Civ2 or Civ3

[morextremist]

which is better? I've been playing Civ2 since it first came out. is three better (be honest)

 

[Titi]

Go to Civ 2 - General Discussion Forum. You'll find a poll on the subject

 

[CivMonger]

I personally like civ 3 better, cause it has a lot more features and is more streamlined in many areas. Civ 3 is about empire management, whereas Civ 2 is about managing cities in your empire. example- Civ 2, units cost shields in city built. Civ 3, units cost 1 gold a piece. Being without a good enough computer anymore (brother took it) I am back to playing Civ 2, which has its own perks, but isn't as good in my opinion (and its a lot easier). I'll take donations so I can get a good computer again

 

[ElephantU]

Civ3 is more glitz; Civ2 is more guts.

 

[covok48]

I'm a newbie to civ III, it's HARD! That's probably why I don't play it often and will not shell out more money for the multiplayer edition that SHOULD HAVE come with the original game!

 

[GaryNemo]

People say the graphics of Civ3 are better. I can't understand what they mean. Once you have RightClicked a bit in Civ2, you learn each graphic means a particular thing. In Civ3, you Right Click all the way to Carpel Tunnel Syndrome because some shapes have a trade here, none there, stack of units appears as one, whatever. And then there is the corruption and the bugs - terrible in Civ3 iirc.
Take a look at the Civ2 Democracy Game and compare it to the Civ3 Democracy Game.

 

[FLQ.Storm]

the war in democracy on civ2 is hard and AI knows it

on civ3 u CAN do war in democracy, but u get only couple of turns before ppl start complaining

and the senators are reallys asses when they keep you from doing what u want (civ2)

civ3 = bugs, i agree

 

[GaryNemo]

TheStorm, I hope you join us in Civ2 Game of Democracy. We're playing Deity, and we're in Republic now, 1400AD and gobbling up the AI. Soon we'll be in Democracy, although that is not yet agreeable to our electorate, so we are sidetracking to Dragoons. It's ok, we all have fun discussing every little thing.
Well, most of us have fun. ElephantU is still coy about playing That Game with Us.

 

[funxus]

Civ 2 definitely
For one reason: Civ3 gets boring after half a game
I also agree that the corruption is too bad. Setting up colonies and expanding is practically impossible.

 

[havoc242]

i rell like to play both but civ 3 got scratched one day and the disc is scratched real bad but i,m back to playing civ2 now and i,m ok bucuse it is a fun game but i love the fact about 3 becuse it has so many ways to win the game

 

[The Person]

I've never finished a single game of Civ3, even though I must've started about half a dozen. Civ3 is good, but not good enough to bring me away from Civ2.

 

[rrhal]

I still play Civ 2 way more than 3. Something about being voted winner by the UN that leave a hollow feeling.

 

[geofelt]

I like civ2 better. In civ3 you can't build an empire because corruption wipes out almost all of your production capacity. I also dislike the wonder process, you can get beat out for a wonder without notice, and there is nothing you can do abour it.

 

[RegentMan]

Nice little here.

I like each for their own reasons, but I prefer Civ III. However, I miss farmland and not needing to mass railroads everywhere... The look on my face when I discovered that farmland was not in Civ III wasn't too positive.

 

[gunkulator]

Civ3 for me - and this is from a long time Civ2'er. There are just too many exploits in Civ2 that make it a cakewalk. The fact that something as extreme as OCC can be won at all is testimony to how poor of a challenge Civ2 is.

 

[RegentMan]

Well, you can win a one city challenge in Civ III too.

 

[gunkulator]

At sid level with max barbs and maximum aggression?

I won Civ2 OCC the very first time I tried it. Not much of a challenge really.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

Poor guys who still play civ2

Really, civ3 has some aspects that you need to get used to, but once you are used to them, you can only wonder why some people still play civ2.

 

[RegentMan]

Really, civ3 has some aspects that you need to get used to, but once you are used to them, you can only wonder why some people still play civ2.

I can make a few minor changes and it'll still be true:

"Really, civ2 has some aspects that you need to get used to, but once you are used to them, you can only wonder why some people still play civ3."

I personally like both games, each for their own reasons.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

I can make a few minor changes and it'll still be true:

"Really, civ2 has some aspects that you need to get used to, but once you are used to them, you can only wonder why some people still play civ3."

I personally like both games, each for their own reasons.

The point is that i played both games very intensively. Most of those who prefer civ2 have given civ3 a short try at best.
So you can make those changes, but then your comment might very well be based on nothing.