Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

4X Old World - historical 4X strategy by Civ 4 designer (formerly 10 Crowns)

LESS T_T

Arcane
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
13,582
Codex 2014
https://www.mohawkgames.com/oldworld/




https://af.gog.com/en/game/old_world?as=1649904300
https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/product/old-world/home

A new historical 4X strategy by Soren Johnson, the Lead designer of Civilization IV and recently Offworld Trading Company: https://www.starbreeze.com/2018/02/...-signs-mohawk-games-strategy-title-10-crowns/

STARBREEZE PUBLISHING SIGNS MOHAWK GAMES STRATEGY TITLE “10 CROWNS”

Starbreeze, an independent creator, publisher and distributor of high quality entertainment products, has signed a publishing agreement with Mohawk Games regarding the project currently under the working title 10 Crowns.

10 Crowns is an epic-scale turn-based strategy game that lets players create the greatest dynasty in world history.

The industry veteran team behind Mohawk Games is led by Soren Johnson (Lead Designer of Civilization IV) and Dorian Newcomb (Art Director of Civilization V).

“As an avid Civilization IV fan and gamer, I couldn’t be more excited about 10 Crowns promise of refreshing the classic strategy genre. I’m greatly looking forward to working with Mohawk on the game”, said Bo Andersson-Klint, Starbreeze CEO.

“Everyone here at Mohawk is very excited to work with Starbreeze on 10 Crowns, going back to our game development roots to make a classic historical 4X strategy game with some important and radical innovations to the genre. I look forward to sharing more about the design with the strategy game community and involving them in development as early as possible”, said Soren Johnson at Mohawk Games.

10 Crowns is currently in prototyping stages of development.

Only some pretty pictures for now:

fsBThGA.jpg


YGpCTUJ.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jimmious

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,132
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Man you are unbelievable. I thought I actually found something relatively fast... but no, there is your topic already. Damn son.
 

Beowulf

Arcane
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
1,964
Too early to tell anything, but maybe, just maybe, this will be what I hoped Sovereignty would be.
 

Karellen

Arcane
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
327
Art director of Civ 5. Why would you advertise that.
Because it would still be better than Civ VI? :lol:

Not to mention Civilization 4, which wasn't just technically mediocre but on top of that had pretty terrible art direction too. None of the Civilization games really excel at having uniform, well-thought-out aesthetics, but Civ 5 is almost certainly the most competent out of all the Civ games in that regard (though I have a giant soft spot for the Mac version of Civ 1 too, and Civ 4 obviously gets points for having by far the best soundtrack). In any case, one must give credit where it's due, and even if Civ 5 is a middling game all around, the only thing that's really wrong about how it looks is that it's not 2D. There's no shame in having been the art director for it.
 

Zboj Lamignat

Arcane
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
5,534
Art director of Civ 5. Why would you advertise that.
Because it would still be better than Civ VI? :lol:

Not to mention Civilization 4, which wasn't just technically mediocre but on top of that had pretty terrible art direction too. None of the Civilization games really excel at having uniform, well-thought-out aesthetics, but Civ 5 is almost certainly the most competent out of all the Civ games in that regard (though I have a giant soft spot for the Mac version of Civ 1 too, and Civ 4 obviously gets points for having by far the best soundtrack). In any case, one must give credit where it's due, and even if Civ 5 is a middling game all around, the only thing that's really wrong about how it looks is that it's not 2D. There's no shame in having been the art director for it.
Er, what. Civ V, VI, BE and new XCOM games all look just bad, the tech, the art, the production values all are mediocre at best and horrible at worst. They look extremely bland and often reek of just completely not giving a fuck. Admittedly Civ V is not as bad as VI and XCOM games with their "unofficial mod for The Sims 2" graphics, but that's hardly an achievement. The aesthetics are not freaking 100 miles near AAA $60 titles the supposedly are. Finally, they fail at the most important things in strategy/tactical games: giving clear and easily assessable picture of what is going on. Games with much lower budget put them to shame time after time.
 

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,083
Location
SERPGIA
I really hope this is more historical, mechanically deeper and aesthetically less PG 7+ version of latest Civilizations.
If it turns out to be exactly that I might actually purchase, play and enjoy it.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,116
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
I hope this is a Civilization game where the combat isn't shit for one reason or another (either 1UPT limitation or boring stackspamming).

What about building army stacks and having a seperate battlemap like Master of Magic, Elemental, MoO2, Total War etc. That would be the best way to do combat in a Civ game, but nobody has made such a game yet.
 
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
1,853,697
Location
Belém do Pará, Império do Brasil
I hope this is a Civilization game where the combat isn't shit for one reason or another (either 1UPT limitation or boring stackspamming).

What about building army stacks and having a seperate battlemap like Master of Magic, Elemental, MoO2, Total War etc. That would be the best way to do combat in a Civ game, but nobody has made such a game yet.

Honestly, I prefer non-tactical combat in games like Civs and Pdox games, because the focus is on ruling the nation.

Some people think that something like "Civilization with tactical combat" is Triumph's coming next game.
 

Space Satan

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,231
Location
Space Hell
Anything that will be a competition to Civilization francize will be welcome. Because stagnation and degeneracy now is so rooted in civ that I doubt it will be possible to save the franchize
 

LESS T_T

Arcane
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
13,582
Codex 2014
Yeah, FWIW I'd guess Starbreeze will pour some serious money unlike previous challengers.

I wonder why this is not published by Stardock by the way. Not complaining, just curious. Stardock's Brad Wardell is co-founder of the development studio Mohawk, and the studios has even shared developers with other Stardock family studios. Will this not use Stardock's Oxide engine?
 

flyingjohn

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
2,956
A civ competitor will only succeed if the budget is low enough.
A high budget will accomplish nothing since firaxis can pour millions into animations and graphics.Master of Orion tried and failed with the typical aaa focus.
A low budget focused on game play will hurt firaxis the most since this is where they fail,the game play and core systems.
 
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
1,853,697
Location
Belém do Pará, Império do Brasil
Anything that will be a competition to Civilization francize will be welcome. Because stagnation and degeneracy now is so rooted in civ that I doubt it will be possible to save the franchize

Agreed.

Pdox are another group who also need a competitor, hard. At least Pdox still innovates.

By the way, this could be a good Codex article - Games which became their own (sub)genres. X-COM, Civilization, Fallout...
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,894
I hope this is a Civilization game where the combat isn't shit for one reason or another (either 1UPT limitation or boring stackspamming).

What about building army stacks and having a seperate battlemap like Master of Magic, Elemental, MoO2, Total War etc. That would be the best way to do combat in a Civ game, but nobody has made such a game yet.
If developers continue to cater to SJW gaming media and not to their playerbase, the tendency is for combat to have an ever-reduced role, not the opposite. I wouldn't be surprised if these faggot ass gaming media people aren't crying about having to fight other people at all in Civ.Their idea of an ideal strategy game is probably something close to Farmville.

edit: first search yields expected results:

http://archive.is/yS4N0 (LOLygon article)

"Most striking of all is a bold acknowledgement that civilizations can thrive without aggressive military strength and conquest, relying on peaceful achievements to make their mark on history. I’ve written before about how this series bullies players into armed conflict, satisfying the strategy genre’s core principle of conquest. But in Rise and Fall, the emphasis is on nudging the player away from fighting, and towards more creative means to victory."

Firaxis is a joke. Welcome to the future.

I can't say I'll miss these new popamole Civs. Between Endless Legend, Endless Space 2 and Age of Wonders 3 (yes, I still play it regularly), I'm set for the forseeable future. Amplitude games certainly ain't perfect, but they're trying to make them better, not cater to fat blue armpit cows and soyboys.
 
Last edited:

LESS T_T

Arcane
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
13,582
Codex 2014
Interview with Soren Johnson: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2018/04/06/soren-johnson-4x-strategy-interview/

Sounds like he's thinking about less game-y and less competitive sports-like approach than Civ, inspired by Paradox.

Soren Johnson on challenging the norms of 4X games

10-crowns-concept-3.jpg


“Sid [Meier] didn’t know he was inventing a genre back in ’91 – if he had he might have been a lot more careful. He was just making it up as he went along.”

That’s how genres begin. By mistake. Somebody creates a set of rules and systems for the needs of a particular game, and then either people adopt and adapt those rules. Soren Johnson, creator of Offworld Trading Company and lead designer of Civilization IV, is working on a new game called Ten Crowns and after spending almost an hour talking with him at GDC, I get the impression he’s going to be very careful indeed. Not cautious, because I expect some bold reinvention of 4X strategy fundamentals, but careful in his treatment of a genre that we both agree needs to escape its own past.

As might be expected, we began with Civilization. It’s the single settler at the beginning of the 4X genre, planting its flag in fertile soil and watching as empires grow around it. From the not-so-humble beginnings of a game about 4,000 years of history, the 4X genre soon went to space, to fantastical worlds with multiple planes of being, and to specific times and places.

Through it all, the four Xs have endured. Whether you’re visiting a Tolkienesque land or a distant galaxy, the aim is to eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, and eXterminate, usually in that order.

Depending on your playstyle, there might be a little more exploitation and a little less expansion, or hardly any extermination at all if you’re chasing specific victory conditions. In its earliest incarnation, Civilization only had two end-games; either you eliminated every other nation or you won the space race and launched the first ship to Alpha Centauri. Broadly speaking, that’s one aggressive option for the martially minded and one more suited to leaders who prefer to concentrate on internal growth and improvement rather than conquest.

Since then, the series has incorporated a variety of victory conditions, each encouraging and rewarding a different style of play. Sometimes they involve systems that make them feel unique, as with Civ V: Brave New World’s World Congress that makes a political game out of the diplomatic route to victory. Other victory conditions feel like gathering raw materials until a tipping point is reached and success is assured; they’re like a longer-term version of the rush toward constructing a wonder.

10-crowns-concept-1.jpg


Ten Crowns is going to be very different. Probably. It’s hard to know for sure in precisely what ways it will be different because Johnson is still figuring out the shape of the game. Victory conditions, however, are definitely on the rethinking and rebuilding agenda.

“It’s easy for me to talk about victory conditions for Ten Crowns because we haven’t made up our minds about what we’re going to do, so I can’t really spill the beans (laughs). But I’m very conflicted about the existence of victory conditions in a game like Civ. I feel like it distorts the game in a lot of ways and that doesn’t mean I necessarily have a solution or substitute for that. If you’re going to make it through a whole game of Civ, the victory conditions are a huge part of your motivation and affect the whole way you play.

“At some point, you’re no longer writing your story, you’re trying to fill up whichever bar you choose instead. This is going to be a struggle for me because I’m going to try and do it a different way, but I’m not sure yet how I’m going to get there.”

I’m going to reiterate my feelings about Civ VI and 4X games in general before I follow up on what I find so exciting about Johnson’s thoughts about the genre, and his ambitions for Ten Crowns. I like Civ VI a lot, even though I found the Rise and Fall expansion disappointing. Every month I sink hours and hours into one 4X game or another, and even though grand strategy games provide more of the emergent stories and complexity that I crave, I can’t imagine a time when I won’t have at least one Civ game on my hard drive, ready to load up when I’m in the mood to discover another new world.

civprev1.jpg


Increasingly, however, I want to see 4X games making some fundamental changes. Not bolting on new features and layers, but reinventing themselves from the ground up. It’s why I love the automation of Distant Worlds, which makes me an actor in a world that doesn’t rely entirely on my input, or Stellaris’ attempts to combine grand strategy with recognisably Civ-like traits. I have a great deal of affection for the Elemental games, which bring in heroes and loot, reminding me how much I still miss enchanting items in Master of Magic.

What these games don’t address is the overall flow and shape of a 4X campaign. Stellaris introduces wrinkles in the shape of its crisis events, which interrupt the march of history with fresh conflicts, enemies and alliances, but you still smart small and hope to end big. Compare that to the kind of games Paradox have made their speciality, which have a more open structure and reward experimentation and roleplaying as well as the pursuit of perfection. Not only is the view of history more intriguing and complex, it’s also less restrictive in ways that are worth considering as strategy games become more inclusive in their representation of cultures.

The existence of victory conditions is a significant part of the problem. History and the development of a culture can be thought of in terms of winning and being better than the rest, but it is a limiting view, and the pursuit of power leaves little room for creative expression. I’d love to build a city that is wildly wasteful and inconvenient but captures some of the character of my people.

And that’s why Johnson’s conflicted feelings about victory conditions excite me. Recent Civ games have focused on the individual qualities of nations, giving their leaders personality traits, and giving the civs themselves their own rulesets. I’m interested to know how Johnson feels about those changes and how they affect the shape of the game, and it’s structure as a race toward the end of history.

civ41.jpg


“I think the steady trajectory toward victory is definitely a problem. It’s absolutely one of the top three or four things we’re trying to do with Ten Crowns, to approach those ideas in a different way.”

“Civ is difficult because they’re stuck with a certain trajectory. Sid didn’t know he was inventing a genre back in ’91, he was just making this up a he went along. And because he chose to make a game that was about all of human history, and beyond that because it’s such a broad view of history, it’s hard to make that about something other than just accumulation and things getting better and better.

“I was a part of this too, with Civ 3 and 4. We were always hesitant to take something away from the player. There’s a typical story we try to tell. In Civ IV we introduced Golden Ages, but originally they were Dark Ages. That was something that we wanted to incorporate because it’s something that’s in history and it’s important to talk about. But players really didn’t like it.

“The game has a certain pace and suddenly that was changed. Everything was taking longer and players weren’t as strong as they used to be. So we thought, let’s flip it on its head and instead of Dark Ages they’ll be Golden Ages.

“This is an approach that you’ll see all over the place. Maybe you’re familiar with the story of World of Warcraft and their rest mechanic. Originally, they penalized you for playing the game too much, but players didn’t like that, so instead they gave you a Rest Bonus. Basically, for the first hour of each day you got double experience. It was encouraging you to follow a certain playstyle – but the point is that they started with a negative and then flipped it on its head.

“And that’s something that’s built into the Civ designer mentality. You can’t take things away from players. But things have changed. What people are OK with and their expectations of what games do have changed. The thing that made me realise this was the success of the Paradox games. It was almost like these games existed in a bizarro universe where the rules are different.”

halloweensale-620x304.jpg


The first Paradox game I played, Europa Universalis II, changed the way I thought about strategy design. Crusader Kings and its sequel even more so. Suddenly here was this game where you didn’t have to be a major power and there was no pressure to try and rise to the top. Sometimes it can be more fun to be subservient to the simulation rather than attempting to dominate it. If the end-point of Civ is always known, perhaps some of the joy of Crusader Kings is in allowing the tides of alternate history to carry you to places that you didn’t expect to exist or intend to visit.

“Right. And you might have your moment in the sun and you take a backseat for a while, and maybe you’ll come back or maybe you won’t. You accept that there are twists and turns to life, and that’s also true in history.

“They did all sorts of things, like the way war is handled. In Civ you can basically declare at any time and if you take a bunch of cities they’re yours. In Crusader Kings, that’s no longer true. You have to have a reason to declare war and even if you take a bunch of cities, you need to negotiate what happens to those cities at the end of the way.

“I find all of that really interesting. Ultimately, though, it’s not about whether we’re being true to history. It’s also a gameplay problem. If the game is just on this continual upward trajectory, it just gets boring. You need some sort of challenge and pushback.
“Traditionally, in Civ, that comes from external forces. Other civilizations. I think that was totally fine in 1991. But nowadays there is a lot more you can do.

“Right now with Ten Crowns, we spent the first x number of months building a multiplayer version. That’s how I like to start. It’s good to get all of that in place right off the bat and you can get a good sense of the feel of the game in multiplayer because it’s always good to try and beat your friends.

“But in the last six to nine months I’ve mostly been playing singleplayer. I’ll start a game, play as long as I can, and I’m adding layers over time. And I’ve actually been holding off, longer than I thought I would, putting in any AI opponents.

“Currently, I’m playing with a subset of the game where there are no other players so you’re only dealing with internal issues and what you would normally call barbarians in a game of Civ. External tribes, which aren’t another player in the game but are a problem. I don’t have the exact term for what we’ll call them yet.

“What I’ve found is that I’ve been able to make the game good enough that it’s enjoyable at that level. If you think of a game of Civ where you’re the only player on the board, that would be pretty boring. So I set the bar for myself that Ten Crowns should be interesting even if there aren’t any other civs involved. Pretty soon I need to add that layer, but it was important for me to have enough stuff going on internally that the game is still fun without opponents.

“So there might be a period of time where I was really good at science, then one where I was really bad at it, and what does that mean for how the game plays? Or maybe there was a time when I could build powerful military units easily and I was really strong, but now I’m not. Or I’ve lost a bunch of cities but I can see a path to reclaim them.”

mohawkgames.jpg


This brings us back to players not liking it when a game takes things away from them. One possible solution, I suggest, is to ensure that when a thing is taken away, the game offers something else in return. You might lose a city or a resource, but in exchange for that loss you receive interesting choices. Failure, or loss, open up new avenues and possibilities rather than closing them down. It’s certainly true of my own experience that I don’t mind losing something as long as I’m given interesting choices in order to negotiate a solution to that loss.

“In 4X, the early stages where you have just a few cities or units work really well. What I want is a way for the game to put you back into that situation a few times. At that point, you know you have a few interesting options and the longer you play, the more they get pared back.

“I am thinking about all of these issues. How you can show the ways a nation changes over time, so you can look back over two or three hundred years of history and see actual changes and obstacles you overcame.”

When a nation’s character is partially set in stone by the unique qualities that the game gives it from the very beginning, it’s hard to see change happening. Progress, yes, but not swerves and meaningful setbacks along the route. The idea of building a nation or an empire that accrues an identity over time, and for that identity to be malleable, is attractive to me but I’m not clear on how it might work.

In some ways, what I’m interested in is a strategy game that asks me to be reactive. There’s some of that in Civ, particularly during the exploration phase when you’re discovering a new world and trying to make the most of it. As time passes, it becomes a game about stamping your authority on your surroundings though – the exploitation, expansion and extermination phases of play.

I asked Johnson if he’d considered the challenge of a 4X game where your nation begins as a blank slate, where you spend the game in a process of becoming a type of people.

10-crowns-concept-4.jpg


“I think that’s what Jon (Schafer) was trying to do with the social policies in Civ V. I think the trend toward very strong civ powers is seen through all sorts of games – whatever the appropriate term might be in any genre. Whether it’s a fighting game with very specific character powers, or something like StarCraft as a classic example. For a lot of strategy games that’s become standard.

“Civ was actually fairly slow to embrace that. In Civ III we had this weird matrix thing with six civ bonuses and each civ had two different ones. They weren’t very strongly differentiated. But then each version since has gone further down that path. I think that was mainly done for gameplay reasons, but once you go down that path, you do lose that sense of writing history as opposed to doing a culture run and then a religion run, or whatever.

“I don’t think it’s necessarily even intentional. People do like the variety of the different civs and giving them those choices is a perfectly valid design decision, but one ramification of that is that you may feel that your path is set from the very beginning.

“It’s weird because I’ve heard people say both things about Civ: that they like playing with the different civ traits, but they don’t like feeling like they’re being railroaded into a certain playstyle. In truth, the two things are closely interconnected. It’s a dilemma.”

It’d be unfair to view Ten Crowns as nothing more than a reaction to existing dilemmas. Even in these early stages of development, however, there are points when Johnson almost has to bite his tongue during our conversation. It’s too early for him to discuss specifics because so few things are decided, but whether its maps, victory conditions, AI, political strife or battles, he sees the standards of the genre as a challenge rather than a given. That attitude might just lead us somewhere altogether different than the familiar routes through history, and I reckon it’s about time.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom