CIV IV: a step backwards...
- Thread starter CIV-RAZOR
- Start date
You can't really judge a game after 7 hours, especially not after playing a similar game for maybe hundreds, or thousands of hours. You will be sentimental to how you are used to play civilization. Embrace the changes. Try to flow with it instead of pushing against a wall.
In my opinion Civ4 is a much better game than Civ3 was, and I played Civ3 a lot.
It fixes a lot of the problems with Civ3.
- Much of the micromanagement I felt necessary in Civ3 is now pretty much gone.
- The tech tree is so much better.
- Civics are an immense improvement over the government types of Civ3.
- Great People and Specialist are now a fully functional feature/mechanic instead of some hack put on top of the gameplay.
- Religions can create alliances, relationships, other reasons for war than just territory grabs. Though it can be a bit easy to manipulate and sometimes creates too forced alliances etc which I hope will be improved upon in the next civ game.
- Terrain and Feature division, and resources and improvements work much better.
- Siege isn't as overpowered, even though it still is the way to go.
- Graphics and general Graphics design is better
- Music is better (even though I usually mute it now)
- The combat system with it's promotions and experience is SO MUCH BETTER. I was practically begging on my bare knees for them to implement anti-unit type bonuses and they did. THANKS FIRAXIS! No longer do we have static attack and defense values. Now instead spearmen are better versus mounted and archers get defense in cities and hills. Mounted units get flanking and able to take promotions increasing their flanking abilities.
- MP is a lot better and works more smoothly.
- The Moddability is AWESOME. Thanks to this we have for example one of the best Games I have ever played. The mod Fall from Heaven 2.
- Etc... the list goes on...
In my opinion Civ4 is a much better game than Civ3 was, and I played Civ3 a lot.
It fixes a lot of the problems with Civ3.
- Much of the micromanagement I felt necessary in Civ3 is now pretty much gone.
- The tech tree is so much better.
- Civics are an immense improvement over the government types of Civ3.
- Great People and Specialist are now a fully functional feature/mechanic instead of some hack put on top of the gameplay.
- Religions can create alliances, relationships, other reasons for war than just territory grabs. Though it can be a bit easy to manipulate and sometimes creates too forced alliances etc which I hope will be improved upon in the next civ game.
- Terrain and Feature division, and resources and improvements work much better.
- Siege isn't as overpowered, even though it still is the way to go.
- Graphics and general Graphics design is better
- Music is better (even though I usually mute it now)
- The combat system with it's promotions and experience is SO MUCH BETTER. I was practically begging on my bare knees for them to implement anti-unit type bonuses and they did. THANKS FIRAXIS! No longer do we have static attack and defense values. Now instead spearmen are better versus mounted and archers get defense in cities and hills. Mounted units get flanking and able to take promotions increasing their flanking abilities.
- MP is a lot better and works more smoothly.
- The Moddability is AWESOME. Thanks to this we have for example one of the best Games I have ever played. The mod Fall from Heaven 2.
- Etc... the list goes on...
r_rolo1
King of myself
I don't want to be hostile or anything, but I still don't understand from what exactly the OP is complaining.... besides that he feels ( for some not very solid idea ) that Civ II/III were better. can you be specific?
1_more_round
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2009
- Messages
- 30
Loved Civ I and enjoyed CIV II even more.
Purchaded CIV III and just didn't like it - partly my computer was underpowered and partly Civ II was just more fun for me.
Purchased CIV IV and didn't care for it that much at beginning but gave myself time to get through the learning curve - even for an experienced CIV user there was a significant learning curve.
Other than the fact that I am going to have to lay it down for awhile becuase it is cutting to much into family/work/poker time - the CIV 4 game is a very textured rewarding experience. There are so many ways to play it.
My biggest complaint is that the games take too long. I don't like the automation options (I think the computer's choices are not even close to optimal) - smarter players are able to use them but they are not intuitive enough for the average gamer.
I'm going to download BUG and see if it helps.
Back to the reason for the post. Before you sack the game
1. Give the game 4 more tries.
2. Play on small maps so you can get a quicker feel.
3. Each one should be with a different leader and going for a different objective.
a. Domination
b. Cultural
c. Space Race
d. Whatever you want.
After playing 4 games and getting into the flow of how the game works then decide. 7 hours just isn't enough time to evaluate a game this complex.
Personally, I enjoyed CivII the most (must be getting old) but it is to simple compared to todays games.
Personally I loved the video games that came out in the 80's but other than playing Galaga everytime I go to the airport I wouldn't consider buying it today - today's games are so much better.
I have elementary age kids - I would trade places with them in an instant just to be able to play their games as a kid! Plus their parents are so much more fun than mine were.
Remember this is a game meant for fun, if checkers is what you really enjoy why shot pool?
Purchaded CIV III and just didn't like it - partly my computer was underpowered and partly Civ II was just more fun for me.
Purchased CIV IV and didn't care for it that much at beginning but gave myself time to get through the learning curve - even for an experienced CIV user there was a significant learning curve.
Other than the fact that I am going to have to lay it down for awhile becuase it is cutting to much into family/work/poker time - the CIV 4 game is a very textured rewarding experience. There are so many ways to play it.
My biggest complaint is that the games take too long. I don't like the automation options (I think the computer's choices are not even close to optimal) - smarter players are able to use them but they are not intuitive enough for the average gamer.
I'm going to download BUG and see if it helps.
Back to the reason for the post. Before you sack the game
1. Give the game 4 more tries.
2. Play on small maps so you can get a quicker feel.
3. Each one should be with a different leader and going for a different objective.
a. Domination
b. Cultural
c. Space Race
d. Whatever you want.
After playing 4 games and getting into the flow of how the game works then decide. 7 hours just isn't enough time to evaluate a game this complex.
Personally, I enjoyed CivII the most (must be getting old) but it is to simple compared to todays games.
Personally I loved the video games that came out in the 80's but other than playing Galaga everytime I go to the airport I wouldn't consider buying it today - today's games are so much better.
I have elementary age kids - I would trade places with them in an instant just to be able to play their games as a kid! Plus their parents are so much more fun than mine were.
Remember this is a game meant for fun, if checkers is what you really enjoy why shot pool?
I wasnt really complaining in all honestly i was trying to display how dissapointed i was with the latest installment of civilization, however they are points i do like about IV for example the globe view is just an amazing addition and looks amazing even down to the way you can post signs and write across the map, etc...
my main problem with IV is the fact it seems to routine i wish i could put into words what it is that has upset me about the game, but the problem is im a hardcore fan of civilization and the basic gameplay princiles are just the same at the core.
two things that seem to be a huge part of IV is religion and corporations, i just dont like them and you cant turn them off theres so many specialist running around that half the main focus of what i fell in love with about the titles has been taken up by what seems to be choirish kind of tasks.
ive pretty much being playing all day trying to get a grip for the game but i just cant do it, it just seems better but somehow more limited, if that makes sense?
but ive not gave up yet the night is still young im going to try and play it again for a second time today but this time since i have a rough memory of how the tech tree goes and the way events unfold lets see how i feel about it after tonight.
at this point i still prefer the previous versions....
my main problem with IV is the fact it seems to routine i wish i could put into words what it is that has upset me about the game, but the problem is im a hardcore fan of civilization and the basic gameplay princiles are just the same at the core.
two things that seem to be a huge part of IV is religion and corporations, i just dont like them and you cant turn them off theres so many specialist running around that half the main focus of what i fell in love with about the titles has been taken up by what seems to be choirish kind of tasks.
ive pretty much being playing all day trying to get a grip for the game but i just cant do it, it just seems better but somehow more limited, if that makes sense?
but ive not gave up yet the night is still young im going to try and play it again for a second time today but this time since i have a rough memory of how the tech tree goes and the way events unfold lets see how i feel about it after tonight.
at this point i still prefer the previous versions....
mechaerik
Tuturuu!
What difficulty are you on?
TheWilltoAct
I am observe
[Not a rant]: You don't seem to be approaching it with an open mind.
The things that are impeding your enjoyment of the game are the exact sorts of things I wrestled with. I hated the idea of specialists, because I didn't understand the concept. Now that I have some understanding I enjoy the game that much more.
I can tell you that you can get by without bothering with corporations. Probably even do great (tho I'm not a great player and I don't use corps a lot so there you go! In fairness I don't play/finish a lot of games.). Still grab the tech for free trade routes tho! 
(unless you have the Great Lighthouse - it obsoletes it)
The things that are impeding your enjoyment of the game are the exact sorts of things I wrestled with. I hated the idea of specialists, because I didn't understand the concept. Now that I have some understanding I enjoy the game that much more.
I can tell you that you can get by without bothering with corporations. Probably even do great (tho I'm not a great player and I don't use corps a lot so there you go!
In fairness I don't play/finish a lot of games.). Still grab the tech for free trade routes tho! (unless you have the Great Lighthouse - it obsoletes it)
It already matches real life locations.
Ambidexter
Edjumacated Idjit
I was introduced to Civ II many years (and several computers) ago. It was a great game that I played for hours. My daughter bought Civ CTP and while I thought it had some interesting points I never really got into it. The AI was too dumb to be an engaging opponent.
I loved Alpha Centauri and the expansion (can't remember its name, always knew it as SMAX). I'd still play SMAX except I can't get it to load on my latest computer.
Civ III came out and I liked it, particularly the Conquests (C3C) expansion. Then I discovered the DYP (Double Your Pleasure) mod and played that for many, many hours.
I preordered CivIV. The learning curve was steep (I particularly had problems with corporations, I kept losing money with them). Then Warlords came out. It fixed some problems with CivIV Vanilla but always seemed incomplete to me. I fell in love with the Fall From Heaven (FFH) mod, it wasn't even a mod but more like a new game. If you're not familiar with FFH you should try it. Beyond the Sword (BtS) turned CivIV into the game it should have been from the beginning. I've been playing CivIV BtS more than any other game I own.
Yes, there are some things I don't like about CivIV BtS. Diplomacy sucks (in my present game, Isabella is still upset that I wouldn't give her a tech a thousand years ago). Espionage could be better. I really don't like the artificial "two national wonders per city" limitation (this is fixed in FFH).
Personally, I think CivIV BtS is the best version of Civ. SMAX was second and C3C third. My wife still plays CivII and I've looked over her shoulder once or twice, but I've never felt the urge to load it on my hard drive.
I loved Alpha Centauri and the expansion (can't remember its name, always knew it as SMAX). I'd still play SMAX except I can't get it to load on my latest computer.
Civ III came out and I liked it, particularly the Conquests (C3C) expansion. Then I discovered the DYP (Double Your Pleasure) mod and played that for many, many hours.
I preordered CivIV. The learning curve was steep (I particularly had problems with corporations, I kept losing money with them). Then Warlords came out. It fixed some problems with CivIV Vanilla but always seemed incomplete to me. I fell in love with the Fall From Heaven (FFH) mod, it wasn't even a mod but more like a new game. If you're not familiar with FFH you should try it. Beyond the Sword (BtS) turned CivIV into the game it should have been from the beginning. I've been playing CivIV BtS more than any other game I own.
Yes, there are some things I don't like about CivIV BtS. Diplomacy sucks (in my present game, Isabella is still upset that I wouldn't give her a tech a thousand years ago). Espionage could be better. I really don't like the artificial "two national wonders per city" limitation (this is fixed in FFH).
Personally, I think CivIV BtS is the best version of Civ. SMAX was second and C3C third. My wife still plays CivII and I've looked over her shoulder once or twice, but I've never felt the urge to load it on my hard drive.
MeteorPunch
#WINNING
Yeah when Civ 4 came out I had been playing Civ 3 religiously and I thought Civ 4 was so bad that I started playing different games all together. Civ 3 was a complete war game and they changed it into something else.
Graphics - every aspect of Civ 4's graphics and interface are terrible.
Combat - why do defenders get such staggering bonuses?
War weariness - why does it take over half way through the game to tone this down?
Peace mongering - why do galleons hold 3 and transports only 4? why do peace civics get better bonuses?
However, it has some cool new features which make it still a good game - unit promotions, tile improvements, civics, and food/shield/science carryover. It's fun, but different.
Graphics - every aspect of Civ 4's graphics and interface are terrible.
Combat - why do defenders get such staggering bonuses?
War weariness - why does it take over half way through the game to tone this down?
Peace mongering - why do galleons hold 3 and transports only 4? why do peace civics get better bonuses?
However, it has some cool new features which make it still a good game - unit promotions, tile improvements, civics, and food/shield/science carryover. It's fun, but different.
TheWilltoAct
I am observe
I enjoy the graphics for the most part, I think they are appealing: bright and colorful. What do people find so loathsome about them???
Another thing for your list MeteorPunch (for me at least) would be why can't I put a settler on my caravel??? :/
Another thing for your list MeteorPunch (for me at least) would be why can't I put a settler on my caravel??? :/
Well no wonder you're bored. That isn't a very challenging level, especially for someone who already has some background with the game. It's meant for new players who aren't familiar with how Civ works. Bump it up to at least Noble to get a better feel for the game.
No, that's not right. Corporations are a BtS addition so you couldn't have had problems with them before Warlords was even released.
For me, the best point about CivIV, is the balance in the number of cities you can afford.
I dont know if it was just my style of playing civ3 (since i didnt have internet then), but it was just REX for me. All the games were the same: the more land you can grab, the best you are. I didnt play more than two games in a row, it was more like 1game - wait 1 month- another game - two months.
I dont know if it was just my style of playing civ3 (since i didnt have internet then), but it was just REX for me. All the games were the same: the more land you can grab, the best you are. I didnt play more than two games in a row, it was more like 1game - wait 1 month- another game - two months.
TeraHammer
Prince
Civ4 is the best game in history.
Dixi.
Dixi.
ecuizbest
Chieftain
Well my points of view on IV have changed a little after yesterdays monster gaming session, i still maintain certain aspects of the game itself are just plain annoying...
religon & Corporations just plain wind me up, but this said i have noticed a goverment civic that stops it being so much of a pain and cant wait half the time for united nations and get "free religion" adopted ;lol
the corporations always seem to set monster stupid tasks like secure another three sources of oil, knowing full well that means you got to go to war with the strongest three civiliaztions and your civ isint ready for that, and furthermore i already own two oil, why do i need more ;lol
but whilst i dont think im going to ever like them, i reckon over long periods of time i could learn to ignore them. so what changed my mind about IV ?
well i always played CivIII on the huge world map with 31civs, and rearranged the starting locations to match realworld history maps. never really played anyother way and so i tried that custom senario.
BTW: default diffculty is noble...
1st attempt: i thought i still dont understand everything in the game yet so just the the sensible stuff, and see what happens
build\defend city\workers\expand quick...
Aztecs, first ones to meet, kept asking for technology (sry demanding it) anyway i never give in to demands... so told em to wander off in the other direction, after a few times the aztecs declared war on me.
Straight away i changed every city i had to start producing my best unit, the aztecs walked all over me and i do mean walked over me, even when trying to attack thier cities they seem to be wiping out stacks of 10+
i losted 5cities in as many turns, and turned quit back to main menu...
a bit annoyed about how much damage the aztecs did in such a short time, i started to pay attention to IV and the way the military battles are different, so i tried again..
2nd attempt: same scenarios, same settings, but this time i know where aztecs start and im going for them asap.
built 4 cities
city 1: produced nothing but settlers
city 2: produced nothing but workers
city 3: produced nothing but archers
city 4: produced nothing but warriors\spearmen, etc
each settler in turn, then built a new city which built a new style of military man each time a different unit, the aim to teach myself what units have what affect in different battles...
the aztecs at this point had 3cities (just 3 cities) it took bloody ages to get those 3 cities, no matter what man i sent at thier fortified cities i cudnt break em. this starting to get my attention, making me want to learn more about how the battles work so different and the promotions, etc.
come 3am i was still playing the same game, and i was starting to warm to IV !!!
Went to bed - feelin a little better about things...
------------------------
next day i took the laptop and IV down to my uncles house, me and my uncle have been playing CivIII hotseat for years together as a coop team. against all ai civs on 362x362 maps
for the first time i played IV multiplayer hotseat and tried the team function, i adored it. the way the teams share the maps, techs, research, everything was just what we both said should be able to do in civ III.
so you guys have converted me to IV, happy gaming...
PS: the perfect civilization game is................
a perfect blend of them all !!!
religon & Corporations just plain wind me up, but this said i have noticed a goverment civic that stops it being so much of a pain and cant wait half the time for united nations and get "free religion" adopted ;lol
the corporations always seem to set monster stupid tasks like secure another three sources of oil, knowing full well that means you got to go to war with the strongest three civiliaztions and your civ isint ready for that, and furthermore i already own two oil, why do i need more ;lol
but whilst i dont think im going to ever like them, i reckon over long periods of time i could learn to ignore them. so what changed my mind about IV ?
well i always played CivIII on the huge world map with 31civs, and rearranged the starting locations to match realworld history maps. never really played anyother way and so i tried that custom senario.
BTW: default diffculty is noble...
1st attempt: i thought i still dont understand everything in the game yet so just the the sensible stuff, and see what happens
build\defend city\workers\expand quick...
Aztecs, first ones to meet, kept asking for technology (sry demanding it) anyway i never give in to demands... so told em to wander off in the other direction, after a few times the aztecs declared war on me.
Straight away i changed every city i had to start producing my best unit, the aztecs walked all over me and i do mean walked over me, even when trying to attack thier cities they seem to be wiping out stacks of 10+
i losted 5cities in as many turns, and turned quit back to main menu...
a bit annoyed about how much damage the aztecs did in such a short time, i started to pay attention to IV and the way the military battles are different, so i tried again..
2nd attempt: same scenarios, same settings, but this time i know where aztecs start and im going for them asap.
built 4 cities
city 1: produced nothing but settlers
city 2: produced nothing but workers
city 3: produced nothing but archers
city 4: produced nothing but warriors\spearmen, etc
each settler in turn, then built a new city which built a new style of military man each time a different unit, the aim to teach myself what units have what affect in different battles...
the aztecs at this point had 3cities (just 3 cities) it took bloody ages to get those 3 cities, no matter what man i sent at thier fortified cities i cudnt break em. this starting to get my attention, making me want to learn more about how the battles work so different and the promotions, etc.
come 3am i was still playing the same game, and i was starting to warm to IV !!!
Went to bed - feelin a little better about things...
------------------------
next day i took the laptop and IV down to my uncles house, me and my uncle have been playing CivIII hotseat for years together as a coop team. against all ai civs on 362x362 maps
for the first time i played IV multiplayer hotseat and tried the team function, i adored it. the way the teams share the maps, techs, research, everything was just what we both said should be able to do in civ III.
so you guys have converted me to IV, happy gaming...
PS: the perfect civilization game is................
a perfect blend of them all !!!
Similar threads
- Locked
