Civ 3 or Age of empires 2

[Chalk4]

I was thinking about getting civ 3 complete next week, but i also wanted to get age of empires 2.
What would u guys get if u could only get one thanx!

 

[gmaharriet]

I'd be very much surprised if you get any responses recommending AOE over Civ on this board, which is entirely devoted to Civ Fanatics.

I used to play AOE before I discovered Civ, and now I play nothing but Civ3. Getting "Complete" is a good idea as it has all the different versions and they are fully patched. Enjoy!!!

 

[Heretic_Cata]

I love both games.
But you should buy Civ3 Complete (because it's complete) over Age of Empires 2: Age of Kings (it doesn't have the add-on). But Age of Empires should be on your "Buy list" - it's a great game series.

 

[MAS]

I'm with gmaharriet in that it is a kind of pointless asking CivFanatics whether Civ or AoE is better.

 

[madviking]

Civ3 has 325246^236283 times more replayability than AoE. (IMO)

 

[Heretic_Cata]

I wouldn'y go that high ... I played AoE2 the 4th time, last month.

But AoE doesn't have mods like civ3 .

 

[Dark Sheer]

AoE is a fine game (See? There are CivFanatics who played other games too ). Only thing I hate about AoE series is the limit on number of units (200 I think). And of course when come to replayability no game beats the Civ series.

 

[Flygon]

AoE2 and Civ2 are better than civ 3 in my opinion

 

[Underdawg]

*gasp* ^^^^^^^^



The nerve! Oh well, I stopped playing Civ 3 too and moved to Civ 4.

 

[Flygon]

Ive never tried civ 4 yet but...i dont really like 3D games that much...(might explain how i lost the civ 3 cd)

 

[MadScotsMan]

I like both games, but thats just me....

 

[KyleNumbers]

Age of Empires II is pretty good, and I've played the demo for Age of Empires III, which is also pretty good as well. But Civilization III is on a whole different level, IMO. Much more strategic, as well as no restrictions on the amount of units you can have. AOE also gets pretty boring after a while, while Civ III will never get old(for me at least.). Of course, it depends on your personal taste, but I recommend Civ III (and RoN) over AOE II. Not taking away from the AOE franchise, it's really quite good, but Civilization blows it away. (Once again, IMO)

 

[AutomatedTeller]

I have no intention of even trying AOE, but that's at least partly because 1 game addiction is enough.

But Civ is endlessly replayable - each Civ plays differently, each victory condition plays differently, each map plays differntly, each level plays differently...

To say nothing of the differences given by this site:

COTM/GOTM - test yourself against others using the same start
HOF - try to get the best possible, cooking the map however you can (and who can argue with a 7 turn game!)
Epic game - where you just play around.
Variants...

 

[azzaman333]

AoE II is a pretty good game. But i havent played a single player game for over 6 months now. Multiplayer is good though, since humans dont do the exact same things every single time.

 

[Thasis]

Get Civ III. I don't play it anymore (cause I'm in love with my numereous message boards and modding Civ IV) but when I did it was... well... very full of sensual words I can't say on these boards. It is a very very very good game.

 

[fishjie]

As aoe is microsoft, it's not something I'll ever buy. The less money microsoft can weasel out of my hands, the better. I despise that company and the crooks who run it intensely. So, civ3 definately over aoe.

I cant imagine microsoft making a quality game, anyway.

well that's pretty ignorant. first off, microsoft published aoe, it didn't make it. ensemble studios did. publishing and actually designing/coding the game is not the same thing. big difference.

second, microsoft is a big corporation who did some bad things, but its hardly run by crooks. they do make some good software every now and then you know.

third, aoe II is a good game, so is aoeIII. i'd say try them both out. iirc, one of the civII designers worked on the aoe series.

 

[conquer_dude]

I wouldn'y go that high ... I played AoE2 the 4th time, last month.

But AoE doesn't have mods like civ3 .

You can make scenerios.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

Microsoft is run by crooks, their software is mediochre and buying aoe still is buying from microsoft whoever the people are who developed it.
Your gods are false, I'm afraid.
Anyway you look at it, microsoft sucks. It's the mcdonalds of software. Ask any real computer geeks.

Yea i know they suck. BUT they are idiots with money.
And what did ensemble studios need ? Some idiot with money to distribute their game. Don't discredit Ensemble studios because of Microsoft, they don't deserve it.

 

[Padma]

Moderator Action: Much as I dislike MS, we don't need a Microsoft-bashing thread in Civ3-General Discussion. Please keep the discussion on-topic.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[fishjie]

yeah the thing i like most about AOE II is their campaigns. they are quite educational, as they are based on historical research. whats better, they have many rich informational articles in game about the units, races, etc, kind of like the civlopedia.

there is a rich selection of units, tech tree, and civs to play. you get to do basic diplo, such as pay tribute, ally up, share maps, etc. it also has a random map generator, you can save replays, view a power graph. it is definitely a fine game, but its like comparing apples and oranges, so asking which one to get is an unfair question.

ask yourself, do you want a turn based strategy game where each game lasts for days? or do you want an rts with short games and a focus on resource collection / tactical combat? me i would suggest civ3 for its replay value - games can last for days, so you'll get more bang for your buck. but definitely try out aoeII eventually.

Ask any real computer geeks.

hi i'm a computer programmer who has developed on BOTH linux and windows platforms. kthx.