Firaxis off on the wrong foot

Capt Dizle · January 14, 2004, 23:45

Rumor floats that Civ4 will be a mission based game, starting with limited maps to complete, with larger maps available, then rinse and repeat. This is awful, it is not Civ and we ought to let them know right now that if they want to do that sort of game, fine, just do it as a spinoff and do not crap up any small chance that we might get a quality Civ4 product.

notyoueither · January 14, 2004, 23:51

No way!

Where did you hear this?

Kuciwalker · January 15, 2004, 00:32

He made it up, I'm sure

Capt Dizle · January 15, 2004, 00:54

No, I did not.

Capt Dizle · January 15, 2004, 00:57

Honestly, I maybe spiced it a tad, but either here or at civfantics a firaxian was talking about this concept. Sounded like a trial balloon to me. I can't place the thread just now.

Theseus · January 15, 2004, 02:24

I haven't seen that, jt. If true, I'd chime in with you in a heartbeat. From what I know, Civ4 is intended to be a logical extension.

PrinceBimz · January 15, 2004, 02:35

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick

Rumor floats that Civ4 will be a mission based game, starting with limited maps to complete, with larger maps available, then rinse and repeat. This is awful, it is not Civ and we ought to let them know right now that if they want to do that sort of game, fine, just do it as a spinoff and do not crap up any small chance that we might get a quality Civ4 product.

Rumor

vmxa1 · January 15, 2004, 03:18

Does not pass the smell test.

MrWhereItsAt · January 15, 2004, 04:53

/me sniffs

Well, I DID have fish for dinner.....

Seriously, jt, if you find a link to this, please post it ASAP, OK?

Cheers - I think this would concern us ALL.

Harovan · January 15, 2004, 04:54

I don't believe it. If it were true, it would be an absolute atrocity and I think the outcry of protest would be in unison.

Flip McWho · January 15, 2004, 05:35

Yeah. No way in hell that this would happen. Even if hell froze over this wouldn't happen.

Harovan · January 15, 2004, 07:22

May be Civ4 will have a mission based tutorial. That would make sense and explain the rumor (assuming it exists, haven't heard it yet except for this thread).

DaveV · January 15, 2004, 08:47

I'm guessing he's talking about this post...

WarpStorm · January 15, 2004, 09:03

That's probably Jesse rambling rather than a definitive statement about Civ4 features.

asleepathewheel · January 15, 2004, 09:14

Jimmytrick, you've misconstrued Jesse's words.

He isn't talking about mission based civ, though a modder could do that if he wanted. He's not turning this into warcraft or something, build five cities in this scenario then move onto a larger map.

He's talking about increasing the map size (or map awareness would be more appropriate) through time, or what ever parameter is in place (era, tech, etc). I for one love this idea (and said so in that thread posted above) To me this would give a much more interesting experience, and more realistic. No more 4000bc warrior travelling around the globe. did people in, say, Germany know of people in India in 3000BC? Well, I have no clue, but I doubt it. They knew of their immediate neighbors and some others. In a game like this, you would start in, say, Kansas (random Rock Chalk selection), build cities there, conquer an enemy or two, then expand into, say, Colorado and Nebraska etc. all the while being able to move further and further out from your cities. Eventually you could see all of N. America and S. America, and then finally the world.

I think this would be implemented similar to the ToT multimaps,ie you can play the old standard civ XXXxXXX map or you can play the ever expanding universe.

So I think you're horribly misconstruing Jesse's post by calling it "mission-based", though he does acknowledge what modders could do with this.

Like I said in that thread, when I think of my ideal civ game in bed at night (!) I think of something similar to this.

I see this as evolving civ from an game where you have a bunch of individual cities, nearly autonomous units, to where you start off as a city state, like Ur or whatever, and through time you develop into a nation like what we have today.

Harovan · January 15, 2004, 09:26

Don't get me wrong all, but the more I think of this, the better I can imagine that it would be a viable concept. That's me "rambling", so don't take it too serious, it's just an idea, which is far from being thoroughly reasoned:

Imagine, in the early game you are given only a very rough roster of, say, 40x40. You are able to explore, to grab land and place very rough tile improvements. In this phase, you found the centers of your provinces, or let's say in terms of the US, your states. The city radii ("state areas") will get borders, the location of which you can determine. Then, at some point in the game, the granularity doubles. Each tile is split in four (2x2), making it a 80x80 map. Your cities and first tile improvements remain, but the regions they cover double in size (or in terms of area, grow fourfold). Now, you can found smaller, secondary cities between the primaries, say, the centers of your "counties" in terms of the US. Your tile improvement capabilities will refine; what once was a pure irrigation (emphasizing food) or mining (emphasizing production), can now be changed in +2 food, +2 production, or +1 food, +3 production, etc. The trade network also has to be further developed. May be at some point, the granularity doubles again, to 160x160. You get the idea. Could work.

Capt Dizle · January 15, 2004, 10:41

It's sounds like a mission based game to me. Anyhow, it clearly isn't civ. Civ is 4X and if you limit the exploration and expansion aspect artificially you can only move one way...towards linear gaming. I'll point out that Civ3 was and is infinitely more linear than previous editions of Civ. I for one detest this idea and really will not buy that sort of product.

This is clearly mission based whatever else you want to call it.

Cookie Monster · January 15, 2004, 10:41

There is no way I'd buy a civ game that is mission based. That is just blasphemous. If they are trying to capture a different audience in an effort to boost sales they will lose. All the real civ'ers will be alienated and I for one would never buy this sort of crap.

Are you listening Firaxis? Don't alienate your core customers.

asleepathewheel · January 15, 2004, 10:50

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
It's sounds like a mission based game to me. Anyhow, it clearly isn't civ. Civ is 4X and if you limit the exploration and expansion aspect artificially you can only move one way...towards linear gaming. I'll point out that Civ3 was and is infinitely more linear than previous editions of Civ. I for one detest this idea and really will not buy that sort of product.

This is clearly mission based whatever else you want to call it.

I call it hyperbole

you need to reread that thread.

If that's mission based, then all civ is mission based. Build cities, discover advances, go to war, etc. Its the same game but on a much grander scale. More realistic in my opinion.

steven8r · January 15, 2004, 12:41

Perhaps it was just a thought of a 'feature' that could be in the next game to attract those whom do like that sort of thing, but not necessarily one that 'die-hard civ fans' would have to play.

Kinda like the Conquest scenarios that come w/ C3C. They're fun. They're civish. They're not 'civ'.

Oh well. From what I can tell, Civ4 is still just a distant dream/vision--like when Kennedy said, "Our goal is to put a man on the Moon and bring him safely back to Earth by the end of the decade." It's a huge vision with an end in mind, but as yet, nobody knows what the 'journey' will look like.

Steven

Alex · January 15, 2004, 12:58

jt clearly misinterpreted jesse's words... in the end, jesse mentions how this concept could interesting for the modders... he wasn't referring to this concept as being the heart of civ4.

Sarxis · January 15, 2004, 15:57

I remember hearing about this. Not enough concrete detail to know exactly what Firaxis intends by this. I don't have a substantial opinion on it at the moment.

Cookie Monster · January 15, 2004, 16:22

Still anytime Firaxis witholds information regarding a new game I get nervous. Hopefully the heart of civ 4 will remain true to it's genre otherwise the golden age of TBS games truely will be dead............

Jaybe · January 15, 2004, 17:07

The mission concept sounds great! It might not be pure "civ" (as we know it). Perhaps an offshoot name would be good, similar to the way Call To Power was.

That way there could be 2 branches and I could play new versions of both!

WarpStorm · January 15, 2004, 18:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Cookie Monster
Still anytime Firaxis witholds information regarding a new game I get nervous.

Withholds? From what I've heard they have barely started it. I'm pretty sure that they haven't even nailed down what the big features of the game will be much less the details. After all, their biggest thrust right now isn't Civ.

As long as they don't try to make it into an RTS...