Re: Freeciv vs. Xconq

[Hans Ronne <hronne at pp dot sbbs dot se>]

>Hans Ronne wrote:
>>
>> The point I'm trying to make is that Civ2 (or Freeciv) is a game. Xconq is
>> not. It's a tool or a platform for writing entirely new games.
>
>Freeciv actually aspires to be a game platform.  It has about a
>half-dozen or so rulesets right now, and there's work underway to
>extend to SMAC and other Civ-like games.  That's one of the reasons
>it's very interesting to me; while Xconq is fairly criticized as
>trying to be *too* general everywhere, Freeciv is edging into
>generality piecemeal.  It remains to be seen whether Freeciv will
>hit a complexity wall before it achieves its goal of supporting
>the gamut of Civ-like games.

I see. I was not aware of that. Of course, it makes sense to fix some
problems and limitations when you rewrite a game. So does Freeciv allow
more unit types now than Civ2? I think that is the single most important
limitation in Civ2.

Hans

Hans Ronne

hronne@pp.sbbs.se