A suequel needed?

Lambiorix_be · May 12, 2003, 07:19

Is there still sufficient room for improvement to make a complete new version of the civilization series?

Cruddy · May 12, 2003, 08:45

I voted yes - but I don't think there will be a release until 2006 or later.

There are more powerful computers around now than when Civ3 was released - but they aren't too widespread as yet, so the potential market hasn't evolved.

I also wouldn't be surprised if such a game had little to do with Sid Meir. He's expreseed total disinterest, if I understand correctly.

Don't hold your breath for it - you'll faint.

It also depends on what you mean by completely new version - one which doesn't have isometric tiles? One which doesn't have individual units as such?

After reading 'Poly for a couple of months now, I appreciate a lot of people have complaints about Civ3 and PTW.

Trying to tie those complaints together to do a completely new version is a huge job. But I would certainly buy and play the end product.

nbarclay · May 12, 2003, 09:17

I interpret "complete new version" as meaning a degree of change similar to that from Civ to Civ 2, or Civ 2 to Civ 3. I'm actually very happy with Civ 3 as it is, but I can see room for improvement - especially in terms of coming up with an AI that relies a bit more on strategy and a bit less on playing by different rules that give it an advantage. And I'm sure a good design team could come up with some other nice changes, as long as they don't make the mistake of making the game too complicated in the process. (Fortunately, the Civ 3 team had the sense to keep things simple instead of trying to provide everything individual players asked for.)

Nathan

Nym · May 12, 2003, 10:12

I vote bananas (but there is no banana option

).

Alex · May 12, 2003, 10:32

Precisely. Damn newbies, always forgetting the banana option.

Thirgaral · May 12, 2003, 11:43

No more expansions...please

So i voted yes....

Azeem · May 12, 2003, 12:07

I think there's still a lot of room for improvement in CivIII. But they need to enhance the editor a bit and also make the AI a bit more clever and cheat a little less if they're to make an expansion.

By the way, no banana option?

Rommel2D · May 12, 2003, 13:49

Yes. I think Firaxis is thinking like car maufacturers did back in the 60s- they're not improving certain parts of the game to leave them for the next version.

The Templar · May 12, 2003, 14:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Rommel2D
Yes. I think Firaxis is thinking like car maufacturers did back in the 60s- they're not improving certain parts of the game to leave them for the next version.

I thought that's what expansion packs were for. Lay out the whole game then release it bit by bit to milk it for as much money as possible.

And Cruddy, Sid is only disinterested until he needs a new BMW.

Cruddy · May 12, 2003, 14:35

Quote:

Originally posted by The Templar
.

And Cruddy, Sid is only disinterested until he needs a new BMW.

I don't buy that argument about Civ - I can't afford it!

If Sid was just interested in the money, he could sell the rights for enough to buy most of a BMW production line, without producing one sketch or 1 line of code. His signature on a contract would do it.

He's done great games that are NOT Civ related, and I can see why he'd rather go for something completely different. It's never good to be stereotyped.

Manya · May 12, 2003, 15:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Nym
I vote bananas (but there is no banana option

).

No Banana!!

The Templar · May 12, 2003, 15:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Cruddy

I don't buy that argument about Civ - I can't afford it!

If Sid was just interested in the money, he could sell the rights for enough to buy most of a BMW production line, without producing one sketch or 1 line of code. His signature on a contract would do it.

That's not quite what I mean. IMHO Sid feels as though he's stuck in a rut - so he's always trying to do something new - something that exceeds Civ. I say this because Sid repeatedly claims to be tired of Civ.

Unfortunately for him, none of his other efforts live up. So back to Civ he goes for more money. I'm not syaing this is a bad thing - think of it as us collectively bribing him (by buying the game) to put down Dinosaurs or SimGolf 2 or whatever to make another Civ for us.

Besides, I thought Infogrames, I mean "Atari", owns the rights for Civ? And don't worry, as long as there is money to be milked, there will be more civ (I guess capitalism does sometimes work out).

Yahweh Sabaoth · May 12, 2003, 15:41

Bah, I don't care how severe the complaints are, or how overpriced PTW was, I want another expansion pack!

ALL I want are more civs, and I want us all to have the new civs so we can all be on the same page in the strategy forum.

Where are the Israelis? The Dutch? The Sioux? The etc., etc., etc.? Sure, I can work a few hours overtime to afford an XP, and I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard for the Atari/Firaxis people to whip one together.

Think of all the new complaining people have to do!

Cruddy · May 12, 2003, 17:39

Quote:

Originally posted by The Templar

1) That's not quite what I mean. IMHO Sid feels as though he's stuck in a rut - so he's always trying to do something new - something that exceeds Civ. I say this because Sid repeatedly claims to be tired of Civ.

2) Unfortunately for him, none of his other efforts live up. So back to Civ he goes for more money. I'm not syaing this is a bad thing - think of it as us collectively bribing him (by buying the game) to put down Dinosaurs or SimGolf 2 or whatever to make another Civ for us.

3) Besides, I thought Infogrames, I mean "Atari", owns the rights for Civ? And don't worry, as long as there is money to be milked, there will be more civ (I guess capitalism does sometimes work out).

1) I totally agree - If I was Sid I'd have difficulty facing another Civ rewrite for latest tech machines. I'm sure there's plenty of good games besides Civ in Sid & Firaxis.

2) Noooo - dont agree. For reason on my first post. Also, revenue raised from Civ can be put into future projects - they don't have to go into the next Civ. OK, the Firaxis employment/consultant contract has this in the small print somewhere - I'm sure it's confidential so let's not speculate.

3) A company may "CLAIM" to own the rights to anything. Software ownership has resulted in many, many legal cases. I can only speculate about who owns the rights to Civ. These are my thoughts and reasons.

a) Atari/Infogrames are unlikely to hold all rights to Civ. If they did, why would they bother putting Firaxis logo on the box and on the website, or allow them any sort of public contact in regards to Civ? If they had all the rights, they'd cut Firaxis off. I suspect what they have is "license to distribute", not "ownership".

b) If Firaxis/Sid have no rights to Civ, why would they continue to support patches and the website for it? Not the Atari one - the Firaxis one? That just doesn't make sense, devoting resources (including having forums between employees and the public). If Atari had all the rights Firaxis would just walk away.

Those aren't proof - but they are strong evidence. If correct, it will be interesting to see who picks up the rights to distribute Civ when the current contract runs out. One fascingating thought - who owns the trademark "Sid Meirs Civilisation"? That might be a strong clue - or a red herring!

raghar · May 12, 2003, 18:21

Sure is. It took me just few hours to design significant improvement and it looked interesting, thought it was differnt game at the end. One of problems is unit movement. Movement one unit a time would spell problems with higher amount of units and with speed of next game.

M. le Comte · May 13, 2003, 05:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexnm
Precisely. Damn newbies, always forgetting the banana option.

The banana option is "no, I lost my interest for that kind of games"...

We are at Apolyton, a site dedicated to civ games. I would be very surprised if there was a lot of votes for that sentence.