Sid Meier. Despite being immensely well-hung in the personal wealth department, globally feted by game players and designers, and the proud owner of a staggering collection of jumpers, he and his team have an unenviable task ahead of them.

Just how do you improve on perfection? Leaving aside the many other well-known projects to which Sid has contributed, the first two games of the Civilization series have garnered more 'Best Game Ever' awards than just about any other title. When he created the original in 1990 it defined a new genre o f empire-building games and set the standard in tum-based strategy for years to come. Civ II added a bit of polish and sophistication, and the detour into space (Alpha Centauri) did much the same only with murkier backgrounds.

The problem then becomes where to take the third instalment? We all know they can't just tear up the rulebook and come up with something completely fresh and inspirational. In effect it has to be Civ II-and-a-bit or there will be a minor riot in the gaming world Civ III is pencilled in for release early next year, and although the team is veering towards an 'it'll be done when it's done' stand-off, they already have a fully playable prototype. On a technical level, it boasts an all-new graphics engine, replete with contoured maps (yes, elevations and terrain features affect strategies and combat) and fully animated units. There is also a thorough overhaul of the pathing and AI, and a more streamlined, two-tier interface to accommodate the needs of veterans and novices.

In gameplay terms, Firaxis is concentrating most notably on diplomacy and combat. You'll be able to trade resources, agreements, technologies, units, maps and cities in any combination. This mix-and-match approach applies as much to new diplomatic agreements as it does to trade. For example, you might bargain for peace, with a mutual protection pact, a right of passage agreement and a trade embargo against the French. An impottant distinction, however. is that newcomers won't have to deal with these added diplomatic complexities - the whole 'bargaining table' approach is tucked away for advanced users who don't scare easily.

Although it was never intended that way, with people being what they are, military aggression has become a key feature of the Civ experience.And so in Civ III it's finally getting the revamp it deserves. Along with any number of
minor additions, the combat rules covering zones of control are being extensively reworked, so anachronistic units are no longer likely to be able to hold key positions against all logical dictates. Similarly, the effectiveness
and involvement of ranged weapons such as artillery are being increased to reflect a more realistic military perspective - including 'softening' a target's defences before a major assault.

Perhaps more interestingly (and with a definite nod to Age Of Kings), nations will be able to produce leaders from the past, each capable of changing the course of history eitherin their own lifetimes or through the efforts of future generations they influence.

There's no doubt Civilization III with it's expanded scope and tweaks will sell well and play even better. Whether it'll be capable of surprising us is less certain. But maybe, just maybe, Firaxis will manage the multiplayer aspect as compulsive as the single-player game.

quote: Originally posted by Zanzin on 05-04-2001 02:06 AM With the small detail about contoured maps, I'm beginning to believe all the screenshots we've seen are nothing more than SMAC re-worked - this is fully playable prototype. I don't think (other than the city view screens) we've actually seen anything of what the final product will look like...which is good news, cause most of the screenshots sucked.

Yes, I agree it seems not only graph of tiles is mostly driven by a flat SMAC or old Civ engine, the whole map is really a temporary board.

Pheew, I hope my fear was really wrong

I noticed as really relevant that

quote: Civ III is pencilled in for release early next year

because it means Firaxis can do is job without "Christmas holidays" pressure.

I worthly disagree with

quote: The problem then becomes where to take the third instalment? We all know they can't just tear up the rulebook and come up with something completely fresh and inspirational. In effect it has to be Civ II-and-a-bit or there will be a minor riot in the gaming world

But once you have enough cash and a good reputation, IMO you must take some risk to innovate and stay on top.
If Sid and his staff are doing this, only not revealing all they cards for lot of reasons, my hat will be off for them. Surely I take no pleasure bashing a product, or at least not a pale shadow if matched with enjoying a great game

quote: But once you have enough cash and a good reputation, IMO you must take some risk to innovate and stay on top.

I so much agree with this. I'm afraid that CIV3 will end up being just like any other TBS game....not that I wont buy it, but they just got to do something new!!! What's the point then asides from selling something that should be an expansion (for 30$ something) instead of a whole new game (40-50$ something..not counting canadian prices). Much like CTP2. I have (almost had) faith that FIRAXIS might be hidng some news that will blow us all away, but with all of these different previews, its starting soo much to sound like a new civ game with up-to-date features. Wich is cool - I've been looking for a worthy challenge and fun game for a while now (hard to find nowadays), I just hope they dont mess it up, and dont forget that plenty of the CIV3 buyers will be veterans of the same old same old civ game genre.

quote: Originally posted by JosefGiven on 05-03-2001 10:16 AM We all know they can't just tear up the rulebook and come up with something completely fresh and inspirational. In effect it has to be Civ II-and-a-bit or there will be a minor riot in the gaming world.

Good point! Well, I want MORE then just "Civ II-and-a-bit" of course. From what I have seen from Civ-3 so far, we are already talking about a pretty substantial upgrade to say the least. Nevertheless, many civers also wants to be able to quickly "feel at home" with Civ-3.
The latter IS really important. There are many rather conservative civers out there - and the last thing they (and I) want to see, is yet another CTP-style "it doesnt matter if old formulas worked - replace every damn feature anyway" type of upgrade.

quote: On a technical level, it boasts an all-new graphics engine, replete with contoured maps (yes, elevations and terrain features affect strategies and combat) and fully animated units.

Contoured maps? Does that mean several 3D-height layers that builds up the topography underneath the terrain-types? Like SC-3000, but probably with reduced level-differences - perhaps only half of SC, or even less.

- 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)

Sea & river both on level 3-4, but minus 0.5 level. The water is perhaps bluish semi-transparent so one can see any sea/river/ocean indentations carved into the 3D-topography.

quote: You'll be able to trade resources, agreements, technologies, units, maps and cities in any combination. This mix-and-match approach applies as much to new diplomatic agreements as it does to trade.

Why should firaxis try new things with Civ3 when so far just about anything that would be new to the civ series has been trashed so far (unique units, unique civs etc etc etc). Im not trying to make this into a unique civ thread, as I am not in favor of that idea either but come on people. You cant have your cake and eat it too. You can either want Civ3 to have new ideas or it can be Civ2+.

quote: Originally posted by treb on 05-07-2001 12:46 PM This may rub some people the wrong way but I believe that its a valid point. Why should firaxis try new things with Civ3 when so far just about anything that would be new to the civ series has been trashed so far (unique units, unique civs etc etc etc). Im not trying to make this into a unique civ thread, as I am not in favor of that idea either but come on people. You cant have your cake and eat it too. You can either want Civ3 to have new ideas or it can be Civ2+. Personally I want Civ2+ I think hehe.

Firaxis should try new things because it is making a new game. Firaxis should try new things because they need a game to sell very well. Firaxis should try new things because well thats what they should do.

As for making Civ2+, I say bogus. If you just improve on Civ2's graphics and faults then your really making Civ 1.9 or something like that. Civ II is practically the same game as the original with some modifications. I would hate it if they don't try some new things.