Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Head to head at last...
Published on March 10, 2006 By Draginol In GalCiv Journals

VS. 

by Brad Wardell (designer of both)

Updated: 3/11

So what is the difference between Galactic Civilizations II and the first Windows version from 2003?  This article will take a look at that and offer some editorial criticism/comparisons between the two.

A long time ago...

In 2003, Galactic Civilizations (www.galciv1.com) was released.  The total budget for the title was $600,000. But in reality, it was less than that. Far less.  The development budget for the release version was approximately $240,000.  The rest was post-release updates, the expansion pack, and increasing support of marketing and support.

The game got very positive reviews:

Site

Review Score

Gamespy

87

Gamespot

8.4

IGN

8.2

PC Gamer

82

UGO

A-

CGW

4.5/5

Firing Squad

88

CGM

4.5/5

Overall it averaged between 4 and 4.5 stars (out of 5).  The reviews were pretty consistent. 

The game did reasonably well selling approximately 150,000 units worldwide. 70,000 or so in North America retail (I don't have the exact number), nearly that # overseas plus electronic.  At the time of this writing, GalCiv II in its first 10 days have exceeded that North American # and by the end of the month may exceed the # of units sold electronically.  We will be looking into what precisely caused such a huge difference in sales and report the findings. But so far -- word of mouth is king. Simply put, people seem to like GalCiv II and tell their friends. 

So what makes the sequel so much more popular than the original? What improvements were made? Here in this article we'll start exploring.  If you played both, feel free to comment on what changes we made that mattered to you.

Flaws in Galactic Civilizations I

Not that we were completely happy with it.  While most users liked the game, a number of users did not and often shared the same criticisms:

  1. The game forced you to play only as humans.
  2. The graphics were pretty awful
  3. The user interface was awful and unintuitive
  4. The tech tree was bizarre and didn't make sense (research Impulse Drive to invade planets???)
  5. The overall game was a little bland and generic at times.
  6. The combat was a little lifeless - research tougher and tougher ships faster than your enemies and win.
  7. The game itself didn't age as well as it could -- reader reviews on the game slowly decline over time
  8. It forced you to play as a particular resolution
  9. The planets were basically all the same and made little sense.
  10. There was no real strategy to colonization, just get the best planets and you win.
  11. No story or "soul".

We had a couple of years to think about how to solve these things.  From here on out, we'll talk about how we attempted to make the game a lot better than the original while still sticking with the spirit of the original game.

Setting up the game

A UI only a mother could love. And even then...

For a game that forced you to play as humans, you didn't get very many options. Just some numbers.

VS.

So where to start? First off, now you can have pre-canned maps. The first one only had random maps.  Moreover, there are now specific scenarios to choose from rather than simply the random setup. There's a lot more control over the galaxy as well than previously.

Secondly, you can choose which civilization you want to play as. Not good enough? Fine, you can also create your own from scratch.

Third, customization isn't just about numbers. You can control your logo, your portrait, your ship style, your ship color. Heck, you can even control what the actual game interface looks like! And it's all moddable.

Being able to pick your race also matters because unlike in GalCiv I, the new relations system takes into account which race you are.  The Torians and the Drengin don't like each other, for instance.  The way different races react to you depends on who you pick.

We had to develop a special dialog editing system just for this feature because there was so much to do in order to make sure different races weren't just cosmetically different.

Your opponents

You had 5 opponents to choose from. That's it.  Each race was fairly interchangeable.

VS.

Now you have 10 opponents and each opponent has its own set of dialog and personality based on which player you play as making sure that the game feels different each time.  And in v1.1, Stardock will be making is to that you can simply select opponents and in intelligence range and the game will provide a mystery of who you play against.

Moreover, while GalCiv I had multiple AI engines, this time around, the AI engine is far far more sophisticated.  With ship design, enhanced diplomacy, fleet management, social management, and of course the new tactical AI, different players will blatantly play differently.  The AI is much better as using things like star bases.  So much of the improvements can't really show in a screenshot unfortunately.

First Impressions

Your home solar system.  Besides the aesthetics of the game map only having blobs on it to represent stars, interacting with planets, which you did all the time, required clicking on the right star, then double-clicking on the planet you wanted to interact with. Over a period of many hours, this could be a pain.

VS.

Your home solar system is presented on the map cleanly and with much better graphics. Moreover, despite being 3D, it actually is smoother and performs better on average than GalCiv 1 did (I can attest to this having taken these screenshots today, GalCiv 1 is slower on this machine because it's all software-accelerated vs. GalCiv II's hardware acceleration).

I don't want to make it sound like I thought the first Galactic Civilizations was a bad game. It was a good game, especially for the time.  But the things we bring up make the difference, I think, between a good game and a great game.

The new engine allows for some really cool stuff too.  For instance, you can zoom in:

zoom out a bit.

   

Zoom out a bit more..

Zoom out a bit further..

Zoom out until..

The map is presented as icons.  Bear in mind, you can do this even with a roller-mouse so it's completely smooth.

The first one didn't have anything like this, it was fixed camera.  Here it's 3D so you can rotate the map and zoom in and out at will.  It is also resolution independent.  You can play it on a wide-screen monitor and it'll take advantage of the extra width. And by that I mean it doesn't just stretch, I mean it uses those extra pixels.  If you have a swivel monitor, no problem, you can have it run at (for example) 1200x1600.

Again, a screenshot doesn't really give justice to how much of a difference this makes in game play.

Why resolution independence matters

Games get dated mostly by graphics.  Stardock has no delusions of grandeur. We'll never be the top selling game out there.  We simply don't have the distribution clout to pump enough units out there.  But we can sell a lot of units -- over time.  That is, if we can make sure the game doesn't get dated. 

A lot of time went into inventing technologies that are counter-intuitive in the game industry.  We need our game to not look dated. We need it to still look "state of the art" two years from now.  So we invented a technology called smart-scalling. It makes use of Stardock's DesktopX.  DesktopX comes from the other side of the company, the non-game side.  DesktopX has been used in movies and TV to create faux-computer UI.  Next time you're watching a movie or TV show that has some fake computer UI, it might have been done with DesktopX.  So we used DesktopX to create the in-game UI.  The game's Direct3D engine reads in the .dxpacks and then the data files tell the game how to scale them based on your specific resolution.  So things don't just get bigger, they get used based on the UI designer's intent. 

So in a couple years when people are running 2800x1600, Galactic Civilizations will take advantage of that.

Also, the game's textures were developed using vectors instead of bitmaps.  That means we can increase the detail and resolution of the in-game models very easily without it losing quality.  The 3D engine itself has no polygon limit. Modders have already discovered that they can take 3D models intended for movie production or cut-scenes, export them as .X and put them into the game and they run.  So ships with a million polygons are very possible.

Planets

In Galactic Civilizations I, the planets were all the same other than the sprite and the umber that determines how much of a bonus all your planetary improvements are.  Players effectively built the same stuff on every planet in the same order.  We would have been, in hindsight, better off eliminating the whole planet development and streamlining things with simple sliders.  A lot of the numbers also were hard to figure out.  Why was my approval 40%? Players sometimes felt like they were at the mercy of some voodoo economics.

By contrast, in GalCiv II, all the high quality planets are unique.  You see the surface of the planets and build on them.  The planet quality number determines how many useable tiles there are. And if there are GalCiv II players that don't like some aspect of the economics, bear in mind, in GalCiv I, all resources were wasted, the approval rating was total voodoo, and so was how much production, money, etc.

Now, a factory does X units of production when funded. A research center does Y units of research when it's funded.  This is a big change from GalCiv 1 where research centers did a 15% bonus to the voodoo number that planets naturally generated in research which was based on a whole bunch of different criteria. So the new system is much cleaner.  It could still be cleaner yet, it's something we plan to explore as we do updates. But compared to the first, it's quite straight forward.

The result is that planet management involves strategy. Some reviewers have already commented that this, not ship design, is actually the most significant difference in actual game play.

Research

VS.

The original had a really strange tech tree that probably made sense when I originally made it back in 1993.  But by 2003, it just was jumbled.  When I was playing it today to make this article, I couldn't remember how to get transports to invade planets. Oh, yea, Impulse Drive. Huh? What was I thinking? In Galactic Civilizations II, the tech tree is utilitarian. Yes, it's bland. But that's because it's basically designed to be a tool shed.  You want to invade planets? You pick out Planetary Invasion and research it.  You need better beam weapons, then go up the beam weapon trunk. 

The techs are designed to be relatively cheap but have baby steps between them to keep good pacing.  So you do have Laser I, Laser II, etc.  But it sure beats researching "4D Phasing" in order to combine that was "Energy Combination" to get some new ship.  The tech tree isn't the game. The game is a strategy game and the tech tree should be a tool to implement your strategy.

The tech tree is radically different. Rewritten from scratch. 

Diplomacy

 

VS.

The diplomacy looks similar, except prettier.  But it's under the covers that it's much better.  The AI is more intelligent, the balancing much better, and the dialog much more dynamic than before.  Players can expect to keep seeing new dialog even months after release There's a ton of it..

Players can fight proxy wars. The Drath, for instane, regularly pay off other races to stir up trouble while keeping their hands clean. Thanks to ship design, you can make special "lend lease" type ships that are designed specifically to supply other players. You can become the ultimate arms dealer providing weapons to various races in exchange for their good will and protection.

One thing that can't be understated is that with 10 alien civs in a given game (plus several minor races) the political games can be intense and much more gratifying than the first game.

Starbases

VS.

In the first one, there were starbases but they were all the same. You just built them up.  And they were prone to all kinds of cheese.  Now, players pick a type of star base they want to build -- Influencer, Economic, Resource, or Military. The graphics are different and the abilities different. It makes for a lot omore strategic options.

Also, starbases have an area of effect. They're not sector based anymore. Click on a starbase and you can see the area around them that they affect.

WAR!

This represents and exciting and tense moment in Galactic Civilizations 1.  Lots of ships, lots of action.

In Galactic Civilizations II, you have ship design. You not only can design up your ships to do what you want them to do. You also have control over how they look in ways that no game has ever made possible.  When your ships or fleets battle it out, you can see them battling.  This screenshot I have here is actually pretty lame.  Picture one with dozens of ships involved -- fighters on up to capital ships.  Ooh. It's good stuff.

Battles are also a lot more sophisticated.  Now units have 3 types of attack and corresponding defenses. This puts a lot of real strategy into what technologies to research, how to design your ships, and which enemies to attack.  Your mega battle cruiser might be great against the Drengin with its mark IV phasors. But it might be useless against the Yor whose ships have Type IV shields that counter phasors.  It's hard to describe in words how significant this relatively simple change has on the fun/gameplay of the game.

It means having to adapt to the AI's weapons and defenses and watching them do the same to you.

Other additions

Ship design and fleet combat are two obvious new additions. The fleet combat is fairly unique we think in how it was implemented -- the number of ships you can have in a fleet is dependent on how many logistics points you have and the logistics value of each ship.  Fighters use a lot fewer logistics than say a battle ship. So you can have swarms of fighters going against a loan battle ship.  Or you can put all your effort into having more logistics points through researching logistics techs at the expense of not researching various weapons technologies.

But another new area in Galactic Civilizations II isn't as fancy sounding. It's the civilization manager:

It simply gives you a nice progress report on how you're doing.

And you can keep track of how you're doing in a bunch of areas.

With more data than you might ever want.

GOOD vs. EVIL

Good and Evil were in the first GalCiv.  But this time, you can research a new technology called Xeno Ethics and officially accept your..destiny.  The result is that each of the three ethical alignments -- good, neutral, evil, has their own pros and cons to them. 

Scratching the surface

These are just the obvious differences between the first Galactic Civilizations and the new one.  The real difference comes while playing as you see loose ends tied up and things polished up.  There's a campaign in Galactic Civilizations II that helps give players more info on the backstory of the game.  There's a lot more music, a lot more cut scenes, video tutorials, the Metaverse is integrated into the game and allows people to mod the game to their heart's content without it affecting the Metaverse.

Like I said, these are just some of the more blatant things that are different. There's tons of little details as users see ideas and suggestions they made after GalCiv I now make their appearance here. The Civ Manager is one such example.  The AI's behavior is another.

Gameplay announces that are gone

In GalCiv I, minor races were really obnoxious. First thing I noticed when I fired up the game was how Minor races were outcompeting me for planets. That really annoyed me. I didn't realize at the time how annoying that was.  In GalCiv II, minor races can't colonize (they can do everything else).

Also, in GalCiv I the computer players knew where all the good planets were.  In GalCiv II, the AI has to scout out planets just like anyone else.  They may make a guess that there's a good planet in a certain place but it's a guess and they can be wrong.  Same on transports, it'll guess whether the path is clear to send transports. Sometimes it'll decide it needs to escort them, sometimes it'll think the coast is clear.  But the fact that the AI has to make these guesses is a big deal.

The colony rush has changed as well. Many GalCiv I players will put their money into rush buying colony ships still but it's not necessarily the best strategy.  Also, since the computer players don't know where all the good planets are, there isn't this endless stream of colony ships going out.

And we're just getting started.  Like the original, we'll be releasing free updates with new features and content for a long time to come.

Stay tuned!


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Mar 11, 2006
"the approval rating was total voodoo"

Does this means that in order to improve your morale in GalCiv I you had to spray chicken blood on the monitor?
on Mar 11, 2006
A thing I'd like to be added to the GalCiv2 would be Religion tactics: then you could use your priests' ships to convert your enemies' units, like in Civ IV or Age of Empires. And there could be another form of government, Theocracy: your priests get a bonus, but your research is retarded. Temples could be just a new kind of Starbase...

Also the spies could be involved in domestic politics too, for example: if your political party loses elections, you could send a spy to kill the leader of the winner party to force elections sooner (though your moral alignment will be seriously turned to evil).

It will be fantastic too if IA style for each empire will be dependant on each leader's own "personality": that way you could send a spy to try the killing of a too agressive leader to force the election of a more "reasonable" person to your cause! There could be a "royal family" tree for each empire too, so you can make an alliance with a potential heir in order to create a civil war on the other empire.
on Mar 11, 2006
I think the begining of the article is a little too hard on GCI. Yes, GCII is totally awesome, but the begining of the article makes GCI sound like it was bad. Sure it had problems, but let's make no mistake about it. GCI is an awesome game, and maybe the best I bought that year. I still have it on my laptop and my home PC, because it really is great.

I imagine I won't be playing it as much now, because of GCII, but I imagine I might come back to it from time to time.
on Mar 13, 2006
Thanks, very interesting article.

The sad thing about you releasing GalCiv 2 is that I did'nt feel I had completed Galciv 1 + Altarian Prophecy yet..
And there is not enough time in the world to play both (or all three) at the same time
on Mar 15, 2006
What about the original Galatic Civilizations? You know..the one for OS/2. Back then iirc one could destabilize civilizations and take planets via espionage.
on Mar 23, 2006
So in a couple years when people are running 2800x1600, Galactic Civilizations will take advantage of that.


I do run GC2 at 2560x1600, and the interface does take advantage of that.

Not everything scales exactly as I would like, but, for the most part, it's pretty good.
on Mar 23, 2006
...woah. New editions of games always make me forget about what the original was like, especially if there were a lot of changes. Europa Universallis I & II, Civilization II through IV, Masters of Orion II & III, Hearts of Iron I & II... now this.
I didn't realize how different the graphics were though. It's... disorienting.

And you forgot the most annoying feature of Galciv I: The map didn't show what you explored, only if you had explored anything in that sector, even if it was only a corner. Made finding resources hard, I remember that part.
All in all, an amazing improvement. Especially the map... which looks weird now.
on Mar 24, 2006
I just got my preordered copy and I am enjoying it. I haven't played GC1 so I will have to go with GC2 on this one.
on Mar 24, 2006
Hi!
imagine I won't be playing GC1as much now, because of GCII, but I imagine I might come back to it from time to time.

I'm not going back. GalCiv2 has every mayor feature GC1 has, but it is simply better / nicer / more user-friendly than GC1. Thanks, Stardock! Great sequel.
BR, Iztok
on Mar 24, 2006

Regarding the maps : it'd be real sweet if there were a few more options for things like spiral galaxies, starfish galaxies, etc, that would really impact the visual appearance of the map, and the gameplay.
on Mar 25, 2006
Regarding personalized techtrees, it is VERY easy to add this in. In fact, I was half way done with this by creating a starting tech (IE: Dregin tech), give it to them as the default, and then branch a tree off of it (the existing technologies would be 'defaults' that everyone can use, while the specialized techs would cater to the race strengths, basically a little bit better than basic technologies). Of course, then I realized the AI would just go and trade it all to one another... which completely defeats the purpose. DOH!

Such is why I've been trying to get Brad to add in a tag to techtree.xml to completely limit a specific tech from being traded and/or stolen, but nothing so far... *hint* *hint* lol...
on Mar 28, 2006
Hey all...it was after reading this post that sent me to my local Best Buy to purchase this game. I'm so impressed with it. What I loved about GalCiv was that it was challenging yet simple to interact with. I can say the same for GalCiv II. I love this game and I've a feeling I'm going to get some sleepless nights playing this one. Very addictive. I think the UI is clean and user-friendly. The AI is remarkable and WOW....the ship designer. The new graphics and all the advances are beautifully integrated into the core game we know and love!! Great job!
on Mar 28, 2006
what was the budget for galciv 2 release ?
(if you are able to deliver that kind of information of course)
I'm just curious

the biggest point for me I think is the customization of your race + design your own ship
next is the amount of information explaining where you are, how well you are doing, how things work ...
on Mar 30, 2006
What about the original Galatic Civilizations? You know..the one for OS/2. Back then iirc one could destabilize civilizations and take planets via espionage


Yep, and you could also refuse the AI's surrender, if you wanted to try and take over the whole galaxy by force. I remember doing that a few times on the OS/2 version, and being very annoyed by the computer's ability to easily micromanage one or two hundred small fighter ships. I gave up on that one... I've still got a copy of OS/2 GalCiv somewhere, but I lost that annoying copy protection paper (and gave up totally on OS/2 a while back)

on Apr 02, 2006
I realize that it would be a tremendous undertaking but there are a few points i'd like to bring up for whenever you guys do an update on it. there are a few things to see in the future. one is some kind of carrier component or even a carrier-class of ship (light, escort, fleet, super, basically go read any david weber book like Insurrection or Crusade or In Death Ground) or you can do both. have a carrier design and let the user decide how many fighter bays it will hold VS. shields and defenses. you can go even further in-depth. add a tech-tree for fighters, starting with maybe little patrol fighters and ending with some sort of "Strikefighter". logistics would play a part too, in how many carriers a fleet can support and how many fighters a carrier can support. maybe you can customize your own fighters. they would have a 'range' similar to the effects of a starbase, and the more along you are on the 'life-support' tree, the further the range. there's nothing i'd like better than to have swarms of fighters swooping in at the crucial moment in combat to deliver the knock out blow. and with the carrier module, even captial ships could hold at least some fighters for self defense. i know it would be a whole lot of work to make it happen, but i'd buy the game all over again and again if i could command a carrier-based task force or two. i know i can't be the only carrier-commander out there??? another thing i'd like to see may be a little simpler. a mine-layer class of ships, and you can lay mines around your planets or along rival trade routes. it could be it's own tech tree, getting smaller and more lethal as you go, and a cargo ship could have a module installed to show 'capacity'? i know it's moving more toward a tactical rather than a strategic game in terms of my suggestions, but part of a strategy is tactics. mining an enemy's path slows him down so your fleets can get back in time to be decisive, a light carrier on patrol can secure your trade routes while your heavies speed toward conquest. finally, if you have ships in orbit around a planet with missiles or rail-guns, what's to stop them from raining destruction down on the planet before sending in the troops? you can go both ways on this one. planetary-based shields, point defense, and armor (just armor for your structures, not the entire planet) this way your fleet can do a pre-invasion bombardment and 'soften' up the area for your ground troops. just a few suggestions that i'd like to see and i'd like to think i'm not alone. if there's someone i can send this directly to, please let me know (edat10thmtndiv@yahoo.com)

Ed C.
29th Infantry Regt.
3 Pages1 2 3