Aussie_Lurker said:
[...]
(b) as alluded to in my first point, I also believe that graphics in a TBS game are the thing least likely to ruin a fans enjoyment of the game experience, thus it is the part of the game which should be the least subject to change due simply to the complaints of some fans (especially given the aforementioned subjectivity regarding graphics).
(c) graphics have been-and will probably remain-the easiest component of the civ series for fans to alter themselves. This fact, when combined with points (a) and (b) highlight why the games developers should focus as little time as possible trying to placate the graphical concerns of every single fan with an opinion on the subject-because when you try to please too many different people, you ultimately end up pleasing no-one at all!
[...]
I have to disagree on both points.
b) misconcepted graphics may severly harm the player's immersion. For Civ4, this seems at least to be likely as there are completely different graphic styles being incorporated. Semi-realistic houses combined with strange mountains, not too realistic trees which don't make for forests, giant-or-not units and leaderheads looking like being taken from cartoons don't make for much player immersion, if you would be asking me.
c) as neither I am nor many of other posters here seem to be graphic artists, the altering of graphics is nothing less than easily to be managed.
All we can do is to hope for some of the well-known graphic artists in the modding area to come up with the one unit we would love to be improved, or with the terrain set up we were missing. If they don't, many people here just HAVE to stick with what was released. If this makes for "the easiest component to alter" than I really don't know.
I understand that you for yourself are happy with what you currently have learned about Civ4 and that you are hoping for the best in areas where you don't know yet.
But, please accept that there are people who may have different opinions and who take Firaxis' history of mis-implementing good ideas into consideration, which makes those people very sceptical about which path Civ4 will take.
This is very much less "whining" than other peoples semi-religious and fan-boyish "cheering" and "praising" of the same features. (This is not targetted at you!)
Both fractions don't have played the game yet, so the final judgement still is outstanding.
But, I for my part get a strange feeling at my backbone when I read statements like "oh, thanks, Firaxis!" (when they will have to pay for it) or "must have the game now" (when there are months to go) or "It is Civ, it WILL rock!" (when almost nothing is known about the game yet) or whatever childish exclamations one has to read here from time to time.
At the moment we don't know much about how most features are intended to work in combination - except for being "more immersive, more realistice, deeper, less complex and easier to enter". All of which are just some statements you might read for any sequel.
Yet, we don't know much about how trading SHOULD work in combination with the leaders, just to give only one example.
So, no information is given about the intention of the developers how the game should finally work.
Therefore, in regards to gameplay only isolated features can be discussed right now. Yet, the graphics are something which is obvious at first glance and therefore are discussed so much.
Maybe 3d was necessary to justify selling a new Civilization game, but not necessary to make a better game.. for instance. Maybe a crude first attempt at 3d was unnecessary also. I think they tried to re-sell the franchize too early. I'm unsure there will be a Civilization 5.
