Nailed it right on the head.I love that Civ III is much simpler than these newer games. Not that I've played 5 or 6, but they sound very complex. I do own Civ IV, and I find it to be too complex. In Civ III your units have an Attack, Defend and Mobility value, and maybe a bombard value as well. In the newer games you have to worry about how certain types of units match up against other types, having weaknesses vs some, and strengths vs others. No thanks! I also like the ability to build all city improvements in every city. I have enough to worry about each turn, I don't have patience for needing to "specialize" my cities, by building only certain improvements in one city, and then different improvements in another. I don't understand how people can micromanage 20+ cities like that, or why they would enjoy doing so. Civ 3 was about as complex as I want a strategy game to be, which is far less complex than today's games.
Maybe I'm one of the few who is bothered by this, but I have found that games have become unnecessarily complex over time! My first game console was an Atari 2600, and to play I used a joystick with just one button! Then I had a Sega Master System with 2 buttons, and then a Genesis with 3. I was okay with the 6 button pads on the Genesis and SNES, but was annoyed with 8+ buttons on the Playstation controller. How was it that people could lose hours, days and weeks out of their lives playing games that required only 2-3 buttons, yet now you need 8+ buttons to keep yourself entertained? And it's not that I dislike micromanagement. I actually found micromanagement to be very enjoyable in Civ I, II and III. However, it seems to me that game companies like Firaxis would rather make games more difficult by making them more complex, when what they really ought to be doing is making the AI more challenging. What I would prefer is a better, more life-like AI, instead of more and more complexity!
I love that Civ III is much simpler than these newer games. Not that I've played 5 or 6, but they sound very complex. I do own Civ IV, and I find it to be too complex. In Civ III your units have an Attack, Defend and Mobility value, and maybe a bombard value as well. In the newer games you have to worry about how certain types of units match up against other types, having weaknesses vs some, and strengths vs others. No thanks! I also like the ability to build all city improvements in every city. I have enough to worry about each turn, I don't have patience for needing to "specialize" my cities, by building only certain improvements in one city, and then different improvements in another. I don't understand how people can micromanage 20+ cities like that, or why they would enjoy doing so. Civ 3 was about as complex as I want a strategy game to be, which is far less complex than today's games.
Maybe I'm one of the few who is bothered by this, but I have found that games have become unnecessarily complex over time! My first game console was an Atari 2600, and to play I used a joystick with just one button! Then I had a Sega Master System with 2 buttons, and then a Genesis with 3. I was okay with the 6 button pads on the Genesis and SNES, but was annoyed with 8+ buttons on the Playstation controller. How was it that people could lose hours, days and weeks out of their lives playing games that required only 2-3 buttons, yet now you need 8+ buttons to keep yourself entertained? And it's not that I dislike micromanagement. I actually found micromanagement to be very enjoyable in Civ I, II and III. However, it seems to me that game companies like Firaxis would rather make games more difficult by making them more complex, when what they really ought to be doing is making the AI more challenging. What I would prefer is a better, more life-like AI, instead of more and more complexity!
Later games went to 3D and all the units are tiny unless you zoom way in you can't tell who's what. It's not good to try to make everything to scale. Ideally a swordsman is a giant picture of 1 guy with a sword, so that when you glance at the map you instantly know this is a swordsman.
You mean the "one unit per tile rule", I assume? "Zone of control" is something else. In fact that concept already exists in Civ3: Armies and some of the fast units like Cavalry, Cossacks, Sipahi, Tanks etc. have ZoC.No dumb restrictions like zone of control, or you already have a worker there so you can't go there...
But one thing everyone seems to forget is that no matter how challenging the ai gets, the 'challenge' will flip to easy mode the moment you figure it out. iii is not 'challenging.'
I disagree that it isn't challenging. I'm no Civ rookie, and I still struggle on Demigod, Deity, and forget about Sid! That being said, I used to think Monarch was impossible, but through practice and refinement I now play more regularly on Emperor and higher. However, it seems like the low hanging fruit has been obtained- improvement in play seems to be getting more and more difficult. Now I know there are some legends that easily beat Sid, but I think for most people, those levels are nearly impossible.