What do you think Firaxis is doing right now?

[Urban Ranger]

Aftermath looks great. I hope they get it done soon.

[Alex]

Hm, Pirates 2 would not be a bad idea...

[Carolus Rex]

I fear that the success of Civ 1 (which I've only looked at and never really played) and Civ 2 will never be repeated. They are difficult to improve upon.

I, for one, would be completely satisfied if the bugs in Civ 2 were ironed out and minor changes made, like adding the possibility to move units in stacks and getting rid of rush buying.

I fear that my expectations on future Civ games will always be too high and the disappointment grim...

Maybe they're working on a new Civil War battle?

Carolus

[Joseph]

Originally posted by vovansim
Don't see Sid Meier working on X-COM. Can't imagine that at all...

I think X-Com was made in England and Sid had nothing to do with it.
Just found my X-Com Manual. A company call Mythos Games Ltd made the game.

[vovan]

Right. What I was referring to was the rumour that he will be working on a remake of X-COM, or a sequel, or whatever you wanna call it.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Carolus Rex
I fear that the success of Civ 1 (which I've only looked at and never really played) and Civ 2 will never be repeated. They are difficult to improve upon.

I, for one, would be completely satisfied if the bugs in Civ 2 were ironed out and minor changes made, like adding the possibility to move units in stacks and getting rid of rush buying.

I fear that my expectations on future Civ games will always be too high and the disappointment grim...

Carolus

I completely agree. IMO the best chance for a great Civ2.5 will come from one of the non-commercial efforts.

[Urban Ranger]

My view is there are improvements that can be made to Civ, and Civ 3 is a step in the right direction. First thing they need to do is to eliminate ICS, the way to do it is to remove city building out of the player's hands. Make that a consequence of population development in a region. The player can do things to help with this, of course. Variable city radius and cultural influences are good additions. They should also make the whole thing more like playing a country instead of a collection of cities.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by DrSpike


I completely agree. IMO the best chance for a great Civ2.5 will come from one of the non-commercial efforts.

Why make Civ2.5 when Civ3 is superior in every aspect save one, scenarios?

[DrSpike]

Well you are entitled to your opinion but the majority of long term serious civvers understand the limits to Civ3 gameplay.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by DrSpike
Well you are entitled to your opinion but the majority of long term serious civvers understand the limits to Civ3 gameplay.

Right, ok.

And I've played Civ, at least the PC game as long as anyone on this board, unless the man himself or his testers are lurking, so get off your high horse.

How many people still hang out in the Civ2 forums here? 10? 15?

edit: add to this message

[FrustratedPoet]

so get off your high horse.

What? Ain't it big enough for the two of you?

Sorry sleepy, I just couldn't resist, but you've gotta admit that your original statement was a little bit high-horse-ish too.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet

Quote:

so get off your high horse.

What? Ain't it big enough for the two of you?

Sorry sleepy, I just couldn't resist, but you've gotta admit that your original statement was a little bit high-horse-ish too.

Well, yes, I would admit that. In retrospect I am not embarrased by how I used that phrase, but that I used it at all, I mean, I'm not in my sixties yet, I should have better cooler phrases to use than that one.

[Cruddy]

I reckon Firaxis are

a) Busy writing patches for existing games.

b) Waiting for market maturation.

I don't mean they're standing still - no doubt storyboarding and design of new games is advancing. However, the lack of public announcements makes me suspect that current PCs (at least, what most people have) are not powerful enough for what they have in mind.

Another way of looking at it - they're designing games now that will be completed when everyone has a 512M machine and at least a 1G processor. If I was in their shoes - that's what I'd be doing. Release in 3-5 years say.

[Carolus Rex]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel

How many people still hang out in the Civ2 forums here? 10? 15?

Yep, and that's about 10 or 15 more than you'll find in the Civ 3 forums six and a half or seven years after that game was released.

Seriously, the forums may be slow, but Civ 2 is alive and kicking.

Carolus

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Carolus Rex


Yep, and that's about 10 or 15 more than you'll find in the Civ 3 forums six and a half or seven years after that game was released.

Seriously, the forums may be slow, but Civ 2 is alive and kicking.

Carolus

I'm sure in five years the same will be said about Civ4 and Civ3, but its all good.

[DrSpike]

Sleepy: As I said you are entitled to your opinion. Don't get me wrong I played Civ3 for 3 or 4 months after release and I don't think it's a bad game. But in my opinion anyone who thinks Civ3 is as deep a game as Civ2 or SMAC doesn't have a good grasp of the genre. If that's high horseish then so be it.

And for the record the amount of Civ2 players remaining is amazing, for a game that is 7 years old. Once the patches/Xpacks run out for Civ3 I give it 1 or 2 years tops........it just doesn't have the longevity.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Cruddy
However, the lack of public announcements makes me suspect that current PCs (at least, what most people have) are not powerful enough for what they have in mind.

You must be kidding. Most games don't even make CPUs sweat, just look at the frame rates of Quake 3 etc. running on high end Wintel boxes.

[Alex]

Maybe Cruddy means that they are planning a full 3D version of Civ whereby you walk around your cities, go inside the buildings and talk to the locals, and you can guide your armies to the battle in full first-person mode, with thousands of polygons being rendered on the screen in real-time...

[Urban Ranger]

The Sims meets Civ? Now that's an interesting idea.

[Nubclear]

What is it doing?

Masturbating. Just look at Civ3 and PTW

[pg]

i hope they are working on an entirely new game. i pretty much always prefer something totally new to sequels.

btw, i think all civs are pretty deeply flawed gameplay wise but they are still fun as long as the micromanagement doesn't get out of control(ala civ2).

[Naiveplayer]

Civ3 profits? Firaxis turned a profit on Civ3? I thought they lost money from all the posts how Civ3 is really bad on cfc and poly...wait, that was reputation actually.

I hope they are working on a ptw patch. They need to appease the non-US players and fix little issues.

[lord of the mark]

no one thinks they're working on a dino game?

or a more serious collaboration with Maxis?

[Urban Ranger]

A completely new game is definitely much better than a sequel, if it is done right.

[thinkingamer]

Originally posted by pg
i hope they are working on an entirely new game. i pretty much always prefer something totally new to sequels.

btw, i think all civs are pretty deeply flawed gameplay wise but they are still fun as long as the micromanagement doesn't get out of control(ala civ2).

Well, i prefer GOOD sequel than a totally new stuff as long as its done well. Which games are good sequels? To me Civ2, HoMM2, Warcraft2, and AoK:AoE2 comes to my mind.

I have to agree that there is too many flaws in all Civ games (including SMAC and CtP), but many people still plays them because its fun and the CONCEPT of the game is very interesting; which strategy gamer would not be tempted to play a good Empire simulation (w/ interesting diplomacy, trade, and of course WAR!). But to me Civ3 had enough "flaws" to really not get into it.

[kring]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel




Right, ok.

And I've played Civ, at least the PC game as long as anyone on this board, unless the man himself or his testers are lurking, so get off your high horse.

How many people still hang out in the Civ2 forums here? 10? 15?

edit: add to this message

Originally posted by Carolus Rex


Yep, and that's about 10 or 15 more than you'll find in the Civ 3 forums six and a half or seven years after that game was released.

Seriously, the forums may be slow, but Civ 2 is alive and kicking.

Carolus

I don't post in the Civ 2 fora, but I do still play the game on a regular basis.

[Adagio]

In the news they say Firaxis might be working on Pirates II... this picture gaves them the idea:

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/pirates_map.jpg


Now's the big question: What is pirates? I've never played that game... what was it about?

[DrSpike]

Pirates.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


You must be kidding. Most games don't even make CPUs sweat, just look at the frame rates of Quake 3 etc. running on high end Wintel boxes.

Not really fair to compare Quake engine games - it steps way outside the O/S. Most games run with the burden of the MS O/S. Quake engine games running in OpenGL really stuff DirectX equivalents.

Processor speed is one factor, but a more important one for a deep game is memory. Virtual's all very well, but it slows down the action. I was really thinking of when enough people have a decent chunk of RAM rather than processors > 1G or faster.

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

A completely new game is definitely much better than a sequel, if it is done right.

I agree with you 100%.

Pirates was an amazing 8 bit game. You played the part of a Pirate commander in the Caribbean, starting with a tiny undermanned vessel and ending up with a fleet of frigates and a huge army capable of sacking all the cities for whichever country you wanted to.

Pirates - I had loads of fun playing it - but I honestly can't see how they'd do the sword fighting in 3D without a lot of keyboard commands. I'd love to be proved wrong on this.

[Joseph]

It would be nice to make some more scenarios for PTW.
WWI and WW II for sure.