Whom would you like to see as lead designer of civ 6: edited to add sulla to list

[Helmling]

I really like alpha centauri a lot, but it didn't do nearly as well as the civ games. probably just ahead of its time since it was a great game.

It was great...in some ways, it may be the best Civ ever. The sci-fi theme may not have the same appeal, but it had lots of awesome elements at work. The unit design workshop, the terrain differences, and the way it implemented government--all fantastic. I wish they'd left those things in place in Civ 3, 4 and 5.

 

[bryanw1995]

I think Sullla should be in the team somehow

once the sdk is released I suspect that we will see some serious modding. I can't wait for a 150 tech tree, 8 new sp trees, better ai, etc etc etc. maybe a team with some of our better/more involved modders (hint: see my sig), sulla, maybe kael if he has time, etc could put out something that we'd all be proud to recommend.

firaxis should fire some of their programmers and allocate the budget to modders based upon mod feedback. I'd start with the ai programmer...

 

[JollyRoger]

Haha. I'm not a computer programmer, I don't know how to write code, so I think that's a no. But if Firaxis wanted to pay me to be a design consultant, I'm all for it!

More seriously, I actually do have a vision about how to design a Civ game, I should get around to typing that up soon...

I assumed that they would hire some decent programmers and choose their civics wisely ( )

 

[lschnarch]

I voted "other".

Sid himself is a complete no-go. He is doing FB's Civ-Ville, was responsible (really responsible for CivRev, IIRC). Actually, I don't think he is a good designer for a 4x game

Soren, Jon, Brian... in all "their" versions were good ideas and bad ideas.
Kael I cannot estimate since I never played FFH.
Sullla already announced to be available just as consultant.

Btw, why did nobody mention Alex Mantzaris? (Just out of curiosity)

Regardless of who it will become, it should be a person who has analyzed ALL civ games about their strengths and weaknesses and then comes up with a solid summery of what to take over, in which way to improve it and how to create an appealing Civilization game.

 

[Dale]

Invalid poll, I'm not on it.

 

[attackfighter]

definately not Sid, he's a horrible dev imo

Brian Reynolds was the driving force behind Civ 2 and Alpha Centauri, the two best civ and civ spin-off games.

Soren iirc is the Dr. Frankenstein responcible for Civ 4... well, there were a few concepts I liked about Civ 4, such as multiple leaders per civ and Leonard Nemoy, but other then that he and his game were just incompetant and horrible to me. Rather not have him anywhere near a civ game again.

So yeah, Reynolds would be my choice, although he no longer works for Sid so it isn't a possibility.

 

[bryanw1995]

sorry guys, didn't think of everybody. probably instead of kael should have had "person with strong credentials of modding civ 3/4/5". kael, alexman and dale seem to fit that bill very well, and I'm sure there are others who deserve a mention as well. post your thoughts guys, I have a sneaky suspicion that 2k/firaxis is paying attention right now.

@attackfighter: don't say that brian couldn't come back, I suspect that sid is feeling a bit of pressure right now. brian would probably come back under the right conditions, as would many of the others no doubt if asked properly (esp if the "asking" involved lots of zeros).

 

[Left Foot]

I've had the most fun with Civ 2 so I voted Brian Reynolds.

However, a completely new face, one who has not been involved with the Civ series and who could bring in a number of new and fresh ideas to reboot the entire franchise on a solid new footing would be the best option IMHO. There are only so many times you can recycle the tech tree and keep it interesting.

 

[lschnarch]

a number of new and fresh ideas to reboot the entire franchise

Thanks a lot. That we've just had.

I don't oppose the idea of having brand new games, not at all.

But the franchise should be about Civilization games and not any newcomer's crazy ideas of how to revolutionize things which worked in the past.
We don't need any new "Civ: Panzer General, now even better since without panzers"

 

[Hail]

Thanks a lot. That we've just had.

I don't oppose the idea of having brand new games, not at all.

But the franchise should be about Civilization games and not any newcomer's crazy ideas of how to revolutionize things which worked in the past.

disagree. the same old can sell so many times and not one more.
there must be some innovation. however i do agree that civ5 had too much innovation. a revolution of sort

Moderator Action: Circumventing the autocensor by adding smileys as you did is not allowed.

We don't need any new "Civ: Panzer General, now even better since without panzers"

agree. 1upt does not work on a civ scale. the combat mechanics innovation thinking should have gone in some other direction. oh well!

Brian Reynolds shall be the lead game designer and Soren Johnson shall be appointed to code a player-friendly, consistent, non-schizophrenic AI

 

[jagdtigerciv]

Sid him self. I'd love to see how his game would turn out.

That was CivRev.

 

[Left Foot]

Thanks a lot. That we've just had.

I don't oppose the idea of having brand new games, not at all.

But the franchise should be about Civilization games and not any newcomer's crazy ideas of how to revolutionize things which worked in the past.
We don't need any new "Civ: Panzer General, now even better since without panzers"

You did neglect to quote the whole "on solid new footing" part of my post

Anyway, I agree, I don't want a Civilization VI RTS or whatnot, but I wouldn't mind some new ideas in the game. The Civ 5 changes fall in the category of "gimmicks" as far as I'm concerned, and not "ideas".

I get a feeling of "What can I change just so that I can claim I changed something" when I play Civ 5 more than anything else.

What I had in mind for example was a whole new approach to religion. I personally would have every civ start with a religion, which could either grow and expand based on the player's choices (e.g. build missionaries and temples) or remain a local religion with the player focusing more on economic aspects of his Civ thereby having less cultural influence but more trade influence.

Health, Vassals and religion were all new ideas that were implemented in Civ 4 (and its expansions) that really added to the game without killing the core concept. That's what I want for Civ 6.

 

[bryanw1995]

brian and soren both have jobs right now, so they're not exactly a slam-dunk. ditto alexman, kael, and probably all of our modders-in-residence. firaxis has a history of promoting from within, but I think that putting somebody with strong civ roots would go a long way towards building cVI enthusiasm amongst us fanatics.

edit: @leftfoot: I think that the challenge will be to take useful components from ciV as well as the older versions. health added a tertiary cap on city growth (with happiness and food already in the mix), so getting rid of that was probably a good idea. empire-wide happiness is interesting, but the really high level players seem to have better success dealing with that than they did with the increasing $$ cost of new cities. 1upt? hex system? I personally like both of those, but a BOD can be just as bad as a SOD, and the AI clearly struggles more with the restrictions than the human does. city development? tile yields? etc etc etc. it is going to be interesting to see which way the design team goes.

 

[lschnarch]

I get a feeling of "What can I change just so that I can claim I changed something" when I play Civ 5 more than anything else.

Me too.
I wrote is already somewhere: it seemed like the revenge of somebody whose ideas were not praised enough in the past.

What I had in mind for example was a whole new approach to religion. (...)
Health, Vassals and religion were all new ideas that were implemented in Civ 4 (and its expansions) that really added to the game without killing the core concept. That's what I want for Civ 6.

To this I agree as well.
As I've written above: look at all the past Civilization games, check for the their features, improve them where necessary and make a new CIVILIZATION game out of it.
And of course, if there is a good new idea, implement it as well.

And a good new idea is not defined as "scratch as many concepts as possible from the most successful predecessor, try to copy a game from the 90'ies and scratch many integral components of that game, too".

Rant aside: yes, the franchise deserves to be reanimated by careful improvements in the next game.

 

[SirSaab]

I voted other. How about Cliff Bleszinski?!?! Think about it: "Gears of Civ: Sidpocalypse"

 

[Left Foot]

Me too.
I wrote is already somewhere: it seemed like the revenge of somebody whose ideas were not praised enough in the past.

Rant aside: yes, the franchise deserves to be reanimated by careful improvements in the next game.

We are in full agreement.

 

[hardcore_gamer]

Can't we wait until Civ 5 is actually finished until we start to talk about who should be the lead designer for Civ 6?

I would rather give Civ 5 another year or so as a chance to improve itself before I start to wait another 3-4 years for Civ 6.

 

[Left Foot]

Can't we wait until Civ 5 is actually finished until we start to talk about who should be the lead designer for Civ 6?

I would rather give Civ 5 another year or so as a chance to improve itself before I start to wait another 3-4 years for Civ 6.

Ordinarily I would have agreed with you. Hell, right up to the release of the patch I would have agreed with you. But in this case, no. As far as I'm concerned the Civ 5 chapter should end and they should start writing the Civ 6 chapter asap. Why?

Because the patch merely served to show how barebones the game actually is. Did the patch improve the game? Definitely so. Did it make the game good? For me, no.

The patch improved the game mechanics, corrected some things, but I still find myself bored. There's just not enough variety, not enough things to do. What it does, it now does better, but it just isn't doing anything good.

Now, I agree that a Civ 5 expansion could be a huge improvement to the game, and I would probably buy it, moron that I am. But I'm still not convinced that it would make the game good enough and I would rather skip directly to purchasing Civ 6 (whose release is only going to get delayed by a Civ 5 expansion).

 

[Maniacal]

Johan Andersson of Paradox Interactive.

As awesome as that would be, seeing the massive amount of legitimate complaints and whining from Civ5's changes and bugs, I'd hate to see what it would be like if Paradox made the game (since their games are usually pretty buggy upon release too, but are so awesome once patched and the expansions are sweet).

 

[MadRat]

I'd love to have Brian Reynolds back in making Civ games.

Rat