Don't get me wrong Civ 4 is an alright game, I have played many hours and had some fun, but game of the year??? Goes to show you that it has not been a very good year for computer games.
Don't get me wrong Civ 4 is an alright game, I have played many hours and had some fun, but game of the year??? Goes to show you that it has not been a very good year for computer games.
My reaction too. I'm bewildered by the universally wonderful ratings the game has got from reviewers. Civ 4 does have some useful improvements compared with earlier versions, but combat is still a drag and attaining any of the victory conditions is a chore. When I say "a chore", I don't mean that it's difficult (that depends on the difficulty level); I mean that it's tedious and not fun.
The only part of Civ that I've ever really enjoyed (in any version from 1 to 4) is the early stage of exploration and city-building. Once national borders have stabilized, all you can do is to attack one city after another (slow, repetitive, boring) or sit there at peace building one city improvement after another (static, repetitive, boring).
I haven't given up playing it yet, but I'm looking for some way to make it more enjoyable. Maybe if I cut the game in in half and play only the first half?
I haven't given up playing it yet, but I'm looking for some way to make it more enjoyable. Maybe if I cut the game in in half and play only the first half?
I'm a little nonplussed by . I want to like it because I just loved and Civ2 but there is some underlying quality that is leaving me unenthused.
Still it's the game I play the most so I guess GotY is appropriate.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.