posted May 20, 1999 12:43                

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.

posted May 20, 1999 16:06                

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.

posted May 20, 1999 21:16                

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.

posted May 20, 1999 23:15                

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.

posted May 21, 1999 13:11                

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.

posted May 21, 1999 16:02                

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.

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).]

posted May 21, 1999 17:02                

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.

posted May 21, 1999 17:12             

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.

posted May 21, 1999 18:55                

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

posted May 21, 1999 20:37                

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.

posted May 22, 1999 04:58                

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?

posted May 22, 1999 16:14                

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.

posted May 22, 1999 22:55                

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

posted May 23, 1999 12:15                

By the way, EnochF, I LOVE your idea. As I recall, SMAC was going to do something like this, putting faction-specific graphics. They ditched it almost at the last minute. I don't know why. One thing: it'd probably take up some memory. Oh, and I hope you're not considering putting those age-specific fonts for city names ON the map...I wouldn't want to see hieroglyphic fonts under London or Paris or whatever - stick with the same font on the map - but for decoration purposes, it's a great idea.

posted May 23, 1999 04:21                

3D Globe

I want to see CivIII in Popolous III's Round 3D Globe. They implemented it well, with Terrain height and various building and people and whatnot. I like being able to zoom in and out, and navigate the world as I choose. I found the lack in SMAC to rotate VERY irritating, and the 'Flattening' of the terrain was barely acceptable. SMAC's 2D Terrain is barely acceptable. If they aren't going to catch up with the new standard, they should go to at least a split dodecahedron system as found in Discovery Channel's Game Evolution and the old board War Game of Traveller/MegaTraveller Invasion Earth. This aren't new ideas, but make it possible to send units around poles and whatnot and the amount of area is less at the poles than the equator. Makes for a map that lends itself to globe view easily.

re: Water Animation - I don't see why this would be a problem. Using rotating palettes for water blues would give us water animations again. No biggie... As long as tile terrain builders remembered to add in water designated tones, they will get the animations. And the number of tile terrains for the various meetings of land/water isn't going to change because you have added water animation.

------------------
-Darkstar
(Knight Errant Of Spam)

posted May 23, 1999 04:22                

Now, I understand, you probably would like to make your own units and put them into the game, well I don't see what the big problem would be, Surely it would be OK for Firaxis to implement that option, to use "own created units" into the game, the only draw back is the fact it won't look as good as the other units which are already in there.

posted May 23, 1999 04:31                

But in Quake 2, you could make your own looking units, which are then masked around the body frame. So I guess that shouldnt be tooooo much of a problem.

posted May 23, 1999 22:18                

And I don't care if the graphics are identical to Civ2. I want gameplay and improved AI a whole lot more than pretty pictures.

And just as a mention about the maps, I like the idea of inaccurate maps early in the game. Ever seen some of those old maps? One I saw had the Americas upside down. Or how about the infamous ISLAND California.

posted May 24, 1999 15:16                

Then an idea hit me, what if you would make the units for Civ3 in true animated 3D, but at the touch of a botton or key, the animated image freezes in the position it is in, changes to a bitmap image or whatever and zips along the rest of the way to where it is going. This idea should work for both types of people, those that like watching animated images, and the ones that want to stop wasting time watching animations and want to get back to playing. I really have to agree that the unit animations in CTP are quite cute, but they do get boring if the unit has to go too far.

posted May 24, 1999 15:18                

Then an idea hit me, what if you would make the units for Civ3 in true animated 3D, but at the touch of a botton or key, the animated image freezes in the position it is in, changes to a bitmap image or whatever and zips along the rest of the way to where it is going. This idea should work for both types of people, those that like watching animated images, and the ones that want to stop wasting time watching animations and want to get back to playing. I really have to agree that the unit animations in CTP are quite cute, but they do get boring if the unit has to go too far.

posted May 25, 1999 07:59                

It would be rediculous not to do what he has suggested!

I never thought of that, how can you have mud and sticks for a hut, in the snow?

Really, buildings should be built with what resources are availble in the area!! and THEN design of the buildings come in!

Oh and the flags idea, brilliant! add some flavour, power and pride to the game!!

And maybe the armies can carry the flags aswell?

I can imagine that, playing in a 3d world, and then over the hills from your view, an army of legions comes over, but the first thing you see is the Roman Flag waving in the wind, and suddenly you feel afraid.

Such interaction!

posted May 25, 1999 09:39                

check out Black and White, thatīs the kind of graphics we want, just on a different scale

posted May 26, 1999 18:37                

How the hell is the game going to stand out if its still in isometric view, in the year 2000! where computer games will be so awesome looking!

And just in case you don't realise it, a 3D world can actually be faster than a 2d Isometric world. CtP is proof that it can be incredibly slow. And Populus 3 is proof that 3D worlds can be quite fast. And don't forget the game Myth aswell. Both those games ran well and smooth on my P200, 50RAM.

But CtP does not!

posted May 29, 1999 18:07                

Please see version 1.1 of the GRAPHICS thread! Thanks.