SNIKTITT: Civilization: Beyond Earth

[Majjan]

Civilization: Beyond Earth kan bli svært artig.

SNIKTITT: Civilization: Beyond Earth

[Kron]

I Alpha Centauri kunne man lage sine egne enheter basert på hvilke teknologier som man hadde forsket på. Er dette noe som også er i Civilization: Beyond Earth?

 

 

EDIT: Ser nå at dette ble skrevet om i artikkelen. Litt skuffet over dette.

 

 

Måten man utvikler sine krigsenheter på ser ut til å bli en kombinasjon av Alpha Centauri og Civilization-tradisjonen. Vi får ikke den samme byggemodulen som Alpha Centauri hadde, hvor du selv kunne sette sammen hva du ville av alle elementer du hadde forsket frem. Det blir heller ikke slik at du hele tiden kommer opp med nye enheter som erstatter de du allerede har. Det virker som om man har en håndfull med grunnenheter, som for eksempel infanteri, stridsvogn, og lignende. Disse byttes ikke ut, men oppgraderes etter hvert som du forsker frem ny teknologi til dem

Endret 28. august 2014 av Kron

[krist2]

edit:

ser at du fant det selv

 

Endret 28. august 2014 av krist2

[radiohodet]

 

 

La oss kalle en spade for en spade - dette er Alpha Centauri 2

 

Vel..... jeg ville heller sagt: La oss kalle en spade for en spade - dette er Civilization 5 in space. Likhetene med Civ 4 - Colonization er mange, hvor de også gjorde en slapp jobb med å skjule at spillet ikke var mer en enn en reskin, og jeg synes vi ser de samme tegnene her.

 

Fra et Gamestar-intervju:

 

 

 

• Terrain & Terraforming: SMAC - SMAC had real 3D terrain, each tile had exposition, heigh and inclination, with an impact on gameplay. Tiles could be raised and lowered or the player could plant forests.
  Terrain & Terraforming: BE - Since BE uses the CIV5 graphics engine, the terrain is "flat". The terrain has a clear structure and each tile consists of a fixed terrain type and cannot be changed. Terraforming is gone, so interaction is limited by building farms, mines and the like.
  Terrain & Terraforming: Why it was changed - (David McDonough) - "Like many other players I have found memories of SMAC's terraforming. But in BE we used another approach because we don't think that this level of micromanagement is really necessary. Instead you can now influence the terrain with units, like satellites that can create or remove Miasma."
• Governments: SMAC - Instead of premade governments (like "republic"), we were allowed to create our own state from 16 predefined policies like "police state" or "mind control". That had different pros and cons, could be changed at any time and had significant impact on diplomacy.
  Governments: BE - Culture gained from buildings increases culture levels and unlocks "virtues". There are 4 differnt trees (Might, Growth, Science, Industry).
  Governments: Why it was changed - (David McDonough) - "The virtues act like the SPs from CIV5. We like that because it allows you to shape the identy of your people. Now we also have quest decisions and affinities. That adds a lot more character than a simple "form of government".

• Diplomacy & Espionage: SMAC - Next to direct negotiations we had the planetary council, some sort of UN to make important global decisions. Espionage was handled via a CIV2 like system with on-map units.
  Diplomacy & Espionage: BE - There is no longer a planetary council, so we have only direct negotiations with other players. Espionage, however, was improved: Instead of on-map units we assign spies in a special menu.
  Diplomacy & Espionage: Why it was changed - (Will Miller) "You can interact a lot more with the other parties than you could in CIV, since we have more than just alliances and the like. We removed the planetary council because it was not really necessary anymore. In SMAC it was one of the victory conditions, but now we have different ones."

• Story & Quests: SMAC - As the game went on the planet became increasingly hostile. The told the story via text: The planet was alive - and allergic against humans.
  Story & Quests: BE - There is no story. Instead the player can start quests via surveying artifacts that tell little stories. The play can, for example, look for clues about the precursors that lived on the planet - but he doesn't have to.
  Story & Quests: Why it was changed - (David McDonough) - "We think CIV players want to experience their own story - many write down their experience and publish them in forums. We don't want to ruin that with a strict storyline. Instead quests will give the player some cool SciFi bits that they can weave into their story."
• Cities & Expansion: SMAC - Founding cities in SMAC worked like in every CIV game before. Except for one thing: We could also settle the seas with special colony ships.
  Cities & Expansion: BE - No more ocean cities, the player can only settle on land. Colonists are costly and outposts need 10-15 turns before they turn into real cities. Until then they are defenceless and must be protected and supplied.
  Cities & Expansion: Why it was changed - (Anton Strenger) "We thought about adding ocean cities but refrained to add them in, because we want the player to focus on land. Outposts were added to prevent rapid expansion and allow early game border clashes. The player should focus on the alien enviroment instead of the other factions during the early game."
• Combat System: SMAC - Combat is like in CIV2. An unlimted amount of units can be placed on any tile. A new mechanic allowed to bombard tiles and damage all units on it. This made bigger armies more vulnerable.
  Combat System: BE - BE uses the CIV5 combat system: 1UPT, so the formation of the units is very important. Satellites add a new level of strategic depth.
  Combat System: Why it was changed - (Dennis Shirk) "We added hexes and 1UPT to CIV5 to remove the doomstacks from CIV4. Instead of just massing units in cities battles should be fought on the world map. Initially the AI had some trouble, but it got better after a few patches." [indeed, now they just suicide their armies most of the time...]
• Units & Upgrades: SMAC - Instead of researching CIV-like prebuild units the player unlocks parts. From these the player can create whatever unit he desires. Old units could be upgraded for an energy cost.
  Units & Upgrades: BE - Premade units, all units of one category (e.g. Infantry) can be upgraded for free once the player has reached a higher affinity level. Each upgrade offers 2 perks, but only once can be chosen. Veteran units increase their combat power like in SMAC, but don't learn new special abilities [from promotions] like in CIV5.
  Units & Upgrades: Why it was changed - (Will Miller) "Our first prototype actually contained a SMAC-like unit editor. However, that required too much micromanagement and was quite tedious. So we decided to go with a more linear upgrade system that made more fun and felt more like CIV."
• Factions: SMAC - Factions with ideologies, pros + cons, impact on AI behaviour
  Factions: BE - Nationality + Colonist Professions + Equipment. AI behaviour depends on nationality, but may vary: Brazilian AI is usually more aggressive than Franco-Iberia but doesn't have to.
  Factions: Why it was changed - (Will Miller) "We want to give the player more choise when selecting a Faction. Instead of repeating the same strategy over and over again they should try new things. Ai doesn't follow a fixed strategy but reacts to it's situation.

 

 

[fnwilborn]

Eh. Dette er ikke SMAC2. Veldig mye som er annerledes.

[KayAU]

Hmm...eg synest Alpha Centauri var fantastisk, og har faktisk vurdert å kjøpe dette på lanseringsdatoen, men er litt skeptisk etter at parallelane til Civ4: Colonization vart påpeikt. Dette var utan sidestykke det mest skuffande spelet frå Firaxis eg har spelt, sjølv om både Civ4 og det opprinnelege Colonization var svært bra.

 

Eg trur kanskje eg ventar og ser.

 

Kay

[Everket]

Alt jeg har lest og sett peker ikke mot alpha centauri 2. Men gamer.no mener det stikk motsatte. Slutt å gi meg falske forhåpninger gamer.no!!!

 

Seriøst viss dette bare er en dum hype piece så kommer jeg tilbake og gir dere fingen. Hva faen er vitsen med å lyve til oss som dere jobber for å hjelpe?

 

Confused.

Endret 28. august 2014 av Everket

[fnwilborn]

Det virker som om Gamer har blitt blendet av ønsketenkning.

[ATWindsor]

Eh. Dette er ikke SMAC2. Veldig mye som er annerledes.

 

Oppfølgere må ikke være en ren kopi av originalen.

 

AtW

[ATWindsor]

 

La oss kalle en spade for en spade - dette er Alpha Centauri 2

 

Vel..... jeg ville heller sagt: La oss kalle en spade for en spade - dette er Civilization 5 in space. Likhetene med Civ 4 - Colonization er mange, hvor de også gjorde en slapp jobb med å skjule at spillet ikke var mer en enn en reskin, og jeg synes vi ser de samme tegnene her.

 

Fra et Gamestar-intervju:

 

 

 

• Terrain & Terraforming: SMAC - SMAC had real 3D terrain, each tile had exposition, heigh and inclination, with an impact on gameplay. Tiles could be raised and lowered or the player could plant forests.

  Terrain & Terraforming: BE - Since BE uses the CIV5 graphics engine, the terrain is "flat". The terrain has a clear structure and each tile consists of a fixed terrain type and cannot be changed. Terraforming is gone, so interaction is limited by building farms, mines and the like.

  Terrain & Terraforming: Why it was changed - (David McDonough) - "Like many other players I have found memories of SMAC's terraforming. But in BE we used another approach because we don't think that this level of micromanagement is really necessary. Instead you can now influence the terrain with units, like satellites that can create or remove Miasma."

• Governments: SMAC - Instead of premade governments (like "republic"), we were allowed to create our own state from 16 predefined policies like "police state" or "mind control". That had different pros and cons, could be changed at any time and had significant impact on diplomacy.

  Governments: BE - Culture gained from buildings increases culture levels and unlocks "virtues". There are 4 differnt trees (Might, Growth, Science, Industry).

  Governments: Why it was changed - (David McDonough) - "The virtues act like the SPs from CIV5. We like that because it allows you to shape the identy of your people. Now we also have quest decisions and affinities. That adds a lot more character than a simple "form of government".

• Diplomacy & Espionage: SMAC - Next to direct negotiations we had the planetary council, some sort of UN to make important global decisions. Espionage was handled via a CIV2 like system with on-map units.

  Diplomacy & Espionage: BE - There is no longer a planetary council, so we have only direct negotiations with other players. Espionage, however, was improved: Instead of on-map units we assign spies in a special menu.

  Diplomacy & Espionage: Why it was changed - (Will Miller) "You can interact a lot more with the other parties than you could in CIV, since we have more than just alliances and the like. We removed the planetary council because it was not really necessary anymore. In SMAC it was one of the victory conditions, but now we have different ones."

• Story & Quests: SMAC - As the game went on the planet became increasingly hostile. The told the story via text: The planet was alive - and allergic against humans.

  Story & Quests: BE - There is no story. Instead the player can start quests via surveying artifacts that tell little stories. The play can, for example, look for clues about the precursors that lived on the planet - but he doesn't have to.

  Story & Quests: Why it was changed - (David McDonough) - "We think CIV players want to experience their own story - many write down their experience and publish them in forums. We don't want to ruin that with a strict storyline. Instead quests will give the player some cool SciFi bits that they can weave into their story."

• Cities & Expansion: SMAC - Founding cities in SMAC worked like in every CIV game before. Except for one thing: We could also settle the seas with special colony ships.

  Cities & Expansion: BE - No more ocean cities, the player can only settle on land. Colonists are costly and outposts need 10-15 turns before they turn into real cities. Until then they are defenceless and must be protected and supplied.

  Cities & Expansion: Why it was changed - (Anton Strenger) "We thought about adding ocean cities but refrained to add them in, because we want the player to focus on land. Outposts were added to prevent rapid expansion and allow early game border clashes. The player should focus on the alien enviroment instead of the other factions during the early game."

• Combat System: SMAC - Combat is like in CIV2. An unlimted amount of units can be placed on any tile. A new mechanic allowed to bombard tiles and damage all units on it. This made bigger armies more vulnerable.

  Combat System: BE - BE uses the CIV5 combat system: 1UPT, so the formation of the units is very important. Satellites add a new level of strategic depth.

  Combat System: Why it was changed - (Dennis Shirk) "We added hexes and 1UPT to CIV5 to remove the doomstacks from CIV4. Instead of just massing units in cities battles should be fought on the world map. Initially the AI had some trouble, but it got better after a few patches." [indeed, now they just suicide their armies most of the time...]

• Units & Upgrades: SMAC - Instead of researching CIV-like prebuild units the player unlocks parts. From these the player can create whatever unit he desires. Old units could be upgraded for an energy cost.

  Units & Upgrades: BE - Premade units, all units of one category (e.g. Infantry) can be upgraded for free once the player has reached a higher affinity level. Each upgrade offers 2 perks, but only once can be chosen. Veteran units increase their combat power like in SMAC, but don't learn new special abilities [from promotions] like in CIV5.

  Units & Upgrades: Why it was changed - (Will Miller) "Our first prototype actually contained a SMAC-like unit editor. However, that required too much micromanagement and was quite tedious. So we decided to go with a more linear upgrade system that made more fun and felt more like CIV."

• Factions: SMAC - Factions with ideologies, pros + cons, impact on AI behaviour

  Factions: BE - Nationality + Colonist Professions + Equipment. AI behaviour depends on nationality, but may vary: Brazilian AI is usually more aggressive than Franco-Iberia but doesn't have to.

  Factions: Why it was changed - (Will Miller) "We want to give the player more choise when selecting a Faction. Instead of repeating the same strategy over and over again they should try new things. Ai doesn't follow a fixed strategy but reacts to it's situation.

 

 

 

 

Takk for en interessant lenke, endel av tingene som er forandret synes jeg ikke er noe stress, det var bare unødvendig komplekst til liten glede, men endel ting er kjipt at de tar vekk også.

 

AtW

[fnwilborn]

 

 

Eh. Dette er ikke SMAC2. Veldig mye som er annerledes.

Oppfølgere må ikke være en ren kopi av originalen.

 

AtW

Selvsagt ikke. Men dette spillet er funksjonelt veldig annerledes og designerne har uttrykt spesifikt at de vil gjøre en del ting på en annen måte.

[Gother-Bit]

Skuffende.

[KayAU]

Takk for informasjonen, radiohodet. Etter å ha lest dette, er eg overbevist om at eg ikkje skal kjøpe dette før eg har nok informasjon til å gjere eit informert valg...og kanskje eg ikkje vil kjøpe det til full pris heller. Det høyrast ut som om veldig mykje av det som gjorde Alpha Centauri so bra kjem til å mangle i BE. Og veldig mykje av det som fungerte bra i Civ 5 kjem truleg til å bli satt inn i ein samanheng der det passar dårlegare inn.

 

Det er mykje det samme som dei gjorde med Civ4: Colonization. Mellom dei mange svakheitene til spelet, var det at dei tankelaust kopierte inn mekanismar frå Civ4. T.d. hugsar eg at dei hadde med moglegheita til å konvertere produksjon til andre ting. Det ga meining i Civ4, men i Colonization var resultatet at dersom eg hadde nok snekkarar, kunne eg låse opp alt eg ville av "Exploration"-trèet av grunnleggarar. Sjølv om eg aldri gjorde noko utforsking.

 

Tilsvarande ser det ut til å bli i Beyond Earth, når eg kjem til ein ny planet, og det første eg må gjere er...å produsere kultur, slik at eg kan få innflytelse over større landområder rundt basen min? Hæh?

 

Kay

[Tå.]

Jeg er på jakt etter mye dybde. CIV serien dummes for det meste bare mer og mer ned. Tviler på at BE vil endre på dette. Hvor lang tid tar det å reskinne til science fiction anyways?

 

Ta ressurser for eks. Hvorfor har ikke dette mye større strategisk betydning? AI blir trolig håpløs som vanlig, og det blir et få random events(noe som er genialt i denne type spill).

 

Skulle ønske flere prøvde seg på civ cloner da civ langt ifra er den ultimate sivilisasjons simulator.

[KayAU]

Tilfeldige hendingar er absolutt eit bra krydder for denne typen spel, fordi det bidreg både til variasjonen og til å skape ei historie. Dette var ei av styrkene til Alpha Centauri. No var det som skjedde rett nok ikkje so tilfeldig, men der var ei sterk historie i grunnen, og kombinert med den viktige rolla til ideologi og ideologiske konflikter, gjorde det heile opplevinga meir engasjerande.

 

Eit anna spel som gjorde dette veldig bra, var den fantastiske Fall from Heaven/Master of Mana-modden til Civ 4. Her hadde ein igjen ei levande og farleg verd å temme, fargerike leiarar med store skilnadar i ideologi og spelestil, og mange tilfeldige hendingar som hjalp til med å drive historia framover. Eg skulle ønske Firaxis kunne trekke lærdom frå denne modden når dei designa BE.

 

Kay

[Joachim_F]

Jeg er på jakt etter mye dybde. CIV serien dummes for det meste bare mer og mer ned.

 

Du bør kanskje teste det originale Civilization (eller spille det om igjen) før du sier slike ting, for Civilization-serien har aldri vært spesielt dyp.

 

Å designe et nytt spill i Civilization-serien har ofte blitt beskrevet ved å sammenligne det med å fylle en bøtte. Man bør holde kompleksiteten omtrent som før, så størrelsen på bøtta bør være uendret fra spill til spill. Det innebærer nødvendigvis at om nye ting skal inn, må noe gammelt ut. Hvis ikke flommer bøtta over.

 

Jeg liker den bøtte-analogien godt. Den passer for de fleste spill og serier. Man kan ikke bare putte inn mer og mer detaljer, for da blir ting overveldende for spillerne. Så man må hele tiden balansere. Skal noe nytt inn, bør noe annet ut.

 

Størrelsen på bøtta avhenger selvsagt av sjanger, kundegruppe og så videre. Matrix Games eller Paradox kan nok tillate seg større bøtter enn Firaxis.

[Sectoid]

Jeg liker nå faktisk Civ V jeg da, særlig etter at man legger til Gods & Kings og Brave New World. Og særlig med den siste vil jeg påstå at gameplay faktisk kan bli ganske dypt i form av strategier. Hvis du ikke har lagt merke til det er sjansene store for at du ikke har spilt det så mye eller har spilt på for lav vanskelighetsgrad.

Når et spill bruker samme spillmotor er det åpenbart at det blir ekstremt store likheter. Det ser man også på f.eks FPS eller mer direkte sammenlignbart RTS sjangeren.

Og til alle som kritiserer med at dette er en variant av Civilization... har Firaxis noengang hevdet noe annet? Prøver de å selge et turbasert strategispill som noe annet enn det det er? Nei, det gjør de ikke.

[fnwilborn]

Civ5 er et bra spill med de to XPene, helt klart. Firaxis har vært klar på hva de er ute etter å lage. Og det er ikke SMAC2. Det er Civilization på en fremmed planet, med inspirasjon fra SMAC. Noen hevder BE er kun en mod av Civ5. De tar helt feil, spillet har heldigvis mer i seg enn det.

[Sectoid]

Når Civ VI kommer vil noen påstå at Civ V var bedre også. That's the circle of life.

Dette er et problem alle spill som er avhengig av utvidelser lider under når de slipper en ny versjon.

Endret 29. august 2014 av Sectoid

[KayAU]

Eg har likt alle Civ-spela...faktisk synest eg måten Firaxis lagar oppfølgjarar i Civilization-serien på er noko andre utviklarar bør ta lærdom av. Dei klarar å forandre og fornye spela, men samstundes halde fast på det som gjer serien bra: vanedannande turbasert strategi der ein får utvikle ein sivilisasjon frå steinalderen fram til moderne tid, og ei merkeleg dragning mot å berre gjere ein tur til. Civ 5 er favoritten min so langt, og eg synest so å seie alle endringane dei gjorde var til det betre: situasjonsbaserte underverk og bygningar, betre krigføring, betre system for naturressursar, meir naturleg utviding av grenser, verdskongressen, betre brukargrensesnitt, og meir.

 

Firaxis leverer so å seie alltid...men Civ4: Colonization viste at dei òg kan svikte. Eg kryssar fingrane for at Beyond Earth blir bra, men er litt bekymra av det eg har lest.

 

Kay