A open letter to Firaxis (don't let this great game die)

[Geardy]

The game Sim City by Maxis has been a still is one of the top games of its kind. Myst is another game that still carries the title of greatest game of its kind and other versions of it are coming out later this year and early next year. We must convey to Firaxis that Alpha Centauri is one of the premier games of its class. We need to support more and newer versions of this incredible game, by letting its creators at Firaxis know the game still is and will remain a game that players will continue to enjoy for years to come. This site is the place to begin to let them know that the game still holds the potential for even newer ideas and innovations. That we don’t want Firaxis to let this game fade away with time when like the other two games mentioned above, are still, after the many years in production are involved in newer versions and ideas. Please add your thoughts and comments and how much you would like to see even more added to this great game of Alpha Centauri.
[This message has been edited by Geardy (edited September 09, 2000).]

[mark13]

Finally, someone echoing the sentiments of millions of die-hard Alpha gamers all around the globe. Each and every game Sid Meier has worked on since the original Civilisation has been nothing short of a classic.

I bought Alpha Centauri on 13th November 1998, in the hope that the same ideas from Civilisation 2 would be transferred onto a new concept, continuing the future history of mankind. I was wrong, and I am glad that I was wrong, because this game is BETTER than Civ II, and better than ny other turn-based strategy game bar none. Usually I get bored of my games within a couple of months, when something better comes along, but not this game. I am still playing smac as hard now as I was then, and enjoying it every iota as much.

So, once more, I echo the notion pressed forward by Geardy, for goodness' sake Firaxis, DON'T let this great game die

[stuntman19]

I concur, a game engine that can handle more than 7 factions would be a positive addition. Just seeing how it plays out with the added interactions of the splinter factions would be cool.

[XWaste]

Yeah, it would be good to have all the factions playing at the same time. Besides that though, I'm not sure what else can be done (more patches maybe...) that wouldn't completly change the feel of the game.
More alien races maybe...but then the game could get too star warsy. Different planets with different terrain (no more fungus)...but then the game story is so tied to Chiron that it might just make the other planets feel contrived, especially if they were made with some sort of inner mystery to be discovered.

I think firaxis have done a good job of making a great self-contained game which works well because it doesn't need a whole host of add-ons. They would probably be better of creating a new space colonisation game which is more dynamic and allows for greater variance/expansion rather than trying to force them into smac.

[Provost Harrison]

I think the point is a valid one, but I think Firaxis are trying to develop other games and move on (Civ3, dinosaurs, etc) to expand the genre further. Sometimes all some companies are doing with the multitude of expansions is flogging a dead. Respect to Firaxis for not doing this, although the extra factions idea would be nice, if extraordinarily difficult to add into the game now without a serious rewrite. I think that it would be best to keep this in mind when making Civ3...

[Alinestra Covelia]

I agree. Although a stranger complaint perhaps would be that you couldn't reenact the history of the world in the game (Civ II or Civ I).

I'd personally find it very gratifying if it were possible for fans to actually put in a sort of "Replay" style game but with new civs starting up at controlled times (eg Americans declare independence 4th July 1776) and forcing government changes (eg China declares martial law 1st October 1949) etc.

That would allow "realworld" scenarios to be more easily created, for example cutting and pasting inside this given framework.

If this doesn't sound too complex and unimplementable, I hope Firaxis might consider it. As far as I know, no other game of Civ2's historical scope has a scenmaker so relatively simple to use.

------------------
Machines: outthinkable YES outfightable NO.
Men: outfightable YES outthinkable NO.
Allie Cove: outfallable INEVITABLY

Homepage http://www.enixine.dabsol.co.uk (Shared)

[Adm.Naismith]

Some months ago, we argue about the "Sweep of time" trilogy (Dino+Civ+SMAC).

It's still unclear if the three games will have some real link or only a marketing relation.

Like XWaste underline, SMAC is more "self-contained" than CIV, and I have read that SMACX already tuned some parts (but left bugs too).

Until Civ 3 I'm sure there is no place (means money, market and developer team) for a proper SMAC 2: aiming for late 2002 as early release date suggest to me we don't hold breathe

Still, for the sake of this discussion, I suppose that:
- SMAC 2 will get every CIV 3 engine and main features
- it probably will not evolve the main line too much, but if it will do anyway, I bet for one of the follow historyline:

1) start to play from the starship Unity voyage, with the first game part more about tactical squad inside the ship (very low probability)

2) colonize Chiron then expand on the Alpha centauri system asteroids (low probability)

3) fight aliens race, then go to war on the aliens planet, to clean up their mother planet in a vengeance (if you play as human) or to the earth (if you play as the alien factions) (medium probability)

4) colonize Chiron then go back to solve the mistery of the earth long silence; there you discover the planet is lost in a messy war and you have the opportunity to restart life almost from scratch (a) restarting with a Dino 2 game, with concept from a S.F. story when scientist act more like gods seeding the life (medium probability),
or
(b) restarting with a Civ 3 game, but helping human tribe survived, with only knowledge of few low tech, to raise up again cleaning up the messy earth (medium probability)

5) keep the same history, add CIV 3 features and some graphics bells and whistles (high probability )

Ok, now vote the poll!

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant
[This message has been edited by Adm.Naismith (edited September 13, 2000).]

[Helium Pond]

The games originally mentioned--Sim City and Myst--were phenomenons. They created whole genres of gaming (well, they didn't actually create them, but they proved their potential so strongly that many imitators followed). The reason those games have been kept alive, with updates to their graphics engines and new additions, but basically still the same game, is because they still sell well. Alpha Centauri, while my favorite game, has simply not sold at levels high enough to make it worth Firaxis' continued support. I'm addressing the original point of this thread, here, not more wishes about what the game should be. I would love it if the game were kept alive--if it was a staple of the gaming industry, if it was continually bug-fixed and finally balanced--but it isn't going to happen. It's much more likely that we'll see a new version of Civ II than a new version of SMAC. And I'm not being facetious: a new version of Civ II could actually happen. It wouldn't be a new version with new AI and new features; it would be a new suit of clothes on the old engine, and it would happen because the game is considered a classic, and its parent company wants to milk the franchise a little more. That's a long way off from happening to SMAC, which isn't even considered a classic yet, if it ever will be.

[Neptunus]

You there, at FIRAXIS... You've made a masterpiece and HAVE TO present a SMAC II to the world EVEN BETTER. (Sid knows the way to achieve that - he has the touch of Midas)

OK it may be after Civ III but we DO expect a SMAC II.

After all, I personally can't stand the fanfares about the new CtP II as I strongly believe there is a better and cheaper way to obtain trays for coffee mugs : just use old CDs (At least MY copy of CtP made a nice coffee mug tray).

So, Helium Pond you may be correct in your speculations about the future of SMAC (from the FIRAXIS point of view). But CtP is NOT and will NEVER be a classic even if it sells more than SMAC (which I think it did, but not to a much greater degree).

So why CtP II and not SMAC II ????????

[XWaste]

The normal premise for a sequal is the continuation of unresolved issues from the original.
Civ doesn't really have a storyline, so a sequal is really just a newer version of the same game.
Smac does have a story, and I wouldn't be interested in any sequal that repeats the story with an 'improved' games engine and some new features.
Logic would dictate then, that a smac2 would have to continue where smac left off.
This would then suggest the sort of space civ game like Masters of Orion II (one of my fav games).
There are a number of possibilites
-different start conditions dependant on how you deem you won smac (maybe the ability to play through both games - starting from smac, winning and then transfering to smac2)
-different levels of management...rather than colonising empty planets or those with submissive natives (like MoO2) some planets could have thriving civilisations, which you could intrude upon by colonising some free territory, meaning not only do you have to keep track of everything your doing in the universe, but some planets will have a civ/samc like nature to their management.
-unlimited potential for oppenents, as you could always develop new alien races.
-The progenitors are out there somewhere
-What has happened to Earth, I like the idea of some sort of evil Empire like out of Star Wars
-Did other groups of humans leave earth?
-What benifits would a sentient planet give?
-How would you win the game?

I don't like the idea of a smac2 being just a revamped smac, like the civ sequals are. If a smac2 is to be developed (which doesn't seem too likely) it should be a new game worthy of being a classic in its own right.

[Helium Pond]

Yeah, everybody's full of great ideas for the game makers.

[Khan Singh]

Smac is a great game. So Firaxis (and Big Huge) should go on to make other great games. Not the same game again.

For SMAC 2, why not have Humans from Alpha Centauri to come back to Earth... they get there about the same time a Proginator colonization or whatever fleet arrived there...

-LordLMP

[Dry]

I long hesitated before writing this post because what follow is about friends' opinion and not really mine and it is difficult to write a) for others b) in a foreign language.
I post it because out of 4 friends, I am the only one who still play SMAC. The 3 others refuse to play anymore: they prefer Civ2.

Reason1: ethic.
Two of my friends consider Civ2 a game about the good side of mankind. Most wonders (except KR Crusade, Manhattan) are testimonies of what beautifull things mankind can achieve when men work together. Most Secret Pojects (not all) are testimonies of what bad things man can do to other man (I was personnaly shocked by the Self Aware Colony).

Reason2: optimism/pessimism
The same 2 see Civ2 as a game where mankind progress. Mankind starts from barbarism and - with discoveries of new tech - it progress to civilisation. Man goes from despotism to democracy, from slavery to freedom.
They see Smac as a regression of Mankind: from (relative) freedom back to slavery. Man learn how to enslave more deeply other men (Thought control, Virtual reality,...).

Reason3: Torture
We all 4 where shocked by what happen to a captured leader. Even if you switch of the scene (I no more sure if we can do this, but anyhow...) you still have the message that the leader is tortured. We all tried to find if we can choose something else for captured leaders, but found nothing. For one of us it was too much and he refuses to play because of that (A message like "you *may* torture him/her" would have been enough, but you don't even have the choice!!) . For another, it is just "not compatible with his personality", he dislikes that sequence and - like me - he tried not to take the last city, to avoid that message.

I am the only one who continues playing smac because I don't care about game context, I just play, like I would play Doom. But for my friends (They also play Doom), context of a "builder" game is important, especially if it is the follower of such a great game as civ.
The one for who the torture sequence is too much had nearly a depression by playing. He now play civ2 only.

So, if there is a SmacII, can you please make it more ethical, optimistic and allow "democratic" players to bring captured leader before the court for a fair trial (or torture him for those who likes that).
Please allow players to role-play that game also as "good" leaders, not only as despots.

Once again, it is difficult to explain why others don't want to play anymore, I tried to explain what I understood from what they told me, but my request is:
Please, bring back my friends: I miss being able to talk to someone about what great game I played the day before...
[This message has been edited by Dry (edited October 03, 2000).]

[stuntman19]

You make some good points, I do grant you that. However, how can one find smac so offensive as not to be able to play, but play DOOM? In my opinion DOOM is way more violent and offensive. Don't give me the DOOM is violence against mutants, etc as this is still barbaric if even against another form of life.

[Deimos]

Ideological Differences.

Isn't that one of the defining differences between CivII and SMAC? (I've never played any of the civ games, but from what I have picked up from others discussions over the differences, this was a big one.)

SMAC, at its core, is about the interaction of different ideologies and how they can/cannot get along.

SMAC has many SP's/unit abilities/actions that are unethecial, and here's the great thing about the game: you don't have to use/do them!

If one ideology is going to go so far as to completely eliminate another, it is committing genocide, and a "torture the leader" movie is appropriate.

If you are prepared to commit genocide, then, you should be prepared to accecpt the baggage that it comes with.

I'm with stuntman19. Doom contains a much higher level of disturbing content that SMAC, IMHO. How can you be ok with that, but not be ok with a stylized, simulated torture session?

On a side note: If a CGI movie about a simulated torture has caused one of your friends to suffer a bout of depression, then I would like to suggest that this person seek professional help, since there are probably other RealLife(tm) issues that need to be addressed.

[drewski]

I hadn't really given it much thought until I read Dry's post.

My wife will occasionally ask me what I'm doing and when I reply that I'm playing SMAC, she'll say, "and how are you trying to win this time?" (She's not really a gamer at heart, but she has listened to my description of the different victory conditions.) I usually have to respond that I'm busy conquering or beating someone into submission, as the AI is usually at odds with me. She sometimes asks, "why are you so mean?" I kind of shrug and think, "it's a game, that's how it goes."

Once, she walked into the room just when I had eliminated a faction, and she saw the torture scene. "That's terrible," she said. It hadn't really crossed my mind that, it was, in fact, terrible.

This will in no way influence my future playing vs. non-playing of SMAC. I enjoy the game and its challenges, but now, having had my eyes opened to the one-sidedness of the options, I feel that things could, in fact, be improved. (It wouldn't have been all that difficult to have the game check your SE settings at the time of a capture and choose an appropriate ending sequence for particular cases. On the other hand, it wouldn't have been too hard to make spore launchers less impotent or AI city trades less ridiculous etc.) I think there many other issues/bugs that could be addressed as well and I'm not sure how many SMAC fans would be more excited to see different choices for dealing with captured faction's leaders at the expense of other fixes... not that either are being awaited with held breath.

[Nigel]

I'm a little confused by your post, Dry. You comment that you and your friends see the trend toward 'virtual reality' as something bad, yet your friends play these builder games and take the whole content seriously. Maybe you could get them to play again by cornering them with logic.

[Dry]

About Doom and violence:
like many other things, violence is also a question of context. If you see a girl with short skirt at the office, you will find her "sexy". If you see her half naked at the beach, that's just normal.
Doom IS a game about violence, you expect it, you choose to play it.
Smac was expected as the follower of Civ2. In Civ2, you can role-play a little bit and choose to be a "nice" leader or an "evil" leader. All the violence you do (and my friend ARE violent in Civ2), you choose it.
I think that Civ2 had great success because you could play different styles. Of course, Smac also, but it contains more unchosen violence than Civ2.
One good sign for me of this is that I see (saw) more girl posts on Civ2 sites than on Smac sites.

Deimos:
This friend IS following a therapy, for more than 15 years.

Nigel:
Virtual reality is not bad per se, it is bad if your whole life is only virtual.
Television is not bad, television is bad at the rate of 12 hours a day.
Virtual reality is like drugs. It is a way to avoid reality. The problem of virtual reality is the same as the problem of drug: it would be nice if there wasn't this dependency problem (or do you say addiction?).
There is no problem of sometimes, to forget your everyday problems to go in a dream (or nightmare) world. The problem is not to become addicted. With some drugs you can become addicted very fast, that's why they are forbidden. You can have the same effect with virtual reality.
Who cares about eating one cookie, what about eating 100 cookies a day?

To All:
Please, don't see things as just "good" or "evil", it depend on the context and/or in the amount.

After this post, I thought a little bit more about the whole thing: the difference between my friends and me, is that I saw SMAC more as a wargame than as a builder game, they saw it more as Civ3.
Smac was made for gamers, Civ2 was made for a more wide public, even to non-gamers. In that way Civ2 can be called a "great classical", Smac only deserve the term of "very good game".

[mark13]

OK, so a bout of depression may be taking the whole ethics kick a bit too far, but despite that, Dry does have a valid point. It is not particularly ethical for one faction leader to torture another, however, neither is it particularly ethical to attack a base with several million citizens in it. I believe, however, that the two scenarios are very different....

1) you defeat another faction leader, and decide to have them put in a chamber and ceremoniously tortured for your own personal pleasure. This, IMHO, is very wrong indeed, and the writers should indeed edit this out of SMAC2, if there were to be such a game.

2) you attack an enemy for the survival of your faction. This, in most cases, is justified, as they would no doubt do exactly the same to you given half a chance.

Although there are indeed other issues which *need* to be resolved for any sequel, it wouldn't do any harm to get rid of these tasteless and ultimately unethical sequences, as they do not add to the flavour of the game at all.

[stuntman19]

Dry,

You've totally lost me, one can play smac as Morgan and not attack anyone. I've won a game as the Consciousness and not fought a battle or had even a vendetta.

Your DOOM explanation makes no sense either. How can one approach depression from smac and still play DOOM? Maybe when your friend goes in for his next counciling you should go with and get some help too.

[Alinestra Covelia]

I think Sid Meier should make a new type of turn based strategy game. It would depart from the precedent set by the original Civ trilogy (Civ, CivII, SMAC) and be much more human and individualistic.

It could be called


THE BIG BANG by Sid Meier.

Hmm.... no. Maybe not. Sorry.

[Aredhran]

Sid Meier's BIG BANG

Good one, Alinestra !

[WhiteElephants]

Dry -- I don't agree with your friends because you do have an option. When your beating your opponent bad enough to have him down to his last city he/she usually submits and asks for a submission pact. Now the only circumstances where they won't, that I have heard of, is if you used a planet buster on them or nerve gas or which makes torturing the leader petty in comparison. Another situation I am aware of is if you already have three submissive pacts which would then make the torture unaviodable. Someone else already mentioned that your friends are in fact commiting genocide on an ideaological basis anyways so I feel torture is a rather moot point. There is no one twisting anyones arm in SMAC to conquer another faction or commit atrocities. You can subvert bases with probe teams or just plain play defense. I also have to disagree about the SP slant your friends have taken. It is easy to look into the past and pick and choose which marvels of the world are deemed achievements of mankind, but a far greater task would be to look into mankinds future and speculate as to what achievements are possible. I believe that CIVII completely left out bio warfare which is certainly scientific achievement of mankind although not a real happy-go-lucky one. Besides, do your friends really know what the implications of a virtual reality or a self aware colony really are? Of course not, they can't even estimate the far reaching implications of the Human Genome Project let alone scientific break throughs that might not even occur in our lifetime. I also think it is a bit presumptuous to assume that democracy is the pinnacle of governmental administration. I think they would have to agree that forms of government have their place in time and that it would be hard for me to imagine that democracy doesn't have it's place in time as well. In summary, I think it is rather sad that your friends feel like the game is compelling them to conquer other factions and commit atrocities, perhaps the self aware colony is already in place?

[Nigel]

Sid Meier: the opiate of the middle class?

[RedFred]

My own experience with Civ, CivII, SMAC and SMACX is that each successive game was more violent. So I agree with Dry's assessment. Although it is possible to have a violence-free SMAC game I would suggest that it is an extremely rare event. SMAC, and even more so, SMACX is tilted toward fighting. I'd also have to say that Stuntman19's idea about playing Morgan peacefully has never worked for me...soon as I switch to FM all the AI factions decide to pound on me.

The debate about the torture chamber has raged since the early days of .owo. Personally, I am not fond of it.

White Elephants has sort of touched on one aspect of SMAC that interests me greatly. Our technology in year 2000 has started to outstrip our ability to form a consensus on what is ethically acceptable. It is easy to see this trend accelerating over the next hundred years. A great feature of SMAC is that it makes me think a bit about things like euthanasia, genetically modified humans, ethical research, artificial intelligence, new styles of government...

This game has an unusual level of complexity to it which I really appreciate. Sure it doesn't take long to be able to whup the AI at Transcend level. But to truly master this game at every detail is extremely difficult. I will freely admit that I am learning new stuff all the time.

I believe that another reason this game will be viewed as a classic is due to the unusual level of detail given to character development. This game is short on pure villians and pure heros. No question that each faction leader has their own style. It is also interesting that everyone has a favourite and a least favourite faction to play, but that all factions have supporters and detractors.

Many ideas have been proposed on a new storyline for SMAC2. I have no idea if there ever will be a SMAC2, but I for one would be interested in seeing what Firaxis could come up with. For me just a reduction in bugs, a slightly better Design Workshop and a different planet to land on would be all it would take to make my ears perk up.

[Deimos]

quote: For me just a reduction in bugs, a slightly better Design Workshop and a different planet to land on would be all it would take to make my ears perk up.

If you would like a more bug free version of SMAC/X, check out Loki Games. They have ported SMAC/X to Linux and are fixing a bunch of bugs in the process. The game has gone gold, but it hasn't shipped yet due to "packaging problems", whatever that means.

[Dry]

One last word about my friends because like I said, it is difficult to argue for others.
Last word is:
The Topic here was "A open letter to Firaxis". What I wanted to do here was to pass an information to Firaxis designers, explaning why some civ player did not play Smac. I saw here posts were everybody said "This game is great, go ahead".
I wanted to be more constructive say something like "If you are designing a sequel to smac, here is the reason why 3 civ player - among thousands of others - do play Civ2 and not Smac".

So now, about my opinion:
I remember some interview of Sid Meier about Civ. He told he designed a game he wanted to play, and not a game that will please marketing (concept of beeing free, and not thought probed or controlled ). The result was a hit.
I fear that Smac was more a game to please people (or marketing). The result is a good game, but not a hit.
In this way I didn't felt the "Sid Meier's touch" in Smac. The game *is* good and I feel SM's presence in that game, but as a consultant, not as chief designer.

Civ2 was a game allowing great freedom in scenario design. We all saw hundreds of scenarii on the net. I expected Smac to be even more configurable: SciFi is more able to give freedom to people than history. I would have expected for example, some variety in the planet choice (arctic, jungle, desert,...).
I think the ideas were there: workshop, SE, txt files,... *are* something in that direction - and this is why I say I feel SM's presence - but on others points (always same planet, same worms), I have the feeling the game is not finished.
An idea for a (cheap) sequel would simply be: an extension. Different planets (more or less hotile), different native life, with different sentient levels, to have some kind of Colonization Smac.