C:CTP on March 16th - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  C:CTP on March 16th

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   C:CTP on March 16th

MarkG posted 02-08-99 05:30 AM ET
Activision announced that C:CTP will ship on March 16th... only a month after SMAC...
what do you make of it?
Markos, Apolyton Civilization Site
http://civilization.gamestats.com/smac
tOFfGI posted 02-08-99 07:39 AM ET
Ahh... The Civrapers are at it again. The graphics really suck, don't they?
MrSmily posted 02-08-99 11:02 AM ET
graphics arent everything. the unreal cd is a great frissbee (spelling?). i know im gonna get SMAC the 1st day when it comes here (grr, damn EA and thier shipping schedule) i might get C:CTP, ill have to get the demo and see a couple of reveiws.
tOFfGI posted 02-08-99 01:03 PM ET
: I know. But since everyone has been ranting about how much superior the graphics are to SMAC, I just thought I'd point this out... Frisbee, I think....
tOFfGI posted 02-08-99 01:31 PM ET
I Just read the Preview on Gamespot. It's a joke, right? A game developed for 1.5 years results in something which (discounting the new interface) could basically be created with the Civ2 Scenario Editor? All the changes are purely cosmetic, meaning much less difference than between Civ1 and 2. I wonder if it will sell, I really do...
JaimeWolf posted 02-08-99 05:13 PM ET
Uhhh ... stacked combat where combined arms is an advantage (archers + shieldwall is very effective), space colonisation for another level of combat/resource, sea cities ... how is this possible with a Civ2 scenario editor?
James
MarkG posted 02-08-99 05:54 PM ET
"could basically be created with the Civ2 Scenario Editor"
That could also be said for SMAC as well, but it would be lie
Markos, Apolyton CS
Apocalypse posted 02-08-99 05:57 PM ET
You'd need a few editors to make Civ2 like SMAC as well as a handy dandy Brian-O-Matic.
TheHelperMonkey posted 02-08-99 07:09 PM ET
I agree. If you don't have a Sid Meir {spelling?) or a Brian Renolds it's not a civ game. Even though they have some pretty good ideas, they probably won't be implemented in that good 'ole "sid" style of programming. Besides I've seen the graphics on Gamespot and they blow chunks (really). I ain't buying unless it gets 90 or more percent from OGR and Gamespot and PCGamer.
Besides, how would a company that makes mostly action gamer create a hit with a genre that they don't "specialize" in?
Victor Galis posted 02-08-99 07:36 PM ET
You might not be able to create it from Civ2 with a few editors, but it really deserves to be an expansion pack, and not a full game. i know there is no way I am getting it. That would be treason and cowardice (because I wouldn't be able to play multi-player SMAC).
Shining1 posted 02-08-99 07:41 PM ET
The last straw was changing the wonders. No Pyramids, no Lighthouse, no Leonardo.
While they did come up with some good ideas, such as the improvements, there is too much 'dumb' stuff in there to be attractive. Lawyers, the Hollywood wonder - sorry, I don't get americian humour at least part of the time, and this is certainly on of those times.
YES there is good stuff. But to combine Civ with farce the game becomes a bit T.A - nobody really gives a damn because interest in the result gets lost along with the realism.
Wen_Amon posted 02-08-99 10:15 PM ET
I think it looks pretty good. Besides, its a history game, so Im game.
Imran Siddiqui posted 02-09-99 02:55 PM ET
Something I posted in the CTP forums at Apolyton:
"One problem for CTP: SMAC is close to being released (next couple days). CTP is being released a month later (more or less). The masses that buy SMAC, thirsting for another empire-building, turn-based game may not want to purchase CTP a month after they purchased SMAC."
Imran Siddiqui
tOFfGI posted 02-09-99 03:06 PM ET
The Pinnacles of American Humour (Mad Magazine, South Park, Secret of Monkey Island, etc.) Have certainly not reached the game...
MarkG posted 02-09-99 03:19 PM ET
Simply because of the 100% SF character of SMAC, and the history-SF mix of C:CTP, not exactly the same people are going to buy the games. Lots of people will not buy SMAC simply because they dont like SF games. The same goes with C:CTP
Also, lots of people might just wait one more months to see the reviews of both games before deciding...
On the lawyer units, here's Peter Karpas'(of Activision) quote from usenet
[quote]Lawyer's don't kill units in Civilization: Call to Power. They, like the
other unconventional warfare units, are non-militaristic and are easily killed by anything that is militaristic. If you're at war, lawyers may be helpful, but probably won't be.
History has shown quite clearly that not all wars are fought on the battlefield. Let's just look at modern times. Radio Free Europe is an example of propaganda warfare the West used against the Communist Bloc. Economic warfare happens all the time among modern day countries -- in the form of treaties, taxes on imported goods, etc. Ever read articles on the difficulties some American companies have in setting up businesses in Japan, most of which end up in the courts, and all of which significantly slow their entry (and therefore their production) into that market?
In the end, the purpose of the unconventional warfare units is to try to fill in some of the gray area between "I'm at war with you" and "I'm not at war with you." In a post I made a while ago I said this, and it still holds true: "The point of the cleric and lawyer units and all the other unconventional warfare units isn't to be clever -- it's to provide the player with new strategies, better strategies, more flexibility in weakening opponents, and, overall, allow for greater creativity and fun in how you
play."[/quote]

Markos, Apolyton CS
Krushala posted 09-06-99 07:48 PM ET
CTP, the ultimate game
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: C:CTP on March 16th
MarkG	posted 02-08-99 05:30 AM ET Activision announced that C:CTP will ship on March 16th... only a month after SMAC... what do you make of it? Markos, Apolyton Civilization Site http://civilization.gamestats.com/smac
tOFfGI	posted 02-08-99 07:39 AM ET Ahh... The Civrapers are at it again. The graphics really suck, don't they?
MrSmily	posted 02-08-99 11:02 AM ET graphics arent everything. the unreal cd is a great frissbee (spelling?). i know im gonna get SMAC the 1st day when it comes here (grr, damn EA and thier shipping schedule) i might get C:CTP, ill have to get the demo and see a couple of reveiws.
tOFfGI	posted 02-08-99 01:03 PM ET : I know. But since everyone has been ranting about how much superior the graphics are to SMAC, I just thought I'd point this out... Frisbee, I think....
tOFfGI	posted 02-08-99 01:31 PM ET I Just read the Preview on Gamespot. It's a joke, right? A game developed for 1.5 years results in something which (discounting the new interface) could basically be created with the Civ2 Scenario Editor? All the changes are purely cosmetic, meaning much less difference than between Civ1 and 2. I wonder if it will sell, I really do...
JaimeWolf	posted 02-08-99 05:13 PM ET Uhhh ... stacked combat where combined arms is an advantage (archers + shieldwall is very effective), space colonisation for another level of combat/resource, sea cities ... how is this possible with a Civ2 scenario editor? James
MarkG	posted 02-08-99 05:54 PM ET "could basically be created with the Civ2 Scenario Editor" That could also be said for SMAC as well, but it would be lie Markos, Apolyton CS
Apocalypse	posted 02-08-99 05:57 PM ET You'd need a few editors to make Civ2 like SMAC as well as a handy dandy Brian-O-Matic.
TheHelperMonkey	posted 02-08-99 07:09 PM ET I agree. If you don't have a Sid Meir {spelling?) or a Brian Renolds it's not a civ game. Even though they have some pretty good ideas, they probably won't be implemented in that good 'ole "sid" style of programming. Besides I've seen the graphics on Gamespot and they blow chunks (really). I ain't buying unless it gets 90 or more percent from OGR and Gamespot and PCGamer. Besides, how would a company that makes mostly action gamer create a hit with a genre that they don't "specialize" in?
Victor Galis	posted 02-08-99 07:36 PM ET You might not be able to create it from Civ2 with a few editors, but it really deserves to be an expansion pack, and not a full game. i know there is no way I am getting it. That would be treason and cowardice (because I wouldn't be able to play multi-player SMAC).
Shining1	posted 02-08-99 07:41 PM ET The last straw was changing the wonders. No Pyramids, no Lighthouse, no Leonardo. While they did come up with some good ideas, such as the improvements, there is too much 'dumb' stuff in there to be attractive. Lawyers, the Hollywood wonder - sorry, I don't get americian humour at least part of the time, and this is certainly on of those times. YES there is good stuff. But to combine Civ with farce the game becomes a bit T.A - nobody really gives a damn because interest in the result gets lost along with the realism.
Wen_Amon	posted 02-08-99 10:15 PM ET I think it looks pretty good. Besides, its a history game, so Im game.
Imran Siddiqui	posted 02-09-99 02:55 PM ET Something I posted in the CTP forums at Apolyton: "One problem for CTP: SMAC is close to being released (next couple days). CTP is being released a month later (more or less). The masses that buy SMAC, thirsting for another empire-building, turn-based game may not want to purchase CTP a month after they purchased SMAC." Imran Siddiqui
tOFfGI	posted 02-09-99 03:06 PM ET The Pinnacles of American Humour (Mad Magazine, South Park, Secret of Monkey Island, etc.) Have certainly not reached the game...
MarkG	posted 02-09-99 03:19 PM ET Simply because of the 100% SF character of SMAC, and the history-SF mix of C:CTP, not exactly the same people are going to buy the games. Lots of people will not buy SMAC simply because they dont like SF games. The same goes with C:CTP Also, lots of people might just wait one more months to see the reviews of both games before deciding... On the lawyer units, here's Peter Karpas'(of Activision) quote from usenet [quote]Lawyer's don't kill units in Civilization: Call to Power. They, like the other unconventional warfare units, are non-militaristic and are easily killed by anything that is militaristic. If you're at war, lawyers may be helpful, but probably won't be. History has shown quite clearly that not all wars are fought on the battlefield. Let's just look at modern times. Radio Free Europe is an example of propaganda warfare the West used against the Communist Bloc. Economic warfare happens all the time among modern day countries -- in the form of treaties, taxes on imported goods, etc. Ever read articles on the difficulties some American companies have in setting up businesses in Japan, most of which end up in the courts, and all of which significantly slow their entry (and therefore their production) into that market? In the end, the purpose of the unconventional warfare units is to try to fill in some of the gray area between "I'm at war with you" and "I'm not at war with you." In a post I made a while ago I said this, and it still holds true: "The point of the cleric and lawyer units and all the other unconventional warfare units isn't to be clever -- it's to provide the player with new strategies, better strategies, more flexibility in weakening opponents, and, overall, allow for greater creativity and fun in how you play."[/quote] Markos, Apolyton CS
Krushala	posted 09-06-99 07:48 PM ET CTP, the ultimate game