Does the failure of civ III show Brian reynolds is the true genius of civgame design? - Page 2

Raion · April 3, 2002, 04:11

I think the point is still missed about this game.

Civ III was made this way, because of the way people played Civ II for the most part, always talking about them conqueoring the other Civ's.

For the rest of us that played it differently, Civ III is not that much different, but still different enough to be genuine update to a Classic game.

Civ II was still different when it came out, Sid, I am guessing had to teach the computer to make roads and railroads, and other things were added to the game, and a lot of work was done.

I still think Civ III is better out of the box to begin with, and yes one may need a faster computer. But this is nothing new. I verily remember Civ I but still I have that and I think some people are still talking about Civ when it was out in MS-Dos.

Civ III is very different, but then it is different because of the way that people in the Past have played the game.

It is tougher, because of that, and because it seems to involve more animated figures that are needed for todays games.

I think the game is funnier now, although it wants to bite at you.

But as someone said, 'If I wanted an easy game after beating Civ II on Deity, then I play Civ II'.

So, it does not bother me to play on Cheiftain level if needed with Civ III, since with Civ II, I play a long time on Warlord before going up the ladder to different levels.

I still would not play Civ II on Deity, and I probably will not play Civ III on Deity.

I plan the play the game on a level that I enjoy and leave the competiveness to other people.

If multiplayer, who would be the people you would play with?

Ones that traded with you or interacted with you the way you want, or more like the computer plays in Civ III.

If you were winning, would they not try and stop you?

Have a Cigar, you'll go far!
Shine on you Crazy Diamond!
(Pink Floyd song)

Inverse Icarus · April 3, 2002, 13:21

i'll never forget one day playing CivII MGE on the zone, i forgot who it was, but they told me "only one can win", and broke an alliance and stormed all my cities in 1 turn.

Carver · April 3, 2002, 14:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Zylka
I will luv dar civ3 and mistar civ meiers for demands r met:

-Korruption must be included more and more tyo make it liek thine olden days once I heard a story thart all that happened was corruption and thaT was it they corrupted 4 miles back and froth to school in the freezing cold avery day

LMFAO...You can be rude and coarse but - holy sheep - you are the funniest guy in this forum. ...and thumbs up on the new picture.

Eyes_Of_Night · April 3, 2002, 18:58

"i'll never forget one day playing CivII MGE on the zone, i forgot who it was, but they told me "only one can win", and broke an alliance and stormed all my cities in 1 turn."

There's a very distinct possibility that that was me.

Inverse Icarus · April 3, 2002, 20:23

lol i believe it was

Alexander's Horse · April 3, 2002, 22:54

Don't feel bad - he cheats like there's no tomorrow - we caught him cold and got an admission on the civ II MP forum.

TCO · April 4, 2002, 02:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Ethelred

Civilization the first IS a classic. Sid did that.

Actually I think it was that AOE guy who did most of the Civ1 design...

TCO · April 4, 2002, 02:45

What exactly did Brian do to ruin the project, other than leave during crunch time?

TCO · April 4, 2002, 02:47

Eyes of Night is a well known cheater. Who whines like crazy when called on it...

notyoueither · April 4, 2002, 02:52

left during crunch time.

Battle is about to be joined. MacArthur says *nope, don't think so, I'd rather be a supreme court justice. I think I'll go to law school.*

Nope, Doug has nothing to do with the ensuing result. Not a bit. Nada.

Not that it was his moral responsibility to see it through. No one should be a slave in this day and age. However, his departure can be counted as having an effect on the final civ3 product.

Any other conclusion is absurd.

Alex · April 4, 2002, 08:12

Quote:

However, his departure can be counted as having an effect on the final civ3 product.

Sure. But I don't think that BR would have made a better game at all. The genre seems to be exhausted, and you can only go so far. On the other hand, his departure made Firaxis lose a lot of valuable development time, and as a result we don't have wonder movies, for example. I'll never forgive BR for that.

SpencerH · April 4, 2002, 11:13

Quote:

Originally posted by The Templar
For the record, Gettysburg sucked.

Thats your own record of course. I dont think it sucked. I found it to be an enjoyable RTS wargame. There was limited replay value, but I loved whoopin those damn yankees

.

SpencerH · April 4, 2002, 11:42

Forgot to mention, Sid is the "genius" here. Its the original work that counts not the follow-ups. We'll measure Brian Reynolds stature when his original game comes out.

Alexander's Horse · April 4, 2002, 19:47

HA! Sid can't even beat the banana option in the poll.

Skanky Burns · April 4, 2002, 20:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
HA! Sid can't even beat the banana option in the poll.

Its been a looong time since Civ 1.

notyoueither · April 4, 2002, 20:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
HA! Sid can't even beat the banana option in the poll.

He would if you held the poll on a Golf Course.

Eyes_Of_Night · April 4, 2002, 20:55

Editing the riot factor isn't cheating. It was built into the game to be changed by the user. Kind of like all the custom options in civ3. However in civ3 they're used to fix the game whereas in civ2 they're there to customize the game.

Alexander's Horse · April 5, 2002, 02:38

Quote:

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
Editing the riot factor isn't cheating.

It is if you don't tell your opponent about it - which you DIDN'T!

Harovan · April 5, 2002, 03:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
HA! Sid can't even beat the banana option in the poll.

At this point, Brian can't either. Banana is invincible.

Alex · April 5, 2002, 07:58

Banana is always invincible.

Brian is Sid's pupil, but he seems to have his own ideas. If those ideas will become the work of a genius we'll only know next year. So far, Brian shown us his talent designing civ games, bringing curious ideas to the genre -- take Colonization, for instance. Rise of Nations will be Brian's most ambitious effort till now, and we'll have to wait and see.

Locutus · April 5, 2002, 11:11

From today's RoN news item: Proof that Brian Reynolds is the true genius of (civ) game design

asleepathewheel · April 5, 2002, 15:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
From today's RoN news item: Proof that Brian Reynolds is the true genius of (civ) game design

how is this proof of anything? if you're referring to the scripting language-it was designed and written by Ilya Kreymer. and how can you legitimately cite this as proof that Brian is the civ genius until the game is actually released?

BustaMike · April 5, 2002, 16:18

My 2 cents.

Civ 1 was pretty cool back in the day (when I was like 12).

Civ 2 was fun, scenarios made it better.

SMAC makes them both look like pong. You get tons of different strats to pursue, an engaging story line, a planet that fights back, a myriad of wonderful quotes, leaders with actual personalities, movies that own civ movies, built in multi, and a great built in editor.

Civ 3 then comes and has no movies, no speech, no good editor, and an AI + rules that make you play the same every time to be able to play well. That said it's still a good game.

NOTICE - all civ games are decent but the one that kicks ass is the one that says ALPHA CENTAURI - a Brian Reynolds design.

Ogie Oglethorpe · April 5, 2002, 17:32

Ditto BustaMike.

Cookie Monster · April 5, 2002, 17:47

BustaMike!

mark13 · April 5, 2002, 18:12

Ditto Ogie.

Akka · April 5, 2002, 19:29

Ditto Mark13

Skanky Burns · April 5, 2002, 23:13

I disagree, I didn't enjoy SMAC.