1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

CIV IV vs CIV III

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Crimson1, Dec 12, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Crimson1

    Crimson1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1
    Hello, I have been a long-term civ III player and have recently purchased civ IV and found it to be a terrible game in comparison. Not only that but it runs very slow on my machine. What about CIV IV makes you prefer it over III? Also what innovations do you feel it has made over Civ3
     
  2. ThERat

    ThERat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Messages:
    11,066
    Location:
    City of one angel
    crimson, if you liked Civ3 a lot, there is a high chance that you might not like CIV. It seems more suited for players that liked Civ2
     
  3. Ben E Gas

    Ben E Gas Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    935
    Location:
    Boston, MA USA
    not entirely true. I liked civ2 & civ3 and I love civ4. It took some getting used to. I wasn't impressed at first. Civ4 has a steeper learning curve. Just give it a chance, ask questions here about what you don't understand. I'm still learning things about civ4. I'll never go back to civ3 after playing civ4.
     
  4. Prestidigitator

    Prestidigitator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    587
    Location:
    Is this a trick question?
    If you were REALLY into Civ3, didn't change to Civ4 quickly, and now you've decided to make the shift, then maybe you won't like Civ4 at first.
    It'll take some time, just give it a while, and you'll find yourself tied to it more than any previous civ ;).
     
  5. Psyringe

    Psyringe Scout

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,393
    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    Too many to mention them all, actually. I liked Civ3 (and found it an improvement over Civ2), but Civ4 is the pinnacle of the series in my opinion. Usually, when I buy a new game of a series I like, it makes me want to go back to the previous game for a while ... usually there are always some things that I miss in the new game. However, Civ4 made me never want to go back to CIv3 - and I reall, really liked Civ3!

    Here are some of the things that make me prefer Civ4:

    - No corruption, no more tons of totally useless cities that you only keep to occupy the respective space on the map

    - Much improved maintenance system, paying maintenance for cities instead of buildings now makes it viable to actually develop all cities, even if they are far away from your palace.

    - Religion added, an interesting new game feature offering many new possibilities (although the implementation of many of those is left to the modders due to Firaxis being very careful and politically correct with religion as a game concept)

    - much improved AI that does not magically know where your weakest defended city is, or where resources will appear thousands of years later

    - Better implementation of artillery - still not perfect (suiciding artillery against well-defended cities seems not very realistic), but gameplay-wise much better than the overpowered artillery of Civ3 Conquests

    - Unit promotions and many special abilities for units, which allow for interesting counters and counter-counters, much more complex, tactical and challenging than the simple "offense/defense" system of previous Civs

    - all in all, more focus on viable builder strategies, including possibilities to actually win a game with a rather small empire (specialist economies etc.), less focus on war and conquest as in Civ3

    That said, there are also things that I didn't find that great in Civ4. Fortunately for me, those were things I regarded as unimportant (3d graphics, choppy movie replay), or that could be fixed by mods and patches (game speed was too fast before marathon was introduced, maps were too much concerned with "fair" positioning, salpeter was taken out, etc.)

    Unfortunately, Civ4 *is* a much worse resource hog than it could be. Don't expect to be able to play huge maps unless you're well above the recommended specs.

    Also, no doubt there are people around that do not like the changes introduced in Civ4. The aspects above are my personal feelings about the game, I don't regard them as the one and only truth. ;)

    If you tell us what especially you found terrible, we may be able to help you adapt (or find out whether Civ4 really isn't the game for you)
     
  6. nc-1701

    nc-1701 bombombedum

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    4,025
    Location:
    America
    You're not alone man I bought civ4, played it hated it, but kept giving it chances which it never took I finaly went back to c3c and am now incredibly pissed by the factr I wasted $50.
     
  7. gdgrimm

    gdgrimm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Messages:
    530

    I think there's a lot of truth in that. Well, probably better to say that if you liked a previous Civ installment, but don't like CivIV, then you probably liked CivIII. Or, if you liked Civ2, you'll like CivIV (after relearning how to play the game), but that's less guaranteed if you liked CivIII.

    I loved Civ2. Tried playing CivIII for a few months, but never got hooked on it. Went back to Civ2. Then got CivIV, and I don't think I'll ever go back.

    Some reasons (for CivIV over Civ2):
    Religion
    "Fairer" AI
    Distinct personalities and game play in the AI.
    Rock/paper/scissors and promotions for military units.
    Ability to win without being the biggest/baddest on the planet.
     
  8. Jawsofwar

    Jawsofwar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    81
    Location:
    Lexington , KY
    Same here. I really liked civ2 and never got into civ3 as much. When I got civIV I loved the game and bought the expansion pack right when it came out. I still think the wonder movies in civ2 are awesome.
     
  9. Ben E Gas

    Ben E Gas Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    935
    Location:
    Boston, MA USA
    Yes the wonders vids in Civ4 don't compare to civ2, but I still like em and atleast they are back in the game unlike civ3. Also the world builder in civ4 is awesome. Some hate it as it allows cheating in single player like the civ2 cheat menu did, but I love it. Civ3 had no cheat menu but the good thing about civ is that it has a lot of fans that can mod and they added a mod that added a cheat menu thingy. The suicidal artillary was an aweful idea in civ4. I use a mod that allows bombardment. I can't even remember now if the vanilla civ4 allows bombardment or not. Someone can correct me on that. I find that with all the civs I like to use fan made mods to enhance gameplay. I'm sure it'll be like that until the end of my civ days......which will most likely be the end of my days too.
     
  10. rschissler

    rschissler Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    Messages:
    691
    Location:
    So. Cal, USA
    I think Civ3 was more fun, so I'd have to say I liked it better.

    I like the new features of Civ4 and are a great improvement over Civ3, but what I don't like is the difference in warmongering. It is almost a chore trying to take a city in Civ4, as it's almost impossible without tons of catapults, cannon, etc. I like the collateral damage aspect, but moving one tile at a time can take a long time to get to a city. Also, the slower movement of calvary lessens their effectiveness. Sure I can still capture enemy cities, but the one tile at a time takes so much longer and can be kind of boring after awhile.

    As a result, I find myself playing at a lower difficulty level (prince) than I'd really like to.
     
  11. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    4,792
    Hi Crimson1,

    there are a lot of threads about that theme in the Civ 4 and Civ 3 forums. Interesting is the theory, that "if you liked Civ 2 you have a tendency, that you prefer Civ 4". At least for me this theory is completely wrong. I like Civ 2 and I like Civ 3, but until now I´m dissapointed with Civ 4.

    When I look on my big upcoming mod for the Civ 3 epic game, I recognized the following: I did set my units stats more than Civ 2 units (including land artillery that was set in Civ 4 as I tried to fix this for Civ 3) but have -in my eyes- the much better naval combat system of Civ 3. I don´t understand why Firaxis did kill the working Civ 3 naval bombardment concept. To turn the pollution problem in a negative happiness was a good idea of the Civ 4 creators that I did adopt for my Civ 3 mod without bigger problems. I think I have a better religious system in my new Civ 3 mod than there is in Civ 4 (!).

    What i really dislike in Civ 4 is the horrible and in my eyes completely unnecessairy Civ 4 graphics engine, that turns modding of that game in a nightmare (at least for me). And it seems, that this graphic engine can´t be modded away for Civ 4.

    That war workes better in Civ 3 than in Civ 4 was still metioned by some posters in this thread. And there are thousands and thousands of existing units that can be integrated in a Civ 3 mod. I don´t understand, why FIRAXIS wants to throw them all in the garbage bin. Especially for naval units the situation for additional units in Civ 4 is very poor (not to say for good looking naval units). May be there is a time when FIRAXIS recognizes, that most parts of the earth are water...

    Another annoying thing is the unit combat promotion system for civ 4. So some additional flags for units are a very positive improvement of Civ 4 to Civ 3(the "pikeman"-flag" solution in Civ 2 for more combat situations), the existing combat promotion system of Civ 4 in the epic game is somewhat ridicolous in my eyes. A unit that learned to defend forests better is not able to tell the neighbouring unit of the same army command in more than thousand years how they do that.:lol:

    What is definitely better in Civ 4 in my eyes is the diplomatic system, events, some additional flags for units, civics and wonder movies ( so a lot of them in my eyes don´t look as interesting as the Civ 2 movies).

    On the other side in Civ 3 there is much more "freedom" for the average modder without this :thumbdown :cringe: :thumbdown :nope: :cry: -Civ 4 graphic engine, war works better in Civ 3 (what is the most fun in Civ games for me), there is a much better feeling to have a big empire in Civ 3 than in Civ 4 and there is a much better gaming performance on my pc for Civ 3 than for Civ 4. Civ 4 is definitely no game that triggers me to buy a new computer.
     
  12. T.A JONES

    T.A JONES Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,471
    I imagine I'll be dished out some Civ2 this Xmas I bet I'll like it more then CIv4You can't top what the game engineers and graffic designers have done to CIv3 Thats really all I can play right now.
    To command large, yet keepin it smooth and still in charge is what its about for me. Everyone likes a differant approach so find what your suited for. Civ4 plays a great turtle up strategy but Personnaly, I got this feel like it was glossed over and placed behind a glass wall. I just coudn't get a feel for it.
     
  13. Moxxa

    Moxxa Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    241
    I'm not quite sure what to think yet.

    I just got CIV yesterday and so far it looks like it has some potential. It certainly isn't Civ III though. It's a completely different game that you will have to learn, but just the fact that its drawing me in to take the time to learn it tells me that its a good game.

    Civ is one of the few things that can completely take over my mind and my imagination. I like it. :thumbsup:

    That's called your computer screen... :sad:
     
  14. T.A JONES

    T.A JONES Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,471
    ^^ :undecide: .....lol (ok its funny) STill I hope you now what I mean CIv4 took the auto pilot approach on this rake in. They met half way with the dimwits by using a "hands off" approach. Target: hope we hit the kiddie console market. It worked great Im hearing( no sarcasm)
     
  15. Lord_Iggy

    Lord_Iggy Tsesk'ihe

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2005
    Messages:
    24,455
    Location:
    Yukon
    I dislike the suicide artillery, the difficulty of wars, and the overpowering of culture in CivIV. I also miss the Scientific trait (Philo just doesn't feel the same).

    Other than that, I like Civ IV. I regularly play both games.
     
  16. gdgrimm

    gdgrimm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2005
    Messages:
    530
    Doesn't that make you a good example of the axiom? If you liked Civ3 (as much or more than Civ2), then you're in the group that is more likely to not be thrilled with CivIV -- at least, when compared to the group that likes Civ2 much more than Civ3.

    As to some other topics....

    Navy - As mentioned, I never did play Civ3 much, so can't comment. But Civ2 had more Naval units than CivIV, but guess what?! I never really needed to build any of them (still don't need to build subs and seldom carriers). Having a whole bunch of units that are seldom or never needed is a "bad thing", IMO. It's like just generating eye candy for the sake of "cool factor".

    CivIV Graphics engine -- I completely agree. It's overkill. A good example of eye candy for "cool factor" that still made it into the game.

    Warring -- I really think this is the primary difference between the "like CivIV" and the "don't like CivIV" groups. Building a military to go to war is something that should only have to happen when you pursue those types of victory. You should be able to build military just to defend your empire and win that way, also. Of course, anything the programmers do to make the "go to war" human play easier/faster/more enjoyable can (or at least should) be used by the AI, which tends to make the "avoid war" human play more difficult. And vice versa.

    Or put another way, I think the game should be about building the best empire, NOT about destroying all (or most) of the other empires.

    I seldom started a war in Civ2. At some level of empire growth, the AI would go to war with me, and then I might crush him completely :lol: , but I almost never started the war myself.

    In Civ4, depending on the type of leader and map, I might play war-like. But I think Civ4 has almost, already went to far with it's war mentality. At higher levels, you really HAVE to destroy others to win in most of the games (isolated starts for Culture Victories being the most frequent alternative).
     
  17. ulsterman88

    ulsterman88 4-2 Rangers rule supreme!

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2006
    Messages:
    523
    Location:
    Co. Down, Northern Ireland, UK
    Il like the enviroment and new gameplay features as well as religion etc... in Civ4, but i miss units like the paratrooper and i think that artillery should be changed part of the way back to civ3 style. i.e. artillery can bombard but it cant intitiate attack; can only defend.
     
  18. Civinator

    Civinator Blue Lion

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    4,792

    gdgrimm, thank you for your long repost.:). About that axiom: So the important part seems to be "if you like Civ 3 you don´t like Civ 4." But, so I like Civ 3, I always want to have something better. :D I sometimes did reflect what I did like more, Civ 2 or Civ 3: The result was: I would prefer Civ 2, but with the unit animation and the number of Civs of Civ 3 (may be, this is one of the reasons why I imported such a lot of "Civ 2-retro-stuff" into my Civ 3 mod: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=172250, especially posts 15 ff). The animated units of Civ 3 were such a big progress in my eyes compared to that of Civ 2 ToT, that in combination with the greater number of civs, I came to the result, that in total I prefer Civ 3 over Civ 2. But there is no such big progress in Civ 4 compared to Civ 3 and in Civ 4 I lost the feature I liked most in Civ 2 and Civ 3: Easy modability.
     
  19. Stormrage

    Stormrage Ever Present Taskmaster

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    10,573
    Location:
    behind the scenes
    I loved civ2. I love civ3. Haven`t played civ4 - I hate the way it looks, and I know, I know, its not about gfx, its about gameplay, blah, blah, blah.. but hey.. if I`m gonna sit and play a game all day long and even pay money to be able to do so, I don`t want 7 fuggin pixels running around!

    I hope they take the best things from all civs and use them in civ5... I hope those 7 pixels are not really considered the best thing for civ in WHOEVEROWNSTHELICENSETHISMONTH`s offices, they are just saying that now to earn $ from newcomers and kids with bad taste in game gfx ;)
     
  20. Salarakas

    Salarakas Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    329
    I think Northern Pike said it best in THIS thread:

    I agree with all that. There are many things that are better in CIV but it just isn't that fun to play.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page