civ2 vs civ3

[pax_65]

Civ3 sure looks a lot better than civ2, but it is really a better game? I hope it is... but I'm honestly not sure yet. All I know is that civ2 was a bit more addictive, but that may be because of gameplay issues on civ3 that will be fixed with the patch. I've tried to be objective and break the game up to compare them:

Graphics: civ3 is better, although civ2 had the wonder movies

Gameplay: civ2 is smoother & faster... hopefully the patch will help civ3. Civ2 also seemed more historically accurate - your forces were approximately historically accurate when compared to the date (depending somewhat on what difficulty level you were playing on).

Governments: civ2 had 1 extra government, and the governments seem to work better/more accurately than in civ3

Units: Civ3 has the unique units, which are very cool, as well as some additional units.

Culture: A very cool addition to Civ3, although it doesn't seem to be working quite right. Or maybe I just don't fully understand what is involved when you lose a city due to culture.

Wonders: Civ3 has additional wonders, some of which are cool

AI: I think the AI is similar in both games. I am disappointed that the AI on Civ3 isn't better than it is.

Civs: I like how civ3 gives advantages to certain civs. But this doesn't seem to be as big a factor as I wish it was.

Happiness: Similar in both games, although "war weariness" is probably an improvement in civ3 (versus the old senate overrulling your decisions in civ2.)

Corruption/waste: Not much of a factor in civ2, out of control in civ3. Somewhere in the middle would be about right.

Terrain: Cool additions of new terrain squares to civ3. I miss farmland improvement from civ2.

Resources: Civ3 has more resources. The addition of strategic resources adds a whole new dimension to the game.

Trade: I like the way civ2 handled trade, where you had to actually get your caravan or freight safely to the city. Civ3 does offer more options on the trade screen, though.

Espionage: Civ2 is better. Espionage on civ3 is poorly handled.

Technology: I guess Civ3 is better/more expansive... although it does bother me that some techs only offer the opportunity to research other techs - they don't have any units or wonders associated with them.

Bottom line: Civ3 is better... but I wish it blew civ2 away... but I don't think it does (at least not yet).

Jon

 

[CivJester]

"Gameplay: civ2 is smoother & faster... hopefully the patch will help civ3. Civ2 also seemed more historically accurate - your forces were approximately historically accurate when compared to the date (depending somewhat on what difficulty level you were playing on). "

I would have to disagree with this one point, in CIV II even on King I could have tanks and such by the 1700 if not earlier. If I played on Prince I could have the tech tree done by the 1900's. In CIV III I am playing the second level (still learning) and I seem to be maybe just a little bit ahead of history, but I have also beelined for specfic techs (Republic, Demo, Steam Power), some of the holes I have filled in by buying techs.

Corruption most definately out of control, I like a large (read lots and lots of cities) civ and the corruption is killing me!!

To me CIV III is harder, the bigest beef is the time between turns later on, but this maynot be able to be helped, other turn based games have this problem (i.e. Warlords III, etc).

Just my two cents

 

[SkidiWili]

I don't think that the historical accuracy meant the time they appeared, but their power. Tanks vs. spearmen fights.

The corruption is definetly bit out of control, but corruption handling like the CivII's democracy were horrible. I mean, what makes democracy so special. Definetly just making the corruption bit more forgiving would be a good thing.

CivIII is harder than CivII and I enjoy that. CivII started to be *quite* boring even with the hardest levels, but the CivIII resources and diplomacy really bring more changes to the general course of the game.

 

[Proteus]

Aside from the annoying Combat System I think Civ 3 is the far better game.(Yes to hell, I want my Tanks defeat Spearmen with ease. And if I am the technologically backward Civ or failed to aquire the needed Ressources I should be punished for it, by having my antique Units loose very often to more modern Stuff. Somebody in another Thread made a Comparison with MOO2, where you are definitely punished for staying behind in Technology by your Ships not having strong enough Shield or Weapons to sustain in Battle. Thats the way it should work.)

Even the AI in Civ 3 in my Opinion handles their Empires better and makes it harder for you, to keep up with their rate of Exploration, City Building and Research.

I hope Firaxis patches this thing (the Combat System) also. Maybe an Option to choose between the old Combat System and an Improved Combat System would be nice. Or an additional Civ3Mod.bic which has more historically accurate Values for the units (or more Hitpoints) and which you can use alternatively if the old System doesn´t suit your needs (btw. I know that I/we can do it my-/ourselves [and maybe even publish it, if Infogrames doesn´t react with a cease and desist-Order ], but wouldn´t it be nice to have something like this being done by the Developers? )