Jump to content

Talk:Civilization Revolution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DS version

[edit]

The DS version has downloadable scenarioes as well from Nintendo WFC. I don't have a source for this, but I do have a copy of the game that confirms this is possible. 194.255.6.230 (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me too! Stupid sourcing, but it's true, and totally sweet! 69.155.81.39 (talk) 23:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reboot

[edit]

The old mess is archived. This is going to be a nice, civil discussion of this article now, right? JAF1970 18:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wii Version

[edit]

I have not yet seen any sources other than the one you guys cite in the article that says that there is not going to be a Wii Version. I guess we'll have to wait until E3 next week to be sure, but I see not reason why it will not be made as well. Does it really make sense to make a game for all systems, including the DS, but not for the DS' 'big brother'? LN3000 06:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It has not been confirmed. The PS3, 360, PSP, and DS were confirmed. SG-17 06:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it has not been denied, either. I don't recall any official confirmation of the other systems either. Just a generic "Next generation consoles and handhelds," So really, it can go either way. In regards to the wikiarticle, I don't think people should keep adding (or removing it) until there is reliable (and more than just that one report, which is arguable) information. Right now, We have Zero information on this game until next week. LN3000 08:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article links are there for a reason. JAF1970 15:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know about the TG one, but I am specifically saying that that is not confirmation. They are the ONLY place saying there is no Wii version. No official sources are saying that. LN3000 19:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see http://www.vooks.net/modules.php?module=article&id=11986

See also http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070710005616&newsLang=en no mention of a psp version? - should that be removed?
I still don't know.. and I don't think anyone else really does, either. This seems to be based off of 2K Games' E3 show-off list, so I am not questioning it's creditability. We'll know 100% within the next few days, but for now, I think your edits to the article are good. I find it funny that everyone was yelling that they know "100%" that there was no Wii version (as if the Wii is not GOOD enough for the game. Yeah right, uber-fanboys. I also find it interesting that there's no PSP version listed. I'd say that is a small oversight, and will be rectified in the upcoming days. LN3000 15:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has all been cleared up by the publishers at E3, there will be no PSP version at all, but there will be a Wii and Nintendo DS version. JayKeaton 05:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I emailed 2K Games asking for information about, and screenshots of, the Wii version for an article. The response email stated in no uncertain terms that there would be no Wii version. I have not updated the article to reflect this, chiefly because I don't really want to deal with the combative response that seems likely to elicit from a few select people. CamLewis 03:28, 7 Jan 2008 (UTC)

Plus there's no press release or news item stating as such. Your email = irrelevent. JAF1970 (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/848/848144p1.html. The developers had made clear to a number of outlets covering games that a Wii version was in development. The absence of a press release is not proof of absence. CamLewis 17:15, 29 Jan 2008 (UTC)

New information

[edit]

GameSpy preview - add information as needed to article. JAF1970 17:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No colon

[edit]

There is no colon in the title. It's "Civilization Revolution", not "Civilization: Revolution". JAF1970 17:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No preface

[edit]

"Sid Meier's Civilization Revolution" is NOT the official title. JAF1970 22:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, look at the box.... and in the manual where it says welcome to sid miers civilizations revolutions on the first page 86.16.153.191 (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wii

[edit]

there is sth wrong with wii release part but it's coming out. Xelas211 (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC) it might coming out. so it might not come out[reply]

Hey

[edit]

I hope this game lives up to the name, can't wait. So does anyone know its like splitscreen multiplayer or is it only online? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.99.92.88 (talk) 06:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

looking at ds screens i think so67.80.30.201 (talk) 18:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC) aka Xelas211 (talk) 18:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

civs

[edit]

russia is in. arab is also in. idon't think peria is inXelas211 (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

where is proof of perisa67.80.30.201 (talk) 22:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Need citations, please. JAF1970 (talk) 23:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Single Player Random Map

[edit]

Is there any confirmation of the presence (or lack thereof) of a single player random map mode? I've heard some rumors and concerns that there won't be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.204.34 (talk) 02:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i don't have any sources/links, but I don't think the consoles have the ability to consisntly genrate 100% random maps. i may be wrong, that's just what I think, and I think i have heard that rumor as well. However, it may ot generate random landforms, but maybe they can generate different terrains/rescources? who knows (except the development team). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.219.169 (talk) 23:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i've played the game. civrev always genrate random maps and you have no options like in civ 4 (conitinents, islands, map size, temperature, number of other civilications...) --217.7.154.69 (talk) 11:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Civilization V(5)

[edit]

Civilization_V redirects to Civilization_Revolution, however looking at the context and title of this game isn't that technically wrong? I think of Revolution as a branch in a different direction, not a follow-up game. Civilization V(If they're ever going to make it) will most likely follow in the same footsteps of Civilization IV/III/II/I. I propose we remove the redirection or specify that this is not the fifth installment of this game. Any thoughts or am I just being anal here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.145.59 (talk) 10:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with 84.208.145.59. Civilization V, Civ V, Civilization 5, and Civ 5 pages should all either redirect to a page of Civilization in general or be deleted. Jon (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PC Version

[edit]

Will there really be no PC version or is this just a branch-out version (not Civilization V)? --89.142.138.168 (talk) 09:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct, no PC version planned at this time. (And pretty unlikely unless console game controllers ever become popular for PCs.) Civ Revolution is using something seldom seen on PC games but quite common on console games, which is an indepedent flying camara sepreate from the main select/movement controler. One of the mini-joysticks on the console controller controls the camara and the other selection/movement. Jon (talk) 17:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, console game controllers are prevelant on the PC (Xbox 360 controllers, Logitech gamepads), but no PC version (yet). And this is not a forum. JAF1970 (talk) 18:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, because the pc has Civ4. rev is basically a console-friendly, simplified version of civ4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.93.46 (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ComicCon

[edit]

Okay, met with Sid today, chatted, have been playing Civ Rev the last 2 days, will be posting a preview of the game, so someone is going to have to post my preview. A lot of gameplay stuff, ie. the first to get a tech gets a free unit or building based on it. (ie. 1st to Pottery, get a free granary. 1st to Iron, get a free Legion unit.) JAF1970 (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Posted three facts for the article in my preview. The freebie for being the first to reaching a tech, and 3 units = 1 army. Winning the game is a simple affair: either earn a set amount of gold, wipe out the other civs capitals, build the United Nations wonder (after earning 20 Great People/wonders/flipped cities), or, of course, launch a spaceship to Alpha Centauri. JAF1970 (talk) 03:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Box

[edit]

Please don't change the cover without good reason. JAF1970 (talk) 14:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

[edit]

Perhaps a year ago, I would've agreed to promote this to start class. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has been undergoing a huge revision with its style policies, and this article no longer passes. First and foremost, the prose isn't that great. For example, who's Sid Meier?

Gameplay is really short, and all those random sections underneath should be given a level three header. This article lacks a development section, and the Reception section needs {{VG Reviews}}.

Organization is horrible. The Wii thing at the end should become a level three header to the hypothetical "Development" section. Finally, the cites need to be formatted with {{Citeweb}}. Also, I notice that the gameplay section has no cites at all, and the Reception section is seriously lacking. Oh, and per MoS, refs should go after commas, not before.

I think you'd have better off requesting an assessment for Civilization (series).--haha169 (talk) 01:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People and Wonders

[edit]

Do you think it would be a relevant topic to list all of the Great People and Wonders in here?

Fortenium (talk) 03:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should be mentioned, but there are too many of them to list them all--Krasilschic (talk) 20:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Multiplayer problems

[edit]

I removed the following for lack of citations:

Currently, many users are experiencing difficulties with the multiplayer functionality of the game, with many players stating multiplayer to be nonexistent. This is due to a lack of support from the parent company as well as many gamers simply giving up on trying to connect with each other. A new patch was released in late October but it has failed to correct many issues pointed out by gamers, as well as allowing new problems to appear which has further aggravated the gaming community. These issues are mostly specific to the PS3 version of the game. A new version, 1.40, is expected soon although no formal announcements have been made.

Other than the truth of this information being unsupported, not having sources also means we can't investigate whether or not this information is out of date. - Rainwarrior (talk) 01:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commentary

[edit]

Junior's first turn-based strategy. 96.243.177.81 (talk) 06:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay picture

[edit]

the picture of the gameplay is for the PS3. this is a picture of the xbox 360 version and as you can see the borders are straight lines as opposed to the ripples in the PS3 borders.

[1]--Krasilschic (talk) 16:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the xbox 360 version, England is red. This picture appears to be one of either Rome or Greece, who are purple and light blue respectively.--Krasilschic (talk) 00:30, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

relics

[edit]

the article doesn't mention relics. also, should civfanatic be referenced. Canvashat (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Civ Tables/Trivial Lists

[edit]

This is being discussed in the Civ:V article and likely to have ramifications for this previous incarnation's article too. Rather than tread the same ground over please join the debate; Talk:Civilization_V#Removal_of_tables_of_Civilizations to see if we can't reach a consensus.Flygongengar (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Civilization Revolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:17, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Civilization_Revolution&oldid=1206705864"