Civ3 or civ4?

TheOverseer714 said:
Interesting reading. I almost want to cancel my order for Civ4... But I won't. I am just stubborn enough to find out for myself. I loved Civ2 and SMAC, but Civ3 has owned my heart for 4 years. I never regretted purchasing any of those or their expansion packs. I did get Call to Power, which sucked eggs. I hope I didn't waste my money on Civ4. I'm not worried about hardware, as my game computer has plenty of all the right stuff to handle it (it runs The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion almost seamlessly, only chugging on the most intense battles) I guess I am in the group who doesn't have a problem with graphics. I like pretty, but I also like a good addictive game, and Civ3 has only eclipsed Civ2 in that respect.
Click to expand...

Indeed, i don't care about paying for civ4 while i don't play it. I have gotten enough value out of my civ3 purchase to make up for that :)
 
I am personally a big fan of civIII and I loved civII so naturally I have felt the need to get civIV out of loyalty. This thread had me seriously doubting whether I should get it but after checking out the above thread I have to admit their are a lot of similarities between the two.;) That said I think the posters in the civII v civIII thread were a little less disgruntled.
 
I can't wait for Civ5... these Civ4 vs. Civ5 discussions will be really interesting... Or, maybe, not. ;)
 
I, too agree with Sashi VII when he/she said that Civ IV is a good break from Civ III from time to time. However, I still cannot bear to play a random map on civ IV, I only play scenarios. In fact, I only play Rhye's 18 civ world map, because I think that is exciting: getting to re-write history!
 
Civilization IV has some great ideas, and some terrible graphics. I really believe with some modding, we can turn Civilization IV into what we wanted Civilization III to be.
 
Well, what I think is that if u get Civ4, You would probably need a new video card which is bout $75 and then u gonna buy another and another games/versions of civ4 (Which each new game/version are bout $30 or $20) And this the price is bout $30 or $40 just for civ4 itself, so if u have all dis money, then Your just another Rich Whiteboi :P

PS: I would wait till they make Civ4 Complete like they did to Civ3 =]
 
Civ 3 by far. I tried playing Civ 4 I just can't get into it. Slow gameplay, less technologies, less units, stupid wonders and much more crap. The only thing I like about Civ 4 is the categories of the units i.e. melee, gunpowder, sea, air etc., the bonuses of units vs other units and that's about it. Also I loved the air combat system that they had on CIV 2. If they include categories for units, bonuses of units and the CIV 2 type air combat in a new patch for Civ 3I wouldn't mind spending $30-$40 for it. Is it possible?
 
Well, I'm an old timer.
I don't think someone can speak for Civ in general if they haven't played all the games(but they can discuss individual versions). I have played 1,2,3,4 and can tell you, if it weren't for the graphics, Civ 2 IS the best of the series.
Civ 3 unfortunately isn't Civ 2 ver 2. If it was we would all be extremely happy.

And prolly wouldn't buy 3/4 to begin with. I suspect that's the reason they radicalize the differences so much from game to game. But at least until 2010 and/or Civ5(unless it demands directX 10 and Vista), factoring in the graphics and other goodies you can get, Civ 3 is the best of the series for me.

And that's what you'll get here or anywhere, individual opinion. Some will like a specific version, some will like all(like me) and prefer civ 4(unlike me). The point is what you want in a game. If you can get demos of the two, that's your best bet, personal experience.
 
Decebalus said:
It is clearly NOT a memeber of the Civillization series. I have nothing against it, like I said for someone picking it up the first time it is a decent enough game, and fun in it's own way. But it does not belong in this series.

CIVII was clearly CIVI version 2, CIVIII was clearly CIVII version 2.

Similarly if you look at any other series:
- Age of Kings was clearly Age of Empires version 2
- DOOM 2 was clearly DOOM 1 version 2, DOOM 3 was clearly DOOM 2 version 2
- Caesar 2 was clearly Caesar 1 version 2, Caesar 3 was clearly Caesar 2 version 2, Caesar 4 was clearly Caesar 3 version 2

I could go on forever. :) That's what makes a series a series. Similarity and familiarity in gameplay experience.

CIV IV, though not a bad game, is different enough to not belong as part of the series I think. And as seems to be the overal concensus, not just on this but other forums, CIV IV is a bust when looked at from a CIV players point of view. :) Mas, you're probably one of very very very few I've heard that likes both.
Click to expand...

I just don't agree.

Civ II was Civ I, improved. That's okay; from the first version of the game, there was a lot to improve on. Much as I loved Civ, I never played it again once I got II - there would be no point.

Civ III was much different than II. Different style, supported different options for scenarios... so Civ III didn't replace II.

Similarly, IV hasn't replaced III.

I think this is a good thing!

Three of the five games I've played lately are versions of Civ. (The others are WoW and Doom III.)
 
I like C3 better but I'm eager to try out BTS to see if that changes my opinion on CivIV specially knowing "our" reputable AlexMan is the Lead Designer. What I dislike more, apart from the childish graphics, is the lack of making thrilling tech trades to catch-up and of course the lack of GML (Armies).
 
My single biggest gripe with CIV is that expansion is limited. In the earlier versions of Civ, there were nearly always good reasons for expanding so long as there was any kind of unclaimed territory. In CIV, new cities are often an immediate drain on your economy and have to be improved to actually pay for themselves. That sole aspect of the game annoys me because it made me adopt a bad habit of possibly not expanding enough.

I'm a bit torn on CIV's take on city specialization. It is both a blessing and a curse for me.
 
Nials said:
My single biggest gripe with CIV is that expansion is limited. In the earlier versions of Civ, there were nearly always good reasons for expanding so long as there was any kind of unclaimed territory. In CIV, new cities are often an immediate drain on your economy and have to be improved to actually pay for themselves. That sole aspect of the game annoys me because it made me adopt a bad habit of possibly not expanding enough.

I'm a bit torn on CIV's take on city specialization. It is both a blessing and a curse for me.
Click to expand...

There are always things given and things taken away when games get new versions. I loved CIV2... and certainly noticed several changes that I was pleased about and annoyed about when I got CIV3. I've only had CIV 3 for a short time, and I'm still getting to grips with it. A lot of 'win' options besides the space race, and I see that turns are limited to 540, though I've tried to tweak that up.... it won't accept any number over 1,000. One of the things I liked about CIV 2 was the unlimited turns,,, you could win or lose the space race and just keep on going if you wanted, beyond any score-keeping.
Any way one can do that with CIV3????
 
Yeah. After you win (or lose), click on the option that allows you to keep playing - "Wait! Lemme play a few more turns." :)
 
psweetman1590 said:
Yeah. After you win (or lose), click on the option that allows you to keep playing - "Wait! Lemme play a few more turns." :)
Click to expand...

Cool; thanks for that!
So at least I'll be able to carry on past the end of scoring.... but I wonder if there is there any way of increasing the 'official' number of turns in the game... some little 'cheat' somewhere???
 
You can up the turns to 1000, as you've already discovered. Aside from that, no. And really, why would you want to play one game that long anyhow?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Playing on Civ3 complete on steam eliminate all rivals VC. all rivals eliminated but last Last CIV still exists with no cities. How?
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
Lanzelot
Lanzelot
Lazy sweeper
Anyone got Civ 3 loading with Nobara42 or Bazzite with Lutris???
Replies
0
Views
122
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
K
Why are combat and waging war so tedious?
Replies
10
Views
727
Theov
Theov
M
This game is too addictive. I need to make it shorter
2 3
Replies
42
Views
2K
Fergei
Fergei
B
[C3C] Did the buffs to armies in Conquests make them overpowered?
Replies
10
Views
2K
ronning
ronning
Back
Top Bottom