Op-Ed
Revolution: A More Primitive Civilization?
by Jordan Deam, 5 Jun 2008 21:00
Op-Ed - RSS 2.0

continued from page 1

image

Civilization Revolution is the latest installment of the series, set for release on June 13 in Europe and July 8 in North America. The first indication that this Civ will be a drastic departure from Civs past is immediately evident: Civilization Revolution will be playable on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, hell, even the Nintendo DS. That's right; after two and a half decades in the industry he helped pioneer, Sid Meier has revealed himself for what he really is: a consoletard.

But instead of dismissing the game outright and returning to my EVE spreadsheets, I decided to take it for a test drive by spending some time with the Xbox 360 demo, which became available early this morning. From the first moments of the opening cinematic, it's clear that this Civ has reached a new level of graphical polish for the series. In Civilization IV, combat animations felt awkward and tacked on. Granted, it's always a little jarring to watch a knight take out a Howitzer, so the bar for realism is set pretty low. In Revolution, however, battles play out (almost) in real time. When your Centurions attack a barbarian village, the bristling savages actually scurry around, taking potshots at your troops with their blowguns. It doesn't add any strategic complexity to conflicts, but it sure is fun to watch.

In fact, making Revolution "fun to watch" seems to have been a primary goal for Firaxis. The series has always had an unabashedly corny sense of humor - meet Julius Caesar in Civilization IV and he'll offer you some salad - but in Revolution it's brought to the fore. Selecting a unit brings up their its animated 3-D representation in the lower right corner of the screen; warriors puff out their chests with bravado, while settlers shuffle around anxiously. Like EA DICE with Battlefield Heroes, Firaxis seems to have taken a page from Team Fortress' iconic character design.

Furthermore, Civs (the leaders of rival civilizations, not the games) now how have voices, speaking a heavily affected form of gibberish that's both grating and strangely endearing. In the tutorial I played, you're guided by a blustering, tweed-jacketed academic-type who obliviously interrupts your conversations with other units. It may not have made the game easier to learn, but it brought a smile to my face, anyway.

And then there's the actual gameplay. The demo cuts you off at 1250 A.D., but from what I experienced, most of the markers of a Civilization game are still there. Your success depends on a balance of military might, cultural sophistication and economic efficiency; but the simple enjoyment of watching your empire grow from a few scattered hovels into a complex network of metropolises hasn't changed a bit.

As for the control scheme, it's surprisingly intuitive. After a few minutes, switching between units and managing your cities' production becomes second nature. While it's more than possible to play Revolution with a standard game pad, however, there's certainly no advantage to be gained from doing so. You might be able to rig up a DDR dance pad and a couple of Samba de Amigo's maracas to play Steel Battalion if you had the time and the inclination, but it's probably not how it was meant to be played.

Ultimately, diehard fans of the series (who exchange home-brew mods or vigorously debate strategies on fan-supported forums) might feel a bit betrayed by Revolution. It feels like some of the energy previously devoted to eking out every last ounce of complexity from the gameplay has been redirected into making it a more accessible, aesthetically pleasing experience. But if the thrill of conquest and the pride of empire-building are still to be had, who says consoletards shouldn't be able to get in on the action?

Jordan Deam is Content Editor at The Escapist. His only gaming systems are an Xbox 360 and a Mac. Yeah, total consoletard.