who ever created the word "DinoCraft" was a genious

January 15, 2000, 09:43

it sures looks like it's going to be that way....

question: if it goes like this, what's the common thing with smac and civ3 to make a trilogy?

NoviceCEO · January 16, 2000, 21:23

DinoCraft?

OK, that's the second message in this forum I read this year, but DinoCraft is terrible...if you're talking seriously that is... Unless you're planning to risk being processed by Blizzard.
WarCraft and StarCraft are real popular titles, actually the best selling games in the strategy gaming history. Creating a game and putting DinoCraft as its name would be lower than the floor itselft...
It would make the game like amateur thing, and that you're copying Blizzard, what is obviously not true.

That's what I think anyway...
novice
About the common thing, both have Sid on the name and are based on controlling humanity... ah forget it... im not aware of civ3 development anyway

January 16, 2000, 22:25

you misunderstood me. when discussing what kind of game Dinosaurs will be, some people referred to it as "dinocraft", meaning an rts game in the warcraft style.

Narck · January 17, 2000, 06:46

Quote:

Originally posted by MarkG on 01-15-2000 08:43 AM
question: if it goes like this, what's the common thing with smac and civ3 to make a trilogy?

SMAC: the future
Civ3: The present (well, give or take a few thousand years

Dino: The past

Conclusion: In the past civilization wasn't civilized enough yet to be turn-based

Kill or be killed

January 17, 2000, 08:53

Quote:

Conclusion: In the past civilization wasn't civilized enough yet to be turn-based

Kill or be killed

LOL!! Excellent explanation!

Biddles · January 18, 2000, 01:43

. You're the first person that has actually made a reasonable explanation for the (alleged) TBS/RTS difference.

------------------
- Biddles

"Now that our life-support systems are utilising the new Windows 2027 OS, we don't have to worry about anythi......."
Mars Colonizer Mission

NoviceCEO · January 18, 2000, 20:42

Quote:

Originally posted by MarkG on 01-16-2000 09:25 PM
you misunderstood me. when discussing what kind of game Dinosaurs will be, some people referred to it as "dinocraft", meaning an rts game in the warcraft style.

As you said, it sure looks like it's going to be that way...

... I'm taking it as a similar game...

then you tell me...in a standart game,I'll start with peons (what dino can be a peon??), a building to build peons (a tree that build dinos or a dino momma?) and I'll be able to construc another buildings (new kinds of trees??), research (give T-Rex a longer arm??) and build attack units (ok... but take off that build word).
Now I'm confused.
MarkG you're either laughing at man or saying incredible news about the game that no one else knows yet, except us, forummers.
Please explain
novice

January 18, 2000, 20:54

well, from the diaries it seems to me that they are going for an rts game(diary 2) with small scenarios/objectives(diary 3)
clear enough?

Imran Siddiqui · January 18, 2000, 21:14

Diagree, at least on the second part. It seems that Diary #3 is going for a world-wide Civ-type game, to me...

Bblue · January 19, 2000, 07:19

Well it seems to me that the last diary entry was sort of pointless.. They put out both options.. but I got the distinct impression it is going to be BOTH (althought this involed some reasoning.. and not sure if Firaxis uses that

)
The 'epic, Pangea, big game' is a perfect fit for an all-encompassing game about evolution where the turns/seconds will be in the 10-100 thousand year range. At least for single player mode. However as I get the distinct impression that it is going to be RTS and is going to actually try to support a multiplayer enviroment. Who has 1-2 days to play a RTS 'Pangea' multiplayer game. The solution for the multiplayer enviroment would be 'scenarios' of varing length (including the 'Pangea' game for those diehard types

) but concentrating on a 'scenerio' that could be played in under 2 hours.
A better discussion for the last diary entry would have been how to restrict the 'senarios' so that it includes some of the feel of the 'Pangea' game (do you restrict the 'evolutions' the dinos can have, smaller maps size and not let the game become a zergling opps... rover opps agian... 'dinoling' rush

, Do you just speed up population and 'tech/evolution' progression, etc...)
So I see both as happening.. if you leave out the 'Pangea' game you have pure 'dinocraft' and it would take HUGE RAVES for me to buy it (I don't need 2 copies of Starcraft thank you very much) and if you leave out the 'scenerios' Multiplayer just will not happen on a big scale, and I have the feeling this is what Firaxis may be striving towards.

Third option... Sid has done wonderous and ingenius groundbreaking work in the past...
Maybe it was best said by the Flying Circus... "And now for something completely different"

"Dinobots transform!" Sorry, I couldn't resist

------------------
"Power does not corrupt; it merely attracts the corruptable"

[This message has been edited by Bblue (edited January 19, 2000).]

NoviceCEO · January 19, 2000, 18:31

OK... first of all, let's get things straight. I thought MarkG was firaxian... well you aren't, are you?
You (MarkG) said that, from previous discussion, you believe that the game will be in Warcraft style.
My friend, there is a huge difference from saying the game will be RTS and saying will be Warcraft style.

January 19, 2000, 22:15

Quote:

Originally posted by NoviceCEO on 01-19-2000 05:31 PM
OK... first of all, let's get things straight. I thought MarkG was firaxian... well you aren't, are you?

no, I'm not. I'm a simple fan

Quote:

You (MarkG) said that, from previous discussion, you believe that the game will be in Warcraft style.
My friend, there is a huge difference from saying the game will be RTS and saying will be Warcraft style.

so an "rts game with small scenarios/objectives"(and a couple other things like resource managment, military forces creation and organization, etc) is not the warcraft style?

NoviceCEO · January 21, 2000, 14:01

Warcraft style is a game where you have a main building to train peons, which are resource collectors and can build buildings.
With some more buildings you're able to research new tech and build new units (which can be normal units or spell casters).
Games in warcraft style: Warcraft series (of course

), Starcraft, the Command and Conquer series, Dark Colony and many more I cannot remember, and you may be able to consider some other games too, but I haven't played then, as Total Anhilitio (how the hell you write that?), Myth and the Brazilian Starcraft clone Outlive.
Frankly, I don't imagine that on a dino game. But as I've seen so far, we all have pretty different visions of what the game may be.
Cheers
novice

Maniac · January 21, 2000, 14:41

"question: if it goes like this, what's the common thing with smac and civ3 to make a trilogy?"

In the first diaries Mike Ely has clearly said that the Dinosaurs game isn't a part of the Sweep of Time trilogy where SMAC and Civ3 are part of.

January 21, 2000, 18:54

Quote:

Originally posted by M@ni@c on 01-21-2000 01:41 PM
In the first diaries Mike Ely has clearly said that the Dinosaurs game isn't a part of the Sweep of Time trilogy where SMAC and Civ3 are part of.

eeer where exactly?
anyway, is the official press release wrong? http://apolyton.net/dino/press.shtml

NoviceCEO, I cant imagine how the game will be at all!

Still, Sid mentioned a resource system in the latest diary... dont know...

NoviceCEO · January 21, 2000, 21:46

What I read in a diary is that the resources (or he used the owrd food?) for the dinosaurs made an impressive difference if changed just a little bit. For me, he may be talking about the amount of "eatable" trees and water, for example.
But you haven't told me yet about the other things: training a dino in a building?, having a dino build something?, having a dino spellcaster???...
Anyway, I also think it would be possible a RTS game in some way similar to Warcraft, but it would need so much modifications that only hardcore gamers could see the similar elements.
Whatever, I'm off for the weekend.
Have a nice time fellows.
novice

NoviceCEO · January 21, 2000, 21:48

btw Mark, I'm now a Chieftain.

D
Feels so proud.

Feels so nice.

)

January 21, 2000, 21:53

sure, it's extremely hard to imagine what the dino's will actually do in this game!

Maniac · January 23, 2000, 16:45

Hmm, there's definitely something wrong with my memory.

January 28, 2000, 01:00

I think that a real-time dinosaur game would have more in common with Myth than it would StarCraft. The 'Craft style of RTS would just be to hard to implement logically given the theme of this game.

Biddles · January 28, 2000, 01:54

Real-time dino game: Turok.

Well shoot 'em ups are real time.

Let's just hope that this game doesn't goe the way of turok and totally bobm out.

------------------
- Biddles

"Now that our life-support systems are utilising the new Windows 2027 OS, we don't have to worry about anythi......."
Mars Colonizer Mission

Caesar the Great · January 28, 2000, 17:05

Turok... LOL

------------------
Its normal to be weird here and weird to be normal~ Brain

___
CtG

NoviceCEO · January 29, 2000, 01:32

LOL

MikeH · March 30, 2000, 05:17

First person I heard use the phrase was Darkstar on ACOL.

March 31, 2000, 09:24

Was it Darkstar or was it Shining1? It was one of the two certainly.

MikeH · March 31, 2000, 10:27

Oh yeah, could have been shining.

Herr Glockenspiel · April 1, 2000, 22:26

DinoCraft would not stand a chance up against WarCraft III. First off I doubt that Meier would be able to make it better than WarCraft III, which means that the gaming community will automatically flock to the better of the two games (Blizzard's), especially when it has better name recognition. The name Sid Meier is not as powerful as it once was--just look at what John Romero's name brings now. Nada. Microprose fans will buy Civ III and will steer clear of DinoCraft or whatever concoction is being made there at Firaxis.