Civ1 vs. Civ2 And 3!

[madman]

Okay, me and palehorse are talking civ and its eveloution. I feel that any civ after civ1 (including civ3) is a derivitive of the original. Yes civ2 and the like are different from the original, but how different are they? You add a government here and there and some units and a little better graphics and walla, you have a new version of the same game. Now, Im not saying that is bad, Im simply stating that civ2 is not that much different from the original. Oh tell me the ways Im wrong.

"I have not yet begun to fight"


------------------
madman

 

[Thunderfall]

I agree. It was a good thing that Microprose didn't make Civ2 completely different from Civ1...

[This message has been edited by Thunderfall (edited February 20, 2001).]

 

[Cedric Greene]

I think that this should be obvious, as the game is called Civilization <u>II</u> and not something else. SMAC is the civilization idea tweaked and CTP is Civ turned to crap. But Civ II is and should be an evolved version of Civ

------------------
"I could give you that advance, but then I'd have to kill you." -CivNet chat macro

 

[MrLeN]

Yeah, of course they are the same. It's obvious. I don't see a point to even mention it.

Civ three has an entirely new machine!!!

Yaaaaaaay!!!

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

I think of Civ-2 as being an update of civ-1. As better tech is discovered, the games are (hopefully) improved. I hope that civ-3 is familiar, but with more features and better graphics.

------------------
All knowledge begins with the Phrase: I don't know

 

[MrLeN]

It will be all that and more, I am sure!

I have great expectations for civ III <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/redface.gif" border=0>)

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!

[This message has been edited by MrLeN (edited February 25, 2001).]

 

[vladmir_illych_lenin]

I wonder why they are spending all that effort on the graphics. Firaxis should start reading our posts, and make better diplomacy and AI.

The diplomacy sucks cause:
AI gets an advantage-can make multiple demands, can declare war at will, and can form alliances so easily

AI sucks cause:
well, you know

The goal for CivIII to aim at is decent AI and diplomacy!

 

[MrLeN]

At their site they say that they are paying ALOT of attention to diplomacy.

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!

 

[vladmir_illych_lenin]

Yes, but all they showed us in detail so far is the graphics.



[This message has been edited by vladmir_illych_lenin (edited February 25, 2001).]

 

[MrLeN]

Well...

It's pretty hard to show pictures of diplomacy! *hehe*

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!

 

[vladmir_illych_lenin]

Show the dip screen, or actually showing the AI winning. nah, that'll give away too much of the game.

 

[MrLeN]

LOL

Patience is a virtue. They said they are working on it, and I believe them

Sid always 'never' fails

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!

 

[vladmir_illych_lenin]

Sid isn't even working on it. He's just a "director".

 

[MrLeN]

Yeah, he's director of programming, so what he says goes.

Does that mean that Bush isn't running the country because hes not digging the trench on 3rd ave?

I think Bush is the president now?

I know Clinton was 'or something?

LOL

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!

 

[Håkan Eriksson]

Is call to power realy that bad s everyone says? I never tested it myself.

------------------
This is my cool book:
John Valdez, vladmir_illych_lenin, Thunderfall, shadowdale, stormerne, Stellar Converter

 

[vladmir_illych_lenin]

I guess your right. I watched too many gangster movies. I thought it was going to turn out where Sid is being used as a puppet so they could lable the game under his name and have good reputation.