Comparing it to Civ 4..

[ttomm46]

Hi
i know it's a weird question but i need something to lose myself in on a daily basis..Lost my fiance and would like something to really immerse in.
as far as Civ 4 the late game is gets slow due to ling AI turns..Want to play mostly single player..Is it good compared to Civ?
also i posted awhile ago and i can see my previous post so i apologize if this is a double post.
Tom http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif

[Ironhawk]

Sorry to hear about your loss http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Dominions 3 is definitely a great game. Up there with Civ, in my opinion. However, I feel that Civ4 has a far stronger single player game. While Dominions3 SP will challenge you, as a new player, for a good amount of time I don't think that it can compete with Civ4 in that arena.

That said, Dom3 totally blows away Civ when you turn to MultiPlayer. The range of strategies and tactics is just mind boggling, even after playing for some time. Ample room to lose yourself in!

[Cor2]

if you like customizablitiy this is the game for you. i have played every civ up until civ4,why not civ 4? Because i have dominions.

If you like modding this is the game for you. If you like player made mods, same.

buy it.

And join MP, there are two diffrent ways to join mp games on servers or play by email, both are free.

[sector24]

This game is far more complex than Civ 4. Civ 4 is awesome because over the decades they game has become incredibly streamlined and the game has a general big budget polish. But it's also pretty straightforward, Civ 4 never got "boring" for me but the games frequently played out the same way, and they really bogged down once you got to the late game.

Dominions 3 on the other hand will take you hours and hours just to get a handle on the game's intricacies. Then after you think you've got a handle on it, if you play as a different nation it's like starting all over. And there's so many nations, even the vets haven't necessarily played them all. This is a good thing though, this game will keep you occupied for years if you want it to. The incredible complexity of Dominions 3 makes it the perfect game to get lost in.

Civ 4 wins on graphics and streamlined interface, but part of playing Dominions 3 single player is learning how to manage your nation with the minimum amount of micromanagement. Once you get it figured out the game moves at a good pace. I play full games with me vs. all the AI nations and turn generation is usually under 5 minutes on an old crappy laptop. For a reasonably powered desktop I think turns can generate in a minute or two. This is also subject to how you set up the games. If there are 1500 provinces of course the turns will take a little longer.

You can also read a review of it here:
http://www.odstudios.com/article.php?anum=311

[Velusion]

IMHO Civ4 is a better single player game (though dom3 is still plenty fun single player).

Dom3 is a MUCH better MP game though (the best 4x turn based MP game I've ever played actually).

[ttomm46]

thanks all..you've been helpful.

[Sombre]

Every time someone asks if dom3 is worth buying, I always feel the need to give them this answer:

If you are willing to use player made mods, Dom3 has more content (in terms of units, spells, nations, graphics etc) than you could ever hope to get tired of.

If you are willing to mod, Dom3 is one of the most mod friendly games ever and the amount you can do is surprising.

If Dom3 had no modding, I wouldn't be half as into it as I am. As it stands, I will keep playing it for years to come. I wish it had better SP, but the MP is so strong that it almost makes up for it.

[Lingchih]

Well, to put it simply, I'm a Civ Fanatic. And I love Civ 4. That said, after Dom 3 came out, I haven't played Civ 4 at all. (I must confess to taking a break to play Galactic Civilizations 2 every once in while though).

[Zeldor]

Civ 4 is a really weak game with many stupid solutions. It was a good game many many years ago [well, not 4, but civ 1 & 2], but it cannot compare to Alpha Centauri or Dominions. I have tried to play Civ4 recently but it isn't fun. All that vassals, fighting archers with tanks and so on...

[Humakty]

I agree with Zeldor, the improved graphics killed the modding frenzy you had with civ 2 (hundreds of scenario).
I play mostly SP in most games, and I think civ 4 is no match to dom 3 on this point of view.( currently taking dust in its box...)
As the MP part as mutch fans, it is a good bonus !

[Edratman]

Civ 1 is the greatest game ever. It is the founding father of the entire genre of 4X games and the great-great grandfather of Dom 3.

Civ 2,3 and 4 are upgrades of Civ 1, but the same strategy that I used in Civ 1 was still successful in the three subsequent versions, requiring only minor adaptions to the details that changed.

Dom 3 is vastly superior to Civ 2,3 and 4. (Sorry KO & JO, but nothing but an entirely new game type can knock Civ 1 off the top perch on the pantheon.) Dom 3 has vastly more complexities and is much more challenging than the Civ series. Dom 3 is a paper/scissors/rock game with unending variables and the Civ series are merely about power and research and all stem from the number of cities.

In Civ, if you have the biggest guns you win. In Dom 3, your big guns can be turned into limp noodles in front of your unbelieving eyes.

Dom 3 also has a greater variety of sites that have a chance of significently altering the game. While some probably curse their bad luck and the unfairness of the game in not getting a great site and others rejoice when they are blessed, I think these are great variables that dwarf the influence of a coal/horse/banana site in Civ.

In Civ, there is limited stratgic differences between nations. In Dom, you need a different strategy not only for every nation, but also for which nations are your immediate neighbors.

All in all, I am a major Civ fan. My Civ playing was cited in my divorce. (Guilty as charged, and the major factor why I will not MP; a smart Polack doesn't get burnt by hot Kielbasa twice.) But I find Dom 3 preferable by a wide margin to Civ 4. I played Civ 4 for about 3 months, but it really was the same game I've been playing for 20 some odd years. I've been playing Dom3 for 9 months now and still haven't figured it out.

[Caduceus]

ttomm46 said:
as far as Civ 4 the late game is gets slow due to ling (sic) AI turns..



The AI processing gets longer in Dom3 as well. I don't play most games to extinction of other races, but they tend to get longer and longer.

I think that the SP mode to Dom3 is challenging (to a newbie to me) and MP will regularly clean your clock.

[LDiCesare]

Late game in Dom 3 can be at least as boring as in Civ 4. Make sure you set victory conditions to f.e. victory points else you'll have a boring end game chasing the last atlantian out of its last sea province.
Dom3 is very moddable. Of course, contrary to Civ 4, you can't mod everything since you don't have the source code, so people who tell you that dom3 is great because of its mods are not comparing it to civ4, as civ4 is 100% more moddable.
Civ4 can be extremely enjoyable. The Fall from Heaven II mod, where everything is remade, magic added in the game, where the world changes based on your actions (armaggeddon counter) changes the gameplay more than any dominions mod can ever hope to.
This said, I like dom3 more because there's always so much to discover in this game.

[ttomm46]

thank you..it's getting ordered..Hope at 61 I'm not to dumb to figure it out..lol
Tom

[Edratman]

ttomm46 said:
thank you..it's getting ordered..Hope at 61 I'm not to dumb to figure it out..lol
Tom



Gamers are a tougher lot than the normal run of humanity, so nothing to worry about.

There are many advocates for mental gymnastics for maintaining your faculties. But I had to laugh at a TV commercial I saw the other evening; some middle aged adult was playing a hand held game requiring him to choose between a "plus" sign, "minus" sign, etc as a technique to maintain his sharpness as he aged. Obviously an attempt to seperate the butter knives of the world from their money.

One bit of advice for you. This game does not play like Civ. It has many superficial similarities to Civ, but if you try to play it like Civ, you will get your butt kicked. I did.

Of course, that is how you will learn to play the game.

[NTJedi]

In my opinion Dominions is better than CIV_4 because you have more control over the battles and units. CIV_4 has the same battle interactions as all previous CIV versions... which is Unit_A bumps into Unit_B and battle results are determined by formula XYZ.

Dominions series allows you to specify where individual units of an army stand in battle, what enemy groups melee units target, what spells mages cast in the first five rounds of combat, what items are being worn by your commanders and a more detailed list of statistics than CIV_4.

CIV_4 allows for larger maps using the smart map tool, it's too bad Dominions doesn't have a smart map tool allowing gamers to increase the commander and unit limits within the game because 10 years from now 99% of everyone will have upgraded their computers. CIV_4 also has a more developed AI, but Dominions_4 will hopefully have a scriptable AI. I know Dominions_4 is not the next project being developed, but I believe it will be coming to us one day.

[Folket]

hmm... I can't believe that people are so negative about civ 4.

Civ 4 is just such a great improvment on earlier versions.

[Zeldor]

It is impossible to like Civ4 if you played Alpha Centauri... if they made Civ4 on that I would play that again. In Civ4 every game comes down to 2-3 opponents [some nations plus their vassals] + some weak nations that are smaller challange than indies in Dom3. Civ4 is like Dom3 with research and gem income based only on number of your provinces. Imagine playing that.

[Meglobob]

I like Civ4, I loved Alpha Centauri but dominions beats them both. I cant believe I am still playing Dom3 after nearly a year and enjoying it.

Even other much loved games such as GC2 and MOO2 never held my interest for so long.

The patches help alot to keep my interest.

The 'new project' that Illwinter is working on will after be fantastic to compare with Dom3.

[Shuma]

I'm with Folket, Civ 4 is an excellent game. The best in the series, certainly.

Any beefs you have with that game specifially are more due to the genre than anything else. The gameplay has gotten to be so polished and streamlined that I don't understand where the gripes are coming from.

[thejeff]

That was my experience. I loved Civ I and Civ II. Played Alpha Centauri, then tried both Civ III & IV and was left cold.

Dominions scratches the same itch, but is even deeper.

I'd still go back to play Alpha Centauri, if some upgrade hadn't broken it's compatibility with Linux install.

[Edratman]

Shuma said:
I'm with Folket, Civ 4 is an excellent game. The best in the series, certainly.

Any beefs you have with that game specifially are more due to the genre than anything else. The gameplay has gotten to be so polished and streamlined that I don't understand where the gripes are coming from.



I am not saying Civ 4 is a bad game. But look at it from my perspective. I'm a few weeks short of 56, so I played all the Civ games the day they were released and when they were state of the art. I am still a major Civ fan. Civ 1 broke new ground in the gaming world. The others 3 were the same game with improvements, many in gameplay, but mostly in graphics.

Dom 3 is Civ 1 with an increase of complexity by several magnitudes. Civ 2, 3 and 4 are Civ 1 with an increase of complexity of several multiples. Therein lies the difference.

By saying I like Dom 3 more than Civ 4 I am not downgrading the Civ 4.

[sector24]

Yeah, Civ 4 is highly polished but very derivative. It's great, but very familiar. Sometimes familiar is what you want, but Dominions is like a brand new adventure every time.

[Folket]

I find that civ 4 is very diffrent from earlier civs.

Civ 1 was a great game, 2 and 3 was allmost the same. Civ 4 was the first civ that changed the gameplay.

I also agre on that Alpha Centauri is also a great game. At the moment I will not compare it to civ 4, but it was better then 2 and 3.

Dom3 is really a great game but I would say that most people will enjoy civ 4 more.

[Cor2]

Alpha Centauri !!! what memories. sigh.

[Cor2]

Has anybody tried the "Freeciv" ?

[Dedas]

Freeciv is like Civ2 but with worse sprites and better multiplayer support. I like it alot.

[Nikolai]

Alpha Centauri is way better than Civ III and IV. I still play it time to time. But for MP, no turn based strategy comes close with Dominions III, let alone equals. All in my opinion, of course.

[Velusion]

Edratman said:

Shuma said:
I'm with Folket, Civ 4 is an excellent game. The best in the series, certainly.

Any beefs you have with that game specifially are more due to the genre than anything else. The gameplay has gotten to be so polished and streamlined that I don't understand where the gripes are coming from.



I am not saying Civ 4 is a bad game. But look at it from my perspective. I'm a few weeks short of 56, so I played all the Civ games the day they were released and when they were state of the art. I am still a major Civ fan. Civ 1 broke new ground in the gaming world. The others 3 were the same game with improvements, many in gameplay, but mostly in graphics.

Dom 3 is Civ 1 with an increase of complexity by several magnitudes. Civ 2, 3 and 4 are Civ 1 with an increase of complexity of several multiples. Therein lies the difference.

By saying I like Dom 3 more than Civ 4 I am not downgrading the Civ 4.



I pretty much agree with everything here. Civ4 is a wonderful, polished, fairly deep 4x turn based game. It's glaring problems are it's lack of originality (it doesn't really change much from its originals) and it's horrible MP play.

I played civ4 for awhile and admired it but I tired of it quickly because I felt as if I'd already played "that game" to death.

Of course - you could say the same thing about Dom3 just being an updated Dom2, but then I never really played Dom2 so the whole game feels fresher to me.

[Velusion]

Cor2 said:
Alpha Centauri !!! what memories. sigh.



I heard Sid is making the sequal to this...

Anyone know if its true?

[NTJedi]

Velusion said:

Cor2 said:
Alpha Centauri !!! what memories. sigh.



I heard Sid is making the sequal to this...

Anyone know if its true?



Not sure about the Alpha Centuri sequel yet I do know Sid and crew have hired a developer who focuses purely on improving/creating the Artificial Intelligence. An important step for a great need within all PC games.

[Zeldor]

Velusion:

I hope it's true... but I've heard EA has rights to Alpha Centauri, so we are rather doomed.

[Humakty]

I agree with those saying AC is still the greatest civ like game. Everything was so nice ! You could even hand make each and all of your units...

It wouldn't have been so difficult to implement in Civ 4, but I guess the commercials (I could have been one of them....) said : Oh no ! Let us sell some expansion packs to satisfy their envy of variety.

If EA or Firaxis bought Dom license, they would give us 3-6 nations for the same price, the rest coming up in those darn expansions.( maybe with nicer graphics, but when I want to see a nice tree, I go in the forest...)

As for the mods, almost none is ready yet, I guess making 3D mods is really time consuming. (The only one not beta is about WW2...)(talking civ 4 mods)(issuing an extension (payable) every six months doesn't help modding either)

Another thing I hate in civ 3&4 are the national units : I find it racist and straightforward. Like if the destiny of humanity was written forever by some mad old Norns : It seems like you don't have to make any effort to have top elite troops. (did you know german engineers naturally known how to build a super tank ?)

[LDiCesare]

Humakty said:
It wouldn't have been so difficult to implement in Civ 4, but I guess the commercials (I could have been one of them....) said : Oh no ! Let us sell some expansion packs to satisfy their envy of variety.



No. They did so mostly because no ai has ever been able to handle hand tailored units correctly. SMAC and MoO are good examples I believe. Read what Soren Johnson wrote, you should see it was a thought out design decision, not a marketting one.


If EA or Firaxis bought Dom license, they would give us 3-6 nations for the same price, the rest coming up in those darn expansions.( maybe with nicer graphics, but when I want to see a nice tree, I go in the forest...)



Yeah, there were 3-6 civs in civ4 out of the box???? Come on.


As for the mods, almost none is ready yet, I guess making 3D mods is really time consuming. (The only one not beta is about WW2...)(talking civ 4 mods)(issuing an extension (payable) every six months doesn't help modding either)



The only one not in beta? You aren't talking about Fall from Heaven II? Ever tried it? Please do. Call it a beta if you like, it's got more functionality than any mode made for any game I ever saw, and is very stable. Dismiss FfH and FfH II if you like, but then look at mods like Sevomod, Rhye's and Fall... Plus there are other small mods, almost like tools (map scripts for instance), and mods which got included into the game (like the score graph).
I agree that 3D makes modding longer, but there are mods out there, including Blue Marble whose only effect is to change the terrain (so purely 3D cosmetics).


Another thing I hate in civ 3&4 are the national units : I find it racist and straightforward. Like if the destiny of humanity was written forever by some mad old Norns : It seems like you don't have to make any effort to have top elite troops. (did you know german engineers naturally known how to build a super tank ?)


It's not like it was an option you couldn't turn off. You can. Sure, I don't like it much either, but you can play without.

[Zeldor]

LDiCesare:

There is one civ in civilization, just cosmetic differences. And you do not need to adjust a gameplay according to enemy nation. But probably they wouldn't sell many copies if they made a challenging and good game, not just pretty [the same goes for Europa Universalis, which is really weak game with wasted potential]. And don't forget that vanilla civ was only a beta or even alpha version without many obvious and important things. And it was made only so they can release expansions and take money for them.

Only thing I can agree are mods - there are some finished ones with a game.

[Kristoffer O]

> [the same goes for Europa Universalis, which is really weak game with wasted potential]

It is?

[Zeldor]

Kristoffer O:

Don't tell me you like it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif Historical version of Dominions would be 100x better than EU. EU 3 has extremely dumb AI, imbalanced and ahistoric nations, only few playable countries, only one map, not even mentioning diplomacy [mainly peace system] and seizing colonies.

[Kristoffer O]

Actually I never played it. It seemed a bit hard to get into http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
Which tells me I would never ever play dominions unless I was guided through the whole process of learning how to play it.

I just thought it was a good game.

Nowdays I lack patience and only play roguelikes and fast paced games like Guild Wars, which I no longer have patience to play well.

[Zeldor]

Kristoffer O:

EU players have very closed society and they do not welcome criticism there. Something similar to iPod worshippers [or take any other example you like]. They made an extremely stupid way of conquering territories [you must conquer it and then convince them to sign a peace giving it to you, which is based on war score and some very random throws, so to get 1 province you need to conquer 40 one time and you can get lucky and be losing that 40 provinces to AI and then get white peace and give nothing].

And I prefer Enemy Territory: Quake Wars when I have no patience and my brain does not want to do what I want him to do.

[tombom]

I like a lot of the Paradox games, although EUIII didn't appeal much, and I hang around the forums there a lot. I haven't ever noticed people being any more fanatical than any other game forum and plenty of criticism goes on.

[Sombre]

I quite liked EU2 and I heard EU3 was basically improved in all aspects. Anyway, I prefer dom3 to both.

[Taqwus]

Kristoffer O said:
Nowdays I lack patience and only play roguelikes and fast paced games like Guild Wars, which I no longer have patience to play well.



Nethack or Angband? :p

[Cor2]

Zeldor said:
They made an extremely stupid way of conquering territories [you must conquer it and then convince them to sign a peace giving it to you, which is based on war score and some very random throws, so to get 1 province you need to conquer 40 one time and you can get lucky and be losing that 40 provinces to AI and then get white peace and give nothing].



So i guess nobody here likes Victoria? How does EU3 compare to Vicky?

[Folket]

Victoria is probably one of the best game ever created. I find the econimic modell somewhat weak but the game has huge potentials.

[Cor2]

I love victoria too. you really have to be a hard core gamer to play it though.

[Kristoffer O]

Recently incursion. Dungeon Crawl before that. Adom before that.

[WonderLlama]

I think incursion shows a lot of promise. I'm still not sold on the interface, although it has improved. The promising part is that there is so much to do, and almost all of it is fun. If the bugs get worked out, I think it has a shot to rival Crawl.

[Endoperez]

Kristoffer O said:
Recently incursion. Dungeon Crawl before that. Adom before that.



What's Incursion like? I take it's based on D&D. Army has left me out of the roguelike scene for a while.

I also started with ADOM (tried others, but ADOM was the first serious one), moved to Crawl, and never had patience to try Nethack or *bands. I did have fun with DoomRL and DwarfFortress when they were released, but they got old pretty fast. I'll probably try DF again when the big update comes...

[Ironhawk]

What are Incursion and Victoria? I've never heard of either until now...

[S.R. Krol]

NTJedi said:
Not sure about the Alpha Centuri sequel yet I do know Sid and crew have hired a developer who focuses purely on improving/creating the Artificial Intelligence. An important step for a great need within all PC games.



They're working on Civilization Revolution at the moment, the console version of Civ. He's thrown around doing a Civ V in the future in interviews, but I haven't seen AC mentioned so I wouldn't count on seeing another AC anytime soon, but we could always be surprised.

[WonderLlama]

Incursion is a roguelike that is heavily based on D&D. It's more about creating and powering up your character than most roguelikes. It has a very complete D&D character system, with over a hundred feats fully implemented, and I'd guess 20ish skills. Somehow the developer found a way to make almost every skill useful in a dungeon crawl too. It also has birth perks that make a very big difference to the character. One of my favorites is clairvoyance, which lets you peak around the nearby dungeon for free at any time. But there are lots, and many are very nice. The religion system is similar to many roguelikes, but I find that it is more fun in incursion because of the way the god granted abilities can complement the already complex characters. The god favor/conduct system is very cool, although last I played, it had a lot of tweaking and bugfixing left to do.

The dungeon is fairly typical roguelike. Probably the coolest unusual feature is all the detail that has gone into non-hostile creatures. You can attempt to trade with and recruit almost all of them. Which is especially nice when they pick something up that you want; you have the option of demanding it or buying from them instead of killing them. I don't think anyone will ever write an NPC system that eliminates annoyance completely, but this one is relatively good.

I'd say if you like complex character design and random dungeon crawls, you'll like this game.

[Cor2]

Ironhawk said:
What are Incursion and Victoria? I've never heard of either until now...



Victoria: An Empire Under the Sun is its full name.
It is a game of grand stratagy set in 1836-1920. You choose a nation (literally any nation in the world at that time) and make all thier econiomic, military and political decsions. You accumuate prestige, which is how you win teh game. Basically it its a huge world map with every nation in the world on it.
Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria:_An_Empire_Under_the_Sun

I think you can find it used on amazon for like $10. Totally worth it.

The downsides:
its real time (but you can pause)
weird popup system of notification
There are a fairly limited number of military units
Nasty "civilized" and "uncivilized" titles to nations(this is to reflect the laguage of the period, I hope)

Up sides:
Play any nation
real historical events
change history
47 separate resources
indepth political and economic systems

[NTJedi]

WonderLlama said:
Incursion is a roguelike that is heavily based on D&D. It's more about creating and powering up your character than most roguelikes. It has a very complete D&D character system, with over a hundred feats fully implemented, and I'd guess 20ish skills. Somehow the developer found a way to make almost every skill useful in a dungeon crawl too. It also has birth perks that make a very big difference to the character. One of my favorites is clairvoyance, which lets you peak around the nearby dungeon for free at any time. But there are lots, and many are very nice. The religion system is similar to many roguelikes, but I find that it is more fun in incursion because of the way the god granted abilities can complement the already complex characters. The god favor/conduct system is very cool, although last I played, it had a lot of tweaking and bugfixing left to do.

The dungeon is fairly typical roguelike. Probably the coolest unusual feature is all the detail that has gone into non-hostile creatures. You can attempt to trade with and recruit almost all of them. Which is especially nice when they pick something up that you want; you have the option of demanding it or buying from them instead of killing them. I don't think anyone will ever write an NPC system that eliminates annoyance completely, but this one is relatively good.

I'd say if you like complex character design and random dungeon crawls, you'll like this game.



Sounds interesting, but is this a PC game or board game?
I looked on the wikipedia, yet no pics/screenshots.

[Lingchih]

S.R. Krol said:

NTJedi said:
Not sure about the Alpha Centuri sequel yet I do know Sid and crew have hired a developer who focuses purely on improving/creating the Artificial Intelligence. An important step for a great need within all PC games.



They're working on Civilization Revolution at the moment, the console version of Civ. He's thrown around doing a Civ V in the future in interviews, but I haven't seen AC mentioned so I wouldn't count on seeing another AC anytime soon, but we could always be surprised.



Alpha Centauri, IMHP the best of the Civ type games, was made by Brian Reynolds, who now runs Big Huge Games. I think there is a conflict between him and Sid, as to who actually owns the right to the game. That said, I don't know if we will ever see another Alpha Centauri game.

[Endoperez]

NTJedi said:
Sounds interesting, but is this a PC game or board game?
I looked on the wikipedia, yet no pics/screenshots.



PC game, but there are no graphics.
ADOM screenshot (http://www.terstiege.de/files/images/adom_win2.preview.png)

Several Incursion screenshots (http://www.incursion-roguelike.org/screens.html)

[S.R. Krol]

Lingchih said:
Alpha Centauri, IMHP the best of the Civ type games, was made by Brian Reynolds, who now runs Big Huge Games. I think there is a conflict between him and Sid, as to who actually owns the right to the game. That said, I don't know if we will ever see another Alpha Centauri game.



The next big project at Big Huge is a RPG, slated for release in 2009. Maybe then AC2 in 2011? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I'm not sure if a question of rights would figure into it. Both he and Sid co-wrote the game, and there are quite a few other notables who helped shape the design. Ultimately I wonder if it's a question of economics. Sure, people who love the game REALLY love it, but overall I have to wonder how many units it actually moved? I'm guessing that if it really did well we would have seen AC2 long before Civ III, or Rise of Nations...

[Gandalf Parker]

For all those who love NetHack, Rogue, or any version thereof
http://www.thefump.com/lyrics.php?id=93

[Aezeal]

/me insists on hailing Master of Magic again!!

[tombom]

S.R. Krol said:
The next big project at Big Huge is a RPG, slated for release in 2009. Maybe then AC2 in 2011? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I'm not sure if a question of rights would figure into it. Both he and Sid co-wrote the game, and there are quite a few other notables who helped shape the design. Ultimately I wonder if it's a question of economics. Sure, people who love the game REALLY love it, but overall I have to wonder how many units it actually moved? I'm guessing that if it really did well we would have seen AC2 long before Civ III, or Rise of Nations...



I think somebody contacted Firaxis about the rights when they were working on a Civ4 Alpha Centauri mod and they said EA owned them.

[Fate]

I don't know if we are still talking about Dom III, but here is how I "play" it:

I don't really have the self-discipline for multiplayer, so I only play hotseat MP (when I have a friend around).

Otherwise I check the forums now and again. People are always discussing something completely new. The only topics which are repeated are newbie problems (like how does the game work, how do I avoid insta-death, etc...) and are fun to read because everyone is nice and has some good, often new tips, or people asking if they should buy Dominions. If I see an interesting strategy/unit/NEW PATCH(should I say expansion?) I rush to my game and try it.

Sometimes I will think of a new nation/spell/item/unit/strategy I want to play with, so I go to my game to try that. And I haven't even found time for mods yet.

...I think Dom III is worth it.

[tsr]

You have to admit, as a gamer, that civilization was one of the paramount reasons to own a computer years ago. (Pun intended)

But to be honest, I didn't buy Civ IV, but I did learn about Dom 3 thru the GC2 game, and well... I expect I'll have more playability from this based on comnents here, than I had ever expected.

In fact, I'm so excited I waited outside for the postman today.

T.Sr.

[HoneyBadger]

Since we're talking great games for hardcore gamers, I'd like to mention Empire of the Fading Suns. Now that game had some serious potential (mind you, it had massive flaws too, but to me it possessed the qualities of elegance and genius that only the best board games ever approach-it just needed a lot more TLC, and as a gaming experience, it was a lot richer than Civ 1 upon which it was based.).

Alpha Centauri was indeed the finest Sid Meyer-style game ever made, especially with the expansion pack. I'd have very much liked to see a second expansion and a sequil-I've never ever heard any serious gamer give a bad review of the game, my experience has been universal applause.

If Illwinter really chooses not to persue Dom 4 (which would make all the poor starving orphans in the world really, really sad) then ideally, I'd love to see them take the same Dominions concepts and apply them to a Steampunk sortof game, something like Europa Universalis (which I bought but never got to play, since my computer wouldn't run it, even when my hard-drive was still alive-same goes for Civ4), only with real world mythological and Lovecraftian concepts set from say 1492-1945.

You've got everything from the Conquistadores to the Thuggee Cult. Real live Pirates of the Carribean, opening up China and Japan to the rest of the world-and the tragedies of the opium wars. Religious schisms, Nazi Occultism, witch burning, the golden age of Science Fiction. Everything from the Inquisition to the Victorian age of fairies to the spiritualist movements and subsequent supernatural horror of the 19th and early 20th century. And ofcourse, you've still got all the myths to play with that are present in Dominions.

The game could include such things as the British Empire allied with Faerie-both seelie and unseelie, the Nazis turning their backs on both Christ and Odin, and in league with Cthulhu, Norse Ice Giants alongside Arabian Djinn, Jewish golems and African zombies being sold into slavery as physical machines and components of industrialization, and the power of blood magic only accessible by real-world serial killers, such as Jack the Ripper, Elizabeth Bathory, Giles De Rais, H H Holmes, the Lalauries, etc.

The goal would be to take what innovations Dominions has already made, and advance them one step further beyond the normal midieval fantasy concept, into a time when mythological and traditional beliefs were in direct competition with science, innovation, and evolving social mores. I think it would be a lot of fun to both make and to play, and wouldn't require totally scrapping Dominions, since it could draw from the basic game already in place.

You'd see your sword-weilding infantry gradually adopt crude pistols, rifles, the bayonette, better fortresses, cannon, ships, diplomacy, a trade economy, colonization, cures for disease, and eventually things like tanks and planes, with magic and myths evolving right alongside.

The focus would shift from the Pretender-the source of all magic-to the Prophet, in charge of leading the nation, who may or may not ultimately choose to become independant. And the more changes the nation adopts, the more difficult it would be to preserve the relationship between the Nation and the Nation's patron Pretender. And maybe your Prophet is a real live historical figure. Maybe he's Leonardo Da Vinci or Rasputin or Abraham Lincoln.

All sorts of moral questions would present themselves, with real impacts in the game-well, do I want to put a maniacle serial-killer on the payroll, just so I can summon demons? If anyone finds out, it's going to be a major scandal-and in this game there *would* be coups and rebellions, competing religions and major societal shifts.

Do I want to improve my technological level so I can outfit my armies with rifles, but in the process alienate and ultimately wipe out my magic-user base, or do I want to research magic exclusively, oppress my people back into the stone-age, and turn my back on a dynamic, technological society in favor of an agrarian utopia?

I think one of the major reasons that the middle ages (really, the dark ages, atleast until the invention of the printing-press) are so often used as a backdrop for fantasy tropes is because they're a "safe" area.

There aren't *that* many questions to ask. Society's evolution and the unpredictability of technology, new forms of government, religion, etc. didn't come into it, and even if they did, we don't know that much about them anyway, because it was so long ago-but not so very long ago that we can't paint an acceptable picture and do some reasonable conjecture.

The poor downtrodden people in your typical fantasy story don't want or need major upheavals and reforms, they just need a strong, competent king with a magic sword and a few less dragons eating their kids. Diseases weren't going to be cured for a couple hundred years, and only Jews and Muslims bathed. Hardly anybody read, and there was only Catholicism to worry about, so getting rid of the big bad ogre is a nice immediate bandaid on the plague sore, and it makes everyone feel better about their miserable lot in life.

A pure, simple, stupid land, in to which never need enter any messiness of real-life complexity or human pathos.
And, ofcourse, human beings were simply technologically incapable of systematically destroying the Earth, which is also very comforting.

It would be wonderfully refreshing, after Illwinter has already thumbed it's nose at all the plastic dragon/elf masturbatory fantasy and given us our rich, glorious, human mythology back, to now go forward with it into a setting that is still romantic, still mysterious and capable of containing anything the imagination might require, but has a little bit more flavor than the backwards armpit of ignorance and infection that was the middle ages.

[Folket]

I liked your post but I think Illwinter will be overwelmed by the scope of this project.

[HoneyBadger]

Well, it's not exactly like Dominions is a tiny little game.

[solops]

Alpha Centauri was the only Civ series game I did not like. And I truly disliked it. It was visually revolting and totally unintuitive.

On another point: Victoria..Yeah! I am one of the 6 people that really thought is was Great!!

[CUnknown]

Interesting, you didn't like Alpha Centauri, solops? I'd like to chime in and say that I agree it's the best Civ-game out there. The game itself was great, certainly, but what made it really shine to me, anyway, was the backstory and the basic sci-fi concept of it.

I know it sounds odd to praise a game's "backstory", but you can tell that they really put a lot of work in Alpha's backstory, voice acting, characters, etc. They showed a lot of knowledge of actual and near-future scientific advances, intertwining that with sci-fi elements to make a very belivable tech tree for humanity's next 200 years or so (assuming we don't kill ourselves, which is a big caveat). The movies for the wonders were superb, and were emotionally moving at times (anyone remember the one for 'Self-Aware Colony'?).

Basically, I think the game moves beyond merely a "game" and progresses to something that really has to be considered a work of art. In the same way, I think that Dominions in a sense can also be considered to be more than just a game -- it's also a great compilation of humanity's myths across cultures. You can learn a lot from playing both games, imo.

[Lord_Bob]

Alpha Centauri was nice, but it had some very serious problems.

First:
Deliberate limitation of "Victory Options"
Military Victory made extremely tedious:
The only way to win "militarily" was to wipe everyone else out. But of course if you have conqueored half the planet, then a "diplomatic" victory should be easy, right? You have half the votes already! NOPE!

Diplomatic Victory made almost impossible!
Decision to basically stop any group except the "Peacekeepers" from having a diplomatic victory. In fact, they were apparently trying to stop a diplomatic victory entirely. The requirment of needing 75% ! of the votes in your favor to win, with the peacekeepers having twice as many votes per population unit was ridicilous. With 7 groups, if the Peacekeepers were very slightly larger than "average size"(1/7 the population), then they would be able to stop another race from achieving diplomatic victory ALL BY THEMSELVES! Also, because they have twice the votes of everyone else per population point, unless they have been wiped out, they will always be one of the canidates and will always vote for themselves! Thus you need EVERY SINGLE OTHER RACE ON YOUR SIDE, even if they only have four cities, in order to counter the Peacekeepers. Or you have to wipe them out. If the peacekeepers are on the other side of the map, then to bad.

Also:
For a "technological" game made by a computer programmer, the nasty descriptions of Cyborgs and certain other projects was unnecessary. IF it could be done, Cyborgs would be awesome and a "step up" on the evolutionary ladder. Forget typing, go straight to "thinking" it in. Oh, and surgery? Through electronic eyes and with mechanical hands both extremely strong and extremely precise? But all we get is some crude limeric.

Also, the planet may be tough, but it isn't dealing with some "clever cow" that happens to be able to resist it's pyschic attacks. It's dealing with aliens from another world with advanced technology and the will to use it. R'yleh! R'yleh!

I believe the need to DEMAND the technological "planet contact" victory is why all the other victory conditions were crippled. I don't like being forced to follow one path to win.

[Velusion]

I really liked the AC gameplay - especially multiplayer. I've never found the problems listed in the posts above (or at least nothing that wasn't also present in the normal Civ series).

The graphics were pretty bad though.... even for the time. A bit too garish with the colors.

[Humakty]

Lord-Bob : the various factions all had a specific advantage, and being able to block other civs was the only real bonus you had playing peacekeepers.
Not able to wipe them out ? What about the awesome vehicle chasis you had late game ? Ever played Spartans or Ruche or those religious fanatics? They were able to crush anyone anywhere.(especially those ridiculous peacekeepers)
Comparing to civ 4, military victory was a real pleasure.(cultur...)