Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Civilization V Announced For This Fall

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the more-cow-to-be-cashed dept.

PC Games (Games) 326

sopssa writes "2K Games announced today that they will be releasing Civilization V in the fall. For the first time in the series, the square tiles will be changed to hexes, which 2K Games says provides 'deeper strategy' and 'more realistic gameplay.' Civilization V will also include a new graphics engine, new combat system including ranged bombardment, multiplayer and good support for the modding community. 'Each new version of Civilization presents exciting challenges for our team. Thankfully, ideas on how to bring new and fun experiences to Civ players never seem to stop flowing. From fully animated leaders and realistic landscapes, new combat tactics, expanded diplomacy and shared mods, we're excited for players to see the new vision our team at Firaxis has brought to the series,' Sid Meier said. In addition to Civilization V, the Facebook-based Civilization Network will also be released during 2010."

cancel ×

326 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

SO EXCITED!!! (3, Funny)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31189940)

Some of our best LANs were had with Civilization 4...hell, I played through Mirror's Edge start to finish in between turns during an extended Civ 4 LAN weekend.

Crazy insanely excited about this. The screenshots look awesome.

Re:SO EXCITED!!! (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190074)

Ugh. This means I'll finally have to go and upgrade my rig.

Lately I've been mucking around with the FreeCiv beta... looks like I'll only have about 6-9 months between release of FreeCiv and Civ5. I guess I'd better get all my home projects done this spring and summer.

Moddability = Success (5, Insightful)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190340)

Civilization 5's success will ultimately depend on how moddable it is. If it is less moddable than Civilization 4, there is no way it will have any staying power.

Before you mod me down; I know, I mod for Civilization 4.t [civfanatics.com]

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190368)

I'm not sure how much I agree with that...I think its staying power will depend on how moddable it is, but I don't think that will matter at first. It took a couple of years before I started looking into the Civ4 modding scene as a way to extend the life of the game.

Re:Moddability = Success (2, Insightful)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190482)

The first Civ4 mods came out very quickly after the game. Games that restrict how moddable their content are, like MW2, have little staying power, as shown by their quickly dropping NPD numbers.

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190598)

The thought they put into Civ4 in regards to modding was brilliant. But I must say that Civ:Rev DS has been the greatest Civ experience I have had since first popping in the Civ cart on my SNES. But needless to say I am excited [facebook.com] .

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190830)

I've wondered why CivIII, Civ4 (and AC) never got console ports, like CivI and CivII did. Thy're turn based and not that all graphically intensive and PS2's/PS3's have USB ports so they could even throw in a traditional control scheme in addition to a DualShock oriented one.

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

dc29A (636871) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190972)

I've wondered why CivIII, Civ4 (and AC) never got console ports, like CivI and CivII did. Thy're turn based and not that all graphically intensive and PS2's/PS3's have USB ports so they could even throw in a traditional control scheme in addition to a DualShock oriented one.

Civ IV got a console port, was called Civilization Revolution [wikipedia.org] . Mind you, it was beyond dumbed down. Graphics have nothing to do with the port of strategy games like Civilization to a console, it's more of an audience problem. It has more than two buttons to press, it doesn't have shiny ultra realistic 3D graphics and it's ... 'complex'.

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190994)

I wouldn't call Civ:Rev for the DS my greatest Civ experience, but being able to bang out a few turns no matter where I go has been awesome. It's also been great when we have a bunch of people over that don't want to/can't bring their gaming PCs over.

Bunch of nerds lounging on couches and bean bag chairs + multiplayer Civ Rev DS = awesome

Re:Moddability = Success (2)

greyline (1052440) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190630)

What are NPD numbers?

Re:Moddability = Success (3, Informative)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190706)

Sales figures. Called NPD because they are released by the NPD group [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190714)

True, but I think comparing MW2 (a game which has, lets face it, a small amount of content and variety) and Civ4 (a game which, when first shipped, had a rather large amount of variety and content.) I fully understand what you are saying, but provided the base game is varied enough and big enough, it should be fine for a little while.

Still, I agree with you that it needs to be moddable to have staying power.

Re:Moddability = Success (1)

ChefInnocent (667809) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190724)

They seem to only add to the modibility. However, I think its success will be dependent upon whether they piss everyone off again by requiring a "modern gamers" graphic card again. There was no reason to require such a hefty graphics card last time as Civ previously was more about playability than "ooh neat graphics". I still play Civ 4 (now that I have a newer computer), but I won't be the first in line this time. With both Civ 3 & 4, I pre-purchased the game. I'll buy 5 if I can play it on my machine. I've been playing since "Civ 1" and own "Civ Gold", "Civ 2", Test of Time, Civ 3, Civ 4. It's really the only game I own and play.

As an aside, I'd be elated if they made it for *nix.

Anonymous Coward (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31189978)

Well, I was planning on having a life this fall. So much for planning.

What I want in it (1)

C0R1D4N (970153) | more than 4 years ago | (#31189996)

My only wishes for the civ games has always been for a more in depth combat systems (maybe not Rome: Total War in depth, but at least Star Trek: Birth of the Federation in depth) and a good way to create your own civilization (unique units, leaders, etc)

Re:What I want in it (1)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190400)

It does; Civilization 5 splits strength into attack and defense values; both are modified by terrain, promotions, experience, etc...

Re:What I want in it (4, Insightful)

Carik (205890) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191144)

I've got to say, my favorite of the Civ combat systems is still in Call To Power ("The Civ Game that Never Was"). Actually, that was my favorite of the games in a lot of ways... I've never really understood why no one else liked it. Multi-unit combat, ranged units affecting what happened between the non-ranged units, and good use of flying units.

Realism: (1)

Adaeniel (1315637) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190020)

If they really want to provide "more realistic gameplay", they would let you start spying on your own citizens once your technology is advanced enough.

Re:Realism: (4, Funny)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190266)

like giving away free laptops with webcams?

Re:Realism: (1)

rainmayun (842754) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190670)

You don't need technology to do this. All you need is a network of government informants.

Re:Realism: (1)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191028)

If they really want to provide "more realistic gameplay", they would let you start spying on your own citizens once your technology is advanced enough.

"Will we next create false gods to rule over us? How proud we have become, and how blind."
- Sister Miriam Godwinson, We Must Dissent

Apparently we did, and not only did we not need to build "The Self-Aware Colony" to do it, it wasn't even a secret project. (In Civ V, I guess you get it for free if you play as the British or Americans.)

Re:Realism: (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191096)

I'm pretty sure that's been in every Civ game.

Mac (5, Insightful)

Chris Lawrence (1733598) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190040)

Please, please, follow the example of Blizzard and release a Mac version at the same time, or even on the same media. I don't want to wait a year or more for the Mac version to come out!

Re:Mac (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190070)

Mac for show, Windows for a pro

Re:Mac (4, Insightful)

CorporateSuit (1319461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190180)

Or they could follow the example of Blizzard and release only the stoneage for single player (while letting you play through all ages in multiplayer, minus 50% of the military units) and then next month, release classical age with another 25% of the units, and then modern age with the rest of the units.

Re:Mac (1)

jaymz666 (34050) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190406)

this!

Re:Mac (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190650)

Or they could follow the example of Blizzard and release only the stoneage for single player (while letting you play through all ages in multiplayer, minus 50% of the military units) and then next month, release classical age with another 25% of the units, and then modern age with the rest of the units.

Wow.... I concur....

Bliz has really sold out since they released wow.

Re:Mac (2, Informative)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190234)

what's wrong with installing Windows via Boot Camp?

Re:Mac (1)

Chris Lawrence (1733598) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190306)

Um, because I am continually working and checking email, RSS, twitter, publishing a blog and doing various other things? It takes a couple seconds to cmd-tab out of the game and do some work and then go back in. Rebooting every 15 minutes ain't going to cut it.

Re:Mac (3, Funny)

Your.Master (1088569) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190804)

Well, you'll be pleased to note that Windows is perfectly capable of twitter.

Re:Mac (2, Insightful)

Chris Lawrence (1733598) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190888)

Right, so if I just run Windows full time, problem solved! Wait a minute...

Re:Mac (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190922)

not only does Windows run all the software, but Civ4 runs in a window and not as a full screen making it easy to minimize

Re:Mac (3, Funny)

Brandee07 (964634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190472)

what's wrong with installing Windows via Boot Camp?

Paying money to install malware on your computer.

Re:Mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190772)

Windows is not exactly cheap and there are bloody few PC games I care about playing. It's not worth paying $130 or so EXTRA just to play one or two games which one then has to reboot to play (not to mention having the extra space for a second OS, etc, etc). I would tend to agree that if one is into PC gaming, it's better to bite the bullet and buy windows. But Civ is one of those games that tends to be more popular with people that might not do a lot of other gaming in general (so it's perfect for a mac port :D).

Re:Mac (2, Insightful)

hatten (1640681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190300)

Please, please, follow the example of ... ehh ... whomever and give us a linux version! Don't think it will happen though :(

Re:Mac (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191124)

Penny Arcade.

Re:Mac (0, Troll)

emkyooess (1551693) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190420)

Don't learn from Blizzard and require online presence to play your game and other DRM called "Features of Battle.Net 2".

Hexes - beyond square grid (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190058)

Are those hex tiles I'm seeing? Woot!

Brings back memories... (5, Insightful)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190066)

It was 1995 and I was in the computer lab playing Civ II. I was just starting to get the hang of it when my wife-to-be popped in to see if I wanted to go down to the Commons for lunch. I wasn't hungry, so I passed. I played myself into a corner, and decided to start a new game. Just as it was getting rolling, my girlfriend popped in again and asked if I wanted to go to dinner.

I looked in amazement at the game in front of me and realized that it had eaten 6 hours of my life without my realizing it.

I had never before enjoyed a computer game as much, and have likewise never since.

Re:Brings back memories... (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190222)

Reminds me of when my uncle brought a copy of Alpha Centauri, and this was back when DRM was such that you could just install it anywhere without any fuss. Me and my brother played it for like 8 hours after my uncle left, my brother over my shoulder suggesting stuff.

When I want to burn a day away I'll still dust it off and pray the scratches haven't accumulated too much (I later bought both it and the expansion, and can't find anywhere to buy a new copy.)

I'm vaguely interested in the new version, but my old Windows machine can't even run Civ IV, and it basically only exists for when I want to boot into XP to enjoy an old game. Now a re-release of Alpha Centauri / Crossfire for Linux, I'd drop $50 on that in a second.

Re:Brings back memories... (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190752)

For sure. I used to play AC with a friend about every week or so. Damn thing kept crashing (and as far as we could tell, reloading a multiplayer saved turned it into a single player game) but this is the greatest testament to the game: we kept trying even though it always crashed before we got to the end.

Re:Brings back memories... (1)

mujadaddy (1238164) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190580)

It was 1995 and my wife-to-be popped in to see if I wanted to go down to the Commons for lunch.

I decided to start a new game. Just as it was getting rolling, my girlfriend popped in again and asked if I wanted to go to dinner.

But... What was your wife-to-be doing for dinner? ;)

Re:Brings back memories... (1)

damien_kane (519267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190838)

But... What was your wife-to-be doing for dinner? ;)

His best man?
No, wait, that would be who she was doing for dinner.

Re:Brings back memories... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190936)

If he was really lucky? His girlfriend.

Re:Brings back memories... (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190622)

If you think that sucks, I was up until 1 a.m. this morning, repeatedly playing "just one more turn" on Civ 3.

At my age, I can't any longer chalk it up to youthful indiscretion. That came is simply crack, and the later at night, the worse.

Re:Brings back memories... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190818)

There is a last turn and there is a last turn. It's almost like heroin. The difference is with Civ you pay only once and with heroin you die only once.

Re:Brings back memories... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190858)

That's nothing, I've been playing Pong continuously for 35 years.

Re:Brings back memories... (5, Funny)

verbalcontract (909922) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190796)

My wife-to-be popped in...

My girlfriend popped in again...

Oof, I hope they didn't run into each other.

To Firaxis (4, Interesting)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190084)

The Civ games are awesome & all, but I *really* want to see a sequel / remake of Alpha Centauri / Alien Crossfire!

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190314)

I second that!

I'm not sure if they could really improve on the story though, so perhaps they ought to just stick to a HD/newer engine remake. If they did anything that involved changing or expanding the tech tree they better either leave the old voice overs in or record all new ones. Alpha Centauri was the only Civ type game where you ever felt like a real story was being told, and the quotes from the various leaders were the biggest part of it.

Re:To Firaxis (2, Insightful)

Zedrick (764028) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190374)

+1 seconded. AC is still the best in the series. I love Civ IV, but miss the ability to design my own units. An updated AC for Linux would also be acceptable (low resolution and 256? Colours doesn't look good on a modern widescreen monitor).

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190492)

Odd, I play SMAX @ 1280x768 & 32-bit color on Windows XP. The game says the units won't animate right, but I've never noticed a difference.

Re:To Firaxis (3, Informative)

Brandee07 (964634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190424)

I saw Sid Meier speak at MAGfest earlier this year on the issue; EA owns the rights to it, not Mr. Meier, and a new one won't be developed without their consent. He was remarkably closemouthed about the issue beyond that.

There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

To console you, have an Alpha Centari fanpatch to fix some of those longstanding bugs: http://www.civgaming.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7152 [civgaming.net]

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190584)

Thanks for the info, that sucks.

Already using that patch, BTW.

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190570)

Yes, Yes, and more Yes.

That being said, Civ III put a bad taste in my mouth, and I have barely touched Civ IV.

Civ II was a bit broken with how powerful wonders of the world were. But some of the victory conditions in Civ III were far too easy. Corruption was an absolute pain. Layering cities on top of each other doesn't work for me, but the CPU was no problems with it.

I don't want an AI that cheats. I want complex, balanced, dynamic play against a fair, but difficult CPU.

Can Civ V do any better than FreeCiv, or Alpha Centauri?

Re:To Firaxis (2, Informative)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190644)

The AI cheats in SMAX above either citizen or librarian difficulty. May want to try GalCiv 2 for a non-cheating AI in a 4x game.

Civ 4 is pretty damn fun with both expansions installed.

Re:To Firaxis (1, Interesting)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190744)

If only GalCiv 2 actually had a sensible economy.

Re:To Firaxis (1)

toastar (573882) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190730)

Planet busters > Nukes.

I wish Civ had Planet busters

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191082)

The tectonic payloads would be more fun.

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190742)

Could someone take the existing FreeCiv engine, which supports Civ 1, Civ 2, and FreeCiv modes, and implement an Alpha Centauri mode?

It wouldn't be a small task by any means, but I'd love to see a modern playable clone.

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190902)

The terraforming & unit design would be the hardest things to add, I'm thinking.

Re:To Firaxis (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190958)

Looks like somebody started on something similar years & years ago.

http://freecivac.sf.net/ [sf.net]

But I liked sleeping.... (3, Interesting)

SpuriousLogic (1183411) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190122)

Next fall is going to have some really late nights and brutal AMs at the office. Just one more turn....

Re:But I liked sleeping.... (1)

DeadDecoy (877617) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190504)

Imagine the soul-wrenching hell when someone makes an iphone app/mod. That way, Civ V could consume your life while you're at or away from your computer.
P.S. If this happens, please don't Civ V and drive. I like my continued existence.

Reminds me of (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190192)

Wow, Civ5 really looks similar to Settlers of Catan now that its tileset is hex. I'm not sure I like the more realistic environments though.

Civ (1)

GMThomas (1115405) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190276)

Funny how I saw this announcement while playing a LAN of Civilization IV with a few other people and talking about if they were going to make another one for the PC. This is exciting news! As you can tell, Civ is a game I really enjoy as I still play it today. Hopefully they don't mess up the mechanics a lot, or add a lot of DRM.

Have to delete browsing history... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190282)

This is by the far the worst thing my wife could find in my browsing history...

Re:Have to delete browsing history... (0, Offtopic)

SpuriousLogic (1183411) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190554)

too true.

More realistic? (2, Funny)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190286)

It will be more realistic because my entire world is really made up of hexes and I can only move in one of six directions?

Re:More realistic? (2, Interesting)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190372)

Yeah, as opposed to the 8 they had before. I don't get it either.

Re:More realistic? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190516)

"The primary advantage of a hex map over a traditional square grid map is that the distance between the center of each hex cell (or hex) and the center of all six adjacent hexes is constant. By comparison, in a square grid map, the distance from the center of each square cell to the center of the four diagonal adjacent cells it shares a corner with is greater than the distance to the center of the four adjacent cells it shares an edge with. This is desirable for games in which the measurement of movement is a factor."

(Quoted from Wikipedia to save the time of figuring out how to expess it clearly myself).

Re:More realistic? (1)

damien_kane (519267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190894)

(Quoted from Wikipedia to save the time of figuring out how to expess it clearly myself).

Simple.
With a hex-map, when you cast Fireball, you can approximate the range.
With an iso-map, you end up with Firecube.

Re:More realistic? (1)

Tronster (25566) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190434)

It will be more realistic because my entire world is really made up of hexes and I can only move in one of six directions?

From the screen shots, the graphics look more realistic than previous versions.

As for real life; I tend to only move forward with an occasional 0.5 second strafe to avoid an obstacle. But seriously, (good) games are about mechanics that introduce "fun"; simulations are about modeling life.

Re:More realistic? (1, Troll)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190566)

Hex maps allow the world to really be a sphere, as opposed to a flat map.

Re:More realistic? (1)

mujadaddy (1238164) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190692)

Good god! You don't suppose...?

Re:More realistic? (2)

Entropius (188861) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190690)

Moving in six directions instead of eight is better than having sqrt(2) = 1, which is what a grid gives you.

Re:More realistic? (1)

Grokmoo (1180039) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190898)

There are several advantages if you think about it. One important property of hex tilings is that as you make the hex grid finer and finer, the distance between two arbitrary points on the grid approaches our standard (Euclidean) distance measure. Square tiles do not have this property. (Think moving diagonally; no matter how fine the grid is it is always faster to move diagonally than horizontally or vertically.

Another advantage is in combat; forming defensive or offensive lines will work better as the distance between a tile and any adjacent tile is always the same. In the context of Civ, this also makes a lot more sense for things like the city radius.

Overall, it is just a much better system.

Re:More realistic? (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190978)

Yes, thank you everybody, I'm well aware of why a hex grid is better for strategy games because of the distance thing, and how it might improve the game mechanics (actually I'm fully behind the idea!). The point is, let's not label things as "realistic" when they are clearly not. If Civ was realistic we wouldn't have spearmen defeating tanks. Guess I should have added a sarcasm tag.

Notebooks (1)

Cheburator-2 (260358) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190350)

Civilization-like games are perfectly suited for playing on notebooks. Please, tell me that this new graphic engine is smart enough to downgrade visual effects and run on notebooks and netbooks... And that is doesn't require a CD in drive...

Re:Notebooks (2, Interesting)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190520)

Civilization 4 doesn't require the CD in the drive, so it is fairly safe to assume the same for Civilization 5.

New Engine it seems (2, Insightful)

Reapman (740286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190352)

A new engine concerns me... a bit. Although my favorite game in the series is Civ4, it did have some growing pains with the new 3D engine. Hex is a welcome addition if used properly, and who knows what other tweaks they have in store.

One feature I'd love is (and maybe it exists) being able to have someone host the game, and then call in when your ready to make your turn. Basically a dedicated server you can come and go (password protected or something like that)

Bad news for my sleeping patterns and forgoing having any sort of life this fall...

Re:New Engine it seems (3, Insightful)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190538)

CIV4 had play by email, which is better than a dedicated server (in this one way anyway) since no machine had to stay up all the time.

Re:New Engine it seems (5, Informative)

emkyooess (1551693) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190552)

Civ4 has this feature. It's called PitBoss. It's a dedicated server, basically. And, it has turn timers, drop in/out gameplay, as well as a SMTP to email people when it's their turn.

Re:New Engine it seems (1)

Reapman (740286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190776)

I knew about the email thing, but PitBoss.. hmmm I'll have to check into this. Thanks for the tip!

My fiance is in tears... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190428)

...becuase I just got barely "got good" at Civ 4.

Bad persons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190456)

Why, oh why do they have to announce it now, couldnt they just be kind and announce it the day after it is released?
How am I supposed to hold on until fall now??

Seriously, I think Im going to start smoking... hope you re happy Mr. Sid Meier, if thats even your real name.

Hexes will be hard (4, Insightful)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190474)

I know it will result in a much more natural city-radius, but adapting to the new tile shape will be hard at first. After almost two decades of playing Civ games (both the main line and the various spin-offs) i've got that "5x5 with the corners cut off" plus shape imprinted in my mind at some basic level. For the first couple hours of Civ 5 i'll probably be counting out the tiles just to double-check which resources will be within range of which potential city spots, and where the next city would have to be not to overlap.

And is it just me, or did the fact that the old city-radius shape didn't tile perfectly actually add another layer of strategy to the game? Did you want to place your cities close together to maximize usage the tiles within your territory but forcing cities to compete with each other over resources, or space your cities out so that each city got as many resources as possible even though that would mean some areas in between wouldn't be exploited at all?

With the hex-based tiles it should be possible to perfectly tile your cities so that all tiles are being exploited but none are being overlapped, unless they decide to do something really strange with the radius shape. (Possible conflicts with unbuildable terrain aside of course.)

Re:Hexes will be hard (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191190)

>>I know it will result in a much more natural city-radius, but adapting to the new tile shape will be hard at first. After almost two decades of playing Civ games (both the main line and the various spin-offs) i've got that "5x5 with the corners cut off" plus shape imprinted in my mind at some basic level.

I agree... the notion of hexes is really painful to me. And I play with hexes in some of my tabletop games, too.

The "fat plus" is one of those sacred cows of the Civ franchise, I don't think they should have messed with it.

Also, the graphics look like it is a chimeric blend of Settlers of Catan and Civ Revolution, both of which are perfectly fine games in their own right, but not something I want in a real Civ experience.

Re:Hexes will be hard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31191208)

I never found gaps to be a problem. In the earlier games you could make a staggered grid leaving only one square blank. In Civ4 your cultural boundaries negated it completely.
Civilization: Call to Power had an insane city radius, I think the 30+ sized cities had a 5 tile radius, which did cause high competition if you didn't plan well early enough, and led to some ridiculously overpowered specialist cities - a single coastal city could produce more science than the rest of your empire combined.

Never was too good at it... (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190526)

I have many fond memories of playing Civilization, but most don't involve playing it without cheating. I was never too good at it and so would always wind up giving myself "unlimited money" via a cheat. (There was a funds limit, but when you can refill it at any time, it is effectively unlimited.) I would then develop Diplomacy as quickly as possible and counter all offensives with Diplomats. My diplomats would buy out enemy troops and cities, eventually leaving them with just their home city (immune to my diplomats) standing. I'd usually just keep those cities around to keep the game running while I built my space station, but occasionally I'd tire of them and squash them. Ah, the memories.

Re:Never was too good at it... (1)

PhxBlue (562201) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190696)

I don't know what game you were playing -- Call to Power, maybe? -- but that sounds nothing like any version of Civ I've ever played.

Worth checking out, but not spectacular... (1)

Zitchas (713512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190594)

Well, it's nice that they're issuing a new Civilization game, but I'm still hoping they'll include more of the stuff they used in Alpha Centauri. That being said, some of the things they mention here *are* from Alpha Centauri, so there's hope yet. (for those unaware, Alpha Centauri was produced by Sid Meirs and Firaxis (among others) around 2000. Or at least, that was when they issued the last official patch.

For instance, ranged combat: Alpha Centauri had an artillery system built in, and the computer AI used it fairly effectively. Including artillery duels, bombardment, etc. Ship to shore combat was automatically a bombardment.

Modability: All the files for creating your own scenarios were there, easy to modify, written in plain english, and usually with explanations. And the game had a built in map editor. Which includes modifying factions, creating new ones, etc.

In fact, that leads directly to the one feature I really want to see in Civ V: Customized units. Not mods, but the ability, in game, to create new units by combining technology. For example, you've figured out how to make iron armor. Great. But you only know how to make longbows? So you now have iron-plated archers. Or whatever. That was one thing in Alpha Centauri that made the game truly unique: Tech developments gave you aspects of units, not the units themselves. As in they gave you a new type of weapon, a new type of armor, a new special ability, a new reactor (aka more hitpoints), new chassis (determines whether it's land, water, or air, and how fast it is, how often it needs to return to a city, etc)... Then the player puts them together to create the unit they want, the system figures out how much it costs, and there you go.

It led to some funny possibilities, like when you have really high powered cities, that you can create terraformers (equiv to engineers) that have tougher armor/hitpoints than most combat units. (although they still got a non-combat penalty) Or whatever one's heart desires, really. Not planning on going anywhere, but need defence? Then put together some sentinels with top of the line armor and hp, but leave them with the bare minimum for weaponry and chasis, and maybe give them one of the defensive special abilities. Or planning on doing some exploration? Throw together some rovers with high speed equipment, and deep radar (see 2 squares instead of 1), but leave off the weapons and armor. Almost anything is possible, really. And it adds so much variety to the game, so much re-playability.

The other thing I'm looking forward to seeing is the automation control. Can you activate an automated "governor" for a city? Can you tell that governor to only build stuff towards a specific end (say, research, or population expansion). Can you forbid the governor from building certain types of units (or any unit, for that matter)? On the same vein, can you give specific limits to engineer's automation? (for example, only allow them to build certain types of terrain improvement?

These are all things that they had in Alpha Centauri back in 2000, but have been almost entirely absent to all the Civ games produced since then. Otherwise, I'll probably just keep playing AC. Sure the graphics are bad (by 2010 standards, anyway), but it's the gameplay that matters.

Re:Worth checking out, but not spectacular... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31190826)

Yeah, except not!

Alpha Centauri had an artillery system built in, and the computer AI used it fairly effectively. Including artillery duels, bombardment, etc. Ship to shore combat was automatically a bombardment.

Been there in one form or another since Civ III, in Civ IV you have artillery units that destroy the defense bonuses when they bombard OR can be used as attack units. Ships do the same!

Modability: All the files for creating your own scenarios were there, easy to modify, written in plain english, and usually with explanations. And the game had a built in map editor. Which includes modifying factions, creating new ones, etc.

Existed in one form or another since Civ II at least, in Civ III toolset is more powerful, in Civ IV almost everything is in Python, so it's very easy to modify things!

Can you activate an automated "governor" for a city? Can you tell that governor to only build stuff towards a specific end (say, research, or population expansion).

Yes, lower right corner of the screen in Civ IV city management screen, focus on expansion, research, culture, production, avoid expansion, commerce...etc....

So no offense, I'm looking forward to the innovations too, but most of your gripes are already fixed. The exception being the customized units, which might be fun, but would also drastically change the tone of Civilization to one of Alpha Centauri, which is fine, but I think part of why they don't do it is history. Part of Civ IV is about simulating history and different historical scenarios, what if things had gone differently? In Alpha Centauri, you don't have that, you are in the future, so things can go anywhere.

So I think Civilization is doing just fine, and some innovation might be nice, but I'm glad it isn't alpha centauri.

Now, if they were to make a sequel to alpha centauri...

Dammit (1)

hipp5 (1635263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190748)

Damn, and I thought I'd actually do well on my masters degree. Good bye doing work, hello hours and hours that disappear into that game.

Don't forget the fun this time! (4, Insightful)

onyxruby (118189) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190754)

I have loved many of the old versions of Civ, spending far too many hours playing them. Heck, learning how to hack the original Civ was a siginifant contributing factoring to me choosing IT over business.

All that being said, the last version turned into the green eco-facist game from hell. Any game that extended too long became one giant environmental nag session. Didn't matter how 'green' you were, someone else was polluting and everything quickly turned to waste with reasonable way to get restore things.

I'm not opposed to the pollution bit to some level, it's always been a part of the game, but it should never /become/ the game. The bottom line was that the fun got stripped away, because someone took their green preaching too far! The game wasn't fun to play, and I simply stopped playing.

Re:Don't forget the fun this time! (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191006)

If you were playing Civ 4 like that, you were obviously not handling the issues in a sensible way. Just like city unhappiness, you cannot easily combat it as an afterthought. It has to be an integrated part of your total strategy. (My own nag in this area would be corruption in Civ 3, or rather the weights and distance-dependence with most government styles. "Sure, you can have an empire encompassing the globe, but don't expect any serious production out of it.")

Re:Don't forget the fun this time! (4, Informative)

Cheburator-2 (260358) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191154)

What version are you talking about? The last version to irritate us with pollutions was Civ 3. Civilization IV with health counters was quite reasonable and not annoying.

Civilization V for Vendetta (0)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31190782)

Features a new gameplay mechanic where if your civilization becomes too authoritarian, a crazy person in a Guy Fawkes mask murders you with knives.

or

Civilization V: In addition to the traditional civilizations from previous games, introduces the Visitors who are an alien race stranded on earth and who are quite adamant that they do not find humans delicious in the least, not even with fava beans and a nice chianti.

as much as I loved civ (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31191026)

As much as I loved the Civ games, once I played stuff like EU2 and others based on the same engine I just couldn't go back. Civ has an exploding degree of management, which I found woefully unnecessary. If I'm the guy in charge, when there is one city, ok I care about building the library, but if there are 50 cities, I care less about your library, and more about the focus of your city. Spore had the right concept, if appaling implementation, what defines a civilization changes through time, and the 'level' you want to envision the problem changes.

The scope of an EU/vicky/HOI game is about on par with a late stage civ game, where the world is filled up and you're managing your empire within that. But in the paradox products I can actually manage the empire, my stacks of 12 units that I move at once makes sense - I'm not managing every single bloody division in the army, I now manage army groups and someone else. I felt HOI3 when kinda the wrong direction with tripling the number of provinces because that's like the same problem with Civ. The economic system in civ now feels oversimplified, that might be good, but something like Vicky you start to see an actual population growth mechanic and something that seems kinda like a real economy. Not that it was necessarily perfectly balanced, but the system was a lot better than Civ.

Oh and other games can do real time and have it work well. I know turn based is a civ thing, and I wouldn't change it if I were them, but turned based and hexagonal squares is like an old school wargame, other products don't bind you to a particular shape of terrain and run in real time, either fast or slow. I find that much more compelling. I'll still buy it, but I feel like the Civ series is a throwback to and old way of doing things, it has it's moments and its charm, but the rest of the grand strategy world has progressed along (except spore, which kinda has the right idea for a while, and then dies completely). No more than I would expect to see a turn based stand there and one guy at a time swing in final fantasy (like say FF6) - it's been done, but they have progressed from that. I'll still put up with outdated mechanics to see the world they've created but I'm unlikely to invest heavily in it repeatedly when it's like that.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?