Civ 3 is awful

[Shodan]

Opening this topic after buting Civ 3 complete and get amused how a crap like this got so good reviews from various sites. (at least now I learned a lesson: to trust in fans reviews ).

Is it possible for a veteran in Sid games like Colonization, Civs 1 and 2, and Alpha Centauri really appreciate Civ 3 ? I mean, for a 1st timer in the genre 4x, the game can even be interesting, but for a veteran ????

- AI is crap - it cheats to keep itself competitive; it lacks any rational humanistic behavior (what SMACs already had, years before this game);

- Diplomacy is shallow - again SMAC is older and better;

- Civs uninteresting - SMAC factions had personalities/ideologies, each seeking to impose its ideas on the others, but in Civ 3 all Civs are puppets for the computer, trying to defeat you at all costs; Even Colonization had better factions with more identity and uniqueness;

- Gameplay dumbed down to "expand, expand, expand, ad infinitum" imposed to the player, is the worst of all Sid games - irrealistic, frustrating, boring and acephalous.

I really tried to like this game. I tried everything. I tried Rhys of Civilization (GREAT WORK THERE RHYS), but the AI cant be modded, making this game a stillborn one.

 

[vmxa]

I have nothing to say about peoples feeling on games, they are thiers. I can say as one that played all the previous versions of Civ and Smac that I prefer this to them.

Yes I felt civ2 was the best game of all at that time. Yes I thought Smac was great. Now I prefer III.

Just for the record the AI does not cheat. It has one advantage that is it knows the tiles from the start. This not exactly a big deal. After Regent level it gets bonus items, that is not cheating.

It no more cheating than if I were to give the 7 and 8 in a game of nine ball or two games in a race to 9 games. It is a spot, not a cheat.

 

[Ansar]

I used to think that SMAC was better, and then , I discovered that its great.
Cant really say anything else though.

 

[Padma]

I played Civ2, SMAC, and the CTP series. Civ3 is the only one that is still on my PC....

 

[TruePurple]

I really like smac, though its population growth system sucks. Been hoping to find a mod for it, but haven't really started looking yet aside from a fruitless google search.

Into civ3 at the moment, it is a fun game, but its got some definite drawbacks, bad AI, automation(well so did smac), diplomacy, only thing really new that really adds to the game is the the resource trading. Don't know when I might get bored of it.

Been so long since I've played civ2 I can't remember much of it.

 

[TyranusBonehead]

Can't speak for the other games as I've never played them, but I have played games like Age of Empires, Starcraft, and Warcraft III. Comparing CivIII to them, I would say CivIII wins hands down on complexity, strategy, replayability, etc. The only thing I think Age of Empires had over CivIII was religion, which we'll be getting with Civ IV.

 

[CommandoBob]

I played SMAC. I did not care for it. In Civ, I understand the technology progression. In SMAC, I could not comprehend it.

(But I did like the terra-forming. That was neat. Raise the sea, lower the mountains, change the weather patterns. Very god-like.)

If you really do not like the game, uninstall it and sell it or give it away. I know that sounds harsh, but I do not intend to be harsh. Given the number of things you dislike and the evident strength of those dislikes, this may be the best solution.

It does not sound like that CivIII is the game you thought it was. So get rid of it.

 

[Himalia]

I can understand how people can think the Ai is cheating at times but the fact remains it isnt. The AI at times can be very dumb but also quiet sneaky, if thats just chance or not im not sure guess it must happen sometimes. For me what really made the game was the multiplayer mode i just wish you could have more than eight players on that

 

[Bungus]

Shodan, those are Civ3's weaknesses, but you make them sound worse than they are.

No RTS or "God" game to date has rational humanistic behavior. They all give the AI opponents edges and bonuses that the human doesn't have in order to even the playing field and create a challenge. Even the much-touted Rome Total War has glaring AI deficencies. But all of civs are can be viewed or changed in the editor, and it doesn't give itself combat advantages.
Can't say much for the diplomacy system. While its not real complex, it gets the job done. Its not terrible.
You make it sound like the civs team up to dogpile the human player, but they do fight a fair bit amongst themselves.
And yeah, in the default game the expand expand philosophy sucks, but this can be seriously aleviated with mods/modding.

 

[Yaype]

I played Civ2, SMAC, and the CTP series. Civ3 is the only one that is still on my PC....

Well said.

 

[TruePurple]

Well games like smac allow you to actually work with the AI, in civ 3 theres no loyalty and no way to work with the AI, even inside a MA. Smac had brotherhood agreements (ability to be in the same square as your brother allies units and even in his/her cities) and were able to request your allie to attack specific targets.

But civ 3 has its bright spots. Though too few changes from civ 2 to really be worth buying, even though I got civ 3+conquest for $25 or so. If I had known, I might not have bought it, but now that I have, I am enjoying it, maybe not long term but eh.

 

[BIGRICK]

what is smac?

 

[TruePurple]

sid mer alpha centuri. A great version/spin off of civ.

 

[Ansar]

sid mer alpha centuri. A great version/spin off of civ.

actually, its the game after civ, cause the space race is to alpha centauri.

 

[Own]

When I started Civ3, I sucked, and thought it was crap. I didn't understand any game mechanics, so it was no fun. But I had nothing better to do, and I found the goodness in it.

 

[Durkz]

When I started Civ3, I sucked, and thought it was crap. I didn't understand any game mechanics, so it was no fun. But I had nothing better to do, and I found the goodness in it.

same here.

 

[gmaharriet]

I liked Civ III when I first bought it, but it's increased my enjoyment since I found this board and upgraded to C3C. I love reading the ideas other players come up with and it's added so much depth to the game to be able to talk to other players about it and increase my skill.

 

[TruePurple]

SMAC is civ, just themed differently with a number of revolutionary new ideas (many of which were ignored by civ3) But civ none the less. Even the same team as civ 2 if I'm not mistaken.

@harriet
Yah, being able to discuss stuff on the forum about the game helps the fun alot.

 

[Ghostwind]

I was a Civ II fanatic, and when I bought Civ III I was a bit disappointed. I still consider Civ II my favorite game of all time, but I never play it. I am still playing Civ III and my appreciation of it has grown over time. I've come to consider it a great game.

I have a copy of Alpha Centauri somewhere. I didn't get it until fairly recently, and I've only looked at it briefly. I got it around the same time C3C came out, and I wanted more recent graphics, etc., so I played C3C instead.

Maybe I'll go back and have another look at SMAC, given all the praise here.

~Ghostwind

 

[TruePurple]

You should get the alien crossfire upgrade to fully appreciate it.
Moderator Action: Link deleted.

I personally bought the planatary pack which included it and two very thick books with it, $30 some time ago. Certainly got my moneys worth, even though I didn't find civ3 kind of community & mods for it.

I dont like its population growth based on city size system (was like that in civ2 I think though) Or the imbalance of the helicopter. But AC has alot going for it. Civ3 should have used more of its ideas.