New screenshots on Gamespot

[ThERat]

wow, that screenie of riseoflegends looks awesome...why can't they make something like that. But even then, imagine those bulky Giants come into view...forget that beauty landscape then

I agree, the graphics look a bit like Black and White

 

[GoodGame]

On the giants, maybe in addition to not showing them (like CIV3),
they can develop flat icons like the the other indicators. Like a pictograph for rifleman, one for swordsman, etc... so the giants don't spoil the view.

 

[Anguished]

What I'm trying to say is, even though the gameplay is top-notch, the way it's presented (via graphics) should be appropriate. Civ3's graphics were perfect, it was to the point, it had an appropriate look (like a mixture between seeing the world from space and a board game), buttons were nice and were easily acessible. Although I'm still angry that it eats up a gig of my hard drive, while it has the graphics of AOK (I have nothing against 2d) . Now what I just saw this afternoon is a complete mess. It has an interface of what you would see in an RTS (this is supposed to be a TBS), the mountains all look the same, there's a bunch of unecessary crap littered all over the map, and the colors are so bad and so out of place, that I'm reluctant to buy the game. Of course, no one should be judging a book by it's cover but....stuff like this will drive customers away. They should have stuck to the same principle of graphics with Civ3; not too much focus on graphics, but something that looks nice. Here Firaxis (and I'm sure they did a good job on it) focused way too much on everything else (moddability, gameplay, stuff) and forgot about how it looked. Kinda like a chef who prepares something that tastes like heaven, but looks like something a hobo wouldn't even touch.

And if Firaxis plans on having graphics of mediocre quality, the should minimize the amount of space it takes. Like it or not, graphics are what's going to take the bulk of the game not the gameplay itself. If I took out those animations from Civ3, and replaced it with regular, cheap, 2d sprites...Civ3 would be less than 20 MB.


Once again, I'm still angry why CivIII takes up so much space but the gameplay is the same, and the graphics aren't state of the art though they were good looking. It was all 2d, the sprites and map did not have the quality of HL2 and somehow, it managed to take up 1.4 GB off my PC.

 

[ogmoir]

Like ironduck said, the distant views are rather nice, better than Civ3; and since this is the view I (and probably a lot of other people) will be playing at most of the time, I'm not worried.

Same here. The units look huge only when zomed in close. If you want to zoom in to view the beauty, you can hide the units.

 

[M4 Carbine]

@HamaticBabylon

Son ... you were probably still being breast fed while I was playing the original Civilization. Secondly, and as ThERat metioned, this is a "FORUM" ... people will express their opinions in an open discussion ... thats what "FORUMS" are for ... if you have a Webster's Dictionary handy I would suggest you look it up for yourself. You would best serve yourself and everyone else in the community if you kept that in the forefront of your mind.

I do want to thank you for the video link you posted ... although seeing it in action does showcase some of Civ4's nicer qualities, I am still growing in disappointment with the quality of the graphics that will most likely be included out of the box.

@HamaticBabylonIt's always nice to see qualified posts. But, I hope you don't mind that some people have their own opinion that differs from yours. I am playing Civ since Civ1 came out many years ago, thus I just wanted to share my feelings. But, thanks to you I know now what I am.

Bravo ... Bravo! I always respect the opinions of those who can share in the anguish and reminisce about Battleships being lost to Phalanxs and Bombers to Cavalry!

 

[ThERat]

Bravo ... Bravo! I always respect the opinions of those who can share in the anguish and reminisce about Battleships being lost to Phalanxs and Bombers to Cavalry!

well, I remember, before Civ came out, there was this game called 'empire' which resembled Civ, just that it was not complex at all. Fun though. I was so hooked on Civ1 and Civ2 really beat it for me costing me hours and days of real life. When Civ3 came out, though I did share the sentiments about those obvious bugs, I really enjoyed playing it, and no need to say that C3C rocks as well. At that time I was really looking forward to those games. I remember I bought Civ2 while in Singapore on vacation while my computer was waiting back home. Out of desperation, I actually read and studied the whole damn booklet, trying to reduce the agony of waiting to play.

I would love to have the same feelings for Civ4 and probably will buy it as soon as I can grab it, but I just feel 'some things ain't right' and the step to 3D is unnecessary and makes me feel sceptical.

 

[Philips beard]

I agree! Think I would look even more forward to it, if it still was in 2-D! Think of all the possibilities with more CIVS, more unique units, more unique paths of science, larger maps, possibilities for modders.....etc......

Hmmmm, I'm getting nostalgic too, I feel......

 

[oldStatesman]

I am middle aged...not an idiot...and very well educated. The designers need constructive criticism, not cheerleading in order to make a great game.

IMHO I find these screenshots showing some sloppy graphic work. Strange, because the last batch were very good. Perhaps they are from a test version...but if they do reflect the finished product graphically, I cringe at what the rest of the game may be like. Here's hoping, as I do believe, that they are just workups and not a reflection of general sloppiness through the whole product.

Personally, I don't like the 'land of the giants' look...the train passing under one of the riflemen's legs in the one shot is especially farcical to me. (Perhaps the subtitle for the game should be Civ4 - Lilliputia. ) The whole mode is very cartoony which I dislike...but hey, this is all just my personal opinion and to each their own.

 

[Wolfwood]

Those latest screenshots must be from max zoom in. The earlier shots resembled Civ3 more as far as unit size was concerned, so I think we'll be ok.

I will just never want to see that max zoom in my games...

I also hope that they'll work on the graphics a bit more before release: we need to see differences between mountains and more realistic variety in the landscape. Firaxis seems to be too enthusiastic about cartoony graphics these days...

 

[Hemlige Arne]

Does anyone know what screen resolution Civ4 will have? I'm currently operating at 1400x1050 and the Civ3 resolution is pretty crappy compared to that. Only thing that's annoying to me with this otherwise great game. I mean with today's modern screens...

 

[ironduck]

It's 3D so you should be able to set the resolution you prefer.

 

[ThePrankMonkey]

It will most likely be the same as for Pirates: a 1 GHz CPU, 256MB RAM, and a 32MB video card with hardware transform and lighting capabilities.

this certainly put my mind at ease...this is all i really cared about. i fit in the specs though if it turns out anything like sim city 4 it'll be slow and that'll annoy me to no end and i wont want to play it longer than five minute.

 

[M4 Carbine]

this certainly put my mind at ease...this is all i really cared about. i fit in the specs though if it turns out anything like sim city 4 it'll be slow and that'll annoy me to no end and i wont want to play it longer than five minute.

I understand your uneasiness ... I share in your anxiety. I was very excited about Sim City 4 and the fact I could run it on my computer until my city population hit 50,000. Forget about running the day/night option. I still love the game though and can't refuse to play it. I think Sim City 4 is genius and such a step in the right direction from the previous editions. I wish I had such a heartfelt opinion for Civilization 4 as well but I'm still very skeptical ... I should be careful not to judge a book by its cover, I guess.

 

[ThePrankMonkey]

I understand your uneasiness ... I share in your anxiety. I was very excited about Sim City 4 and the fact I could run it on my computer until my city population hit 50,000. Forget about running the day/night option. I still love the game though and can't refuse to play it. I think Sim City 4 is genius and such a step in the right direction from the previous editions. I wish I had such a heartfelt opinion for Civilization 4 as well but I'm still very skeptical ... I should be careful not to judge a book by its cover, I guess.

i had the same problems. 50K and its all down hill. i left it daytime only as thats how i've always played sim city.

im not gonna judge civ 4 just yet. i want to give it a fair shot and actually play the game before saying it sucks. i like playing on huge maps (but with only 7 other civs, i like civs to get big) but with sim city 4 50K in people isnt much, it really isnt. that would be like playing a small map and taking five-ten minutes a turn.

my specs for that game was within their parameters but it jsut got too slow so i gave up on it. though the game is wonderful, i'll give it that.

i'll wait and see and hope with civ 4. as i am not going to buy another computer or faster processor just to play a game. its so not worth it.

 

[warpstorm]

The thing I am most surprised about is that in every poll CivFanatics claim they aren't concerned about graphics "It's all in the gameplay", and then proceed to rant about how much they don't like the graphics and that Firaxis "betrayed" them by going 3D.

 

[ironduck]

Graphics mean a lot to me, I've never said otherwise

 

[ThePrankMonkey]

The thing I am most surprised about is that in every poll CivFanatics claim they aren't concerned about graphics "It's all in the gameplay", and then proceed to rant about how much they don't like the graphics and that Firaxis "betrayed" them by going 3D.

i dont see the point in going 3D. however i will not complain about it. i think the graphics look nice though i'll probably wind up using player made mods and graphics packs and such. my one real complaint thus far is the multi-units. i prefer a single unit graphic but thats a personal choice and i can change that so its not a big deal.

i am a little concerned about having to create missionaries...im not into religion and emphasizing religion in the game really sucks for me. i have a feeling i wont create any missionaries and wind up losing my empire city by city because of it. i liked it the way it was, kind of generic and not THAT integral in the game. it only made people content. this whole idea of creating missionaries and sending them out into other civs lands bothers me.

im more concered about game play than graphics, graphics i can always change, changing the game play isnt so easy (im less apt to change rules than changing how something looks, i hate tinkering with the mechanics of a game)

 

[Hemlige Arne]

I like religion as a new game concep. Boosts realism, I think.

 

[ThERat]

The thing I am most surprised about is that in every poll CivFanatics claim they aren't concerned about graphics "It's all in the gameplay", and then proceed to rant about how much they don't like the graphics and that Firaxis "betrayed" them by going 3D.

you see, if people are asked in a poll what matters most, they would of course say, gameplay (hey this is a strategy game after all, if we want graphics and action, other genres are more suitable).
But, this needs an underlying 'eye pleasing' graphics engine that also supports the gameplay by several factors.
- since it is turn and square based, one should be able to easily recognize each square
- forces and workers must be easily detectable
- any bonus or other important added features of any square must be easily recognized and spotted

Looking at the screenshots so far, people have a problem or a sense of uneasiness about the cluttered and somewhat messy look.

If you play AoE3, you don't need to bother about squares and exact resource location, in Civ it does matter (at least it did so far).
Civ3 did a good job in this regard, at least IMHO.

 

[vbraun]

Looking at the screenshots so far, people have a problem or a sense of uneasiness about the cluttered and somewhat messy look.

I actually think it looks clean and orgarnized, but my standards might be slightly lower, just look at my desk: it's a mess.