Changes in Civ Rev

[civfinatic29]

I sold my civ rev copy for xbox 360 a few weeks ago. The game was really cool and was glad civilization finally came to consoles. Ive been a loyal civ fan since 1991. I own and played all the civ games on pc. I do feel civ rev is really laking some areas. These are things I would to see in the future for civ rev 2 or a expansion pack. Then I would definietely buy it. In the mean time Im back to playing to Civ4 Beyone the Sword on my pc with the lastest update recently released.

1) more diplomacy options
2) open borders option
3) more civs
4) more maps
5) more nukes
6) smarter AI
7) customization for games - like civ4 where you can choose the size of the map, type of map, number of civs, length of game
8) being able to play past 2100 AD
9) religion
10) more units
11) being able to upgrade units for a cost
12) if a civ declares war on you there has to be reason - more like civ 4 where it says not the same religion, close borders, trading with an enemy, etc.
13) having the option of longer games if you like

[LittleCupcakes]

Well, they made those changes on purpose. They didn't want "classic" Civ, they wanted console Civ.

[Aenima]

yes but, it would be interesting to have classic civ on a console, me i can't play classic civ on my pc (i use linux .... and i never play on my pc, there's the console for this).

[The Panguin]

more units/techs/civs, smarter AI, diplomacy and borders are the only things I think are needed from what you mentioned. the map customization concepts are simply too bulky and would have to be restricted to SP and player matches anyways. Same with the going past 2100AD concept you mentioned three times. O_o it just wont happen.

Upgrading units makes leonardo's workshop(or barracks / great leader depending on what you meant) completely and utterly useless. The religion option is pointless, as is the 'needing a reason to start a war' concept. Here's a reason for you:They just don't like you. You'll never Zulu tanks or warriors killing riflemen in reality so I don't see why you logic should apply to diplomatic affairs if it doesn't in the actual gameplay.

Thats bout it. You also mentioned more nukes, but that would just be pointless in a game like this. Granted it would give more use to the SDI...but the cons outweigh the pros for this specific game.

So like the other person said, this is console civ. It can't and wont ever be as complex as Civ on the computer...at least on the 360 it wont be. Who knows, maybe in another decade you'll have your wish =P

[nzgeek]

These are things I would to see in the future for civ rev 2 or a expansion pack.

1) more diplomacy options
Agree. We need to be able to do the various things that the enemy civs can do to us, like demanding technologies/great people.
2) open borders option
Agree. It's a real pain when a unit is stuck because you can't move through another civ's square. You should at least be able to negotiate a few turns of movement, after which your units are returned to neutral/home territory.
3) more civs
4) more maps
I assume you mean having 3/4/5/6/7 civs and small/medium/large/x-large maps. If so, I agree, so long as it doesn't make the game longer (*).
5) more nukes
Disagree, unless there were some harsher penalties for using a nuke.
6) smarter AI
Totally agree. If the AI was just a little smarter, it wouldn't have to resort to cheating any more.
7) customization for games - like civ4 where you can choose the size of the map, type of map, number of civs, length of game
Agreed!
8) being able to play past 2100 AD
I disagree as far as the main game goes. It doesn't really harm the game, and most people don't hit it unless they're trying (or new to the game). However, I totally agree that it should be an option when creating a custom scenario.
9) religion
I haven't played any of the PC-based Civ games since Civ 2, so don't know much about the religion aspect of the game. However, it sound like it might draw the game out (*), so for now I disagree.
10) more units
It'd be nice to see a few more units, but only so long as it doesn't require too many more techs to fit them in. The main concern (again) is game time (*).
11) being able to upgrade units for a cost
I'm of 2 minds on this. It does help to get rid of obsolete units, but you don't want it to unbalance the game. Imagine what it'd be like to have an opponent suddenly upgrade a huge number of fully-upgraded warrior armies to tank armies.
12) if a civ declares war on you there has to be reason - more like civ 4 where it says not the same religion, close borders, trading with an enemy, etc.
Disagree. Wars start in real life for really petty reasons which don't really make much sense. This game is no different.
13) having the option of longer games if you like
Isn't this just combining 7 and 8?

(*) The main thing I'm worried about is turning CivRev into a console-based version of the PC games. It's not supposed to be like that, it's supposed to be leaner and quicker.

Perhaps Firaxis should look at releasing the next major Civ game (i.e. Civ 5) on the consoles as well as the PC, to complement CivRev. That would suit those that like marathon games (not me) and those that like to whoop butt in a single sitting (me! :D).

[BOSS NASTi]

Honestly bro those ideas are great but as far as multiplayer based upgrades which is wat we really should be looking at a little more than just the overall generalness of civ. Is the team play.

1. U need to be able to join ranked team matches with partners, so incorporating some type of lobby to search wit your partner.
2. 3v3 play is essential. Every single strategy game or RTS only goes up to 2v2 and it gets so boring after a while. Civ is a game where 3v3 and 4v4 play should be easy to do on a console. I mean if you can already have 5 players on a map wen playing FFA then what's the difference with 1 more.
3. I also think maybe some alternate ways to make money early in the game besides just finding huts and title squares would be better to have.
4. A clan system would be nice to incorporate into the game and then have a clan ranked leaderboard section where their can be a whole other division aside where it allows u to play 1v1's,2v2's,3v3's, and FFA's and your clan can keep records of how they do and how their individual members do in their clan. This would be sweet if this could be a little in-depth.

[bmac21212121]

Boss good ideas i really like 2,3, and 4 but 1 would cause a glitch in the system, not there isn't hundreds of them already in existance in this game, but if i could pair with a partner wouldnt we be able to cheat the system and rack up on wins if i had 2 xboxs and my friend had 2 x boxs.

[Leo]

you can resolve the cheating element by monitoring how many times the same people (or the same IP's) play each other, it can even be automatic. say the system allows people to play with each other on the same team for unlimited amounts of times, but the same people cannot match against each other more than 3 times in a row, per day. or something like that (in ranked, they can do whatever they like in unranked).

all of BOSS NASTi's suggestions are already present in a number of PC RTS games, specifically the games that i came from before i played civ rev, there is no reason why they cannot be part of civ rev, there isn't really a valid argument against them because it has been successfully done already, years ago.

[bmac21212121]

yes i understand that but i feel that this would take more time than fraxis wants to make this change maybe it is more simple than i expect but all of his other suggestions seem to be really easily fixed and incorperated with very little effort but what do i know im no computer programer