What Civ 4 needs: New Look - Page 2

Kuciwalker · January 1, 2004, 12:32

Quote:

Originally posted by altF18
i agree DarkCloud, that Civ3 graphics were bad. II ruled.

For terrain and units, C3 DEFINATELY ruled. It's a matter of opinion for the interface (personally, I found C2's too austere).

LDiCesare · January 1, 2004, 14:35

Get rid of all those cartoony leaders. The advisors are more bearable.
Make the units easier to spot. A power circle of the civ's color under the units would be nice. But then I'm biased.
Make the units graphics easier to mod, which means, please, no animated unit graphics. Really, I hate animated units in every game that has them.

Kuciwalker · January 1, 2004, 17:03

Quote:

Make the units easier to spot. A power circle of the civ's color under the units would be nice.

This is already an option in C3. Check the preferences screen

The Slayer · January 2, 2004, 03:37

That feature in fact was already in PtW preferences.. and who knows if they were in Vanilla Civ3 too...

Quote:

For terrain and units, C3 DEFINATELY ruled. It's a matter of opinion for the interface (personally, I found C2's too austere).

Totally agree!

. But I wish (let me dream) if they (Firaxians) could realise some tips/models/tutorials, etc about unit creation. Some weeks ago in the Spanish Forum we had one of the classic threads "which is better, 2 or 3?". Then I made the great mistake of saying that civ3 had more units than 2, completly wrong...

... but the think I want to recall is that in civ3 the unit is an 3d animation, not a simple draw of a settler, for example.

LDiCesare · January 2, 2004, 06:16

Quote:

This is already an option in C3. Check the preferences screen

That's not exactly what I ment. I want a circle that grows with the power (number) of units there. Right now I jave to count the little white dots under the health bar of the unit to check whether I may beat tjem or not. A smaller/bigger circle instead of a small mark I can heardly read is what I'd like.

I want units to be 2D. Whatever you do, a 3D model is much more time consuming to do than a 2D one, and I'm sure that Firaxis won't use a proprietary 3D engine/format they coul bundle with the program, which means you won't be able to mod the game unless you have bought Maya or somesuch.

Kuciwalker · January 2, 2004, 07:16

Quote:

That's not exactly what I ment. I want a circle that grows with the power (number) of units there. Right now I jave to count the little white dots under the health bar of the unit to check whether I may beat tjem or not. A smaller/bigger circle instead of a small mark I can heardly read is what I'd like.

It's easy to tell about how many units are on a tile. You couldn't tell how many were on a tile just by looking at a circle.

Kuciwalker · January 2, 2004, 07:18

Quote:

Originally posted by The Slayer
Totally agree!

. But I wish (let me dream) if they (Firaxians) could realise some tips/models/tutorials, etc about unit creation. Some weeks ago in the Spanish Forum we had one of the classic threads "which is better, 2 or 3?". Then I made the great mistake of saying that civ3 had more units than 2, completly wrong...

Completely right. C3 has IIRC over a hundred units (maybe not vanilla civ).

LDiCesare · January 2, 2004, 09:03

Quote:

It's easy to tell about how many units are on a tile.

Well, I can't. I can see whether there is one, 2, or many. I have to count instead of seeing them immediately. Varying circle sizes work.

civman2000 · January 2, 2004, 10:34

I don't like civ3 graphics or interface...i prefer simple, unanimated, civ2 style graphics, and also a simpler interface like civ2's that does not separate itself from the windows environment. On the little things like the advisors, I couldn't care less.

Eli · January 2, 2004, 10:51

I'm building and managing a huge empire, sending thousands to their deaths, controlling millions, reshaping the earth, and I want the interface to look like it.

But the thing that was really good about the Civ3 interface was it's lightness. I dont like the huge bars that take over 20%, if not more, of the screen like in the HoMM series or most(all?) of the AOE-style games.

The Slayer · January 2, 2004, 12:15

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker

Completely right. C3 has IIRC over a hundred units (maybe not vanilla civ).

Yes, I also thought the same, but a friend over there told me that was wrong. Take a look in the "Scenario League/Civ 2" Forum... there're many over there.

Anyway, perhaps the amount of units between them reflects the great work in tha graphics making the units animated

Sorry for the another, but now I couldn't be able to see a Civ4 without animated units.

Solver · January 2, 2004, 12:32

I like the idea of interface changing with the age. Civ 4 interface shouldn't be as Dark as SMAC was, though SMAC was cool with that space sci-fi hi-tech look. At least the graphics of Civ 3 never put any strain on my eyes, which is a good thing. And that's what I didn't like about Civ 2, I could never figure anything on the wierdo isometric view

.

Leaderheads... maybe do em with CtP1 style, where there are ambassadors, not leaders. Or Civ 2 style, with using actual images/portraits. I didn't mind Civ 3 leaderheads, they were cute, but a tad too cartoonish.

Advisors, though, I loved Civ 3 ones all the way. Sid as science advisor and Jeff as Military Advisor, can't get much better

.

Kuciwalker · January 2, 2004, 13:16

Quote:

Originally posted by The Slayer

Yes, I also thought the same, but a friend over there told me that was wrong. Take a look in the "Scenario League/Civ 2" Forum... there're many over there.

Anyway, perhaps the amount of units between them reflects the great work in tha graphics making the units animated

Sorry for the another, but now I couldn't be able to see a Civ4 without animated units.

Oh, you mean made for it, not just included in the game. In that case they are right.

Lambiorix_be · January 2, 2004, 14:11

I want an upgrade of all the graphics. The more realistic a landscape (city, unit...) looks the better I like it. I even want to spend the extra cost for it if need be.

Next to the graphics I would like a more complex diplomacy and trade model. Some people here refer to Civ3 as a 'wargame' which it is (in my eyes at least

) absolutely not. Most of my games several empires remain alive. I like to win cultural, diplomatic and space race victories. How can an emperor show off his success if everybody has been destroyed :-)

LDiCesare · January 2, 2004, 17:09

Quote:

Some people here refer to Civ3 as a 'wargame' which it is (in my eyes at least ) absolutely not.

It's much more warmongerlike than civ2 in my opinion.

Brent · January 2, 2004, 20:48

Terrain and Units

Civ2. 2D. No animation.

Leaders

Portraits like in Civ2. No animation. Photos if available, classical paintings or whatever.

Advisors

In general I am antigraphics, or at least I think I am until faced with a specific issue, but I did like the video of real people in Civ2. If it means more available resources for other issues, or lower system requirements, they can be nonanimated drawings.

New Look in General

Light

Kuciwalker · January 3, 2004, 01:11

Quote:

Civ2. 2D. No animation.

Ignoring the merits (or rather, the lack thereof) of this, it isn't going to happen. Firaxis cannot sell something with five-year-old graphics.

Brent · January 3, 2004, 01:39

Why do consumers demand to be forced to upgrade their computer unnecesarily? Apparently most consumers don't want to mod either.

Kuciwalker · January 3, 2004, 02:01

It doesn't matter if it is a rational decision for them. Don't argue the decision with me. It is a fact of life, and you're just going to have to deal with it.

joncha · January 3, 2004, 02:46

There's no way I'd pay for a 2-d game that wasn't shareware (and cheap!). I might play it a lot, but pay $30 plus? No way! I might as well just play civ2 and save the money.

Good, animated units that don't distract from gameplay (grunting warriors=ok, screaming fire catapults=not ok) are a must if firaxis wants me to actually pay them. I'm sure I'm not the only one who was annoyed with the Giant Aarvarks--err--Ancient Cavalry graphics, etc in Conquests.

As for leaderheads and advisors, they went way over the top. In this case, the animation adds nothing to the gameplay and gets tired fast. Here, I think, less actually is more.

jon.

Brent · January 3, 2004, 03:03

You didn't explain how animated units add to the gameplay.

joncha · January 3, 2004, 03:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Brent
You didn't explain how animated units add to the gameplay.

I never claimed they did. I believe I only called for units that "don't distract from gameplay."

To me, "distracting" includes flat, bit-mappy icons as well as over-done animation.

I think, for the most part, the rendered 3-d units and their movement (including attack, fidget and death animation) were not distracting and looked good.

jon.

POTUS · January 3, 2004, 03:59

Maybe make them easier for modders, but otherwise, the Civ 3 units were good.

civman2000 · January 3, 2004, 09:50

. IMHO the only thing that really matters for graphics is that they don't get in the way. Neither 3d nor 2d graphics are "distracting" for me, but 3d graphics hamper modding. Thus 2d is better.

VetLegion · January 3, 2004, 23:14

If someone would bother to add all those little one second delays in screens, all the delays because Civ 3 graphics overtax most machines on the market and all the other unnecessary delays, it would come out that Firaxis stole a huge amount of player's time with suboptimal graphics design.

I am not saying "ugly", heck, I wan't to print the screenshots and put them on my wall, but it is suboptimal.

I suggest simpler, faster graphics.

I think returning to windowed mode would also be a good thing.