The future of Fall from Heaven

Theres this nice turn based strategy called civ 1, but its 4 sequals are also turn based strategy. Theres also Civ rev and colonization.
 
Valkrionn said:
Again: Why is everyone so sure FfH3 will be anything like FfH2? I wouldn't be surprised if the only similarity is the setting; Genre, style of game, everything else can be different.

I really do not believe that it will a standalone version of FfH2; What's the point of that? Why stick to the same thing over and over? Why compete with Civ5, when you could instead develop something different and unique?
Click to expand...

What's the point? How about the fact that some parts of FFH2 are the way they are because of engine limitations. Hell terrain, for example. Kael wanted to have a hell map that the demons came from and players could invade, but civ4's engine doesn't support multiple maps. The scenario engine could be made more seamless and less buggy if Kael didn't have to deal with civ4's limitations. I'm sure there's more.
 
link16 said:
Theres this nice turn based strategy called civ 1, but its 4 sequels are also turn based strategy. Theres also Civ rev and colonization.
Click to expand...

Is it wrong to not want to see FfH become something endlessly repetitive, putting out game after game, each being the same as the last but 'better'? There is far too much potential in Erebus for that.

If that is what the game will be, then fine. But I for one would be far more happy if it is not.

deanej said:
What's the point? How about the fact that some parts of FFH2 are the way they are because of engine limitations. Hell terrain, for example. Kael wanted to have a hell map that the demons came from and players could invade, but civ4's engine doesn't support multiple maps. The scenario engine could be made more seamless and less buggy if Kael didn't have to deal with civ4's limitations. I'm sure there's more.
Click to expand...

This I can give you, yeah. But my 'what's the point' was not addressed towards the game itself. I was not speaking there from the point of view of a player, but a developer. How many years has Kael spent on FfH 2? I already know I want to explore other settings, myself, and will not be working on importing FfH to Civ5. I know were I Kael, I would want to see what else I can do in Erebus, rather than recreating the work of years.

So my "What's the point?" was meant as this: "Why stick to the same thing? Why limit yourself? Why not explore, be different, be creative?"
 
Maybe we could have a RTS or two dealing with the civs of FfH in the style of the Warcraft and Starcraft series.

We could also have a prequel RTS dealing with the Patrian Empire, the Rebellions and eventually the fall of Bhall.

And we could have a prequel game in a 1st/3rd person shooter manner for the Age of Ice.
 
I'd hate it if it was an RTS, I just don't like these at all and wouldn't get it, no matter what the setting may be. TBS or RPG would be both ok.
 
link16 said:
How can you say that? Go play EU3 or HoI2.
Click to expand...
I DO NOT LIKE "REAL TIME".
That's pretty simple. I think it's silly to begin with and don't like clicking everywhere. Yes, you can pause and give orders. And then wait until something interesting happens. And then, it's just a matter of taste, but I don't like RTS and won't play them. All those I tried ended with my being disappointed.
 
I guess you can't play civ online MP if you hate clicking everywhere franticly.
 
Heh ... timed turns are FAR!! BETTER!!! than time sensitive Build-Orders.


RTS's are just far more sensitive than TBS's (even timed ones)

RTS combat requires a lot more attention, economy requires a lot more attention ... and you have to be doing them both at the same time.

Meanwhile, in a TBS everyone has equal time, and only your strategic mind will save or lose the day.
 
I'd prefer a Planescape Torment rip-off roleplaying game where you play as Saverous seeking redemption for your crimes committed while a thrall. Obviously you'd have lost memory of committing those crimes, so the game would consist of discovering your own tragic past. :mischief:
 
Or take it one step farther and play Perpentarch with his myriad personalities trying to escape the Tower of Eyes.

(I'm pretty ignorant about FFH lore but I think what I said make senses.)
 
link16 said:
I guess you can't play civ online MP if you hate clicking everywhere franticly.
Click to expand...
Yes, I dislike MP Civ IV. I remember once a turn when we both waited out till the opponent moved his stack one way so the other player would move accordingly. I finally caved in and moved because I didn't have the patience to wait 4 minutes for the game to end.
But I also dislike it because I think it's too slow for online play and too long for pbem, which has less to do with the RTS/TBS dichotomy.
 
Dexterity is a factor in RTS. I think an RPG like KOTOR would be great with turn based combat.
 
LDiCesare said:
Yes, I dislike MP Civ IV. I remember once a turn when we both waited out till the opponent moved his stack one way so the other player would move accordingly. I finally caved in and moved because I didn't have the patience to wait 4 minutes for the game to end.
But I also dislike it because I think it's too slow for online play and too long for pbem, which has less to do with the RTS/TBS dichotomy.
Click to expand...
My last civ MP game had 6 players on a small pangaea map. t only took a couple hours for us to finish. I've never tried PBEM, though.
 
Opening post by Kael, edited 6 May 2010 ...

We are 08 September, Civ5 is around the corner, and all what we have about FFH standalone is a (4 months old) few introductory lines, followed by 33 pages (656 post!), mixture of interesting suggestions, less interesting hypothesis, and numerous off-topic discussions ...

I am not sure I will follow this topic once Civ5 is out, because I am not sure I will buy anything based on Civ4 as soon as I learn (and hopefully, enjoy) Civ5's new mechanics.
I incredibly enjoyed FFH2 (except the OOS when playing a LAN…), but I know I have only 1 life, and with Civ5 end of September, Shogun2 Total War for next March, Dragon Ages 2 in 2011, and Diablo 3 in the pipe, my gaming life/queue is full as I do not like to dilute myself with too many games and have a “take-away / fast food” life… hence, FFH-standalone will have to wait for my next life!

BUT… if FFH standalone is based on Civ5 mechanics, so then we are talking “future” !…

Accurate and 1st hand news would be most welcome...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tielby
Gratuitous appreciation thread
Replies
1
Views
462
Alekseyev_
Alekseyev_
C
brainstorm about a hypothetical FFH3 here
Replies
2
Views
616
Calavente
Calavente
Smayo
Fall From Heaven: A Civ 6 Conversion
Replies
3
Views
228
Smayo
Smayo
Mouthwash
Looking for FfH2 tracks
Replies
2
Views
584
Mouthwash
Mouthwash
E
Help me try FfH in 2024
Replies
5
Views
2K
black_imperator
B
Back
Top Bottom