PC Gamer civ3 preview - Page 2

May 2, 2001, 00:06

harlan, the exact quote is

quote:

Briggs also confirmed that Firaxis is seriously investigating ways to convert the myriad Civ2 scenarios for civ3. This crossover will supply an incredibly vast source of material until users have become acustomed to the news editing suite

sounds good, no?

May 2, 2001, 00:09

and guys, the time span is noted twice: it's
4000BC - 2500AD = 6500 years

civ3 will have future techs. live with

The diplomat · May 2, 2001, 00:27

I am confused about the timeline. Didn't Firaxis confirm that the game ends in 2020 AD?

If the game lasts 6500 years, instead of stretching into the future maybe the game starts earlier? Perhaps, the game goes from 4500 BC to 2020 AD?

If the game must last 6500 years, I would much prefer more ancient techs than future techs.

------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.

Roman · May 2, 2001, 00:31

quote:

Briggs also confirmed that Firaxis is seriously investigating ways to convert the myriad Civ2 scenarios for civ3. This crossover will supply an incredibly vast source of material until users have become acustomed to the news editing suite

This would be excellent news!

Old Beardy · May 2, 2001, 00:34

Here's the actual quote from SID :

GSUK: How many years of human history will the game span and will there be an ultimate objective like conquering the stars or the subduing the other races?

Sid: Civ III will cover from 4000BC to somewhere around the year 2020. The game will offer several ways to win, so the ultimate objective will depend on which pathway to victory you choose (we'll talk more about new ways to win in an upcoming website update).

So unless he's talking out of his anal rectory, that should be an end to it!

Roman · May 2, 2001, 00:36

quote:

Originally posted by MarkG on 05-01-2001 12:09 PM
and guys, the time span is noted twice: it's
4000BC - 2500AD = 6500 years

civ3 will have future techs. live with

Nooooooooooooooooo!

Nooooooooooooooo!

Noooooooooooo!

If it's true, this is major dissapointment no. 2.

Roman · May 2, 2001, 00:39

quote:

Originally posted by Old Beardy on 05-01-2001 12:34 PM
Here's the actual quote from SID :

GSUK: How many years of human history will the game span and will there be an ultimate objective like conquering the stars or the subduing the other races?

Sid: Civ III will cover from 4000BC to somewhere around the year 2020. The game will offer several ways to win, so the ultimate objective will depend on which pathway to victory you choose (we'll talk more about new ways to win in an upcoming website update).

So unless he's talking out of his anal rectory, that should be an end to it!

*On seeing this, Roman breathes a sigh of relief*

No future techs.

JamesJKirk · May 2, 2001, 02:08

quote:

Originally posted by joseph1944 on 05-01-2001 11:40 PM
Imran I was thinking the same as you. If we are aloud to pick 7 Civs, will the other 8 civs be the minor civs. If that is true than we will be playing with 16 Civs in every game. Just think in one game the German, English could major civs and in another game they could be minor. Of course the US also could be a minor or major Civs in someone else game.

Who knows what that could be, but I would like to think that they would choose the more looked over civs for minor civs, rather than the same old ones...Spain could be a minor civ now, as could the Netherlands, Mexico, Brazil, and any number or other countries from around the world...but hopefully NOT Jamaica

Lord_Davinator · May 2, 2001, 10:27

Ya picking minor civs from the ones overlooked would be a heck of a lot better... and I wonder if we the players can play with these minor civs..

Now I wonder what they'll do for special units for the minor civs...
the special units of a neigbouring civ might be what the minor civ gets for that.. but maybe I'm wrong after all I am just speculating...

Admiral PJ · May 2, 2001, 22:18

I think it would be fascinating if civ3 went into the 'far' future.. why not?
It would be cool to recreate how , say the africans(zulus etc) would become an industrial power and How robotic warfare would affect wars.

It would allow a lot of futuristic scenarios too- giving more of that eras artwork for scenario designers to implement.

If done realistically futuristic techs could work well, with things like Nano technologies, laser/beam guns.. antigravity vehicles etc. could be very interesting and make the game much more interesting.
Maybe there could be some scifi scenarios with the game at least.

AdmiralPete

Zanzin · May 3, 2001, 03:46

Firaxis have announced in one of the magazines that there will be 4 Ages . This doesn't really take into account a future age, does it? This is why me thinks Civ3 will only play up to 2020. It's probably best this way - I'd hate to see Firaxis screw up civ with future techs like Activision did.

MazaNaza · May 3, 2001, 11:19

You know, I'm not entirely certain why everyone is so oppossed to futuristic technologies being present in Civ 3. The reason most people seem to give is the fact that Activision screwed them up in CTP. Not to be insulting or anything, but that's an extremely narrow point of view. What you're basically saying is that any element of any game that didn't function correctly in that particualar method of implementation should never again be attempted.

If that were true, we'd have missed out on a lot of great games and there would be no innovation whatsoever. Think of CTP as a beta test for future techs, one that failed but a test all the same. If Sid can take Activision's mistakes and learn from them, perhaps he can turn them into an important aspect of the game. I can remember a few naysayers back in the day who said that the hit point system would ruin combat in Civ 2, but I think that we can all agree that it was an important addition.

All I'm saying is that we need to be careful not to pounce on new ideas so quickly. It's important to say what we hated about the future techs but we also need to say what we liked (if anything) about them. The last thing I want to do is stand in the way of the next game-changing addition to Civilization. As I always say, "Trust in Sid."

--> Norm

Ralf · May 3, 2001, 13:08

quote:

Originally posted by Zanzin on 05-03-2001 03:46 AM
Firaxis have announced in one of the magazines that there will be 4 Ages . This doesn't really take into account a future age, does it? This is why me thinks Civ3 will only play up to 2020.

Good point!

Lets hope so. Remember though that Civ-3 most probably WILL come with SciFi/Fantasy scenarios included in the deal.

Some say perhaps: Yes, but I dont like "jump-in scenarios", there half the game-action have already implicitly been executed, leaving player only with pre-shaped take-it-or-leave-it playing-challenges.
Well, fair enough! But all scenarios doesnt necessarily HAVE to be designed like that. Theres nothing that hinders designers at Firaxis (or elsewere) to make scenarios much more open-ended, with perhaps only 4-5 start-out cities for each civ/faction; thus leaving most of the fun evolution-, cultivating- and empire-expansion work in the hands of the players instead.

Father Beast · May 3, 2001, 13:56

quote:

Originally posted by Zanzin on 05-03-2001 03:46 AM
Firaxis have announced in one of the magazines that there will be 4 Ages . This doesn't really take into account a future age, does it? This is why me thinks Civ3 will only play up to 2020. It's probably best this way - I'd hate to see Firaxis screw up civ with future techs like Activision did.

And I would hate for people to say that "because it didn't work in CTP, then Firaxis will also fail if they try".

I've heard that a lot on this forum - "that was tried in CTP, and it didn't work. Forget about it." I don't believe that.
I trust team firaxis to get the gameplay right.

St Leo · May 3, 2001, 15:38

SMAC had realistic future techs, but I am not sure if I want them in Civ3.

Helheim, the only future tech I want is a defense against nukes.

------------------
Leons Petrazickis (St. Leo)
http://aventine.cf-developer.net/minizigg/
petrazi@sprint.ca

jadlakha · May 3, 2001, 18:39

GEESE PPL CALM DOWN!!!!!!!! You are nitpicking at a Magazine preview. Most previews are general and never get the details right anyways. Just calm down and wait for the game to be released. Patience is a virtue my friends. Now take a deep breathe and exhale slowly. Go ahead, its ok.

java4me · May 3, 2001, 18:42

I heard that they were extending the game to 6500 years, and that means that the game will end in year 2500. That means that there will most likely be future techs, or they are just extending the time a lot to allow you to build more.

If someone could tell me if they are really going to 2500 please inform us!!!!!

May 3, 2001, 21:15

What if the game went back to the year 4480BC and the first 10 turns or so you were not able or aloud to build a city. However you would be aloud to move your settler around looking for the perfect starting place for your first city. The game then could still end in 2020. In Civ2 on the upper playing levels you had to start your city turn one or be way behind in tech. Just food for though.

------------------

Harlan · May 4, 2001, 22:50

I saw the PC Gamer review in a bookstore today, and the review doesn't just say the game lasts 6500 years, it specifically states that it starts in 4000 BC and ends in 2500 AD. It then talks a bit about how only near the very end does one get the capability to send the spaceship to Alpha Centauri. Which makes sense- the original game was completely unrealistic by having an interstellar spaceship holding 10,000+ people being done anywhere near 2020 AD.

So it seems to me there is little doubt the game will end in 2500 AD or close to it, and not 2020, as some keep suggesting. The main reason for that suggestion is a quote from Sid Meier, saying the game would end roughly around 2020. But that interview is from two months ago, and 2500 is the latest info. Furthermore, in the Sid interview the timeline sounded uncertain still, with him only giving a rough estimate.

Personally, I don't mind a little future history, especially keeping in mind the Alpha Centauri ending, but 2500 is a bit much. The further one goes into the future, the more speculative and absurd it gets. I'd rather see the game end in 2100 or 2200. Let's hope they're still tinkering with that.

Lord_Davinator · May 4, 2001, 23:28

Nice point.
I think 2500 is a bit to far ahead 2200 would be a better date as we probably can predict the advancements we'll have by then.

Anyone seen the PCZone online preview???

in the second page they have an all new screenshot its of the city view showing a collesum and a wonder which I suspect to be the lighthouse.
A nice aquedut also. They seem to be building something in the city but can't say what it is...

looks good to be ppl.

Harlan · May 5, 2001, 00:04

Another thing I remember from that preview:

It mentions near the end of the article that not all the units from Civ2 are making a comeback, and specifically mentions the Fanatic unit as one that's getting cut. I'm glad to hear that actually- the Fanatic unit is a slight bit offensive (why does it has to be an Islamic looking Fanatic?) and doesn't have much justification militarily. Plus, it looks like there's gonna be tons of new units so losing a few isn't a big deal. I wonder which others will be cut though, since they did say some (not one) were getting the axe.

java4me · May 5, 2001, 02:01

It would be interesting to know witch units are getting the boot and witch units will stay! Maybe Firaxis will post the units at a later time, but in the meantime i am actually glad to see the fanatic unit go!

But it really makes you think about witch units are going!!!

Thanks for the thought Harlan!!!

java4me · May 5, 2001, 02:02

Oh...I spelled which wrong!!!!
It is getting late for me!
Sorry

Lord_Davinator · May 5, 2001, 07:55

you sure got that wrong java

I was kinda confused and all... like where'd the witch unit come from??

the fanatic being cut is well... good I guess never really used it anyway.
but being an islamic one probably makes sense. There are few other types of fundamentalist anyway...or so to my knowledge. but maybe a strong cultural rating in your civ could automatically give you these units?? ones which can't be brided by others....

Sirotnikov · May 5, 2001, 18:29

quote:

Originally posted by Admiral PJ on 05-02-2001 10:18 PM
I think it would be fascinating if civ3 went into the 'far' future.. why not?
It would be cool to recreate how , say the africans(zulus etc) would become an industrial power and How robotic warfare would affect wars.

It would allow a lot of futuristic scenarios too- giving more of that eras artwork for scenario designers to implement.

If done realistically futuristic techs could work well, with things like Nano technologies, laser/beam guns.. antigravity vehicles etc. could be very interesting and make the game much more interesting.
Maybe there could be some scifi scenarios with the game at least.

Again, that's SMAC.

I don't mind civ going a bit into the future, like cures for AIDS, Cancer etc, or SDI and spaceships to other galacies.

I don't mind planes and machines controled from afar. I don't mind robot cheap units used to detonate nukes.

I do mind robots and mech machines used to fight. That's an area for scenario designers and other games.

Kautilya · May 5, 2001, 20:24

Well in terms of gameplay there isn't anything particularly wrong with future stuff . There are probably lots of cool possibilities. But in terms of the Civ concept I would much prefer it to stop not too far after 2000. They can do the cool future stuff in some other game like SMAC 2.

If they do continue later I think 2100 is a good place to stop. That is the first year of SMAC and serious space colonization could realistically be a possibility by then.

tniem · May 6, 2001, 00:52

Personally I hope Civ III doesn't go past like say 2050. Anything past that is extreme speculation, unrealistic, and the end of the world. But in the end I'll trust Sid and the boys will know where to stop.

Theben · May 7, 2001, 04:11

Perhaps the 4 ages are loosely based on ember's ERA-BASED games idea. It would be kind of interesting if at the end of each era- ancient, reinassance, industrial (which would include modern), and futuristic- the player was offered the option to end the game. Non-futurists could opt out before the "future" came in. Or perhaps it could be pre-set at game start which eras you wished to play through, and the total # of years in the game would be divided by the set # of game turns, with research and terrain modification times adjusted accordingly. Or maybe not.