Civ III - V

[goodsmell]

Hello guys,
How are you ?


It's been a while since I touched civilization at all and now I want to play again and I have questions.
I want to know what you guys, Civilization III players think about Civ V ?

When sid released Civ IV, I wasn't really impressed and in fact I didn't like it at all.
I saw some screens, gameplay on youtube and it looks quite good, but so did Civ IV but after playing civ III for a decent amount of time I just couldn't play Civ IV, I just couldn't get used to the gameplay and everything.


so all in all, what are your thoughts about Civilization V ?

 

[Schalke 04]

Hi goodsmell!

Nice to see, that I am not alone with my taste. I really LOVE Civ 3, and enjoyed this game for years. When Civ 4 came out I was totally thrilled, because I like this series so much. Well, actually I never played even one Civ 4 game till the end...

I don't know why, but I really couldn't get used to it. So I kept playing Civ 3 and I didn't regret it.

Now that Civ 5 came out, I wanted to give it a try. There is no doubt, that Civ 5 is not perfect at all. It suffers from a lot of bugs and balancing issues. However, I think (hope) they will be fixed somewhen. But even with these problems I really like to play Civ 5!

Having said that, I am absolutely positive that I will come back to Civ 3 for a game or two in the future

 

[vmxa]

Well I guess I could sum it up by saying that I paid 59.99 for V and I am not playing. It is like IV was for me, I was excited when I got them. I played both every day for a month or so and then decide it was not much fun for me.

IOW I am not going to bash either game, but I did prefer C3C over them. I will say that V has many problems the time I played. Note that I did not go backto II and it was my favoite for years.

Meaning I do not just dismiss later versions for not being the original.

 

[mythmonster2]

I have CiV, but I'm still a bit wary of it after my first experiences. I'm gonna wait until the first expansion comes out, play it after downloading all the patches till then, and then see if I want to get the expansions.

 

[GamezRule]

Haven't bought either of those two. I usually buy action when I buy new games.

 

[Chieftess]

Civ4 was nice, having some features I liked (promotion system), but other's I didn't (economy system, an in-game map editor that felt too much like Civ2-style cheating... granted, that was fun for its' time back in Civ2).

Anyway, I only played the Civ5 demo. I love the interface, which looks nice and clean (and fast for a change!) compared to the other civ games. Gameplay is interesting, but does seem a bit more simplistic. I'm not sure if having the game tell you the chances of success/failure if you attack is a good thing or not. Seems like too much info. In fact, that's what I don't like about Civ5 - too much info (and too much distracting "pretty graphics") displayed on the screen. Too confusing.

I have no plans on playing the full game, though. After 20 years of Civ, it's kind of at a civ-overload point right now.

 

[ThERat]

Stay away from Civ 5 I'd say. Besides being unpolished and seemingly rushed, the new concepts are rather punitive in nature.

Usually, fans of Civ 3 like big empires with lots of cities. Civ 5 does everything it can to penalize you for doing that. It's not very good at it though, but the philosophy remains.

 

[goodsmell]

Thank you for sharing your experiences/thoughts about Civ 4 and 5.

As Chieftess mentioned about "pretty graphics", it was one of the main reasons I didn't want to play Civ IV, I got used to the simple graphics of civ3 and the new 'super duper' graphics are quite confusing for me too. That said, it would be great if some of the new features from the new versions could be added to C3C, I'd love to see new diplomatic features in C3C but I guess that would never happen.

Be well.

 

[Spoonwood]

I know there exists a mod somewhere that has incorporated the religion concept into civ III.

 

[John L]

You know, what I find so strange is that after all these years, I still find Civ III the best Civ game. I'll admit I have not tried out version V yet, even though I have the game. There must be something about all the initial trouble experienced, with all the bugs, in Civ IV when it first came out. But there is definitely more for me that has turned me off, and stuck with Civ III.

If you are left handed, as I am, Civ III is user friendly to we Southpaws. That's right, it is either one big coincidence, or someone did this on purpose. For example, if the player is using his/her mouse, or touch pad, with the left hand, the right hand is able to use the numeric keypad and move the units any direction. Also, the "Enter" key takes care of all the buttons that need to be clicked. So, the player can point with the left hand, and make the initial click, and follow up with the final click, and do it very quickly.

Now, try that in Civ IV. It's one Huge Cluster Foxtrot, because the "Enter" button doesn't really do diddly squat. It takes twice as long, and is terribly frustrating for we lefties. It's like someone purposefully decided to screw us royally.

Also, the quick and easy tinkering I can do with Civ III, I can only dream of doing in Civ IV. I'm not a programmer, and want to have things straight forward. But you cannot do things straight forward in IV, as far as I know. It's like they purposefully wanted us to keep our hands out of the really detailed stuff.

I'm currently in the middle of a Civ IV game, and I am frustrated with it. Now, granted this is the first time in about four years for me in IV, but it still sucks IMO. There is too much fluff, and attention to the things that really have no bearing to the game. If Alexander is a big bad homo, who cares? And Hatshepsut, with her PC African lips, and huge eyes, are a negative to me. Oh, and while I'm at it, having ships do the cartoon arival, like being driven by Daffy Duck, are so unnecessary IMO.

But here is another reason why I like Civ III best. A large map is a large map. With Civ IV a large map is....., well, sorta medium in size. There is just no Grand Scale there anymore.

Oh well, I am through venting my spleen here. But I really do have some issues with Civ III, First and foremost is the fact that the AI for the opponent could have been a bit more intuitive. Anyway, perhaps I doth protest a bit too much. So, I'm going to make this my last Civ IV game and try out Civ V, just to see if it is really an improvement in the game, as well as the realism and graphics. I know the last two are going to be better, but a great game has to be able to stand on it's own merits, and the last two be just icing on the cake.

I guess we'll see real soon, won't we?

 

[mythmonster2]

Yeah, that's pretty much my main gripe for IV and, though I haven't played it for a while, V. Scale. I want to feel like I'm ruling an empire, stretching over landmasses, landing on far-away coasts. CIV, though, didn't have that feel at all. Even huge maps couldn't satisfy, and the lag even on my high-end computer definitely didn't help. I really want to try CiV again soon, considering the patches are supposed to have help immensely, but I simply can't bring myself to play it. Maybe I'm just afraid I'll be let down again.

 

[Quintillus]

Maybe I'm just afraid I'll be let down again.

I think that's part of it for me. And that Civ5's reception is so poor doesn't help - I would've been cautious even if its reception had been positive. It also probably makes a difference that I found Civ4 to actually be fun once I finally started playing it with all its expansions, whereas it wasn't much fun compared to III with just vanilla + all patches, and was tedious with vanilla + no patches. Thus I figure if I'm going to enjoy Civ5 long term, it behooves me to wait until they at least get a ton of patches out, and probably until they have an expansion or two out.

Granted, most games are better with their expansions, but with Civ4/5 it seems like you need the expansion for the fun. Whereas with Age of Empires or Total War, sure I'd rather have the expansion, but the vanilla game is lots of fun in its own right.

Disclaimer: I've only played the demo. The biggest problem seemed to be that the AI blew. The first game I easily outexpanded the AI at Warlord, like really outexpanded by a factor of more than three. Second game I drew even with them in combat at King. Third game I owned them in combat at King. I've never won Civ4 above Noble. I shouldn't have been able to own the AI at a higher level in my second game with fighting like that. Course my empire happiness was negative forty-seven or something very bad when I finished owning the AI, but they were vanquished so who cares? But the game didn't seem to offer much promise of presenting a good challenge.

 

[Puppeteer]

Although I am plenty old enough to have been a fan since Civ 1, I was never properly introduced to the genre until SMAC, and then I got Civ III. I still go back and play these two. I've fired up Civ 2 a couple of times but never really played it.

I bought Civ IV when it came out, but I could never get into it. Later I tried CivRev and couldn't get into it, either. I just don't care. I don't plan on trying Civ V.

 

[John L]

Although I am plenty old enough to have been a fan since Civ 1, I was never properly introduced to the genre until SMAC, and then I got Civ III. I still go back and play these two. I've fired up Civ 2 a couple of times but never really played it.

I bought Civ IV when it came out, but I could never get into it. Later I tried CivRev and couldn't get into it, either. I just don't care. I don't plan on trying Civ V.

Oh, I'll give it a try soon. I just picked up a reconditioned Dell Quad computer, so it should be more than up to the job. But I'm going to study hard up front before going after it.

I just wish the AI was able to be upgraded in CivIII. To my thinking, the interaction with the opponents is the main thing, once you are able to change the smaller stuff. And too, I'm not easily swayed by the subjective stuff, such as multiple person units, which just take up memory. But layout and easy/speed of use is also very important. And remember KISS.

 

[Silmaril Dragon]

Civ III was and probably still is my favorite computer game. I went through many an install/uninstall cycle with that game, and last played it in 2004 or 2005. Bought Civ IV the day it came out, and experienced things many Civ III fans complained of: bugs, unfamiliar/too fancy graphics, unfamiliar new game concepts, and high system requirements.

Stopped playing after a month or so, mostly because of the lag and my near-inability to see enemy units very well in my territory, especially those dropped off by some sneaky galleon. Don't even get me started on gunships....

Missed Civ III again three months ago, but couldn't find it and figured I had sold it (again). Found Civ IV instead, remembered my misgivings, and said "...well, it's still a Civ..." Installed the complete version (bought from Steam for six dollars or so!?), and now quite enjoy it. I doubt I'll ever master key game concepts in Civ IV to the extent I did in Civ III, but I'm enjoying myself, and getting better in slow steps.

I doubt I'll ever try Civ V. I did find my complete Civ III copy in my storage space just days ago, and considered, REALLY considered installing it and forgetting Civ IV for a while, but couldn't quite do it. Concepts like pollution, corruption, and the enemy AI cheating, which Civ III has in spades, discouraged me from going back.

Ah, memories though...

 

[shl7070]

I tried civ V in a friends' home and didn't especially liked what I see. I don't like the one-hex-unit limit for a supposed "grand strategy" game, it make combat more tedious then in civ 3 or 4.

The philosphy of the game looks like using every possible way to penalize expansion and war expansion (Harder to build staff, slower combat, mainenance for roads, civ-wise and not city-wise contentment meter) When I go to war in either civ 3 or 4 I don't start building teathers/cathedrals and other building like that just to compensate conquered cities unhappiness effect empire wide. I understand the resistance of the conquered but I don't understand that building a teater in some crap city can compensate or even needed to compensate.

And there is STEAM. After those guys refused to sell me some games because I'm in "inappropriate region" blahblah... I don't want to have any buisness with them. Hard copy of civ V is even more expensive and still requires STEAM. (It carries insane 80-100$ price tag where I live). The other civilization games were bought from online retailers that don't discriminate between customers and don't require active account after downloading, registration and activation.

If the game become fully patched, given normal expansion like BTS or C3C- not the additional civs DLC that they sell with a price attached to each, and disengage from steam and allow all online retailers to distribute it (monopoly distribution increases the price and decreases quality) I would consider it.

 

[ChaosArbiter]

The philosphy of the game looks like using every possible way to penalize expansion and war expansion (Harder to build staff, slower combat, mainenance for roads, civ-wise and not city-wise contentment meter)

Some of those sound like they could be interesting, at least if implemented correctly. Road maintenance in particular I can understand - they take a lot to keep going, and there's construction on at least three major roads where I live right now, and that doesn't count the two-three other places that they've worked on in the past few years. Civ-wide vs City-wide contentment is something that I can see happening, although I'd prefer if both were used - city happiness affects that city, civ happiness affects your government and its benefits (lowered unit support, slower workers, etc). Again, though, it would depend on how well they're implemented.

And there is STEAM.

Although this is the main reason I'm probably never going to play 5. Or Supreme Commander 2, which I didn't even realize was a STEAM game until *after* I'd bought it and started installing it ... :/

 

[darski]

The "Steam" thing is what stopped me cold from buying V.

I also didn't like the graphics all that much. I am challenged by spatial effects. I had a hard time adapting to the diagonal grid when it started in Civ II and I still have to think about how to get units where I want them. I depend on goto all the time. the hexes would just send me round the bend.

 

[shl7070]

Some of those sound like they could be interesting, at least if implemented correctly. Road maintenance in particular I can understand - they take a lot to keep going, and there's construction on at least three major roads where I live right now, and that doesn't count the two-three other places that they've worked on in the past few years. Civ-wide vs City-wide contentment is something that I can see happening, although I'd prefer if both were used - city happiness affects that city, civ happiness affects your government and its benefits (lowered unit support, slower workers, etc). Again, though, it would depend on how well they're implemented.


:/

Your idea reminds me of the old step brother of the civ series- call to power.
There was a basic happines level for the empire with individual city modifications factors- buildings, specialist, overpopulation and luxury. War weariness, work conditions and government determined the empire rating.

Something along this line could be implemented to give an interesting management issue.

They could also borrow the awesome combat system call to power had (in most other aspects it was a crappy game).
All units were divided into ranged and close quarters. There was stack limit of 9 and all stack fought at once with the enemy stack. In order to win your stack had to be balanced between ranged and melee, and on the same time there were no SODs and low infuence of RNG.

 

[Moosezilla]

In the last week or so I played Axis & Allies spring '42 with a buddy and enjoyed it. When I called him back he had dled "triplea" (on his phone) and was playing it. So I went online and found Game table online which installed spy ware and 100 privacy issues each time I used it. Now I use triplea. So no steam for me. If CivVI isn't "all in the box" you can have it.