I bought the DS version fully knowing that it would be a cut down version of a cut down game, but I have to say that I was so disappointed with the end result. Apart from the rubbish marker pen graphics the game isn't even trying. I mean if you set the game to the second difficulty setting the Enemy just attacks you constantly so unless you have a reasonable start you can forget getting ahead. It's a silly glitch that just makes the game a domination game through military might. It takes away any strategy. it could have been a good game which is great for them long train rides. Can this be patched on the DS?? If it could it would be great.
DS Version
- Thread starter Gingerman
- Start date
Don't expect any patches for the DS game. It's not like the big consoles where you can install the game to a hard drive and update it.
As for its being a "cut down version of a cut down game", I think you are off-base. The only thing different from the big console games is the graphics. The game engine is exactly the same. (And I kind of like the graphics. They remind me of Civ2.
)
I haven't had any problem with the enemy attacking me constantly. I've been playing on Warlord (the 2nd level) for a while, to get the feel of the game. While they talk tough, they rarely seem to attack in the early game, and on the occasions they do, I have been able to hold them off while I increase my knowledge so I can hit them with ever-better units. Eventually they get tired, and ask for peace. If I'm not ready to stomp on them, I let them go.
More likely, it happens like in my current game, where France decided that I was getting too big for my britches. I didn't have enough money (a 'mere' 2000 gold) or any techs they wanted (I was about 20 techs ahead of them), so I was to be "disposed of". Okay. I sent an army of Tanks to Cherbourg. WTH? It was defended by a single Archer? On to Paris. Again, a single Archer?. I rolled on through the remainder of his cities, wiping him out in a single turn. His total military force consisted of four Archers, defending his four cities.
(And, yes, I intend to step up a level real soon now, since I'm overpowering them at this level. )
My point is, I'm finding it an excellent way to get in a little 'Civ-Lite' when I'm on the go. I find I'm playing it much more than Civ3 or Civ4, lately.
As for its being a "cut down version of a cut down game", I think you are off-base. The only thing different from the big console games is the graphics. The game engine is exactly the same. (And I kind of like the graphics. They remind me of Civ2.
)I haven't had any problem with the enemy attacking me constantly. I've been playing on Warlord (the 2nd level) for a while, to get the feel of the game. While they talk tough, they rarely seem to attack in the early game, and on the occasions they do, I have been able to hold them off while I increase my knowledge so I can hit them with ever-better units. Eventually they get tired, and ask for peace. If I'm not ready to stomp on them, I let them go.
More likely, it happens like in my current game, where France decided that I was getting too big for my britches. I didn't have enough money (a 'mere' 2000 gold) or any techs they wanted (I was about 20 techs ahead of them), so I was to be "disposed of". Okay. I sent an army of Tanks to Cherbourg. WTH? It was defended by a single Archer? On to Paris. Again, a single Archer?. I rolled on through the remainder of his cities, wiping him out in a single turn. His total military force consisted of four Archers, defending his four cities.
(And, yes, I intend to step up a level real soon now, since I'm overpowering them at this level. )My point is, I'm finding it an excellent way to get in a little 'Civ-Lite' when I'm on the go. I find I'm playing it much more than Civ3 or Civ4, lately.
Wait till you play the higher levels it becomes annoying. I just want to win without war. I also miss the religious aspect of Civ 4. If it is just a fully cut down version then I'm glad I didn't shell out for the PS3 version. That said a secondhand version of the game might come my way. Yeah I agree with you on Civ 3. I wish they just ported that 
I wonder if they could port it to my iPhone?? HINT HINT! I guess I like the pixel graphics for my strategy games. Lets hope there is a revision in the 3d look for Civ 5. I do love playing Civ Rev on my commute though it has to be said. Still sad they can't patch certain things. That said I will of course be buying the next version no matter what...sigh they have me over a Barrel at take2.
I wonder if they could port it to my iPhone?? HINT HINT! I guess I like the pixel graphics for my strategy games. Lets hope there is a revision in the 3d look for Civ 5. I do love playing Civ Rev on my commute though it has to be said. Still sad they can't patch certain things. That said I will of course be buying the next version no matter what...sigh they have me over a Barrel at take2.
Sciguy001
CiV Great Scientist (duh)
I know. My older brother had an x-box that I used to play Civ Rev on, but he moved out and now I degraded to the DS version
The horibble graphics on the DS is my greatest problem, and the lack of civiliopedia. These small things made the game that much funner on the 360. Other than that, it is practically the same.
The horibble graphics on the DS is my greatest problem, and the lack of civiliopedia. These small things made the game that much funner on the 360. Other than that, it is practically the same.
Especially when you see what can be done with the DS system hell even Advanced Wars looks better. I mean it handles Pixel graphics fine so why make them so crappy. In fact you are at an advantage to the Xbox and Ps3 system when it comes to interface as it is touch screen which they could have made a cut down version of a more advanced game without losing the PC control. But the main thing is the ******** Ai I'm now playing on the highest level and I have to keep fighting. The politics is lost when you can't turn one nation against another for gain because they are already at war with you. GRRRR
I bet if they released a version of Civ3 it would sell like hot cakes. With the addition of Religion and the new spy system. Oh and throw me a Caravan or two in for a quick buck when I most need it.
I bet if they released a version of Civ3 it would sell like hot cakes. With the addition of Religion and the new spy system. Oh and throw me a Caravan or two in for a quick buck
when I most need it.I do enjoy the DS version from time to time. It's a good companion when on the road. But to be fair, when at home, CivIV BTS is far more enjoyable. I haven't got any X-box or PS3 so I haven't tried that version of Civ Rev.
What bugs me most with the DS version is the lack of any kind of Civipedia or manual for that matter, first time it was a complete guessing game on what the different buildings/units etc did. Since I found the printable PDFs with the needed info in short it's always with me on the road so that covers the downside of no civipedia a bit.
The game itself is quite fun and drags you in, the "just one more turn" syndrome is there, though you can get frustrated at times with the lack in the diplomacy options and wars that seem to start and end without any real implications. But then, it's not ever said to be as in depth as for example BtS. So I still haven't regretted spending some $ on a DS just for this game.
What bugs me most with the DS version is the lack of any kind of Civipedia or manual for that matter, first time it was a complete guessing game on what the different buildings/units etc did. Since I found the printable PDFs with the needed info in short it's always with me on the road so that covers the downside of no civipedia a bit.
The game itself is quite fun and drags you in, the "just one more turn" syndrome is there, though you can get frustrated at times with the lack in the diplomacy options and wars that seem to start and end without any real implications. But then, it's not ever said to be as in depth as for example BtS. So I still haven't regretted spending some $ on a DS just for this game.
Sciguy001
CiV Great Scientist (duh)
It also seems like the AI's are worst when it comes to everything except for war on the DS version. I have never seen an AI ever try to acieve a space race on the DS but a couple of civs have actually gotton advanced flight and attempted to win on the X-box 360.
I had it happen to me on the DS last week. I was going for an economic victory when one of the AIs started building spaceship parts. I couldn't fight my way to his capital quickly enough... 
dojoboy
Tsalagi
You certainly can win w/ out declaring war, or by not going on the offensive when attacked. I usually just defend at key points, then counter attack if necessary.
I really like CIV on my DS. OK - the PC game is bigger (I used to like playing CIV 3 on the largest actualy world map for some epic games), but ..... PORTABLE CIV!!!!!!!! HORAY!!!.
I'll say it again... PORT-ABLE CIVILIZATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GREAT! What's not to like?
I'll say it again... PORT-ABLE CIVILIZATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GREAT! What's not to like?
Sciguy001
CiV Great Scientist (duh)
This would be a realy great game overall if the AI didn't have the intellignece of a can of barbeque sauce (who puts barbeque sauce in a can anyways?). The sucky AI lowers the whole rating of the game and realy vacums away from the replay value with repetitive, predictable actions and strategies for nearly every AI controled civ. The AI is a lot worse on the DS I have realised on Emperor and Diety levels. I would defenitly rate this game 5 out of 5 stars if the AI was better, but with the AI in this pathetic state on the DS and somewhat on the consoles it would probably earn an 3.5.
HOWEVER, it is a portable civilization and gives you a nice break from the complex world of Civ 3 and Civ 4.
HOWEVER, it is a portable civilization and gives you a nice break from the complex world of Civ 3 and Civ 4.
Volga
Chieftain
To me, it was an absolute disgrace...graphics are terrible (they could have used graphics similar to Mario Party, or Kart for example), paired with the boring combat system and general lack of diplomacy options. The game was developed by a third party, and only got a glance from Sid Meier before its release, which is probably why it wasn't up to par with the console versions
I love the graphics! They remind me of Civ2! 
And I'm interested in where you got the info that the DS version was developed by a 3rd party. When I visited Firaxis in Nov 2007, I was clearly led to believe that all the development was being done in-house. In fact, that's why the Wii version never made it - they didn't have the manpower (and money) to do it in the necessary time.
And I'm interested in where you got the info that the DS version was developed by a 3rd party. When I visited Firaxis in Nov 2007, I was clearly led to believe that all the development was being done in-house. In fact, that's why the Wii version never made it - they didn't have the manpower (and money) to do it in the necessary time.
Volga
Chieftain
I love the graphics! They remind me of Civ2!
And I'm interested in where you got the info that the DS version was developed by a 3rd party. When I visited Firaxis in Nov 2007, I was clearly led to believe that all the development was being done in-house. In fact, that's why the Wii version never made it - they didn't have the manpower (and money) to do it in the necessary time.
I swear I saw another company's splash when opening the game, but I checked, and it doesnt seem to have another one, so Im gonna call you right on that one. As to the graphics, I say if you can do better, do better!
Could the graphics have been "better" (I disagree with the term, but I'll use it for the sake of argument
)? Sure. But would there have been room left for saving the game if they were? Probably not.Like anything in life, there are trade-offs. The engine is the same for all three systems, just compiled separately for each. The PS3 and Xbox360 have lots of space, relatively speaking, so they could do some real nice graphics and effects. For the DS, they had to squeeze everything down to fit on the card. Plus, the DS only supports 8-bit graphics. In order to have space to save games, they squeezed the graphics a little more than some would like.
Of course, I don't play for the graphics, anyway.
Volga
Chieftain
Could the graphics have been "better" (I disagree with the term, but I'll use it for the sake of argument
Like anything in life, there are trade-offs. The engine is the same for all three systems, just compiled separately for each. The PS3 and Xbox360 have lots of space, relatively speaking, so they could do some real nice graphics and effects. For the DS, they had to squeeze everything down to fit on the card. Plus, the DS only supports 8-bit graphics. In order to have space to save games, they squeezed the graphics a little more than some would like.
Of course, I don't play for the graphics, anyway.
Well I just look at other games that have similar complexities but superior graphics, such as Mario Party DS, or Animal Crossing, and compare them to Civ Rev's, and get below par results, but I see why saving the game could have an effect. I am a person that loves a mixture of both quality graphics and gameplay, but when either of them become dominant aspects of the game, I tend to shy away. I do not expect the DS to pump out 360 graphics, but itd be nice if they'd of taken the models from the 360 version and downtoned them, which was what I was expecting. :'(
Is there any way to view offensive and defensive stats during city attack? I'm not talking about previewing, I'm talking about during the fight. For example, in the 360 version, I can attack a city and, say my unit has an attack strength of 28. Maybe I lose, but in the process I learn that their leading defensive unit has a defense of 30, so now I have a better idea of what to come back with (this is also helpful because as I destroy units and see those defensive numbers dwindle, I have an idea of how close I am to seizing the city).
PiMan
Deity
CivRev is far more complicated than you realise. It is a more complex game than Animal Crossing or Mario Party. Yes they could have gone for more complicated graphics, but it would likely have required a larger cartridge, development costs would have been higher, development times would have been longer. This would add up to a more expensive game.
In the DS version, highlight the city (using the stylus is an option), this will tell you what attack power your unit will have against the city. If you have the correct unit promotion (leadership?) then you will see you opponent's information too.
Similar threads
- Sticky