Civilization IV: Colonization Anticipation Thread

[Honolulu Blue]

HB #2 here.

I'm cautiously optimistic. I hope they don't plan to charge full price for what is essentially a scenario for a 2-year-old game.

Other notes:

Imperialism II: Yay (though I haven't played it in a long time)
SMAC:

[gi]

I miss Planet Busters....

[Ksyrup]

This will cost $50, to be sure.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This will cost $50, to be sure.

Definitely.

While I see my Good Twin's point, Civ IV's amazing addictability and replayability has saved from buying so many different PC games, that I think I can throw another $50 at them and still be way ahead.

There have been a number of times where I have looked into buying a game and decided that it wouldn't be any better than Civ IV, so I might as well not buy it and keep exploring all the untapped options Civ IV has to offer.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Definitely.

While I see my Good Twin's point, Civ IV's amazing addictability and replayability has saved from buying so many different PC games, that I think I can throw another $50 at them and still be way ahead.

There have been a number of times where I have looked into buying a game and decided that it wouldn't be any better than Civ IV, so I might as well not buy it and keep exploring all the untapped options Civ IV has to offer.

No kidding. I ended playing mostly Civ2 scenarios long after nothing more could've gotten out of the main game (once we nailed OCC). Some of those Civ2 scenarios I would have paid $30-40 for. I have not tried any of the Civ4 scenarios yet because there is still too much to learn from the main game, esp. consistently winning with various conditions on mid-high levels. Even though I was not a fan of Colonization (compared to other games around that time), this would be probably be the best scenario to try first.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by gi

I miss Planet Busters....

Just so's ya know...

The substructure of the universe regresses infinitely towards smaller and smaller components. Behind atoms we find electrons, and behind electrons quarks. Each layer unraveled reveals new secrets, but also new mysteries.

[gi]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Just so's ya know...

The substructure of the universe regresses infinitely towards smaller and smaller components. Behind atoms we find electrons, and behind electrons quarks. Each layer unraveled reveals new secrets, but also new mysteries.

Now I regret losing the installation disks.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This will cost $50, to be sure.

Maybe $40. Wasn't CivIV $40?

I don't see why they wouldn't charge full price for it. I mean they charged full price for FPSs based on the Unreal Engine (back when that was the big engine used... I'm out of date now).

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Just so's ya know...

The substructure of the universe regresses infinitely towards smaller and smaller components. Behind atoms we find electrons, and behind electrons quarks. Each layer unraveled reveals new secrets, but also new mysteries.

That always cracked me up.

I've been meaning to try to get back into Civ IV. I had fun with it for awhile, but kept going back to EU and the other Paradox games.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by sabotai

That always cracked me up.

I've been meaning to try to get back into Civ IV. I had fun with it for awhile, but kept going back to EU and the other Paradox games.

I actually have been playing Alpha Centauri of late, ironically. Hence the reference(s) are fresh in my mind at the moment.

Perhaps you want to invoke UN sanctions on me? Ha ha!

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by sabotai

That always cracked me up.

I've been meaning to try to get back into Civ IV. I had fun with it for awhile, but kept going back to EU and the other Paradox games.

EU? EU???

What better? Game that glorifies colonization, or game that literally treats slaves like a commodity?

Answer: AI

[Flasch186]

new issue of PCGamer has the full game of the original on the disk. Im going to install it so I can harken back to days of ole

[SackAttack]

2K demo'ed this for me earlier. They referred to it as "the third expansion in the Civ IV franchise," which leads me to believe that it probably won't be $50...but they did say it was stand-alone while still being an expansion, so who knows.

[Ksyrup]

This was posted over at Apolyton today:


CONFIRMED: COMING IN SEPTEMBER
(18 July 2008, 13:34 | Col | 0 comments) After some reports from the floor of E3 that the release date for Civilization IV: Colonization would be September 2008, we contacted Firaxis to ask for their comment on the matter, and Marketing Director Kelley Gilmore brings us the official word: this is indeed true, the game is coming out in September already. No word on the exact date yet, that remains to be determined. We`ll of course let you know as soon as we find out.

[Ksyrup]

Gamespy preview:


Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization (PC)

The original Colonization erupted onto the PC gaming scene in 1995, challenging players to settle the New World, develop an economy, and ultimately turn the tables on their Old World masters by declaring (and winning) their independence. It featured the same delicious turn-based tile-shuffling action of Sid Meier's legendary Civilization and became a favorite among strategy gamers.

Much like the recent re-release of Sid Meier's Pirates, Firaxis has raided the closet and is once again updating a classic. The success of Civilization IV, and the flexibility of the engine, gives the team a perfect excuse to revisit Colonization with some snazzy new graphics and some gameplay enhancements. As with Pirates, the team isn't trying to change the formula; at its core, this is very much the same game that kept us up all night 13 years ago. But like Civilization IV, it's got the slick presentation and refined gameplay of a modern strategy title... not to mention multiplayer.

Despite the name, this isn't an expansion pack -- it's a standalone title, so Civilization IV isn't required.

Birth of Some Nations

After choosing to play as either Dutch, English, French, or Spanish settlers, players begin with a tiny settlement on the new continent. Each nationality has a choice of two leaders that'll guide your overall strategy. As an example, the English player can either roll with George Washington, gaining some military benefits, or opt to go with John Adams, who will provide more economic help. Colonization is packed with decisions like this that subtly impact the gameplay.

Your objectives shift as the game progresses. Early on you'll definitely want to explore the land, scope out the natives, and possibly develop a few other settlements. The biggest issue in the early game is simply convincing settlers to come over from the new world, making growing your population your biggest problem. Toward the midgame, your focus shifts to your economy. The real money is in sending manufactured goods back to the Old World, which requires gathering a lot of resources and building a manufacturing infrastructure.

And of course Colonization ends with a bang: You'll declare your independence from the King, which triggers off wave after wave of attackers from the Old World. You have 300 turns to defeat your colonial masters, and if you're not prepared for this kind of brutal slugfest against a well-armed royal opponent, you'll lose the game. And probably your head. Whether to declare your independence or build up your forces for another couple of turns is a real tooth-grinder of a decision that's central to the game. Stall too long and the King gets nervous and keeps reinforcing his colonial forces. Strike too early and your meager forces are easily overwhelmed. Who says turn-based strategy games can't have edge-of-your-seat tension?


The New Economy, Circa 1760

The map screen looks very much like Civilization IV, albeit with higher-detailed units, better animation, and prettier water. But popping open the city screen reveals an interface that will look foreign to Civ IV players but familiar to old-school Colonization fans. Every city has a certain number of buildings, each of which has a number of slots to fill with industrious colonists. You can choose to have your colonists working the land around your city (usually gathering raw materials) or working in buildings within (manufacturing those materials into finished goods).

While you can let the AI figure out a workable allocation, some of the fun lies in tweaking the economies of individual cities by hand, figuring out the optimal allocation to meet your goals at the time. At first your untrained colonists, working in the most basic of cities, can do little more than harvest goods to ship back to Europe. All your "big-ticket" items -- like guns! -- will have to be imported.

Building up your economy will require a lot of planning. Key to mastering this part of the game is your relationship with the natives. Militarily, natives can act as your allies should you get into skirmishes with other powers, and throughout the game they can be your most profitable trading partner. Most importantly, natives can provide you with expertise. As in the original game, colonists can be upgraded to have expertise in a particular field (for example, a textile expert can dramatically raise the efficiency of a textile mill). Experts are terribly expensive to lure over from Europe, but nearby natives will happily train up your colonists in various skills if your relationship is solid.

Of course, you can also engage in combat with the natives, and sometimes you're forced to. A tangled web of tribal wars and alliances mean you might not be able to befriend everyone, and you may get dragged into a fight between warring factions. And, of course, your colonial neighbors from the other European powers might sic the locals on you.

As your economy develops, your cities will begin to spread across the map, encompassing multiple tiles. We loaded up an advanced game and checked out a Spanish settlement featuring multiple large cities, all walled-off with stockades. The largest of the cities had little satellite towns around them, harvesting raw materials, while tiny wagon trains criss-crossed back and forth between urban centers. Visually it looked great.

Players have lots of choices to make with regards to an overall strategy. Around 52 "founding fathers" are featured in the game; these are prominent colonists who can give you big benefits if they decide to join your cause. Each founding father will choose to join only one nation, and they'll only join a nation that meets certain criteria, so you can adjust your strategy to woo certain individuals. For example, convince Betsy Ross to join your cause and you'll get a major boost to textile production. Other leaders might give you religious, political, economic or military bonuses.

When it comes time to declare your independence, it's up to you to draft up your constitution. There are a number of key decisions to make here about things like slavery, natives' rights, or the right to bear arms. Each decision you make here will determine what bonuses or penalties you'll suffer during the war for your freedom.

Pounding the Four Fathers

This version of Colonization offers something the original never could: multiplayer! Civ IV's online play returns with four-player multiplayer, allowing one player to step into the shoes of each major colonial power.

Multiplayer aside, most of the gameplay described above should sound pretty familiar to classic Colonization fans. This is very much a slick-looking remake of the original, with the added benefit of not having to boot up into DOS in order to play. Great strategy is timeless. But is Colonization enough of a departure from Civ IV to make it worth a separate purchase? We'll find out September when the game hits store shelves.

[path12]

That independence decision should be interesting. Though since I usually focus on building rather than war it could be annoying for those who prefer peaceful exploration/empire building.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by path12

That independence decision should be interesting. Though since I usually focus on building rather than war it could be annoying for those who prefer peaceful exploration/empire building.

Yeah, it's a pain in the butt if you're a peace lover. But if it's anything like the old game, you can spend most of your building on artillery.

[SackAttack]

What's annoying to me is that gun control adds to the "liberty" meter. Completely back-asswards, and according to the guys who demo'ed it for me, "Well, that's the way the lead designer wanted it."

Did he not freaking pay ATTENTION in high school civics when the bill of rights, and the reasons behind each of the first ten amendments, was discussed?

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

What's annoying to me is that gun control adds to the "liberty" meter. Completely back-asswards, and according to the guys who demo'ed it for me, "Well, that's the way the lead designer wanted it."

Did he not freaking pay ATTENTION in high school civics when the bill of rights, and the reasons behind each of the first ten amendments, was discussed?

I agree that this is historically incorrect and an improper intrusion of modern politics into the game.

[ColtCrazy]

Originally Posted by path12

That independence decision should be interesting. Though since I usually focus on building rather than war it could be annoying for those who prefer peaceful exploration/empire building.

Sounds like we should MP...I'm the same way. I'm always more of a builder in Civ than a conqueror and really only get bloodlust because someone ticked me off and I'm out for revenge. Can't wait till this comes out.

The 5th grade teacher in me is excited at the possibilities of this. The Age of Discovery is a huge standard in our curriculum.

[ColtCrazy]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

I agree that this is historically incorrect and an improper intrusion of modern politics into the game.

dola - yeah, that is a little annoying. Shame they have to skew things for modern ideals.

[Honolulu Blue]

After reading and hearing much more about this upcoming remake, I am very excited about it - probably more so than for any game in several years.

I look forward to screwing the Natives, screwing my neighbors, and driving the Redcoats into the sea.

[Ajaxab]

Originally Posted by ColtCrazy

dola - yeah, that is a little annoying. Shame they have to skew things for modern ideals.

Aren't all contemporary digital games influenced by modern ideals to some degree?

[Sgran]

I have to admit that when I first read the marketing blurb for the game I was taken aback (not offended, per se, more stunned) that they would have slavery in a game called Colonization. When I read that the Dutch would specialize in trading my jaw dropped open. Were they really going to load a ship with slaves from Africa? Would there be an icon for that? Would the slaves be a resource in Africa that you had to build a camp on? Or, more accurately, would you meet African tribal leaders and trade them guns for slaves? My head was spinning with how they were going to get around this, but now that I see the preview it seems they're going to mostly dodge the issue. You have slaves so you get an extra anvil from your plantation, or whatever.

I think that if there is major outcry, it will be that the story is a bit too close to home. In Civ 4 the leaders are all mixed up and when you invoke slavery it is presumebly over your own people. Religion was a gutsy call (that I applaud), but again you could have Saladin the Jew attacking Elizabeth the Muslim, so it was all balanced. In this game it looks like you have the Spanish slaughtering the local Indians. Historical accuracy doesn't inherently mean good taste, so I would understand some protest against it, even if I wouldn't join the parade.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Sgran

I have to admit that when I first read the marketing blurb for the game I was taken aback (not offended, per se, more stunned) that they would have slavery in a game called Colonization. When I read that the Dutch would specialize in trading my jaw dropped open. Were they really going to load a ship with slaves from Africa? Would there be an icon for that? Would the slaves be a resource in Africa that you had to build a camp on? Or, more accurately, would you meet African tribal leaders and trade them guns for slaves? My head was spinning with how they were going to get around this, but now that I see the preview it seems they're going to mostly dodge the issue. You have slaves so you get an extra anvil from your plantation, or whatever.

I think that if there is major outcry, it will be that the story is a bit too close to home. In Civ 4 the leaders are all mixed up and when you invoke slavery it is presumebly over your own people. Religion was a gutsy call (that I applaud), but again you could have Saladin the Jew attacking Elizabeth the Muslim, so it was all balanced. In this game it looks like you have the Spanish slaughtering the local Indians. Historical accuracy doesn't inherently mean good taste, so I would understand some protest against it, even if I wouldn't join the parade.

How long has Europa Universalis been around? The part of your post that I bolded is exactly how EU worked -- each region had something that could be produced in it, things like sugar, spices, gold, and in some parts of Africa, slaves. I haven't paid much attention to the new Colonization, but that seems way worse than anything the old Colonization did.

[Sgran]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

How long has Europa Universalis been around? The part of your post that I bolded is exactly how EU worked -- each region had something that could be produced in it, things like sugar, spices, gold, and in some parts of Africa, slaves. I haven't paid much attention to the new Colonization, but that seems way worse than anything the old Colonization did.

Seriously? And was it something you could only do in Africa or could you capture slaves anywhere?

[JPhillips]

Slaves exist as a resource in certain territories. IIRC, those territories are entirely in Africa, but there may be ones in Indonesia or India as well. It's a difficult issue if you're trying to present an accurate picture of the timeperiod. Slavery was very important to the colonization of the Americas and leaving it out due to modern sensibilities ignores history.

In term of gameplay slaves are a resource that provides trade income for the province owner as would fish or sugar or silk, etc. There's no way to transport slaves or use them in colonization. A province's population can get a boost from native population at the time of colonization, but it's mostly a function of sending colonists.

On a practical matter Paradox can more easily get away with it because they're based in Europe and have a much smaller sales base than the Civ franchise.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

What's annoying to me is that gun control adds to the "liberty" meter. Completely back-asswards, and according to the guys who demo'ed it for me, "Well, that's the way the lead designer wanted it."

Did he not freaking pay ATTENTION in high school civics when the bill of rights, and the reasons behind each of the first ten amendments, was discussed?

I don't know why this decision was made, but it's at least possible that it's partly for game balance. If gun rights gives some sort of manpower or weaponry bonus it would make sense to balance that with some negative otherwise everyone would choose it every time.

[Sgran]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I don't know why this decision was made, but it's at least possible that it's partly for game balance. If gun rights gives some sort of manpower or weaponry bonus it would make sense to balance that with some negative otherwise everyone would choose it every time.

I was thinking that too, but the real solution would have been to increase the drawbacks of liberty rather than turn the equation on its head. Make it harder to reach consensus, or maybe your military units get their own ideas about where they should go, who they should attack, etc.

[samifan24]

This game looks pretty cool. It sounds more like the sort of strategy game I'm looking for rather than the regular Civ IV, which seemed almost too open ended to me when I played the demo. The hard part is waiting for a Mac version now.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

HOLLA! IT'S A NEW TRAILER!!!!!!!

Civilization IV: A Look at the New Civilization Colonization Trailer

[Tasan]

bump

Anything else about this? I can't wait.

[Tasan]

PC Coming Soon - Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization

Go Gamer link there. I'm a little scared because of the discount pricing. Now I gotta decide if I'm gonna be a guinea pig or if I'm gonna wait and let someone else try it first.

[Big Fo]

I think the MSRP is $29.99 so that isn't much of a discount. It's still a nice price though, I'd have been fine with paying full price.

edit: do you have to be an Amazon Prime member to get the option where you can choose to have the game arrive at your home on release day, or maybe they only do that for big console games?

[Tasan]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

I think the MSRP is $29.99 so that isn't much of a discount. It's still a nice price though, I'd have been fine with paying full price.

edit: do you have to be an Amazon Prime member to get the option where you can choose to have the game arrive at your home on release day, or maybe they only do that for big console games?

It not being 49.99 MSRP is what I meant, not the tiny discount the site is providing off of 29.99. ;- )

I'm a prime member, and I don't see that option. However, I don't ever remember seeing that as an option, but I usually get books and movies on my doorstep the day they come out.

[Honolulu Blue]

Originally Posted by Tasan

I'm a little scared because of the discount pricing. Now I gotta decide if I'm gonna be a guinea pig or if I'm gonna wait and let someone else try it first.

I'm never afraid of a low price. In fact, the price point is exactly where I expected it would be.

Everything I've read so far indicates that it will be a very good game, so I'm not particularly worried about that either. So don't worry about being a guinea pig; I'm sure there are many of us that will tell you how good it is (or not) shortly after it comes out.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Tasan

It not being 49.99 MSRP is what I meant, not the tiny discount the site is providing off of 29.99. ;- )

The pricing has to do with the fact that the game is using the already existing engine from Civ IV. They didn't have to invest anywhere near the amount of developer salaries that they would have done on a full development. The price has nothing to do with a lack of quality.

[Tasan]

I hope that's all it is. Don't get me wrong, I like paying 30 bucks instead of 50 like the console guys, but sometimes it sends up a flag about quality. I'll prolly still pick it up day 1 as I'm a little impulsive. Hopefully it'll be money well spent.

[CamEdwards]

Well darn. After reading about the right to keep and bear arms aspect of the game, I contacted the folks at Firaxis to see if anyone could come on the show and discuss the decision. I just got word that they are "not in a position" to have a debate or discussion, and that the decision regarding the right to keep and bear arms was made on what the designers feel will make the game most fun, not something politically motivated.

I sent back a very nice email throwing in my $.02, telling them that if they really wish to not politicize the game, they might think about making that something the players can modify. Doubt it'll happen, pleased that they replied, but disappointed that they won't talk about their decision.

[Big Fo]

Yeah, it doesn't make any sense the way it's been implemented.

After playing these games for 15+ years I just ignore the names and focus on the in-game effect, otherwise I'd have quit due to the old phalanx v. battleship problem.

[CamEdwards]

A bright spot from the folks at Firaxis. After my last email to the marketing folks, I got an email back that says ALL constitutional amendments can be modified in the game and the player can "make the rules whatever they would like". So it sounds like the penalty/reward for various constitutional rights is tweakable.

[spleen1015]

A Colonization review...

hxxp://kotaku.com/5052886/civ-iv-colonization-review-once-more-without-feeling

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

A Colonization review...

hxxp://kotaku.com/5052886/civ-iv-colonization-review-once-more-without-feeling

Wwow the parts this reviewer hated really sound bad in my mind. This has definitely gone to a wait 4 months and see how it holds up or if they patch it and or add expansion down the road. I can see why it is only 29.99. This sounds basically like colonization stapled unto Civ IV. Anyone looking to get this should definitley read that review.

[Big Fo]

The hype has deflated some. I'll probably buy it tomorrow anyway though.

[Flasch186]

the question is will they be able to mod it?

[ISiddiqui]

Some of the complaints, IMO, are silly. I like the brown interface. It looks cool to mine eyes. And, of course, there is a reason they called it "Civilization IV: Colonization".

[Flasch186]

picked it up and am playing it now so Im still just trying to get through my first game and get familiar with it all again.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

picked it up and am playing it now so Im still just trying to get through my first game and get familiar with it all again.

I just got the notification from D2D that it was available for purchase. Let me know how it is.. I'm debating getting it tonight.

[Flasch186]

it's certainly beautiful

[Doug5984]

Damn, I really don't have the money to blow on this- but is a must buy at some point. Let us know how it is!