numbers in terms of the ADM values. If the A/D/M values for a UU are essentially the the same as the A/D/M values for another unit, then the UU becomes just a graphics wrapper on top of the same skeleton. There are a lot of combinations of UU advantages that can be mixed and matched with the 15 possible civ trait combinations but some UU + trait combinations are fairly worthless in game play and result in the civ either being wiped out early or just being a flash in the pan.

A fourth area of civ specific ability that could be discussed is the aggression level since this seems to be the next issue after traits and UU that effects how the Civ will play in the game. If you cloned Bismarck's current civ and just retitled it to be the Polish, lead by Kosciusko, with its aggression slider set low instead way high like Otto, the civ would play different.

If any debate needs to be swirling in these "new civ debates" it needs to focus on the trait combination with UUs as well as the possible release of additional civ specific traits. Currently, all of the combinations of civ specific traits have been applied to at least one civ and now we are working on duplicates. Adding one new civ specific trait with its own advantages would expand the possible civs from 15 up to 21 combinations as a base. This would also lead to expanding the choices in terms of wonder matching that would be available in the game

It doesn't matter whether they are called the Hatfields or the McCoys as long as we understand where the trait, UU, and aggression abilities fall in the list of available choices.

Instead we end up mired in a series of debates as to whose home culture has more historic sexaul process or some equivalent form of "my ethnic background is worth more than your ethnic background, Nyah Nyah poo poo, can't catch me.!!!

 

[Higher Game]

They are both Muslim and they certainly don't hate each other. They are both peaceful and united to each other. They helped each other out in the crusades. It was the West versus the Middle East. The crusades were lost because some stupid German guy, I think Barbarosa was his name, drowned before he got to the holy land. Germany, ugh. Germany wasn't a nation until the 1850-90 time period either, I don't know or care when, about the same time as Italy. But Germany got in and Italy did not. The Gauls should be in, not Germany.

I would make my own civs but I don't know what to make of an Italian UU and I don't know how to make leader portraits. I'm not a hacker. I can't change the civs but Firaxis can. They left out Italy for the Ottoman's...

God, or whoever you are, the Persians are not Aryans. That was some BS that Hitler made up. I can't believe you would think that. Aryans do not exist, man.

Italy is so different from Rome. The Roman Empire divided into the Byzantine Empire and the Holy Roman Empire, both were left out of the game. I don't think the crusader would be an offensive UU at all if they are going to make so many Arab civs.

 

[Higher Game]

I'm with Cracker here. Forget this thread. Someday when I'm 42 some hacker is going to make me a UU for Italy, probably a guy that can take over tanks like in Grand Theft Auto 3. Actually, I bet they might make some UU for the Ottomans that doesn't really resemble a desert civ too much. I think they have gone a little overboard with desert civs, though. All I can think of are camels, camels, and more camels... Nomads hardly count as a civilization.

 

[Maple]

Thank you cracker- this thread was getting repititious.