Civ5Col?

[chrissifniotis]

I know it's way too early to speculate, but do you think Firaxis would contemplate a new version of Colonization with the CiV engine?

 

[Ahriman]

Why, what would it add?

Civ4 Colonization is a pretty narrow/simple game, I'm not sure there's enough depth for a sequel.

 

[GigaNerd]

Why, what would it add?

European colonization of Africa!!!

 

[Fleur-de-Lis]

I really doubt they would make a Colonization for Civ 5 as they did for Civ 4. For Civ 4, they just wanted to remake an old classic of the game. We could possibly expect something similar after Civ 5 is released but not Colonization, perhaps another early Firaxis game.

 

[Schuesseled]

I wasnt hugely fond of Colonisation, thought to be fair I didnt really give it a fair go, only a couple games. Still I wasn't all to fond of the mechanisms.

 

[Niptium]

YES YES AND YES ! The original Colonization was by far my favorite game in the 1990s, surpassing the Civ serie. With that being said, Firaxis and 2K would need to fund such a project properly. The Civ4Col offer was no more than a simple remake. We need a 2011 rehaul of the Colonization structure. COUNT ME IN !

 

[Disgustipated]

never played it, but I found the civ3 scenario kind of fun. It's definitely worthy of being in an XP as a professional scenario or pay content.

 

[CoolLizy]

I'd actually prefer they didn't. I was disappointed with Civ IV: Colonization, especially considering how much I loved the original. If they're going to remake it again, it needs to be its own game running on its own engine, instead of trying to shoehorn it into a glorified mod.

 

[BobDole]

Seeing how long it took for them to make another Colonization game....I doubt it's happening. And if they do make it, as others have said, I'd hope it ends up as its own game, rather than a modified version of Civ IV. (Although they'd have to make the game less narrow than it was to justify it).

 

[Ahriman]

European colonization of Africa!!!

With wars of independence???

None of the core mechanics would make sense. They'd have to completely redesign the game. And even then, not that interesting; Africa was about prestige and raw material extraction. Little domestic refining of goods. Little domestic social development. Little political inclusion of locals - so nothing really like the Founding Fathers.

 

[bite]

For me Colonization is the only Civ game I ever took back and asked for my money back, so I would not be looking forward to another remake

 

[Greybriar]

For me Colonization is the only Civ game I ever took back and asked for my money back, so I would not be looking forward to another remake

I didn't take it back, but I was very disappointed. So much for "re-imagining" the classics.

 

[chrissifniotis]

Now see this is rather interesting. I have to agree that Firaxis wouldn't make a new Colonization, certainly not after Civ4Col, but I didn't realize it was so disapproved here. I personally enjoy the game, albeit not as a good remake of the original, but to me they did a not bad job of attempting to preserve as much of the game into the new engine as possible, from what I've understood they seem to have restored the game nearly in tact, they just modernized it. I will say that being used on the Civ4 engine it did have traits of Civ4, borders and multiple leaders the most obvious.

 

[Disgustipated]

I feel kind of dumb. I had no idea civ4: colonization existed. Is it worth checking out?

 

[Ahriman]

Its fun for a few hours, but gets old rapidly. Not much replay value.

 

[Commander Bello]

I'd actually prefer they didn't. I was disappointed with Civ IV: Colonization, especially considering how much I loved the original. If they're going to remake it again, it needs to be its own game running on its own engine, instead of trying to shoehorn it into a glorified mod.

With the TAC modification (The Authentical Colonization), which is constantly enhanced and improved, Civ4:Col really becomes a good game.
Unfortunately, as it is a development of the German speaking community, only the vital parts have yet been translated into English, but it is fully playable - and as I said, it is much, much better than the vanilla version.

 

[markieness]

Id buy it.

 

[Wieke]

They should do the colonization of Chiron .

 

[Schuesseled]

I feel kind of dumb. I had no idea civ4: colonization existed. Is it worth checking out?

It depends entirely on whether you like it or not.

For me it was not addictive like other Civ games, I found the mechanics a bit agrevating, constantly sending ships too and from the new and old world to do some dodgy trades and get people and bring them to the new world. You build your civilisation, competing with other colonisers for territory, as well as either diplomatically dealing with Native Americans or Obliterating them with Cannon. Eventually you decide after achiveing certain goals to become independant and then have to survive an armada from your home country. If you survive the "war of independence" you win the game. Cant say I ever bothered to finish a game, got bored quick and is now left uninstalled on my steam account.

I wouldn't recommend it to anybody, but obviously some people liked it. As I say, it wasn't my cup of tea but it might be yours, you won't know till you try it out, you should be able to buy it reasonably cheap now. It will allow you to frizzle away some hours while still waiting for Civ5 at the very least.

 

[GigaNerd]

Okay, new idea:

Colonization of Britain by the Martians!!!