Why Are There Less Civs??

Seeker · August 10, 2001, 14:36

It seems the number of Civs has shrunk from Civ 2...I was expecting kinda the opposite...especially losing my beloved Mongolian hordes...

I WILL pay for an expansion pack with Genghis, Tokugawa, and company though!!! (animated advisors or just a download on the site paid by credit card) Pretty pretty please??

Sabre2th · August 10, 2001, 15:05

There are less now because of the unique civs and units. It would have been quite a bit more work (and longer wait for us) if they did 21 unique civs.

Juggernaut · August 10, 2001, 15:07

Due to storage limit, what would you prefer, 21 civs with none-changing leaders through time, or 16 with pictures of each leader in each time era?

I think this is more fun and better.

Footie Mad · August 10, 2001, 15:09

A way of seeing it is that in the previous civ games we only had one civ while we now get 16.

Sabre2th · August 10, 2001, 15:12

Uncle Funk: I think you're forgetting about the unique units, city art, and civ abilities. When all of this is taken into account, it takes a bit more than just a couple of crusty, old leader animations

Juggernaut · August 10, 2001, 15:23

I intended that too. In one sentence: Quality instead of quantity.

Brent · August 10, 2001, 15:27

I hope there is an expansion (on CD, sold in real stores) which doubles the number of civs. We need Vikings, Mayans, Mound Builders, Incas, Anasazi, Olmecs, Hawaiians, Arabs, Hebrews, Inuit, Atlanteans, Hmong, Australian Aborigines, Maori, Mongols, and Spanish.

Juggernaut · August 10, 2001, 15:37

Yeah, hopefully it will come soon after the launch. Making your own custom Viking civ with the leader portrait drawn in Paintbrush ain't really the same thing.

Hey, Eskimoes would make a hilarious civ. Just imagine their igloo-like city style.

Mercator · August 10, 2001, 15:42

That would be Inuit Uncle Funk!!

EDIT: Anyway, I do agree with the fact that quality is better than quantity... But 16 is really very little, I think.
It´s just another way of milking their civ fans by getting them to buy another $30 add-on.

Juggernaut · August 10, 2001, 16:02

Steve Clark · August 10, 2001, 16:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Wille
A way of seeing it is that in the previous civ games we only had one civ while we now get 16.

Perfectly said. In Civ2, all of the civs were the same...all stupid. While I doubt that each of those 16 civs are unique, I certainly will not be playing with that many at one time. I think I can find 7 civs that would require a different strategy/tactics to deal with.

kolpo · August 10, 2001, 17:34

We will have to destroy a civ to make a new one(like in SMAC) and this is a big design flaw.

And that whole quality over quantity actually means : graphics quality over gameplay!
(The "quality over quantity" nonsense is in fact an original way of the rp department to hide that they choosed graphics above gameplay)

Instead of more differnt civs/personalities to have as enemies get we some stupid leader animations and extra leader graphics that are fun the first week you play it but are useless afther that.

Please firaxis do NOT choose graphics quality above gameplay!

I would rather been able to play choose from 32 civs then some leader animations.

There is also another explanation for "quality over quantity" : "expansion pack over current game". If they don't include many civs at first can they get money from an expansion pack.

It looks like the rp departemnt of civ3 is better then we thought. So to all the firaxis personel that is posting on anominous names to let us believe that the majority of the posters are blind optimists: congratulations with your pr department !

Seeker · August 10, 2001, 17:45

Well hopefully the leader pictures can easily be replaced with common format pictures by the user (.gf, jpg, etc)

GENGHIS SHALL RETURN!!

(Civ I reference)

Juggernaut · August 10, 2001, 17:50

Quote:

We will have to destroy a civ to make a new one(like in SMAC) and this is a big design flaw.

So you have tested the new editor? Was it cool?

dainbramaged13 · August 10, 2001, 17:59

aw, come ON kolpo.

GIVE THEM A %@^# BREAK once i a while. at LEAST play the GAME before you start judging them on the gameplay and such issues, especially on such a fine point...

maybe you would rather have more civs to choose from, but then look at the other trove of people on the other side who are yelling at firaxis for not having good enough graphics. They have a lot to deal with, and so far i commend firaxis on their ability to balance the two groups.

Brent · August 10, 2001, 18:44

The reason I want more civ options is so I can play my own nationality or do a continent- specific game such as American. If I can change the names of my opponents that should work. I hope there's a way to tell your opponents' feelings without facial expressions. If the makers want super graphics so they can sell more copies, fine. But I personally place gameplay ahead of graphics. Let's stop biting the hand that feeds us, shall we?

SerapisIV · August 10, 2001, 18:50

Quote:

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
at LEAST play the GAME before you start judging them on the gameplay and such issues, especially on such a fine point...

That's something that should be said to a LOT of posters. Even with all the pictures and written info, we really don't know how the game will 'feel' to play. The game may just 'feel' right, then again it could fall flat, outright denying that it could still be a good game based on a few pictures and some general info a few MONTHS before the game release is pretty harsh. Give it time folks, give it time. If you're so worried about Civ sucking so badly, buy from a store that takes returns. THEN, after you've actually played the game, rant all you want about how much it sucks.

lord of the mark · August 10, 2001, 19:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark

Perfectly said. In Civ2, all of the civs were the same...all stupid. While I doubt that each of those 16 civs are unique, I certainly will not be playing with that many at one time. I think I can find 7 civs that would require a different strategy/tactics to deal with.

They were stupid because the AI was stupid - I fail to see how CSU's and special abilities make the AI smarter.

And as a matter of fact they were not all the same - not after the first turn that is

And certainly I didnt play the same way each time.

LOTM

lord of the mark · August 10, 2001, 19:32

Quote:

Originally posted by SerapisIV

That's something that should be said to a LOT of posters. Even with all the pictures and written info, we really don't know how the game will 'feel' to play. The game may just 'feel' right, then again it could fall flat, outright denying that it could still be a good game based on a few pictures and some general info a few MONTHS before the game release is pretty harsh. Give it time folks, give it time. If you're so worried about Civ sucking so badly, buy from a store that takes returns. THEN, after you've actually played the game, rant all you want about how much it sucks.

I think people criticize in advance in the hope that they can still have some impact on Firaxis. It may, of course, be too late.

LOTM

dainbramaged13 · August 10, 2001, 21:17

Quote:

Originally posted by lord of the mark

I think people criticize in advance in the hope that they can still have some impact on Firaxis. It may, of course, be too late.

LOTM

a couple months before release? of course its too late! theyre moviing from alpha into beta stage! at least in this case, its absurd, that reasoning.

kolpo · August 10, 2001, 21:22

Quote:

So you have tested the new editor? Was it cool?

the current setup screen in the screen shots has no place for more then 16 civs, it is of copurse possible that it is a dynamic cscreen that show extra buttons when extra civs are added(let's hope so)

Just found out that civ3.com was up the game looks actualy better then I thought so i'm also less pesimistic about this iseu and this isue can maybe also be fixed by making a manage leader data program(wouldn't be that hard to make so some fan will do it if needed i think(like in SMAC)

btw, even a few months before release can they still change some important isues,just look to colonization for example, they did dramatical changes near release in it and user input can help in that.

TechWins · August 10, 2001, 21:36

In an expansion I would like to see the Polynesians, Brazilians, Incans, Turkey (Ottoman Empire), Mongols, Spanish, Vikings, and some others that I haven't mentioned. This thread gives me a good idea for a thread and a poll but I'm not going to make them seperate.

DarkCloud · August 10, 2001, 22:16

Quote:

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
aw, come ON kolpo.

GIVE THEM A %@^# BREAK once i a while. at LEAST play the GAME before you start judging them on the gameplay and such issues, especially on such a fine point...

maybe you would rather have more civs to choose from, but then look at the other trove of people on the other side who are yelling at firaxis for not having good enough graphics. They have a lot to deal with, and so far i commend firaxis on their ability to balance the two groups.

If the editor is good enough, I will be able to stand just 16 civs, but I feel that Firaxis should not have snubbed the Mongols and Spanish and should have instead only included my Essential Civs, see the list in XoyXo's thread.

TCO · August 10, 2001, 22:20

They will come out in an expansion pack. Just after the MP expansion pack.

Imran Siddiqui · August 11, 2001, 00:14

IIRC, the SMAC faction editor was VERY good, and easy to use.

Urban Ranger · August 11, 2001, 00:36

They made less civs probably due to time constrains and some other design decisons. I don't think the number of units is a limitation (can easily be fixed) but the diplo screen can be hard to handle.

Irman,

Yup.

Brent · August 11, 2001, 01:51

Quote:

Originally posted by GP
They will come out in an expansion pack. Just after the MP expansion pack.

Is that official? Hey, I thought MP was in the original release!

JellyDonut · August 11, 2001, 03:10

I hate to sound like a pedant (Just kidding...I love it

) but shouldn't the title read FEWER CIVS?

Warm Beer · August 11, 2001, 03:35

Does having less civs really effect game play? Actually, let me restate that: Will having 16 unique civs affect game play when compared to 21 identical civs, differing only in attitude and asthetics?

I think the answer is yes. It will improve the game. So we have five less than before, but now each civ has a very unique attitude, advantages, disadvantages and strategy.

And, yes, I like the added animations and 'eye candy'... I thought when you come up with a sequal, you should improve all aspects of the game (this includes graphics and interface).

And we have no definitive answer RE: custom civs. No use having a heart attack over a speculative observation.

Alex 14 · August 14, 2001, 01:52

I like the idea of 16 Civs, it keeps the game simple. (In a way CTP2 didn't)