Civ3: Who needs it? - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Civ3: Who needs it?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Civ3: Who needs it?

Khan Singh posted 05-18-99 10:20 AM ET
I haven't made any trouble in a while and I feel guilt about it, since I list "troublemaking" in my profile as an interest. So here goes!
What will Civ3 be like? Probably something like this: You'll start the game with one or two settlers, then build a city, then send out some warriors to run over Goody Huts. Meanwhile your civilization will be researching the wheel and building a temple at your capital.....
Haven't we seen this gameplay someplace before? Do we really want to see it again?The "Sweep of History" idea sounds interesting in principle, but in practice it will probably just amount to replaying Civ2 with a slightly different scoring system. It just doesn't sound very interesting to me.
I'm happy that Firaxis has solid backing for their next project, and I'm sure that they'll make a bundle of money on the project. But I don't see any reason why I should get excited about Yet Another Civ Clone, even one from the Firaxis.
Firaxis has delivered two very original games to date. Gettysburg took the stagnent real time genre and created a great tactical game that was also a history lesson. Alpha Centauri created an interesting new world for exploration and conquest, a world filled with interesting new ideas and brain stretching concepts.
But I just don't see what Firaxis can do to Civ to make it fresh or interesting. What are we actually talking about here? New Wonder of the World movies? Better graphics? Better AI? Stuff like this is nice but they don't change the basic fact that we have all "been there and done that" so many times that it's hard to keep from yawning every time you say the name "Civ3"
Firaxis was a fiery wheel of creativity. But apparently the fire has burned out. All they are doing now is going in circles.
umbra1 posted 05-18-99 10:33 AM ET
Hey Khan Singh, I'm sure Sid and Brian have got to pay the rent somehow
So what if the gameplay is familiar ? I played both Civ 1 and 2, and got alot of enjoyment from both games. Civ 3 appeals to me because of its pedigree, rather than dispite it.
Bingmann posted 05-18-99 10:42 AM ET
I'll take it if they open source the AI and allow each civ to pursue completely separate AIs. This has to be the next step in TBS games until the jump can be made to intelligent learning AI. Allowing players to impart their collective knowledge to the AI is the next best alternative to the AI learning for itself.
carlos posted 05-18-99 11:06 AM ET
Khan Singh,
I agree with you. I wasn't very pleased when I heard that Firaxis was going to make Civ3 so soon after Alpha Centauri. As a game developer/innovator you have to recharge your creative batteries after just finishing a major project by simply doing something completly different.
Another major problem is market saturation. The couple of years between Civ1 and Civ2 was about right for making people long for a game like Civ1 upgraded for the new hardware. You have to give people the time to dream about new possibilities for the game.
I think the time between the appearance of Civ3 and Alpha Centauri is going to be too short for a lot of people.
This sudden creation of Civ3 might also be rather dissapointing for some buyers of Alpha Centauri, who were led to believe that they were buying the ultimate Civ for many years to come.
Greetings
DeVore posted 05-18-99 12:16 PM ET
Carlos: By the time SM's Civ3 hits the shelves you'll be running Windows2000 OSR2.32 on your P4-900.
Bringing a new game to the market from scratch isn't the 1 guy coding for 6 months thing it used to be, now it's 10 coders, 5 gfx artists the entire marketing crew + you name it that works for several years on a new title.
And BTW IIRC there was at least 5 years between Civ1 & 2. (I remember buing a used copy of Amiga Civ1 7 or 8 years ago).
/Dev
Mcerion posted 05-18-99 12:19 PM ET
I don't want to see another Civ game either.
Let's see something NEW. If Sid and company are such geniuses, let's see an ingenious NEW game.
I for one want a NEW game. Not another game with II or III or IV after the title.
Rong posted 05-18-99 12:38 PM ET
Well, they can call it CivIII and make it a completely new game. How is that?
The concept of Civ is too wonderful to be abandoned. I think I'll start a new thread on how to make that work.
JT 3 posted 05-18-99 12:50 PM ET
YOU EVIL EVIL MAN!!! HOW DARE YOU DISGRACE ALL WHO WANT CIV3 WITH THIS THREAD!!! YOU SHOULD BE THROWN IN JAIL!!! OR WORSE!!!
stryfe posted 05-18-99 12:50 PM ET
Not to be rude, but they ARE coming out with a NEW game, which could very well be quite ingenius. Sid is going to be working on the as-yet-untitled third game of the trilogy while BR works on Civ III--and while still have no idea what the third game is going to be, and I doubt it will be Civ IV, so you have nothing to worry about regarding original product still coming from Firaxis. The "fiery wheel has burned out"? Oh come on. You haven't even PLAYED the game yet; how can you know whether it will be original or not? For all we know they may finally include truly editable AI, and that by itself would make an original game.
trippin daily posted 05-18-99 03:43 PM ET
A MESSAGE TO THOSE WHO HAVE A BRAIN AND DO NOT USE IT...
If the PROGRAMMERS can't program a decent AI, what makes you think it is possible for us gamers to. It is a whole lot more sophisticated than build this, then this. They have variables which alter this. Big long ass mathematical equations as well. You want to write all that, go ahead. And then for them to make it open source, that is a more than one step ahead, that is many. So don't expect it. Sure we may be able to alter the AI to some extents, but it will just be on aggressiveness, and basic tactics. It will never be a completely open source code.
Yeah, all this talk of Civ 3 on the GAMES forum, not on the off topic forum is kinda ****in retarded. Most of the threads today are Civ3 this, and Civ3 that. Everybody is getting there balls in a bunch over a game that isn't even gonna be hitting the shelves for at least a year. And also, why clutter THE GAME (you know guys... SMAC) with Civ 3 topics. Isn't there an off topic forum?
Trippin Daily
-yeah, yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah-
Goobmeister posted 05-18-99 04:02 PM ET
Phew, I thought I was going to be alone in feeling that this was not the place to be discussing new Civ III ideas, at least not in multiple threads. Apolyton has Yin making all these threads over there, and I believe Firaxis has there own forums.

I am excited about Civ III, but I am addicted to SMAC, infatuated by SMAC and I come here to talk about SMAC.
Did you know that my Morganite Mercenary army was able to force a surrender from Miriam, after only taking 1 city, destroying another and besieging a third. All the while she still had at least a dozen cities left and she was the third most powerful faction, after the UoP and myself.
Now our Wealthy and well trained and in her case fundamentalist armies will wheel and Consume the territory that the UoP considers home.
Ahhhhhh.... I feel better.
Goob
Just let me talk SMAC and I will be happy.
and no one will get hurt.
Imran Siddiqui posted 05-18-99 04:03 PM ET
Actually, I believe BR (or someone) said that they will try to prevent Civ3 from being a rehash, because they know Civ fans don't want that. I like the idea of Civ3. Imagine a spherical world like in Populous (only MUCH bigger) with 12 Civs with distinct personalities and much improved diplomacy. It is amazing to think of the possibilities!
Imran Siddiqui
tfs99 posted 05-18-99 04:06 PM ET
>>>> Trippin Daily
Yada, yada, yada ... There are a lot of programmers that play strategy games that don't work for Firaxis No doubt you know that already, but there are those of us who would like to take a shot at building a better AI. And at least one that doesn't send formers and colony pods in circles!
SMAC - The Game ... well this has always been a wild and wooly forum where anything goes. Even so, it does seem like Civ3 is dominating.
Maybe it might be better to have one Civ3 topic that would point people to all of the hot and heavy Civ3 action over at Apolyton.
SMAC n ... Ted S.
Singularity posted 05-18-99 04:45 PM ET
I think that we need a civ 3 to make up for CtP. I mean what would people think if that was the supposed to be the best they could do?
Freddz posted 05-18-99 05:01 PM ET
Imran and everyone one else truly excited,
a spherical world, better diplomacy and a few more twitches will hardly be worth to get excited and wait a year or so for. I don't care crap about the money spent to buy the game, but I WANT A GAME WORTH THE WAIT.
This is the truth: I want them to give us a whole "new world", a whole new feel of Civilization. AC, while good was too much about numbers. Make a game that makes us feel for our people, that makes us understand them, suffer with them through our choices, all the way into the future, and make truly great multiplayer game(probably slow real-time with a TBS option!!!!!). Then it won't be just hype. Then civilization will be more than a sequel.
But I suspect this is just another Activision/Firaxis race to get to the market first. Tell me I'm probably wrong...
Rong posted 05-18-99 05:23 PM ET
I hear ya, Freddz. That's why I am lobbying for a "Foundation" group over at Apolyton. Hop over to
http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum6/HTML/000514.html
and show your support.
Khan Singh posted 05-18-99 05:44 PM ET
stryfe,
Firaxis is a fairly small studio. If they spend the next year on Civ3, then they won't be working very hard on anything else. I think it's a waste of their time to rehash a twelve year old game for the fifth time.
BR may intend to avoid rehashing Civ2, as Imran states. But whether that is his intention or not it seems to me that the overwhelming probability is that Civ3 will the same old thing once again. Civ, Civ2 and Smac are all very, very good games. I've spent a lot of time enjoyable time playing them. But enough is enough. Time to do something new.
The Game Forum really seems to me to be the appropriate place for this discussion. We're talking about the next Firaxis game and how it relates to Smac. The Off-topic forum is for current events and philosophy. In any case it is the place where all the Civ3 topics are posted, so de facto, it is the right place for this thread. Sorry, Goob.
I agree with Freddz that what is called for is a whole new game, with a whole new feel. I want to learn new tactics and new rules, not do the same old thing on a pretty new map.
Shining1 posted 05-18-99 06:11 PM ET
Khan Singh - you're not related to Victor, are you?
Personally, there are a huge number of things that CivIII can include that CivII did not - more scale and better A.I for a start (the AC A.I was a genius relative to Civ. Give Bry Un Renn Olds another year or so and it might even stop doing idiotic things every turn... who knows?)
And Civ is a better game than SMAC. The Sci-Fi thing worked at the start, but the ludicrous future techs just got out of hand towards the end (sentinent econometrics violates so many fundamental rules it isn't even funny).
Besides, we need something to talk about while waiting for patch 4.0. (or 3.1, as it really should be...)
Shining1
jimmytrick posted 05-18-99 06:35 PM ET
yada, yada, yada....
I don't want to sound like Don King, but, whatever tripe they turn out, we will pay for it............
I even bought CTP, its still in the shrink wrap, but I will open it up someday.....
The drum we should all beat is: "its the AI, stupid"
Also, lets post CIV3 stuff at Apolyton
Shining1 posted 05-18-99 06:39 PM ET
'Nother Apolyton infiltrator.
SMAC will have the better CivIII plan. YOU WILL SEE.
j/king, of course. Anybody seen patch 4.0 recently?
Shining1 posted 05-18-99 07:21 PM ET
Also: "...we will pay for it." Speak for yourself. But don't treat the rest of us as fatalistic morons.
Sparky posted 05-18-99 07:28 PM ET
ARE YOU MAD?!!! Of course we need Civ3. I crave it. Yes, the game has been done before --- the same goes for almost every game ever game. But Civ3 will use the creative minds of Sid and Brian and mix in improved technology.
Imagine:
A new game engine
Intelligent AI
Vibrant graphics
New Strategies, technologiess, civilizations and realism
Better interface
Compatibility with SMAC!!!!
This may become the best game ever made since Civ 2 .... and until Civ 4. Long reign Sid and Brian!
ejrolon posted 05-18-99 08:21 PM ET
running the risk of being branded an heretic. I have mixed feelings about Civ III. I played Civ I and then CII and now SMAC and i cannot think what kind of hook they will throw so that i should buy it.
Civ II was CI with better graphics ( the same strategies that i used on CI applied to CII). SMAC is a natural result of the series but the same tactics that i used on CI still apply i just had a harder time figuring out the secret projects.
Now, Civ III looks like a problem, what would it improve. MP support,... i usually play alone so i would want a better AI. Graphics? i usually disregard them if the game is good, no amount of 3d modeling or rendering will make a game that sucks better. Music? ditto.
AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!
I have a faith crisis...
somebody put me out of my misery
Submachinegun posted 05-18-99 11:44 PM ET
Ok...
<BLAM>
Evk posted 05-19-99 12:22 AM ET
THANK you.
I'd like to add that I don't think this is a good place to post Civ3-stuff. How am I supposted to find my sex threads when the entire first page of threads is CIV3: UNITS! CIV3: DIPLOMACY!, CIV3: LET'S PLAN THE ENTIRE GAME A YEAR AHEAD AND THEN BE REALLY DISAPPOINTED WHEN FIRAXIS DOSN'T USE EVERY SINGLE STUPID IDEA WE CAME UP WITH (What do you MEAN cramming it full of every crackpot idea I can come up with 'isn't fesable'!!!)
Rong posted 05-19-99 01:07 AM ET
Hmm, if you are getting tired of Sid & Brian's interpretation of civilization, check out The Clash of Civilizations at
http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum21/HTML/000043.html
This looks really interesting. Might give Civ3 a run for its money.
Freddz posted 05-19-99 04:26 AM ET
Shining,
I'm getting the chills as I read your posts. Brrr. Sounds like you have given up your hopes for something really exciting. And you of ALL PEOPLE! Improvements are good, better AI is neccessary, but the whole "we've got plenty of 'small' improvements thing" makes me very sleepy.
Sorry, I gotta go back to bed. Keep working against something truly new.
Freddz posted 05-19-99 05:21 AM ET
Shiny,
maybe I came out a bit too strong. Not too unusual.
I just think we should set our goals high. I realize some ideas some of us have probably will not be implemented 'cause they are too difficult, or too out of genre. For example: real time with a TBS option. But at least an idea like that illustrates how much I care about a good multiplayer game. Crazy ideas can give good balanced ones. And I do think we must keep the ribbon real high. Preferably in the clouds.
Just a point of view, but an important one IMO
Hugo Rune posted 05-19-99 08:12 AM ET
I will want a _truly_ customisable game to get Civ3. I was greatly dissapointed by the lack of editors for SMAC.
Anyway, I'd rather see SMAC2 than Civ3. Anyone agree with me?
stryfe posted 05-19-99 01:46 PM ET
Which was my point about the customizable AI. Someone several dozen messages up attacked the idea of this, saying that if the programmers couldn't, blah blah blah. The point isn't for us to be _programming_ the AI, its to be able to customize it. It doesn't matter if not everyone can do it--how many of us can make decnet scenarios or modpacks? It's just one more thing to increase replayability, and I'm surprised that anyone could think I was suggesting that we be able to go at the source code itself, which is a patently ridiculous idea.
Rabid Dog posted 05-19-99 02:08 PM ET
You can already customize the AI -- it is called INI files. To do what you are asking -- an open interface to the AI -- would be extremely difficult. You can already tweak the parameters.
Let us take the most popular case -- what, specifically, kind of interface, psuedocode, etc, do you envision that would allow the 'Former going in circles' to be prevented by a user?
I can personally not envision an easy way to prevent that. You are asking the AI to develop complicated multi-move schemas -- which might be possible in the source code itself, but I can't imagine how a post implementation parameter could prevent it.
Rabid Dog
Bingmann posted 05-19-99 02:40 PM ET
RDog - Nope, open sourcing the AI is easy, especially if it's designed in from the start. Even now, the SMAC AI could be open sourced by moving the AI routines out of terran.exe into a dll, say terranai.dll, and then also shipping the source code that makes up terranai.dll. Then, the SMAC-addicted programmer/hacker-players could tinker with the AI routines (don't have to start from scratch, use the standard AI code as a starting point), run them through a compiler, and get a new terranai.dll. These new AIs will evolve quickly as dozens of AI hackers swap ideas and code.
It would be much more accessible if the AI were written in a script language (like Python), but this would need to be designed in from the start. I would be against creating a new proprietary scripting language for this - it would be wasted time - just use an existing script language (like Python). An added bonus from taking this approach is that it would be much easier for the game developers to design and write the AI code since most script languages (like Python) can be modified while the program is running, making it easy to tweak (no stopping for compiling or starting over).
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Civ3: Who needs it?
Khan Singh	posted 05-18-99 10:20 AM ET I haven't made any trouble in a while and I feel guilt about it, since I list "troublemaking" in my profile as an interest. So here goes! What will Civ3 be like? Probably something like this: You'll start the game with one or two settlers, then build a city, then send out some warriors to run over Goody Huts. Meanwhile your civilization will be researching the wheel and building a temple at your capital..... Haven't we seen this gameplay someplace before? Do we really want to see it again?The "Sweep of History" idea sounds interesting in principle, but in practice it will probably just amount to replaying Civ2 with a slightly different scoring system. It just doesn't sound very interesting to me. I'm happy that Firaxis has solid backing for their next project, and I'm sure that they'll make a bundle of money on the project. But I don't see any reason why I should get excited about Yet Another Civ Clone, even one from the Firaxis. Firaxis has delivered two very original games to date. Gettysburg took the stagnent real time genre and created a great tactical game that was also a history lesson. Alpha Centauri created an interesting new world for exploration and conquest, a world filled with interesting new ideas and brain stretching concepts. But I just don't see what Firaxis can do to Civ to make it fresh or interesting. What are we actually talking about here? New Wonder of the World movies? Better graphics? Better AI? Stuff like this is nice but they don't change the basic fact that we have all "been there and done that" so many times that it's hard to keep from yawning every time you say the name "Civ3" Firaxis was a fiery wheel of creativity. But apparently the fire has burned out. All they are doing now is going in circles.
umbra1	posted 05-18-99 10:33 AM ET Hey Khan Singh, I'm sure Sid and Brian have got to pay the rent somehow So what if the gameplay is familiar ? I played both Civ 1 and 2, and got alot of enjoyment from both games. Civ 3 appeals to me because of its pedigree, rather than dispite it.
Bingmann	posted 05-18-99 10:42 AM ET I'll take it if they open source the AI and allow each civ to pursue completely separate AIs. This has to be the next step in TBS games until the jump can be made to intelligent learning AI. Allowing players to impart their collective knowledge to the AI is the next best alternative to the AI learning for itself.
carlos	posted 05-18-99 11:06 AM ET Khan Singh, I agree with you. I wasn't very pleased when I heard that Firaxis was going to make Civ3 so soon after Alpha Centauri. As a game developer/innovator you have to recharge your creative batteries after just finishing a major project by simply doing something completly different. Another major problem is market saturation. The couple of years between Civ1 and Civ2 was about right for making people long for a game like Civ1 upgraded for the new hardware. You have to give people the time to dream about new possibilities for the game. I think the time between the appearance of Civ3 and Alpha Centauri is going to be too short for a lot of people. This sudden creation of Civ3 might also be rather dissapointing for some buyers of Alpha Centauri, who were led to believe that they were buying the ultimate Civ for many years to come. Greetings
DeVore	posted 05-18-99 12:16 PM ET Carlos: By the time SM's Civ3 hits the shelves you'll be running Windows2000 OSR2.32 on your P4-900. Bringing a new game to the market from scratch isn't the 1 guy coding for 6 months thing it used to be, now it's 10 coders, 5 gfx artists the entire marketing crew + you name it that works for several years on a new title. And BTW IIRC there was at least 5 years between Civ1 & 2. (I remember buing a used copy of Amiga Civ1 7 or 8 years ago). /Dev
Mcerion	posted 05-18-99 12:19 PM ET I don't want to see another Civ game either. Let's see something NEW. If Sid and company are such geniuses, let's see an ingenious NEW game. I for one want a NEW game. Not another game with II or III or IV after the title.
Rong	posted 05-18-99 12:38 PM ET Well, they can call it CivIII and make it a completely new game. How is that? The concept of Civ is too wonderful to be abandoned. I think I'll start a new thread on how to make that work.
JT 3	posted 05-18-99 12:50 PM ET YOU EVIL EVIL MAN!!! HOW DARE YOU DISGRACE ALL WHO WANT CIV3 WITH THIS THREAD!!! YOU SHOULD BE THROWN IN JAIL!!! OR WORSE!!!
stryfe	posted 05-18-99 12:50 PM ET Not to be rude, but they ARE coming out with a NEW game, which could very well be quite ingenius. Sid is going to be working on the as-yet-untitled third game of the trilogy while BR works on Civ III--and while still have no idea what the third game is going to be, and I doubt it will be Civ IV, so you have nothing to worry about regarding original product still coming from Firaxis. The "fiery wheel has burned out"? Oh come on. You haven't even PLAYED the game yet; how can you know whether it will be original or not? For all we know they may finally include truly editable AI, and that by itself would make an original game.
trippin daily	posted 05-18-99 03:43 PM ET A MESSAGE TO THOSE WHO HAVE A BRAIN AND DO NOT USE IT... If the PROGRAMMERS can't program a decent AI, what makes you think it is possible for us gamers to. It is a whole lot more sophisticated than build this, then this. They have variables which alter this. Big long ass mathematical equations as well. You want to write all that, go ahead. And then for them to make it open source, that is a more than one step ahead, that is many. So don't expect it. Sure we may be able to alter the AI to some extents, but it will just be on aggressiveness, and basic tactics. It will never be a completely open source code. Yeah, all this talk of Civ 3 on the GAMES forum, not on the off topic forum is kinda ****in retarded. Most of the threads today are Civ3 this, and Civ3 that. Everybody is getting there balls in a bunch over a game that isn't even gonna be hitting the shelves for at least a year. And also, why clutter THE GAME (you know guys... SMAC) with Civ 3 topics. Isn't there an off topic forum? Trippin Daily -yeah, yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah-
Goobmeister	posted 05-18-99 04:02 PM ET Phew, I thought I was going to be alone in feeling that this was not the place to be discussing new Civ III ideas, at least not in multiple threads. Apolyton has Yin making all these threads over there, and I believe Firaxis has there own forums. I am excited about Civ III, but I am addicted to SMAC, infatuated by SMAC and I come here to talk about SMAC. Did you know that my Morganite Mercenary army was able to force a surrender from Miriam, after only taking 1 city, destroying another and besieging a third. All the while she still had at least a dozen cities left and she was the third most powerful faction, after the UoP and myself. Now our Wealthy and well trained and in her case fundamentalist armies will wheel and Consume the territory that the UoP considers home. Ahhhhhh.... I feel better. Goob Just let me talk SMAC and I will be happy. and no one will get hurt.
Imran Siddiqui	posted 05-18-99 04:03 PM ET Actually, I believe BR (or someone) said that they will try to prevent Civ3 from being a rehash, because they know Civ fans don't want that. I like the idea of Civ3. Imagine a spherical world like in Populous (only MUCH bigger) with 12 Civs with distinct personalities and much improved diplomacy. It is amazing to think of the possibilities! Imran Siddiqui
tfs99	posted 05-18-99 04:06 PM ET >>>> Trippin Daily Yada, yada, yada ... There are a lot of programmers that play strategy games that don't work for Firaxis No doubt you know that already, but there are those of us who would like to take a shot at building a better AI. And at least one that doesn't send formers and colony pods in circles! SMAC - The Game ... well this has always been a wild and wooly forum where anything goes. Even so, it does seem like Civ3 is dominating. Maybe it might be better to have one Civ3 topic that would point people to all of the hot and heavy Civ3 action over at Apolyton. SMAC n ... Ted S.
Singularity	posted 05-18-99 04:45 PM ET I think that we need a civ 3 to make up for CtP. I mean what would people think if that was the supposed to be the best they could do?
Freddz	posted 05-18-99 05:01 PM ET Imran and everyone one else truly excited, a spherical world, better diplomacy and a few more twitches will hardly be worth to get excited and wait a year or so for. I don't care crap about the money spent to buy the game, but I WANT A GAME WORTH THE WAIT. This is the truth: I want them to give us a whole "new world", a whole new feel of Civilization. AC, while good was too much about numbers. Make a game that makes us feel for our people, that makes us understand them, suffer with them through our choices, all the way into the future, and make truly great multiplayer game(probably slow real-time with a TBS option!!!!!). Then it won't be just hype. Then civilization will be more than a sequel. But I suspect this is just another Activision/Firaxis race to get to the market first. Tell me I'm probably wrong...
Rong	posted 05-18-99 05:23 PM ET I hear ya, Freddz. That's why I am lobbying for a "Foundation" group over at Apolyton. Hop over to http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum6/HTML/000514.html and show your support.
Khan Singh	posted 05-18-99 05:44 PM ET stryfe, Firaxis is a fairly small studio. If they spend the next year on Civ3, then they won't be working very hard on anything else. I think it's a waste of their time to rehash a twelve year old game for the fifth time. BR may intend to avoid rehashing Civ2, as Imran states. But whether that is his intention or not it seems to me that the overwhelming probability is that Civ3 will the same old thing once again. Civ, Civ2 and Smac are all very, very good games. I've spent a lot of time enjoyable time playing them. But enough is enough. Time to do something new. The Game Forum really seems to me to be the appropriate place for this discussion. We're talking about the next Firaxis game and how it relates to Smac. The Off-topic forum is for current events and philosophy. In any case it is the place where all the Civ3 topics are posted, so de facto, it is the right place for this thread. Sorry, Goob. I agree with Freddz that what is called for is a whole new game, with a whole new feel. I want to learn new tactics and new rules, not do the same old thing on a pretty new map.
Shining1	posted 05-18-99 06:11 PM ET Khan Singh - you're not related to Victor, are you? Personally, there are a huge number of things that CivIII can include that CivII did not - more scale and better A.I for a start (the AC A.I was a genius relative to Civ. Give Bry Un Renn Olds another year or so and it might even stop doing idiotic things every turn... who knows?) And Civ is a better game than SMAC. The Sci-Fi thing worked at the start, but the ludicrous future techs just got out of hand towards the end (sentinent econometrics violates so many fundamental rules it isn't even funny). Besides, we need something to talk about while waiting for patch 4.0. (or 3.1, as it really should be...) Shining1
jimmytrick	posted 05-18-99 06:35 PM ET yada, yada, yada.... I don't want to sound like Don King, but, whatever tripe they turn out, we will pay for it............ I even bought CTP, its still in the shrink wrap, but I will open it up someday..... The drum we should all beat is: "its the AI, stupid" Also, lets post CIV3 stuff at Apolyton
Shining1	posted 05-18-99 06:39 PM ET 'Nother Apolyton infiltrator. SMAC will have the better CivIII plan. YOU WILL SEE. j/king, of course. Anybody seen patch 4.0 recently?
Shining1	posted 05-18-99 07:21 PM ET Also: "...we will pay for it." Speak for yourself. But don't treat the rest of us as fatalistic morons.
Sparky	posted 05-18-99 07:28 PM ET ARE YOU MAD?!!! Of course we need Civ3. I crave it. Yes, the game has been done before --- the same goes for almost every game ever game. But Civ3 will use the creative minds of Sid and Brian and mix in improved technology. Imagine: A new game engine Intelligent AI Vibrant graphics New Strategies, technologiess, civilizations and realism Better interface Compatibility with SMAC!!!! This may become the best game ever made since Civ 2 .... and until Civ 4. Long reign Sid and Brian!
ejrolon	posted 05-18-99 08:21 PM ET running the risk of being branded an heretic. I have mixed feelings about Civ III. I played Civ I and then CII and now SMAC and i cannot think what kind of hook they will throw so that i should buy it. Civ II was CI with better graphics ( the same strategies that i used on CI applied to CII). SMAC is a natural result of the series but the same tactics that i used on CI still apply i just had a harder time figuring out the secret projects. Now, Civ III looks like a problem, what would it improve. MP support,... i usually play alone so i would want a better AI. Graphics? i usually disregard them if the game is good, no amount of 3d modeling or rendering will make a game that sucks better. Music? ditto. AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH! I have a faith crisis... somebody put me out of my misery
Submachinegun	posted 05-18-99 11:44 PM ET Ok... <BLAM>
Evk	posted 05-19-99 12:22 AM ET THANK you. I'd like to add that I don't think this is a good place to post Civ3-stuff. How am I supposted to find my sex threads when the entire first page of threads is CIV3: UNITS! CIV3: DIPLOMACY!, CIV3: LET'S PLAN THE ENTIRE GAME A YEAR AHEAD AND THEN BE REALLY DISAPPOINTED WHEN FIRAXIS DOSN'T USE EVERY SINGLE STUPID IDEA WE CAME UP WITH (What do you MEAN cramming it full of every crackpot idea I can come up with 'isn't fesable'!!!)
Rong	posted 05-19-99 01:07 AM ET Hmm, if you are getting tired of Sid & Brian's interpretation of civilization, check out The Clash of Civilizations at http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum21/HTML/000043.html This looks really interesting. Might give Civ3 a run for its money.
Freddz	posted 05-19-99 04:26 AM ET Shining, I'm getting the chills as I read your posts. Brrr. Sounds like you have given up your hopes for something really exciting. And you of ALL PEOPLE! Improvements are good, better AI is neccessary, but the whole "we've got plenty of 'small' improvements thing" makes me very sleepy. Sorry, I gotta go back to bed. Keep working against something truly new.
Freddz	posted 05-19-99 05:21 AM ET Shiny, maybe I came out a bit too strong. Not too unusual. I just think we should set our goals high. I realize some ideas some of us have probably will not be implemented 'cause they are too difficult, or too out of genre. For example: real time with a TBS option. But at least an idea like that illustrates how much I care about a good multiplayer game. Crazy ideas can give good balanced ones. And I do think we must keep the ribbon real high. Preferably in the clouds. Just a point of view, but an important one IMO
Hugo Rune	posted 05-19-99 08:12 AM ET I will want a _truly_ customisable game to get Civ3. I was greatly dissapointed by the lack of editors for SMAC. Anyway, I'd rather see SMAC2 than Civ3. Anyone agree with me?
stryfe	posted 05-19-99 01:46 PM ET Which was my point about the customizable AI. Someone several dozen messages up attacked the idea of this, saying that if the programmers couldn't, blah blah blah. The point isn't for us to be _programming_ the AI, its to be able to customize it. It doesn't matter if not everyone can do it--how many of us can make decnet scenarios or modpacks? It's just one more thing to increase replayability, and I'm surprised that anyone could think I was suggesting that we be able to go at the source code itself, which is a patently ridiculous idea.
Rabid Dog	posted 05-19-99 02:08 PM ET You can already customize the AI -- it is called INI files. To do what you are asking -- an open interface to the AI -- would be extremely difficult. You can already tweak the parameters. Let us take the most popular case -- what, specifically, kind of interface, psuedocode, etc, do you envision that would allow the 'Former going in circles' to be prevented by a user? I can personally not envision an easy way to prevent that. You are asking the AI to develop complicated multi-move schemas -- which might be possible in the source code itself, but I can't imagine how a post implementation parameter could prevent it. Rabid Dog
Bingmann	posted 05-19-99 02:40 PM ET RDog - Nope, open sourcing the AI is easy, especially if it's designed in from the start. Even now, the SMAC AI could be open sourced by moving the AI routines out of terran.exe into a dll, say terranai.dll, and then also shipping the source code that makes up terranai.dll. Then, the SMAC-addicted programmer/hacker-players could tinker with the AI routines (don't have to start from scratch, use the standard AI code as a starting point), run them through a compiler, and get a new terranai.dll. These new AIs will evolve quickly as dozens of AI hackers swap ideas and code. It would be much more accessible if the AI were written in a script language (like Python), but this would need to be designed in from the start. I would be against creating a new proprietary scripting language for this - it would be wasted time - just use an existing script language (like Python). An added bonus from taking this approach is that it would be much easier for the game developers to design and write the AI code since most script languages (like Python) can be modified while the program is running, making it easy to tweak (no stopping for compiling or starting over).