The Good of Civ III

TechWins · May 2, 2001, 22:47

In a seperate thread (not created by me) I stated that mainly all the people talk about is the bad stuff. So I decided to start a thread about the good stuff of Civ III. I really like the idea of the new wonders system how ever that turns out to be. With barbarians having encampments that's more realistic than having barbarians appearing out of nowhere. I can think of many more great new additions to Civ III, but I would like to hear other people's insights on the good thing of Civ III.

May 3, 2001, 00:17

I really like the fact that some of the wonders can be seen and put to use on the filed of play, so to speak. The "Great Wall" for example; what a cool idea. You actually get to place it somewhere on the map (How long it is, what strength it has, or when it expires, I don't know.) But just this devolpment of a simple game component is outstanding!

Good work Firaxis!

Cyclotron · May 3, 2001, 00:20

I must say I don't understand why you need a thread to boost Firaxis' ego. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and although it is good to give complements I don't understand what you could possibly hope to gain or change by this puffery.

However, you can do whatever you want, don't let me stop you. Just my opinion.

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

May 3, 2001, 00:55

I don't see what you think you are accomplishing by constantly bashing a game that is still in the middle of development. Maybe you should design your own games, that would leave very little for you to complain about.

Do you think that everyone on the Firaxis team that play tests the game is a moron? Don't you think that they will be able to sort out which features they would like to have against the constaraints of the playability of the game?

There have been many a list posted on this site and sent to Firaxis portraying what we the Civ fans would like to see, I'm sure they plan to do their best to deliver. Civ2 outshown Civ by a major margin, I expect the same for Civ3 compared to Civ2. Firaxis knows that we expect this, so in order for us to want a Civ4 they will first have to deliver a Civ3 that lives up to it's own expectations as compared to previous installments.

Don't play the team as a bunch of idiots, they know what we'd like to see and they know what they are capable of delivering, let them do there jobs. If they fail, who knows, maybe you'll be the next Sid (yeah, right!)

yin26 · May 3, 2001, 02:03

[ON-TOPIC]

While we don't have many details, the resource system sounds outstanding (and directly from these forums), along with minor civs and revamped diplomacy, wonders, units, etc. As I said, though, we really don't know enough about any of it to praise or criticise. About the most encouraging thing I can say is that it looks like we WON'T have a Civ 2.5! Whether or not this ends up being good, we'll see, but all I ever really wanted was something NOT Civ 2.5-esque.

[OFF-TOPIC]

The time to make our opinions count the most was several months ago when we made the List (two versions, 500 organized pages in the final one). I know for a FACT that some of the Civ3 ideas rumored to be in the game came DIRECTLY from us! Back then, I gave the List the title "If Just One Idea..." and it looks like Firaxis is going to use far more than just one of our ideas. So they ARE listening!

As for this squeeky-wheel argument, like I said: We used our window of opportunity to the fullest. No game (I believe) has ever had such an enormous outpouring of fan-input so early in development. They tabbed this thing at Firaxis and used it often when Civ3 was still basically on the drawing board.

Now, of course, we are getting some hints of what is coming. And like it or not, some of those things are likely too far in development to be scratched, squeeky wheel or not. And when we get to some of these topics, it's simply impossible to determine if they will be successful or not, so a lot of this "squeekiness" sounds a lot more like ignorant whining. I say this, again, because we don't actually KNOW much.

However, if and when Firaxis makes a definitive statement like: "We've decided you'll only be able to play ONE civ...a barbian tribe on an island." THEN we should kick and scream and yell and boycott etc. But not now. Not yet. Not until justified.

TechWins · May 3, 2001, 13:40

I'm not trying to boost Firaxis's ego I'm just trying to find out what people most like about some of the new additions. Some people understood what I meant some people didn't hhhmmmm(cyclotron7). I also like the idea of being able to have far more complex diplomatic agreements.

Father Beast · May 3, 2001, 14:04

the WONDERS. Minor Wonders, to be specific. I rejoiced to hear that Manhattan and Apollo will be civ specific wonders. it always ticked me off to work so hard on a wonder and have everyone reap the benefits.

I suggested this in a thread which quickly died some time back, how Glad I am to find it implemeted in civ3! (yes, I know it was also in THE LIST)

Go, Firaxis, GO!

ajbera · May 3, 2001, 14:19

The resource model. Now oil and uranium serve an actual production purpose rather than simply being trade goods. Excellent improvement.

Ilkuul · May 3, 2001, 16:14

The boost to road & rail building given by the new resource model: now you have a solid economic reason to build roads (which I love doing anyway!), other than the sordid military one of troop-movements!

Also the Grand Canal! Fantastic!! How often have I wanted to build a canal at a crucial isthmus...

And coastal fortresses that go on the offensive... the list of pluses goes on and on, and I think it's only right to give credit where credit is due. Who gets spurred on to even better achievements by a constant hail of negative criticism? Not many people, and I'm sure the Firaxis team are only human like the rest of us. Thanks you, TechWins, for starting this thread!

JosefGiven · May 3, 2001, 19:01

quote:

...I would like to hear other people's insights on the good thing of Civ III...

I like the look of the graphics. They're somewhere between CtP (not necessarily a good thing) and a brightened-up Alpha Centauri. Somehow the product of this unholy union works

I'm looking forward to seeing the overhauled resources concept, too.

[This message has been edited by JosefGiven (edited May 03, 2001).]

TechWins · May 3, 2001, 20:15

No problem Ilkuul.

Nemo · May 3, 2001, 21:11

I really like everything i have seen changed (either added or or removed) in the game, except the 7 civs.
what would ge a real gem on this stack of gold, would be that we get to build a "tower of babel" as a replacement forthe throne room, but with the optoins to add different things to it, like the castle in civ I

i just keep thinking that is what the "tower of babel" like screen shot is for

Imran Siddiqui · May 3, 2001, 21:16

I love the resource system, and I like the minor wonders.

I agree with Yin (jeez, we are agreeing too much... we need a flame war soon

), that this doesn't look like Civ 2.5.

Roman · May 4, 2001, 08:02

Despite my rant on the 7 civilization limit, I actually think the game is looking very well. I like basically all changes and especially the resource system, addition of culture, minor wonders, how nukes work and the possibility of corporations.

Russian King · May 4, 2001, 08:39

quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 05-03-2001 12:20 AM
I must say I don't understand why you need a thread to boost Firaxis' ego. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and although it is good to give complements I don't understand what you could possibly hope to gain or change by this puffery.

However, you can do whatever you want, don't let me stop you. Just my opinion.

I kinda agree with Cyclotron7, you can do what u want but that will make Firaxis think they are doing as good a job as they are...
The trick is to make them believe their work sux and that will hopefully make them work harder

Sorry Firaxis, but the better game you guys make, the more money you'll make

tniem · May 4, 2001, 16:42

This is my personal opinion but I believe that everyone posting on this forum believes that Firaxis is doing a fantastic job and is looking forward to Civ III. However, that does not mean we do not have problems with some of the decisions that they made nor does it mean we won't voice these problems.

To voice a complaint, many times you need to have a reason to even worry about it. What I mean is that if people really hated how Civ III was coming along they would just give up on it and not be posting here on Apolyton. For me voicing criticism is my way of telling Firaxis that I am still on board and still am planning on purchasing Civ III. You do your job and I'll continue to give you feedback. Firaxis knows this and wants our feedback positive and negative. So for the people that feel criticising Firaxis isn't good for us to be doing, I'd just say that is what Firaxis wants us to be doing.

tniem · May 4, 2001, 17:13

Oh and what am I absolutely positively excited for?

CULTURES, NATIONALITIES, and CORPORATIONS

Admiral PJ · May 4, 2001, 17:35

Some of the things i like the sound of so far:

The use of a Culture value,
Minor Tribes,
Special Civ Bonuses,
Special Units (german panzers etc.. this could be good if balanced out or just put in optionally even)
Many more unit subclasses (like old tanks/advanced tanks/light scout tanks which seems to be in i hope) ,
Proper Resource/Trade management (trade embargoes?) ,
Many ways of winning,
Curvy polygon landscape,
3d Voxel units (hopefully),
Animated Units (hopefully decent battle animations too)
This thread,
etc

I hope they keep in SMAC's multi leveled unit ranking system, so units can go from Green status to Regular to Vetaran then Elite,
not just Green/Veteran like the old civs, I feel STRONGLY about that.

Admiral Pete

Admiral PJ · May 4, 2001, 17:37

Any more news on Corporations? that would be great if it could be included,

TechWins · May 4, 2001, 19:49

No, Tniem I agree with you that there does need to be negative feed back towards Firaxis so they can get an idea of what the customers want. I'm saying that we should tell Firaxis some of the things we like that they said will be in the game. Meaning some of the things we like right now could still be taken out. Such as when Sid said there would be minor civs we're not sure if they still have those in or not. Most likely they won't take anything out if there is good response from it. Same as if there is a lot of negative feed back on something they might take that out. Also I was interested in hearing some of the things people find most intriguing of the new additions to the game.

P.S. Don't say negative and positive feedback comes around here it's just like when news stations use this advertisement phrase of "we touch base on the good and the bad of the world." Oh yeah, if you consider, talking about the bad for 29 minutes and talking about the good for 1 minute, touching base on the good and the bad. So this thread is the one minute of good here.

lord of the mark · May 7, 2001, 00:48

Good:
1. Armies
2. Bombarding
3. Cultural model
4. Graphics
5. Improved trade model
6. Borders
7. ICS limited
8. Wonders fixed - some new, fewer overall, national projects

Bad: Only 7 civs

Very, very bad: Unique race charecteristics