SMAC Alpha Centauri Graphics - Message from FIRAXIS
Joey
color contrast on the terrain features. I might train my eye a little
more during play.
I think the graphics are great! I like the almost 3-D "unfolding" of
land.
Also, I hope you do not go to some sort of Quakie Doomy approach... I
think that is inappropriate for battle resolution.
The leap of graphics improvement from CivII is like the leap from
original Civ to CivII. Very good and taking a little to get used to.
One last little criticism on the units. Could you get the health
monitor/flag a little closer to the unit? (and still be clear as to what
the unit is?)
Thanks,
-jj
Damocles wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 22:50:50 +0100, "Lars Andersen"
> <Snake13...@writeme.com> wrote:
>
> >Brian Reynolds:
> >>Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
> >>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
> >>address these issues.
> >
> >
> >It looks to me as if that is what most people are complaining about, that
> >you are not releasing a strategy game with C&C-like graphics. Should you
> >decide to change your game to accomodate those people, it is almost certain
> >to mess up what it is we love about it, the depth and gameplay.
> >
>
> That's a totally unfair judgment. I've been playing computer games
> since 1982. I loved the original Civ, thought Civ 2 was a wonderful
> improvement and still intend to buy Alpha Centauri. I expressed
> concern about the graphics because I found that they did detract from
> the gaming experience, and that if they do so for me I can only
> imagine how people without my love of the genre would feel.
>
> You do want the game to succeed in the marketplace, don't you? It's
> all well and good if the strategy grognards love it, but it's got to
> sell enough copies to keep Firaxis afloat and independent. Or would
> you prefer that they have to sell out to Take 2 or a company like
> them? Fortunately, Brian Reynolds has addressed my and other posters'
> concerns.
>
> Why are some people so damned snooty about other genres? Some us
> actually enjoy both RTS games like C&C and turn-based games like
> Civilization and MOO. Is that really so hard for some people to
> accept?
Brian Reynolds
Alpha Centauri Demo. But with regard to graphic display, though there
have also been many positive responses there, a considerable number of
people have had a strongly negative reaction.
We obviously thought the graphics were pretty cool when we released the
demo. Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work (more than
just dislike of a particular style).
Clearly it was not our intention to provide graphics too dark for some
people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
SMAC with.
I suspect that in the very near future we'll provide alternate palettes
with brighter colors as a short term solution.
Then we'll add some in-game gamma ramp correction, probably for the
patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
an add-on disk in a few months.
Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
address these issues.
Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
voiceovers and sound, etc. I think people have come to expect demos to
try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
Nevertheless, we definitely intend to provide fixes for people who have
had significant contrast problems.
Hope you continue to enjoy the game!
Brian Reynolds
Alpha Centauri Designer
FIRAXIS Games
Brian Reynolds
one way to significantly brighten them:
On Game menu, go to Preferences, pick "Map Display Preferences", and
uncheck the "Fog of War" option. The game will then cease to "grey out"
areas of the map which aren't currently near your units or bases.
The fog-of-war mode is intended as a player aid to remind you what you
can't currently see (an enemy unit could be there and you wouldn't see
it), but it can easily be turned off if you'd prefer to see all the
terrain at its clearest.
Terry McKelvey
seems realistic. If you are able to follow through with them, including the
more ambitious fixes such as 16-bit color for an expansion disk, I think
most reasonable gamers will be satisfied. Thanks for listening to your past
and future customers!
Also, don't let this experience with the SMAC demo discourage you from
future similar demos. No matter how polished the neat-o effects that had to
be sacrificed for a small demo are, it does not affect the basic map and
unit graphics, which is the main point of criticism. It is best to find out
about such problems a month and a half before the game hits the shelves than
one week after. You have time to get a good interim solution in place so
that the worst of the problem is avoided from day one of the release of the
full game. If you think that stripping down the demo sacrificed too much of
the game polish, then either release a larger demo as an additional demo
that can be downloaded or further emphasize the additional cool factors left
out in your splash screen. The demo let me know that the gameplay is more
than Civ2 on another planet. The whole of SMAC is greater than the sum of
the evolved Civ2 parts. (I got this backward in another post on SMAC. This
is the correct one.)
I was unsure before the demo whether there would be enough changes to
warrant a purchase. Now, I know that I will buy SMAC.
Terry McKelvey
Brian Reynolds wrote in message <36867F19...@firaxis.com>...
Rod Ramsey
Well, Brian, it wasn't a mistake, obviously. You've learned ahead of market
time about problems people had with colors and you've got time to fix that. My
only graphics complaint was that I couldn't easily tell if a terrain square had
"grass" or rocks. A simple palette fix seems to have changed that. The units
themselves are fine for a game like this. My only interface complaint is on
the base improvement building queue- adding things to it is a bit odd. For one
thing, I'd have improvement underway show up in the queue lsit- it's confusing
otherwise. And when it comes to adding new things, I really don't like having
to hit the "insert" button for each one. I'd much rather use a simple
double-click. Less mousing around.
Anyway, I for one see hints of greatnes in the demo. There seem to be whole
climates to consider, sea levels, (you can actually build on the seas!),
borders, customizable units, real futuristic techs (beyond warp drive 5 or some
such),etc, etc. I really think the game will be a classic. I was almsot
certainly gonna buy it anyway, but now I can't wait until Feb.
And I think what you've also gotten out of all this is a sense that most of
us reallly *want* your game to succeed. We want you to sell a zillion copies,
not just cause we like the people at Firaxis, but so we get more and more of
your games. I really doubt many other games/companies/developers have that
level of goodwill out there.
Rod
Rasta Kyle
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>voiceovers and sound, etc.
No, I'm glad you released the demo. I've seen better graphics but with
this type of game it's the least of my concerns. It's great to get a
chance to test gameplay before buying, ecspecially since it's going to
take so damn long to hit the stores.....:^)
SiRP2
>Alpha Centauri Demo. But with regard to graphic display, though there
>have also been many positive responses there, a considerable number of
>people have had a strongly negative reaction.
>
>We obviously thought the graphics were pretty cool when we released the
>demo. Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work (more than
>just dislike of a particular style).
>
>Clearly it was not our intention to provide graphics too dark for some
>people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
>SMAC with.
>
>I suspect that in the very near future we'll provide alternate palettes
>with brighter colors as a short term solution.
>
>Then we'll add some in-game gamma ramp correction, probably for the
>patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
>
>Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
>an add-on disk in a few months.
>
>Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
>address these issues.
>
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
>really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
>see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
>presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
>
>Nevertheless, we definitely intend to provide fixes for people who have
>had significant contrast problems.
>
>Hope you continue to enjoy the game!
>
>Brian Reynolds
>Alpha Centauri Designer
>FIRAXIS Games
>
>
I was going to buy SMAC before this message, but now I will not only buy SMAC,
but every other game ever published by FIRAXIS and Brian Reynolds. It really
shows how much you really care for the customer. I was one of the ones who
really had no problems with the graphics, I actually thought they were very
cool, and I thought the terrain was some of the best graphics I've ever seen.
I was really wondering what everyone was complaining about, and I really felt
bad for FIRAXIS. SMAC is sure to be a classic in PC gaming. I am sure of
that.
--
Sirish
si...@aol.com
ICQ # - 7523010
Lars Andersen
>Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
>address these issues.
It looks to me as if that is what most people are complaining about, that
you are not releasing a strategy game with C&C-like graphics. Should you
decide to change your game to accomodate those people, it is almost certain
to mess up what it is we love about it, the depth and gameplay.
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>voiceovers and sound, etc. I think people have come to expect demos to
>try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
>really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
>see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
>presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
Interesting thinking. How would you benefit from not releasing the demo?
People who have loaded the demo and disliked it might not buy your game, but
with the attention that the demo alone got out there, you made a lot of
people aware of the qualities of your game. And I believe that the qualities
you present in AC are qualities that other games have failed to provide ever
since Civ2. So, to add it up you stand to have gained in sales from the
demo, IMO, and the number of unhappy customers(those expecting something
else than what is realistic) has decreased. Of course, with the statement
quoted above and the promise of helping out with the graphics you could have
convinced the unhappy loaders of the demo to buy the game after all, a
second chance.
Something else, Brian are you going to send the game to major game-sites for
review ahead of release? I have read what I could find so far and would love
more.
Lars Andersen
Damocles
<Snake13...@writeme.com> wrote:
>Brian Reynolds:
>>Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
>>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
>>address these issues.
>
>
>It looks to me as if that is what most people are complaining about, that
>you are not releasing a strategy game with C&C-like graphics. Should you
>decide to change your game to accomodate those people, it is almost certain
>to mess up what it is we love about it, the depth and gameplay.
>
That's a totally unfair judgment. I've been playing computer games
foamy
<Snake13...@writeme.com> wrote:
<snipped>
>It looks to me as if that is what most people are complaining about, that
>you are not releasing a strategy game with C&C-like graphics.
Lars, I have no alternative but to believe you haven't read a darn thing
people have posted. The fundamental beef has been the color selection
makes it difficult to easily distinguish differences between terrain and
objects, different types of terrain, and the somewhat depressing, drab
and dark nature of the colors.
Jim
her...@apostate.com
Rod Ramsey wrote:
> And when it comes to adding new things, I really don't like having
> to hit the "insert" button for each one. I'd much rather use a simple
> double-click. Less mousing around.
Errrr.... You CAN just double-click, you know. That's what I've been doing. ;-)
HA (who didn't know he wasn't supposed to double-click... but it works! ;-)
Lars Andersen
>since 1982. I loved the original Civ, thought Civ 2 was a wonderful
>improvement and still intend to buy Alpha Centauri. I expressed
>concern about the graphics because I found that they did detract from
>the gaming experience, and that if they do so for me I can only
>imagine how people without my love of the genre would feel.
I can't really comment on that since I love the genre as well. I'm currently
deeply involved in a civ2 multiplayer over LAN and have never had such great
fun with a game. I just have no problems with the graphics in SMAC, perhaps
my monitor is set differently, but I think they look like what I would
expect on an alien planet: like something from outer space and possibly
darker(farther from the sun perhaps?).
>You do want the game to succeed in the marketplace, don't you? It's
>all well and good if the strategy grognards love it, but it's got to
>sell enough copies to keep Firaxis afloat and independent. Or would
>you prefer that they have to sell out to Take 2 or a company like
>them? Fortunately, Brian Reynolds has addressed my and other posters'
>concerns.
Firaxis' support is admirable. I think that this is the best support any
gamer could want and if there is a Gamer's Medal of Honor, Firaxis/Brian
Reynolds gets it, he and Firaxis deserves all the support we can give them.
I think that SMAC will succeed in the marketplace no matter if a demo is
released or not or if they improve the graphics, the gameplay is so good and
the legend of Civ 1+2 and Sid Meier is enough to guarantee success almost on
its own.
>Why are some people so damned snooty about other genres? Some us
>actually enjoy both RTS games like C&C and turn-based games like
>Civilization and MOO. Is that really so hard for some people to
>accept?
I play everything from RTS(love half-life) to Wall Street Trader. I just
believe that to criticize SMAC for the graphics is like criticizing chess
for its lack of explosions. It's off target and belongs to another genre.
That said, if people have problems with the graphics then they should be
addressed as it seems they will be. But one post said something about going
backwards from Civ2 and that is the one I had in mind when writing my post,
not the dark colors. Looking further in the NG I see that most people don't
like the colors, my mistake.
Lars Andersen
Ben Flieger
Damocles wrote in message <3686b5c6...@news.rdc1.va.home.com>...
>>It looks to me as if that is what most people are complaining about,
that
you
>>decide to change your game to accomodate those people, it is almost
certain
>>to mess up what it is we love about it, the depth and gameplay.
>>
Easy for you to say, you stupid graphics head! Next thing ya know, you
will be claiming that the game should be just a big CG movie! With
3Dfx support!
I've been playing computer games
>since 1982. I loved the original Civ, thought Civ 2 was a wonderful
>improvement and still intend to buy Alpha Centauri. I expressed
>concern about the graphics because I found that they did detract from
>the gaming experience, and that if they do so for me I can only
>imagine how people without my love of the genre would feel.
For some reason, expressing graphics concerns here or in .rpg is a sin
of mythic proportions. Liking action games is too. But those who fight
against it have never been able to do anything but build strawmen and
then flail feebly at those strawmen. C&C2 graphics would make SMAC a
better game.
>Why are some people so damned snooty about other genres?
Elitism(inferiority complex expressed through arrogance). They are
never going to be part of the Great Unwashed. In typical ironic
fashion, though, they tend to be cookie-cutter parrots.
Some us
>actually enjoy both RTS games like C&C and turn-based games like
>Civilization and MOO. Is that really so hard for some people to
>accept?
Next thing you know, you are going to claim Quake and Doom aren't PURE
EVIL. That 3Dfx support doesn't consign a game to failure. And other
assorted heresy.
jeff reid
Thanks for the great support ! I will buy this game the second it hits the
shelves. If I was sure that pre-ordering it would get me the game before it
appeared in the stores here in N.Y., I would pre-order it now. The gameplay
is what matters. I originally did not think the graphics were very good,
but I discovered the zoom in feature and I now think they look pretty good.
If you were to produce an add-on containing 16-bit sprites, I would
definately buy it.
Thanks again, Jeff.
Brian Reynolds wrote in message <36867F19...@firaxis.com>...
>We've receive many strongly positive responses to the gameplay in the
>Alpha Centauri Demo. But with regard to graphic display, though there
>have also been many positive responses there, a considerable number of
>people have had a strongly negative reaction.
>
>We obviously thought the graphics were pretty cool when we released the
>demo. Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work (more than
>just dislike of a particular style).
>
>Clearly it was not our intention to provide graphics too dark for some
>people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
>SMAC with.
>
>I suspect that in the very near future we'll provide alternate palettes
>with brighter colors as a short term solution.
>
>Then we'll add some in-game gamma ramp correction, probably for the
>patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
>
>Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
>an add-on disk in a few months.
>
>Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
>address these issues.
>
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>voiceovers and sound, etc. I think people have come to expect demos to
>try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
>really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
>see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
>presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
>
Neil Fradkin
> to hit the "insert" button for each one. I'd much rather use a simple
> double-click. Less mousing around.
You can double click to insert, try it.
Neil Fradkin
> one way to significantly brighten them:
>
> On Game menu, go to Preferences, pick "Map Display Preferences", and
> uncheck the "Fog of War" option. The game will then cease to "grey out"
> areas of the map which aren't currently near your units or bases.
ROTFL! I wonder if this is the cause of a lot of the complaints.
Terence Gui
I've played through the demo a couple of times on both a 17" and 19"
monitor, one with an 4mb Mystique (not G200) and one with an 8mb ATI AGP
card and I for one don't find a problem with the graphics being too dark,
nor distinguishing between different terrain and units. They are, at the
least, serviceable - and IMHO, good enough. Granted they don't have that
nice crisp cardboard cut-out look that CIV2 does, but CIV2 graphics are
basically 2D bitmaps, whereas SMAC uses 3D sprites to model their unites (at
least I think they do), which, which gives them a rougher look, but with
better animation (ie. you can view it at different angles). So really, a
direct comparison is somewhat unfair. One could compare the difference in
graphics to Syndicate vs. Syndicate Wars - you can never get as clean a look
going from 2D bitmaps to 3D sprites, since you have to render the 3D in
realtime.
Besides, I'll be getting the game when it comes out primarily because of its
gameplay, not its graphics. I like SMAC's atmosphere, as well as a lot of
the changes/additions they've put in compared to Civ2, the clearly defined
borders, expanded diplomatic options, and the unique feel of the different
factions being in the top of my list. The only bad thing is I'll have to
wait a couple of months before it comes out.
TAG
Christoph Nahr
<Snake13...@writeme.com> wrote:
>It looks to me as if that is what most people are complaining about, that
>you are not releasing a strategy game with C&C-like graphics. Should you
>decide to change your game to accomodate those people, it is almost certain
>to mess up what it is we love about it, the depth and gameplay.
So you believe that if Brian supplies some additional palette files,
the rest of the game will mystically collapse and cease functioning?
Have you even read a single post on the topic of SMAC graphics prior
to the one to which you replied?
--
Chris Nahr (cnahr@ibmnet, insert dot after ibm to reply by e-mail)
Please don't e-mail me if you post! PGP key at wwwkeys.ch.pgp.net
Christoph Nahr
<brey...@firaxis.com> wrote:
First I'd like to say that this level of customer support is truly
amazing. Thank you very much for taking so much time to address our
criticisms! I'm sure SMAC will only get better for it, and after all
this is what these discussions are about.
>We obviously thought the graphics were pretty cool when we released the
>demo. Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work (more than
>just dislike of a particular style).
In my case at least I don't think it's a configuration issue
(Millenium & NEC Multisync LCD 1810). The only other program that
gives me problems with darkish colours is Thief -- when it's running
on my Voodoo 2 card. As soon as I switch to software rendering
(Millenium, ie the card SMAC is running on) it's just fine.
I rather think it's a matter of personal preference or capability (I
do have pretty bad eyes) and, of course, getting used to the graphics.
Your beta testers simply wouldn't notice that the graphics might be
hard to decipher after having looked at them for months! With enough
training I should be able to read Sumerian stone tablets but right now
I find them rather incomprehensible. ;-)
>Clearly it was not our intention to provide graphics too dark for some
>people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
>SMAC with.
As stated above, I don't think the monitors have anything to do with
it.
>I suspect that in the very near future we'll provide alternate palettes
>with brighter colors as a short term solution.
Excellent idea, the modified palettes that were posted here by Istvan
Albert already look much better than the standard palette.
>Then we'll add some in-game gamma ramp correction, probably for the
>patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
>
>Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
>an add-on disk in a few months.
All good ideas. The most important thing, however, would be to have
external testers judge these modifications, not just the beta testers
who are already specialised in reading stone tablets. ;-)
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us,
Quite the opposite, you should have done an external beta test. Had I
bought this game sight unseen I would have been furious at the
graphics. You would have seen many returned copies in that case.
>since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>voiceovers and sound, etc.
Not at all. I really don't care about all that extra stuff, I'm only
talking about the graphics that matter, ie map & unit graphics.
>I think people have come to expect demos to
>try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
>really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
>see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
>presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
Unless the map & unit graphics are different in the full game all of
our criticism apply as well, and would have been voiced just as well.
Many people here do think the graphics look bad and are hard to read.
Adding more still screens wouldn't have changed that. The problem is
with the functional graphics, not with any lack of eye candy. Anyway,
I'm sure your proposed measures go in the right direction here.
Brian Reynolds
> review ahead of release? I have read what I could find so far and would love
> more.
I suspect we are, but I'm not directly involved so don't have details.
Brian Reynolds
somewhat ROTFL that Civ2 of all games is being held up as a graphics
standard. When Civ2 came out (and I was here on the newsgroups), the
only comment I -ever- heard about the graphics was how -awful- they
were! Glad to hear they've finally achieved classic status, if somewhat
belatedly.
We'll keep plugging on AC graphics!
BR
her...@apostate.com
three-button mouse) to count as a double-click. What can I say? Works for me...
HA (big shrug as to why it doesn't work...)
Rod Ramsey wrote:
> In article <3686B77D...@apostate.com>, her...@apostate.com says...
> >Rod Ramsey wrote:
> >
> >> And when it comes to adding new things, I really don't like having
> >> to hit the "insert" button for each one. I'd much rather use a simple
> >> double-click. Less mousing around.
> >
> >Errrr.... You CAN just double-click, you know. That's what I've been doing.
> ;-)
> >HA (who didn't know he wasn't supposed to double-click... but it works! ;-)
> >
>
> Hmm...when I tried double-clicking, it closes the screen, but doesn;t enter
> my chocie into the queue. I assumed this was cause the DC was counting as the
> "OK" button, which also doenst enter my current selecting in the build queue.
>
> Rod
Mike T
play like the full version with the limitations you put on the demo (100
turns, 10 bases ect ect.). Size of the demo wouldn't matter then.
Brian Reynolds wrote in message <36867F19...@firaxis.com>...
>We've receive many strongly positive responses to the gameplay in the
>Alpha Centauri Demo. But with regard to graphic display, though there
>have also been many positive responses there, a considerable number of
>people have had a strongly negative reaction.
>
>demo. Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work (more than
>just dislike of a particular style).
>
>people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
>SMAC with.
>
>with brighter colors as a short term solution.
>
>patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
>
>Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
>an add-on disk in a few months.
>
>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
>address these issues.
>
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
>really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
>see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
>presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
>
>had significant contrast problems.
>
>Hope you continue to enjoy the game!
>
Filip Camerman
>I was going to buy SMAC before this message, but now I will not only buy SMAC,
>but every other game ever published by FIRAXIS and Brian Reynolds. It really
>shows how much you really care for the customer. I was one of the ones who
>really had no problems with the graphics, I actually thought they were very
>cool, and I thought the terrain was some of the best graphics I've ever seen.
>I was really wondering what everyone was complaining about, and I really felt
>bad for FIRAXIS. SMAC is sure to be a classic in PC gaming. I am sure of
>that.
I think SMAC is sure to be a classic in strategy gaming (i.e. strategy
gamers are generally gonna love it), but not in gaming in general,
i.e. it's not gonna sell in big numbers like Civ2 did because the
general gaming audience WILL stumble over the graphics. Otoh, Brian
Reynolds may have a point when he says the graphics stuff that was
left out (e.g. movies for secret projects) will make a big difference.
Judging from the few screenshots, I think the people complaining about
the depressing colours will get a better opinion when they see the
full game. The sharpness will remain a problem though, unless Firaxis
decide to redo the unit graphics after all.
I have a question i hope someone can answer: why would Firaxis have
opted for 8 bit graphics? What's the advantage? I'd like to know coz
I'm making a game (simple freeware) for which I also started out using
8bit but quickly changed to 16bits coz my pictures looked shitty.
The answer could have been Firaxis wanted to make sure the game would
run on really old computers which can't show 16bit, but those
computers generally can't run 800x600 either.
Thanx for any info.
--
Filip Camerman
Rod Ramsey
Andy McFadden
Rod Ramsey <rra...@DELETE.mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> And when it comes to adding new things, I really don't like having
>>> to hit the "insert" button for each one. I'd much rather use a simple
>>> double-click. Less mousing around.
>>
>>Errrr.... You CAN just double-click, you know. That's what I've been doing.
>;-)
>>HA (who didn't know he wasn't supposed to double-click... but it works! ;-)
>>
>
> Hmm...when I tried double-clicking, it closes the screen, but doesn;t enter
>my chocie into the queue. I assumed this was cause the DC was counting as the
>"OK" button, which also doenst enter my current selecting in the build queue.
Were you using the "change" button or the "queue" button? The former just
changes the current item.
I've been happily double-clicking on everything (e.g. instead of saying "yes"
and then "okay" on dialogs, which would have gotten old real fast). The
build queue works as advertised for me.
(Am I the only one who let out a cheer the first time the build queue was
noticed? After playing lots of Civ2 it was *very* welcome...)
--
Send mail to fad...@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)
CD-Recordable FAQ - http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/ (a/k/a www.spies.com/~fadden)
Fight Internet Spam - http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ & news.admin.net-abuse.email
Andy McFadden
foamy <fo...@direct.ca> wrote:
>In article <766ad5$1jso$1...@news-inn.inet.tele.dk>, "Lars Andersen"
><Snake13...@writeme.com> wrote:
><snipped>
>>you are not releasing a strategy game with C&C-like graphics.
>
>people have posted. The fundamental beef has been the color selection
>makes it difficult to easily distinguish differences between terrain and
>objects, different types of terrain, and the somewhat depressing, drab
>and dark nature of the colors.
Well, there are also issues with the units being a little blob-ish unless
you zoom the map in, and the displaced health indicators can be confusing
(somebody had a nice idea of highlighting the border of the square that
the currently active unit is in). It took me a while to figure out that
the boxed "1" in the ocean square was actually the population of the city
in the next square over.
Hardly a make-or-break item, but as somebody once said, "to be great, a
movie needs two or three great scenes and no bad ones".
Irwin Choy
Rod Ramsey wrote:
> In article <36867F19...@firaxis.com>, brey...@firaxis.com says...
>
> Well, Brian, it wasn't a mistake, obviously. You've learned ahead of market
> time about problems people had with colors and you've got time to fix that. My
> only graphics complaint was that I couldn't easily tell if a terrain square had
> "grass" or rocks.
Since there are actually varying degrees of moisture and rockiness for each square,
the most accurate way to analyze a square is by shift-right click on it.
Irwin
SnowFire
each square,
> the most accurate way to analyze a square is by shift-right click on it.
>
> Irwin
Or just hitting v, for view mode, and moving your cursor over the square.
Jeff George
be rubbing their hands in glee.
--
Jeff George
Terry McKelvey wrote in message <7663it$e5d$1...@winter.news.rcn.net>...
> Now, I know that I will buy SMAC.
>
Rod Ramsey
>
>
>I've been happily double-clicking on everything (e.g. instead of saying "yes"
>and then "okay" on dialogs, which would have gotten old real fast). The
>build queue works as advertised for me.
>
>
Ok, so I tried it again and now it works as reported by everyone else. I
dunno what I did before (typical user response to bug report, righ t next to
'I didn't change anything!').
Still, I wish the change and insert into queue were from the same screen
(ie, dont have to do one then the other)
Rod
David J Richardson
<brey...@firaxis.com> writes
Brian,
First off, many thanks for the demo. I finally got it downloaded here in
the UK early afternoon on the 25/12. Played it for a while. Replayed Civ
II v2.42 yesterday for comparison.
These are my first impressions....
I have a good quality 17" video set up. I have to agree about the
colouring - too much black and dark sombre reds, greens etc... Civ I and
II were full of vibrant blues, greens, etc... Your colouring is dark,
atmospheric, hostile, menacing, alien and so on - probably right for the
game - but it *is* a bit depressing. This is my only criticism of the
graphics. Unit representation and so on is fine by me.
While I replayed CIV yesterday I asked myself what it would be like
without all the clever audio visuals and just the basic game play - I
feel it would have lost a lot of atmosphere. I expect great things from
the full version of SMAC in this respect.
Although I don't want to compare SMAC to CIV II too much, One major
point is this: What would you get out of a demo of CIV II that was
limited to 100 turns. You would get the basic game mechanics. You might
be able to get just one wonder up. You would probably have explored your
local patch of the world. You would have researched a few new units. You
might have met two or three other civilisations. You would have put up
a few extra cities. You might have built a few basic buildings in those
cities. You might have had a rumble with the barbarians and even an
overly aggressive neighbour. *But* you wouldn't have even touched on the
game play complexity, escalating choices regarding tactics and strategy,
decision making, and all the depth and beauty of the game that cuts in
later. I hope and pray that SMAC develops similarly after a couple of
hundred turns.
I think you might have done yourself a minor disservice by limiting the
game to only 100 turns. There might be a new generation of players who
have never played CIV who will judge the whole game by the demo. I think
the old 80/20 rule kicks in here. I have played demos this year like
Caesar III, RRT2, Anno 1602, where the demo previews *most* of the game
from the point of view of playability. From the online documentation and
my experience of CIV, it looks as though your demo previews the only
the *basics* of the game.
It might be a good thing to scare off those people who judge a game by
the superficial audio and visuals. You do them a service by saving them
from wasting their money on a game they will hate, and you do us a
service by keeping their whinges out of this newsgroup. Their tastes may
mature as time goes on - then they can buy and enjoy.
Another problem with demos of games like SMAC is that you really need a
decent manual with tech charts etc. to get into it quickly. Obviously a
demo is limited (if that is the word in this case <G>) to the built in
documentation. There is nothing as good as having a book in your hands -
online documentation, both at home and work, has never really worked for
me.
Just a thought in passing - what about a print option for online
documentation pages - including indexes. Most people have printers these
days and Acrobat is widely used already.
There is also an accessibility problem with SMAC. In CIV *everyone* has
a basic grasp of the basics. We all know what granary is and what a
sword wielding soldier does. CIV was always therefore immediately
accessible. SMAC is made up and imaginary. It takes time and effort to
figure out the internal rules and concepts of the SMAC universe. You
have to climb a learning curve to figure out what things are. This is
something that it might be easy for a play tester, and yourself
possibly, to forget after a few hundred hours playing.
The demo uses Directx 6.0, and I get stuttering on audio. In fact, on
both my PCs at home with practically every game that uses Directx 6 I
get problems. Directx 5.2 seemed much better. Remember what they used to
say about Microsoft - "Don't use an operating system with an even
number". It applies to Win '95 and Win '98 IMHO too.
Finally, one feature of CIV I really liked was the city view. I liked to
look at the buildings change style over time and see what a granary, for
instance, actually looked like. It put flesh on the bones of the
schematic playing area. I haven't found a similar feature in the SMAC
demo yet. Is it there?
Thank you for the demo. I am looking forward to the full game, and will
certainly buy it. I will play the demo some more as well.
Thanks too, for your time in this newsgroup.
--
David J Richardson
Phil Anderson
>Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work [...]
I just moved SMAC across to the new machine I'm assembling over Xmas
and saw a noticeable improvement in the appearance of the terrain. The
old system has a Diamond Stealth 3D 2000, the new one a Viper 330 PCI,
and I use the same Viewsonic P775 monitor on both.
Still a bit dark for my tastes, but the greens definitely stand out
better with the Viper. The problem might be more related to cards than
to monitors.
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, [...]
I think you're wrong there: many of those criticising the graphics say
that it's not fancy explosions they're looking for. This issue was
going to come up anyway; an earlier demo release would have got you
quicker feedback on this and given a better chance to fix things.
The game itself is great and I certainly intend to buy it, even though
it'll be closer to $150 than $50 in this part of the world (nasty
exchange rate and most distributors seem to be greedy).
And if you ever find yourself in the same city as me, Mr Reynolds, I'd
be most happy to buy you a few drinks!
--
----------------------------------------------
Phil Anderson *** ha...@sloth.southern.co.nz
----------------------------------------------
"No-one is equal to anyone else!"
Waver
Christoph Nahr wrote in message
>gives me problems with darkish colours is Thief -- when it's running
>on my Voodoo 2 card.
erm... excus me... Thief is _ment_ to be like that. your ment to hid in the
shadows.
Waver
Mr Brian Reynolds wrote in message
>I suspect that in the very near future we'll provide alternate palettes
>with brighter colors as a short term solution.
>
>Then we'll add some in-game gamma ramp correction, probably for the
>patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
>
>Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
>an add-on disk in a few months.
Just made my day!
W
Waver
the crap looks graphics. I have 2 set-ups..
17" Acerview 79g (120mhz refresh, .22dpi)
CL Riva TNT
and
Bridge 17" (85mhz refresh, .26 dpi)
Trident AGP trio colour
and both are hard to see WTF units are and WTF is on the ground.
W
Christoph Nahr
wrote:
>erm... excus me... Thief is _ment_ to be like that. your ment to hid in the
>shadows.
That's a bit off topic but I'm not talking about the intentional
darkness. Remember the mines below the Hammerite prison? The spiral
staircase where you go up to the factory from the second mines level?
Well, I couldn't see this staircase on the Voodoo display, no matter
how I adjusted the gamma setting. I had to switch to software
rendering before I noticed the windows in the stone. Some other
people had this problem as well, always with Voodoo cards; TNT is
rumoured to be clearer.
Christoph Nahr
<da...@dcs-ltd.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>It might be a good thing to scare off those people who judge a game by
>the superficial audio and visuals. You do them a service by saving them
>from wasting their money on a game they will hate, and you do us a
>service by keeping their whinges out of this newsgroup. Their tastes may
>mature as time goes on - then they can buy and enjoy.
Yeah, drive away all those peons and heathens who are not believers in
the true faith of hardcore gaming! People who have to be lured by
good graphics don't deserve to play our hallowed hard-core games!
Never mind that Firaxis has to make money to survive as a company!
Money and companies are evil anyway! And after all, you "we don't
need no stinkin grafix" people are willing to pay $300 for a game to
make up for the lost sales, right? Hello, where are you now?
Neil Fradkin
>changes the current item.
Now I'm really confused, I though the former was like the settler?
;)
Lou Grinzo
game, with a solid design, etc., but with some regrettable
color selections. The look of the units doesn't bother me,
as some have commented; I think they're fine. But the
terrain types can be unnecessarily hard to distinguish, at
least on my new 17" Dell monitor at 1024x768.
For those who know Civ2 but haven't yet seen the SMAC demo,
it reminds me of a brand-new BMW or Mercedes model--it's
clearly a new, fresh design, but it's just as clearly part
of the same family. (Who says you can't have your cake and
eat it, too? <g>)
As for improving the graphics situation, I'm sure there will
be many player-supplied texture files in short order. I plan
to fiddle around with making one of my own, when I get a chance.
(Just check the PCX files in the main AC directory. They're
self-explanatory.)
I do think there will be a somewhat steeper learning curve for
this game than there was for Civ and Civ2, since, as others
have already pointed out, there are so many new and fabricated
terms and technologies. Given the game's setting, this was
inevitable, and as long as the printed docs that come with the
game are first rate, I don't see this as being a problem in the
long run.
When is the gold version hitting the shelves, anyway?
Lou
Neil Fradkin
> on my Voodoo 2 card.
Thief and some VooDoo2 drivers don't work well together, namely the ones on
the Thief disk. After hosing my machine with them, I got the latest drivers
for my card (Diamond m3d2) which fixed everything. I run thief now at 1.0
gamma and can see in shadows easily (well, as long as there's no ambient
light in the room my computer is in ;) You might want to try and get your
cards drivers or the latest ref drivers.
her...@apostate.com
Christoph, do you know, that's the same tone of argument I use against people
who moan and whine about game designers putting in cheats into games? "Sure,
they could take the cheats out. But then the people who buy the games to
cheat in multiplayer would just buy something else. Are you going to buy the
extra copies so that the designers can afford to keep cheat codes out?"
(used ad nauseum...)
HA
Christoph Nahr wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 1998 10:03:23 +0000, David J Richardson
> <da...@dcs-ltd.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >It might be a good thing to scare off those people who judge a game by
> >the superficial audio and visuals. You do them a service by saving them
> >from wasting their money on a game they will hate, and you do us a
> >service by keeping their whinges out of this newsgroup. Their tastes may
> >mature as time goes on - then they can buy and enjoy.
>
Terry McKelvey
does not require any more purchases after the initial game purchase, except
electricity for the computer system and the cost of one or two scenario
disks :) .
Terry McKelvey
Jeff George wrote in message <7673f8$k...@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>...
Paul Miller
>both my PCs at home with practically every game that uses Directx 6 I
>get problems. Directx 5.2 seemed much better. Remember what they used to
>say about Microsoft - "Don't use an operating system with an even
>number". It applies to Win '95 and Win '98 IMHO too.
Aha, at least I am not the only one having that problem! At times it is so bad,
the entire system locks up. I've had to resort to turning the (great) music
off, just to play through the full 100 turns. :( The computer voice doesn't
seem to give any problems, just the music at certain times, such as when you
build a new base.
Daniel Proost
Paul Miller wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Dec 1998 10:03:23 +0000, David J Richardson
><da...@dcs-ltd.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>both my PCs at home with practically every game that uses Directx 6 I
>>get problems. Directx 5.2 seemed much better. Remember what they used
to
>>say about Microsoft - "Don't use an operating system with an even
>>number". It applies to Win '95 and Win '98 IMHO too.
>
is so bad,
>the entire system locks up. I've had to resort to turning the (great)
music
>off, just to play through the full 100 turns. :( The computer voice
doesn't
>seem to give any problems, just the music at certain times, such as
when you
>build a new base.
I have problems with the sound too. When I am building a new
base the sound seems to "hang" for maybe a minute, after that
it stops and the games goes on. This could very well be a DirectX
problem, the sound gives me problems on other games too. The
problems started with DirectX 4, before that version I never had
problems with the sound/music of games. The strange thing is
that it allways happens at different moments in the games, it is
impossible to see any pattern in it.
--
Daniėl Proost
<dwpr...@telekabel.nl>
ICQ 25652054
Andy McFadden
Andy McFadden
>a basic grasp of the basics. We all know what granary is and what a
>sword wielding soldier does. CIV was always therefore immediately
>accessible. SMAC is made up and imaginary. It takes time and effort to
>figure out the internal rules and concepts of the SMAC universe. You
>have to climb a learning curve to figure out what things are. This is
>something that it might be easy for a play tester, and yourself
>possibly, to forget after a few hundred hours playing.
I've heard this argument before on this newsgroup, and I'm still not
sure it's a convincing one. We all know what a granary *is*, but until
you've looked at the manual or help screens once you don't know what it
*does* in Civ.
Ditto with technology advances. Things like Chemistry, Engineering,
and Astronomy are familar concepts, but understanding what they allow
you to do in Civ isn't automatic.
The only thing I find compelling about the "learning curve" argument
is that the words themselves are going to unfamiliar to many. Naming
technology advances after self-modifying code may throw people. On the
other hand, advances like "Techology Base" are pretty clear.
Your statement about it being easy to forget about the learning curve
after lots of play is a valid one, but remember too that Civ had a
fair learning curve as well... but after a few hundred hours of playing
*that*, we perceive it as second nature. The trick with Civ is that
it was still fairly accessible even without a deep understanding of the
tech tree nuances. With SMAC they've taken a different approach ("blind
research"), which may be better in the end.
>The demo uses Directx 6.0, and I get stuttering on audio. In fact, on
>both my PCs at home with practically every game that uses Directx 6 I
>get problems. Directx 5.2 seemed much better. Remember what they used to
>say about Microsoft - "Don't use an operating system with an even
>number". It applies to Win '95 and Win '98 IMHO too.
Plays fine for me. I'm using the DirectX 6 that came with my Diamond
Viper 550. (FWIW, the game colors are fine for me. Sometimes the writing
is a little small in 1024x768, but that's probably just my eyes.)
One little gripe, while I'm on a rant: sometimes after a battle, there
will be a little yellow section of text on the main screen that tells
you something like "captured some resources". I'm not entirely sure what
it says, since it always gets oblitered by the next window that pops up.
I haven't found a way to review those messages.
The_...@texas.net
Matt Orlich
Product Manager
OSI
On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 21:48:03 -0500, Brian Reynolds
<brey...@firaxis.com> wrote:
>> Something else, Brian are you going to send the game to major game-sites for
>> review ahead of release? I have read what I could find so far and would love
>> more.
>
>I suspect we are, but I'm not directly involved so don't have details.
Pinochet
Andy McFadden wrote in message ...
>Plays fine for me. I'm using the DirectX 6 that came with my Diamond
>Viper 550. (FWIW, the game colors are fine for me. Sometimes the writing
>is a little small in 1024x768, but that's probably just my eyes.)
Well, IIRC, there is some ability to modify the font used. Look in the readme
file and see if that helps.
>One little gripe, while I'm on a rant: sometimes after a battle, there
>will be a little yellow section of text on the main screen that tells
>you something like "captured some resources". I'm not entirely sure what
>it says, since it always gets oblitered by the next window that pops up.
>I haven't found a way to review those messages.
Hmm, I usually manage to spot those easily enough myself..
Brian Reynolds
I believe most such messages can be reviewed by clicking the "M" button
towards the right of the main display.
Waver
game.. had to try to explain to them.. its mento be like that. :)
Great game eh? wish they hurryed up with the patch.. ment to fix those
pauses ya get some times.
W
Waver
but they have an excelent GAMMA slider, refresh rate slider. The 3DFX Ref
drivers don't. Oh yeah, the Creativelabs drivers work with all 3dfx ref v2
cards. eg R3d2, M3d2 ect.
W
rlmu...@spambusters.mindspring.com
<mcke...@erols.com> wrote:
>It could be just as addictive as heroin. Fortunately for the "addict", it
>does not require any more purchases after the initial game purchase, except
>electricity for the computer system and the cost of one or two scenario
>disks :) .
>
You forgot that for many people SMAC addiction will also cost them a
relationship or marriage... oh well you've got to have priorities!!
Later,
Rob
Dennis Sullivan
>One little gripe, while I'm on a rant: sometimes after a battle, there
>will be a little yellow section of text on the main screen that tells
>you something like "captured some resources". I'm not entirely sure what
>it says, since it always gets oblitered by the next window that pops up.
preferences to slow this down? Anyway, it usually says either "you've
captured the mind worms (or isle of the deep)" or that you failed to do so.
If you kill the mind worms, you get an energy bonus (usually 20 or 30
credits).
Keith Rohrer
Brian Reynolds <brey...@firaxis.com> wrote:
>We've receive many strongly positive responses to the gameplay in the
>Alpha Centauri Demo. But with regard to graphic display, though there
>have also been many positive responses there, a considerable number of
>people have had a strongly negative reaction.
>
>We obviously thought the graphics were pretty cool when we released the
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>just dislike of a particular style).
If the fog of ware is truly the problem, and the palette keeps you from
just darkening the fogged terrain, perhaps blacking out fewer rows would
do better, say every third row instead of every other, or using two or
more black rows together so it's obviously "struck out" but still visible?
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>voiceovers and sound, etc.
I dunno, taking the CPU "drone riots" message out of the context of the
rest of the CPU messages, he sounds pretty bored...makes for a great
Windows startup sound.
With only one exception, every game designer I've seen supporting their
product on the net like you are has not only been good customer support,
but has put the energy and thought and love and talent into the game to
make it truly worth supporting. You and Phil Steinmeyer(sp?) will have
quality products and loyal fans for as long as you remain true to yourselves
and don't burn out. :-)
Keith
--
"Well, look at that. The sun's | Linux: http://www.linuxhq.com |"Zooty,
coming up." -- John Sheridan, | KDE: http://www.kde.org | zoot
"Sleeping in Light", Babylon 5 | Keith: kwro...@enteract.com | zoot!"
www.midwinter.com/lurk/lurker.html | http://www.enteract.com/~kwrohrer | --Rebo
Andy McFadden
There's often a pop-up telling me that my unit was promoted, or something
else happens at about the same time. When the pop-up goes away, the
message is gone.
Andy McFadden
>towards the right of the main display.
>
Not these.
As somebody pointed out, they're usually something to the effect of
receiving some energy credits from nuking the mind worms. I usually
get a dialog coming up, telling me that my unit's morale level was
improved or something similar.
The only stuff I've seen appear in the 'M' window are things that presented
themselves strongly in the first place, like drone riots or forest
expansion. Beating up mind worms doesn't seem to be important enough.
Brian Bowling
Andy McFadden wrote:
I had a mind worm hit an unprotected base. At first I thought it didn't do anything
because the message was erased so quickly. It was only when I looked through the
base that I found it had done some damage.
Brian
her...@apostate.com
the bottom half of the screen. One is "I" and the other is "M."
HA
her...@apostate.com
some sleep before posting after having read only half the message...)
M. Norton
: > In article <36884059...@firaxis.com>,
: > Brian Reynolds <brey...@firaxis.com> wrote:
: > >>>I haven't found a way to review those messages.
: > >
: > >I believe most such messages can be reviewed by clicking the "M" button
: > >towards the right of the main display.
: > >
: >
: > Not these.
: >
: > As somebody pointed out, they're usually something to the effect of
: > receiving some energy credits from nuking the mind worms. I usually
: > get a dialog coming up, telling me that my unit's morale level was
: > improved or something similar.
: >
: > The only stuff I've seen appear in the 'M' window are things that presented
: > themselves strongly in the first place, like drone riots or forest
: > expansion. Beating up mind worms doesn't seem to be important enough.
her...@apostate.com wrote:
: I think the "M" Brian is referring to is those two radio-buttons in the
middle of
: the bottom half of the screen. One is "I" and the other is "M."
The message screen in the middle displays <I>nformation which are things
like faction standing, progress, income, outgo, etc. The <M>essage pane
is mostly for upkeep messages. These are the things that happen at the
beginning of the turn. Production finishes, environmental effects, etc.
You'll notice each has a little --> arrow next to each item, which will
take you there (it's essentially a map hyperlink).
The yellow messages are things that happen during your turn. I'll have to
make an effort to wipe out some mindworms or something along those lines
and get a unit to promote in status (shouldn't be too hard)
Typically though the messages you see will be:
"Capture attempt failed" meaning you have the technology to attempt a
mindworm capture. It's somewhat gratuitous because if it fails you go into
combat, and if it succeeds, your unit will go cover the other unit and the
flag will turn to your faction color.
"Planetpearls retrieved for XX energy credits!" (wording may not be precise
this is from memory). Essentially you whomped the mindworms and their
carcass is worth something.
"The monolith is silent". As it says.
"The monolith has repaired our unit." As it says.
"The monolith has promoted our unit to XXXX status." Ditto.
"The monolith has opened a wormhole to another location!" Your unit just got
transported.
I also believe that the Unity modules also put text here, but you can
typically tell what they do.
I agree that there is a bug here if the popup dialog isn't returning the
graphics underneath to pristine status when it goes away, but I think until
that gets fixed, if you just keep in mind what's happening here, it's not
typically a critical item.
Hopefully this helps.
Regards,
Mark Norton
--
===================+=========================================================
Mark D. Norton | This signature was printed on
mno...@netcom.com | 100% recycled electrons
=============================================================================
Ben & Karen
The_...@texas.net wrote:
> Actually, reviews won't be showing up until the game ships.
This is true. Most magazines undoubtably have the game right now, but you still
have to play it and then get the review to press. There will probably be a lot less
lag time for SMAC than there is with most games (a lot of review copies arrive
around the same time the game is hitting the shelves in stores).
-Ben
David Short
Thanks to Brian R. of Firaxis
Thanks to Phil S. of Poptop
Thanks to Brad W. of Stardock
Thanks to David L. from Seirra.
I KNOW there are others who post here that I've forgotten. Sorry and
Thanks. I'm sure there are otheres who lurk here and listen. Thanks.
There was a time when developers came on line and
almost always devolved into acting .... Smart. I'm
impressed and pleased with the gentlemen above
who have all acted in a professional manner and
increased my enjoyment of a hobby by listening
to my piddling little complaints and making public
efforts to improve the product.
We're a tough crowd. If you can please us
you're doing ok. Thanks for listening.
dfs
Joey
>
> Cyberspace Buddha wrote:
>
> > Brian Reynolds <brey...@firaxis.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> > >Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us,
> >
> > willing to download a 20MB file and give mostly positive constructive
> > feedback, the stack dump, for example.
> >
> > cheers,
> > cb
> > --
> > Cyberspace Buddha /(0\ What's on, your mind?
> > mailto:c...@io.com \1)/ http://www.io.com/~cb
> > Not your fathers buddha.
>
> I agree. I rarely buy games anymore unless I can play a demo first because
> there's been too many games that turned out to be huge disappointments. As
> it is, I can't wait until SMAC is released in February.
>
> No, really. I can't wait. Please, please, please let me go past the demo
> limit.
>
> Ahem, sorry.
> Brian
me too!
I've seen pretty boxes of software before that show nicee pictures, but
weren't worth a dang.
Now, Centaurians (Chironites?, Chironians?):
automate the formers!
queue up the base production line!
probe the factions!
adopt a pet boil!
build a foil and see the myriad of goody disks in the ocean waters!
give me more rounds of play!
AHHHH!
"You have reached the demo time limit" Oh No, the Demo dialog-box of
death! Chump!
see you at the stores!
-jj
Don Shaw
David Short <dsh...@nova.wright.edu> wrote in article
<76dpnr$nco$1...@mercury.wright.edu>...
>
> Thanks to Brian R. of Firaxis
> Thanks to Phil S. of Poptop
> Thanks to Brad W. of Stardock
> Thanks to David L. from Seirra.
>
I'd like to add my thanx as well. In my game magazines I read statements
from game companies like this "Identifying key product lines is crucial to
our success. We made our decisions based on careful evaluation of the
products themselves and our strategic objectives as a business unit" and
"These are quality titles, but they don't fit into our strategic plans".
If they took the time to just make the game we want, their "Business unit"
wouldn't need strategy. Thanx for using the right approach, making killer
games, and for putting up with kids like Crush@whocaresanyway...
Todd Taylor
>
>Thanks to Brian R. of Firaxis
>Thanks to Phil S. of Poptop
>Thanks to Brad W. of Stardock
>Thanks to David L. from Seirra.
>
>Thanks. I'm sure there are otheres who lurk here and listen. Thanks.
Hear, hear!
If management/shareholders/venture capitalists ever question the wisdom
of wasting time on Usenet: I purchased Civ II, Railroad Tycoon II,
Entrepreneur, and Caesar III based largely on the input of these
gentlemen on this newsgroup (and will buy SMAC as soon as it is
available). As I only buy 4 or 5 games a year (so many games, so little
time), their postings obviously have a huge impact on my purchasing
decisions.
It helps that all of the above develop the style of games I like
(millions of posts by Carmack and Romero wouldn't get me to buy
Quake-like games). Still, the developers' support and obvious
enthusiasm for their games makes my purchase decisions easy. It's worth
a lot more to me than a dozen vapid previews or six-page 3D pullout
print advertisements.
Given my own experience and the standard high lurker/poster ratio of
Usenet, I suspect that developer input here generates a significant
number of sales as well as tremendous goodwill for future titles.
Todd Taylor
Oakland, California
Please remove the NOSPAM. from my address to e-mail me.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
David Short
David Short wrote in message <76dpnr$nco$1...@mercury.wright.edu>...
Looking at todays posts I was reminded that Dave Thielen,
Peter Karpas, Ben Polk, No 19, and Amy Boylan
also deserve my thanks. I'm sure I've still missed others.
This group even saw a post from Ken Burd(Lead Coder
for MOM and MOO). We are watched.
>Thanks to Brian R. of Firaxis
>Thanks to Phil S. of Poptop
>Thanks to Brad W. of Stardock
>Thanks to David L. from Seirra.
>
>I KNOW there are others who post here that I've forgotten. Sorry and
>Thanks. I'm sure there are otheres who lurk here and listen. Thanks.
>
Cyberspace Buddha
>Clearly it was not our intention to provide graphics too dark for some
>people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
>SMAC with.
Not a problem here. I had no problem discerning different kinds of
terrain, aside from squares on the back sides of hills, but that's why
you put in the toggle for a flat map view, right?
Brian Bowling
Cyberspace Buddha wrote:
> Brian Reynolds <brey...@firaxis.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us,
>
> Not at all. Gives you feedback from the more hard-core fans that are
> willing to download a 20MB file and give mostly positive constructive
> feedback, the stack dump, for example.
>
> cheers,
> cb
> --
> Cyberspace Buddha /(0\ What's on, your mind?
> mailto:c...@io.com \1)/ http://www.io.com/~cb
> Not your fathers buddha.
I agree. I rarely buy games anymore unless I can play a demo first because
Stephen Knuth
expansion of the Beta testing program. Judging by the postings that
Brian has been making they have learned a lot from it and are already
planning some improvements in the first revision of the product to ship.
Ian Adkins *THE DEITY*
I'm slightly red/green colour blind and the planet looks all brown to me!!
Can't see the levels of green at all - anything to be done here? Civ 1&2 are
very clear but not realistic. SMAC's Planet is much more realistic, I guess.
Is that the trade-off or can the colours in SMAC be fine-tuned a bit to
allow for better contrast?
BTW I've played only one demo game and loved it but I kept see the Civ
analagies in the gameplay. It's really like Civ with a much better
interface. I think what I would like is Civ with this interface. Don't like
the notion of factions. I guess we'll be able to design scenarios that use
the SMAC i/f but play like civ - using Earth maps sometimes too! But SMAC is
a very refreshing change for someone who has played Civ 1&2 since Jan
1994 -constantly!!! :)
Congrats.
Thanks,
Ian
Brian Reynolds wrote in message <36867F19...@firaxis.com>...
>We've receive many strongly positive responses to the gameplay in the
>Alpha Centauri Demo. But with regard to graphic display, though there
>have also been many positive responses there, a considerable number of
>people have had a strongly negative reaction.
>
>We obviously thought the graphics were pretty cool when we released the
>demo. Since the reactions have been so polarized ("Graphics are
>fine/great" on one hand vs. "Graphics impossible to see" on the other) I
>suspect that there may be deeper configuration issues at work (more than
>just dislike of a particular style).
>
>Clearly it was not our intention to provide graphics too dark for some
>people to see; that was not the case on any of the monitors we tested
>SMAC with.
>
>I suspect that in the very near future we'll provide alternate palettes
>with brighter colors as a short term solution.
>
>Then we'll add some in-game gamma ramp correction, probably for the
>patch, which we hope to make available when the full game ships.
>
>Finally, sprite graphics options and 16-bit colors are possibilities for
>an add-on disk in a few months.
>
>Obviously I don't expect to please everyone who simply dislikes a
>particular graphic style, but I wanted to let you know that we plan to
>address these issues.
>
>Releasing a demo of SMAC was perhaps a misstep for us, since for our
>game a 20MB demo meant by definition cutting out all of the most
>polished presentation elements, some of the coolest explosions, many
>graphic screens, lots of the coolest atmosphere, virtually all of the
>voiceovers and sound, etc. I think people have come to expect demos to
>try to sell them on the cool graphics, whereas with the SMAC demo we are
>really trying to sell people based on the gameplay. I think when people
>see the full game they will agree that it has a quite polished
>presentation, so we might have been better off sticking to that route.
>
>Nevertheless, we definitely intend to provide fixes for people who have
>had significant contrast problems.
>
>Hope you continue to enjoy the game!
White Cat
> The planet _is_ all brown. Just as well that I can discriminate many
> shades of brown (as i've excellent color vision, provided that the
> light is adequate, and on my monitor it is).
>
> > Can't see the levels of green at all - anything to be done here?
>
> Green? What's green? The fungus is red. A couple of special squares
> have some green objects on them, but mostly squares are one brown or
> another.
>
> I cope OK, but your point is obviously valid. :(
What's your video config? I'm suspecting that it has something to do
with people's setup. I can see the green just fine.
- White Cat
Geoffrey Tobin
>
> Hi,
> I'm slightly red/green colour blind and the planet looks all brown to me!!
The planet _is_ all brown. Just as well that I can discriminate many
shades of brown (as i've excellent color vision, provided that the
light is adequate, and on my monitor it is).
> Can't see the levels of green at all - anything to be done here?
Green? What's green? The fungus is red. A couple of special squares
have some green objects on them, but mostly squares are one brown or
another.
I cope OK, but your point is obviously valid. :(
--
Best wishes!
Geoffrey Tobin
Email: G.T...@latrobe.edu.au
WWW: http://www.ee.latrobe.edu.au/~gt/gt.html
AcK!
<G.T...@latrobe.edu.au>'s computer and wrote:
>Ian Adkins *THE [time-limited] DEITY* wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I'm slightly red/green colour blind and the planet looks all brown to me!!
>
>The planet _is_ all brown. Just as well that I can discriminate many
>shades of brown (as i've excellent color vision, provided that the
>light is adequate, and on my monitor it is).
Looking at a screenshot in February's PC Gamer, I've seen green\purple, actually
light-coloured terrain, along with a brighter ocean. Is this the game or the effect
of printing out the screenshot? <shrug>
TTYL
... I have a dream: DIR C: 965465065464984030373436 bytes free...
krup...@yahoospa.com
remove "spa" to email
Victor M
voilet.
> > Green? What's green? The fungus is red. A couple of special squares
> > have some green objects on them, but mostly squares are one brown or
> > another.
>
Geoffrey Tobin
>
> Geoffrey Tobin wrote:
>
> > The planet _is_ all brown. Just as well that I can discriminate many
> > shades of brown (as i've excellent color vision, provided that the
> > light is adequate, and on my monitor it is).
> >
> >
On second recollection, the fungus is pink.
> > A couple of special squares
> > have some green objects on them, but mostly squares are one brown or
> > another.
> >
> > I cope OK, but your point is obviously valid. :(
>
> What's your video config?
I'd check, but my power supply popped a capacitor, and the computer's
case is some proprietary bodge that doesn't fit standard supplies.
The company that sold it is out of business now that I need to use
the four-year parts and labor warranty, of course.
However, as I recall I was using a Diamond Stealth 64 card on the
higher SMAC DEMO setting (1024x800 is it?) at either 8 or 16 bits,
I forget which, but I tried both resolutions and it made negligible
difference.
The squares were distinguishable, but the differences didn't jump
out at me the way they do with the whites and yellows and oranges
and vivid greens and interesting symbols for swamps, peat, bananas,
oases, oil, etc, in Civ2.
It seems that Chiron/Planet only has two forms of land-life:
fungus and mindworms, to which you can add forest. There is
so little variety in land-cover compared to Civ2, and the
dullness understandably draws an unfavorable comparison with
the breathtaking beauty of HOMM2.
On the premise that the settlers probably didn't land immediately
after Chiron lost most of its plant and animal life, there should
be much more variation between the land squares than there is.
> I'm suspecting that it has something to do
> with people's setup. I can see the green just fine.
How much green do you see? I can see the forests well enough,
though they too seem a little dark. Is every plantation one
species of pine? How about some light-colored leaves, such
as a willow's?