Don’t Worry, Be Happy!

[Timeline]

Greetings Fellow Civ Fanatics,

I have been thinking a lot about all this debate about unique units, future techs, 7/8 civilizations, and not so great graphics. I dug up my May CGW magazine and found it really provided some nice assurance on the development of the game. For example, please notice this point in the article and as you read this think about how silly (and early) it is too be complaining about all this stuff.

Unique Units:

“Must...Play...Test

It’s Dogma at Firaxis - everyone plays as much as possible. People talk, revisions are made, and they play some more.

For this reason, many of the design elements are still in flux, which means that some of what you are reading about (Timeline: like Unique Units) will be tweaked, changed, or even absent. Civilizations may or may not have inherent advantages. Ditto for the special units in the game. The American F-16 or the Roman Legion may have special powers, but not if Firaxis feels it unbalances the game.”

I know what you are going to say (*cough* Roman ) “we complain so that it *will* get changed before it is too late”. Well, believe me, Firaxis can handle it. Look at it this way, they are just in the development stages. They are experimenting with different things hoping to hit something big, how do you progress unless you are willing to experiment some? They aren’t stupid and they know what will and won’t work; they don’t need us screaming and kicking just because they went to check something out. Maybe unique units *will* be in the game but will not be inherent to specific races. Maybe they will become available through special achievements or starting location or first tech discovered or maybe a unique unit will “evolve” as Thoehall suggested or . . . who knows? But you can be sure of one thing: it will not be in the game unless 1: it is balanced, and 2: it is fun (not frustrating).

Next thing one might say is “SMAC was terrible, it just shows that Sid can mess up and that race specific advantages are a bad thing”. Okay, first of all SMAC was not a part of the Civilization Series, and even though Meier helped create it, he was trying to accomplish something totally different in that game. In SMAC you were not trying to build a Civilization, you were trying to survive on a desolate and alien world. Different scenario, different environment, different game rules, and different design. Civilization really doesn’t have all that much to do with SMAC in it’s design, and I suspect Civ III will be quite different.

I agree 7 or 8 Civilizations on a random map game could be limiting, but maybe not. I believe Firaxis will allow more civs for scenarios. Read this clip from the CGW review, it may help you to see why Meier is hesitant to throw in more civs:

“The original Civilization had hovercrafts and maps that were twice as big,” Meier enthusiastically responds when pressed to explain his emphasis on play testing. “But the more we played it the more we realized that it’s better to overcompress the gameplay than to undercompress it. We learned to keep the midgame short so that the player is constantly juggling decisions. Civ is long, but it could be a lot longer.”

Gigantic maps, long games, 32 civs . . . you see, I think these are things that Sid is talking about. I may be wrong here, but I think he is basically saying that such things as keeping the random game at 7 (or 8) Civs is a good thing - he is “overcompressing” it, and that is one of the many secrets to a successful Civ game.

As far as the 7 civ limit being hard coded, well, it’s possible, but I’ll believe it when I see it.

Future techs: good, bad? Read the next paragraph in CGW:

“Anyone familiar with” Craptavision’s . . . er no wait, it said “Activision’s” “take on Civilization knows exactly what this means (overcompressing). While an interesting representation of a Hall of Fame game, the middle and end portions of the two Call To Power titles got too bogged down in tedium when they should have been racing to the end.”

Very true IMO. Question: Isn’t it reasonable to conclude that the man who discovered this tactic (overcompressing) would know best how to implement it? Therefore, I would not worry about future techs being a major part of the game. And if they are, I think it will be in a good and realistic way.

Well, I guess my point is: It’s silly to go picking on parts of the game so early - that time will come when we have the Beta version. Suggestions are fine, and may be helpful to the team, but be careful of a complaining attitude, as it may prove counter-productive. Oh, one more thing, someone (I think Yin?) mentioned crappy graphics. I am fairly certain that almost all the pictures we see are from the Alpha version of Civ III - SMAC engine and placeholder graphics. I wouldn’t worry all that much about it, I am sure that the terrain/city/interface and maybe even unit graphics will be a ton better in the Beta version. As for the game being too graphic intensive, well I think we all here learned from CTP how bad that can be, but I don’t think Civ III will make that mistake. Even in SMAC you had the option to turn off unit animations.

I don’t have blind faith in Sid and the Firaxis team, and I hope to be able to do a lot of damage control/clean up work if I have the privilege of testing the Beta. But for now people, don’t worry, be happy I am fairly certain we’ll be getting a great game.


Timeline

[Timeline]

Come on Ya'll I want to see what you thought of my post! Let's have some feedback!!

[Cyclotron]

I am not certain, but I certainly hope Civ3 turns out well. I for one am trying to make constructive criticism, and not just complain. I hope you do not confuse getting our voices heard with whining. I simply don't want to wait, I want to say what I think. If you don't feel that way, that's fine.

I too have the feeling we will get a good game... but I'm just trying to make sure of that.

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

[lord of the mark]

quote: Originally posted by Timeline on 05-07-2001 09:11 Maybe unique units *will* be in the game but will not be inherent to specific races. Maybe they will become available through special achievements or starting location or first tech discovered or maybe a unique unit will “evolve” as Thoehall suggested or . . . who knows Timeline

I would be delighted with such an implementation of unique civs.

And yes Im glad they will play test extensively.

I still think it beneficial to keep letting them know what we think the implications of proposed features will be.

Remember, its not the customer who complains thats the problem. Its the one who doesnt, and just goes away.

LOTM

Very very good. I wish I could write that good.

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

[Hundred Waters]

Timeline
I pretty much agree with your views on this. I think people seem to be misreading many things and/or spinning of wild speculation from essentially little known facts.
BTW: The only point I will contest is the fact that I think SMAC was a great game. Visionary in fact. But this is essetially a question of tastes I suppose.

Bravo however. Good post.
H/W.

[Rhuarc]

I completely agree with Timeline! They know waht they are doing! They aren't going to put something into a game that isn't fun or is too rustrating. And as for the grpahics, it is WAY to early to be able to tell anything definitive about the final product. Well, that' just my two-bit!!

[Nemo]

I think we should make the post this forum's mission statement until the beta is released

quote: I for one am trying to make constructive criticism, and not just complain.

I think that most people feel the same way. But, I am afraid that Firaxis might not see it that way, only becuase there is SO MUCH criticism, that it is negatively overwhelming. -I mean, if you were them, and you put sooo many hours of work into something, only to come here and see what has been posted recently...I know *I* would feel very fustrated and upset.

But, even though i believe this, i just cant help myself from giving "constructive criticism" too
[This message has been edited by Nemo (edited May 08, 2001).]

[Imran Siddiqui]

Very nice... I'd recommend you sending this in as a column... it is definitely up to snuff.

[Timeline]

Thanks for all the comments, I really appreciate them.

quote: Originally posted by cyclotron7 I for one am trying to make constructive criticism, and not just complain.

Good for you

quote: I hope you do not confuse getting our voices heard with whining. I simply don't want to wait, I want to say what I think. If you don't feel that way, that's fine.

Actually, I agree with you and LOTM. Letting the developers know our views (in a constructive and polite way) about proposed features *can* (in some cases) be a good thing. It is helpful for the designers to keep these thoughts in the back of their mind as they develop, implement, and expand these features. However, fans presenting information in a discouraging and negative way can be VERY damaging and detrimental to game development. This is so in a few ways: It can cause developers to lose enthusiasm for a feature and become discouraged; when this happens it causes the game designer to either drop the feature (when it could have really had potential if they had explored it further) or, more likely, put the feature in (against recommendations) but only with half hearted effort - and then no one is happy. Also it can diminish the overall quality and even stifle support for the product.

Now, I hope none of those things to happen to the development of Civ III, and honestly, I don’t think this will happen. I am just trying to help all to see the possible dangers of a complaining spirit and the need to always be on guard of falling into that habit (it’s an easy one to get into ).

quote: Originally posted by Hundred Waters on 05-08-2001 08:31 PM BTW: The only point I will contest is the fact that I think SMAC was a great game. Visionary in fact. But this is essetially a question of tastes I suppose.

I think you may have misunderstood my thought on this subject. I very much agree with you about SMAC, I liked it a lot and still play it. It’s just I have heard so much criticism about it I felt I needed to address it and try to express my feelings on the matter.

Thanks again for the comments. Once things settle down a bit (on the designing front) and we know more about the game and how it will work, I will enjoy engaging in all the discussion about how to tweak it and make it better .



[This message has been edited by Timeline (edited May 08, 2001).]

[Timeline]

*bump*

Is bumping illegal in this forum? I never see anyone do it.

[Roman]

quote: Originally posted by Timeline on 05-09-2001 08:00 AM Is bumping illegal in this forum? I never see anyone do it.

I don't think so, but it's not done frequently.

[Grumbold]

There is alot of talk about "wait for beta" and "only 50% done" but if experience of other products counts for anything, it shows that a widely distributed beta test is usually too late to do anything except alert the team to big bugs and gameplay problems. The game is already hurtling down the home straight with lots of fixed milestones ahead that cannot be changed. The beta just gets them working to issue patch 1.1 almost the day the game is released. It is far too late by then to point out any fundamental problems with something integral to the game design like combat, trade, diplomacy or simultaneous turns.

Unfortunately this means that those of us without inside information must draw conclusions and build scenarios from a tantalising hint of a screenshot or a few upbeat comments in a magazine article. Often our responses will be useless because our initial assumptions will be wrong. I'd still rather offer comments and criticism in the hope that they are pertinent than sit back and wait until the demo hits the website and it is too late to participate in the design. All the wasted time is rewarded when occasionally a point is on target and helps improve the product.

[Ralf]

I basically agree with most, if not everything you (= Timeline) say in under this topic. Thumbs up! Too many CTP-loving cry-babies out there.

Most things that Firaxis have revealed about the game so far, have been very inspiring and positive, for the most part. The rest can be customized and changed by the player. Personally, I have only three highly prioritized things left on my Civ-3 wishlist:
[*] A good re-balancing implementation of anti-BAB (Bigger-always-Better) and preferably also built-in Rise-and-Fall.[*] A Map-editor (and generator) there one can manually pin-point (or automatically pre-game calculate) ideal and optimized (but invisible and potentional) AI-city locations all over the map; thus saving the AI from the hard task trying to calculate those locations between game-turns for themselves.[*] A considerably beefed-up Rules.txt tweak-file, where one also can manually "spoonfeed" ideal and optimized AI-empire build- and emphasize-choices in much more effective and direct ways then previously; thus saving the AI-civs from their own stupid selves as much as reasonably possible.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 09, 2001).]

[MrFun]

The game's not coming out until early 02 though.

------------------
Never submit to social double standards.

[tniem]

quote: Originally posted by MrFun on 05-09-2001 03:10 PM The game's not coming out until early 02 though.

Another date...

If only I knew which one to believe so I could start saving up days off of work

[Nemo]

as it stands now, it looks like 4th quarter 2001, or 1st quarter 2002. -very broad, yes, but it's just not close enough to pinpoint until probably the 2 or 3rd beta release.

[Sabre2th]

While it's certainly possible that Firaxis will finish by the fourth quarter, we shouldn't get our hopes up. I can only hope that they will wait until the game is perfect (almost) before they release it.

------------------
"We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything."
-Thomas A. Edison

[Timeline]

quote: Originally posted by Sabre2th on 05-10-2001 08:47 PM While it's certainly possible that Firaxis will finish by the fourth quarter, we shouldn't get our hopes up. I can only hope that they will wait until the game is perfect (almost) before they release it.

Yes, I agree with you here, the longer they take, all the better.