Civ3 forever?

Hello,

I haven't played civ3 for ages and what reminded me of this brilliant game is yesterday's Twitch.tv explorations. I was streaming my favorite game (worldoftanks) and took a short break to look around twitch games, found civ5 and thought why not let's check it out.

For some reason, I just can't see myself playing civ5 ~ just as I couldn't play civ4. Just can't make this happen, the game feels SO different but not necessarily better. I understand it has evolved in the sense of how diplomacy works and different ideologies additions etc etc.. but it could be the same with civ3 if it were developed further as well.

Gladly I still have a civ3 copy so I can play a game or two for the sweet nostology.


How is it with you guys?
Did you try civ4/5 and came back to civ3? do you think civ5 is amazing and better and all civ3fans should definitely just get used to the new game/meta/wateva?

I double post it; meaning I posted on civ3 general discussions as well, to have as many opinions as I can get so mods, don't delete plz

What do you mean by nostalgia? Isn't that like saying the plates you eat off of give you nostalgia every night because they are old plates? Your car gives you nostalgia because you've driven it for 10 years?

I don't think you understand what nostalgia actually means. If you played it once one Christmas 10 years ago and have fond but vague memories of it, then load it up just to get a feeling of that whole time in your life, then that's nostalgia. But on a fanatics forum on a Civ 3 board full of people that have played it off and on for 10 years, there's no nostalgia, it's still an entirely contemporary action.

If you're only playing out of nostalgia you're not going to have much in common with the people who frequent these boards...

Buttercup said:

What do you mean by nostalgia? Isn't that like saying the plates you eat off of give you nostalgia every night because they are old plates? Your car gives you nostalgia because you've driven it for 10 years?

I don't think you understand what nostalgia actually means. If you played it once one Christmas 10 years ago and have fond but vague memories of it, then load it up just to get a feeling of that whole time in your life, then that's nostalgia. But on a fanatics forum on a Civ 3 board full of people that have played it off and on for 10 years, there's no nostalgia, it's still an entirely contemporary action.

If you're only playing out of nostalgia you're not going to have much in common with the people who frequent these boards...

Click to expand...

Go easy on him, Buttercup. For he has seen the "light" that newer does not always mean better, just more tampered with.

As for further development of Civ3, that is up to Firaxis letting some of the Forum members have access to the source code, which up to now, they have been very carefully guarding.

I see no reason to pile on the OP either. Goodsmell, I have only ever played Civ3. I have watched my son play Civ5 and I have Civ2 on my iPad. I don't know why. I have no intention of playing anything but Civ3.

I have copies of CIV IV and CIV V, which I thought might be worth playing. I found the (overdone) graphics a distraction. I continue to play CIV III exclusively. Perhaps when they produce a massively complex game that can only be played well by a computer program, and they provide convenient hooks to allow the 'human player' to be a program, I'll dust off my programming skills and have a go at it. But come to think of it, CIV III is sufficiently complex to make that a challenge, and the AI's do not come close to playing a decent game. Programs that play chess do really well these days. But they have a fixed start, only two game players, and just a few simple pieces. 'Canned' openings and endgame piece attrition further simplify play.

So why add further complexity to a game that already leaves games like chess in the dust?

The religion thing in Civ IV was a dealbreaker for me, and I never got around to playing Civ V. So Civ III for now, yeah.

I think i have played all civs(1,2,3,4,5).
When i was like 14, i played civ 1(Totally sucked at this). I pretty much skipped civ 2 and played civ 3 extensively. Then tried civ 2(2-3 games till medieval ages) and didn't like it, switched back to civ 3. Like 10 years later tried civ 4. Played here and there, again, didn't like it(religions and stuff, making some choices linear(i get this, thus then it's logical i go this route, thus then i go this route and maybe minorly can afford that other route; later, whoops, i should have specialized on linear path)). Some years later tried civ 5. It was somewhat better, but the linearity of choices were still there(social policies, research based on terrain etc). I think devs understood people don't want strategic choices hopping around like in a 100x100 'chess'. I don't know, maybe i haven't played civ 5 so much so that i would love that.

So, i have been stuck with civ 3. I think i spend too much time with it, actually(sometimes i spend half a hour thinking about strategical choices i can make even when i have only 10 cities, in ancient age, in one turn; Then after 3-4 turns i can spend another half a hour rethinking my choices/strategies). My gf plays that game because of me. The more i learn about this game, the more i love it. There are just so many variations how to play(also, editor has given many more variations). And micromanagement rules

Anyways, it's all about preference and what emotions people want to feel when doing something(like playing), but when it comes to 'chess', i think civ 3 is the best candidate. At least for now.

I cant deside if Civ 3 or 4 is best. I really like the sence of scale in civ 3 where more is more and armies are massive and cities are plentiful. It feels most realistic with the huge scale and the graphics feels like a map u overlook in your expanding stonepalace with your advisors around you. Also artillery works as artillery should work fire behind the lines from safety, not spearheading the assault to suicide like in civ 4. Yeah it probably is civ 3 forever I only miss a overflow system.

I tried 2-3 games in Civ4 and didn't like it, so went back to Civ3. But Civ5 in my opinion is much better than Civ4. Civ5 was able to kindle the "Civ-fever" in me, like the earlier editions (1, 2 and 3) did and which Civ 4 completely failed to do...
There are a lot of things in Civ5, which I like, for example the combat system is the best of all Civ editions so far. (Artillery again works as artillery should...) In some things I still like Civ3 better, but over all Civ5 is much fun to play. You can't really compare Civ3 to Civ5, they are different games, but both are great fun. The fact that in Civ5 only one unit can be on the same square, makes it more like chess: you have to "calculate" your moves like in chess, while in Civ3 it is just "big numbers carry the victory"...

I have played Civ 1 - 4.

I like Civ3 most, as it is much more user friendly then the first two titles.

I have tried Civ4, but as by Lanzelot there is no civ feelings in it. And some of the concept changes (religion, illness instead of happiness, right of passage) are game and fun killers in my eyes.

Also I dislike the graphics in Civ4.

Loved 1, 2 and 3 in different stages in my life. I played 4 two times. Didn't like it. Too restrictive.

I still play civ1. It's still beyond amazing fun to play.

Kirejara said:

I have played Civ 1 - 4.

I like Civ3 most, as it is much more user friendly then the first two titles.

I have tried Civ4, but as by Lanzelot there is no civ feelings in it. And some of the concept changes (religion, illness instead of happiness, right of passage) are game and fun killers in my eyes.

Also I dislike the graphics in Civ4.

Click to expand...

I've wondered if it was possible to make Civ3 on the Civ4 engine. And then add some minor things. I like the military promotion system for example.

I've never been a fan of the promotion systems of any of the Civ games, civ 4's worst of all, because, and perhaps this just relates to my style of play, but when I attack I tend to do it very, very quickly. I loathe attrition and I loathe giving the AI one more second to mass produce 40 more Archers per second, so I tend to attack, move into a city, fortify the bare minimum for quelling and shoot the rest of the army onwards all in one turn on a continuous cycle until I've reached my limit of being able to quell a conquered city in one turn.

By doing this my front-line is always the Veterans (4/4) and the fortifiers are always the Elites (2/5). By the time the Elites are fully healed I'm lucky to be able to get one or two of the early victors back to the front-line before I've finished conquering the problematic areas of a rival civ. By the time of my next war the Elite Units are outdated anyway and upgrading them takes them back to Veteran.

If they had followed normal game conventions and fully healed a Unit upon promotion then this wouldn't be a problem. I found the issue of Units becoming outdated just as they get really good in civ 4 to be even worse than civ 3, even on it's "really drag out the turns" option.

Yes, Civ3 forever...

Buttercup said:

What do you mean by nostalgia? Isn't that like saying the plates you eat off of give you nostalgia every night because they are old plates? Your car gives you nostalgia because you've driven it for 10 years?

Click to expand...

I think nostalgia is a bit more nuanced than you suggest. For instance, I drive by the house of my youth frequently and I rarely notice. Yet, sometimes I do and get the feeling of nostalgia. I've had Civ 3 for quite sometime, but its not the sole game I play, nor do I play Civ 3 everyday not even every week. Sometimes I feel a bit nostalgic and fire up a game myself and the meaning of the word shines through, longing for something that is gone. Of course I still have the game and the ability to play yet I cannot recapture all the little surprises and pleasurable "firsts" of the game: first resource, first victory etc. If I play Civ 3 now I know pretty much how each game is going to go. I know if I am going to lose or win. I know which tech are more important I know what the AI is going to do in certain situations etc. Its not new. So yes, I can yearn for the time when it was.

So yes I can yearn for Civ 3, for all the newness and surprises, but I ll never be able to recapture those moments.

Kirejara said:

I have played Civ 1 - 4.

I like Civ3 most, as it is much more user friendly then the first two titles.

I have tried Civ4, but as by Lanzelot there is no civ feelings in it. And some of the concept changes (religion, illness instead of happiness, right of passage) are game and fun killers in my eyes.

Also I dislike the graphics in Civ4.

Click to expand...

Civ4 does have happiness that functions quite similarly to how it does in Civ3. The health/illness system replaced Civ3's pollution mechanic, and IMO it is better than whack-a-mole pollution hunting.

Theov said:

I've wondered if it was possible to make Civ3 on the Civ4 engine. And then add some minor things. I like the military promotion system for example.

Click to expand...

By and large, yes, it should. It should be possible to implement nearly all of Civ3's rules in a Civ4 mod, with enough dedication. Governments may be slightly tricky, but you could replace Civ4's multiple civics with one Government civic. Civ4 is quite flexible, so even in areas where there are significant differences, such as bonus traits (militaristic, religious, etc.) the differences could likely be programmed in in most cases (though it may require the more advanced C++ modding rather than easier XML/Python modding). Some things would be easier than others.

The one thing that I don't think could be implemented in Civ4 is the isometric grid; Civ4 has a fundamentally different graphics engine.

strongreaction said:

I think nostalgia is a bit more nuanced than you suggest. For instance, I drive by the house of my youth frequently and I rarely notice. Yet, sometimes I do and get the feeling of nostalgia. I've had Civ 3 for quite sometime, but its not the sole game I play, nor do I play Civ 3 everyday not even every week. Sometimes I feel a bit nostalgic and fire up a game myself and the meaning of the word shines through, longing for something that is gone. Of course I still have the game and the ability to play yet I cannot recapture all the little surprises and pleasurable "firsts" of the game: first resource, first victory etc. If I play Civ 3 now I know pretty much how each game is going to go. I know if I am going to lose or win. I know which tech are more important I know what the AI is going to do in certain situations etc. Its not new. So yes, I can yearn for the time when it was.

So yes I can yearn for Civ 3, for all the newness and surprises, but I ll never be able to recapture those moments.

Click to expand...

Welcome to CFC! I do agree with your comments on nostalgia; while the game is still here, and it's still quite possibly to be dragged into it, it's impossible to perfectly recapture the first few games and the first few times the sun rose while still playing just one more turn.