Several Civ3 expansions planned.

Tarquelne · February 5, 2002, 07:18

"Civ3: For the Sake of Realism"

One advance reviewer raves "Every facet of gameplay has been adjusted to ensure that the game is as realistic as possible. For example, one of my favorite changes is the fact that every turn is now 1 day. Of course, some may not like the fact that a Spearman's move is now 0.0000001 tiles per turn. However, like the changes to war weariness, corruption, unit combat statistics, government choice, resources, workers, technological advancement, and improvement costs, I think the total unplayability (and, I should mention, complete inaccessability to new players) of the game is a small price to pay for the increased realism."

Next planned is "Civ3: The Anecdote" Like the "simulation" version above, but all the rules are based on the anecdotal evidence mentioned by web-forum posters. "Someone pointed out that the American government didn't collapse during the Vietnam war. We found ourselves all nodding "True, that's true." We found it a compelling argument, and so we've drastically reduced "war weariness" levels. And, of course, the combat system is much simplified. The more powerfull unit _always_ defeats the weaker unit."

Third planed is "Civ3: Mob rule" "The inspiration behind this product, Mark, is the assumption that those who complained the most about the original release know best." A Firaxis marketing executive, who spoke only when her anonymity was assured, was very euthusiastic. "Of course, Mob Rule II will practically write itself, as a new generation of Civ3 players become embittered by the sweeping changes made in the first Mob Rule expansion. We've come to see the gaming community's inability to accept new design concepts in a familiar title as a valuable sales motivator."

And finally the "Aye AI!" special edition. "It will retail for about $100,000, but we've confident it will be able to beat the best human players in the world without cheating. The price may seem a little steep, but after all the outcry about the quality of the origional AI we know that there are players willing to the price for a quality AI."

Also rumored to be under consideration is a "Sid Meier's Sid Meier's Civilization III" limited edition. "Each box would be licked by Sid to guarantee that personal touch that so many fans are demanding."

OneInTen · February 5, 2002, 07:32

score:
+1 funny
-1 flamebait

Ooops, I thought I was moderating slashdot there.

Flight · February 5, 2002, 08:23

funny

nice 1

Deathwalker · February 5, 2002, 09:53

ACooper · February 5, 2002, 12:24

great post

PsionicMind · February 5, 2002, 17:57

clap clap clap!

Somebody reasonable!

Terser · February 5, 2002, 18:32

Hmmm. Curiously I see no mention of the additional expansion for CivIII due out in the summer of '03. "CivIII for Complete and Utter Tards." will feature a design that is completely stripped down and simplified yet still lacks accessibility and fun for the casual player.

Rather than having these things called "cities" CivIIICUT will just have nations represented by big colored blobs on a 16 color screen. Culture will be done away with, though corruption will be set at 80% for all your cities and war weariness will cripple any nation at war for more than three turns. Wonders that reduce war weariness have been removed as they added too much complexity to the game.

It will also completely dispense with varying military units--indeed, it will feature a generic military structure sporting just one unit--called, appropriatley enough, a unit. This unit will be a multifunction settler-worker-infantry-armor-ship-plane that will move across land and water squares with equal impunity. Combat will be resolved by an eloquent "first-strike-system" whereby whichever unit attacks first will automatically win. Concepts like morale and terrain have been removed, as they are needlessly complex and have no place in CivIIICUT.

The game will be designed by somebody at Firaxis--who it is cannot be revealed for legal reasons. Rest assured, however, that Sid Meier's name will appear prominently on the box...

pauli · February 5, 2002, 18:46

heheheh, all very funny

but is that oneinten i see? get back to ars!

OneInTen · February 5, 2002, 20:02

Quote:

Originally posted by pauli
heheheh, all very funny

but is that oneinten i see? get back to ars!

What, and pay for the questionable priviledge of posting? Um, no thanks.

embermage · February 5, 2002, 22:03

d@%$ right! pple need to get over it...it's supposed to be fun not realisitic

Encomium · February 5, 2002, 23:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Tarquelne
"Civ3: For the Sake of Realism"

One advance reviewer raves "Every facet of gameplay has been adjusted to ensure that the game is as realistic as possible. . . "

Is that why Civ III is SO "realistic" Sid gives War Elephants airlift capability?

Is that why waves of bombers cannot sink any warship?? Ever hear of Pearl Harbor, Sid?

Is that why AI Diplomatic Advisors are so stupid and stubborn they won't make peace until almost exterminated??

Is that why dozens of privateers or submarines on an enemy's trade routes have NO effect on damaging that trade?

Iis that why wooden ships with cannons that could barely reach five hundred yards past the shoreline can destroy mines and irrigation canals?

Is that why garrisons just disappear if a city flips?

Is that why a Roman city existing for 5,000 years suddenly decides to join with the Iroquois due to this Culture Flipping crap?

Realistic? Civ II's batleships in lakes was more realistic.

OneInTen · February 6, 2002, 01:19

Oh boy, not only did someone miss the sarcasm, but even taking the post at face value they've misread it!

Perhaps this thread should be retitled "Is Encomium smarter than a hamster"

pauli · February 6, 2002, 01:54

Quote:

What, and pay for the questionable priviledge of posting? Um, no thanks.

if it'll get you back, i can see about getting you sponsored.

OneInTen · February 6, 2002, 02:28

Quote:

Originally posted by pauli
if it'll get you back, i can see about getting you sponsored.

Nah it's not a money thing.

Trifna · February 6, 2002, 17:07

It would be nice to have real arguments with the post though... Oh sure, there are some, but they are so metaphorical that they make "as if" some other factors didn't exist. Or I'd say "Civ III will be great when we'll all make a spear and attack our [poor] banlieue neighbor" is an argument against "We want something that has some sense in the referencial of reality". Useful...

Tarquelne · February 6, 2002, 22:59

"It would be nice to have real arguments with the post though... "

Well, I feel obligated to respond to any plea for "real arguments", but the use of sarcasm in place of a real argument was intentional. The sarcasm was directed against positions I think are so foolish that I have trouble formulating a real argument... at least, one that wouldn't simply state things I think are bloody obvious. Sarcam is a way to get some amusement out of stateing things you think are bloody obvious.

Realism: Maybe its because I do play lots of wargames (even the board-game type... and I'm not refering to Axis&Allies) and enjoy simulations, but the distinction between a wargame/simulation and a strategy game seems quite clear to me. Civ3 is a strategy game - not a war game or simulation - that's supposed to be simple and appeal to a wide audience. Civ3 is already highly unrealistic, and realism generally complicates things. In strategy games (most esp. "simple" ones) it's generally a bad idea to sacrifice game-play for realism. There are valid game-play reasons for, for example, having bombers not sink ships (you have to actually make some ships of your own) or allowing 1 Resource to supply an entire civ (a multiple resource system would, I believe, be vastly more difficult for the AI to cope with)

Anecdote: Criticising a system via anecdotes is futile (you can read "futile" as a euphanism for "idiotic". I sure to see it alot, though. (Everywhere, not just here.)

Mob Rule: This was just me venting irritation with the fanatic Civ3 critics who strike me being completely misguided. They should really be saying "We demand a true sequal to Civ2." not "Civ3 sucks."

Aye AI! (Isn't that a stupid name? Can't you see them really using it?) A lot of people don't seem to appreciate the fact that game development isn't free, and that Civ3 is a bit more complicated than Chess. Ok, a lot more complicated. Compaines have thrown a lot of $$ at chess programs, and chess is far easier to analyze than Civ3. Civ3 AI could certainly be better, and is often clueless, but its still one of the best I've seen.

Sid Meier's Sid Meier's Civilization III: Addressing one's complaints to Sid Meier strikes me as either singularly stupid, or malicious. (Or both, of course.) After "Robert Hienlein's Starship Troopers" and "Bram Stoker's Dracula", and all the other lies called "Marketing" everyone should realize that Names get attached to product for no good reason. Hmm... I guess I'm having trouble framing an "argument" here because I don't really understand why "Sid" should come into the discussion at all.