These screenshots are not impressing me.

DarthVeda · July 23, 2000, 14:09

I'm looking at these shots and about all I can see is a vague difference between ctp and ctp2

So I got CtP and hated it, with a game that looks almost identical, why should I get it and expect to like it? (That's an acutal question... please attempt to answer it)

July 23, 2000, 14:45

I didnt know that appearance was the most important factor in civ games....

DarthVeda · July 23, 2000, 17:48

I'm looking for something tangible to go on since I can't really trust word of mouth anymore around here. Call to Power was hyped at Apolyton and turned out to be godawful.

MapleLeaf · July 23, 2000, 18:26

quote:

Originally posted by DarthVeda on 07-23-2000 02:09 PM
...why should I get it and expect to like it?

Excuse me, but who says you should get CtP2? Even more - who in his right mind and familiar with your postings on this forum says that you should expect to like it?

Slax · July 24, 2000, 13:36

Its a silly question, since its not likely DarthVeda hated the game because of the way it looked. If there was one thing that didn't require fixing it was the graphics.

I don't think anyone should judge a computer game from screenshots (unless thay are really awful looking). Always wait for reviews by people who have actually played the game.

Shavlor · July 25, 2000, 00:52

DarthVeda: I beleive that if you didn't like the gameplay of CTP then you will probally not like gameplay of CTP2. I think that CTP has definately had the best graphics I have ever seen for a Civ. SMAC had ugly graphics in comparinson to CTP.

DarthVeda · July 25, 2000, 18:41

Well the graphics in CtP were ahead of their time, the gameplay was way behind it's time.

I'd rather play Colonization or Civ1 over CtP, that's how bad the gameplay was, or at least what it couldn't measure up to.

What really bugs me about these screenshots is that aside from a new menu interface, the graphics look identical to the first Call to Power. I seriously doubt that CtP 1 graphics were the Apex of all graphics.
[This message has been edited by DarthVeda (edited July 25, 2000).]

meriadoc · July 25, 2000, 22:23

DarthVeda: Judging CTP (1 or 2) based on its screenshots is like picking a girlfriend (or boyfriend) based on how she/he looks. In the end while good graphics are nice, it is the substance (playability) that counts.

Nordicus · July 26, 2000, 10:41

DV:

quote:

I'd rather play Colonization or Civ1 over CtP, that's how bad the gameplay was, or at least what it couldn't measure up to.

Then perhaps what you ought to do is continue playing those games and not tax your blood pressure over a game that you do not wish to play....

meriadoc:
Excellent point and analogy.

Big Dave · July 26, 2000, 18:15

Darth,
Have you read what's been done to nukes? MAD is now possible and nukes will have been changed, tho we're not sure exactly how. That was based on feedback from this forum. Numerous other changes have been made, again based on feedback from this and the CTP2 Suggestions forum.

If you are expecting the same Civ game you know and love, forget it, this is CTP and it's different. I personally love the unconventional warfare units and the way trade has been abstracted, just to name 2 of the improvements. The development team from Activision is listening to what we say in here. That means that the players are helping to design this game!!!!

You know how I feel about Activision doing us all wrong with CTP so I won't re-iterate that here, but I've got some hope for CTP2. I will of course try it before I buy, and I recommend that you do the same.

Yes, screenshots can be little more than eye candy. On the other hand some information has been gleaned from them. One of the things we've seen in screen shots are many more diplomatic options. Others are national borders and a city "radius" that grows as your city does. What are your comments on those?
Respectfully,

Big Dave

meriadoc · July 26, 2000, 23:55

Nordicus: Thank you.

------------------
The Electronic Hobbit

DarthVeda · July 27, 2000, 16:23

I just don't want nonsensical units (ie unit with a TV head).

July 27, 2000, 16:41

darth, it has become apparent that there is nothing that will change your views for ctp1, ctp2 or ctp3

so, do your and us a favor: leave this pathetic group of people(us) who happen to love/ like/ have hopes for ctp2 in our peace

btw, I fail to see how ctp was "hyped" on apolyton. we(apolyton) posted our impressions and our thoughts as they were. we posted in the news about the good and the bad reviews. people posted on the forums all kinds of opinions, etc etc etc.....

Big Dave · July 27, 2000, 19:41

quote:

Originally posted by DarthVeda on 07-27-2000 04:23 PM
I just don't want nonsensical units (ie unit with a TV head).

Then how would you make a distinctive unit that's supposed to be a Televangelist?

One minutes you're saying that graphics don't make the game (the implied statement here is they can't break it, either) and the next you're griping about an icon.

Do you care?
You haven't even responded to one of the previous comments I made.

Is there a possibility you'll even play CTP2 once? Or are you just (as I once rudely suggested in another thread) another AH?

------------------
Big Dave

A bad pun is its own reword.

DarthVeda · July 27, 2000, 23:19

I'll play CTP2 If somebody sends me a free copy. (Or if they ask me to playtest or something)

DarthVeda · July 29, 2000, 13:01

It's the quality of the graphics that impress me, not the thought behind them. TV-Man may look nice, but is a very stupid looking unit.

July 29, 2000, 13:46

quote:

Originally posted by DarthVeda on 07-29-2000 01:01 PM
TV-Man may look nice, but is a very stupid looking unit.

huh???????
it looks nice or it looks stupid???

The Kaiser · July 29, 2000, 18:56

I agree the TV man does look a bit stupid, but it's all about instant recon as your eyes scan the map.

As for the other units, I personally think that they didn't look aggressive enough.

And referring back to a thread which I started (but Activision never answered!), I think there wasn't enough city icon styles which would have added variety to the map.

Depp · July 29, 2000, 19:24

I want them to go back to the Civ 1 look, i much more felt like you were running an empire and moving armies then, not moving dolls around. But that will never happen though....

Diodorus Sicilus · July 31, 2000, 22:21

Back to Civ I !!??! Are you out of your cotton-pickng, ever-loving, blue-eyed mind?? The whole point of the Civ system continuous re-release of new games is to PROGRESS, not REGRESS.
Now, having finished screaming, I'll admit that the graphics in CtP, like too much of the rest of the game, were a question of "two steps forward, one step back"... BUT I maintain that the maps were not the main problem.
Frankly, the CtPII screenshots look fne from a map standpoint. What I ask of a game map is that it be functional - I've got to be able to distinquish all the types of terrain that affect play, and that it not hurt my eyes - keep the colors and forms as natural as possible while maintaining functionality. The CtPII shots seem to show these features, and while neatsy-keen maps with runing water and jumping fish and eruptng volcanoes, 16 different kinds of swamp and 13 varieties of beach might be nice, they ain't in no way required for a Civ-type game.
The graphics I worry about are the units, where CtP was, except for the animaion, largely a step backwards from Civ II.
Fur Gawd's sakes you Firaxial tyes, don't give us any more combat troops in white, red, black, or orange jumpsuits!!! Don't give me any more body types taken from the Steroid-sucking freaks at the local gym.
And as a bonus, please, please, please use some of the myriad actual historical troop types that are available in graphic form: from where I sit I can reach over 200 books with color or black/white illustrations of troopees from the Bronze Age to Yesterday. Osprey publishing in the UK alone has over 150 books full of military troop graphics in print right now. You got no excuse not to have exemplary unit icons: Don't Blow It!
...And while I'm on the subject. The animations of the units could use some tweaking, too. Pikemen and Knights stab their opponents with lances and pikes, they don't stand there and whack at them with a sword or halbard. The Trireme rammed to sink its opponent as its primary weapon, and why can't some game sometime actually show a mounted cavalryman charging instead of walking his horse up to the infantry like he was a traffic control mounted cop trying to shove them out of the way...
Enough ranting. The maps look fine from the screenshots, concentrate on the units now.

Osco · July 31, 2000, 23:25

The only reason this Darthveda kid is saying these things about CTP is because he is frustrated and unable to work out how to play the game....... he is probably 12 years old and wonders why it does not work like C&C
My advice to you Darthveda is to wait until you get a bit older or try reading some books you may develop a brain.

DarthVeda · August 1, 2000, 04:02

O/T: I never managed to finish a game of CtP because I never felt compelled to. The game had no "just-one-more-turn" appeal like civ2 does. I managed to adjust to the (awful) interface so I could at least play the game.

My advice to you Osco, is to actually talk on-topic and act like you have intelligence to begin with, bendejo.

Back:

Let me clarify my position on the televangelist. The unit was well drawn (ie didn't look like scribble), but poorly conceived. There isn't a man in the world with a TV for a head. There are certainly better ways to draw a televangelist.

Diodorus Sicilus · August 2, 2000, 08:19

Not only does no man in the world have a television for a head, but also no army in the world consistsd of a maximum of 9 men. ALL the units in CtP (or Civ II, or SMAX, or just about any other Strategy game) are CARTOONS. The whole debate so far is about which cartoons are believable and which are not, in the context of the game. From that standpoint, the Televangelist is no worse than the "future" units like War Walker or the totally @%#$@*up "historical" units like the Paratroop, Marine, Machinegunner, or Mounted Archer - my own candidates for "unit icons I could most do without"...
Meanwhile, since the whole debate is about individual perceptions, it's a dead-end. Drop it and move on to something constructive, like how to improve the map or unit graphics in ways that will appeal to more gamers, make more money for Firaxis, and move them to bring out more Civ games!

The Kaiser · August 2, 2000, 11:55

How would improving CTP make more money for Firaxis?

However negative I think some of Darth's views are, I have to say I'm with him on the Televangelist.

And while were on it, why does the Cleric look like the Slaver with a dress on?

Also shouldn't Corporate Branch be available much later in the game, as he obviously has a futuristic anti-gravity desk?

DarthVeda · August 3, 2000, 00:06

Well you'll get to ask these questions all over again as it seems Activision is forgoing the art department this time and using recycled graphics...

Nemo · August 3, 2000, 04:16

the graphics by activision seem to be, overall, better than most gaming companies of the same game genre. but i fully agree that they recycle their graphics...way too much. lets see...warwalker, can u say a miniature mechwarrior? and the wonders movies were all dupes too! like the edison lab one where the electric went through the wire... that was used in at least 3 wonders movies. and the space shoot in one of the wonder's clip was in at least 2 wonders movies. i like NEW material in a NEW game, not the same crap over and over again.

i dont pay $40+ to see something i already have sitting on the back shelf collecting dust (afterall, i bought ctp practically at opening on the release date...and it lasted 18 days on my pc - 6 for each patch + 6 for the boxed - it has collected ALOT of dust since on my shelf...good thing i dont make the same mistakes twice, though =).

so, i fully agree with darthvada et al. that the graphics are, but should not be, recycled ... regardless of how good they were.

when i bought civ II, it felt AND LOOKED like a new game compared to civ I. something that was worth my money, and played like a new game, not like a patch. grrrr, i get tense just thinking about this new $40 patch ...k, i am going to lurk back at the civ 3 forum now...u know that game thats coming out with NEW GRAPHICS and that is not going to be fixing any problems with civ II...hey, did civ II even have a patch? hmmm, if it did i sure didnt need it to play the game...now ctp i KNOW had patches, cause i couldn't play without them (or even with them for that matter)

August 3, 2000, 15:48

and once more i wonder when the hell did graphics became the most important factor in civ games...

The Kaiser · August 3, 2000, 18:55

I believe the point is that if there is little visual change evident in the screen shots provided, it implys that the game as a whole is nothing more than a glorified patch. And however many "New" features might have been added, a lot of CTP1's bad features will be carried over into CTP2.

Yes we know fancy graphics are used many times to hide terrible gameplay, but were talking about Intelligent use of graphics. CTP1 doesn't use graphics intelligently, if it did you wouldn't get only a few ancient city icons, guys with television heads, amazing anti-gravity desks and numerous graphical repetitions.

If the graphics are unintelligent, how can we expect the game design to be any different!

DarthVeda · August 3, 2000, 19:48

Kaiser: Totally. I couldn't agree more or say it better.

Dave: Well it's a call to power "first". It sounds interesting but if it is the sole perk of the game, count me out because it's really "Game Over" with M.A.D.

Why do you think they call it M.A.D. anyway? You use the feature and you are toast. I wouldn't go and build the your impression of the game around a game-ending feature.

Cheap shot of the day: This just in! Activision announces that an add-on for "Call-to-Power", "Call-to-Power II: The Game", will be in stores this fall.

[This message has been edited by DarthVeda (edited August 03, 2000).]

Milkman · August 3, 2000, 19:55

Personal opinion here but graphics only look good the first time u see it. Unit animation cool for a few minutes, then seen it, ok big deal, they get turned off. Animated trade goods, looks great, ok turned off. Wonder movies, same as above. After playing the game a few times its just more clutter on the map for me.