Multiple Rulers per Civ

[Teabeard]

This isn't Tropico. And it isn't Civ 2. It's a whooy unique game, Civ. 4. And you still haven't answered how to pick a female Babylonain, Aztec, Mayan, Scandanivian, Ottoman, or Mongol leader. Do you propose just making up someone like Txcetlysz for the Aztecs, or Helga for the Vikings? Use your noodle.

That is what was done for Civ 2.

 

[dh_epic]

I don't think forcing a female leader in every case is feasible or necessary.

But multiple leaders is pretty compelling. People just get into that. Look at how much argument there is over who gets to be the leader of America. Multiple leaders of America could tip a few more sales for such a small implementation -- some quick graphics, and going in and modifying the traits (if that).

Multiple Civs too. Either would have a lot of appeal.

 

[rbis4rbb]

That is what was done for Civ 2.

I'm saying CIV 4 ISN'T CIV 2. Sheesh. I suppose multiple leaderheads would be okay, but, as mentioned earlier, it would take up a lot of room.

 

[sir_schwick]

Unless you got rid of those ridiculous and stupid looking 3D leaderheads. IMHO the Civ 2 portraits looked a lot nicer, especially since you would get a paranthesis showing the emissaries mood.

 

[dh_epic]

I'm a fan of the Civ 2 leaderheads myself.

 

[thestonesfan]

I wouldn't mind 2D leaderheads, but the Civ3 heads have a certain charm to them.

 

[sealman]

But multiple leaders is pretty compelling. People just get into that. Look at how much argument there is over who gets to be the leader of America. Multiple leaders of America could tip a few more sales for such a small implementation -- some quick graphics, and going in and modifying the traits (if that).

I don't think that the leaders of the civ has any realation to the number of games sold.

 

[sir_schwick]

The big advantage to 2D portraits is when you create custom leaders for standard games. Also, you could store hundreds of very good looking portriats, possibly of a new format that allows moods, versus 16 leaderheads you quickly tire of.

 

[dh_epic]

I don't think any one leader could be the tipping point. But I think collectively it could have an impact.

When someone sees 6 or 7 nations that they "love" (because we all have international loves, either from movies, or from our ancestry, or from our history class) they're more likely to enjoy the game than if they see 1 or 2 nations they "love". It creates a sense of thoroughness. The latter is more of a "cool, some solid choices", whereas the prior is more like "WHOA, this game was THOROUGH, they have EVERYTHING!"

Thoroughness is a great aesthetic goal for a historical game like Civ, especially when that thoroughness doesn't interfere with the actual gameplay.

 

[Longasc]

I love well done 2D paintings.

3d animated leaderheads have the plus of animation, but they are not as nice as a really good photo/picture.

But today, everything must be 3d. Even the menus need to look 3d, the cursor, perhaps even the font!

 

[Jon Shafer]

3D font!

Yes, 3D sells these days. 3D everything.

 

[sir_schwick]

Sad but true. Personally I prefer graphics that are representative rather than great. MTW did not have a revolutionary graphics engine, but it represented what I wanted to see and did not make my battles last longer than they already did.

 

[AtomRipper]

I am in favor of multiple leaders, and i think we all agree we can live with 2d leader heads.

 

[sir_schwick]

Actually we can't all agree we can live with a 2nd leader head. tHose things added so little the many many megabytes of memory and performace are not worth it.

 

[Teabeard]

Actually we can't all agree we can live with a 2nd leader head. tHose things added so little the many many megabytes of memory and performace are not worth it.

We discussed this and I think most of us agreed we would be willing to go for 2D non-animated leaderheads which would take up very little space.

 

[sir_schwick]

Sorry, I thought he said 2nd, as in 2nd 3D leaderhead. Sorry

 

[Thunderfall]

I too prefer they use 2D leaderheads instead. 3D leaderheads take very long time to render and don't add that much to the playing experience. They are also why some Civ3 modpacks are over 150 MB in size.

Time is better spent for Firaxis artists to make the terrain graphics (and units) as good as possible IMO. And if they have extra time, they can make a movie for each type of victories, to make it more rewarding. We only have movie for spaceship victory in Civ3.

 

[dh_epic]

Seriously: 150 MegaBytes, serious development time, and no added gameplay or even historical benefit.

Wouldn't anyone gladly give these up? In a game that's going to be overall 3D otherwise, there's enough eye candy for the graphic junkies to be quite happy. What really gets most Civfans going is "more" -- more units, more concepts, more buildings. Firaxis can't do all of those things, because sometimes more makes the game too complex for a casual fan to enjoy.

Multiple leaders and multiple civs are two things that you can add more of without making the game too difficult to play or understand. A rare example getting something great basically for free.

 

[Tholish]

Leaderheads are a frill, but the functionality could be put in the engine in advance, with just one leaderhead, and then the leaderheads come out in an expansion. How about a different leader for each civ for each Government type? You have a revolution and then get a different leader, you know? For America you could have Ronald Reagan and Franklin Roosevelt as the quintessential Republic and Democracy leaders, and maybe Aaron Burr as the Monarchy leader and...I don't know, who would be good Fascist and Communist and Despotism leaders. Just more stuff to program in, without any benefit. But if you were going to do it, that's a way.

 

[mitsho]

@Tholish you had problems to fill these leaders up with America, now do this for the Aztecs, or the Hittites, or Babylon. Never mind the tremendous megabytes of graphic, this would need.

It's just not possible, mitsho