Alpha Centauri / Call to Power: My opinion

[Brian Reynolds FIRAXIS]

Well, I figure you might as well have my opinion too, as biased as I admittedly am.

When wading through all the marketing hype associated with both games (Alpha Centauri and Call to Power) I would caution you not to mistake "more features" for "better gameplay and balance". As someone who has been there, has written code for these games, and has also seen how the marketing hype game works, I'd suggest taking a "I'll believe it when I see it" approach and wait until you have the game in your hand before drawing your conclusions.

Alpha Centauri will combine fresh new subject matter with the experience of the team which created both of the original Civ products. We know a lot about balancing these kinds of games and creating AI to make them challenging, and we've got a demo coming out this week to prove our point.

Call to Power is being created by an untried team which has never done this kind of game before. I admire them for their ambition, but I've also been down the road they're travelling. They have a lot of interesting and fresh ideas, and they may very well pleasantly surprise everyone by pulling it off, but I'd suggest a "wait and see" approach. From a game design perspective, adding lots of new unit types is a prima facie case for the view that the game balance and AI will be worse, not better.

As an analogy, what if some publishing company managed, through a complex legal settlement, to secure the "rights" to use the words "Star Wars", even though that company was not in any way associated with George Lucas, 20th Century Fox, Industrial Light and Magic, or any of the stars or cast of the original movies. And then that company announced that it was going to produce some "Star Wars Prequels" which would use the official Star Wars label and name, and that George Lucas could do -his- movies but couldn't use the name "Star Wars" any more. Both rival groups move forward with millions of dollars of marketing and hype.

Which movies do you think would be really cool? My answer: possibly both but definitely Lucas'. Of course, run through the scenario above again but imagine that -you're- George Lucas and you'll have a pretty good idea about how -we- feel about all of this.

I openly and freely admit my bias and vested interest in the matter, but I think it is fair for me to make the case that Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri is the game being created by the team which brought you your earlier favorites.

Brian Reynolds
Alpha Centauri Designer
FIRAXIS Games

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ahhhh! Brian Reynolds, Brian Reynolds!! I agree with the man, I must wait and see about CTP, if I did come off as a brat, I do apologize, but this is what I was really meaning to say, its just that Mr. Reynolds is sooooo much more eloquent that me.

Imran Siddiqui
God Bless America

[Yo_Yo_Yo_Hey]

Hey cool, Brian! Hey, how come whenever Brian posts we say 'Hey, cool, Brian!'??

Anyway, yeah I agree with you on the wait & see approach. Hopefully someone near me will let me borrow CTP for a couple days, & then I can test it out for a few & make my decision then. I will definately get SMAC first, because IMBO it looks like an excellent game, & I've participated too long on its forums to buy CTP first. It just wouldn't seem right to me.

Nice analogy with Star Wars though...

Your faithful & hell-bent NIMadier general,
YYYH

[DCA]

Brian: Well, you could just as easily use the 'Police Academy' series as an analogy - a follow-up by the original team would most certainly be awful, while a 'fresh' team could plausibly make something remotely amusing... I have no doubt SMAC (BRAC!) will be great though. The CTP developers are trying (to some extent) to re-invent the genre, which may or may not be successful. In any case, freshness is a goal in itself (as is competition), benefiting future productions.

I certainly see see how you would feel less-than-happy about losing the rights to your own brain-child, but the CTP designers are not to blame for this unfortunate legal affair. To me, both games seem promising, though a certain amount of skepticism is always healthy...

DCA,
It may not be beautiful, but it sure is fresh (Tchaikovsky on Mussorgsky's music)

[Eroberer]

What a coincidence. The first day I take an in depth look at Alpha Centauri, the designer posts on the civ forum.

Before I actually looked at it, I thought the sci-fi element would turn me off, but there is actually a great story! The graphics aren't as bad as I remembered them either. It looks like I am getting this game before the reviews even come out.

At first I was skeptical about CTP coming from a developer that had no experience doing a game like this. I am quite sure they are all Civ fans, and there isn't much of a way of screwing up a game that you love, so I will be buying that one the day it is realeased. Maybe I'm too trusting. *sigh*

At any rate, at least us turn-based empire builders will have some games to play next year!

Just my two cents!
Eroberer

[Octavian]

Yikes, if only Sid and a few guys from Activision came along I'd think I had made it to paradise

I'll have to agree, Brian, on the wait and see approach. CTP has potential and SMAC has the masters of the genre. They both look to be shaping up nicely, and I only have a few doubts.

My doubts with CTP lie in the rather ambitious approach. Activision looks like they're trying to do almost too much with CTP. 3000 A.D.? Undersea and Orbtal Colonization/Warfare? Massive Unconventional Warfare? I hope LT John and the rest know they're getting into alot.

As for SMAC, the faction system seems interesting (especially custom factions) but balancing it could be a problem (The Hive and Spartan Command look a bit on the too powerful for the early game side.)

But of course.. guess we'll wait and see

If anything, I hope they both are great games. It would be a shame if the great Civilization (or the new Aplha Centauri) legacy had a game which wound up being lukewarm.

[Quirinus]

Personally, I'm rubbing my hands together with glee at the thought of a couple of new turn-based Empire building games...

[Drakenred]

Lets face it Civ:Call to power is probably not going to be in the same leage as Civ(but then again neither was Civ II)

and (for now) we probably will not be seeing a true Sid/Brian Civ III(sigh)
Untill we Do all we have is Emerialism, Civ:CTP/CIV TOT( I keep thinking Civ Tots, as in Civ ' tater tots(SIGH) we will have to make due with Civ:CTP CIV:TOT, Emerialism 2 and Advanced Civ(unles thats become vaporware)

and so far none of the people who have seen Betas of Civ CTP think it stinks(at least up to around the year 2000 ad)
(unlike Civ:TOT whitch seems to inspire some derition when you get past the "another sequal to CivII " in previews

lets face it how many of us thought ST:TNG, STS9 and ST:V would tank befor the first episiode?(atualy I thoght Partic Stuart would be flying home to England with his tale betwixt his legs before the piolot aired, after all he had never even tried Situational drama TV befor)

{PS. I'll give you ST:V untill they diched the 5Yearold for 7 of 9)

[Mentat]

I don't know, SOMETIMES it's a lot better to get a fresh design perspective though. When you have a lot of experience you tend to try things that you see as safe, and hence come up with some sometimes generic material. On the other hand, a new group has the opportunity to try new things, bringing new perspective to a genre, and maybe adding enhancements that someone more comfortable in the genre might never have come up with, because they are following "the rules" of good game design. If you think about it, the team that made Civ had never really had much experience with these types of games either, and look what they produced. The truely classic games are usually those that make up their own conventions.

By the way, did I mention that I have a nephew named Brian Reynolds? True.

[Harlan]

Brian,
I don't understand why you'd want to knock CTP. Why start knocking the other company's product and building up an antagonism and rivalry? Of all the thousands of computer games out there, isn't there room for two only somewhat similar games to coexist in peace? The two games aren't even that similar: one is purely sci-fi, the other isn't. If both are good, most people on these forums will buy both anyways. Its not like there's lots of lies and slander out there to combat- let the games live or die on their own merits.

And why defend Microprose against Activison? Didn't you leave Microprose before all that legal wrangle? Microprose seems to have largely dropped the ball anyways in coming out with a post-Civ2 product so its no suprise other companies (like yours) are trying to fill the gap. In your analogy, your company is not ILM or 20th Century Fox, Microprose is.

You say "wait until you have the game in your hand before drawing conclusions" so why don't you follow your own advice? You are contradicting yourself because your bias is clear before CTP's in your hands.

I wish Firaxis well and Activison well too.

Harlan

[Shah of Persia]

Brian, it seems like you are pulling an old marketing trick: slander the competition so people will think your product is better.
Even though your post was polite and subtle it isn't too hard to read between the lines. What was the point of "dissing" CTP? To attract people to your product instead isn't it?

When I saw your thread I thought it'd be about the technical difference (i.e. the different features) between the two games. I was quite surprised when all you tried to do was convert people to SMAC.

The Shah has spoken

[Octavian]

When did Reynolds knock on CTP?

He only said the truth, that CTP is being made by a fresh and inexpierenced team with big ambitions, and that SMAC is being made by the masters at the genre. That isn't slander or hype, it's the truth

He never said SMAC would be any better, just that from his analogy it has a good chance at it. The people who made SMAC made Civ and Civ II, they know what they're doing. He also said CTP has an good chance, but from a reality perspective, he's George Lucas and Activision is Steven Spielbergo (notice the "o" at the end.)

I don't think Brian knocked on CTP at all. Nor did he contradict himself. He's telling the honest truth.

[Quirinus]

Octavian, (Ave Caesar!)

The whole point of a post like that is to be subtle... Check out the SMAC forums and you'll see that he posted the same message there. You'll also find that there are quite a few follow up posts from fanatics (and I do not understand this fanatical attitude. Perhaps they need to get out a bit more often...) carrying on about how the 'gods have spoken' and how crap CTP is/will be.

Another point, this is the computer games industry - there are no 'masters of the genre' the playing field changes far too quickly for that... Further, there's no evidence to say that because someone has done something well in the past they will continue to do it well.

Cheers,
Q.

[Drakenred]

actualy Brian probably should not have compared himself to George Lucase, (after all can you list the 12 (not counting the "remakes" of the Starwars Trilogy, and the new Starwarsdue out next summer)movies that G. Lucas has directed and or produced since Starwars Return of The Jedi?



hmm thought not.

Lets face it, if C:CTP had simply been called Call To Power it would not have generated this mutch Hostilitiy, or publicity

(and if Brian had caled it Brians Civization, people at the time would have said "Brian who?")


(actualy some have argued that George Lucas was trying to snage some of the Star Trec Fans with his tital)

(incidentaly im suprised that the creatores of the origianl Alpha Centauri computer Game havet objected, but then Alpha Centari is probably not a Copywritable name)

[St Leo]

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Indiana Jones and the Lost Ark
Indiana Jones II

+many crappy movies akin to Magic and Colonization

[Colon™]

Hey ! Colonization is a great game !

[Robi]

Like Mentat said, a new face can be a good thing sometimes. Look at the first person shooter genre, Doom really broke through with the modern concept of the game, but later styles added to it - heck, Half-Life, which is being billed as revolutionary and one of the all-time best games, is that developers first foray into the shooter genre - look how well they did. Nobody that I can see is questioning Half-Life because it didn't come from id software.
Anyway, I'm buying both the day they come out. They are both going to kick ass, and for their own unique reasons.

[Octavian]

This is true, Q.

If anything, as I said, I hope they'll both be great. The more Civs the merrier!

Anyway, of course Reynolds could screw up and SMAC could wind up stinky. The same applies to Activision and CTP. And asides from, what, a few screenshots, I have very little to base any opinions on for either game. Until I get my grubby paws on 'em I'll remain neutral... sorta

I guess I'm partial to SMAC, primarily because it comes out in a month and I'm going through Turn-Based withdrawal right now. ("Real-Time Strategy" my foot. I want REAL strategy darnnit!)

[Octavian]

Yikes, posting in a row... but I forgot a point and need to bring it up.

Q, the reason I use the term "Masters at the Genre" is because, well, Civilization games and Turn-Based games as a whole are few and far apart. Master of Orion II, which would now be considered a dinosaur, is still one of the more recent of Civ-Games.

Thus, while games do change swiftly, there aren't many TB games out there to change the genre all that often, sadly

[SnowFire]

While I'm surprised as well, in no way was that a flame or a diss of CTP. He simply said that it was unproven. And yes, we have some SMAC fanatics, but you have some CTP fanatics. So I think it's equal.

[Red Trotskyite]

I just got through catching up with this thread. I must say, I found Brian Reynolds' post remarkable. Remarkable for its arrogance and presumptiousness. And it surprised me because in a previous post he seemed to, at least externally, remove himself from the childish BRAC-CTP feud.

It's quite natural that one might think the game they, along with many others, are working on, is best. And there is nothing wrong with that at all, I expect undoubtedly CTP designers think their game design is best too. It's all well and good to have pride in ones creation and work.

But this post of Mr. Reynold's is clearly nothing more than a thinly veiled publicity ploy, or in other words, an ADVERTISEMENT.

As such, it's, quite frankly, offensive.

And certainly not even a genuine attempt to argue in favour of BRAC in its own merits, but rather on ridiculous supposed inadequacies in CTP. Supposed on no legitimate basis whatsoever. It doesn't criticize elements like the Park Ranger for a name that's too far out there, or any other specific element.

Rather, it makes a blanket statement that simply asserts BRAC will probably be better because its designers are better.

The arrogance of it all.

Mr. Reynolds compares his team to George Lucas, and pats himself on the back more than once. At the same time he insults the CTP team. That's really unfair, since neither product can be judged yet and thus the comments serve nothing but afore mentioned publicity scheming.

As someone mentioned, the CTP team has nothing whatsoever to do with the legal wrangling that the Corporate Bosses in Microprose and Activision went through with each other.

The analaogy, therefore, with George Lucas' Star Wars movies and a hypothetical third party Star Wars movie-team is false. Some Activision executive or other big wig sat down and said, "we'd make more profit ultimately with the Civilization name," they did what they had to in order to get the name, and got it.

That's Capitalism, and the CTP team, while they may or may not support Activision's taking of the Civilization name, is removed from it.

That is not to say I blindly defend the CTP team in anything they do. I barely know anyone on the CTP team, only Lt. John posts here once and awhile, and while he is polite, I don't know him on anything resembling a personal level.

However, I'll shoot down unfair remarks as I see them. And boy do I see them.

Mr. Reynolds speaks of the "marketing hype" he has supposedly "wad[ed] through," then procedes to write a hyped-up advertisement in favour of his game.

Mr. Reynolds suggests a wait and see approach with CTP, but a blind-loyalty appraoch with BRAC, an obvious double standard (which he admits, on account of his bias). It's all very subtle of course, it's meant to be, this is Brian Reynolds, not one of his wacked out drones like Imran . He has to be presuasive.

Mr. Reynolds says --Alpha Centauri will combine fresh new subject matter with the experience of the team which created both of the original Civ products. We know a lot about balancing these kinds of games and creating AI to make them challenging, and we've got a demo coming out this week to prove our point.--

This reads like a very thinly disguised marketing statement, I wouldn't be surprised was cleared and polished by a Firaxis PR. It could just as easily have been posted on alphacentauri.com.

He then speaks to the CTP team as a parent lecturing a group of children. The CTP team, I'm rather sure, are all grown adults and while they may not have all of the genre experience of Brian Reynolds "the Great" they certainly don't need to be lectured by Mr. Reynolds in the belittling way he sees fit to treat them.

Then he procedes to make statements that accuse CTP's AI and balancing of being "worse" (than what isn't specified, although I'm inclined to assume he meant CivII, which is a grave insult, because CivII's AI was, in a word, horrid).

These statements, if they had been made by an ordinary person, and not Mr. Reynolds, would gain, I'm quite sure, universal condemnation from people following CTP as being premature since the game engine hasn't even been released in a demo yet.

But, seeing as this is the "great" Brian Reynolds, and he certainly seems to consider himself as such, his comments are taken seriously by a great many people who otherwise wouldn't give them a second thought. It's depressing that someone could generate such a divine-like respect over so many people simply due to involvement with a popular game; but even more depressing that this person would exploit that fact and use it to try to make more sales.

And in this very same post Mr. Reynolds says to take a wait and see attitude with CTP.

Well, Mr. Reynolds, one cannot wait and see with CTP as you say we should do while at the same time making negative assumptions about AI and game balancing with the only "evidence" being an increase in units. That's obvious hypocrisy on your part. I'm not so gullible as to swallow it either and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one.

Mr. Reynolds says --I openly and freely admit my bias and vested interest in the matter...--

This is key, because here not only is his biased conceded, but his "vested interest," that being pawning BRAC. Revealing this post for what it really is, a very offensive and thinly veiled marketing advertisement on a CTP forum.

He says --but I think it is fair for me to make the case that Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri is the game being created by the team which brought you your earlier favorites.--

If this, Mr. Reynolds, was a Court of Law, and a jury had to decide which was better, CTP or Alpha Centauri, you can be quite assured, that "[this] is the game being created by the team which brought you your earlier favorites," would not hold water, would not win you your 'case,' and would probably be objected to on the grounds of irrelevancy.

Red Trotskyite,
POWER TO THE PEOPLE!

[Red Trotskyite]

An Addendum

Imran: --Ahhhh! Brian Reynolds, Brian Reynolds!! I agree with the man, I must wait and see about CTP, if I did come off as a brat, I do apologize, but this is what I was really meaning to say, its just that Mr. Reynolds is sooooo much more eloquent that me.--

Ohhhhh! Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Reynolds! Posting on the forum! I'm such a mess, hang on while I change into something more fit for the occasion. *changing into business suit* Oh Mr. Reynolds, with your wonderful way of arguing illogical points, but you do it so much better than I do!

Everything you do is just so graceful, so swanlike. You are my sunshine, my only sunshine...

Imran, get it over with and propose to the man already, none of us are getting any younger.

Red Trotskyite,
POWER TO THE PEOPLE!

[Starchild]

Lets get CTP's director Cecilia Barajas, armed with a Park Ranger's nano bomb, and Brian Reynolds, armed with a SMAC laser, in the same room. See who comes out. The funny thing is, if SMAC was being developed by anyone else, we wouldn't even have these discussions.

"I will not bow down to the false god, Sid."

[fred]

I respected you Brian but now you just seem like a looser! LT John and all the other Activisiion people are looking forward to your game but here you come dissing a game that could be better than SMAC. I know people will say how a game with a unit like the abolitionist(sp?) can be good but what Activision is bring the real world into their game.

Brisn why did you come here anyways? Everyone here is going to buy SMAC right away. Most of the people here are going to buy CTP right away too because both games have amazing qualities. Also what gave you the idea that CTP is not going to be good as SMAC?

LT John why don't you go over to the SMAC forums and rave about CTP?

To answer my question(even though I'm not LT John) he wouldn't, he's to nice and he also both games are going to be great. He doesn't need to go to SMAC forums to support Activision's CTP because he knows its going to be great hopefully as good as SMAC looks right now.

fred

P.S. Brian don't come to these forums if you are going to put down a great game like CTP!

[St Leo]

If Brian Reynolds is George Lucas, Li(ttle)eutennant John is Patrick Stewart!:-)

[Octavian]

Sheesh, while people in Civ forums are definetly more mature than RT"S" and Action gamers I do see a similiarity in "LET'S DRAG OUT A REALLY BIG AND STUPID FUED OVER SOMETHING POINTLESS" ideal.

Don't get me wrong, I love to debate and argue. But Reynolds is just one man. He is not the personification of Firaxis or SMAC. He's just a capitalist guy who is producing the game.

If people like Imran and whatnot are going to debate about something stupid, atleast go back to the mind-numbing "CTP vs. SMAC" thing. To have a flame-war escalate (as I'm sure will happen when a couple of Brian-Fanatics see this post) from a singular post, veieled attack and bias aside, is just laughable.

Reynolds spoke against CTP. He supported SMAC. The clouds have parted and, lo, our God has spoken in blasphemy! Now those who support CTP must wield the blades of flame as shall those on the side of Reynolds and an epic battle shall ensue in which no man or woman shall emerge.

Sorry folks, Reynolds ain't God. He is not going to be perfect. If he makes an attack? Fine. I do that to the Babylonians all the time with Nuclear Missles.

Aslong as I can get my hands on SMAC and CTP to play against the AI and other people I'm happy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Of course, he is going to biased, but good points are brought out by his argument. This group is untested in the TBS realm. And, because of the hostile reaction I have recieved, I might not get CTP now. You people have turned me off of it. I know that is not a good reason, but it is reason enough for me. So, for the forseeable future, starting tomarrow, I'll be playing SMAC.

Imran Siddiqui
God Bless America

[Colon™]

Jeez, this is childish, man !
Instead of squabling what game is best just buy both ! I don't think these games are created to make two "clans" who are fighting eachother all the time.

Stop the violence! This East Coast/West Coast rap rivalry must end. Oh, wait, wrong forum. ;-)

Well, I think this rivalry is the best thing that could ever happen to the world of Civ. It is indeed a compliment to the original designers that there is room for 3 different companies to develop them game, each with a distinct style and flavor to it. Although it doesn't look like Microprose is making much noise right now with Test of Time. Maybe they suprise us, and pull off something spectacular, and blow everybody away.

Anyway, look what happened to the rap industry, for example--Biggie Smalls/Puff Daddy's East Coast group vs. 2Pac/Suge Knight's West Coast crew. Although both stars died tragically, the rivalry between the groups helped push rap sales higher and higher for both camps. Some analysts wonder how much "artificial" rivalry there is sometimes in the hip-hop world, because it's such an effective marketing tactic.

We also see this in professional wrestling. I stopped watching years ago, because it got boring. But now, with Ted Turner's WCW, WWF has a rival, and both compete so hard against one another that they both get more and more entertaining and innovative. But each has a distinct style and selling point that makes them worth watching. If it wasn't for the rivalry, I think alot of people wouldn't be watching the product because it would have probably gone stale (it did).

Not coincidentally, both shows have grown tremendously, since the new wrestling show was introduced. So there is room for both.

But the key is when people are passionate about a product, as we have definately seen here. If the product isn't good enough, people won't care one way or the other.
But that we can argue over which is better,
even though we haven't played both, speaks
for the quality that we anticipate.

So I say hurray for this rivalry. It is going to make the Civ line better and better for years to come. The products aren't going to get stale, they are only going to get seriously better. I'll buy both.

Civilization truly is the Star Wars of video games.

Thank you Mr. Reynolds for your candid thoughts. I think you should take it as a compliment that another team is also working on your game. And that them developing the game is only going to mutually benefit both companies.

[Colon™]

I'm going to buy both games, though.

Puff Daddy sucks !!!

Scarface Rules !!!