What are your beefs with Civ3?

[Asmodean]

In the last few weeks, a growing number of people have expressed concerns over Civ3. Some people have even said, that they expect the game to suck (Kaak) - others merely that they don't expect the game to live up to standards (Yin26).

I don't understand that. All the people that have said these things are to one degree or another devout Civ fanatics.

So: I would like to know. What exactly is the reason(s) why you don't expect much from Civ3.

Give your comments on this thread.

Asmodean

[Yog-Sothoth]

The one thing I was most dissapointed with was the 8 civ limit, but as this has been increased to 16 I have become much more possitive towards the game.

There is of course one thing that could ruin this game, and thats a crappy AI. I really hope they will be able to make an AI that is significantly better than in the previous games. Especially since MP will not be out in some time.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Asmodean
In the last few weeks, a growing number of people have expressed concerns over Civ3. Some people have even said, that they expect the game to suck (Kaak) - others merely that they don't expect the game to live up to standards (Yin26).

I don't understand that. All the people that have said these things are to one degree or another devout Civ fanatics.

So: I would like to know. What exactly is the reason(s) why you don't expect much from Civ3.

Give your comments on this thread.

Asmodean

Thanks for this thread Asmodean. Personally, I just think their are some people who are not happy unless they have something to complain about. And many people are behaving very childish and expecting Firaxis to implement every single thing THEY want to see.

Two things for gripers to keep in mind:

1. As with any sequel that has expectations, it is IMPOSSIBLE to put in everything every fan wants. Firaxis has been AMAZING when it comes to responding to the fans, and I think we are going to get the best product they can come up with. If you want an example of a crappy sequel where fan input was ignored, all I need say is Origin's Ultima IX. Blech.

2. The game is not released, we don't know anything really about the AI or mechanics or how it plays, etc. So why make assumptions and look like a jerk? When you assume, you make an *ss of u and me...

So guys...relax, let your love for Civ be your guide and have a little faith that Sid Meier, the greatest name in computer gaming, is coming out with another superstar game.

Cheers.

[Yog-Sothoth]

Of course not all of the more or less usefull stuff we propose can be implemented in the game, but if just a small percentage of it does it will be worth it.





Because Firaxis actually listen to their fans it's better with an active community asking for everything between heaven and earth, than one just accepting whatever comes their way. This way some of what we want actually gets implemented in the game.



And I have faith in Sid, and I'm sure a lot of other have to. IMO that's one of the reasons people ask for their favorite thing to get implemented.



Firaxis gets a
from me for actually listening to their fans

[jdd2007]

i think that I will like civ3. it wont be perfect for anyone, but it will be a great game

[Solver]

I believe this to be the best game of all time. And it will no doubt be better than Age of Mythology, though I await AoM as well.

Go Civ 3! October 30th seems like an eternity.

[Earthling7]

No game is perfect, that's why we need a sequel to Civilization. But Looking at the series, from Civ to CivII to SMAC, we can only imagine what great new features will be implemented this time.

I have 99% faith in Firaxis!

[SSBLoveU]

I am looking at the movie High Sierra, and a criminal is forcing a tough battle in the mountains. I was wondering if CivIII is going to account for rock formations and caves. One person could hold off a small army in the ranges. I remember the Lone Ranger, mountains can be very dangerous.

[dainbramaged13]

Originally posted by SSBLoveU
I am looking at the movie High Sierra, and a criminal is forcing a tough battle in the mountains. I was wondering if CivIII is going to account for rock formations and caves. One person could hold off a small army in the ranges. I remember the Lone Ranger, mountains can be very dangerous.

anyone heard of tanya? how about volkov?


(redalert)

[Inverse Icarus]

Yuri Prime (from Yuri's Revenge, an addon to Red Alert 2), which can take over 5 enemy tanks/buildins/infantry at once.

[Kc7mxo]

The primary thing I'm concerned with is the unique unit and unique traits of various civs.

Firstly I think this is a rather rascist. firaxis is forcing themselves to choose traits for various cultures, many of which don't exist anymore, but some which do.

Secondly I'm worried that these tratis and unique units will make the game more predictable, with different nations acting the same way they did before time and time again.

I want civs to be defined by where they live and what they've done IN THE GAME, not in the real world. This is about remaking history, not reliving it.

[squid]

Let me say this. I believe Firaxis is the best computing gaming shop out there. They produce excellent quality games and do not screw up.

Civilization II's AI was impecable for the time when it was released (Computer Science aside it is much easier to create a RTS AI since that is just path finding and build order).

I have nothing to complain about yet. The no-invading with roads actually does make sense now, considering the supressive fire aspect of invasion. I'm really looking forward to the peaceful (cultural) elements for controlling borders.

I'm a little worried about the cartoony world leader screens, but that won't be too bad. I might even like it once I see them animated.

I am looking forward to this game more than any other I've ever looked forward to!

[squid]

Mainly because I can't play Civ2 on my "upgraded" computer.

I think if an OS doesn't run Civ2, it's a downgrade!!!

[DonJoel]

I agree with you kc7mxo. Having different civilization possibilities is just plain stupid since the game is about redoing history not REplay history. Im glad that you can turn it off, thanks firaxis.
But i guess the game will be great anyway...

[Asmodean]

I would still like to hear from those who really worry about the gameplay in civ3. Come on guys. I know you're out there. I've read your posts.

Asmodean

[ColdWizard]

possible lack of multiplayer

[Christantine The Great]

Firstly I think this is a rather rascist. firaxis is forcing themselves to choose traits for various cultures, many of which don't exist anymore, but some which do.

Uh, actually it was the natural evolution of the point system from SMAC. And it is not racist. Ask any historian about the Romans and they will tell you they were militaristic. Anyone on the street can see that. What is racist is saying "The Romans are militaristic because all they did was rape and destroy all the things the Greeks and other cultures did"

If you plan to just turn off this feature as soon as you start your first game then you are insulting Firaxis by saying "This feature seems stupid so I won't give it a chance."

redoing history not REplay history

Then why even choose a civilization to start off as? Then why even spend time to make a leader animation of a civ? Then why not name each civ Generic Communion of People Number 1, Generic Communion of People Number 2, etc.? You are redoing history by replaying the civs that made history.

[Sarxis]

I guess since I haven't seen the game yet, I don't have any legitimate problems with it.

I have none, and mostly because I trust the Firaxis team to do a kick a$$ job.

[Christantine The Great]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
I guess since I haven't seen the game yet, I don't have any legitimate problems with it.

Funny, I was going to say the same thing but it slipped my mind. Right on!

[FuFu15]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


1. As with any sequel that has expectations, it is IMPOSSIBLE to put in everything every fan wants. Firaxis has been AMAZING when it comes to responding to the fans, and I think we are going to get the best product they can come up with. If you want an example of a crappy sequel where fan input was ignored, all I need say is Origin's Ultima IX. Blech.

has been amazing?

THE GAME DOESNT HAVE MULTIPLAYER

[ixnay]

I don't have any problems with the game - the more I see, the more I want it.

[KrazyHorse]

Is MSU in Helena, Kyller? They were trying to recruit me last year. How do you find the school? What are you in, etc.?

[ixnay]

MSU is in Bozeman, which is south of Helena. I'm a freshman in mechanical engineering - MSU has an excellent engineering school. I believe they are the second largest supplier of engineers for Boeing in the country. The country around here is really nice (when it isn't obscured by smoke), with mountains and skiing real close by. I've been here for about a month, and I definitely like it.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Kyller
I believe they are the second largest supplier of engineers for Boeing in the country...

You make it sound like Boeing goes through engineers pretty quick. What do they do with them? Test pilots? lol

Just kidding man.

[Bleyn]

Originally posted by FuFu15


has been amazing?

THE GAME DOESNT HAVE MULTIPLAYER

*Sigh* *Yawn*

Yes. We know. We've all heard about that issue. Frankly, I'm getting sick of it.

I know I am not alone in saying I personally don't care that Civ3 may be coming out SP-only first, with MP delayed for some months. Thats not how I plan on playing the game anyway.

In fact, if I think about the delay in MP at all, what comes to my mind is that when they do say something about it at all they are saying they want the MP element to be the best they can possibly make it. To me, their choice to delay MP shows me two things:

1. They have some ideas about how to make MP in Civ3 better than in CivNet, Civ2MPG, or SMAC. If they didn't have at least one idea along those lines, they probably could have easily slapped in the MP code from SMAC, banged on it until it worked and called it good. That is apparently not what they are doing. And you know, if they did that just because MP "has to be there from the start" the same people that are whining about it not being there now, would be whining about how its no different than previous games.

2. A lot of the people complaining about MP seem to forget that it takes a LOT more effort to make a great SP game than it does to make MP work. Their choice to delay MP shows that not only do they want MP to be the best it can be, they want the SP to be really good as well. There are trade-offs that have to occur in the development of a computer game and as things go, I don't think this is all that bad of one.

As for the subject of the thread, my only complaint is it isn't Oct. 30th yet, and we don't all have our grubby little hands on it.

[yin26]

All I'm going to say on this topic anymore is that it seems like an awfully good idea to WAIT to buy this game until it is actually completed and patched a few times. Perhaps at that point it will be an outstanding game.

[Gandalf The Grey]

1. No multiplayer...this is a big mistake...but after trudging through 6-8 turns of MPGE it doesn't seem that bad....I would like to have seem some nice innovation with the MP system but i guess they will try and pump some more money from us with the "Super big expansion" that will consist of the MP aspect and a few lame scenerios that will not even come close to the ones that will be on Apolyton.

2. Too many irrelevant UUs. 1/1/2 for the aztec UU? I dunno about the rest of you but it isn't long before i get bronze working i normally only make 1 warrior in civ2 and thats to scout with...some of the units look like they will be good but for the most part many seem a little to weak.

3. No use of enemy roads? WTF is this? No use of railroads is understandable but not just plain roads, theres is no historical support for this.

4. No new government forms infact they took out fundementalism...this is my biggest disapointment...I would like to have seen a few new ones like in CTP.

5. No hp/fp for units anymore? What the hell is that? I better not see my battle ship lose to a phalanx in this game as happens in civ 1 far to often.

6. I like the new diplomatic model but is there a way to restructure existing treaties? I hope so. It would be a shame if you could'nt alter a deal without breaking the treaty and getting bad PR...

[Asmodean]

Originally posted by yin26
All I'm going to say on this topic anymore is that it seems like an awfully good idea to WAIT to buy this game until it is actually completed and patched a few times. Perhaps at that point it will be an outstanding game.

But, Yin, why does that seem like a goog idea. Are you that inconfident in Firaxis abilities to do a great game. Or do you think that Infogrames are going to F*ck everything up. Or is it the old MP thing?? Please explain!!

Asmodean

[yin26]

There are a number of indications that Civ3 is being held to a pre-Christmas deadline. The lack of a wider beta effort...apparant lack of MP out of the box...only 16 civs through using the editor...etc., seem to indicate that Firaxis is having to 'focus' the game to meet the shipping deadline.'

So what I think will happen is the game will ship with various bugs, most of which not too serious but a few that are. We'll have to wait for MP. The AI will need some major tweaking, etc.

In the end, all of that will be fixed, I'm sure. Perhaps by May of next year. Thus, I think it's a good idea to wait IF you don't want to handle those issues. But if you are a patient kind of person and don't mind being an unpaid beta tester (and a lot of people will be happy to help Firaxis patch the game, so this is not such a problem), then by all means buy the game.

I'm just saying I'd rather buy it once it is more polished and complete a few months from now.

[Usually Insane]

well...

Originally posted by Gandalf The Grey

2. Too many irrelevant UUs. 1/1/2 for the aztec UU? I dunno about the rest of you but it isn't long before i get bronze working i normally only make 1 warrior in civ2 and thats to scout with...some of the units look like they will be good but for the most part many seem a little to weak.

agree with you on that one, some of those seem a bit pointless.

3. No use of enemy roads? WTF is this? No use of railroads is understandable but not just plain roads, theres is no historical support for this.

My idea would that roads and railroads gives a 1/2 as opposed to 1/3 an idefinateble move rates, except im mountanious regions where the won't confer any bonus at all (except maybe to nonhostile units (explorer)