bryanw1995
Emperor
so was final frontier, plus as co-lead he did more than just espionage.
Whom would you like to see as lead designer of civ 6: edited to add sulla to list
- Thread starter bryanw1995
- Start date
If Civ6 is like Civ4 with better graphics and a few minor changes (and higher system requirements), I guess I'll stick to Civ5.
MadRat
Cheese Raider
But CIV IV was an evolution from Civ III; not a radical departure. Civ V was basically a new game; thus I suspect VI would be an evolution from IV, but with some significant changes.
Rat
Dale
Mohawk Games Developer
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,851
No_such_reality
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 54
Ouch, Pepsi out the nose.
EdCase
Defender of the Faithless
Did it ever occur that he designs according to the requirement given ?
In which case the games you despise (I do as well incidentally..plus I don't understand the obsession with virtual scrap-booking. Yup that's what Facebook is) are proof of the mans ability to hit the target in game design.
He has had a VERY successful career.
I for one would certainly entertain the idea that given the right brief, a Civ game for the 'faithful' would emerge.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
New blood. I don't care who as long as they understand a few concepts:
1. Working UI. If civ VI has it, it will be the first game in the entire series to have a polished UI that keeps clicking down, allows hotkeys, and generally allows the majority of your in-game inputs to have strategic relevance. I'm waiting firaxis. Surely you don't like getting shown up by 1-person design teams, indy games, and so on in this regard? Because that's what has happened for over a decade. Bring in a UI team that knows how to do it. UI is the one department where civ V is INDISPUTABLY weaker than IV, and IV was pretty crappy. When "ranged attack" = "move sideways", it takes several times the amount of input actions to train a unit, and moving a unit on the screen does something else entirely instead, you have UI problems.
Firaxis doesn't get a pass for civ IV, either, where control/shift/alt clicking never worked as advertised, units could forcibly move on a turn before the player could physically cancel orders, and whether units sensed "danger" or not was erratic at best. The sad reality is that somehow, that's BETTER than civ V. UI is the single most pathetic showing in the civ series. When a unit is being given an order that is displayed on the screen, it should ACTUALLY EXECUTE that order.
Until firaxis fixes their tendency to flagrantly neglect this gameplay 101 aspect and deliberately choose sucky interface, it is impossible to consider any game in the series top tier. They can still be fun, but will forever and indisputably be behind every single good game that has working controls and other 101 basics done correctly.
2. Game balance. You advertise 4, 6, or whatever victory conditions depending on which civ we're talking about. Nobody in the series has ever, EVER balanced these conditions. Evidence: competitive MP. No more evidence need be provided. Non-war approaches are, to date, SP-exclusive diversions from the optimal tactic to add some replay value, not actual viable/balanced alternatives.
3. Priority: 1. Game concept. 2. Controls 3. balanced, engaging gameplay 4. Graphics and new content. Any game that prioritizes graphics over controls/concept/balance instantly fails.
4. Someone with extensive experience with the efficient generation of code: Time and again, anybody I've seen with programming experience has some...choice words for this franchise...again for over a decade. Even without programming experience, let's take a look at some basic process failures that have caught IV and V:
- All of the above mentioned problems, especially the hotkey ones
- Right now, honor displays the wrong value for discipline. Shouldn't that display be linked to the actual value? If not, shouldn't there be a system in place such that the GUI actually DISPLAYS ACCURATE DATA?
- Not that lying GUI is anything new, civ IV would routinely display things on the GUI that weren't true
- In BTS patch 3.17, the game's coders attempted to fix the spread culture espionage mission, and bugged it. No hotfix
- In BTS 3.19, the game's coders "patched" overflow in an attempt to nerf the esoteric wall whip overflow. They bugged all overflow, ironically the same way it was bugged in vanilla. This bug remains unfixed
- The unofficial patch in 3.17 actually treated overflow properly and with firaxis' intended effect. Their change was to "streamline" or some such. Please don't "streamline" V that way.
- Both games are, supposedly, chalk-full of redundancies that slow gameplay down. A small team of modders improved the gamespeed in IV by about 15% or so simply by caching things that wouldn't change the gameplay. Really? A couple modders could do this, but firaxis couldn't handle it in a release title or ANY of the expansions?
- In civ IV bts 3.19, the AI will never settle anything on its own landmass that is separated from its capitol by a mountain range. Remind you of inca on the earth18 civ map? Why wasn't THIS among the patch priorities, rather than bugging overflow, spread culture, etch? Why weren't the KNOWN CONTROL ISSUES ever a patch priority?
I could go on, with issues old and new, but I've made my point. Firaxis needs to add somebody competent to this equation, or if it has someone, take the six ton shackles off the person's arms, legs, and neck so that the game can be written in a competent fashion.
I will "denounce" even the great Sid himself if he doesn't feel the UI is more important than flat terrain % modifier, or that flat terrain modifier is more important than graphics. This game needs some people who are seriously adapted to balanced, polished games, or to completely can whoever is inhibiting people who are capable of it. Maybe the lead designers hands are tied to the extent that NOBODY could make this a great game given the resources at firaxis disposal, but if that isn't the case, then we DEFINITELY need new blood.
1. Working UI. If civ VI has it, it will be the first game in the entire series to have a polished UI that keeps clicking down, allows hotkeys, and generally allows the majority of your in-game inputs to have strategic relevance. I'm waiting firaxis. Surely you don't like getting shown up by 1-person design teams, indy games, and so on in this regard? Because that's what has happened for over a decade. Bring in a UI team that knows how to do it. UI is the one department where civ V is INDISPUTABLY weaker than IV, and IV was pretty crappy. When "ranged attack" = "move sideways", it takes several times the amount of input actions to train a unit, and moving a unit on the screen does something else entirely instead, you have UI problems.
Firaxis doesn't get a pass for civ IV, either, where control/shift/alt clicking never worked as advertised, units could forcibly move on a turn before the player could physically cancel orders, and whether units sensed "danger" or not was erratic at best. The sad reality is that somehow, that's BETTER than civ V. UI is the single most pathetic showing in the civ series. When a unit is being given an order that is displayed on the screen, it should ACTUALLY EXECUTE that order.
Until firaxis fixes their tendency to flagrantly neglect this gameplay 101 aspect and deliberately choose sucky interface, it is impossible to consider any game in the series top tier. They can still be fun, but will forever and indisputably be behind every single good game that has working controls and other 101 basics done correctly.
2. Game balance. You advertise 4, 6, or whatever victory conditions depending on which civ we're talking about. Nobody in the series has ever, EVER balanced these conditions. Evidence: competitive MP. No more evidence need be provided. Non-war approaches are, to date, SP-exclusive diversions from the optimal tactic to add some replay value, not actual viable/balanced alternatives.
3. Priority: 1. Game concept. 2. Controls 3. balanced, engaging gameplay 4. Graphics and new content. Any game that prioritizes graphics over controls/concept/balance instantly fails.
4. Someone with extensive experience with the efficient generation of code: Time and again, anybody I've seen with programming experience has some...choice words for this franchise...again for over a decade. Even without programming experience, let's take a look at some basic process failures that have caught IV and V:
- All of the above mentioned problems, especially the hotkey ones
- Right now, honor displays the wrong value for discipline. Shouldn't that display be linked to the actual value? If not, shouldn't there be a system in place such that the GUI actually DISPLAYS ACCURATE DATA?
- Not that lying GUI is anything new, civ IV would routinely display things on the GUI that weren't true
- In BTS patch 3.17, the game's coders attempted to fix the spread culture espionage mission, and bugged it. No hotfix
- In BTS 3.19, the game's coders "patched" overflow in an attempt to nerf the esoteric wall whip overflow. They bugged all overflow, ironically the same way it was bugged in vanilla. This bug remains unfixed
- The unofficial patch in 3.17 actually treated overflow properly and with firaxis' intended effect. Their change was to "streamline" or some such. Please don't "streamline" V that way.
- Both games are, supposedly, chalk-full of redundancies that slow gameplay down. A small team of modders improved the gamespeed in IV by about 15% or so simply by caching things that wouldn't change the gameplay. Really? A couple modders could do this, but firaxis couldn't handle it in a release title or ANY of the expansions?
- In civ IV bts 3.19, the AI will never settle anything on its own landmass that is separated from its capitol by a mountain range. Remind you of inca on the earth18 civ map? Why wasn't THIS among the patch priorities, rather than bugging overflow, spread culture, etch? Why weren't the KNOWN CONTROL ISSUES ever a patch priority?
I could go on, with issues old and new, but I've made my point. Firaxis needs to add somebody competent to this equation, or if it has someone, take the six ton shackles off the person's arms, legs, and neck so that the game can be written in a competent fashion.
I will "denounce" even the great Sid himself if he doesn't feel the UI is more important than flat terrain % modifier, or that flat terrain modifier is more important than graphics. This game needs some people who are seriously adapted to balanced, polished games, or to completely can whoever is inhibiting people who are capable of it. Maybe the lead designers hands are tied to the extent that NOBODY could make this a great game given the resources at firaxis disposal, but if that isn't the case, then we DEFINITELY need new blood.
Doctor Phibes
Prince
Brian Reynolds for me. Not so much to do with Civ VI - except I think that he would commit no evil there - but I want him on the team if Firaxis ever ever do SMAC II. (We know now that Shafer won't be there to turn Alpha Centauri into a travesty, but BR would want the new version to live up to the original, which was a masterpiece - probably the best game of all time, in my opinion.)
My point wasn't that Civ6 should be like Civ4, but that it would make sense to go with the designer who presided over what was the most popular version. Correlation may or not be causation in this case, I guess, but it would make sense if it was.
LAnkou
Breizh A Tao
I voted for Soren Johnson, but after some thinking, if the option was available, I would have gone for:
"A guy from blizzard"
"A guy from blizzard"
bryanw1995
Emperor
yeah, he did really with alpha centauri, he can obviously design games to suit his audience.
Julian Delphiki
Anton's key
Blake was the AI programmer for BTS.
SHaW1986
Prince
+1 for Yohan Andersson
Unless it means he'd leave Paradox. I wouldn't want that.
And Paradox actually mentioned something interesting about this.
Quote : "If we got the opportunity to work with Firaxis we would love to do so. I do not find our approach to games in general to be incompatible."
Source : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...9-Ask-Paradox-(almost)-Anything-Thread/page14
I know, they were talking about Colonization 2, but still...
Unless it means he'd leave Paradox. I wouldn't want that.
And Paradox actually mentioned something interesting about this.
Quote : "If we got the opportunity to work with Firaxis we would love to do so. I do not find our approach to games in general to be incompatible."
Source : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...9-Ask-Paradox-(almost)-Anything-Thread/page14
I know, they were talking about Colonization 2, but still...
CivFanaticMan
Warlord
I would agree to this but I really don't want to have dragons flying around in the Middle ages and battle cruisers as my new future erra gunship. Plus cartoony graphics.
Charles Martel
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2007
- Messages
- 244
But they release games only on the base of fan request, like the new Crusader King II, or the ex mod Magna Mundi, soon a complete standalone game...
My dream team for Civ6 would include some of the people who are now working on CK2 and Magna Mundi.
The Dream Team
- Lead designer: Rhye
- Main development team:
Soren Johnson
Johan Andersson
Henrik Doomdark Fåhraeus (Crusader Kings II)
Kael
Ubik (Magna Mundi) - Lead tester: Sullla
Falk
Prince
Brian Reynolds for sure. SMAC is probably the best turn-based strategy game of all time. And RoN and RoL are two of the best RTS games ever made. What I like about Reynold's games is that they are always (well, AFAIK) perfect. I like Civ4 a lot too, but it does have features that don't really work that well. It's not easy to find stuff like that in SMAC or the two Rise games.
I don't want a modder to take the lead design. I have yet to play a thoroughly well designed Civ mod (especially total conversion mods). Most modders have a lot of ideas and the skills to implement them in their mod, but usually lack the ability to make it all work together well and balanced. If they did Civ6 we would probably get the opposite of Civ5 - a feature overkill that doesn't make much sense as a game.
I'll admit though, that I haven't played all mods out there and the ones I have played I didn't play for very long, so I might be completely wrong.
I don't want a modder to take the lead design. I have yet to play a thoroughly well designed Civ mod (especially total conversion mods). Most modders have a lot of ideas and the skills to implement them in their mod, but usually lack the ability to make it all work together well and balanced. If they did Civ6 we would probably get the opposite of Civ5 - a feature overkill that doesn't make much sense as a game.
I'll admit though, that I haven't played all mods out there and the ones I have played I didn't play for very long, so I might be completely wrong.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
- Poll