Avault's Civ III Review!

[Thunderfall]

The Adrenaline Vault gave Civilziation III 4 out of 5 stars in their <a href="http://www.avault.com/reviews/review_temp.asp?game=civ3" target=link>review of Civilization III</a>. The review is sprinkled with 14 new screenshots, including a nuclear explosion screen and a few screens showing the aircraft carrier! <a href="http://www.avault.com/reviews/review_temp.asp?game=civ3" target=link>Check it out!</a>

 

[delijoe]

yikes! Lots of criticisms here...an archer destroyed a cruise missile?

 

[Sailsa]

OK, so the game isn't perfect, and might now fulfill everything on your endless wishlist, but it's a game. Buy it, enjoy it, spend countless hours in front of your computer while your friends wonder if you're dead because they haven't seen you in so long. I personally, am going to reserve judgement until I play it. I've spent more time playing the other civs than I would like to admit and the games were far from perfect, but I enjoyed every minute of them and I'm sure I'll enjoy this one too. Afterall, if it was perfect what would make Civ4 new and better??

 

[Thunderfall]

It's quiet interesting when you think about it... If the reviewer can spot the problems in the game after playing just a few games, how come the play testers didn't see the problems and suggest a fix?

 

[Jive]

Originally posted by Thunderfall
It's quiet interesting when you think about it... If the reviewer can spot the problems in the game after playing just a few games, how come the play testers didn't see the problems and suggest a fix?

Very puzzling indeed!

 

[duke o' york]

From the review:
Air combat has also been given an overhaul, as losing aircraft was an all too common occurrence in Civilization II when you ran out of fuel unexpectedly.

What does he mean by unexpectedly?. He can't be very good at Civ if he doesn't understand the simple implications of the planes having a certain range and having to return on their next go. This wasn't really a very good feature of Civ 2, but once you got the hang of it, it wasn't really any kind of deterrant to using air units and using them effectively. I was also amused that he was playing at "Reagent" level - quite an explosive challenge. Ultimately, this review is interesting until the fanatics can get their own hands on the game but after that then it will mean little. If Firaxis have indeed streamlined the interface then maybe turns will not last as long as they used to, especially having to access several different menus before finding the appropriate Civilopedia entry. On the whole though, this review hasn't changed my anticipation for the game. Now if only I had a computer that worked well enough to run the thing.....

 

[zandar]

True, either the guy was a chump or he was using a corruption plagued government.

Yeah, war wariness is gonna kill you if you don't have stuff to perk up happiness in the meantime if you're running a war under Democracy, yeesh.

I can't believe corruption is that bad unless he was using Communism or something.

 

[RallyK]

Originally posted by delijoe
yikes! Lots of criticisms here...an archer destroyed a cruise missile?

That seems about right to me. He was transferring the missile between cities so it wasn't 'flying at 300mph' as he states. It was probably stuck in the back of a truck unless he knows how to land a cruise missile safely. I don't think this is a bug, but instead intentional.

That said, it does seem like his version was buggy. I wonder if his copy was the final one.

 

[RallyK]

After looking at the screen shots some more I have some more comments. First, the Manhatten Project screen says it allows nukes by all civs. I was under the impression that this was a small wonder, which could mean that the version he played was perhaps a little old.

Second, I love the screen where he is moving a unit by clicking and dragging. This was the primary way I moved units in Civ2. The reason this screen gets me excited is that it shows the path the unit will take as you drag across the screen. I knew this feature was in from the Civ3 Info-center, but this is the first time I've seen a screenshot of it.

 

[Pggar]

Originally posted by RallyK


That seems about right to me. He was transferring the missile between cities so it wasn't 'flying at 300mph' as he states. It was probably stuck in the back of a truck unless he knows how to land a cruise missile safely. I don't think this is a bug, but instead intentional.

That said, it does seem like his version was buggy. I wonder if his copy was the final one.

You mean that if you're heading your missile to an enemy city and your move ends before you get to the target, the archer won't be able to destroy it. I don't think so. IMO, it's a flaw (at least a minor one).

 

[RallyK]

Originally posted by Pggar


You mean that if you're heading your missile to an enemy city and your move ends before you get to the target, the archer won't be able to destroy it. I don't think so. IMO, it's a flaw (at least a minor one).

I suspect that missile attacks will be abstracted like aircraft attacks. A missile in a city would either be given a target or transported via ground/sea to a new location. Perhaps someone could confirm this with a manual or their experience.

 

[Thunderfall]

First, the Manhatten Project screen says it allows nukes by all civs. I was under the impression that this was a small wonder, which could mean that the version he played was perhaps a little old.

Can someone check the Civilopedia?

 

[Pggar]

Originally posted by RallyK
After looking at the screen shots some more I have some more comments. First, the Manhatten Project screen says it allows nukes by all civs. I was under the impression that this was a small wonder, which could mean that the version he played was perhaps a little old.

The last screenshots from the editor also classified the Man. Proj. as a major wonder, and it didn't look like it was editable to become a minor one (please somobody denies this).

 

[LoneWolf5050]

Sometimes I disagree with their reviews, but they are one of the fairest review sites out there. Sometimes their people jump the gun. I would suspect the only shortcoming of this review is that the player didn't have time to figure out all the subtleties, so some things that actually makes sense hadn't been figured out yet.

Bob Mayer at Computer Games Online has said you should really read the manual before playing, since it's pretty different than Civ2. Between the Avault review, and the forthcoming CGO review, I think we'll have the true picture. CGO is probably the fairest reviewer of all.

Of course, will that stop anyone here from buying the game and playing it? It's obviously a great game, and it will obviously be fine tuned just like Civ2 was (there were about six patches for that game when it first came out).

--LW

 

[Thunderfall]

It's confirmed: The Manhatan Project is a Great Wonder in Civ3!