Enduring appeal of Civ1

spod

Warlord
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
155
I think it says something about Civ1 that we're still playing it twenty years after it was released, and still discussing tactics and asking questions about it...
 
Well, for starters, it's an immense game in it's scope yet it fits on just two floppy discs. It has basically unlimited replay value and an enormous amount of very cleverly and tightly presented information about the game itself, and history, available at the click of a button, at any time you want. And it is yet so simple to play and "get into" that all of the complexity behind the blocky sprites seems to fade away as you're playing.

It is also astounding how real a model of our little planet, and our geologically insignificant species this game is. There are just too many analogies to real world events that you can can clearly see in it. And they're not limited only to historic events, the workings of the game also do a very decent job of representing how the world works in general. It's an educational, thought-provoking AND fun game, and everything in it, including it's space age (for 1991) AI, is held together by relatively simple mathematics. It's basically as good as games get and by far the best in its genre.

Yet Civilizatrion is imperfect, and that is probably its most appealing quality. Many people including Sid Meier have tried to make it better but none have really succeeded. The lack of "realism" in Civ, like the famous phalanx that sits on a beach for 3000 years and then sinks a battleship or shoots down a bomber, is what makes this game more fun than the rest of the bunch. It's these little shocks the player experiences, the ways things go wrong when they shouldn't, that keep you on your toes and help you learn the game.

And when you get decent at it, addiction kicks in. The "one more turn" phenomenon in Civ has been very thoroughly documented. I think I am already starting to repeat myself - Civilization is as good as games get. And then some.
 
Its simplicity.

In game design, there's a tradeoff between multitude of options and elegance. The principles and mechanics of Civ1 are relatively simplistic, but elegant. I usually play Civ4 and Civ3, but I sometimes yearn for the clearness of original Civ.
 
Why don't Sid Meier do a remake?

Some day there's going to be a guy who realizes that you don't necessarily need
to make a bloated game in order for it to be immensely popular.

Back to basic!

Today's programmers tend to make bloated games that want
to be like a blockbuster movie.

They make games with mindboggling graphics and sounds that eat all
the resources on your computer (or worse doesn't even run).

And a lot of the time the end result is a game with excellent visuals and sound but
bad gameplay and too much complexity.
 
I think it says something about Civ1 that we're still playing it twenty years after it was released, and still discussing tactics and asking questions about it...

The way their going with CiV, I doubt it will last Two years!
 
I think it says something about Civ1 that we're still playing it twenty years after it was released, and still discussing tactics and asking questions about it...

I first began to play Civ a short time after Civ3 came out so I am a relative 'Noob' I then progressed to Civ4. I subsequently played Colonization and Civ Rev. I have begun to play Civ2 only recently as I can play it on my Lappy rather than vanish upstairs to the desktop. As a matter of interest (because I am a Civ fanatic) I only very recently thought that I would try the original Civ1. I have to say that despite the graphics (which are of no real concern to a strategy player) that I have found the game to be just as enjoyable as the other, later renditions of the game. I just love the concept of this game anyhow in whatever form it takes. I do believe though that ALL Civ players should give Civ1 a try. I actually find the graphics quite charming (for want of a better word) I am playing Civ1 via the Chronicles disk on a Dell Inspiron with Vista and up to now it seems to play without a problem. Up to this point and I have played three games of Civ1 (not winning any!) I would be just as happy to be serving time in solitary confinement with the original version of the game as with any other version. This speaks volumes for the immensity of the original idea developed by Sid!! :goodjob:
 
I personally think that the appeal of Civ1 relies on the many ways it allows you to play. After ages of being a fan, I can still get to decide "This time I'll act differently", and be amazed at the incredibly diverse outcomes. There is only one game that I still play and which is comparable in that way: Master of Orion (by Sid Meyer, of course).
May both of them live forever! :)
 
It's very replayable because there are many possible permutations. I've been playing for 20 years on and off and even today I'm discovering new strategies
 
Because every game is different. And it's as hard or as easy as you want.
And if I ever get a laptop, Civ1 would be the first game installed.
 
I think people like turn based strategy in general and Civ 1 simply happens to be one of the best out there. Less is more, even if I found a phalanx defeating a bomber unrealistic, I find a library defeating a rifleman by somehow establishing a "culture force field" even more unrealistic. I've also never accepted how units in later Civs heal for free. I've been playing some Civil War Generals 2 lately, as the Confederates, and even though the game is very easy and not really a challenge (not even first time playing it), I find it appealing. It's the simplicity of the game I like and yet there's a lot of deep strategy. I guess the rules of the game are simply, but the strategies that emerge are complicated, or they could be simple if you prefer brute force.
 
This game was so cool in its day. But as a Civ-lover, even Civ 3 is becoming a relic. There comes a point when you have seen it all and played it over and over again. Civ 4 was a disaster, and probabaly made people more reluctant to check out modern Civ. But Civ 5 is a beautiful, magnificent game.

At the present time, Civ 1 looks like Pacman, or Tempest... At some point, its healthy to break away from the nostalgia, and try something new that challenges your brain.
 
The great thing with Civ, every game you start is a new game.

Never, ever will you play the same game again.

Not complaing.
 
If we forget the looks, I think civ 1 is still a better model for how the world functions than civ 4 or civ 5.
 
Civilization AGA on the Amiga was the first game that kept me playing for 45 hours, almost non stop (only a couple quick food and toilet breaks). Other games at the time (early 90s) could keep me playing for 9 hours, but Civ was in a different league.
 
I think it says something about Civ1 that we're still playing it twenty years after it was released, and still discussing tactics and asking questions about it...
Elegance and simplicity. Every time you add a new mechanics, you sacrifice some system elegance to do it. That's why I sometimes prefer Civ4 Vanilla to BTS, and Civ1 to other Civ games.
 
Civilization AGA on the Amiga was the first game that kept me playing for 45 hours, almost non stop (only a couple quick food and toilet breaks). Other games at the time (early 90s) could keep me playing for 9 hours, but Civ was in a different league.
Yeah it was the first game that really made me play till the sun came up. And sometimes still does. Not many other games did that.
 
Elegance and simplicity. Every time you add a new mechanics, you sacrifice some system elegance to do it. That's why I sometimes prefer Civ4 Vanilla to BTS, and Civ1 to other Civ games.

Sorry but I don't know what BTS is.
 
Top Bottom