Not as much of a joke as it will sound at the first glance...

[Somebody613]

The way I see it being fun, casual, and constantly paid-back'y (think CK2, hello):

1. A standalone game of its own.
You don't like it - you don't play it.
And always a decent DEMO (say, one FULL game until an actual Victory, then lockup; it'd be much better than limiting the number of turns or similar horsehocky).
Or something similarly INTERESTING to TRY OUT and not feel ANNOYED.
Let's say that the actual Civ4 DEMO gave me near-zero wish to CONTINUE playing, just for the record.
It was a random "free game" decision that came much later and had nothing to do with the DEMO (which was BORING).

2. A rather limited Basic Game as far as Eras go (but not game play on its own) - and then a ton of DLCs.
It might be not as simple to program, but it's possible to make certain features be included as DLCs that come with additional Eras, not just updates.
Example:
No Hunting until the Ancient Era - you'd need to BUY the Prehistoric DLC to see the marvels of Hunting (short-term DEMO included, of course).
No Multi Maps after the Modern (or whatever) Era - you'd need to BUY quite a few DLC Eras, each adding new cool stuff beyond mere units.
Actual Multiple Planets after the Space (or whatever) Era - that alone would make people BUY those DLCs without a question.
Etc. etc. etc.
Just think what CK2 did - then multiply it by C2C.

3. Additional GAME MODES.
"Play the Real World" - a reflection of Rhye's, but Up To Eleven with cities and map SIZES.
"Fantasy and Fiction" - a SERIES of DLC mods, each being a separate UNIVERSE (either existing franchise, or random fictional setting).
"Spore Civ" - yes, THAT, and that's again a SERIES of DLC mods, and a huge one at that. Also can be named: Microbe2Microbiologist.
"Rule the Galaxy" - you though I meant COSMOS on the above line? Nope, I meant BIOLOGY (edited, lol). THIS one is about COSMOS.
Etc. etc. etc.

In other words, YES, a Civ to Civ all other Civs.
But...
Not exactly LIMITED in what you exactly can CIV in it, lol.
And let's be honest - the existing Civ franchise is yet another case of "the newer, the DUMBER".
I honestly don't see ANY appeal in Civ5/Civ6 over CIv4 (even Vanilla) - so either I'm too SMART for it, or it's actually horsehocky.
(Or I simply can't digest a Civ that has TILE-based cities in the first place, though I see other flaws there as well. And it IS boring.)
The same case goes for HoMM - the best HoMM is HoMM3 (with mods, though), and the latter HoMM's are getting worse and worse for MY taste.
So unless this "casual player" is also "too dumb to play anything complex EVER" - I see absolutely no LOGIC in "later means something new".
It just means "more flashier graphics for the price of dumber game play".
Or so it seems to ME.

 

[Joij21]

The way I see it being fun, casual, and constantly paid-back'y (think CK2, hello):

1. A standalone game of its own.
You don't like it - you don't play it.
And always a decent DEMO (say, one FULL game until an actual Victory, then lockup; it'd be much better than limiting the number of turns or similar ****).
Or something similarly INTERESTING to TRY OUT and not feel ANNOYED.
Let's say that the actual Civ4 DEMO gave me near-zero wish to CONTINUE playing, just for the record.
It was a random "free game" decision that came much later and had nothing to do with the DEMO (which was BORING).

2. A rather limited Basic Game as far as Eras go (but not game play on its own) - and then a ton of DLCs.
It might be not as simple to program, but it's possible to make certain features be included as DLCs that come with additional Eras, not just updates.
Example:
No Hunting until the Ancient Era - you'd need to BUY the Prehistoric DLC to see the marvels of Hunting (short-term DEMO included, of course).
No Multi Maps after the Modern (or whatever) Era - you'd need to BUY quite a few DLC Eras, each adding new cool stuff beyond mere units.
Actual Multiple Planets after the Space (or whatever) Era - that alone would make people BUY those DLCs without a question.
Etc. etc. etc.
Just think what CK2 did - then multiply it by C2C.

3. Additional GAME MODES.
"Play the Real World" - a reflection of Rhye's, but Up To Eleven with cities and map SIZES.
"Fantasy and Fiction" - a SERIES of DLC mods, each being a separate UNIVERSE (either existing franchise, or random fictional setting).
"Spore Civ" - yes, THAT, and that's again a SERIES of DLC mods, and a huge one at that. Also can be named: Microbe2Microbiologist.
"Rule the Galaxy" - you though I meant COSMOS on the above line? Nope, I meant BIOLOGY (edited, lol). THIS one is about COSMOS.
Etc. etc. etc.

In other words, YES, a Civ to Civ all other Civs.
But...
Not exactly LIMITED in what you exactly can CIV in it, lol.
And let's be honest - the existing Civ franchise is yet another case of "the newer, the DUMBER".
I honestly don't see ANY appeal in Civ5/Civ6 over CIv4 (even Vanilla) - so either I'm too SMART for it, or it's actually ****.
(Or I simply can't digest a Civ that has TILE-based cities in the first place, though I see other flaws there as well. And it IS boring.)
The same case goes for HoMM - the best HoMM is HoMM3 (with mods, though), and the latter HoMM's are getting worse and worse for MY taste.
So unless this "casual player" is also "too dumb to play anything complex EVER" - I see absolutely no LOGIC in "later means something new".
It just means "more flashier graphics for the price of dumber game play".
Or so it seems to ME.

A lot of those ideas are just not feasible for a development team with a budget and limited resources. Not to mention the need for staying true to release deadlines. Firaxis publishes through 2K so they have to please their investors. Taking too long on publishing a game is not going to please them, especially if it also is going to cost too much.

The we also have the question of "if other people are going to make mods based on all this stuff then why have it in the main release at all"? Having it in the main game would only serve the purpose of pleasing those who don't like to tamper around with game files and mod in general. Firaxis probably works under the assumption that if they don't code a really nice feature then some fan will just make a mod for it anyway.

 

[Somebody613]

A lot of those ideas are just not feasible for a development team with a budget and limited resources. Not to mention the need for staying true to release deadlines. Firaxis publishes through 2K so they have to please their investors. Taking too long on publishing a game is not going to please them, especially if it also is going to cost too much.

The we also have the question of "if other people are going to make mods based on all this stuff then why have it in the main release at all"? Having it in the main game would only serve the purpose of pleasing those who don't like to tamper around with game files and mod in general. Firaxis probably works under the assumption that if they don't code a really nice feature then some fan will just make a mod for it anyway.

I'm mostly just saying that:
1. CK2 had been kept alive for years exactly in this manner, despite being even MORE moddable and actively modded.
2. All the post-Civ4 iterations had been steadily WORSE from the point of view of a veteran Civ-er like myself.
The rest is just based on those two points one way or another.

 

[Joij21]

I agree that the civ series has taken a turn for the worse. I won't deny that. However what your saying is a little more than just suggesting Firaxis improve their series, but rather shame them for not carbon copying this mod and selling it without the modders' permission.

 

[Somebody613]

I agree that the civ series has taken a turn for the worse. I won't deny that. However what your saying is a little more than just suggesting Firaxis improve their series, but rather shame them for not carbon copying this mod and selling it without the modders' permission.

Some interesting "insights" you have there, I see.
Utterly off and false, but interesting nonetheless.
Or NOT.

 

[Joij21]

Because I can't see anything beyond blind stubbornness being a reason for him/them to NOT get interested in your iteration of Civ.

I have absolutely NO IDEA why he/them hasn't approached your team yet all on his/their own, really.
It's like they literally stopped caring about their product QUALITY whatsoever, because I don't buy that he/they don't KNOW about this mod.

Claiming Firaxis is beyond blindly stubborn and stopped caring about quality because of not copying a mod seems like shaming to me. Then again you probably don't mean it however I doubt an employee from Firaxis would view it that way. Most likely they'd tell you to code it yourself and see how hard it really is.

 

[Patine]

I agree that the civ series has taken a turn for the worse. I won't deny that. However what your saying is a little more than just suggesting Firaxis improve their series, but rather shame them for not carbon copying this mod and selling it without the modders' permission.

It took a turn for the worse after Civ2 ToT was abandoned as the "official," iteration and Sid Meier and Brian Reynalds left MPS to found Firaxis.

 

[Joij21]

ToT got many bad reviews from critics and mixed reviews from fans though. I guess it wasn't everyone's cup of tea.

 

[Patine]

ToT got many bad reviews from critics and mixed reviews from fans though. I guess it wasn't everyone's cup of tea.

Well, it remains king for ease and simplicity of modibility and scenario making. You literally DON'T need to be programmer and a 3-D animated graphics artist, or get someone who is on board with your project.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Test of Time was pretty much the ultimate (if it had a more updated rule base) - it's in large part what we're trying to recapture with multimaps. Unfortunately, there were also a lot of innovations in 3 and 4 particularly 4 with promotions on units and unitcombat definitions and interactions as well as HUGE improvements in border determination rules (the biggest irritation I had in ToT was solved by that bit alone.) Trying to combine the 2 is what C2C is pretty much about in my opinion.

 

[Joij21]

Wasn't Test of Time just a copy of Call to Power? From what I read on wikipedia the only reason Sid made ToT was because of new competition from Call to Power. So in essence the whole multimap thing was originally an Activision idea later used by Microprose.

Probably explains why Sid has chosen not to be as feature reliant for future releases, he hasn't had major competition since then. Although Humankind is coming out soon and it looks like C2C but on a modern game engine. So who knows, maybe Sid will have competition after all when Civ7 comes out.

 

[Patine]

Wasn't Test of Time just a copy of Call to Power? From what I read on wikipedia the only reason Sid made ToT was because of new competition from Call to Power. So in essence the whole multimap thing was originally an Activision idea later used by Microprose.

I don't remotely see any strong similarities, having both CD-ROM's sitting right here on my shelf.

 

[Somebody613]

Although Humankind is coming out soon and it looks like C2C but on a modern game engine.

Then it sadly means that C2C has lost the race for the Future Tech.
Unless it's yet another case of "talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk" of actually BEING all that impressive for real - but we're yet to see that when it comes out.

EDIT:
After taking a closer look, though, this is AT BEST Civ6 level of actual game play, whereas C2C already provides the "evolve into a newer culture" feature IN SPADES.
So maybe it DOESN'T walk the walk, after all.
If we combine C2C and Rhye's - the result would beat ANY cultural diversity feature bundle with a lot of spare baggage to be reserved yet.
And Humankind clearly DOESN'T start in Prehistory, lol.
So it's just basically Civ6 with a few more Civs (in the actual game play, not merely in math).
Nothing that Prehistory2RealWorld should ever be worried about game-wise.
If only it was the only factual problem, though.

 

[Joij21]

In Humankind you can customize your civ from a bunch of cultures like in C2C. There are no preselected civs but rather you make your own. So on that part it seems like C2C to me.

The graphics are also way better than Civ6, and there are now new base terrains. These terrains include plateaus, lowlands, cliffs, and varying elevation. Something that no Civ nor C2C has done so far.

Also from what I have heard you start out nomadic. So I'm not quite sure what you mean by the game doesn't allow you to start in prehistory.

Oh and there's space.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Mankind strikes me as if the designer was paying attn to a lot of our proposals and discussions here. It looks interesting. We'll see.

 

[Somebody613]

Mankind strikes me as if the designer was paying attn to a lot of our proposals and discussions here. It looks interesting. We'll see.

Except it takes a couple of your ideas and glorifies it, while ignoring a couple dozens of your other ideas that it deliberately didn't even try using.
Starting with the Era scope as the minimum (and transparent) difference that matters.
You have Prehistory and Post-history as the normative part of your timeline.
They don't have either of those in the slightest.
The difference in game play is HUGE.

 

[Somebody613]

In Humankind you can customize your civ from a bunch of cultures like in C2C. There are no preselected civs but rather you make your own. So on that part it seems like C2C to me.

The graphics are also way better than Civ6, and there are now new base terrains. These terrains include plateaus, lowlands, cliffs, and varying elevation. Something that no Civ nor C2C has done so far.

Also from what I have heard you start out nomadic. So I'm not quite sure what you mean by the game doesn't allow you to start in prehistory.

Oh and there's space.

I merely based it on what their official site told me - I don't know what are your exact sources that told you differently.
https://humankind.game/
"Ancient to Modern Age", so no Prehistory and no Post-history either.
Terrain elevation simply amounts to "making several Hills with varied access conditions".
We already have "conditionally-(im)passable" terrain in Civ4 mods (I certainly have seen it) - so it's nothing but a graphical naming issue.
The map might or might not work like in Civ4 (no on-map buildings) or Civ6 (yes on-map buildings), the "Claiming Territory" video leaves it vague enough to me.
Videos also suggest (but don't verify) "one unit per tile" abomination from Civ6 style.
So, all in all, it LOOKS and FEELS like Civ6 with maybe a few small % of C2C tacked onto it for "flavor".
Namely, flexible culture-civs being the only feature I can even pinpoint to begin with.
Everything else is either outright Civ6 or close enough to still feel that way.
And news flash - I HATE Civ6.

 

[irishhombre]

I dislike Civ5 and hate Civ6. It only took me 3 hours to uninstall.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Except it takes a couple of your ideas and glorifies it, while ignoring a couple dozens of your other ideas that it deliberately didn't even try using.

Yeah they seemed to want to really refine on those concepts and I think they got out ahead of us on that a bit - though I'm refusing to play the game until ours is pretty much manifest as intended so that I don't get the vision here clouded by the comparison. What we have now is NOT the end design on a number of those matters, just the evolutionary start to adjusting things.

As I was trying to suggest on the previous page, I think it's too much to expect any game to start with the kind of scope we have in C2C... it would have to build up a lot to get where we are now and would take a lot of time and effort to get there so it would be nice to think it could be profitable and something one could step out of having to work at a day job during the development work along the way by making it a constant revenue stream, even if barely enough at first to survive on.

 

[Somebody613]

I would say a weird thing now.
It'd be a rather interesting concept to combine Europa Universalis with both C2C and Rhye's.
As the BASIC game, no less.
Geopolitics mixed with Hero Units and an actual World Map where applicable.
And THEN add Prehistoric and Space stuff as DLC "mods".
Eventually branching into actual "SPORE-style" Multi-maps as yet another DLC (or a few).
And as far as "making customers interested" - to ADVERTISE ALL of those almost from the start, yet PRODUCE them with rather long periods in-between.
So that the players KNOW what's coming "next summer" - up to getting a small-scale taste of it in demos.
This way, you could stretch a FULL game over several YEARS, literally - and still manage to HOOK a lot of people to stay INTERESTED.
While NOT giving everything away from the get-go, even if for a sizable amount of money.
And you can always ADD MORE NEW STUFF this way, maybe going so far as including the CK2 flavor as well.
Just imagine the amount of IMMERSION such a multi-faceted game would have.
And I remind you that it WOULDN'T get "unlocked" over a short time - but instead over a rather LONG one, effectively "recruiting" much more players this way.
These are just semi-random thoughts, but I don't see how this would reap WORSE results than what the actual Paradox games do.