Player's preferences for 4X games
- Thread starter tachidi
- Start date
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Gameplay, immersion, and replay value uber alles.
Zardnaar
Deity
Fun factor. I like Galactic Civ, Hearts of Iron 2 and Civ 1-3.
I ended up ticking all the boxes except graphics (screw pretty RAM-eating graphics as long as the interface is neat and easy to use), tactics (doesn't really belong in a strategy game) and social interaction (because I'm a sad excuse for a human being with no friends).
Also, what warpus and Zardnaar said. Ease of moddability for bonus points.
Also, what warpus and Zardnaar said. Ease of moddability for bonus points.
Perfection
The Great Head.
I only care about graphics
Rashiminos
Fool Prophet
I tried to rule out certain options more than I tried to rule them in on this one. Some of the options overlapped a bit.
Realism gets shot for simply not being fun if fully implemented.
Realism gets shot for simply not being fun if fully implemented.
I don't expect a game like Civ to be fully realistic or historically accurate. But things like spearmen beating tanks or uber-archers shooting over the English Channel are pushing it.
Disgustipated
Deity
I'm not going to say graphics aren't important, or we'd be playing with civ1 style graphics still.
I checked every box except tactics and social interaction. Tactics because I feel civ5 style tactics don't belong in a strategy game, and social interaction because I don't play multiplayer.
I checked every box except tactics and social interaction. Tactics because I feel civ5 style tactics don't belong in a strategy game, and social interaction because I don't play multiplayer.
*****
Warlord
Graphics add a lot. My only beef with them is that 3D models are harder to mod than Civ 2's old .gif files.
Heretic_Cata
We're gonna live forever
Achievements !
History_Buff
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2001
- Messages
- 6,529
Graphics certainly matter, but are never the defining characteristic. Personally, I think complexity, and, of utmost importance in a game set in history, realism are the most important features of the 4X games. The lack of the latter is why I have abandoned the Civ franchise.
holy king
Deity
what genre?
My suggestions, ie what I look for in a strategy game.
A strategy presupposes thinking and planning ahead.
I am not sure how to best express my thoughts so please bear with me. There must be a variety of ways to win or put another way there must choices. There should not be choices that are so obviously superior to all others that it effectively becomes the only choice. The key point is that one must be able to plan a series of choices (ie formulate a strategy) which allow a realistic prospect of victory BUT there must be no strategy which guarantees victory. There must be a certain tension throughout the game, the possibility of defeat must exist at all times (except the last few turns of course).
There must be variety in the game. The strategy for each game must not be a carbon copy of the previous game.
Using Civ 4 as an example. Ones opening moves will differ depending upon terrain. Whether one builds a fishing boat, worker, scout or warrior depends largely upon ones starting location, traits and starting technology. Ones strategy depends on numerous factors including starting location, surrounding terrain, map type neighbours etc etc.
It is good to have a variety of options to allow differentiation of ones strategies however the AI must also be able handle those options. It would arguably be best to leave out features that the AI simply can not handle. (There is debate going on about whether Civ5 should have 1 unit per tile which the AI can not handle or retain the Civ4 stack of doom which the AI could use in a fashion). The AI must be able to put up a good show without excessive reliance on gigantic bonuses or cheating (OTH the braindead AI in Civ2 did cheat and had massive bonuses but it was a good game despite that).
Complex is good as it contributes to replayability. Complicated is bad as it leads to pointless messing about and makes it harder to program a decent AI. Repetitiveness is bad as it leads to boredom.
There should be "milestones" which allow the player a sense of achievement. Such as completing research on a new tech. If there are so many techs that a new one becomes available every turn then getting a new tech has no "oomph" for the player.
A strategy presupposes thinking and planning ahead.
I am not sure how to best express my thoughts so please bear with me. There must be a variety of ways to win or put another way there must choices. There should not be choices that are so obviously superior to all others that it effectively becomes the only choice. The key point is that one must be able to plan a series of choices (ie formulate a strategy) which allow a realistic prospect of victory BUT there must be no strategy which guarantees victory. There must be a certain tension throughout the game, the possibility of defeat must exist at all times (except the last few turns of course).
There must be variety in the game. The strategy for each game must not be a carbon copy of the previous game.
Using Civ 4 as an example. Ones opening moves will differ depending upon terrain. Whether one builds a fishing boat, worker, scout or warrior depends largely upon ones starting location, traits and starting technology. Ones strategy depends on numerous factors including starting location, surrounding terrain, map type neighbours etc etc.
It is good to have a variety of options to allow differentiation of ones strategies however the AI must also be able handle those options. It would arguably be best to leave out features that the AI simply can not handle. (There is debate going on about whether Civ5 should have 1 unit per tile which the AI can not handle or retain the Civ4 stack of doom which the AI could use in a fashion). The AI must be able to put up a good show without excessive reliance on gigantic bonuses or cheating (OTH the braindead AI in Civ2 did cheat and had massive bonuses but it was a good game despite that).
Complex is good as it contributes to replayability. Complicated is bad as it leads to pointless messing about and makes it harder to program a decent AI. Repetitiveness is bad as it leads to boredom.
There should be "milestones" which allow the player a sense of achievement. Such as completing research on a new tech. If there are so many techs that a new one becomes available every turn then getting a new tech has no "oomph" for the player.
Luckymoose
The World is Mine
On second thought I don't really like 4x games.
KMRblue1027
Deity
I picked everything but realism, tactics, politics, and obviously graphics (I still play Civ2 after all.)
Realism just ruins games, #1 rule of gaming IMO is don't sacrifice gameplay for realism or graphics.
Tactics don't belong in a large scale game.
I don't like dealing with politics. I'm fine with diplomacy as long as it doesn't go way to in depth.
I like playing multiplayer with my friends and family so I enjoy the social interaction.(Which surprisingly few of you enjoy)
You'd be surprised I'm 17 so I am easily considered a modern player and I don't care about graphics at all. In fact I hate good graphics for PC games because it won't run as well, I much prefer good performance.
Realism just ruins games, #1 rule of gaming IMO is don't sacrifice gameplay for realism or graphics.
Tactics don't belong in a large scale game.
I don't like dealing with politics. I'm fine with diplomacy as long as it doesn't go way to in depth.
I like playing multiplayer with my friends and family so I enjoy the social interaction.(Which surprisingly few of you enjoy)
You'd be surprised I'm 17 so I am easily considered a modern player and I don't care about graphics at all. In fact I hate good graphics for PC games because it won't run as well, I much prefer good performance.
*****
Warlord
Graphics means different things to different people. I see where you're coming from with wanting something that runs nice and fast, without bells and whistles. But good graphics doesn't just mean a bajillion polygons, it could mean a clean presentation that is easy on the eyes. Frankly I think that Civ 2 had excellent graphics, and that they hold up well. ToT kind of ruined it for me though.
If you really hate graphics, check out Dwarf Fortress.
