To me, the screen shots looked no better than Test Of Time. Even Call To Power looked nicer. I admit that I expected a leap of graphical improvement like that from Civ I to Civ II. I mean, even Alpha Centauri looks better.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not really hung-up on this issue, and I'm not after map animations or anything, but I was hoping for something a bit more pretty. The units look great, so I truly hope they put A LOT more work into making the map a pleasure to behold.

I'm going to do my best to avoid the hype with Civ III, and when I walk into the shop and see it on the shelf, I'll then go through this site with a fine tooth comb. There is only misery for those who follow a game with baited breath.

I just find it strange that everyone else seems to think the graphics look alright. I mean, this is Civ III we are talking about, not some cheap imitation.

Yes, the rivers need to be wider, and more distinct, and for the love of God, get rid of the current irrigation artwork. Civ I had better looking irrigation art.

I was hoping they would intergrate the 3d landscape of Alpha Centauri, but with more polish. But come on, the screen shots displayed maps no better than Test of Time or CTP. What's going on?

And basically the colours are just drab. It would be nice to have a vivid looking ocean that did have some kind of animation, instead of just a drab blue blanket.

Bkeela.

I made the comments when these shots first came out that these look like graphic place-holders. This seems to fit with Firaxis' method of adding graphics and sounds last (of course, that is a double edged sword).

How far can a graphic be stretched to cover the flat, flat, flat, very flat word of CIV III? My God, are we in the 2001 of games or what?
I can play Chess on a flat chessboard, but surely can't see the point to play a game (as strategic as it is) on a flat isometric perspective.

I was hoping for enhancement to SMAC, that is more a draft than a final, but at least was a step into 3D looking.
Hell, I lost and forget a proper spherical globe map, I miss the smart exagonal map and survive to remember, but surely I'll have some hard time trying to living with a completely flat game (BTW MarkG and DanQ, don't you have an UBB code for a flat font? ).

The units seems more like lead model on top of paper board, and as I'd like all interesting game model enhancement (the Culture concept on top of all) I'd really see them fitted nicely into an effective graphic display.

Don't get me wrong, but I think all of you know the old difference about "map" and "territory". Now I think that Firaxis should decide if its Civ III main screen is a map or a territory, because the actual mix doesn't do well enough, IMO.
Map feature
Let me see essential info, cut every unnecessary element that can distract me from my game needs:
- flat as a chessboard (no isometric),
- clear square borders (grid) to help players counting movements, see ZOC and city influence extensions
- straight lines to show roads and rivers
- higly contrasted colors (unrealistic, if necessary, as in false colors photo, often used in astronomy) to help distinguish elements as bonus resources or units from the background
- isometric line to show terrain quote (if relevant for movement, fire advantage or else).
- "onion skin" layers to filter separate info, to avoid a cluttered map
Territory feature
- as 3D as possible to realistical reproduce a world view
- quickly rotable to 3 axis to gain the better point of view
- zoomable to the pratical extent needed to let the player have a "birds' eye look" to the whole, then going as near to the action to (micro)manage the required game details
- as graphically detailed as possible (at the chosed zoom level) to increment the "suspension of disbelieve"

Sid spoke about CIV III as the end of the old reviewers "great game, but the graphics..." closing, as common for Sid previus efforts.
I really hope that Sid has some great white rabbit into his graphic department hat, because as I think gameplay and strategic models are a must to the success, the sense of Civ II "deja vu" on the graphic side will certainly kill the game sales.
Civ 2.5 syndrome, you know.

I think my optimism is tied mainly to the fact that I've been involved in some Alpha - Beta - Gold stuff in the past and was shocked at how quickly and amazingly things like art and sound came together almost at the last moments sometimes. And considering that Firaxis has publically stated that they do the brunt of that stuff AFTER the game mechanics are in place, and you can readily see why I'm not worried.

If Sid said the final graphics are going to put to rest the "good game, but the graphics..." complaint, then I honestly believe him. The guy has more than once pushed the industry envelope. With all the resources at his disposal, Civ3 will NO DOUBT be graphically/acoustically stunning.

- Level 1: Deep ocean
- Level 2: shallow ocean
- Level 3: Shore, lowland (support all terrain-types)
- Level 4: plateau, highland (support all, except djungle & swamp)