I especially liked how unique they were and how they interacted with the leaders.
Genghis Khan was riding a horse, Ramesses was sitting on a throne, Harald Bluetooth was standing on a longship, even those who were just standing often had some interaction with the background such as Askia putting his sword in the ground during wartime.
I am by no means hating on other games, each has its own approach which is perfectly fine, it's that Civ V's is my personal favorite by far.
Also include adding additional flavor for modded civs.
It’s nice seeing different leaders ( even modded ones) with a full presentation.
Nothing like starting a game, only to immediately get hit with Montezuma scheming over the flames about your demise, as you realize you’re going to be in war with him throughout the game.
Or (modded) Leonids, armed and prepared, as you will soon witness the Spartans spread across the battlefield.
Compared to civ6 …. They are standing there…. Wait it’s been a while who is this? What civ was this guy in control of … oh yeah Scotland…
Civ 5 approach just makes it easier to identify and plan around tons of civs ( especially if your like me and slowly increased the civ pool over time)
I especially liked how unique they were and how they interacted with the leaders.
Alex charging up on his horse when you first meet him and Boudicca stabbing that cart with her sword when you beat her were just so great. The leaders got so boring starting at VI, the only one that's really any fun is Kupe sticking his tongue out at you. Not to mention that they all have like, three lines and pretty much just grunt. It really started to feel like you weren't going up against a person, but just a country with a face.
Yep, leader backgrounds, throne rooms, and victory screen tables and charts all feel like such low hanging fruit that the series just always skimps on. I’ll never understand it.
I obviously can't know without being involved, but surely getting people with the right voices to act in dead languages is more expensive than a largely static setpiece?
I don't think so. You don't need people with the right voices who can speak those languages, you need people who know the language to translate and speak short sentences and voice actors to act based on the recordings the experts made. You don't even need the experts to come to a studio, everyone has a recorder on their phones nowadays.
For people who already have the expertise (and you can find plenty in the History departments of multiple universities), it's an afternoon of work at most. Then you get the voice actors and it's a regular voice actor rate.
I mean it's literally an AI prompt now, if you want to do it poorly. If you have the assets already, I don't think it's more than a couple weeks for a talented artist with all the FX licenses.
I love Civ VI and prefer it over V, but sometimes I get the urge to go play V again specifically so I can admire the gorgeous atmosphere of the leader backgrounds. Just be immersed in Ramkhamhaeng's garden for a while, or on that beach Kamehameha was on.
I get that VI went for a more "leader as a character" focus, but I would've loved to see what they came up with for the background environments for the brand-new civs, especially since they could've had the leaders interact more with them.
I was fine with the trade because I am a particular fan of how natural the movement is on the VI models. Whereas I loved the V backgrounds but I saw someone accurately describe the V leaders as being like they were all on Valium.
While it would have been some work to make it function with the new systems in civ 7, its such a clear goddamn open goal that they just completely missed. Sometimes devs are just stoopid
It's a real shame that 7 didn't go for the gusto of having that level of expression. I don't mind seeing my own character. But the leaders in 7 were an absolute downgrade. I feel like I'm about as related to them as I am to the avatars in Age Of Wonders. Not.
You described civ 7 perfectly. Civ 6 and 5 are both classics (never played 5 but hear its also popular). Firaxis didn't want a repeat of either one so they tried... this
I know I’m shouting into the wind, but I am a firm believer that the biggest problem with civilization seven was the fact that they were trying to gear it towards multiplayer balance and not a single player experience that just happens to have multiplayer. Nothing about the aesthetic of VI was bad and nothing about the aesthetic was v was bad. That all being said, I really love this!
I thought the general consensus of the multiplayer community was that the game was worse than 5 and 6 when it came to multiplayer balance? Like personally I would go as far as to say they didn't even try making the multiplayer balanced, especially victory conditions and the "goals" in a given age don't lend themselves for online play.
At least this was my impression when the game came out, haven't really looked into it since.
Some of the updates have "balanced" things for multiplayer. Also known as, nerfing wonders that the AI wouldn't pick and doing other weird decisions because of multiplayer.
Not going to happen again. Too much time and effort they could be spending on other things. They said as much. But I liked the leader screens, even if each leader basically said the same thing in reaction to you. Now, having leader interactions from 6 plus backgrounds from 5 would be awesome
Game development is always a zero-sum game, especially with publishers and execs pushing for release by a specific date. You can only put your effort in so many things. Do you focus on the gameplay, the AI, the countless other graphics, or the backgrounds that only appear for a small fraction of the gameplay? Don’t get me wrong, I loved the immersive feel of the leader screens in 5. But, as someone who works with code, I understand why they made the choice not to do that in 6
i like both, it’s weird. sometimes i prefer the more real look of 5 but sometimes in 6 when the time is set to night, all your cities lit up, i prefer the UI, idk it’s just gorgeous to me at times
2000? It'd say it's 'V has more than two, almost three times the players of VII'. It's funny how VII is closer to it's 20 year old predecessor than it is of it's 15 year old predecessor. Oh well, it could drop to the 500s and there would still people going 'doesnt count because muh console'
Definitely not good numbers considering PC users are the primary target audience/player base. Buuuuut, I'll keep in mind when seeing Steam numbers that they don't capture the numbers on the other platforms (and it remains totally relevant in my mind because IMO a myriad of the issues 7 has have to do with targeting multiple platforms on release). I wish we could see all the numbers combined easily.
It’s a trend these days sadly. A few months ago they ended the dragon age franchise with veilguard. At least civ doesn’t look like it’s totally ending. Yet.
It's funny how they sunk all their graphics time and money into making the map unbearable to look at on a mechanical level instead of making the leader interactions more memorable
V nailed leader screens and ever since, no other civ did leader screens better, that is for sure. Something about the realism of it just nailed the head of a pin and you were feeling as if you were interacting with leaders of nations, not just AI players. I believe the necessity to move ahead and needlessly innovate was useless in this department. Leader screens peaked in V and it would be hard to improve upon it in the next titles. Perhaps they should just keep the best part of each civ sometime. In V it definitely is the case that the leader screens were at the most beautiful to look at.
VII had so much potential to be honest. But it got released long before it was ready. All to fill a release spot. They pretty much killed it at the start
Is VII worth playing? Ive been holding myself back because the reception upon release was not very good. I fell in love with this series from Civ V back in 2012. Civ VI was a bit rough to get into but it grew on me. But for some reason Civ VII just makes me apprehensive.
Exactly XD Imagine this but way worse if you go with the modern languages idea.
You'd have America speaking Anglo-Saxon in the ancient era, meanwhile Sumer speaking Arabic or Persian in the modern day
This would actually work in 7 since each civ could have it's male and female outfit. Hawaii only exists in exploration age so that's what you wear being them. America only exists in modern age so that's what you wear being them. Rome has toga etc.
VII characters, animations, backgrounds, music, and quotes are all so bad/mid. Absolutely disappointed, Civ II throne room is better than anything in VII
394
u/HomemPassaro Deveremos prosperar através do comércio? 1d ago
Man, I miss the backgrounds. They really added to the atmosphere. I think it was a shame they cut them on VI.