Transition to 3D?

The only thing I don't like about the 3d is the fact that (at least from the pictures I've seen) they look pretty bad, the buildings look choppy and the units look square. The cool thing about civ3 was that you could play the game on practically any machine no matter how old and still get amazing gameplay. 3d is going to put a strain on civ fans who don't have high end graphics cards or simply don't like 3d. Honestly, I don't see how 3d is going to make the game more "immersing". I get just as into civ3 games as the "civanon" people get; hell I've been playing almost non-stop for a week since I got the cold war scenario. The fact that civ4 is turn based is the only thing that's saving the game from being a RAM leech. I guess I'll have to see how civ4 runs once it comes out and see whether I'll make the reluctant change from 3 to 4 at all, but I hope with everything in me that I'll be wrong and the graphics will be breath taking and the game even better than it ever was and draws in huge ammounts of fans so that firaxis can get the recognition it deserves for making great games from the mainstream crowd.
 
Actually, the engine they're using for this game runs very well on lowest end graphics cards. Check out Pirates! It uses the same engine to build a living world in real time. I ran that game on its highest settings through my crappy Intel Extreme onboard video (no pixel shading, vertex shading, etc., architecture hovering somewhere around DX8 and DX8.1), and the gameplay was smooth as silk. The gamebryo engine works incredibly well.
 
Since 3D can do everything that 2D can do, and more, I fail to see the problem. If you liked a fixed camera position -- then don't move the camera.
 
I'm thinking right now that it's going to look like age of mythology or Rise of Nations (although RoN wasn't as bad looking as mythology) but looking at those games just dissapoints me.
 
donkeyimage said:
I'm thinking right now that it's going to look like age of mythology or Rise of Nations (although RoN wasn't as bad looking as mythology) but looking at those games just dissapoints me.
Click to expand...
If it's like RoN, it'll be cool. I mean, we áre talking about turn-based strategy here.
 
remconius said:
I dont think they neglected gameplay.

They improved the game and the graphics. After playing you will get used to it very fast, just like civ 3.
Click to expand...

Civ 3 was similar to Civ 2. Civ 3 was more complex in terms of trading and alliances, had some better graphics, sounds, animations and some other changes. But basically it was the same game.

Civ 4 seems to be a revolution in a lot of aspects. Specially the new 3D perspective, terrible idea in my opinion. I really think that people who play the series since Civ 1 or 2 will dislike this. It makes no sense to me, don't see why they decided to change it. Graphics simplicity was something always present in all Civ games. I remember all kinds of complaints and suggestions here in this forum to make Civ series better, but I never saw someone asking for 3D graphics.

I think it would be enough if they solved the known problems of Civ 3, added more civilizations, more units, resources, better AI, better coding to make the game playable (not slow) in huge maps with 30 civs, and some other minor improvements. A good and balanced evolution. They would call it Civ 4 and sell millions.

With all the new "features", and "modern graphics" I think they risk killing the essence of the game. At least for some old fans of it.
 
Wardog said:
With all the new "features", and "modern graphics" I think they risk killing the essence of the game. At least for some old fans of it.
Click to expand...

Wow, I remember these exact same arguments for Civ2 and Civ3.
 
That time it would not make sense but now with this "I wanna be Age of Empires" 3D perspective it is perfectly possible.
 
G'day all, well, i look forward to playing civ4 and i will still continue to play with civ3 as well, as i maybe some of the modders
maynot be able to convert their civ3 mods to civ4, i like the rise and rule mod and am enjoying the dungeons and dragons mod for civ3, great graphics

Also i'm not upgrading video card which is still gf4 mx440 64meg will work quite happily with civ4, my comp is amd2600 with 512k ram and it works fine.

cheers
bt
 
mikehunt said:
kind of sounds like Sid is forgetting that game play is more important than pretty graphics
Click to expand...

If that was the fact we would have FAR better graphics.

The fact is they had already built the graphics engine. It doens't take that much more work to do stuff in 3d (when you consider it had to be done in 3d before anyway).

They have been working for 3 years, if sid was focused on graphics he could have done it in 1, and made it alot prettier.
 
Meleager said:
The fact is they had already built the graphics engine. It doens't take that much more work to do stuff in 3d (when you consider it had to be done in 3d before anyway).
Click to expand...

The artists I know (including the ones who did Conquests) moan when you tell them they have to render their 3D models out to 2D.
 
Lets face it, if you want the Civ. Franchise to survive they had to go 3D! But I don’t think that doesn’t mean they didn’t put a lot into the game play itself! I think they did, for example letting you create your own government types, 3D will appeal to more people for sure, making it a much better seller and bringing in a lot more people into the Civ. World! All and all I’m looking forward to playing Civ. In 3D!!!
 
bring more people into the civ world means more money for the publisher, which means better prospect for civ5. which is crucial for the series to survive.
 
Note that 3D graphic might not be deemed important by the veterans, but it is an hot selling point to the mainstream gamers. in order for a new game to do good, it must constantly attract new gamers.
 
Dida said:
Note that 3D graphic might not be deemed important by the veterans, but it is an hot selling point to the mainstream gamers. in order for a new game to do good, it must constantly attract new gamers.
Click to expand...


I have a perfect example for this: I have 3 friends that I play strategy games with, only one will play Civ., because the other two don’t like the graphics very much and would rather play a newer RTS in 3D. But now they are considering buying Civ.4 when it comes out. They still might not like how in-depth the game is and how much time it takes to play but at least their considering it now.
 
I remember reading about how the wonder movies were removed from civ2 to civ3 because "they took you out of the game, and we want the player to be more immersed in the game." But lo and behold, wonder movies are back! :)

I don't think 3d has anything to do with immersion in the game. Its a marketing ploy to allow for purtier pictures on the box, and to convince people that this is really a step up from civ3. I'm also disappointed in the decreased map size that is apparently connected to the 3d switch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blake00
Heroes of Might and Magic 2 Scenario Mod (& HoMM1 Addon) - Release Thread
Replies
9
Views
5K
Blake00
Blake00
Krajzen
A LONG subjective but orderly list of non - bug improvements and suggestions
Replies
16
Views
3K
CoconutTank
CoconutTank
P
Beyond the Game - Competitive Expansion
2 3
Replies
53
Views
23K
P&nny
P
Back
Top Bottom