Critics!!!

[logical_psycho]

Nah, I was referring to the creator of the topic. Sorry, I should've quoted him to make sure nobody would get confused. You're a whole lot better at spelling.

 

[neriana]

Maybe you should get a life and consider not all people sit around typing on forums like you.

*Looks at her number of posts*

*Looks at henry's number of posts*



1/10.

 

[Multiplicity]

but as a old civ 3 gamer and new game developer I would like to express my critisism towards civ4 and atari game communitiy.

Atari? Does it say that on the game box?

It will be against the game graphic development as it seems that graphics and interface design is the bigger part of the development of civ4. where are you Sid with your greate choises?

Great choices regarding what exactly? I see nothing wrong with the graphics (I don't hold high expectation unless it's a FPS). I am able to navigate with the interface without issue.

I played it and got bored about 15 turns into the game as it seemed like it was a easy life. It did not give me the choisable aspects as civ 3 and before has given me all along.

You judged the game based on a mere 15 turns? That is hardly enough to generate a comprehensive critique of a game. What choosable aspects in Civ 3 are missing in Civ IV? If you want to critique the game, please be specific, rather than being vague and expecting the reader to know everything you do.

Because the fans of civ3 will not be happy about the game at all.

This is an overgeneralization. I am a fan of Civ 3, yet I like Civ IV. It just takes one case to invalidate your claim.

what happened to the vikings and the other nations of civ3? You didnt make a game to reflect civilization but rather a commerical enterprice. what happened to the other civs influencing the world.

There are numerous civilizations that came and went in human history. The previous titles did not include every single one, nor should any expect them to. However, if an expansion pack will be developed (and I will not be surprised the least), adding more civs will be a possibility.

After playing Rome total war, I laugh at the grafically enriched maps and game areas. I am a game developer myself, and I ask... Did you ask the fans of civ3? who were the fans of civ3.

If you are a game developer as you claim, what would you suggest? Telling us that you laughed at the graphical quality of Rome: Total War does not say anything worth noting.

Atari still reflects arcade games and not civilization who until now had a great reputation. Well. If you cannot read what civ players want I just have to make the game myself.

Again, it is Take 2 Interactive who published the game, not Atari. By your statement after, you claim that Fireaxis did not read what the fans wanted. That is yet another overgeneralization.

And if you throw the copyright card on me, ill just say. Well we are all reflective humans and we do not get threatend by emty threats. you know the feelign right and sleep well at nigth? You amed far from the right spot this time. !

I suppose you are unaware of the freeware clones of Civilization?

 

[Cerryl]

My first thought was why is this thread still open? As I finished it, I realized what comic relief it is.

*cheers*

The civilization 4 game is beeing praced in most of the game community, but as a old civ 3 gamer and new game developer I would like to express my critisism towards civ4 and atari game communitiy. It will be against the game graphic development as it seems that graphics and interface design is the bigger part of the development of civ4. where are you Sid with your greate choises? if you were involved in the game you should be ashamed of your self. I played it and got bored about 15 turns into the game as it seemed like it was a easy life. It did not give me the choisable aspects as civ 3 and before has given me all along. Well there is place for a civ 5, but itshould not be on the cost of the fans. Because the fans of civ3 will not be happy about the game at all. what happened to the vikings and the other nations of civ3? You didnt make a game to reflect civilization but rather a commerical enterprice. what happened to the other civs influencing the world. After playing Rome total war, I laugh at the grafically enriched maps and game areas. I am a game developer myself, and I ask... Did you ask the fans of civ3? who were the fans of civ3. Well you have for sure lost one of the fans of civ4. Atari still reflects arcade games and not civilization who until now had a great reputation. Well. If you cannot read what civ players want I just have to make the game myself. And if you throw the copyright card on me, ill just say. Well we are all reflective humans and we do not get threatend by emty threats. you know the feelign right and sleep well at nigth? You amed far from the right spot this time. !

Arne

 

[Phoenix_56721]

It will be against the game graphic development as it seems that graphics and interface design is the bigger part of the development of civ4. where are you Sid with your greate choises? if you were involved in the game you should be ashamed of your self.

I started playing with civ3 and think that Civ4 is way better! Sid really gave players new and interesting choices in Civ4, not sure what your talking about in that respect. The only fault I can find about Civ4 is that the civapeadia is not as streamlined as in Civ3, but with the new interface I rarely find myself going into it anyway. And if you really are a game developer, what games have you made? I think you should try and learn a thing or two from Sid, and not just make quick assumptions on a game you've played for only 15 mins, or you probably wont be a game developer very long!

 

[Liquidated]

I loved loved loved civ1 on my floppy disks and followed me everywhere while I was in the service.

civ2 imo was civ1 with a bit more polish and depth, I loved that game as well but I had been playing civ1 so much I was in burnout already.

Civ3 I cannot even rate because I tried it for a bit and went back to civ2, never giving civ3 a real chance.

CIV4 hits me like the original civ did. I love the new depth involved, the graphics are fine once I found out about the multi unit option on display. The UI is extremely polished and the AI is no chump.

I foolishly set my first civ 4 game to noble and got my behind handed to me fast by egypt and rome ganging up on me.

Imo civ4 brings back the magic of civ by overhauling the system yet retaining what made civilization CIV.

I'm, addicted all over again and this time I can have my friends join in.

Amazing game CVI4 is, but then I've always prefered MOO for the streamlined gameplay over the micromanagement of MOO2.

Cheers!
-Liq

 

[Ravinhood]

*Looks at her number of posts*

*Looks at henry's number of posts*



1/10.

Lol Neriana, also glad to see girls/women/females liking CIV IV also.

 

[Mujadaddy]

Amazing game CVI4 is, but then I've always prefered MOO for the streamlined gameplay over the micromanagement of MOO2.

Cheers!
-Liq

I felt the same way about MOO v. MOO2 at first, but then MOO2 grew on me after playing it A LOT

 

[damxam]

Civ 4's graphics were a step backwards, civ 3's were much better. Thats the sad truth. I was exited about the graphics too before I saw how bad it really was. You people need to stop denying the problem, just because you are civ fans deosn't mean you shouldn't accept the truth.

No. No, they weren't. They just weren't in any conceivable way better. The graphics for Civ 4 are very pretty. Not staggering, but very pretty. If anything, you could complain about the interface, but I think the interface problems people are having are merely because they're new to the game, I find myself clicking buttons without having to think of where I'm supposed to click, and I've only been playing for a day.

 

[warpstorm]

Hmmm, you gave the game 15 turns before giving up on it?

 

[IATyco]

The civilization 4 game is beeing praced in most of the game community, but as a old civ 3 gamer and new game developer I would like to express my critisism towards civ4 and atari game communitiy.

Atari still reflects arcade games and not civilization who until now had a great reputation.

I would expect a game developer to at least know that Atari no longer owns the rights to the Civlization series but Take Two does, and know the difference between the present "Atari" and the old Atari that "reflects arcade games".

I played it and got bored about 15 turns into the game as it seemed like it was a easy life. It did not give me the choisable aspects as civ 3 and before has given me all along.

Yeah, 15 turns in the game when you had barely research your first tech and you can already tell what choices you have for the next few hunderds turn. I would except a game developer, especailly a new one, to at least have the patient to sit through one entire game to at least learn from the game.

 

[OG_Pieps]

I partly agree with jallaballa. I am an old C3C player too and I am not satisfied with Civ4. I don't like the graphics much. They are more 'sweet' than realistic. I also don't like some of the rules. e.g. the rules for artillery in C3 were very good so why did they change it? The animations during fights are bad too. I always get angry when two of my soldiers are staying behind because there is only one enemy left.
Of course there are also positive aspects like the unit improvments (sry, don't know what exactly they are called in English) and the diplomacy options.
But I, for myself, will go on playing C3C and enjoy the difficult diplomatic situations and the big wars in the industrial and the modern ages.

 

[Varelse]

Civ 4's graphics were a step backwards, civ 3's were much better. Thats the sad truth. I was exited about the graphics too before I saw how bad it really was. You people need to stop denying the problem, just because you are civ fans deosn't mean you shouldn't accept the truth.

There is no "truth" when it comes to video games, there is only opinion.

 

[trotskylite]

the original post is the most hilarious thing i've seen on this board

"After playing Rome total war, I laugh at the grafically enriched maps and game areas."

i mean i don't even know where to start

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

I certainly can't read what you want.

You might want to learn English before intentionally violating the copyright of an American company. Just a thought.

No, he doesn't have to.
His English is quite understandable. This is an International site, with lots of non-native speakers.
I can get pretty upset about members who dare to criticize spellings that are obviously not intentionaly wrong. l33t speak, now that's a different issue.
And someone who's name is 'Arne' is most likely no American. But I'm sure, critics, your French/German/Chinese is way better than his English .

 

[trotskylite]

it's not really his spelling that we're criticizing. his ideas are expressed very inadequately, it's impossible to get a real idea of what he means beyond a vague general sense.

 

[wilebill]

Your post is sort of unique. Try it for more than 15 turns, maybe?

 

[Seanirl]

If people are complaining about how Civ III is the best game in the universe and Civ IV is crap, why don't they just return Civ IV and go back and play Civ III? It doesn't make sense.

 

[warpstorm]

I also don't like some of the rules. e.g. the rules for artillery in C3 were very good so why did they change it?

The rules for artillery were not "very good" because they were very easy to abuse. Any time you have an attacker that can do massive damage with no risk, you should rethink that decision from a gameplay perspective.

Did they make the best re-design (it sorely needed a re-design IMNSHO)? I'm not sure, but it is a lot more interesting. Do you sacrifice the arty to do damage to lots of units, or hold him for later?

 

[seasmath]

Of course there are also positive aspects like the unit improvments (sry, don't know what exactly they are called in English)

They are called promotions, for future reference...