Will civ 4 be a good game.

[Vael]

As far as the graphics, they're not trying to make it look like Age of Empires III. That's the point. Look at Sid Meier's other recent game: Pirates. In that game do you play a guy with his teeth falling out who hasn't bathed in years and is being eaten by lice? No, you're a handsome, strapping young lad. It's idealized. Civ is the same way - it's not supposed to look like real life or be realistic. Whether or not people as a whole like that is another issue. And that's why we have modders I suppose.

But it turned out to be a disappointment for those older than 15 years and not gay...

Hmmm, so gay people have bad taste in games? That's a mature statement.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well as far is graphics go I hope the focus is more on useful than either realistic Or cartoony. However, Cartoony tends to be a bit more on the useful side.

Also the Great people are probably better than the Golden Age of Civ 3 for representing significant developments in a civilization.

 

[frekk]

I don't think that a game that has such a strong fan base can flop completely

If the game is bad enough, it surely can. My biggest fear is that they have avoided any substantial AI improvements, and nothing in their statements is so far very reassuring on this point. Also they are clearly not aiming to appease the fan base, as numerous statements have been rather explicit about.

I personally don't understand what passed into their mind with the religious stuff, that was bound to annoy a chuck of fans without bringing new fans in (I cannot imagine religious people being happy either)

Well, I thought it was a decent idea at first. After Government and Culture, Religion certainly does seem like an obvious next step in defining societies. So when I first heard about it, I thought, sounds good to me. But then things started getting, well, strange, almost geared to create controversy. The first was the use of real world religions, even though government was fully customisable. How much sense does that make? Democracy in India is certainly different from democracy in the USA, but so too Catholicism is different in Mexico than in Italy. And nobody is likely to get offended by real-world governments, to me it should have been the other way around: a few broad classifications of government, and customisable religions. How strange is it to have Aztec Judaic Missionaries, anyway? So this was not an obvious or logical decision - imho, it was a decision to create controversy and thus publicity. Meaning that the game is probably not a sure shot in the market at all. This was followed by equally bizarre statements, such as essentially declaring advanced 20th century secular, pluralist societies "the same as" hunter-gatherer tribes led by shamans. Again ... more hints of an attempt to stir up controversy. Aside from just being bothered by the total departure from historical reality, it really does make me suspicious that this is a game that the developers do not feel will succeed on its own merit, so they are trying to hit currently hot-topic issues and stir up attention, get a little press probably, and stimulate sales that way. It's just a suspicion at this point, but I'm far from reassured by any recent statements.

 

[Yoda Power]

It will be great.

 

[Urederra]

Well as far is graphics go I hope the focus is more on useful than either realistic Or cartoony. However, Cartoony tends to be a bit more on the useful side.

Also the Great people are probably better than the Golden Age of Civ 3 for representing significant developments in a civilization.

I recall reading that in Civ IV you will be allowed to trigger more than one golden age by using two great people. And I think that golden ages are wonderful in Civ III.

 

[Chose]

It'll be great.

People need to stop whining about the graphics. They look fine.

In any case, it's not ABOUT the graphics, maan.

It's about the game

i was right my post then i saw it was that sames as your so i 100% agree

 

[Sullla]

Graphics look real deplorable... I don't quite understand how they do that when civ3's were just fine..

I'll never understand why some people keep deriding the Civ4 graphics and seem to prefer Civ3. Just for comparison:

Civ3 City:

Civ4 City:

And the Civ4 graphics probably aren't finished yet either! Everyone can draw their own conclusions, but... well, look above.

 

[warpstorm]

Ya know, Sullla, they ain't watercolored but they are kinda growing on me.

 

[Urederra]

Ya know, Sullla, they ain't watercolored but they are kinda growing on me.

Well, If they were perfect, the graphic modders would have nothing to improve. I like the graphics, but I also hope the modders will make it even better.

 

[frekk]

I'll never understand why some people keep deriding the Civ4 graphics and seem to prefer Civ3. Just for comparison:

Well, I hate to point out the obvious, but that close zoom level on the civ4 game is NOT what you're going to be looking at most of the time. Let's see what they look like at the zoom you WILL be playing at!

Aside from that, its not the terrain graphics etc ... its mostly just the leaderheads. Bobbleheads. Ugh.

Not that I worry overmuch about graphics, its just that I don't understand why they (obviously) spent all that much time on them. Civ is badly in need of lots of work in other areas.

 

[ComradeDavo]

From what i've seen it looks very good, i'm looking forward to it alot

Sullla - good post on the city graphics! Civ4 looks vastly better!

 

[I am the Future]

I have a similair forum read it and you will know what i mean

 

[Meleager]

civ 4 will be great

why is everyone complaining about the graphics? surely they don't want civ4 -> command line version. civ4's graphics are good.

 

[warpstorm]

The other thing is that static screen shots really do not do justice to the look. The movies made it look more alive.

 

[Sub]

I'll never understand why some people keep deriding the Civ4 graphics and seem to prefer Civ3. Just for comparison:

Civ3 City:

Civ4 City:

And the Civ4 graphics probably aren't finished yet either! Everyone can draw their own conclusions, but... well, look above.

Civ3 looks better in my opinion. In Civ IV, it seems like they're trying to be abstract, yet also going for the WYSIWYG thing. That combination doesn’t work well. I mean, if what you see is what you get, how come 20 houses represent a couple thousand people? Maybe its just me, but that bothers me. I wish they kept the abstract tried and true 2d graphics.

Not only that, but people seem to be forgetting, graphics do effect the game. 3d graphics = higher system requirements. It already takes me ages to advance a turn in the modern age in Civ3. I can only see that time increasing for Civ IV =/. Still though, like I said before, everything else they've shown us is very solid. I'm sure I'll love the game and waste half of my life on it.

 

[SonicX]

Hmmm, so gay people have bad taste in games? That's a mature statement.

I wasn't being pejorative about their tastes, I'm just saying their tastes and children's tastes don't correspond with those of adolescant males which in my view still seems to be a great majority of the fanbase.

 

[Meleager]

Civ3 looks better in my opinion. In Civ IV, it seems like they're trying to be abstract, yet also going for the WYSIWYG thing. That combination doesn’t work well. I mean, if what you see is what you get, how come 20 houses represent a couple thousand people? Maybe its just me, but that bothers me. I wish they kept the abstract tried and true 2d graphics.

Not only that, but people seem to be forgetting, graphics do effect the game. 3d graphics = higher system requirements. It already takes me ages to advance a turn in the modern age in Civ3. I can only see that time increasing for Civ IV =/. Still though, like I said before, everything else they've shown us is very solid. I'm sure I'll love the game and waste half of my life on it.

Rather than go crazy as I say this for the thousanth time, i will try to remain calm.

the graphics will NOT effect the time a turn takes to progress.
in detail: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2855916&postcount=25

thankyou.

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

I think the graphics look fine. And the game sounds like it is going to be great.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

The game will be great. Given in the Civ playing community, the vast diversity of preferences, and even pickiness on questions of mere taste, there will be a vocal minority that hates it and a substantial number with pet peeves. I'll probably be in the latter group. The game will be great anyway.

 

[warpstorm]

I wasn't being pejorative about their tastes, I'm just saying their tastes and children's tastes don't correspond with those of adolescant males which in my view still seems to be a great majority of the fanbase.

I think you haven't looked closely at the Civ fan demographics. Males around 30 are the median, IIRC.