Oh, you must.
Civ3 took all the cool ideas that Civ2 had and put it in a game that actually looked good and was playable. I really disliked Civ2. Played 3 for hours untold.
It was ugly. It was hard to play. It was released in 1996 and suffered from acute technological indecision – should it be built to run on Win95 only or still support older 16-bit platforms? The result is a mess. It crashes. The isometric perspective was confusing and annoying. It was no fun.
Curious. I really loved this game. The video parts and the palace were cool. I loved the interface. I think I never played a game more than I did Civ2.
The trouble with that is that I’ve churned the Civ games so much anymore that I can’t stand to look at any of them anymore. I’ve just played them so much, and they’re all exactly the same…
Had the same problem with the Heroes of Might & Magic games.
Hey, I’m getting better at this “pirate lingo” stuff.
Anyways, Civ III and Heroes of M&M IV actively repulsed me after relatively short playing spans. I couldn’t look at any other maganement/strategy game until along came (Sid Meier’s!) Alpha Centauri, making all the progress that Civ III lacked (LACKED, I say, Ygg. Coming up with even MORE governments to enforce, technologies to research and minerals to mine is something I could have done).
Firaxis’ Sid-Meierless Civ IV isn’t going to be able to hold a candle to good old Alpha Centauri. A 3D engine? Curruption and Pollution, the two most singularly genious concepts in Civ II, simplified?? MORE etchnologies?! Arrrrrr!! KILL THE HEATHENS!!!
The growth (Bloat?) of the technology tree isn’t the good thing about CivIII – it choked MOO2, for instance. The good ideas that CIV3 had were things like cultural influence, trade-routes/luxury resources and such – things that changed your goals when playing.
I think about 80% of the games I finished were won by Cultural Victory.
It depends on many factors – the geographical layout, for instance, can determine whether you start running into enemies early or late. The existence of minerals – say you’re stuck with no Iron early on, you’re pretty much doomed for building a decent military and have to push somewhere else.
I love Colonization too (and with the re-release of Pirates! recently, rumors are claiming that Colonization might be reworked too), but it always suffered from too much micromanagement. In Civ I can have quite a few cities and occasionally go over to overlook, build something new or prepare the city for war. In Colonization I constantly have to manage every single colonist in every single city, have them carefully balance the harvesters and the producers, and set up trading routes to swap raw materials if I can’t use them in their home colony.
It’s fun, but way too tedious.
17 תגובות על Firaxis to release Civilization IV in 2005.
tryscer
30 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 09:59
That’s the best news ever.
I wonder if they’re going to listen to any suggestions this time.
orbar
30 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 10:08
so I must see civ3 fast before this comes out!!
yggdrasil
30 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 10:46
Oh, you must.
Civ3 took all the cool ideas that Civ2 had and put it in a game that actually looked good and was playable. I really disliked Civ2. Played 3 for hours untold.
tryscer
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 03:03
What the hell was wrong with Civ 2?
yggdrasil
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 05:14
It was ugly. It was hard to play. It was released in 1996 and suffered from acute technological indecision – should it be built to run on Win95 only or still support older 16-bit platforms? The result is a mess. It crashes. The isometric perspective was confusing and annoying. It was no fun.
orbar
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 05:38
that’s exactly right – I actually preferd to play in civ I
mux2000
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 05:42
I never seen 3. I disliked 2 on sight, which is why I never played either.
ijon
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 06:31
Exactly.
tryscer
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 13:48
Curious. I really loved this game. The video parts and the palace were cool. I loved the interface. I think I never played a game more than I did Civ2.
Well, different strokes..
shiffer
30 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 10:57
The trouble with that is that I’ve churned the Civ games so much anymore that I can’t stand to look at any of them anymore. I’ve just played them so much, and they’re all exactly the same…
Had the same problem with the Heroes of Might & Magic games.
madsamrackham
30 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 13:52
Aye, that be the darn truth!
Hey, I’m getting better at this “pirate lingo” stuff.
Anyways, Civ III and Heroes of M&M IV actively repulsed me after relatively short playing spans. I couldn’t look at any other maganement/strategy game until along came (Sid Meier’s!) Alpha Centauri, making all the progress that Civ III lacked (LACKED, I say, Ygg. Coming up with even MORE governments to enforce, technologies to research and minerals to mine is something I could have done).
Firaxis’ Sid-Meierless Civ IV isn’t going to be able to hold a candle to good old Alpha Centauri. A 3D engine? Curruption and Pollution, the two most singularly genious concepts in Civ II, simplified?? MORE etchnologies?! Arrrrrr!! KILL THE HEATHENS!!!
yggdrasil
30 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 23:47
Re: Aye, that be the darn truth!
The growth (Bloat?) of the technology tree isn’t the good thing about CivIII – it choked MOO2, for instance. The good ideas that CIV3 had were things like cultural influence, trade-routes/luxury resources and such – things that changed your goals when playing.
In short, will be good.
shiffer
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 00:51
I never managed to play a CivIII game that wasn’t warlike. I constantly had to conquer my neighbours or they would have done the same to me.
Peaceful Cultural Victory my ass.
yggdrasil
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 00:54
I think about 80% of the games I finished were won by Cultural Victory.
It depends on many factors – the geographical layout, for instance, can determine whether you start running into enemies early or late. The existence of minerals – say you’re stuck with no Iron early on, you’re pretty much doomed for building a decent military and have to push somewhere else.
Fun game.
shiffer
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 01:07
Fun gmae.
Yeah. Too bad I can’t stand to look at it anymore.
passacaglio
31 בDecember, 2004 בשעה 15:56
Never Liked the Civs. Colonization rocked (still does).
yggdrasil
2 בJanuary, 2005 בשעה 09:14
I love Colonization too (and with the re-release of Pirates! recently, rumors are claiming that Colonization might be reworked too), but it always suffered from too much micromanagement. In Civ I can have quite a few cities and occasionally go over to overlook, build something new or prepare the city for war. In Colonization I constantly have to manage every single colonist in every single city, have them carefully balance the harvesters and the producers, and set up trading routes to swap raw materials if I can’t use them in their home colony.
It’s fun, but way too tedious.