Why are so many people down on Civ Revolutions? It's a different game meant to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd.

I've played Civ since the original, and personally, I'm excited by this game. I realize it's not going to be the same depth as Civ IV. That's alright. Bejeweled isn't the same depth either, and I can still enjoy that on occasion as well.

My only disappointment is that it's not going to make it to the PS2.

If you don't like it, just ignore it and vote with your dollars, no need to spout hate. You add no value to the conversation by doing so.

Well my problem with it is that it is time that could be spent making Civ 5

I started wondering the same thing: 'til i took a quick scan around the forums and noticed that it's more or less the same punks-- Xavier Von Erck, Catharsis, anonyjjang... --who go around and post crap like "this is CIV for the mentally challenged" or "I would chop off my right hand before I play this".

Go into the other Revo chats in the Civ IV forums and you find a more... diverse set of h8rs. Probably the same idiots who have been spamming the Civ IV forums about how Civ III is better.

But my curiousity about both groups-- the Civ III lovers and the Civ Revo h8rs-- are two quesitons:

1) Don't you like multiplayer? Cause until Civ IV, MP was plain ugly, and I would look forward to Revo solely because it won't be on gamespy!

2) Why do you fear the future? If you're such luddites, shouldn't you just stay away from computers? Why do you trust the "internets", this shady "series of tubes"?

Its just annoyance that people think it could be distracting from developmant of future PC versions.. people seem to miss it will drive innovation in the Civ genre, as well as push more funds into its development.

Well my problem with it is that it is time that could be spent making Civ 5

Chances are it's different development teams. Programming for the XBox, PS3 & Wii are completely different than Windows. Companies can take on multiple games and platforms at the same time.

Exactly, its a misunderstanding to think this would inhibit development of ciV. If anything i think we should look upon it as a good thing.

I started wondering the same thing: 'til i took a quick scan around the forums and noticed that it's more or less the same punks-- Xavier Von Erck, Catharsis, anonyjjang... --who go around and post crap like "this is CIV for the mentally challenged" or "I would chop off my right hand before I play this".

What posts of mine have you been reading? :confused: I'm a big supporter of Civ Revolutions. Sorry if my posts have seemed insulting... I'm no good at Civ so I definitely wouldn't be calling anyone 'mentally challenged' with regards to Civ. ;)

Console games are teh suck. The only purpose of a Civ game is to modify it. Can't modify a console game!

And I thought that purpose of Civ game was play it.

Apparently your wrong, but so is Bill- they mention downloadable content will be a feature of Revolutions, so i assume modification will also occur.

I think one of the biggest things people don't like is that there's a new Civ game... and they can't play it unless they happen to also have a console. To me, that is a bit annoying, since I don't own one. I'm looking forward to learning more about it, since it is a new civ game... and this might inspire me to buy a DS (there are a couple other games I wouldn't mind playing). Is it going to be a simplified version? Yes. It'll be quite a bit different since the primary audience is console users rather than PC users. Perhaps people are just feeling alienated for this reason?

Perhaps, ive ignored, and chastised all of cIV- but mainly for the move to 3D

I own both a Wii and 360. Won't even touch this game, it's built for idiots.

"Let's take the greatest PC game of all time and put training wheels on it because we at Firaxis think all console idiots are dumb who can't handle the real experience!"

I own both a Wii and 360. Won't even touch this game, it's built for idiots.

"Let's take the greatest PC game of all time and put training wheels on it because we at Firaxis think all console idiots are dumb who can't handle the real experience!"

Okay, you don't have enough information to be argueing about whether this game is for retards or 12 twelve year olds. We don't have very many previews yet. By "simplified" it probably means easier to understand not necessarily less complex.

What makes people who play on consoles idiots or retards?

I don't understand how people can be so critical of a game when there isn't any information out for it yet...

Im not going to play the game but from what ive seen there is some good stuff in it.

Put it in the next pc version!

One reason I see why people hate it is because it's a waste of their money. (Not the game, the consoles) Adults think that only kiddy stuff is on the consoles. Wrong! What about Halo 3?

Never mind, Halo's on the PC too.....

Well, I like CivRev (New abbreviation!), but apparently, you either have to be extremely softcore or extremely hardcore to accept it. (I'm softcore!)

Another reason is that they could be spending this time making Civ5 for PC. In my opinion, you can't just make sequels to every single game right after it comes out! In between game releases, they have half the crew thinking up new stuff for the next game, and the other half making expansion packs. CivRev seems like a good way to find out what works for other audiences, therefor making them more money! The consoles give them something new, and I think they don't even want to make Civ5 right now! These consoles let them have something to tinker with to get them out of boredness! and besides, you can't take a laptop everywhere you go, but you can with a Nintendo DS!

EDIT: Never mind, somebody already thought up CivRev. :(

All the hate is probably of the same reason people still play CivII.

And they claim CivII is very simple compared to CivIV yet flame the crap out out of civ players, saying something like "CivIV is too simple!"

:rolleyes:

If CivRev comes for PC, I'll consider buying it.

Xavier: how do you know all this? How do you know it'll be 'dumbed down'? I realise that there will need to be some concessions, in order to work with the console interface, but to be honest I don't see any reason why CivRev shouldn't be a suitable challenge.

The 'cartoony' graphics might annoy some people (not me, I think they're whimsical :D) but 'childish' graphics (pardon the expression) does not necessarily imply a 'childish' game.

And what's wrong with training wheels? The way I see it, we want more twelve-year-olds playing Civ... gets them off the streets, dunnit ;).

@Intricacy: Can you see my posts, or am I on your ignore list?

I think since the move to 3D the graphics have been terrible.. but at the same time i realise they are irrelevant for a game like this.. give me 2Disometric any day!!

Xavier: how do you know all this?

Read the interviews by Meier about the game. He's out-and-out said that this will be a departure and built for people like his teenage son. All of the interviews by both Meier and other Firaxis developers have been subtly-insulting Civ for the PC too, such as quotes about needing to make it "more entertaining."

A complete single player game will take one and a half to three hours to finish.

Does that sound like a legitimate version of Civ to you? Really now.

What's wrong with appealing to the none-Cheeto's-clogged-beard demographic?

Read the interviews by Meier about the game. He's out-and-out said that this will be a departure and built for people like his teenage son. All of the interviews by both Meier and other Firaxis developers have been subtly-insulting Civ for the PC too, such as quotes about needing to make it "more entertaining."

A complete single player game will take one and a half to three hours to finish.

Does that sound like a legitimate version of Civ to you? Really now.

Just because some things are different doesn't mean its not civ.

Probably the same idiots who have been spamming the Civ IV forums about how Civ III is better.

But my curiousity about both groups-- the Civ III lovers and the Civ Revo h8rs-- are two quesitons:

1) Don't you like multiplayer? Cause until Civ IV, MP was plain ugly, and I would look forward to Revo solely because it won't be on gamespy!

2) Why do you fear the future? If you're such luddites, shouldn't you just stay away from computers? Why do you trust the "internets", this shady "series of tubes"?

I made some posts at CFC, why I prefer Civ 3 to Civ IV. The term you are using for civers who don´t share your opinion, is falling back to the one who uses that term, in this case to you, Intricacy.

And now to your two questions:

1) I don´t play multiplayer.
2) It´s not a "fear of the future" but a sadness, that a game I did like, from my point of view, consequently moves in the wrong direction.

The cartoonish style that started with Civ 3 with some units (tank, transport, bombers, leaderheads)and culminated with Civ IV is now consequently been followed by FIRAXIS to make the whole globe cartoonish too. I was really shocked by some screenshots about the new cartoonish graphical look of cities on the globe in Civ Rev. The single cities on the cartoonish small globe and even sometimes single houses are standing on that globe like an exploded toilette brush showing in different cartoonish angles.

I want a more historical design of a Civ game, not a Mikey-Mouse-game.

I hope another company uses the gap, that is enlarging permanently, between the players who like that "Mickey-Mouse-Style" FIRAXIS is doing consequently since CIV IV and continues with Civ Rev, and civers who don´t like that style for a new turn based Civilization game.

I grew up with CivIII and CivIV will just never do it for me.

Dont get me wrong its a great game and i enjoy playing it but i just like CivIII better.:D

CivRev will be more suited to some people than others, its what happens when they make such big changes to the game. eg CivIII - CivIV

As for the people spamming up the CivIV forums about how III is better maybe they should go play some?;)

Why can't this game live alongside normal civ? Want a simplified, easier to get into game, which can also be portable, play revolutions. Want the more indepth version, play on PC. And since there is probably a separate team for revolutions, it shouldn't detract from the PC game.

Really, just because you don't like the game, doesn't mean you have to spout hate about it (apologies to those who don't like it but don't spam).

you know, i probably won't buy this because i don't console game. but any game that brings intelligence and complexity to console, even a "dumbed down" civ, is a good thing.

It's not the game, man.

When the announcement of the new Halo was made, I heardd people asking what is a strategy and how it's played. I wonder how would you made a Turn-based Strategy for a PSP or Wii without ruinning the whole game. CivRev will win not fans, but a bad name!

I wonder how would you made a Turn-based Strategy for a PSP or Wii without ruinning the whole game.

Seriously, why would you wonder that? Hell, the Game Boy Advance could manage some nice turn-based strategy games. Sure, Fire Emblem and Advance Wars might not have the same depth of strategy like Civilization, but they were very enjoyable. Besides, the Wii even has mouse-like controls and way more power than a PC that can run Civ 3 perfectly... Or was that a bad game too?

My newest console is a PS1 so I certainly won't be playing this game .. not that it concerns me, since what I'm hearing about it does sound truly awful. A two-hour long game of Civ, I can't even imagine.
I wouldn't actually mind for Civ to be a simpler game in some respects... less micro-management of units would be ok with me, especially in regards to warfare, warfare in Civ is very tedious for me (probably in part because I am quite a micro-manager when given the chance). Overall, more choices on the 'grand' scale and less on the 'micro' scale would suit me well. Things like city placement, finding my best path through the techs and civics is what I really enjoy. Maybe CivRev is exactly what I wish for (doubt it though, 2 hour games! :eek: ), we'll see as it gets closer to release.
I have my doubts that CivRev will sell very well to console gamers who aren't familiar with Civilization ... wouldn't be surprised if 2/3 of their sales are to PC Civ gamers :D Maybe if they do a lot of effective advertising for it, or if its just incredibly good.
As far as the sentiment that console gamers are either young or just plain dumb, I think that is wrong... I tried playing a friends PS2 once and there were so many freaking buttons and controls on the gamepad, I gave up in disgust after less than an hour, and I'm really not that good at action oriented games on PC either. What I am trying to say is that intelligence comes in many forms, your auto mechanic probably isn't a rocket scientist but he's pretty darn smart when it comes to fixing your car. :D

It is wxpected to be 3 hours.

I grew up with CivIII and CivIV will just never do it for me.
Oh, your opinion. Too bad, saint Dezzilisk, but your opinion doesn't always reflect how it really is. I also grew up with CivIII. Now, CivIV has a revolutionary new layout that is simply more fun than CivIII. Please, stop being a conservative Civgamer!

Dezzilisk... is that supposed to be a crossbreed between Death and a Basilisk? Sheesh.

Oh, your opinion. Too bad, saint Dezzilisk, but your opinion doesn't always reflect how it really is.

And with your opinion this could be the same... ;)

Swedishguy, do you have something to contribute to the Civ Rev thread, or do you only want to abuse that thread for your Civ 4 vs Civ 3 propaganda?

Also, CivRev could help fund Civilization 5. After all, C&C3 came out good, and it was released for consoles.

Civ in my opinion is the best single player experience on the PC. The multiplayer aspect if you have the time and patience (as I did in my college years) is the best in PC gaming as well.

The reality unfortunately is that for most people, they can't spend a 'lost weekend' playing multiplayer civ, and playing one game piecemeal over a month or two can be agonizing as well. So something like Revolutions fits great for time constrained multiplayer (which is virtually all multiplayer).
It would also work great for quick 'on the go' civ for civ veterans on portable devices, the civ newbie who wants to be eased into the genre, and of course the young gamer.

Take a look at a game like RoN (Rise of Nations), you can realistically play a multiplayer match in a few hours which can be done reasonably (even several rounds) at a typical LAN game, or say a Friday night of online gaming. I think Civ could use a simplified, faster paced version for quick multiplayer gaming. I think Revolutions will be complementry to the traditional epic PC game. If something like Revolutons were to replace normal Civ I would be screaming bloody murder... but we all know that will never happen... why would firaxis spoil the gravy train? Even if they did you would still have Civ 1-4 (and MOOII :) )and some other game developer would pick up the torch where Firaxis dropped it, and build an awesome civ-like turn based strategy game.

:)

Oh, your opinion. Too bad, saint Dezzilisk, but your opinion doesn't always reflect how it really is. I also grew up with CivIII. Now, CivIV has a revolutionary new layout that is simply more fun than CivIII. Please, stop being a conservative Civgamer!

Dezzilisk... is that supposed to be a crossbreed between Death and a Basilisk? Sheesh.

Yes IN MY OPINION, I am happy to say that I play both of them and enjoy both of them, i was just saying which one I like better.

And as to Civ IV having a 'revolitionary new layout that is simply more fun'?

Thats your opinion too.

And don't make fun of my name just because i said something you didnt like:)

A complete single player game will take one and a half to three hours to finish.

Odd, that's how long my normal CivIV games last.

Odd, that's how long my normal CivIV games last.

What the heck settings do you play on? Even on a quick game, my single player games usually take at least 6 to 10 hours! :eek:

What the heck settings do you play on? Even on a quick game, my single player games usually take at least 6 to 10 hours! :eek:

Normal speed.

Console games are teh suck. The only purpose of a Civ game is to modify it. Can't modify a console game!
actually the wii,360,possibly ds could be modified:)

Console games are teh suck. The only purpose of a Civ game is to modify it. Can't modify a console game!

Wtf do you mean:confused: :confused: Civ games are not only for modding. Only twisted minds think that

IMO the trouble with CivRev is if it represents the future of Civ. Would you really want Civ5 to incorporate simpler features and focus so much on the cartoonish eye candy? If this is just a quick deviation to stir up interest for the Civ series that's alright and I'll just happily ignore it, but I have a feeling it's more than that simply because other strategy series have gone in the same direction.

i wonder if you get advanced starts? (or start in a different era, because i like starting in classical).

IMO the trouble with CivRev is if it represents the future of Civ. Would you really want Civ5 to incorporate simpler features and focus so much on the cartoonish eye candy? If this is just a quick deviation to stir up interest for the Civ series that's alright and I'll just happily ignore it, but I have a feeling it's more than that simply because other strategy series have gone in the same direction.

There is NO WAY that this is even close to what Civ V is going to look like. They are going to do what they've down every single time a new REAL Civ game comes out. They go back, see what was really fun put those things back in. Take out the bad parts and add a lot of new things. I've said it before and at the rate I'm going, I'm going to have to say it again. THIS IS NOT FOR OTHER CIV PLAYERS. THIS IS GOING TO BE MADE FOR NEW PEOPLE TO ENJOY AND FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED TO BUY. Other people don't even have to take a second look if they don't want to.;) :lol:

Those who claim this is for a new audience and that Civ fans need not buy it are right. Those that say it won't affect Civ fans are probably wrong. Like it or not (and I don't) there is far more money in console games than PC games. Games for consoles can be fun (I do some gaming on the PS3, though I primarily use it as a Blue-ray player), but the games tend to be different than PC games--faster, more twitch based, less strategy, less thinking, more interested in rewarding the player than in challenging him or her. Aside from the fact that more effort gets placed on developing console games (resulting in fewer PC games), these concepts spill over into the PC games that do get made. A good example is Oblivion. Its predecessor, Morrowind, was a great RPG designed for the PC that was also ported to XBox. Oblivion, though a fun game to play, was a step back for PC RPG fans. In direct contrast to Morrowwind, it was developed primarily for XBox 360 and ported to the PC, which showed in its clunky PC UI. And the gameplay was far more twitch based than traditional PC RPGs. Similarly, WoW, though on the PC, ruined MMORGs by dumbing down EQ to appeal to the console crowd. Financially, it is understandable what Firaxis is doing. And I cannot guarantee that there will not be a worthy Civ 5--I sure hope there is. But I don't think anyone can really guarantee that Firaxis will spend the money for that project when it can turn a much bigger profit by producing dumbed down games.

May I ask - how long will last a game?

May I ask - how long will last a game?


I'm pretty sure they said around 2 to 3 hours a game.:( ;)

It sounds like Battle For Middle Earth 2.

It sounds like Battle For Middle Earth 2.

How does it sound like BFME II?:confused: :confused: I don't think so because CivRev is a turn-based game while BFMEII is a RTS game.:confused:
Please say why.:confused:

I'm pretty sure they said around 2 to 3 hours a game.:( ;) Yet they also said after adding everything in it probably be more like 4-5 hour game.

Really? where did it say that. I'm not really following CivRev too much so I probably missed the news release.;) :D

A good game if you travel with bus. Not a serious game, thought!

i think that PC gamers are such elitists that any game that was born/spawned on the PC must NEVER. EVER. EVER. make it to a console, or in their eyes it will demean gaming because of all the "kiddies" and "idiots" will play it and think "Durrrrgh PC's Are ST00pid"

I'm a Console Gamer, i think the general amount of hate towards console gamers is disgusting, if you don't like Civ Rev, go back to your Civ 2 Board.

/Rant

there is far more money in console games than PC games
Not true. Last year more PC games were sold than all console games combined.

i think that PC gamers are such elitists that any game that was born/spawned on the PC must NEVER. EVER. EVER. make it to a console, or in their eyes it will demean gaming because of all the "kiddies" and "idiots" will play it and think "Durrrrgh PC's Are ST00pid"

I'm a Console Gamer, i think the general amount of hate towards console gamers is disgusting, if you don't like Civ Rev, go back to your Civ 2 Board.

/Rant

I think you're just going to make them all madder. I play console games and even though I like Civ a WHOLE lot better, console games are ok.;)

Not true. Last year more PC games were sold than all console games combined.
Where did you hear that?

Video games far outsell PC games every year...

Jon

Where did you hear that?

PC Gamer, a very serious PC-magazine.

Video games far outsell PC games every year...

Jon
Where did you hear that? :mischief:

Swedishguy

PC Games

A wiki link. Now my argument is undefeatable.

PC Gamer, a very serious PC-magazine.

Where did you hear that? :mischief:

Swedishguy

PC Games

A wiki link. Now my argument is undefeatable.
I'm not sure what in that wiki link you're pointing to...

In any case, THIS is from Video Game:

The NPD Group tracks computer and video game sales in the United States. It reported that:

* Console and portable software sales: $6.2 billion, up 8% from 2003[30]
* Console and portable hardware and accessory sales: $3.7 billion, down 35% from 2003[30]
* PC game sales: $1.1 billion, down 15% from 2006[31]
Now that doesn't give figures on games sold, but it's pretty clear what is doing better, considering console games made $6.2 billion and PC games made only $1.1 billion. Not only that, but the numbers are increasing for video games and decreasing for PC games.

I'm not sure what in that wiki link you're pointing to...

In any case, THIS is from Video Game:


Now that doesn't give figures on games sold, but it's pretty clear what is doing better, considering console games made $6.2 billion and PC games made only $1.1 billion. Not only that, but the numbers are increasing for video games and decreasing for PC games.
That's from the United States only.

That's from the United States only.
So you think that in the rest of the world PC games do so much better to not only sell evenly with console games, but to make up for how much further behind they are in the US? In Japan almost the ENTIRE market is console games... almost no PC games are sold there. And that's a huge market. PC games do pretty well in Europe, but so do console games. PC games certainly don't sell many times better there than console games. There's just no evidence that points to PC games selling near as well as console games. Other than a small blurb in a magazine, which is biased anyways... what's the name again? ;) There's a reason why everyone is always claiming the PC games industry is "dying."

Why are so many people down on Civ Revolutions? It's a different game meant to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd.
A number of possible, even probable, answers to your question have been raised in this thread already so I will not rehash any of them (specifically, anyway). Personally, I think it comes down to something as with almost anything else in life: a fear of the unknown.

That is to say, Civ developed natively on and for consoles is an unknown to the public and only becoming known in recent months to its developers even.

Agree w/ above.

Anyone who's a Simcity fan might know about what's happening with Simcity Societies: a similar "branch" off of the franchise tree. While most hardcore fans were appalled by the "simplification/ elimination of game concepts," I personally find the game to be quite satisfactory. In fact, when going back to SC4, 3000, and 2000, laying pipes and planning police and fire radii is kind of boring and tedious. So why not just dump it? That being said, many fun concepts (city ordinances, taxes, economic conditions, etc) are just _gone_.

Same thing with Arena to Daggerfall to Morrowind to Oblivion: "simplification/ elimination" consistently led to, for me, a more streamlined experience (after a touch of UI modding, of course:mischief:) Sometimes a good thing gets canned (Morrowind is arguably a more lush environment), but that's just how the cookie crumbles.

Again, I think we all know this isn't Civ5, but I suspect there'll be a few "simplifications/ eliminations" of concepts that many will prefer.

[PS- Civ 1 is still the best, for the record:D]

Nothin wrong with console Tekken is wicked fun playin with a group of buds.

ITs this game that is a real shame. If they wanted to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd they could have made more alteration in historic realism to release civ in the classroom thus further educate not degenerate its name. They could have improved kids mind not weakened them

IN school I played a serious version of simcity (pc) I liked it and then bought the console version for Super Nes. SAme thing could have happend here. THe kid would have fallen back to civ4 on PC as the kide fun version compared to lisenced schoool civ. THe harcore fans would have taken it in as awesome and an improvement to the series thus promoting fan loyalty, not like this seperation fueled from spirilin down format.


They failed when they ignored the potential as a tool to be sold to school and hereby improving the integrity to the name and hence sales to home use to. They instead said we dumb it down to make a buck. They failed this seriies but who saw it coming when some faceless corp digested this classic game manufatureer?

Nothin wrong with console Tekken is wicked fun playin with a group of buds.

ITs this game that is a real shame. If they wanted to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd they could have made more alteration in historic realism to release civ in the classroom thus further educate not degenerate its name. They could have improved kids mind not weakened them

IN school I played a serious version of simcity (pc) I liked it and then bought the console version for Super Nes. SAme thing could have happend here. THe kid would have fallen back to civ4 on PC as the kide fun version compared to lisenced schoool civ. THe harcore fans would have taken it in as awesome and an improvement to the series thus promoting fan loyalty, not like this seperation fueled from spirilin down format.


They failed when they ignored the potential as a tool to be sold to school and hereby improving the integrity to the name and hence sales to home use to. They instead said we dumb it down to make a buck. They failed this seriies but who saw it coming when some faceless corp digested this classic game manufatureer?

If Civ was availible in the classroom, I'd never have gotten any work done.

If Civ was availible in the classroom, I'd never have gotten any work done.

Ive seen two teachers from USA post in the forums sayin they used civ3 as the learning module

Then this happended "History Canada" Civ in school Nation wide scale

All this was done using a 2004 peice of software . They could have used less resources then they poured into Rev to turn a far greater profit instead. Why they would dwarf the G8 county's (Canada)+Breakaway Games(maker of Civ3 Conquests) joint project. Imagine improved realism/faster, better performace on wide range of computers thanks to learning off the mistakes made from civ4.

Each Country's special learning mod would focus on thier history through a set of scenarios and focused random map mods that use all the tribes/cultures that made up that nation . Also having a more broad world perspective available for world history would be included.

IMPORTANT!! : All new flexablity to custum graphics using more distict cultural flavours, Faster pedia in easy to read links and printable tect, Most crucial is the additon of more details for integrity of complex learning by realistic simulation. (even a 50% more options added to the old civ3 editer would do it if these guys could put toghter a classroom worthy project before).
Thay could have revamped n' expanded the civ3 format editer, screw PYTHON. THis way teachers not programmers could refine a certin lesson to thier wishes. Heck even have it linked to laptops in the class, low spec based on improved civ3 2d, (http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=167727&d=1200581619) would mean more junker computers could run this type of deeper civ3 setup (yet still more graphicly pleasing for candy junkies

I could go on but just look at the postive response using straight jacket civ3format. This is hardle flexable enough to provide worth while lessons. Yet its being done today as speak . Not by only a few thousand like some might think. Taketwo sold 100000 copys for this project!!!
(read on as teachers clamour for more copies after the intial hundred thou and pre distributed are gobbled up)

Now Think what they could do if they had a source code nevermind a overhauled product . Schools are a massive market with a chance to trickle in more sales from intrested students and even teachers. This is the only reputable game that ever had a chance to made this market work work since simcity turned a tidy profit(Board of Ed gave more then the average console game could hope for back then).

AFter you hear all this potential to improve minds and make a ton of money doing it INstead you realize they choose to mock the kids and give em dumbed down arcade garbage they can rot with instead of doing their homework


As relayed by Marea Olafson, a Saskatchewan history teacher, member of the Saskatchewan Council of Social Sciences and the first teacher to introduce HistoriCanada to her students:

OK, so I have Mark (names have been changed to protect the innocent), a grade 9 student playing the game. Here are some comments that he has made to make me laugh and love this game:

“I was making peace with everyone and twice I was attacked!”

My question to him was who he was playing as. His answer: a native tribe.

Then he was asking me what the Great Peace was.

The first night he played for a couple of hours and then got up early to play it before school.

He said that "it is a game of strategy and it really makes you think…I’m loving it!!!!"

He has other students wanting to play the game and he is going to share as well

Thanks again - I am really excited to use this with my second semester class of grade 12s come the end of January.

The first night he played for a couple of hours and then got up early to play it before school.
This sounds like my grade 7 class . We would fight to get in class early an play some educatinal game like Carmen Sandiago or Sim city. Lunch time use was another hot commidty durin winter in Northern Canada. The schools libray also had copies we could get on but the class competion was feirce cuz high scores were kept and of course this was of biggest importance.

Holy Crap These fools blew it big time!. Now more teachers/Parents will see thier kids playin Civ on the console and figure it to be another mind rot videogame, thus blowin off any support for future collaberation with massive Gov Education contracts . Just look how much they made on Civ3 through Canada's board of Ed.
I wonder how long it will take Rev to battle throught the haters and convince more then the 110 000 'private custumers', the 'Educational Civ' mangaged to sell using one single swipe!.
Gov tenders are brought in unpromtedexcept in the Nations Senate (http://www.historicanada.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23) Taketwo turns a easy buck without huge ad expenses..
In fact, Canda paid for their advertising in the form of newly established creds in the feirce educational sector. This was develped with a weaker, less flexable, less attractive design!. Still the kids didn't mind. They were so starving for interactive lessons they loved the limited civ3 format, as you see when siftin through tons of post giving thanks

So TakeY\Two was in great shape to capilize on other education projects using better design suited to be sold around the world with various age groups . Heck they could have invested the money normaly spent on ads to carve out more details or add more historic scenarios to capture a postion as leading supplier in this luctrative market.
IT was possable! The Civ brand had worked its way into position of being tailered or improved(in my mind overall ) to suit the educational market. So why rather did Taketwo use a brand they freshly bought, degrade its posture in the eyes of its core market, ruin its expansion into the most promising and complimenting areas, then sell the dumbed down or 'striped' version to an already crowded and more action geared console end. Please anyone!! Is this not a f^&&**@ joke? !!

... Dam counting all the rich countries that were prospective clients and all sales the company could not have hoped to garner in similar volumes with otherwise saggy Civ Rev prodution, It seems they failed shareholders so badly it frightning. Nevermind the familar market they could have reaped praise and driven more sales from at this time. Who knows, mybe one or two strategy fans outside the network of class distribution would haved to forked out for the finnaly PLAYABLE WITHOUT LAG xpience? Hmmm hard to say.

Did some American officials not want to improve their kids education and after seeing Cananda involvment, choose to rip apart the most respectable and proven learning franchise in PC gaming just to match whats happening in their schools today, A complete dumbed down Civilization? Hey isn't Bono the big shareholder here? Hmm sounds about right then :D . A conspiracy theory thats worth looking into thats for sure! lol

Necro: Don't anyone have nothin to say bout this?.(NOt the bump the posts) I thought it made perfect sence . Rip at it at the very least :)

I started wondering the same thing: 'til i took a quick scan around the forums and noticed that it's more or less the same punks-- Xavier Von Erck, Catharsis, anonyjjang... --who go around and post crap like "this is CIV for the mentally challenged" or "I would chop off my right hand before I play this".

Go into the other Revo chats in the Civ IV forums and you find a more... diverse set of h8rs. Probably the same idiots who have been spamming the Civ IV forums about how Civ III is better.

But my curiousity about both groups-- the Civ III lovers and the Civ Revo h8rs-- are two quesitons:

1) Don't you like multiplayer? Cause until Civ IV, MP was plain ugly, and I would look forward to Revo solely because it won't be on gamespy!

2) Why do you fear the future? If you're such luddites, shouldn't you just stay away from computers? Why do you trust the "internets", this shady "series of tubes"?

I personally find it ironic that anyone would bash Civ IV, saying III has more strategy. This couldn't be farther from the truth. In Civ III, the game was simply a land grab. Whoever gets the most cities wins! In Civ IV, that is not always the case. Also, people need to stop bashing Civ Rev until it actually comes up, and they play it for themselves!

ISn't the whole land grab thing in the early days of man kinda imporantant though?. EAch turn in the game at that point reps about 50 years so ya you should be focused on grabin a bit free realestate.

I guess you hate that kinda famous game risk for the early land grab? Thing is many more like risk. CIv4 is more the 'Game of LIfe' with lots of cute popup 3d features to play around and look at

Hey anyway USA did this disgraceful land grab tactic . Same with Russia and CHina. They sit pritty today. HUh? Ya but Civ4 and ten city civs all the way..lol

ISn't the whole land grab thing in the early days of man kinda imporantant though?. EAch turn in the game at that point reps about 50 years so ya you should be focused on grabin a bit free realestate.

Yes, it is very important, but not as important as it was in Civ3.

I guess you hate that kinda famous game risk for the early land grab? Thing is many more like risk. CIv4 is more the 'Game of LIfe' with lots of cute popup 3d features to play around and look at

Risk is nowhere near as complex as Civ3 or Civ4. You cannot compare the two the way you are comparing them.

Hey anyway USA did this disgraceful land grab tactic . Same with Russia and CHina. They sit pritty today. HUh? Ya but Civ4 and ten city civs all the way..lol

Civ is a game, real life is not. Russia is a, frankly, poor excuse for a nation right now, suffering a population decline and a crumbled economy. China is not truly any better off - but it could be if it moved away from communism.
Some could argue America does not 'sit pritty' [sic] today, either.

I think a lot of people are overlooking the best part of Civ Rev. Its coming out on a handheld! A Civ game you can take with you wherever you go. That Rocks! :cool:

And its not even going to replace the old Civ games. If you like the old ones kep playing them. I'm certainly going to. They're still going to make Civ 5 for the computer. Civ Rev isn't replacing Civ 5 its just another bonus game we're getting.

"Let's take the greatest PC game of all time and put training wheels on it because we at Firaxis think all console idiots are dumb who can't handle the real experience!"

Dude, Civ4 is far from the greatest PC game of all time. At Gamerankings it's #11, and that's not even counting old games like StarCraft and X-COM. Have some sense.

For example, take PC Zone's Top 10 PC Games of all time, which were the results of a 2006 poll.

1. Deus Ex
2. Half-Life 2
3. Civilization IV
4. The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind
5. Half-Life
6. Rome: Total War
7. System Shock 2
8. DOOM
9. Battlefield 2
10. The Secret of Monkey Island

Granted, these guys should even be crucified for forgetting about games like StarCraft.

Those who claim this is for a new audience and that Civ fans need not buy it are right. Those that say it won't affect Civ fans are probably wrong. Like it or not (and I don't) there is far more money in console games than PC games. Games for consoles can be fun (I do some gaming on the PS3, though I primarily use it as a Blue-ray player), but the games tend to be different than PC games--faster, more twitch based, less strategy, less thinking, more interested in rewarding the player than in challenging him or her. Aside from the fact that more effort gets placed on developing console games (resulting in fewer PC games), these concepts spill over into the PC games that do get made. A good example is Oblivion. Its predecessor, Morrowind, was a great RPG designed for the PC that was also ported to XBox. Oblivion, though a fun game to play, was a step back for PC RPG fans. In direct contrast to Morrowwind, it was developed primarily for XBox 360 and ported to the PC, which showed in its clunky PC UI. And the gameplay was far more twitch based than traditional PC RPGs. Similarly, WoW, though on the PC, ruined MMORGs by dumbing down EQ to appeal to the console crowd. Financially, it is understandable what Firaxis is doing. And I cannot guarantee that there will not be a worthy Civ 5--I sure hope there is. But I don't think anyone can really guarantee that Firaxis will spend the money for that project when it can turn a much bigger profit by producing dumbed down games.

This is extremely wrong. First of all the best console games are filled with diabolical puzzles and cringy bosses. Just play a Mario or Zelda or Metroid game and you'll see what I'm talking about. And then don't forget about the seriousness in more mature games like Halo. And then play a God of War or Splinter Cell or Resident Evil game and you'll see not just action everywhere, but also you have to use your brain to avoid yourself getting killed and defeat the enemies and bosses. Consoles are where the future is. Previously I always got frustrated playing Civilization IV because I had to deal with llllllllllllllooooooonnnnnnnnnngggggg loading times plus a huge slowdown in the modern era. At least in Zelda and Metroid games I know when I've accomplished something and I can feel happy about it, especially after I've been stuck in this one area for a while. And with Civilization it pretty much took me two hours just to get maybe 10 turns done in the modern era, whereas in Super Mario Galaxy I could always get something accomplished 15 minutes.

Sure this maybe proving your case, but console games are more fun, and that's what games are for. I mean, could you imagine a Mario platformer on the PC?

Also, Sid said that this is the game he's been dying to make. That signifies that the Civilization series, despite the ESRB always giving it and E or E10+, has gotten to geared towards adults with a lot of time to kill. That has been the Civilization series' main problem, and Civ4 did away with it maybe 50%, and CivRev will do away with it 100%.

ISn't the whole land grab thing in the early days of man kinda imporantant though?. EAch turn in the game at that point reps about 50 years so ya you should be focused on grabin a bit free realestate.

I guess you hate that kinda famous game risk for the early land grab? Thing is many more like risk. CIv4 is more the 'Game of LIfe' with lots of cute popup 3d features to play around and look at

Hey anyway USA did this disgraceful land grab tactic . Same with Russia and CHina. They sit pritty today. HUh? Ya but Civ4 and ten city civs all the way..lol

If land is all that matters, Canada would be a more important country than the United States. The truth is, at least half the countries in little Europe are as our more important than Canada. -and all of the European countries together are not as big as just Canada! If population is all the matters, why aren't China and India superpowers? If landmass is all that matters, like I already said before, Canada. Also, Russia.

Even though the Persian empire was MUCH larger than the greek empire, the Greek empire managed to keep themselves from getting invaded.

The chinese and Japanese have been at it for years. In terms of landmass and population, China should be able to just kill Japan anytime they want. Yet they can't. But in Civ III's book, its all about landgrabs and perhaps, population.

In Civ IV, the game is not just a landgrab and such. Much more strategic elements are in the game.

Landgrabbing isn't important, not in real-life or in civ. In civ 4 they made this clear by the fact that you can ruin your economy by grabbing too much territory, of course if you do it well you can be big in space and economic power.

In real-life, i could name at least two empires that started off really small, but managed to invade and conquer large amount of the world through scientific knowledge.

Same thing with Arena to Daggerfall to Morrowind to Oblivion: "simplification/ elimination" consistently led to, for me, a more streamlined experience (after a touch of UI modding, of course:mischief:) Sometimes a good thing gets canned (Morrowind is arguably a more lush environment), but that's just how the cookie crumbles.

Well, Morrowind is actually MORE detailed than the previous Elder Scrolls Games....

I won't get into debate. ITs all good the civ thing.
I think some like fast games some like big games. THe land lottery at the start of civ3 is always a toss up always fresh even always risky as you can be caught pants down in xpanse phase by a nation squeezed out of the sweets(thus switched to military early)

In land lottery phase, Time is represented taking place in milleniums so don't see a realism problem here/ Tribes go on the move and culture binds. It works good with no magic walls to seperate intruders.
Another civ's settler should be able to walk past your tribes tents (culture lines) to set up digs in land your tryin to pass off as your distingished national boundry in sparely populated land around 2000bc.
Cv3 you fight early on for whats yours not apease with the diplo modifiers to shut the door on rival expansion (personal pref)
Civ3 makes for some drawn out action stratagy needin alliances smart logistics, blah blah.. (or how is it not a strategy game compared to civ4)

Civ4 makes for some feirce arcade action. With 10 city empires a civ can be taken out quick( using right rock pap sciss cobo). Thats intense I guess. Civ Rev looks to expand on this using quick n nimble arcade style(civ4 was bogged down slow arcade style for most rigs)

I largely aggree with T.A. Jones, and as proof that the Apocolyspe is nigh, Bill 3000 as well.

One of my favorite parts about Civ (and most of the other games I love, like AoK, AoE III, etc) is the ability to, once I'm bored with pwning it aeveral dozen times, mod it to my liking... Something that is very limited with consoles (although they are starting to add that facet in there, such as with Soul Calibur III's awesome "Create a Soul" mode).

Like I said before, if people were to just think of Civ Rev as "Civilization Fantasy Tactics" instead of Civ Proper, they wouldn't get so bent out of shape....

Civ is a game, real life is not. Russia is a, frankly, poor excuse for a nation right now, suffering a population decline and a crumbled economy.

Don't believe everything CNN tells ya. post patriot act has slighty fewer independent news outlets. Stay awake or You got one hella surprise coming..
Russia is so bold to hire us(canucks) to work on their projects, that is underground "bases"

And you country seems a lil nervous according to the congressional reports


From: Congressional Record
Yamantau Mountain(wiki entry(empty))

Sense of Congress.--In light of the findings in subsection (a), it is the sense of Congress that--

(1) the Russian government should provide to the United States a written explanation on the principal and secondary purposes of the Yamantau Mountain project, specifically identifying the intended end user and explaining the heavy investment in that project;

(2) the Russian government should allow a United States delegation, including officials of the executive branch, Members of Congress, and United States experts on underground facilities, to have full access to the Yamantau Mountain project to inspect the facility and all rail-served buildings in the southern and northern settlements located near Yamantau; and

(3) the Russian government should direct senior officials responsible for the Yamantau Mountain project to explain to such a United States delegation the purpose and operational concept of all completed and planned underground facilities at Yamantau Mountain in sufficient detail (including through the use of drawings and diagrams) to support a high-confidence judgment by the United States delegation that the design is consistent with the official explanations

This base has been compared to a giant anthill with over 100000 workers going steady for over decade underground now.
Why build such crazy underground crap and why is this the 1st you all have heard of this! I think Russia's abiltys are grossly under-exadurated.

Wait till they gets their hands around the petro exchange and sqeeze with the rupie or Euro. Try looking into Irans' Oil bourse..Russia's buddy, they banned the doller from oil sales. WHo tried that last?..think Iraq mid2000 before the fall.

SO How can Iran stand up to you/us guys doing the same tactic that got saddam killed and his Euro's for oil exchange reverted back to USA doller when tanks stole his rigs?? ..try with Russian support. and hows the buck doing these days while the 3rd largest supply on tap bans USA bucks on the barrel?
YOu never even heard of an Iran OIl bourse til now. CNN don't mention it much but IT will get worse with Russia and its plentyful reserves becoming more powerful by the day.
If its going dowb to petro warfare, Russia has been manouvering and they are set to win. (A lot of it is 'location location'..I mean without barging in rapin n killin an upsetin the neighbours, type 'location location' lol)

Read OPEC and Russian influence in letting other currencies trade on the petro exchange

Russia can't possibly be lagging in the Modern age. I mean, look at their UB!

Russia can't possibly be lagging in the Modern age. I mean, look at their UB!

lol:lol: I think if you mocking Russia'a subrock station you should get it right.

THey were the first to build a great wonder thats all. Say how come Civ dosn't let you build multi billion doller underground nuclear retreats/nerve centers?
WHats the benifit? how bout massive production bonus to your city even after a direct nuke strike.
Or, in civ4's case, after 10000 direct nuke strikes

BAck to the point. Take2 sold over 100 000 copies of civ3 in 2007 for educational purposes. Add that with the sales from the consumer base(atleast 10000 copies more ) and that means civ3 probably outsold civ4 in 2007!!

Making a educational civ for the clasroom network with worldwide custumabilty (EX: Norway programers pay take2 to deeped lessons on their history like Canada paid Take 2 to do the the same with their "History Canada" civ3 project

The home version could be sold to scrap up a few hundred thousand copies in sales aswell, but the real money is in educational contracts .

No other game is talked about as being used in the classroom as much as civ3 is(since simcity and Carmen sandiago)
So if civ3 was giving a open source for incresing detail , historical realism and flexabilty to accomplish this, IT would work.
Remember CIv3 could be played on any old computer while new civ versoins can't

MY post above go into much more detail why this would have worked but now this candy version on console gives the teachers who evalute the choice of taking civ to the class more of a mind rot mentaily since its playing on the same system Vice city runs on

So you're saying Firaxis should quit making games and make educational programs instead?

Because it seems like you're getting all steamed up because CivRev is being made as a game instead of a teaching aid.

God forbid they make games for gamers instead of teachers.

i agree with you Oatse, for once. We want games, if i wanted a history lesson, i'd get myself a textbook.

So you're saying Firaxis should quit making games and make educational programs instead?

Because it seems like you're getting all steamed up because CivRev is being made as a game instead of a teaching aid.

God forbid they make games for gamers instead of teachers.

YA steamed I should not be. Making both would seem to be the key. Now you got a game for the mature student and also the pre schoolers for them to come up on

but ya they could have made a bundle in classroom market and kept integrity of the origanal franchise at hand. NO other game had this oppertunity especially followin history canada collaberation but you would have had to read that Scoolboard's Civ website to have any indication of what promise lays in the project. (100 000 copies man, just sayin )

I'll drop it. Thanks for the response.

I don't Firaxis is currently making a game for Pre Schoolers right now, unless that's another one of those "I need dark and realistic graphics to feel like a mature adult! Anything else is clearly made for kids! E for Everyone doesn't exist!" things that always spring up here.

Civ3's graphics were pretty bright and colorful but I never saw anyone calling it "Civilization: Baby edition". Civ1 and Civ2 are clearly games that didn't take themselves seriously that much (Like the newspapers from Civ1, or the advisers from civ1 and Civ2) but noone calls them kiddie games. Sid Meier's Pirates is more bright and colorful then any of the Civ games (Unless you're playing the black and white 1987 version) yet noone calls it a children's game. The only game they made that actually is dark and mature is SMAC/SMAX.

I don't Firaxis is currently making a game for Pre Schoolers right now, unless that's another one of those "I need dark and realistic graphics to feel like a mature adult! Anything else is clearly made for kids! E for Everyone doesn't exist!" things that always spring up here.

Civ3's graphics were pretty bright and colorful but I never saw anyone calling it "Civilization: Baby edition". Civ1 and Civ2 are clearly games that didn't take themselves seriously that much (Like the newspapers from Civ1, or the advisers from civ1 and Civ2) but noone calls them kiddie games. Sid Meier's Pirates is more bright and colorful then any of the Civ games (Unless you're playing the black and white 1987 version) yet noone calls it a children's game. The only game they made that actually is dark and mature is SMAC/SMAX.

WHats it got to do with graphics? I talk of levels in depth in historical accuracy. Sure using better, more graphical represention makes higher grade selection+ realism improvements to org civ3 format but thats something 'preschollers'(Rev fanbs) can't or don't want to comprehend when they play their arcade game

EDucational civ would have more emphisis on raw history simulation still opening the door to making your own reality as before, as long as you learn about the humanitys more as you explore every open door.(add many more open doors)

IS it that unrealistic to see a spruced up civ3 that operates smooth in the classroom average computers?. WHy was Sim earth /sim city given combined million hours across the world in the class? CUz the class liked it and they came out with something. Sceanrios in civ3 are less time then world epics and thats the main tool used in Canadian civ history class designed by 2nd Xpak designer and US mil strategy sim contracter, Take 2.
Each nation can have TAke2 work on their own history plus have the world history random epic come in the box
(this gets sold to world with selrction of other country's history scenarios included ala Conquests) )

Trust me Crazyier business moves have happened and AGain, you havn't seen History canada mod so really no point talkin ta ya . THe sales from that 100 000 add a few more countries all using a stepped up format based on a improved civ3 (more BIC options for realism better and varity) and you have 400 000 copies take it to home front where die hard stratgy fans are eagerly awaiting in depth history sim civ title and off go another 100000 copies.

IT ill never happen I know but so you all see the venture that will not be could turn out costly and had it been expanded on the "Can History", it could have reversed fortunes for the beliguered franchise, for me thats easy to see.

Civ3 isn't that realistic and historically accurate either, Tanks vs Spearmen anyone?

Why do you have to be a pre schooler to enjoy a game because it's fun instead of because of it's educational value?

You're basically proposing that Sid Meier should quit making games and instead make educational software. I'd rather Firaxis make games instead of history teaching software that none of us will ever get to use.

You're basically proposing that Sid Meier should quit making games and instead make educational software.

WHat do ya think civ games to date have been? They have been both. Educational and games (this is what teachers say not me..want quotes? read the link I put up)

WHy not take advange of that rep and refine for educational secter. Lots money in that sector up for grab internationally on s renewable basis.
ON the other hand,compared to huge contracts spanning various natiions, you got a one time shot with Not so much room to manouver in overcrowed console market where Firexis has to dumb down your product and tarnish its integrity to fit in with main fan base built up impression of stratgy on the console platform.

Heres whats going on seeing you are in dark
fact you think Civ has no chance to advance in this lucractive sector is laughable. All they had to do was move with the momentuem. Anyway you got what you wanted.
Now Go along and play with your shiney toys ;)

Civ3 isn't that realistic and historically accurate either, Tanks vs Spearmen anyone?
I guess you didn't hear the 6 times I mention an improved civ3 format :)
THe reason I mention civ3 was for it quick pedia links and playabilty n' fast scenario response on large number of computers. Imagine civ4 on the average classroom computer :lol:
A reverse engineering route where civ3 model was expanded improved for historic versitlity aproachin unique nationalistic outlines. This, and running better all the while with better graphics for the kids to stay intrested and also it would need to be even easier to modify for teachers conductin online course outlines. (your basic check the box editer approach blown up atleast 25%-35% for flexabilty/realism/ individualsim for each sceanerio integrity )

HOw much this console game cost to advertise? Just add that money to a better editer based on civ3 tech and there ya go, realism through greater flexabilty. Best civ game yet..OH but it not oatmeal! um,,I mean. its not educatinal we promise! lol

Is it better to have enhanced simularity to historic conditions n' eras or is that a bad thing because we learn more thus some say not fun? LIkewise, if its to fun while you learn does that make it a bad learning tool cuz your gaming around? Cmon man. Civ found the balance and they where the candidate who should have blown up the lucrative industy at a time when interactive learing is at a maxime threshold, ripe for the right type of company with the rep for reworking learing with a G8's Country Educational program fresh from the oven to take it to the next level of global distribution in the classroom ..hooked civix

The money is the most lucrative for those who suceed in securing tenders SO how many companies had the same chance? Now to think they choose put out drizzle for the kiddies to rot thier mind n time and instead.

Opportunty cost unbelieble but Hey, a games a game you say. Glad IM not shareholder anyway

Those copies of Civ 3 were donated for free... (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6171872.html) nobody made any money off of them. Doesn't sound like a very good business investment to me, that whole "giving stuff away for no money" thing. ;)

WHat do ya think civ games to date have been? They have been both. Educational and games (this is what teachers say not me..want quotes? read the link I put up)

WHy not take advange of that rep and refine for educational secter. Lots money in that sector up for grab internationally on s renewable basis.
ON the other hand,compared to huge contracts spanning various natiions, you got a one time shot with Not so much room to manouver in overcrowed console market where Firexis has to dumb down your product and tarnish its integrity to fit in with main fan base built up impression of stratgy on the console platform.

Heres whats going on seeing you are in dark
fact you think Civ has no chance to advance in this lucractive sector is laughable. All they had to do was move with the momentuem. Anyway you got what you wanted.
Now Go along and play with your shiney toys ;)

So you're trying to insult me by saying "LOL! Look at him! He wants to play a game to have fun! Go and play with your shiney toys."

You sound like the type of person who doesn't play video games, you sound like the type of person who looks down on those who play video games. What are you even doing here?

So you're trying to insult me by saying "LOL! Look at him! He wants to play a game to have fun! Go and play with your shiney toys."

You sound like the type of person who doesn't play video games, you sound like the type of person who looks down on those who play video games. What are you even doing here?

Weird Here I am thinkin your calling me wacked out for thinkin a great game could still be a great learning expierence!
Strange how we perceive is it not?

Sadly everything else you said bout me bullying or hating games can be smacked out and I believe what I stuck with throughout stands as reasonable without a doubt.

They could have come up with a great plan to get in a very valuable market with an improved product for the Civ legacy and improved Ed at for minds of the compter interative generation. INstead they took the easy, even less profitable way i dumbing down Civ to oblivion

IMO of course :)

Those copies of Civ 3 were donated for free... (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6171872.html) nobody made any money off of them. Doesn't sound like a very good business investment to me, that whole "giving stuff away for no money" thing. ;)
Thats cuz you can't see into the future of stategic intitative, er your not a visionary :)
THere was a motive. UNless you think the board happened to be drunk at the time n said here have at these 100 000 boxes and begone kiddies

Wierd how BreakAway was invloved with the 1st major educational contract aswell. They did make a nice game before History Canada called Civ 3 Conquests...hmm hundred thou distribution, quality sub contracter, leavin nothing to chance for a prime precedent it seems.

Course We all know things change including CEO's and any visions they had. NOw we have new CEO's and a great console civ!

NAh who me kiddin you guys know everything lol

Do you have any experience in game marketing or economics? Because you sound like a rookie who thinks he has it all figured out. Games made for the sole purpose of education simply don't sell as well as games that are made to be games (Imagine that.) For every Carmen Sandiego there are millions of games like Mario is Missing.

If what you're suggesting was the simple and best way to make profits then don't you think everyone else would of figured it out by now? Hell, the History Channel is making games made solely to educate too, and guess what? They sell like crap and aren't even fun.

But go ahead, berate them for making a game that's meant to be fun instead of trying your REVOLUTIONARY NEW IDEA that has never been tried before, no Sirree!

And for Christs sake quit it with the "Lol console games are dumbed down and kiddy Durr!" stuff!

Was Carmen Sandiago sole purpose to educate?. What about sim city or sim Earth? They were in every school in Canada.

Today kids are even more inclined to use computers to learn and even more today they need to be stiimulated with intresting game facets in education process (material)

I gave you examples( to many for what you brought.. whining) of teachers sayin civ3 ..civ3 the old game was a great leaning tool.
SO you say a improved product of this nature wouldn't be a good investment?
.....
Oh ya, and Rev is kiddie civ, you soother sucker lol...kidding :D Don't cry now.

Just because something is on a school computer doesn't mean it's only for education. Sim City and Sim Earth were made to be games, some people just use them for education. Think of it like books. Some books are made to educate and some are made for entertainment or to tell a story. Many schools have Lord of the Rings in their school library's, that doesn't make Lord of the Rings an educational book. Some schools have Civ3 on their computer, that doesn't mean Civ3 is made to educate as much as it means some people use it that way, just like the LoTR's example.


Oh ya, and Rev is kiddie civ, you soother sucker lol...kidding :D Don't cry now.

You have to be some kind of troll, noone is this immature and repulsive.

We might as well forget about the whole series entirely if this happens.

Russia stuff

Population is important. Economy is good. Russian population is free fall. Russian Economy is sky dive.

We might as well forget about the whole series entirely if this happens.

If what happens? CIv Rev is happening eventully.

Just because something is on a school computer doesn't mean it's only for education. Sim City and Sim Earth were made to be games, some people just use them for education. .


SO you think this holds up? :D
books were made to be fun just some people got smart while reading them lol.........you jerk :goodjob:

No, I meant that if this huge "fight" over whether Civ3 is better than Civ4 or not and why CivRev is the subject of lots of hate continues, then I'd rather be out playing Metroid Prime or something.

No, I meant that if this huge "fight" over whether Civ3 is better than Civ4 or not and why CivRev is the subject of lots of hate continues, then I'd rather be out playing Metroid Prime or something.

Wrong thread dude but Does that still go on? I hope my name still comes up from time to time

Im mearly stating it was a waste of resources. ANd Instead of playin Prime meteor You should be out priming for a job :)

T.A. Jones has spent the last two and a half years bashing Civ4 at every turn, endlessly proclaiming the superiority of Civ3. If you look at his posting history, you'll see that nearly all of those 3000+ posts have come in the Civ4 forums, constantly harping on one minor issue or another. He's an outright troll of the worst sort, and I would never use that term lightly.

So why am I not surprised that T.A. is back again, ripping yet another Civ game without ever having played it... You'll notice that his points don't make any sense whatsoever (Firaxis should remake Civ3 as an educational game?!?), but instead are simply thrown out to troll this topic and stir up controversy. As usual, this has worked: a dead thread has been revived, and the last two pages are full of replies to T.A.'s posts.

Since we don't have an "ignore user" feature at CivFanatics, my advice to everyone here would be to scroll past any and all of his posts. They all say the same thing: Civ3 is awesome, every other Civ game sucks - and so do you for liking them. It's pointless trying to debate with a closed mind, so don't bother.

T.A. Jones has spent the last two and a half years bashing Civ4 at every turn, endlessly proclaiming the superiority of Civ3. If you look at his posting history, you'll see that nearly all of those 3000+ posts have come in the Civ4 forums, constantly harping on one minor issue or another. He's an outright troll of the worst sort, and I would never use that term lightly.

So why am I not surprised that T.A. is back again, ripping yet another Civ game without ever having played it... You'll notice that his points don't make any sense whatsoever (Firaxis should remake Civ3 as an educational game?!?), but instead are simply thrown out to troll this topic and stir up controversy. As usual, this has worked: a dead thread has been revived, and the last two pages are full of replies to T.A.'s posts.

Since we don't have an "ignore user" feature at CivFanatics, my advice to everyone here would be to scroll past any and all of his posts. They all say the same thing: Civ3 is awesome, every other Civ game sucks - and so do you for liking them. It's pointless trying to debate with a closed mind, so don't bother.
THe worst sort? I though those were paid/sponsered posters?

Are you still sore from us( many others besides me) bashin the snore story proganda peice you did on civ4 and how it was the saviour/masterpeice you had the honour to work on, as you clamoured on you ripped civ3 from a to z.

Well sorry a few of us(few thousand) burst that bubble. I agree though, The one who hits with reality the most is often the enemy of the targets host. (promoters/tester turned public relation poster) So I touched on all the topics you were saying were so well done in your 'why civ4 rules and civ3 sucks' summery. THis makes me ignorable only to those who cant stand seeing thier ideas being recongnized for what they are, deplorable...as compared to what was scraped

On the topic of history why not give the link to are colourful conversation in the 'CIv3 sucks thread'
It can tell it certainly left you in great spirits.

If you like Civ3 so much then stop trolling in other forums. Let the players of Civ3 themselves hear your REVOLUTIONARY NEW IDEA in their own forum.

If you like Civ3 so much then stop trolling in other forums. Let the players of Civ3 themselves hear your REVOLUTIONARY NEW IDEA in their own forum.

WAit. I came here to bring my idea discussion near the forfront in which it revolved .Sadly a few civ4 branded followers brought up things that had nothing to do with my topic.
CIv3's engine works on most computers and civ4's dosn't. Thats where the comparison ties in and thats where it ends.

ONly a few posters from past debates who mybe had things they hadn't forgot returned with sour grapes to try n scour my point. IT still got through

The focus point invloved a proven approach and exciting direction in which the company could have chosen.
IT was simple "what if they chose the other road less traveled" topic.
It was supported and not contested so another tactic was tried..

Me admittidly, I quite enjoyed this myself, but fun had I guess, begin when the site's number one 'ream and repeat, anything to "legally cheat', civ3 Hall of fame champ came in.
This guy who helped tear apart the civ3 game to keep sane when going for more shame/fame HOF Leaderboard, (.1% of buyer play HOF) .. has the nerve to say IM to negative towards a civ project .

Lets see he made it his mission to post anti civ3 setiments all over the internet. INfact his proganda is used as main focal refrence for an entire thread " why do you still play civ3" posted in the civ3 forum!! by none other then admiring sulla fan Swein Forkbeard :lol:

Ya I guess Sulla knew he had a good audience when he unleashed his lil go ahead n hate T.A speech ;)


Allyou guys tried to do was tarnish the messenger for his past mention of obvious flaws with a game that had no busniess even being brought up in discussion
You don't agree with my idea to bad, you can take off ;) FOr one Its a better plan then trying to denounce it weakly as he has then after a sulla sub in, switch to hate mongering me over unrelation in game prefrence.

Hate mongering? People are being discriminated against now because they like certain games? Are there Halo fans curb stomping people for liking Civ3? Did someone burn a giant wooden four on your lawn because you like Civ3?

How come it's not hate mongering when you say only pre schoolers would like CivRev? That's like saying only greasy basement dwellers with ten year old computers like Civ3.

If you like Civ3 so much then stop trolling in other forums. Let the players of Civ3 themselves hear your REVOLUTIONARY NEW IDEA in their own forum.

WAit. I came here to bring my idea n' discussion near the forfront in which it revolved .Sadly a few civ4 branded followers brought up things that had nothing to do with my topic.

ONly a few posters from past debates who mybe had things they hadn't forgot returned with sour grapes. Civ3 runs on most computers and civ4 dosn't. Thats where the comparison ties in and thats where it ends.

The focus point invloved a proven approach and exciting direction in which the company could have chosen.
IT was simple "what if they chose the other road less traveled" topic.
It was supported and not contested so another tactic was tried..

Me admittidly, I quite enjoyed this myself, but the fun begin I guess, when the site's number one 'ream and repeat, anything to "legally cheat', civ3 Hall of fame champ came in.
This guy who helped tear apart the civ3 game, who was used to saying the word "editer" with shame( reason you ain't got one )ripped up the freedom from the masses who enjoyed it to keep his HOF posse sane without more cheap repeat feats for the creds on the Civ street.

Now they and multi play enjoy their chained down game with red everwhere on the way up the new civ4 HOF Leaderboard (.1% of buyer play HOF) ..n' he has the nerve to say IM to negative towards a civ project .He demolished a legacy for a vocal few.

Lets see he made it his mission to post anti civ3 setiments all over the internet. INfact his proganda is used as main focal refrence for an entire thread " why do you still play civ3" posted in the civ3 forum!! by none other then admiring sulla fan Swein Forkbeard :lol:

Ya I guess Sulla knew he had a good audience when he unleashed his lil go ahead n hate T.A speech ;)

ITs all silent on the civ4 supporter front on the Civ comparison I made dealing with performance needed to run the program on a school budget eqpt. SO because I focused on civ3 engine for solution, you dismiss and ignore my entire theme and point of veiw as now IM mearly obsessed with civ3 and going off on how great that game, not how great the harder road taken could have lead to more rewards
IS that how you expect this to end, with me looking silly? lol

Oh brother Comon kiddies lets do better then that

Allyou guys tried to do was tarnish the messenger for his past mention of obvious flaws with a game that had no busniess even being brought up in discussion
You don't agree with my idea to bad, you can take off ;) FOr one Its a better plan then trying to denounce it weakly as one here has or then, after a sulla sub in, switched to OT trolling over unrelated point of game prefrence.

You sound like one of those guys who refuses to accept that people can like things that you don't like without being paid off or being PR guys.

You're doing a pretty good job of looking silly BTW.

The reason it's so quiet on the "Civ4 front" is because noone honestly gives a **** besides you, you need to quit taking video game's so seriously, they're just games, not ideals worth fighting over.

You don't listen when people are talking to you, and when someone makes a point you can't counter you either ignore them or only quote and argue against the ones you can. You are the Bill O'Reilly of Civilization games.

What's the deal with Civ3? Back in 2001, you should have buzzed off and played Metal Gear Solid 2 or Final Fantasy X or Smash Bros. Melee or ICO or Rogue Squadron II or Advance Wars or Mario Kart or Halo or Conker or Grand Theft Auto III or Gran Turismo 3 or something. Now you should just go play Halo, Metroid, Zelda, Mario, Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Resident Evil, etc. instead of all this Civilization business.

And what's the deal with Civ being so highly ranked anyway? I can't get into Civ4 without forcing myself, and judging from reviews it's actually the least time consuming game in the series!

And what's the deal with Civ being so highly ranked anyway? I can't get into Civ4 without forcing myself, and judging from reviews it's actually the least time consuming game in the series!

Heresy I say. :D

I was thinking about a bunch of spin-offs for Civ instead of a new game altogether.

The reason it's so quiet on the "Civ4 front" is because noone honestly gives a **** besides you, you need to quit taking video game's so seriously, they're just games, not ideals worth fighting over.
And it appears we may have a heretic, I might add. :)

Okay, everyone calm down, or I will close this.

I started wondering the same thing: 'til i took a quick scan around the forums and noticed that it's more or less the same punks-- Xavier Von Erck, Catharsis, anonyjjang... --who go around and post crap like "this is CIV for the mentally challenged" or "I would chop off my right hand before I play this".


I don't have any grudge against anyone playing anything they enjoy.

I do worry, that given the expressed aims of Civ Revolutions being a simpler quicker game with shiny graphics that is intended to be playable quickly in an evening, and given no plans to port it to the PC in the foreseeable future, that Civ 5 will go in that direction.

In an ideal world, I would like to see Civ Rev on PC for people who like simpler quicker games with shiny graphics, and Civ 5 to have depth and detail and complexity and not to mess around with the shiny.


1) Don't you like multiplayer?


Actually, no. Not at all. Not even slightly. Time spent developing multiplayer is time spent on a feature I am never going to use, so from my perspective it's time wasted.

Before this thread is closed, I want to come back to the theme of this thread:

Post 1: Why are so many people down on Civ Revolutions? It's a different game meant to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd.I've played Civ since the original, and personally, I'm excited by this game. I realize it's not going to be the same depth as Civ IV. That's alright. Bejeweled isn't the same depth either, and I can still enjoy that on occasion as well...
If you don't like it, just ignore it and vote with your dollars, no need to spout hate. You add no value to the conversation by doing so.

Additionally to the reasons I gave in post 25 of this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5974324&postcount=25) there is one big "burning" fact for a lot of posters who criticize Civ 4 and now Civ Rev:

With the last final semi-patch, that was done for Civ 3, Firaxis frankly posted, that this is a semi-patch that must be uncompleted as they now are doing something better, that will satisfy all civers - Civ 4. Civ 4 didn´t satisfy all civers. The moralic duty by Firaxis and Take 2 to fix the bugs of Civ 3 and to make the game working as it was advertized and where they got our money for, was and is still open -especially as this firm additionally advertises with the good support for their customers (even with Civ Rev), what is not true in my eyes. Of course even in the Civ 4 forums at CFC there was pointed on the facts what civers don´t like about Civ 4 (and why Civ 4 was and is no reason to give only an uncompleted semi-patch for the customers of Civ 3).

Instead of solving their old moralic debts about Civ 3 and completing that unfinished last semi-patch for Civ 3 after Firaxis and Take 2 have finished Civ 4 and their expansions, they are now doing Civ Rev. Of course even with Civ Rev they get shown the known unsatisfying parts of that product and that this product is no substitute for not finishing their last official semi-patch for Civ 3.

So just to "ignore Civ Rev and vote with your dollars" in my eyes is not enough. The firms like Firaxis and Take 2 spend big sums in copy protection, but who helps all the small customers, who spend their 35 or more dollars and received a bugged product that even after lot of years is not getting fixed?

Civilization < Resident Evil, Warcraft, Zelda, Metroid, Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Mario, Metal Gear, Half-Life, Deus Ex, Pokemon, Elder Scrolls, StarCraft, WarCraft, Grand Theft Auto, Sim, Virtua Fighter, Tekken, Soulcalibur, etc.

What's the deal with Civ3? Back in 2001, you should have buzzed off and played Metal Gear Solid 2 or Final Fantasy X or Smash Bros. Melee or ICO or Rogue Squadron II or Advance Wars or Mario Kart or Halo or Conker or Grand Theft Auto III or Gran Turismo 3 or something. Now you should just go play Halo, Metroid, Zelda, Mario, Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Resident Evil, etc. instead of all this Civilization business.

And what's the deal with Civ being so highly ranked anyway? I can't get into Civ4 without forcing myself, and judging from reviews it's actually the least time consuming game in the series!
You should not be allowed on the internet. Just because IGN doesn't like 4x games doesn't mean they aren't good. Also, don't tell me what to play.

yeah swein, just because IGN or gamespot rated a game bad DOESN'T mean that it sucks, end of story............

I didn't say that they don't like 4x games, they scored Civ3 a 9.3/10 and Civ4 a 9.4/10. Does that sound like hate?

yeah swein, just because IGN or gamespot rated a game bad DOESN'T mean that it sucks, end of story............

No, but it does hint that 2K is racing towards the lowest common denominator in the name of the All Holy $ :rolleyes:

-Oz

StarCraft owns all strategy games; end of story.

starcraft's actually easier than total war for example.

At least Starcraft has a much better support for its customers as Firaxis and Take 2 give to the customers of the civ series.

Once I get some good strategies for surviving...

I'm still on the third mission, but the last time I had it I beat #5 and the fun ended there. Afterwards I might just engage in multiplayer with some friends, or, then again, SC2 is going to be out by Early 2009 by the very latest.

StarCraft and Civ4 are the best strategy games ever made, period. Oh, and maybe you could throw X-COM 1 an Company of Heroes in there, and possibly Rome: Total War.

Swein Forkbeard, you always should say, that this is your opinion. Others have another opinion, especially about Civ 4.

Some posts earlier you did write you can't get into Civ4 without forcing yourself. This doesn´t sound for having a lot of fun with Civ 4. I also had to force myself to play Civ 4 with these in my eyes modderunfriendly 3d graphics and the boring gameplay. Civ 3 would still be complete fun for me, if these anoying bugs Firaxis left to the customers since a lot of years would be fixed.

Please keep the discussion on-topic: The topic is Civ Revolutions. The topic is NOT a whole lot of other games.

I think Civ Rev will be a massive commercial success. And hopefully, that might just be enough to encourage one or two other (more reluctant) developers into coding their own tbs games for the consoles, and handhelds.

As for Civ Rev.....having Sid Meier's name above the title is more than sufficient endorsement for me that it's gonna be something special! :)

As for Civ Rev.....having Sid Meier's name above the title is more than sufficient endorsement for me that it's gonna be something special! :)

QFT..........

As for Civ Rev.....having Sid Meier's name above the title is more than sufficient endorsement for me that it's gonna be something special! :)

Looking on the final semi-patches for Civ 3 and Civ 4, for me this is not any longer the case. Both games also have the name of Sid Meier above the title. The same for Sid Meier´s Railroads flop.

The in my eyes conceptionel best title of the Civ series - Civ 2 - was mainly created by Brian Reynolds and Mick Uhl. No Sid Meier in it.

Well, CivRev will be interesting for sure, I always thought large-scale stratagy games couldn't be put on a console due to the whole mouse issue, but since Command&Conquer 3 and Battle for Middle Earth II it seems to be possible. I personally think that console is a good direction for Civ. For all the people who think it is cartoonish, hear me out. CivRev will be a whole new branch. Think of Civ4 and imagine it as a crossroads between CivIII and Rev. Now the PC branch can pick up where CivIII left off and console can pick up on the simplicity and intuitive nature of 4. (At least, I hope it will come to that, I want my PC stratagies to be uber complicated)

StarCraft owns all strategy games; end of story.

If starcraft owns all, how is Twilight at the top of ur list ?:lol:?
*please don't take offense!*

Twilight is an Adventure game.

Metroid kills Civ. So does Mario. So does StarCraft. So does Zelda. And, once I actually get to play it without any dumb interruptions, then so will Elder Scrolls.

:lol: haha, I understand completely It took forever to get my comp to run Oblivion, I even had to get a new grapics card :badcomp:

I solved it the easy way....just got it for the 360 :) no user mods, but no crazy upgrading of my computer either :)

I solved it the easy way....just got it for the 360 :) no user mods, but no crazy upgrading of my computer either :)

That was my solution to the problem as well, Thrallia. I got sick and tired of throwing money at PC upgrades, and saw buying a 360 as being an obvious solution to the problem. And yes, it was Oblivion that did it for me as well!

Needless to say my gaming habits have changed dramatically since then. And consequently, the old PC as it currently stands is only marginally ahead of Stephenson's Rocket in terms of technological advancement. But it can still handle Civ III and Bejewelled, so that'll do for me! :goodjob:

Civ3? Buzz off and play, uhm, Half-Life or something instead.

That was my solution to the problem as well, Thrallia. I got sick and tired of throwing money at PC upgrades, and saw buying a 360 as being an obvious solution to the problem. And yes, it was Oblivion that did it for me as well!

Needless to say my gaming habits have changed dramatically since then. And consequently, the old PC as it currently stands is only marginally ahead of Stephenson's Rocket in terms of technological advancement. But it can still handle Civ III and Bejewelled, so that'll do for me! :goodjob:

have you tried Puzzle Quest for the 360? It's like an RPG mixed with Bejeweled! Its nuts and very addictive!

Btw, you should post your gamertag in the gamertag thread so that you can find a number of CFC members to play CivRev against :)

Civ3? Buzz off and play, uhm, Half-Life or something instead.

Alas, the old steam powered PC would probably collapse under the strain of Half-Life! Which is basically why I bought The Orange Box for the 360. I haven't played it much yet though, because for some strange reason it gives me motion sickness playing Half-Life for too long. But my son loves it to bits!

have you tried Puzzle Quest for the 360? It's like an RPG mixed with Bejeweled! Its nuts and very addictive!

Yes, indeed! In fact, I was so bowled over by the demo I rushed straight into town to buy the gamer points I needed to get the full game! Lol...I still haven't managed to beat 'Lord What's His Name' yet, but it's a great little game for just filling the odd hour or two, or when you don't fancy tackling anything too deep! :)

Btw, you should post your gamertag in the gamertag thread so that you can find a number of CFC members to play CivRev against :)

I would love too! It's just that I'm still on silver at the moment, and for the last couple of weeks I've been having a problem with the 360, that I'm told is the prelude to the RROD. I've tried the towel trick, and miraculously, it seems to be holding out. At the moment though, I'm just a tad reluctant to be throwing money at gold while there's still a pretty good chance that it could die on me at any time!

I think it goes without saying that I'm gutted by this! And as you may recall, I had it all planned out to buy a three month gold account when the Civ Rev demo was released. That way, I wouldn't have to wait a week to download it. Although that very much depended on just how close the demo was, to the full game being released.

But what the heck! Here's my gamertag anyway, it's BustedKarma. And if you still feel that it's worth putting it in the gamertag thread, then please feel free to do so! Hopefully, my current problems with the 360 will get resolved one way or the other quite soon; and who knows, I might even get the chance to have some fun online with you guys in the not too distant future! :)

I've added a couple guys from the 2K forums that are currently silver as well, I usually have silver, but I've got 25 1 month trials(yay GTAIV for having 1 month trials, and yay for blockbuster not taking them out before putting their rentals on the shelves :rolleyes:), and a 13 month paid membership sitting around for my usage :)

I got the RROD last year the week Bioshock came out...it was a shame when it happened, but everything is still under warranty with the RROD, and if they get your address right, it'll take a max of 10 days for you to get a new system(they don't bother fixing yours, they just give you a new one).

Hopefully your system recovers without getting it, I had a lot of homework to work on at the time mine died to keep me busy, but now its summer...no schoolwork to keep anyone busy.

I think it's a bit of a sell out, tbh. Over-simplifying a brilliant PC game in order to grap a quick dollar, and putting gratituous amounts of tits in in order to wheel in the punters.

Civ Rev will always be a slightly watered down and glib remake of civilisation. But is there anything wrong with attempting to appeal to wider audience?

If it means pumping time and resources into such a game, then it's a betrayal of the original fanbase...

But hey, you never know. Might be really . .. .. .. .ing fun :D

Ah, the age old computer age problem... Glass isnt either half full, or half empty. Its either totally full, or utter . .. .. .. .. 1-0-syndrome. To me its seems great that maybe more young people will get into strategy games. Because, if you think a bit further people, the scene will die without new blood. And when you accept the fact that generation after generation is always different, i just hope that this game will bring more people to the scene. Personally, i wont be playing it, since im a PC man myself. But let them be with the new one, ill stick with IV. And i have to add, that its been said, that its NOT Civ V...

Glass isnt either half full, or half empty. Its either totally full, or utter . .. .. .. .. 1-0-syndrome.

As an engineer, I would say the glass is twice the size it needs to be... :crazyeye:


But anyways, as a PC and Wii owner, I'm a little sad that I can't try it out.

I agree with most that CivRev appears to be interesting and worth another look when the game is released. I own a Wii and I hope to get my hands on the game when it comes out. From what I have seen, the combat system and promotion system may be improvements over CivIV(even with BtS). I wouldn't mind having some of those improvements in CivV...

As an engineer, I would say the glass is twice the size it needs to be... :crazyeye:


But anyways, as a PC and Wii owner, I'm a little sad that I can't try it out.

CivRev is being released for Wii, it's just been delayed until September or October.

P.S. Sorry for the Double Post:D

actually, right now the Wii version is on indefinite hold...they felt they couldn't devote the resources to it right now for it to be a worthy version of the game. If it does well on the other consoles, they'll probably go back and finish it for the Wii.

Really, there is CivRev hate?:) A month ago there was barely no info about the game. How come we have "hate" now? My two cents:

Let's see the game first and then hate. I thought CIV IV was going to be a major disappointment because I thought they would neglect the gameplay for 3D stuff. It turned out it was a very well made game. Still, there's a lot to improve there. For example, large territory still gives too much advantage. ICS is NOT dead. I think it got transformed into infinite city conquer. Down with the pleasure of arranging your own cities:( Wonders don't really matter, except maybe the Stonehenge (if you are not creative) and the Internet.

What's good about the Civilization that the other games don't have:

1. It's turn-based.
2. You can interact with the AI. The diplomacy is getting better with each patch/expansion/version.
3. A great combo of warmongering + peaceful building.

What's not good:

1. It's too time consuming.
2. The strategy balance can be upgraded.
3. Peaceful building is neglected.

The Civilization's major advantages are it's AI and being turn based. If I want only a brilliantly balanced strategy game, I'd play Age of Empires (the Conquerors) or chess. If I want MP, I would play Frozen Throne (AoE ladder games died :( ) However, AoE gets boring very fast without MP and Warcraft lacks too much in strategy balance (And I'm too stupid for chess:P). But the Civilization!!! That's a whole new world. Not as balanced as AoE but not as meaningless in strategy as Warcraft either. And the AIs are like real persons!! It's an adventure!

So, I play CIV IV because it is turn based and because of the AIs.

I like to see CivRev as an upgrade to CIV IV (like CIV IV was an upgrade to CIV III).

What I hope to see in CivRev:

1. Good soundtracks. The Warlords soundtrack is DEPRESSIVE!!! And really, I always try to jet out of the medieval ASAP because of all the depressive christian choirs. Hey, my religion is hinduism, buddhism, confucianism - why the christian choirs?:( Not that they are gonna bring Baba Yetu back but we can have some good soundtracks!

2. The great persons and the specialists were a great thing. Maybe develop the concept more and give less importance to territorial expansion? Down with big empires, long live city management!

3. Less deserts on the maaap!

4. Really, console only??? Or I got it wrong? Heh. Maybe someone in the management team heard that consoles are the future because there are no torrents and cracks for consoles and maybe they are right. But still..who plays consoles apart from kids and a limited audience of nerds. My deepest reverence to the last category, they rock and 'own' but I do think they are a very limited number. And kids like hack and slash, not turn based things:P

5. The great leader thing was great. Down with mass stacks and huge numbers and more specialized units pls!

And last, don't hesitate to take the positive examples of other games?:) Like, Warcraft sucked badly (and maybe still does) because you had to manually select your barracks, blacksmith etc. Years before them, AoE had ctrl+B to select the barracks, ctrl + A for the archery range, etc. Blizzard are stupid for refusing to learn, aren't they?:) New concepts such as bringing religion into CIV IV are awesome.

6. An even smarter AI. Sometimes I get the feeling the AIs are just trying to cause trouble and not aim to win the game. More bonuses from friendly relations and not only penalties for angering the neighbours would rock as well.

So, I wish good luck to the new game:)

I started to play Civ II when I was pretty damn young, you'd be surprised at the broadness of its appeal.

But yes! Oh god, that awful choir music in the Medieval era, which gets stuck in your head over and over. Perhaps nation specific music, if that wouldn't be an unnecessary extravagance. Music to raze cities to, if you get me.

The AI does seem to just make trouble, not aim to win, except on space race. What'd be good would be an AI that you couldn't read like a book, and didn't judge you based on a simple points system.


Another thing, is it just me, or have wars lost much of their realism?
I don't know.

actually, right now the Wii version is on indefinite hold...they felt they couldn't devote the resources to it right now for it to be a worthy version of the game. If it does well on the other consoles, they'll probably go back and finish it for the Wii.

Actually, Nintendo Power Magazine has posted the release-date for september

I've played every Civ game ever made, Sid is a total genius. It's the only game I've ever been addicted to. If he says it's good to have a handheld version, then I believe him! (Plus it will make the wait at doctor's offices, etc a lot easier to handle).. Sid for President!

well, I hope it's good!

4. Really, console only??? Or I got it wrong? Heh. Maybe someone in the management team heard that consoles are the future because there are no torrents and cracks for consoles and maybe they are right. But still..who plays consoles apart from kids and a limited audience of nerds. My deepest reverence to the last category, they rock and 'own' but I do think they are a very limited number. And kids like hack and slash, not turn based things:P



I think you'd be surprised to know the actual demographic of console gamers. I switched from PC gaming (other than Civ) about 4 years ago because it was cheaper than keeping my PC upgraded for all the latest games. I'm 46 and play with a large group of adult gamers. I'm no more nerdy now than I was when I played PC games all the time.