Instant Poll over at Gamespot.com

[Ralf]

Click on THIS LINK and vote for Civilization III, in a poll at Gamespot.com, that ask "Which of these third installments are you most excited about?".

[tniem]

We need your help! Civ III is currently losing to both WarCraft III (to be expected) and Doom 3 (talk about overkill).

Cast your vote now!

[TechWins]

I casted my vote. Now here's the current results.

Which of these third installments are you most excited about?

Civilization III 919 (13%)
Doom III 1770 (26%)
The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind 581 (8%)
Master of Orion III 564 (8%)
Myth III 264 (4%)
Thief III 557 (8%)
Warcraft III 2250 (33%)

We can't let this be happening, cast your vote now!

[Alex 14]

Doom 3, what the hell is that?

[Ralf]

Many of those who voted for Warcraft III and Doom III would never play a game like Civ-III anyway. The important thing is that Civilization III have almost twice as many votes as Master of Orion III. And regardless of what one think about SciFi-style MOO III: that game is definitely not destined to be another CTP-II flopp. So by comparison, the gamespot-visitors foretell Civ III:s upcoming future in a rather promishing light, I think.

Lets see if we can actually double, or go beyond compared with MOO-III.

[TechWins]

Doom 3, what the hell is that?

Doom is like a first person shoot 'em up game. Something like a Quake. I'm not real sure how to explain but that sums up the game pretty much. The Doom series has been around for quite awhile now, it's also has games for game consels not just pc.

[yin26]

I'll vote after I see the official civ3.com site. At this point, MOO3 has my interest.

[Solver]

Yin, stop it . I cast my vote there, but we know you'll like Civ 3. And civ3.com is good.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by yin26
I'll vote after I see the official civ3.com site. At this point, MOO3 has my interest.

Well, thats a free choice, of course. Personally, I have two big problems with SciFi-style edbc-games (edbc= explore, discover, build & conquer), like the MOO-series and SMAC.

1: I cant help feeling distant and unattached when dealing with made-up base/planet-improvements, and rather one-dimensional sci-fi tech-advances. They are often hard to relate to and they feel dry & technical. All the improvements, wonders and techs in a Civ-game (that ends 2020), on the other hand makes sense to both my brain-halves.

Also, Firaxis move to steer-away further from war/production/hard tech-upgrades only, by incorporating concepts like culture (with "soft" techs; like "music theory" and "free artistry", and so on), and adding alternative here-on-earth/ easy-to-relate diplomatic and cultural victory-conditions, feels more inviting to me, then any abstract SciFi-fantasies SMAC and upcoming MOO-III has to offer.

2: Also, I cant help feeling a lack of time-flow in SciFi edbc-games. In a Civ-game old ideas (like the need for despotism & monarchy) gets replaced by more modern rule-platforms (but with risky government-overtrows - you must plan & counteract in advance). Also, comprehensible break-through techs (like monotheism, printing press & railroads) give the player a general feel of development and time-flow. Suddenly, the city-graphics changes with the discovery of "industrialism", and so on. I like that. In Civ-3 I believe, one must discover most ancient techs, before one is allowed to entering the medieval era - and all ancient techs and most medieval techs before one is allowed to enter the third era (and hopefully something happens to mark the occasion each time).

By comparison, SciFi-style edbc-games often feels remarkably "frozen-in-time". Like playing a space-empire scenario-game. Changing SMAC SE-values, in small steps one at the time, was easy and harmless (and therefore unchallenging). Also, one dont get any mental images then building & discovering bloodless & abstract Sci-Fi improvements and techs.
For example: in what way feels "temporal mechanics" (build 14) more advanced, and more of an accomplishment then "industrial economics" (build 2)? Im not ranting particulary at SMAC here - its an general problem with all Sci-Fi stategy building-games, including the upcoming MOO III game.

[Sabre2th]

I'm afraid I'm with ralf on this one.

[korn469]

no matter if i'm in space or the stone age a civ game is all numbers to me, be it the Michalangelo's Cathedral or the Virtual Word, be it Shakespeare's Theatre or a punishment sphere, be it an paratrooper or fusion drop infrantry, the effects on the game are practically the same

the game i'm probably looking forward to most is civ3, but if warcraft3 is any good then that might be my favorite game for a while

civ3's biggest strength lies not in its historical accuracy (which is dubious at best) or in any one of its subsystems but i think it lies in the fact that no matter how many games i play i can quickly overcome being burt out on the game...i stoped playing all civ games for about six months (even when i was posting here) but i have went back and recently played a few games of civ and tons of SMAC

it has been a year since i have played starcraft more than once...and while i was playing diablo2 alot i think it almost gave me carple-tunnel...plus i had the misfortune of letting my most advanced hardcore paladin (he was a sacradin) die with my two great rings, and none of the characters have felt the same since then (btw i play d2 on HC only)

[Footie Mad]

Originally posted by korn469
while i was playing diablo2 alot i think it almost gave me carple-tunnel...plus i had the misfortune of letting my most advanced hardcore paladin (he was a sacradin) die with my two great rings, and none of the characters have felt the same since then (btw i play d2 on HC only)

D2 hardcore is bad for your health! I know of people who have broken their chair/wardrobe/d2 CDs/monitor etc when their HC character died, well I guess if you cant tell the difference between from game and reality you can blame nobody but yourself......

[korn469]

D2 hardcore is bad for your health! I know of people who have broken their chair/wardrobe/d2 CDs/monitor etc when their HC character died, well I guess if you cant tell the difference between from game and reality you can blame nobody but yourself......

the first time i lost a hardcore character (i was level 25 i think and got killed because my internet like to disconnect, and this isn't good when you have a LE monster close by) i was so mad that i hit myself in the head so hard that i almost gave myself a concussion...but after that i calmed down...hardcore is the only way to play D2...death really means something, you actually watch out for pks, and in general the adrenaline level is ten times better than what it is in D2...plus you look at the top of ladder, and instead of being a foregone conclusion, you pray that they will all die

[java4me]

Here are the latest results:

Civilization 3- 1171 (14%)
Doom 3- 2121 (25%)
The Elder Scrolls 3- 702 (8%)
MOO 3- 717 (8%)
Myth 3- 320 (4%)
Thief 3- 677 (8%)
Warcraft 3-2770 (33%)

So right now Warcraft 3 has a third of the votes!

We need all the support we can get!!!!

[Colon™]

I wonder how much longer before they'll be able to make such a poll with IV and V games.

[java4me]

Originally posted by Colon
I wonder how much longer before they'll be able to make such a poll with IV and V games.

Maybe when they make a Civilization 4!!!

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Colon
I wonder how much longer before they'll be able to make such a poll with IV and V games.

If Civ III becomes a 3+ million seller, then I think/hope we can look forward to a Civilization IV update "rather quickly" (with Civ-update measures, that is). Maybe late 2004. An ignorant guess, of course - what do I know.

Most game-developers seems to loose inspiration after the second or third installment, and they want to move on. But of course; theres always exception from the rule: "Settler V (release-date 2003), anyone"?

The way I heard it the team behind miss Croft killed her off in the IV version, only to be forced to draw back the time-line in order to release version V. Money is persuasive, I guess.
And now with the succesfull movie, new game-consols, and all. I suspect they must dig deeper in her past to find stuff for new Tomb Raider games.

[Colon™]

Got Lara killed in Tomraider IV? That's not smart indeed, they should at least provided themselves with a decent way out. (a doughter for instance) Alien IV ought to have taught them that.

Maybe there won't be such a IV poll anyway, since it appears that they don't like to admit they've made yet another sequel and exclude the numbers. "Civilisation: The Next Generation" anyone?

[Ralf]

A "bump" for you late-comers. Vote!

[Ralf]

OK, this is my second and final "bump".

I just thought you should know Civ III is gaining "marketshares" in this poll. First 13%, then 14% and now 16%. Nice.

Civilization III 2232 (16%)
Doom III 3255 (23%)
The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind 1093 (8%)
Master of Orion III 1242 (9%)
Myth III 489 (3%)
Thief III 1171 (8%)
Warcraft III 4875 (34%)

[Sabre2th]

What I don't get is why Doom is beating civ

[Solver]

Because there are more action lovers than strategy lovers.

[Sabre2th]

You may be right, but Warcraft is beating the pants off both of them and that's a strategy game (RTS, but still)

Also - I think civ has much more of a following. The people who buy civ will mostly be followers of the series, while the action people may just buy whatever is out there.

Just my two cents.

[Sabre2th]

My reason for saying the above: Action games tend to have the same theme (of course). The main difference between each successive game is new levels and monsters or whatever.

Strategy games can encompass much more and have many more options.

Just another 2% of my $1.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Sabre2th
What I don't get is why Doom is beating civ

Doom is winning because even though the best-seller charts are completely stacked with strategy games, young kids who play FPS are a very vocal minority of internet gamers even though $-talks a lot louder then internet communities.

That's another reason why Firaxis is playing it conservative. The money will be there even if they release Civ2 with new graphics, yet if they try and be really innovative, as the CtP series attempted they can fall flat and lose all of it.

[korn469]

here are the current results

however this is an unscientific gamespot poll so it really means nothing

Civilization III 2407 (16%)
Doom III 3514 (23%)
The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind 1182 (8%)
Master of Orion III 1338 (9%)
Myth III 516 (3%)
Thief III 1288 (8%)
Warcraft III 5271 (34%)

what that means is if you add both of the TBS games together, Civ3 and MoO3 then they still don't compete with WC3...and it's not like they are some unheard of titles...many people in the games industry consistantly list civ, civ2, and moo2 high on their best games list

however what it comes down to is that blizzard has built such a solid reputation that millions of gamers trust blizzard to produce the finely polished, perfectly balanced, fiendishly addictive games...blizzards past six games have all sold a million copies or more, and diablo 2: lord of destruction hit the million mark faster than any computer game expansion ever

if you add up all of the sales by SMAC (about 250k), SMACx (not sure), CtP (again about 250k), and CtP2 (about 40k) you don't hit the million copies sold mark...most likely you could add in Civ:ToT and still not have sold one million copies

Doom is winning because even though the best-seller charts are completely stacked with strategy games, young kids who play FPS are a very vocal minority of internet gamers even though $-talks a lot louder then internet communities.

when you say young kids what age group are you talking about? i would actually think the pc FPS are probaly most dominant in the 15-24 y.o age bracket...any younger than that and they will be playing a console

i think that there has to be a reason for the recent downturn in civ types games and in my opinion it can only be one of three things

*The RTS has finally surpassed the TBS in nearly every category and the TBS game is a dinosaur on the verge of extinction.

*The TBS market has experianced a downturn and it will return to its former glory with the release of Civ3.

*The TBS markey has been flooded with subpar games that either deal with subject matter the majority of gamers are not interested in, or they are bug ridded and highly unbalanced, or they have lacked any significant innovation and gamers are waiting until a truly innovative game come out.

can anyone else explain how the current generation of civ like games when all of their sales were added together didn't hit the million copies sold mark? it has to be one of those three explanations (or a combination of the three)

so every year RTS games get better, they improve on their interface, they improve upon telling a story (thereby adding to the feel that you are in the game), they get better graphics, better sound, they constantly revise their gameplay, and each game further develops multiplayer...then for some reason TBS games fall out of favor...then instead there are two major problem in the TBS game world, there are few competitors and many also think that gameplay alone sells

first class RTS games have gameplay and they also have extras, lots of well done cinematics, good graphics, good support...i actually wish that CtP and CtP2 had of did better than what they did...instead with CtP2 almost complete market failure firaxis could write off doing a radical sequal completely and feel very safe in doing a conservative sequal...i will have to give it to firaxis on one thing, they have a fanatical fanbase and they have some of the best gaming minds in the entire industry over there...while they haven't changed civ that much many of the changes sound like excellent evolutions in the civ formula...however if civ4 comes out four or five years from now with very few changes to its formula then the whole subgenre will be in serious trouble...the RTS market has three major players in it right now, Blizzard (the biggest and best), Ensemble (bruce shelly helped work on civ2 you know), and Westwood (they have some cinematics crammed into their games then just about any other company)...then there are a number of players that although they don't ever sell millions of games they introduce an idea that one of the majors picks up on and therefore the entire RTS genre gets stronger

the same thing has happened in the FPS genre too...there is so much competition that the consumer really does benefit from alot of innovation that is quickly adopted by everyone...competition has been really good for those two genres...i almost think that the success of civ has hurt it in a way...for one there aren't many competitors, and those competitors generally pose little threat to overtaking the civ forumla...so there isn't as much innovation as what there would be in a very competitive genre...

The money will be there even if they release Civ2 with new graphics

SerapisIV you are completely wrong about this...civ:tot improved civ2's graphics and added in a couple new features and a scenario tool...it didn't do that well at all, as far as i know...i don't think it hit #1 on the sales charts nor do i think it even came close to breaking the million copies sold mark...so basically diehard civers would buy it, but the mainstream won't

TBS games must keep up to date...a TBS game should put just as much emphasis on graphics as what RTS games do...they should continually look for ways to streamline the interface (this alone can kill a game) and make it easier for players to concentrate on strategy rather than micromanaging every little nonimportant aspect of the game...they need to keep on adding innovations and listening to what players want, and finally they need to have the best gameplay out of any game...The Sims has been the best selling game of the past year because it draws people in, TBS games need to draw people in like that

[Adm.Naismith]

Very well said Korn469!

Once again, I read some PC magazine and I underline (sadly) that none really care of Civ III release.
Why? Because they looked at E3 preview and write about "mostly same game, age old gaphics and no appeal".

The best they do is to mention Sid as a "rich designer not interested in squeezing enough good gameplay into a money sequel.
Disclaimer: they aren't the exact words, and I'm afraid I can't give you a link to this: they usually are on paper and I red them but don't bought all that magazines. So I can understand you if you don't believe into my quotes, just I must assure you I'm not a liar.

I was in great hope that SMAC would be my loved game after CivII, but it miss it somewhat. I had great hopes that CTPII succed as a parallel game on Civ concept, but it failed (still I'm considering buying it on a low cost sale, then use the MOD around here to see if it's patched enough).

Civ III was announced as the game that will save the TBS genre. I still hope it, but my hopes are thin, at the moment

Darwin explained very well: evolve or starve and die (or merely survive in a bio niche). Are we at Apolyton into the largest TBS Reserve and Museum ever? Let's hope not, let's hope...