Lol...
Well, since you've provoked me
What I was going to say, in a round-about, I-hope-they-don't-figure-out-what-I-mean-before-I've-made-it-to-a-safe-distance kind of way is this:
Civ2 kicked ass. It was great. Easily the most addictive, most playable game I had for a large period of my youth - and I was playing the version on PSX, with all the added limitations (you think modern PCs are slow between turns towards the end of games? Imagine a PSX!) It was all I could hope for - perfect, as far as I was concerned.
Now, obviously Civ3 is an improvement - it's even more perfect than Civ2! (I actually was trying to buy Civ2, but I couldn't find it so I risked a larger amount of money on Civ3). But it's not that big a leap! I mean, where do you go after perfect?! The graphics are oh-so-sweet (never a priority in a turn-based strategy, but I love what they've done with them). The changes, such as those to the tech-tree and the UUs, are pretty much all great. And the culture system is lovely.
But then, when I look at all the suggestions in the Civ4 forum, I see so many things that they can improve upon - including things like the culture system.
I must admit, I'm far too pleased with the game to want to say what I'm going to, and I obviously don't want to upset anybody here... but here goes... (Apologies in advance)
If Sid is such a good game designer, how come he's made Civilisation THREE times already and still hasn't got it right?! (I mean, he's making a fourth - is something wrong with Civ3, or is he just stealing our money?!)
Truth is, I'm kidding. I know there are many reasons why Civ will always go on improving - and if when I'm playing Civ38 when I retire, I'll be happy. I'm also very annoyed that I got SMAC and it wouldn't play on my PC for more than 10 minutes without locking up (hoping the way I've found to make Civ3 run will work on SMAC too - can't wait to try it!)
But, I do have one criticism of the man. Sid Meier's GOLF?! It just sounds so wrong...