Civ 3 to Civ 4 : optimization !!!!

Abdul Alhazred · December 18, 2003, 13:36

Plz Firaxis : optimize the speed of game because i'm kicked by the slower speed in biggests maps ...

And on smaller maps the problem are same ...

Nikolai · December 18, 2003, 14:09

Yeah, I agree. The speed is shamely low as it is today, I'm afraid. And it definately doesn't have to be like that!

Gramphos · December 18, 2003, 15:31

Nah, all that is needed is some clusters to run the game on and all will be fine

Nikolai · December 18, 2003, 15:52

Gramphos, I have a P4 2 GHz processor with 512 MB RAM, and still I have to wait for ages between turns on the bigger maps. There is DEFINATELY room for improvement.

POTUS · December 18, 2003, 16:13

My computer is a few months old, and it is supposably "fast". For some reason, either Civ III enjoys making my computer go slower than a snail, or Civ III is slow.

Fosse · December 18, 2003, 18:11

Nah... it's already too fast. Who needs speed?

I'm reminded of the Simpson's episode in which the US Congress votes on a Bill titled "Flags for Orphans." Who can say no to that?

Speed is a BIG issue. THere is no cause for a machine over the specs of the game to choke on it.

Gramphos · December 18, 2003, 19:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Nikolai
Gramphos, I have a P4 2 GHz processor with 512 MB RAM, and still I have to wait for ages between turns on the bigger maps. There is DEFINATELY room for improvement.

I said you needed a cluster. that's at least three computers working together, but you would problably need at least 10 to make this game fast

Nikolai · December 19, 2003, 08:39

Hrmf... I guess I missed that part.

Shogun Gunner · December 19, 2003, 09:10

If they can improve the speed AND include more features/capabilities AND I don't have to buy new hardware AND it's at a very low price AND multiplayer works great AND...AND...AND....

i still voted that i wanted it faster

Kuciwalker · December 19, 2003, 15:33

ONLY after they actually get the good stuff in.

Andemagne · December 21, 2003, 19:00

I have better than minimum reguirements machine and I still have to wait for 15 minutes to turn to chance during the end game. this gotta change!

alva · December 21, 2003, 22:21

Minimum requirements are always, how should I put it...optimistic.

Inverse Icarus · December 22, 2003, 00:24

minimum reqs are them saying "you can see the splash screen with this crappy system"

Kuciwalker · December 22, 2003, 01:02

*maybe*

Abdul Alhazred · December 22, 2003, 06:12

I'm so happy than majority think like me : need optimization !

LDiCesare · December 22, 2003, 13:17

To me the speed is not so bad. I think the combat model is much worse than the speed problems, and am sure that stacked combat would make for a faster game (12 units grouped into a stack means 12 times less time used by the ai to give orders to them). The flashy graphics also don't help in terms of speed. More 3D = more need for hardware. If the ai could think between turns the way galciv does, it could help. It doesn't look like it does so right now, or processing the orders takes too much time.
Still, civ III is not that slow for me, but requires too much micromanagement (workers and units) so it becomes slow not because of the computer but because the gameplay makes it slow.

Abdul Alhazred · December 22, 2003, 15:47

Interesting point of view

Interessant point de vue

SAMUEL2904 · December 22, 2003, 20:35

I think micromanagament is Ok, is part of the game.

But surely the speed need to be improved.

LDiCesare · December 23, 2003, 04:58

Micromanagement is part of the game, but I vastly prefer (modded) CtP2 over Civ3 because of public works and stacked combat. When micromanagement causes the game to go slow, I don't like it. I loved to micromanage my single city in OCC in civ2, I hate to micromanage a huge empire.

Kuciwalker · December 23, 2003, 10:13

Well, you are in the minority.

LDiCesare · December 23, 2003, 16:34

Minority about CtP2 sure, but about stacked combat? I don't think so. Check the poll on the subject.
And who in the civ3 community played CtP2? The game sucked mostly because of its ai, and some people hate the special units like lawyers. I'm not sure public works has a clearcut majority against it.
The point is that micromanagement was bearable in civ2, but in civ3 it reaches such a level of tedium that the late game is, for me, unplayable.

pg · December 23, 2003, 22:13

i think this is one of the most important things for civ 4. they really need to improve game speed. the lag within the civ 3 interface is the worst imo. i can stand a minute or two between turns but the constant seconds worth of lag in the interface is really what annoys me the most.

Kuciwalker · December 23, 2003, 22:19

Actually, I think Firaxis should work on optimizing Poly first

Shogun Gunner · December 23, 2003, 23:06

Yes!

First optimize Poly.
Second optimize Civ..
Third, you will have to go optimize Poly again because so many people buy the new improved Civ 4 that the membership list grows incredibly large and slows down the system

and there are more popup ads

Urban Ranger · December 25, 2003, 11:26

It's not that hard. Just have the computer players "think" when the human player(s) is/are making their moves.

LDiCesare · December 25, 2003, 14:20

Quote:

It's not that hard. Just have the computer players "think" when the human player(s) is/are making their moves.

Yes, except that the last move made by the human player may change the situation and since moves are not simultaneous, the ai must react to that. The order it wanted to give before the move may have to be reevaluated. This makes programming a bit more complex than straight multi threading.

The Slayer · December 25, 2003, 22:02

Surely YES!!!.

With Conquest the main feature is tha possibility to play with 31 Civs... but it's toooooooooooooooooooooooo slow!!.

And taking the point that we expect for Civ4 more than 40 civs in a game, well...

Chilean President™ · December 25, 2003, 22:31

YES!!!!!!!!!!

actually now I'm pretty much used to the fact that Civ3 is slow, but the first time I played it I was on shock! Civ4 must have a new engine that allow it to be faster even with more civs and other new features.

Hola Slayer, plaswaneando por aqui tambien?

Paddy · December 25, 2003, 22:32

ok so it is slow, especially if playing huge maps with lots of civs.

I have a simple philosophy on the long breaks in between game turns now...

I go visit people, or cook dinner, or have a sleep...

We are lucky that they do not have over 180 countries available like on our planet.

Turns would take soooo long we would forget the name of the game...

Urban Ranger · December 26, 2003, 00:22

Quote:

Originally posted by LDiCesare
Yes, except that the last move made by the human player may change the situation and since moves are not simultaneous, the ai must react to that. The order it wanted to give before the move may have to be reevaluated. This makes programming a bit more complex than straight multi threading.

True enough, though the last human move usually just change things tactically, not strategically.