GRAPHICS (ver1.0): Hosted by Evil Conquerer

yin26 · May 19, 1999, 20:30

Evil was having trouble registering his name here for some reason, so he asked me start the thread for him. I had a big speech ready about the importance of great graphics, but I'll leave that for the Graphics Thread Master himself...

JT · May 19, 1999, 20:31

Didn't he already register?

Ecce Homo · May 19, 1999, 20:39

Remember Civ 1, where waves on the shores and flows in the rivers were animated? That feature disappeared in Civ 2.

If not too hard to make, I would love to see peasants working on the fields outside my cities, and smokestacks above factories...

JT · May 19, 1999, 20:46

I'd like to see visible wonders, ie, the city that builds the SoL has the Statue placed somewhere in the radius. It doesn't affect the square in terms of food/minerals/gold, but it would sure look cool.

Pythagoras · May 19, 1999, 23:45

Ecce - I think adding that would make it completly impossible to edit/modify shoreline terrain, unless it was a gif . . .

------------------
"I think you're all f*cked in the head!"
Chevy Chase-Nat'l Lampoon's Vacation.

Fugi the Great · May 20, 1999, 00:43

Nicer graphics may be nice, but what kind of hardware are we going to need to run the next incarnation. If it is anything like CTP with its beautiful graphic, hay great, but not if it's so blasted slow on a fairly fast computer. Are we all going to have to upgrade to 450, 600, or 800Mhz machines with dual video cards and half a gig of memory? I would rather have toned down graphics if it means that I could actually enjoy playing the game and not have to wait several minutes between turns. Use the extra memory to add more nations played at a time or more features to the game.

Then there's the cute wonder movies that everybody watches once and then disables because it interrupts game play. The build your throne room and palace screen, though cute serve no real purpose, you can never build it exactly the way you want anyway. These things are not really needed in the game and should be left out to make it cheaper and faster to produce. If you really want the extra graphics, then sell a companion disk with this junk on it. You can leave the replay in though unless of course you put it on the companion disk so I buy it. I rarely if ever play CivII with the disk in, and SMAC all animations are disabled, and after a actually finish the game of CTP I started last month I'm going to do the same thing there. If your going to animate anything, them animate the leaders of the different nations like you did in Civ1.

Unit graphics that you can modify yourself, if that means going back to 2d, then so be it. I'd rather have a tank attack backwards than a aircraft carrier that doesn't look like it is supposed to. If you are going 3d then put the unit in a file format we can use with the average 3d program. Or even better yet, put a 3d modeling program on the companion disk, now you just made it worth while buying. I suppose the best would be to make it in 2d, but make it look 3d and just swap pictures when the unit changes direction. Do we really need to animate units? I don't really think so, it doesn't do anything for me. Hopefully it would be something you could disable to speed things up a bit for slow machines.

I guess what I am saying, if it doesn't add anything worthwhile, don't make it any cuter than it already is. Half the stuff you put into the program to make it more eye appealing I look at once and turn it off. Put your time and energy to making a game that is both enjoyable and as realistic as possible. I realize that there are others that will say just the opposite of me, got to have better graphics, more eye candy. If you have to have more eye candy to play this game, then your playing it for the wrong reason - you play because it's fun.

meowser · May 20, 1999, 10:52

Since CIV is a game that lets you recreate history, I want to have the ability like in CIV II to be able to chose which architectural style my cities will look like. Unlike CIV II, give us more than just 4 styles to choose from

EnochF · May 20, 1999, 11:40

Fugi: Actually, there are certain wonder movies that I actually still watch, and I've been playing Civ II since Christmas. Darwin's, United Nations, J.S. Bach's, sometimes Adam Smith. I love the Manhattan Project movie. I always skip past Liberty, SETI and Pyramids, but some of those movies are great.

Meow: I'd like to see a few different cultural styles of decoration in the Throne Room. Let's say the throne room is surrounded by suits of armor. They might be wooden samurai armor, plate mail, Greek style bronze chest plates, y'know, variety. There would be a handful of choices for each area of the throne room, so that you could actually customize it to some extent. (Throne room instead of monument screen, of course.)

evil conquerer · May 20, 1999, 16:06

This is from the original thread at the official SMAC site, and I'm sending it over here so it doesn't get lost.

The most important part of the graphics, IMNSHO, is whether or not it slows down the game. The high-resolution images in SMAC were great, but they were unacceptably slow, even on my PII 300 with 64MB of RAM. The low-resolution files, which looked just fine and ran super-fast, were buried on the CD. There should be a choice during installation of if you want high- or low-resolution graphics (if that option is available).
The graphics should not get in the way of gameplay. In games like Command & Conquer, poor gameplay could be overlooked if the game had awesome graphics. But people don't play Civilization III for the graphics. So make the graphics as good as you can without hindering the true reason for TBS games: gameplay.

A 3D format is a must. In modern games, 2D isometric units, such as those in CivII are simply not acceptable. The system in SMAC was great, but it will obviously need updating because it will be old technology by the time CivIII comes out. If a modular system is used for units (choosing the chassis, weapon, etc. to make custom units), the individual parts should be clearly visible. I found it just fine in SMAC, but some people were complaining about not being able to distinguish different weapon types on the main map.

If a proprietary 3D format is used, there should be an alternate format (such as .pcx) for user-made units. In SMAC, you cannot customize the unit graphics, making MOD packs less flexible. For example, I'm currently working on a historical MOD for SMAC, but it will look really wierd with the regular units. A user-editable graphics file would be really useful.

Shining1 · May 20, 1999, 21:16

From the city interface thread:

I've made the suggestion that, because terraforming can now be done from inside a city, there needs to be a 'work in progress' type icon to show terraforming that is underway but not yet complete.

Also, the idea of regions within a civilisation has been suggested, so there may need to be regional borders as well as global ones. These are 8*8 around the edge of the capital of each region.

Finally, something unrelated - it would be good if the building types for each civilisation were unique to begin with, and if the four types concept from civII was extended into the later part of the game (e.g downtown shanghai still has some asian looking buildings, while new york has none, and london still has some historical type structures, reflecting a different arcitextual style.

I guess I'm asking for the late game buildings to retain some trace of their ancestry.

Trachmyr · May 20, 1999, 23:15

I believe not only city arcitecture should vary upon the CIV selected, but the style of units... esp. ancient units.

This can settle problems of who gets samuari? Everyone does, but they look diffrent, and if a UNIT WORKSHOP is implemented (I hope it is) they'll be named diffrent.

I also suggested in Social Engineering, that they're be a way to change or add options to Architecture/Garb during the game. After you conquer an Asian-style city, you could reaserch the architecture and choose to build new cities with new architecture. This is mostly aesthetics, but can give you a real feel for your civ.

meowser · May 21, 1999, 00:02

EnochF

Great idea about the throne room. I certainly miss it. The throne room was just one of the many things about CIV II that made you feel like your empire was trully growing and expanding. For some reason, I feel detached somehow in CTP's monument screen. Probably because the background stays the same. As for that space thing CTP has, I don't even want to go there.

Mo · May 21, 1999, 00:24

I like some of the wonder movies of alpha centauri, so I would keep them in the game. I wouldn't make the graphics so complex that you need as fast computer to run the game. The throne rooms were nice for the first few times of playing but then I just switched them off because it was always the same.

EnochF · May 21, 1999, 13:11

Hmmm... nobody's summarized the ideas in the Suggestions forum.

I'll just repost this one, which got some favorable response in the earlier thread.

AGE-VARIABLE MAPS

In other words, in the beginning of the game, the screen is drawn up like a primitive papyrus scroll with the now familiar Civ game screen on it. The city names are scrawled in hieroglyphic-looking script.

In the Renaissance, a compass appears in the corner, the map begins to look more like something Amerigo Vespucci would draw, the script for city names becomes fancy European cursive, there are little dragons appearing in the water for no reason, trade routes are on the map.

Eventually, you get to the Modern Age, and the map is criss-crossed with latitude and longitude lines, there's an option to view the map as a globe, the script becomes standardized Times New Roman, there are more complex borders (dotted in times of dispute), that sort of thing.

Those of you who haven't already heard this idea, what d'you think?

JT · May 21, 1999, 13:46

I love the map idea. It would add a lot to the game. Maybe in the future(if the game has one) there it could look like it's being brought up on a veiwscreen?

------------------
-Civ3 Thread Master of OTHER and UNITS.
"We get the paperwork, you get the game!"

evil conquerer · May 21, 1999, 16:02

Here is a list of all the different ideas mentioned, in no particular order:
<hr>

EnochF: The map should have different styles depending on the age it's in. For example, it could be a papyrus scroll during the rennaisance, a map with a compass arrow and fancy European script during the rennaisance, and a viewscreen in the future (JT).
Potential problems/caveats: May make map hard to read.

Ecce Homo: Animate the water tiles.
Problems: May make it hard to customise the map tiles
Suggested fix: Have an animated format for the default that is replacable with a common 2D (.pcx?) format for customization.

Many people: Bring back the throne room!. But make it customizable according to which civilization you have (for example, the Japanese have samurai armor hanging on the wall, the Europeans have knight armor, etc.)
Problems: May make it hard to customize civlizations.
Potential solutions: In the civlization's text file, have an option to say which kind of throne room is used.

JT: Show wonders in the map grid somewhere within the city's radius.
Problems: May make it hard to see what's in that square.
Solutions: Make the wonder show up under units and special resources(?), make wonder invisible with terrain viewing key (T in SMAC and Civ II).

Many people: Either make the units 2D (unacceptable in a modern game, IMNSHO) or have an alternative 2D format to customize the units with. In SMAC, for example, a historical MOD pack is impossible because there is no way to modify the unit pix ("those chariots look pretty silly with particle impactors"

).
Suggested fix: Provide an alternate 2D graphics file (.pcx?) to provide for the customization of units.

Many people: City architecture should be cilivization-specific.
Implementation: Provide a setting in the civilization's text file to determine the architecture style. This could be the same setting that determines the throne room and unit(?) styles.

Many people: The graphics should not slow down the game too much or require ultra-fast machines in order to run acceptably. For example, the animation for founding a new city in Civ's I and II (something unfortunately missing in SMAC) would just be a pain if there wasn't a way to skip it. The high-res graphics in SMAC ran unacceptably slow on my machine (PII-300 w/ 64 MB, in case you're wondering), but the low-res units looked just fine and ran much better.
Solution: Make the graphics as good as you can without slowing down the game.

evil conquerer: If the units are modular (as in SMAC), the different sections of the unit should be clearly visible. I didn't have this problem, but some people complained that the different weapons and special abilites were hard to tell apart.
Possible solution: Weapons and special abilities may have to be exaggerated slightly on the map screen.

EnochF: If terraforming can be done from inside the city, there should be an icon that indicates work in progress on that square.
Potential problem: Might obscure the resources in that square.

<hr>
If I missed anybody's please tell me and I'll gladly put it in. If you disagree with any of the suggested fixes or anything on the list, please feel free to post here with your suggestion.

Credits:
JT
Ecce Homo
Pythagoras
Fugi the Great
meowser
Mo
evil conquerer
Shining1
Trachmyr
EnochF

[This message has been edited by evil conquerer (edited May 21, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by evil conquerer (edited May 22, 1999).]

JT · May 21, 1999, 16:33

Whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on there, evil. I meant a viewscreen for post-modern ages, like the diamond age from CTP. The latitude-longitude and Times New Roman was good for this era. Then, when you get to any eras past this one, it changes into a viewscreen, kinda like in Star Wars where they have those 3-d maps that come up on screen. Of course, this would be 2-d, but you get the basic idea. The latitude-longitude was better for this era.

------------------
-Civ3 Thread Master of OTHER and UNITS.
"We get the paperwork, you get the game!"

Fugi the Great · May 21, 1999, 17:02

Any way you could make the map of what we know of (another nation gave us a map) slightly inaccurate until we have actually been there? I'm thinking of some of those really old maps of what people thought the earth looked like in ancient times.

3D graphics only in the way of how should I say - levels, and a real spherical planet. Sea level (ground units and ships), lower atmosphere(planes and missles), upper atmosphere (spy planes), near earth orbit (satellites), shallow water (subs near coast-seen by most ships), deep water (subs not seen unless ship has sonar or other subs). Missles and planes can then fly over ground units, troop transports can travel over the top of enemy subs without knowing it, ground units can pass under planes, satellites above everything watching whats going on.

Units in 3D will only slow down their movements. As much as I would like to upgrade the game for the millenium to totally 3D, the detail that you might loose because you went to 3D for units is minor, though facing of units if we stayed with 2D would be a definite must, (tanks actually pointed toward the unit you are shooting at).

JT · May 21, 1999, 17:12

Yes, but then it won't get the 100% from Gamespot that it deserves. We need pretty good graphics.

I think the maps should be accurate when you trade. I mean, they explored it, so why would it make a difference if we explored it?

Also, if they put innaccuricies in the map to make it realistic, it would seriously mess up the game. Imagine, you send an invasion force to go conquer the civilization hogging half of your continent, only to realize that there's a channel between you. Not fun.

------------------
-Civ3 Thread Master of OTHER and UNITS.
"We get the paperwork, you get the game!"

EnochF · May 21, 1999, 18:55

JT: I was thinking in the Genetic Age you'd look down on the planet from satellites or the Global Positioning System or something.

Then the Diamond Age could be a sort of virtual real-time world simulation with intense colors and stuff...

But since there's no real consensus about what (if any) future ages there will be, I didn't go into it.

Fugi the Great · May 21, 1999, 20:00

Even if it would be worthy of a 100% in any magazine, (or more if that's possible), if we went totally 3D, it wouldn't get it anyway do to the high hardware requirements it would need. I know most of my the ideas I have are going by very memory hungry as it is. Waiting minutes between turns instead of seconds while everything renders and rerenders moving 3D units on a 3D planet with 3D features is going to take forever. Why can't we just have units that just look left, right, up, down, and 45/60 degree increment angles, and have the APPEARANCE of 3D without actually being 3D. Why do we have to see the angles in between? What does that really do for the average player? Did we really get any extra enjoyment out of watching Needlejets hug the terrain (which was kinda cool at first), or were others like me moderatly annoyed after awhile when it took so blasted long to get to where it was supposed to go?
Now that I have over stayed my welcome, have a nice weekend.

Trachmyr · May 21, 1999, 20:10

I want to suggest using a Style of Graphics similar to LORDS of THE REALM II

May 21, 1999, 20:37

My Dad also plays Civ, and he doesn't care about how good the graphics are.
But guess what Fugi? Graphics actually effect how you play the game.

And don't any of you think that the game is going to come out in the next month or so, Oh nooo..It will certainly be out next year! far into the next year, Do any of you know how fast the computers will be then?
KTX said they will have a computer running at 1 gigahertz by the end of this year, thats the speed of two PIII's. So if you think that the games going to be slow by putting animations in, movies, better graphical interface, etc. I believe you are very wrong!

Ive put a site up of some quick sketches I did to give you all an idea how the game should look in my opinion, for better interactivity (leadership) more people turning heads and sayin "wow"
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Keep/3402/Civ.htm

(The page takes a while to load, big pics)

And I know Fugi, that you don't think you are everyone, but I am quite sure Firaxis are aiming at people with interests in most/all area's of Civ gaming. Not just one.

This is really all I am going to say, I just don't believe we should stick to the old diagonal interface, clumped up with terrain which is hardly interactive at all.

Also, in the site, some of the images may not load because the page is big, so just right click on the images that didnt load and reload that image, or show image.

Lata.

May 22, 1999, 04:58

Oh..and Personally I liked the Castle rather than the Throne room.

I could then see from the outside the city growing around me as my civ grows and my castle becoming more advanced looking through the ages. and so on.

I felt more open to where I "lived" hehe when I built the house I live in.

Perhaps we could also update the throne room aswell?

Rusty Nail · May 22, 1999, 05:29

I want to put in a strong recommendation for crisp, easily distinguishable, and pleasantly colored terrain graphics. It IS important. Civ2 did this well. Smac was a step backwards. CTP did better, but goofed by making hills, swamps, and grasslands look too much alike, and almost impossible to distinguish under the fog of war. And please, make fog of war an OPTION, and not hard-wired ( It has no game play effect). The fog is hell for people with poor eyesight.

Similarly for units. Clarity is more important than cutomability IMHO.

Fugi the Great · May 22, 1999, 10:44

I realize I'm not the only one that has an opinion. "Graphics actually effect how you play the game" - somewhat true, more graphics means slower game play, I can't play nearly as many turns of SMAC or CTP at a sitting as I could with CIV 1 or 2. The slowest part of both new games is the moving of units. Yes I am going to very soon upgrade my P200 to a fast P2 or P3 with a fast video card, but not everyone is - so I guess I am speaking for them. Maybe I just don't care about the graphics so much because I grew up with the C64's, so I'm used to the primitive graphics. I don't want to have to buy another new computer again or have to upgrade my next one any time soon after I buy it just to enjoy the next incarnation in the Civ series. We already jumped from needing a 486 to a P166 minimum to run these new games, what are we going to assume the average user is going to have when the Civ III comes out?

evil conquerer · May 22, 1999, 16:14

Icedan: You say those graphics were in a hurry? I'd give anything to see the ones you take your time on

. While that system looks really good, it has completely no sense of perspective or distance. It's impossible to measure how far units can move if there are no tiles anywhere. In addition, in a map like that it would be impossible to draw tiles. Still, that system would be cool for the city view. Which reminds me: Bring back the city view in Civilization III!. It was oddly lacking in SMAC. While completely useless, it is still good because it gives the user a sense of satisfaction. When I have a city with 15 wonders and all the structures, I like to be able to see close-up my great creation.

JT: You're right. I don't know why I listed the viewscreen as "modern times". Modern times could be a modern military map or a traditional atlas map. I'll fix that shortly.

Ecce Homo · May 22, 1999, 16:28

Icedan - I enjoyed your graphical work. It reminds me of the Destiny maps.

In Destiny you can choose between a 3D landscape (like Icedan's drawings but uglier), a flat map (like Civ 1) and a rotating globe. These systems are good, but badly implemented. If you get a 3D, you should be able to make the square grid visible.

May 22, 1999, 20:16

I understand what you mean Evil, I also took that into account. But if you have a look at the new populus or even the old game Magic Carpet, you'll see the map can rotate around in any direction, so maybe it could work like that?

I don't know what else is capable. Besides, you HAVE to move the map in order to see past the screens vision. So I don't think its hardly a problem.

May 22, 1999, 22:55

And I just want to say, that the drawing I made isnt exactly how I imagine it to be. I just wanted to give a fair idea what I think it should look like.

Age of Empires was made up of tiles aswell, if we could use that system, just make it look less like a tile, but enough to know its a tile, also making it look less like steps, and more like a hill and mountians.

right? hehe

And ahh...I was going to say something else..ah yeah..I enjoyed drawing those, I really started to rush the job near the end. But I am thinking about making it look good, and done properly. Just for fun.