Your Civ4 forecast

Matrix · 30-05-2005, 21:14

It seems reviewers are very positive about Civ4. We however know more about Civ gameplay than those reviewers. (Yes, that's arrogant, but I'm talking more about you top players than me.

)

They really screwed up big time with Master of Orion III. Will Civ4 undergo the same fate, destroying a legacy, or is it another success?

Pastorius · 30-05-2005, 21:30

I see no arrogance in that. It is the truth.

barbu1977 · 30-05-2005, 22:07

Better than 3, as good as 2.

They have wonder movies how can it go wrong?

Shabbaman · 30-05-2005, 22:11

I've read that they're changing the concept of shields (or hammers) as the base of production. To me, the shield based production is pretty much the essence of civ. I wouldn't mind if they'd implement the superior system of colonization, but it wouldn't be civ anymore.
I'm confident firaxis will create a great game, I'm a bit afraid that it won't look a lot like civ anymore. The "unfun" aspects they're taking away have become defining factors for me: limiting the size of your empire through increasing corruption or limiting production through pollution effects are superb in their simplicity. What is the challenge in a game that's all fun? I've seen in Pirates how fun a game without a challenge can be, I've seen in any RTS how much fun creating lots of units and bashing heads with is, but that's just not civilization.

Pastorius · 30-05-2005, 22:19

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Shabbaman

I've read that they're changing the concept of shields (or hammers) as the base of production. To me, the shield based production is pretty much the essence of civ. I wouldn't mind if they'd implement the superior system of colonization, but it wouldn't be civ anymore.
I'm confident firaxis will create a great game, I'm a bit afraid that it won't look a lot like civ anymore. The "unfun" aspects they're taking away have become defining factors for me: limiting the size of your empire through increasing corruption or limiting production through pollution effects are superb in their simplicity. What is the challenge in a game that's all fun? I've seen in Pirates how fun a game without a challenge can be, I've seen in any RTS how much fun creating lots of units and bashing heads with is, but that's just not civilization.

Agreed. At one point, I tried to analyze civ with economic theory, and those aspects in particular are among the tradeoffs I feel Civ3 portrays very well. To take em away is to please the mainstream civ player (the one that plays chieftain-regent because he/she dont want to loose. Ever). To take em away is to reduce the challenge

akots · 30-05-2005, 22:19

Sid is a very creative person. Every new Civ had been a great step ahead imho. Some features were improved, some bugs appeared but the game had become more and more complex with new concepts introduced. I'm sure it will be OK but only after a few patches...

My impression is that it would be a rather similar to RTW strategical part with more complex elements certainly and hopefully with a small possibility to micromanage. After all, this is a very boring task which can be easily done by a governor if this governor is not that of an idiot.

Kingreno · 30-05-2005, 22:37

Lots and lots of Eyecandy yet no realy new things. a flop. yes.

ERIKK · 30-05-2005, 22:44

How can it ever beat civ2???

Beam · 30-05-2005, 22:49

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by ERIKK

How can it ever beat civ2???

How can it ever beat civ1???

Erikk, you've better finished your studies once Civ4 is out, I'll challenge you for game 8!

Markstar · 30-05-2005, 23:41

I say it won't be as good. Yes, hail to Sid Meier for his ideas that changed the way we play strategy games today. However I'm afraid that time has gotten the best of him and Firaxis is just not the right company to handle Civ (which btw reminds me of George Lucas, who, imho, created something very special at a time, but 15 years later all the genious seems to be gone which is rather obvious when his "better" version is much worse than the original).

Actually I liked a lot of concepts of Civ3 while still missing a few from Civ2 even today (like supermarkets, caravans or diplomats) but I guess that everybody has their own issues when comparing the various Civ-installments (for example, while never actually having played Civ: Call Cf Time, I do like the idea of settling the ocean once a certain level of technology is reached).

So why did I vote that it won't be as good? Because imo Civ IS about MMing (to a certain perspective) and about the more thought you put into your moves, the better your game gets (alright, this only counts for people where the time spent thinking about the game actually make a difference

). To me, the talk about "removing unfun elements" sounds like removing the pawns from the chess board since moving the knight or the bishop is more fun.

I heard an interesting quote just today: "Audiences are as smart as you allow them to be."

So yes, modify the pollution to remove some UNNECESSARY MMing, sure, rename the shields to hammers because it makes more sense, but DO NOT water down Civ just because you expect to reach a bigger audience by making the game easier!!!

And since I am convinced that this is EXACTLY what they are doing (as you all probably know from my consistent whining), Civ4 is going to be worse. But boy, do I hope I'm wrong.

View Poll Results: Your Civ4 forecast
Civ4 will rule, more than all it's predecessors (at that time)	4	14.29%
Civ4 will be just as good as it's predecessors (at that time)	18	64.29%
Civ4 won't be as good as it's predecessor(s)	5	17.86%
Civ4 will be a big flop!	1	3.57%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

30-05-2005, 21:14	#1
Matrix Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Tampere, Finland Posts: 4,828	Your Civ4 forecast It seems reviewers are very positive about Civ4. We however know more about Civ gameplay than those reviewers. (Yes, that's arrogant, but I'm talking more about you top players than me. ) They really screwed up big time with Master of Orion III. Will Civ4 undergo the same fate, destroying a legacy, or is it another success? __________________

30-05-2005, 21:30	#2
Pastorius Custard used tile Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Opening a can Posts: 3,158	I see no arrogance in that. It is the truth. __________________

30-05-2005, 22:07	#3
barbu1977 Emperor Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Blame Canada!. Posts: 3,501	Better than 3, as good as 2. They have wonder movies how can it go wrong? __________________ Postcount = Postcount + 1; //Postcount++

30-05-2005, 22:11	#4
Shabbaman Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Costa La Haya Posts: 8,493	I've read that they're changing the concept of shields (or hammers) as the base of production. To me, the shield based production is pretty much the essence of civ. I wouldn't mind if they'd implement the superior system of colonization, but it wouldn't be civ anymore. I'm confident firaxis will create a great game, I'm a bit afraid that it won't look a lot like civ anymore. The "unfun" aspects they're taking away have become defining factors for me: limiting the size of your empire through increasing corruption or limiting production through pollution effects are superb in their simplicity. What is the challenge in a game that's all fun? I've seen in Pirates how fun a game without a challenge can be, I've seen in any RTS how much fun creating lots of units and bashing heads with is, but that's just not civilization. __________________ "Our spam is backed with COMETS!"

30-05-2005, 22:19	#6
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	Sid is a very creative person. Every new Civ had been a great step ahead imho. Some features were improved, some bugs appeared but the game had become more and more complex with new concepts introduced. I'm sure it will be OK but only after a few patches... My impression is that it would be a rather similar to RTW strategical part with more complex elements certainly and hopefully with a small possibility to micromanage. After all, this is a very boring task which can be easily done by a governor if this governor is not that of an idiot. __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)

30-05-2005, 22:37	#7
Kingreno Moderator Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Netherlands. Posts: 3,270	Lots and lots of Eyecandy yet no realy new things. a flop. yes. __________________ Go ahead punk. Make my day.

30-05-2005, 22:44	#8
ERIKK Moderator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands!. Posts: 2,636	How can it ever beat civ2???

30-05-2005, 23:41	#10
Markstar King Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Germany. Posts: 1,746	I say it won't be as good. Yes, hail to Sid Meier for his ideas that changed the way we play strategy games today. However I'm afraid that time has gotten the best of him and Firaxis is just not the right company to handle Civ (which btw reminds me of George Lucas, who, imho, created something very special at a time, but 15 years later all the genious seems to be gone which is rather obvious when his "better" version is much worse than the original). Actually I liked a lot of concepts of Civ3 while still missing a few from Civ2 even today (like supermarkets, caravans or diplomats) but I guess that everybody has their own issues when comparing the various Civ-installments (for example, while never actually having played Civ: Call Cf Time, I do like the idea of settling the ocean once a certain level of technology is reached). So why did I vote that it won't be as good? Because imo Civ IS about MMing (to a certain perspective) and about the more thought you put into your moves, the better your game gets (alright, this only counts for people where the time spent thinking about the game actually make a difference ). To me, the talk about "removing unfun elements" sounds like removing the pawns from the chess board since moving the knight or the bishop is more fun. I heard an interesting quote just today: "Audiences are as smart as you allow them to be." So yes, modify the pollution to remove some UNNECESSARY MMing, sure, rename the shields to hammers because it makes more sense, but DO NOT water down Civ just because you expect to reach a bigger audience by making the game easier!!! And since I am convinced that this is EXACTLY what they are doing (as you all probably know from my consistent whining), Civ4 is going to be worse. But boy, do I hope I'm wrong.