the Civ thread.

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Wed May 18, 2005 12:01 pm

I'll start this up with:
http://www.firaxis.com/games/game_detail.php?gameid=6

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Wed May 18, 2005 1:45 pm

I've been waiting on screenshots for a while.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Wed May 18, 2005 3:36 pm

Alpha Centauri would still kick it's ass.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Wed May 18, 2005 5:04 pm

You old fart.

Koki · Post by **Koki** » Wed May 18, 2005 5:12 pm

That old fart's right though.

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Wed May 18, 2005 5:31 pm

And by extension, the sod supporting the old fart's perspective is EGADS ! also correct. Civilisation <WOW, MORE 'UNIVERSAL APPEAL' ! AWESOME !> has nothing on Alpha Centauri. Yeehaw.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Wed May 18, 2005 6:48 pm

Civilization 3 didn't go for the more universal appeal IMHO.

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Wed May 18, 2005 6:54 pm

Fair enough, agree to disagree. Or do not.

vendetta · Post by **vendetta** » Wed May 18, 2005 7:04 pm

Kashluk wrote:Alpha Centauri would still kick it's ass.

Damn right.

Funny though, just finished one outstanding game last night.. finished at 4h30 AM playing as the Gaians.

I had 2052 planetary votes, 87 cities, conquered the Pirates, the believers and the Angels.. something like 70 000 of energy, 6000 per turn, 37 hydroponic pods, 17 power pods, 100% of technologies, 54 aircrafts ...wow.

My score at the hall of fame was 247% surprinsingly.. weird.

Anyway, my point is that there is absolutely no way that the Civ franchise is gonna get any better than AC. First, they would to hire Brian Reynolds back and second, start all over again because they going in the wrong direction (heck, a freakin' 3D engine).

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Thu May 19, 2005 1:21 pm

There's nothing wrong about a 3D engine if the gameplay isn't degrading, but instead, getting better, like Civ3.

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Thu May 19, 2005 2:11 pm

well, preview & screens of civ4:

http://pc.ign.com/articles/614/614551p1.html

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/620/620513/imgs_1.html

Some of those look rillyrilly weird, bot some look ok.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Thu May 19, 2005 5:00 pm

It I really don't care about the look, as long as the gameplay is as deep as Civ2 and 3.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Fri May 20, 2005 6:25 am

Civ 3 had actually less features than Alpha Centauri. Diplomacy was stripped down to almost nothing, no custom designed units available, really poor social engineering etc. Sure, Alpha Centauri didn't have cultural influence, but it had national borders before any Civ game.

Alpha Centauri > Civ2 > Civ3

Koki · Post by **Koki** » Fri May 20, 2005 6:31 am

What about original Civ? It had one major advantage - after the game, you could how see countries in the world progress in time. That was fucking awesome.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Fri May 20, 2005 6:36 am

I've never played the original

Mismatch · Post by **Mismatch** » Fri May 20, 2005 1:28 pm

what bothers me about civ4 is that they say theyve removed the att/def rating and replaced it with a single power rating. Amnd that they've decided to decrease the no of available units.
Other chit sounds good though.

I also havent played the original civ

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Fri May 20, 2005 5:13 pm

I do hope the diplomacy features are well done. It's the only lacking part of Civ3.

Koki · Post by **Koki** » Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 pm

Kashluk wrote:I've never played the original

I spit on you from my higher moral ground then.

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Fri May 20, 2005 5:44 pm

Philistines. 'Cept for Koki, and possibly D5itm38 (who may in fact be another fucking philistine.)

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Fri May 20, 2005 9:08 pm

I did play the first one, and the second one, and Colonization, so no, not philistine, please D: