civ 3 players will not move on

[jessiecat]

I've been reading this lot with interest, because although I bought Civ IV last year, I really can't get into it. I feel a bit guilty about that, as I played III, II & I to death. I even gave CTP & CTP II a fair try. Athough Civ IV added some new ideas which should be developed further (like religion), it seems to have embraced the idea that graphics are everything.

Perhaps the best test of Civ IV is to see how much it has replaced it's predessor. Back in 2003 (when the ages of Civ II and Civ III are comparible to the ages of Civ III & Civ IV) Civ II was fading away, as the majority of gamers upgraded to III (Hardcore II fans don't shoot!) Today, the Civ III community is still very healthy, which may be a sign that perhaps I'm not alone in my feelings regarding IV.

The continuing vibrancy of the Civ III society may also be a sign of the quality of the game. As a quite hardcore gamer with over a decade experiance with PC games, I can say that III is possibly the most stable (doesn't crash, etc) game I have ever played, and is joint first in length of large community support (the other is The Sims)

With the comment about having to learn XML and Python, it's the way of the world. It is stupid, however not to have a dedicated editor for IV. It is often the first port of call for new scenario creation.

For me, I'm willing to give IV another year or so. If I still can't get into it by then, i'll put it aside and wait for Civ V. It will proberly be around in '09, I hope.

Agree with most of this. As you may have noticed, I'm one of those who's
moved back to Civ3 after 6mos. of Civ4. I wasn't happy when I first saw it,
either. Civ 3 plays and feels more like Civ 2. And, yes, I was one of those
who didn't want to move on to civ 3 at first. but after smashing the A.I
time and time again on Diety with huge scores I needed a bigger challenge.
Civ 3 gave me that, though I've never been as successful on anything
above Monarch as I once was on Civ 2 Diety. Diff. AI I guess or maybe I'm just getter older.
Still playing Civ 3 rather than Civ 4 cause it's more fun.
That's all that really counts, isn't it?

BTW What does "Hardcore Civ2 fans don't shoot" actually mean?

 

[Quintillus]

The continuing vibrancy of the Civ III society may also be a sign of the quality of the game. As a quite hardcore gamer with over a decade experiance with PC games, I can say that III is possibly the most stable (doesn't crash, etc) game I have ever played, and is joint first in length of large community support (the other is The Sims)

With the comment about having to learn XML and Python, it's the way of the world. It is stupid, however not to have a dedicated editor for IV. It is often the first port of call for new scenario creation.

For me, I'm willing to give IV another year or so. If I still can't get into it by then, i'll put it aside and wait for Civ V. It will proberly be around in '09, I hope.

It's not bad in stability, but given that it didn't like my Win98 computer for four years (it does now), doesn't like Vista (at least for me), and had a 1.5 GB memory-leak last week, I can't say it's the most stable game ever . CivIV isn't bad, but I had problems with drivers at first, as well as problems with some scenarios not starting right thanks to XML and Python errors by the scripters, so I can't say it's perfect, either.

I'm pretty sure Minesweeper has been more stable for me than Civ .

You could always go back to CivIII if you can't get into CivIV. No one knows if Civ5 will be better or worse than CivIII.

BTW What does "Hardcore Civ2 fans don't shoot" actually mean?

Back in 2003 (when the ages of Civ II and Civ III are comparible to the ages of Civ III & Civ IV) Civ II was fading away

How DARE you say it was fading away!!! The CivII community is still going strong!!! CivIII is uncomparably worse than Civ2! No Spy units, some barbarian "culture" concept, not running well at all on any computer below 800 MHz! Not to mention those absolutely ugly sprites. Hang the traitor!!! Civilization II Forever!!!

That's what he means by "Civilization II Fans don't shoot". . I've never played CivII, so I can't really defend it like the experts...and I'm in the "Civ3 is the best Civ game ever" camp.

 

[Ace of Gold]

It's not bad in stability, but given that it didn't like my Win98 computer for four years (it does now), doesn't like Vista (at least for me), and had a 1.5 GB memory-leak last week, I can't say it's the most stable game ever . CivIV isn't bad, but I had problems with drivers at first, as well as problems with some scenarios not starting right thanks to XML and Python errors by the scripters, so I can't say it's perfect, either.

I'm pretty sure Minesweeper has been more stable for me than Civ .

You could always go back to CivIII if you can't get into CivIV. No one knows if Civ5 will be better or worse than CivIII.





How DARE you say it was fading away!!! The CivII community is still going strong!!! CivIII is uncomparably worse than Civ2! No Spy units, some barbarian "culture" concept, not running well at all on any computer below 800 MHz! Not to mention those absolutely ugly sprites. Hang the traitor!!! Civilization II Forever!!!

That's what he means by "Civilization II Fans don't shoot". . I've never played CivII, so I can't really defend it like the experts...and I'm in the "Civ3 is the best Civ game ever" camp.

the civ 2 community is alot stronger than the civ 3 community. most of the civ 2 players have skipped civ 3 and moved to civ 4 but they still play civ 2 and have an active forum, unlike civ 3

 

[CyberChrist]

the civ 2 community is alot stronger than the civ 3 community. most of the civ 2 players have skipped civ 3 and moved to civ 4 but they still play civ 2 and have an active forum, unlike civ 3

Hmm, I don't see much evidence anywhere to support any of these claims to be honest.

 

[ThERat]

Churchill, stop being so childish...usually our forums have been quite mature, but I think CIV has seen an influx of quite a few kids, that post immature stuff...it doesn't do you any good to post claims with no substance...

 

[Ace of Gold]

Churchill, stop being so childish...usually our forums have been quite mature, but I think CIV has seen an influx of quite a few kids, that post immature stuff...it doesn't do you any good to post claims with no substance...

and what do you think you and the other civ 3 players are doing

 

[ThERat]

and what do you think you and the other civ 3 players are doing

I am playing the game I like best and don't care whether you call me backwards or whatever else. It's plain childish to think that others are wrong to like different things than yourself. It's no other than those religious nuts that tell you only their religion is the right one.
Play CIV and let others do what they like. Stop being a missionary for CIV. Some people like, some others don't, there is no problem with that, isn't it?

This of course applies for C3C fans as well. Neither is right or wrong.

 

[Ace of Gold]

I am playing the game I like best and don't care whether you call me backwards or whatever else. It's plain childish to think that others are wrong to like different things than yourself. It's no other than those religious nuts that tell you only their religion is the right one.
Play CIV and let others do what they like. Stop being a missionary for CIV. Some people like, some others don't, there is no problem with that, isn't it?

This of course applies for C3C fans as well. Neither is right or wrong.

and i am doing the same thing as you, playing the game i love. i am only saying these statements to respond to the civ 3 missionarys who are making crazy statements who are only playing civ 3 because either 1)their computer is not good enough for civ 4 and their making these statements because the game they play always has to be the best game or 2)they do not have money to buy civ 4 and there making these statements to try to convince people that they are not backwards. And as a matter of fact they are backwards. backwards is using or playing old technology when their is new technology available. kind of like you rat backwards. another example. the aztecs were backwards using spears (civ 3) while europeans were using gunpowder(civ 4)

 

[King Flevance]

and i am doing the same thing as you, playing the game i love.

LOL. No you aren't. Not in this thread anyways. You are being a missionary for Civ 4.

i am only saying these statements to respond to the civ 3 missionarys who are making crazy statements

These are the people you are mimicking. Because you follow this statement with false claims.

who are only playing civ 3 because either 1)their computer is not good enough for civ 4 and their making these statements because the game they play always has to be the best game

In option 1 they are lying because we should all know by now that the game Churchill is playing is the actual "best game".

or 2)they do not have money to buy civ 4 and there making these statements to try to convince people that they are not backwards. And as a matter of fact they are backwards. backwards is using or playing old technology when their is new technology available.

Or option 2, they are lying again because they can't afford the cool game Churchill is playing and seek justification.

It's inconceivable that someone may actually like Civ 3, or worse, prefer it to Civ 4. They are lying!!!
I don't know about you guys but I love going on the internet and trying to convince people that a game I don't like is much better than one I do to people I don't know. After this post I plan on running over to the Call of Duty forums and convincing them that Call of Duty 2 is obviously so much better than 4.

This post needs an in-your-face troll remark.

kind of like you rat backwards.

There we go. Now it's living up to it's potential.

another example. the aztecs were backwards using spears (civ 3) while europeans were using gunpowder(civ 4)

I am seriously surprised Civ 4 wasn't referred to as a modern armor. Although, I can imagine why.

Don't you know yet Churchill? Spear beats everything.

 

[Swein Forkbeard]

I am playing the game I like best and don't care whether you call me backwards or whatever else. It's plain childish to think that others are wrong to like different things than yourself. It's no other than those religious nuts that tell you only their religion is the right one.
Play CIV and let others do what they like. Stop being a missionary for CIV. Some people like, some others don't, there is no problem with that, isn't it?

This of course applies for C3C fans as well. Neither is right or wrong.

ThERat, I originally knew you as a Civ4 succession game player. Why did you move backwards?

 

[Ogedei_the_Mad]

and i am doing the same thing as you, playing the game i love. i am only saying these statements to respond to the civ 3 missionarys who are making crazy statements who are only playing civ 3 because either 1)their computer is not good enough for civ 4 and their making these statements because the game they play always has to be the best game or 2)they do not have money to buy civ 4 and there making these statements to try to convince people that they are not backwards. And as a matter of fact they are backwards. backwards is using or playing old technology when their is new technology available. kind of like you rat backwards. another example. the aztecs were backwards using spears (civ 3) while europeans were using gunpowder(civ 4)

If you don't find your statement here flat-out hypocritical, then you really need to learn how to "think" before you type. To cast yourself and your preferences as being absolutely right is a sign of childishness, plain and simple. And if you can't get it into your head that people have different ideas about what is a better game, then that is just plain unfortunate.

Interesting that you suggest economics has something to do with this. Are you even old enough to make your own purchases and economic decisions? Your statements suggest otherwise. So far, while *some* other individuals [Civ4 and Civ3 players alike] here have made better-constructed arguments, all you are doing is shouting "my precious."

 

[Mirc]

To cast yourself and your preferences as being absolutely right is a sign of childishness, plain and simple.

However the inability of so many Civ4 players to understand this simple fact makes me wonder what kind of target audience it actually has.

Like this gem in the first page:

Civ 4 > Civ 3 simple.

Because it is just absolute truth. And blue eyes are simply better than brown eyes. I'm really getting tired of all these comments.

 

[ThERat]

Mirc, don't bother to reply to the children of CIV here...let them call us backwards...who cares.
Heck, I listen to backwards music from the 80's instead of techno crap and I am happy. I enjoy you playing the classical guitar, though as you know, classical is so backwards...let us b morons and have fun and let those kids be happy to call us backwards.

In German we have a nice saying: 'Du hast Recht und Ich hab meine Ruhe'

 

[mrt144]

Mirc, don't bother to reply to the children of CIV here...let them call us backwards...who cares.
Heck, I listen to backwards music from the 80's instead of techno crap and I am happy. I enjoy you playing the classical guitar, though as you know, classical is so backwards...let us b morons and have fun and let those kids be happy to call us backwards.

In German we have a nice saying: 'Du hast Recht und Ich hab meine Ruhe'

actually we would let you be morons if you werent up in our business showing us what kind of morons you are. go away, there isn't anything in CIV or this CIV forum for you.

let me put it this way; do you look kindly on a bunch of loudmouth people who run up on your forums to tout something you don't care about? thats what you're doing to us.

Moderator Action: Keep it polite.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[ThERat]

it's sometimes good to reflect on yourself before throwing around accusations

The thread started opened the Pandora box asking for input why people do not want to move on to CIV...so what do you expect? You were seriously waiting for all CIV fanbois to support him what morons we are without getting an response? Why ask in a forum when you all are so sure that CIV is the pinnacle of mankind?

Very childish...

Moderator Action: .... don't inflame the situation.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Ace of Gold]

i cant believe you guys are saying im childish and typing bad posts.look at thse posts absoutly no proof just saying opinions. obviously the civ 3 forums are less than 1/3. also saying the grahics want to make you vomit. how can you say that when you have been playing civ 3 and saying those graphics do not make you vomit. as i am saying i am not the only child here.

Once again, you prove how stupid you really are. Seriously, no one can be wrong thinking a game is better or worse than another game. Please, use your brain if you have one...



A very small minority prefer Civ 3? Looking at the activity in the Civ 3 and 4 forums right now, 1/3 of the people in a Civ related forum are in Civ 3's subforums. That is not a very small minority.



Probably a third of the people who had significant problems with Civ 4 when it was released.



Getting rid of corruption came at the cost of being the ruler of an empire. Civ 4 you're the ruler of a small number of cities or you're crippled. You can't have a big army or you're crippled. You can't remove all WW at the expense of other things in your empire even, which is a huge loss for those wanting to be able to stage huge battles between massive armies.



The Civ 4 graphics make me want to vomit, that's how bad they are. Plus, 3d graphics aren't easy to mod, so you can't replace the graphics with others you would prefer unlike in Civ 3. In my opinion, the Warlords expansion was the worst game ever made by Firaxis. Adding a completely unbalancing unit, a new Great Person the AI failed to use wisely and Vassal States which didn't work in anyway like they were intended? Great expansion...

and also i dont know why you are calling me childish.when i make statements at least i give proof. the proof i put on this thread is civ 3 is worse then civ 4 because of 1)graphics suck 2)corruption 3)not as much wonders 4)pollution 5)not enough buildings 6)lacking religion and corporation. 7)lacking great people 8)lacking resorces 8)lacking units 9)no unique buildings 10)music sucks for civ 3 11)only 1 leader per civ 12) not as much scenarios 13)no wonder movies 14)siege equipments can get captured and can only bombard. (how realistic is that if you have cannons you would just surrendur against an archer when in real life and civ 4 you can just shoot them down. you can not give colonies independence 14)the palace feature in civ 3 is horable. its not like a king would live in a cave like it is in civ 3 unless you upgrade it.15) no random events 16)i do not like the strength and defense stats for the units 17)there are no promotions 18)the AI is really dumb. so with all these reasons i posted you still think im childish. (atleast i give reasons for my arguments unlime other players)

 

[mrt144]

it's sometimes good to reflect on yourself before throwing around accusations

The thread started opened the Pandora box asking for input why people do not want to move on to CIV...so what do you expect? You were seriously waiting for all CIV fanbois to support him what morons we are without getting an response? Why ask in a forum when you all are so sure that CIV is the pinnacle of mankind?

Very childish...

i expect you to be happy with what you have and not sink to the level of a CIV poster you detest of. i'd expect anyone with an ounce of self proclaimed maturity to stay away from topics they have to actively seek out and be obnoxious in.

i think it's sad that Civ III players feel the need to defend themselves like this.
even if you "win the argument" you spent time on something that has no relevance to your enjoyment of Civ III

 

[ThERat]

and also i dont know why you are calling me childish.when i make statements at least i give proof. the proof i put on this thread is civ 3 is worse then civ 4

childish...shall we all bow to you

mrt144, you are right in what you say (I really man it)...enough of going to the level of churchill and swein...

 

[mintyfreshdeath]

I play civ4-bts and last week I booted up civ2 for the first time in years. It is still a fantastic game but I have to say, I had forgotten how dated the AI is. So many times I'd find a rival civ dump a unit in my territory, hampering the movement of any units trying to do something in the vicinity or blocking access to a city tile. So I'll ask whoever it is to remove their units from my territory and often find myself at war. I still love that game so much but I have obviously been spoiled forever by civ3 and, in particular, civ4 because things like what I just described seem unnecessary, nonsensical and kind of annoying to me now.

This is a pretty big thread and I'm sure it's been stated a million times already but, in my most humble view, civ4-bts is the best incarnation of the series.

 

[Ace of Gold]

childish...shall we all bow to you

mrt144, you are right in what you say (I really man it)...enough of going to the level of churchill and swein...

who are you calling childish. you have trouble definding yourself and all you have to say is how childish we are all. and what do you mean by "i really man it " is that a misspelled word or are you trying to tell us something. if your trying to spell mean than thats sad your calling us childish but you can not even spell the basic words

Moderator Action: No need to attack spelling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889