Stop complaining about units being big.

[Belboz]

Regarding Unit size, I've always felt that just because you've got a bigger spatula, it doesn't mean you make a better omelet. It's not the size of the ship, after all, its the length of the journey.

 

[Kyriakos]

It would have been a lot better if the 3d enviromnet was pseudo 3d, as in alpha centauri, and also terraformable. 3d terrain graphics ussually look bad nomatter what, because of lack of uniformity.You arent going to bother to check for random dots of dirt on the 3d plane, as if this is Counterstrike; the game needed imo more uniformity in terrain graphics, and more quality graphics all around, but this would just have made it a patched version of civ3.
I am probably way too negative about this, but after civ2 things have been downscaled, with civ3 at least adding some positive things (but also commiting suicide by taking away for no aparrent reason a load of things that were in civ2 and civ2tot) and civ4 looking like it is too messed up to be fixed by any modder.

Also, as i have mentioned before: do not think that having tens of editable tiles (eg 30 something grassland tiles, as in civ3, when civ2 had 2 grassland tiles) you are making the final result better: what you are certainly achieving by this is limiting the possibility of many serious modding attempts for that graphic, since it would take an aeon to complete. I think that less than 10 different complete (or almost complete) terrain mods ever were made for civ3. Compare with the thousants made for terrain for civ2-civ2tot.

 

[ironduck]

Although I think the map looks ok from a classic zoomed out perspective I really think it looks disappointingly poor zoomed even half way in. The 3D modeling looks very amateurish at this level, I'm really surprised that they have not put more funds into better/more 3D artists in such a large project. Graphics were never the first priority in Civ, but it doesn't have to look like it's pieced together in five minutes either.

I actually thought that many of the buildings in earlier screenshots were simply placeholder art because they looked so poor most 3D modelers could have knocked them up in a few minutes. Judging from the new screenshots they apparently are happy with this. Strange.

What's the point of having a 3D world with free zooming when things only look half decent in the classic zoomed out look anyway? 3D opens up a whole new world of immersive gameplay, but they're not using it for anything from a graphics perspective.

 

[El Justo]

while i've always said that civ3 m-units look like crap (most of them)

the civ4 units, even more so, look like bunk.

 

[Bathory666]

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina I realized what's been bugging me about the oversized units: they unrealistically dominate the landscape. Sounds obvious, I suppose, but I think it's still worth emphasizing that terrain and resources (and climate) have had an ENORMOUS amount to do with the fate of nations, and if you underrepresent them you become guilty of hubris (excessive human pride). I've always loved the way Civ games are as much a battle against nature (or a co-operation with her) as simply against other tribes. Gaia is a living character! That being said, if the units' size is manipulable, as other forum participants have suggested, well, all this is a waste of bits and bytes!

 

[Grey Fox]

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina I realized what's been bugging me about the oversized units: they unrealistically dominate the landscape.

Only a bit in the zoomed in pictures. But seen on some of the pictures in this thread, from the zoom range Most are going to be playing at 95% of the time, they are fine to me.


I think this oversized unit complaint comes alot from the zoomed in pictures.

 

[daufoi]

I've had several people say to me "it's like chess." This is not like Chess. This is an epic, 6000 year, multihundreds of turns game spanning entire worlds and taking into account many things. Don't tell me it's like chess.

I disagree with this point to some extent. Civ is very similar to chess in the sense that both games are about territory, having units with different types of ability, and anticipating or suckering your opponent into a defeat (in other words, strategy). Unlike chess, Civ adds in multiple opponents and political ranglings with them, and things like monetary considerations. In a way, Civ is a fancy form of chess.

 

[troytheface]

the graphic complaints continue- been a long time-
Thought i'd chime in on the Chess issue. I =chess player turned civ3 player.
Same mind set type of player i suspect as well as game mechanics.
In so far as graphics-i still can see how one may for whatever reason -and there are quite a few from a visual concern-might feel uneasy.
Size- really Scale - ie "man is the measure of all things" meaning scale is based on the figure -the Leonardo da Vinci guy in the Circle sketch-probably
many have this in their mind so firmly that it really bothers them.
There are also ....Color (not many color complaints)- ....Proportion...Lighting (how about having a tad of sunset or sunrise lighting? i mean that would make the game more dramatic looking-and let the shadows play a role) Shape, Form , Pattern, Value...ect.
Any one of these can cut across someone's aesthetic sense-
Although anyone that likes Surrealism won't complain i bet

 

[frekk]

Only a bit in the zoomed in pictures. But seen on some of the pictures in this thread, from the zoom range Most are going to be playing at 95% of the time, they are fine to me.


I think this oversized unit complaint comes alot from the zoomed in pictures.

Well, personally, I think they look ridiculously enormous even zoomed out. Other than that, the zoomed out map looks fine ... but the zoom feature is, well, a bit silly if things look even worse up close (what's the point?)

I would rather have gone with smaller units, giving the map a fine feeling rather than a blocky, clumsy, childish feeling. If seeing them was a difficulty, then the zoom would have a function - something it currently lacks.

 

[Naokaukodem]

This complaint about Civ4 unit size sounds like an obssession of a psychopath. "Nooo, nooo, not the giants!!! please, noooo, leave me alone, aaaargh!"

But well, I guess that even if this sounds weird to me, there is a reason for that.

Let's try to see:

° Units have the same size to all other unit in other civ game: they fill a whole square.
° Landscape is more detailed, with 3D: different angles, possibility of zoom > more details. Additionnally, forests, particularly, are represented not anymore as a whole, representing possibly a sky or space view, but are trees.
>>> This 3D/increase in details involves a stronger perception of objects. Things are more touchable objects than symbols as they were in previous Civs. And who say touchable, say touchable by humans. It may appear that 3D detailed units that represent humans may appear not in accordance with the environement details, in this case: they appear surprisingly big...

 

[warpstorm]

Other than that, the zoomed out map looks fine ... but the zoom feature is, well, a bit silly if things look even worse up close (what's the point?)

Well, once you've gone 3D, zoom is essentially free to implement.

 

[ironduck]

Well, once you've gone 3D, zoom is essentially free to implement.

Yeah, but what's the point of going 3D if everything looks poor once you actually use it (i.e. zoom)?

 

[Supa]

Jeez, with guys like you, we'd still playing text games

 

[warpstorm]

Yeah, but what's the point of going 3D if everything looks poor once you actually use it (i.e. zoom)?

Maybe they'd actually like to get paid to make the game. In this day and age a non-3d game will only get budget game funding levels.

 

[ironduck]

Maybe they'd actually like to get paid to make the game. In this day and age a non-3d game will only get budget game funding levels.

That doesn't really change my point, does it? It looks like they have a good 3D engine judging from the videos, so it seems a waste not to make good use of it with appetizing graphics. It's of course subjective whether it looks good or not, but I personally find the modelling very disappointing compared to other 3D graphics games of this style, not just the newest ones, but also much older ones. I just don't think most of the graphics are well made at all, they look hurried, confused in style, and of a generally low quality.

In comparison I think the Civ3 graphics are well done, consistent in style, and bring atmosphere to the game. I'm not at all asking for cutting edge lighting and fog effects that push graphics cards to their max. The issue is simply with fundamental modeling and styling. Within the engine they employ there is plenty of room for quality graphics, just like it's possible to create great art with very limited means. It's a matter of having talented graphics artists with enough time (which means having a certain number of them to make a given deadline).

It's my impression that this is a large project with fairly large funding (at least for a Firaxis project), so there should be enough resources to get enough good artists on board. I can see from the 2D graphics that have been supplied that they do have good 2D artists, and the units in Civ3 are modeled in 3D so they clearly had good 3D modelers then at least. It seems to me that this time out they haven't gotten a lead graphics designer in charge who was able to put a strong style and consistency in place and that's just a shame.

It's not going to make a difference now I figure, but if Firaxis reads these forums maybe they'll pay more attention to this aspect onwards. Civ is a great game, it deserves quality graphics.

 

[daufoi]

Lighting (how about having a tad of sunset or sunrise lighting? i mean that would make the game more dramatic looking-and let the shadows play a role)

I mentioned this in another thread but here it is again. If you look closely at some of the screen shots, the designers DO make use of sunsets/rises. ie, some of the screenshots, the trees have shadows that are long and going to the left, implying the sun is low and to the right. The problem, however, in those same screen shots, the units and horses have shadows directly underneath them, as when the sun is high and directly overhead.

 

[Bathory666]

I'm not at all asking for cutting edge lighting and fog effects that push graphics cards to their max...

When I was much younger I used to play Avalon Hill games. Does anyone know those? They've reinvented themselves for PC now, but they were the original immensely complex stat-based boardgames for historical wargame afionados, played on hexagonal tiles. Weather was one of the many factors in their re-enactments of such battles as Stalingrad or Anzio. I've always wondered if weather might be introduced to Civ, but because the turns represent years or even centuries I figured it was impossible. So bringing graphic representation of weather seems equally unlikely, no?

 

[strhopper]

This is going to be somthing everyone complains about untill it is released and then every one will get use to it or change it.........I see this as a minor gripe as I am more interested in diplomacy and trade

 

[warpstorm]

When I was much younger I used to play Avalon Hill games. Does anyone know those?

Sure do. In fact, I work with many of the people who used to be Avalon Hill.

 

[jeedo]

The units are too big, it's simple and plain for everyone to see.

Unfortunently it's an aspect of Civ that they couldn't really improve on but obviously they didn't think it was a new game unless you changed it (broken or not, we're changing this so that people think the game looks different and different = new = wrong).

They should have updated the units without the change in scale. Clearer definition and animation would have done the job without making them look stupid.

How can somebody feel that they are playing with a real (imagined) world when it looks more like ancient mech power rangers towering over buildings?

If this isn't changed (or able to be modded) I am not purchasing the game. This is due to my beliefs that this somehow dictates the style of play. I prefer to have 100 units in a stack with crappy graphics than 10 units in a stack with gigantic crappy units. How can I have 100's of units if they are that big?

Possibly the one big mistake that will turn people off of this game - even if they've played previous Civ's and loved them.