first civ 3 review (IGN)

delijoe

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 25, 2001
Messages
37
IGN gave it a 9.3. The review was more lukewarm and it criticized the game more than I expected. Sounded more like nitpicking to me. You can't view the whole map when editing scenarios? That doesn't sound good..
 
how about a link?
 
And for all the lazy people :D

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE REVIEW FROM IGN.COM -PART ONE

Civilization III

We've got the exclusive first review of Sid Meier's latest empire building game.

October 29, 2001



I'll forego the basic introduction. You know the one -- where I talk all about how the original Civilization and its eventual sequel, Civilization II, have occupied more of my gaming hours than any other game. There's enough of that stuff in the preview. Still, since it would be unfair to assume that everyone who's reading this is intimately familiar with the game, we probably should at least outline the point of it all.
Civilization III follows the basic pattern of the previous games. Starting just with a single group of settlers in the year 4000 BC, you'll have to explore your world, establish new cities, build civic improvements and great wonders, negotiate with rivals for limited space and resources, wage war against your enemies, research new technologies and generally try to do all you can to stay competitive with the other civilizations while making sure things don't fall apart at home. Civ III perfectly captures the epic sweep of the previous games but adds a few new features that make the game much more convenient and much more balanced.

This time around a whole new impulse has been added that dramatically affects the way the game is played. The establishment and growth of your culture should be a top priority for any aspiring ruler. Civ III uses a modified (and improved) version of the zones of influence rules from Alpha Centauri. As you build more cultural improvements (temples, libraries, wonders of the world, etc.) your borders expand bringing even more territory under you control.

Apart from denying your opponents the same territory, the expansion of your borders are important for several reasons. First off, you'll automatically get access to each resource within your empire's borders. Luxuries like silk or gems add to your people's happiness while wheat or cattle increase your food output. The inclusion of special strategic resources within your borders allows you to produce the various military units in the game. Iron is required for swordsmen, saltpeter for musketeers and uranium for nuclear submarines. Any city that builds a unit must be connected to the resource by a road (or to a harbor or airport that has access to the resource).

From time to time you'll find that you've been shortchanged on a key resource (like horses for chariots and cavalry, for instance). In that case, you'll need to trade with one of your rivals (who have probably also been shortchanged on something). To trade with a rival, your cities must be connected by a road (or, again, via a harbor or airport).

You're also able to see any activity within your own borders. Since every unit within your territory is visible to you, you can respond to threats as soon as they cross into your empire. And since rivals can't take advantage of roads within your empire, they move much more slowly than your own forces. Culture is also important in gaining sympathy and devotion from other civs and their cities. If your own borders are close enough to a rival with a much lower culture rating, the rival city may just defect and join your empire. This works both ways, however, so be mindful of plopping down a small city next to your biggest cultural rival.

The overall trading and diplomacy setup is drastically different than it was in previous games. And by different, I mean better. There are no spies, no diplomats and no caravans. Instead all of the functionality of these units is built into your foreign advisor's screen. Once you've established contact with a rival you can start negotiations. During the negotiations you can ask for and offer a very wide range of specific treaties. You and your rival can trade cities, diplomatic states, resources, money, knowledge and access to other civilizations. The tool for creating these deals is very straightforward but I was disappointed to see that the rivals are pretty passive. They tend not to suggest their own trades (opting instead to threaten you when you get a powerful advance or trade world maps with you). Opponents who take a more active role in trade would be nice.

The interface is much better implemented this time around. First and most importantly the main game map lets you see which cities are growing, how long until they add another population point, what they're currently building and how long it will take to complete it. Seeing all this info on the main map makes playing the game incredibly convenient. And you can change production orders and buy improvements right from the main map. The advisor screens are laid out fairly well. The science advisor is particularly useful (although he doesn't always pick the right paths for your civilization).

But there are some basic interface problems that should have been fixed before the game was released. Most importantly, the populations of your cities are hard to read. In the previous game you could clearly see which of your citizens were happy, which were content and which were unhappy. This time around the different heads look much more alike and are harder to read at a glance. Since the happiness of your citizens is so important to maintaining order, this similarity is kind of a pain. And while the game automatically prompts you to adjust city production at key moments (like when you need an aqueduct for instance) it doesn't prompt you to add entertainers to cities in civil disorder.

Another irritating bug is that the list-sorting feature on the domestic advisor screen doesn't stick. If you're interested in seeing your cities rated based on scientific research, or production, or food output, you can click the corresponding icon in the menu bar. But when you move the mouse off of the icon (say, to scroll the list) you lose the sort and go back to the default city list. It's not as big a pain as the indistinct city heads but it's still sloppy.

The game also has some shortcomings in the area of sound. While I've never thought that sound or visuals are necessarily the point of the game, a little more could have been done here, especially in the area of sound. The basic soundtracks are nice and unobtrusive (an mp3 player in the game would be nice) and the sound effects are pretty average. Unfortunately the sound loops every time a unit moves. When you've got units that move a long way and make a lot of noise, you just get these short bursts of noise rather than one continuous sound.

And for some reason, someone thought it would be cool to add the sound of birds chirping to the game. This is honestly probably the most irritating aspect of the game. It's bad enough to hear real birds chirping outside my window because I've been up for 10 hours playing this game. When the game makes chirping sounds it triggers a Pavlovian response in me that makes me feel more tired than I am. It sounds stupid, but it's true.

While the game isn't going to win any graphics awards it does have a tight artistic style. Cities, units, and the world itself are rendered in a very believable fashion that evokes a very well produced tabletop feel. I liked all of the animations on the units. Apart from the aesthetic appeal of the graphics, I was more impressed that everything is much more comprehensible this time around. The map itself is much easier to read (although the borders might have been more discernable at a distance).

The Civilopedia has been also been reworked quite a bit to improve navigation. Everything's laid out in a traditional browser where you can flip back and forth from one topic to the next with almost no trouble at all. Every entry has links within it that direct you to other entries. Apart from covering the basic improvements and units in the game, the Civilopedia also includes lots of historical information (which you can digest or ignore at your leisure) as well as some really awesome sections on game concepts. If you need to know how corruption works or what to do to maximize city growth, then the Civilopedia will really spell it all out for you.

You can use the Civilopedia to check out the various civilizations in the game as well. The sixteen individual civilizations have been given characteristics and unique units this time around. The civ strengths give you certain bonuses in certain areas of the game (happiness, military, commerce, research, etc.) and allow you to either capitalize on your own playing strength or minimize your weaknesses. The traits also allow you to predict a given civ's reaction to a particular situation. We're covering the strategy of the civs in a series of diaries written by the game's designers. (These are running all week so be sure to check in to read the rest of these.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
LAST PART OF THE REVIEW:


The unique unit for each civ is also really significant. Since each unique unit is meant to represent the pinnacle of that society's power, you have a good distribution of cool units throughout the ages. It kind of forces you to make a play for power in the era your unit appears which, depending on how you play can be a good thing or a bad thing. The Romans and the Egyptians with their legionaries and war chariots have to make a move in the ancient phase of the game while the Americans and Germans with their F-15s and Panzers can afford to put things off for a while. Since the F-15 and Panzers aren't ever made obsolete by other units, this kind of weights things in their favor. Still, the unique units almost all have a place in any player's strategy.

On the subject of units it is still possible for ancient armies to defeat modern ones but it's much less likely than in the previous games. You'll still have the odd "spearman defeats mechanized infantry" problem but nowhere near as often as in the previous games. Also stacked units in the open won't all be destroyed by a single attack. The only real problem with the units is that one unit will often obscure another's health bar in combat. Not being able to see the health bars of both units involved in a fight is a small oversight but a frustrating one.

Since it is one of the most addictive single player games around, it's hard to find too much fault with the lack of multiplayer. Firaxis is apparently still thinking about what to do on the multiplayer front (multiplayer gold edition anyone?). Lacking multiplayer, your only option beyond the generated games is the scenario editor. While it's a good tool, it lacks a few key features -- an option to view the whole map would be nice, for instance. Old scenarios won't work with the new game, but the flexibility of the tool is just as high.

There are a lot more things that we could talk about here but that would mean that you're sitting here reading instead of going out and trying out all the new features of the game for yourself. I know that there are those who believe that drastic changes to Civilization are an abomination but these are also the people who write us letters about how the latest Diablo II patch, which reduces a single skill's effectiveness by 4.5% on every other Thursday has completely castrated their 70th level barbarian. To them I say, get over it.

Now that a lot of the cheats and shortcuts have been eliminated from Civilization, I'm glad to have the opportunity to change my playing style. I can't just have 12 cities piling up shields on an existing wonder so I can switch to a new one once I discover a new technology. I can't send out my armies of spies to go around buying up everyone's units and cities. I can't just focus on expansion at the neglect of my temples and libraries.

To make a long story short, Civilization III is a worthy heir for the franchise and a definite must have for any strategy gamer who doesn't want us to make fun of them.

-- Steve Butts
 
Originally posted by Morten Blaabjerg
And for all the lazy people :D

That's me! Thanks Morten! :goodjob:
As expected it sounds great. Now I wouldn't bother reading reviews like this if I had the game to play, but according to my order status on Amazon it won't come until between Nov. 1-9. In the great words of Queen: "I want it all, I want it all, I want it all, and I want it now!"
Where are those StarTrek transporters when you need them?
 
Ta Morten...this guy think he has problems with birds chirping IT makes me head for the long-grass! ;)

The civlopedia is now easier to navigate! It was piss easy b4! :king:
 
How about some criticisms


This brings me to the negative aspects of Civilization III's gameplay, and unfortunately there are many. For starters, a number of units -- mostly those in the Modern era -- are either underbalanced or unrealistic in their lack of potential. For instance, while relocating a Cruise Missile to one of my other cities, it happened to stop accidentally in an open tile. During the enemy's turn, an Archer shot down my Cruise Missile, instantly destroying it. Just how an Ancient era Archer is capable of hitting a Cruise Missile moving at 300+ MPH and destroying it with an arrow is beyond me. Unfortunately this trend continues with other units; as experienced Civilization players recall, it was sometimes possible for a Phalanx to destroy a Battleship in prior titles. This is no longer possible in Civilization III, since sea units (like those in the air) can now only bombard ground targets. However, it is possible for Mechanized Infantry (the best defensive unit) to be destroyed quite easily by an Ancient Swordsman (an attack rating of 3 vs. a defense rating of 18, in case you were wondering). Allowing for some random chance, as the manual states will happen, such cases should really only occur once in a great while, but unfortunately, they happen routinely.

Corruption issues also serve to hinder Civilization III's gameplay to a great degree, as Firaxis has failed to provide any adequate way of dealing with it. Corruption has the effect of siphoning production and money from cities that are far away from your capital, so that the larger your empire becomes, the less able you are to actually produce anything in far away locations. To deal with this, it is possible to relocate your capital, build the Courthouse city improvement, change your government to one less susceptible to corruption and even to build the Forbidden Palace Minor Wonder which acts like a second palace/capital. Despite this and good placement, corruption will still bring your far away cities to a halt; and it was often the case that my distant cities would end up losing all but one shield of production to corruption.

War Weariness is also a problem in Civilization III. While this syndrome only affects those using the Republic or Democratic forms of government, it occurs almost the instant a war begins. Constructing Police Stations is designed to help alleviate this problem, but in fact seems to have little effect, so be warned that such governments can spell the doom of a civilization in war-time.

Lastly, it seems as if Firaxis reached the Modern era and then stopped short. While there is a full slate of technological advances, this era is almost barren of Wonders and new unit types. In fact, some of what was in Civilization II, such as launching satellites into orbit and eliminating the fog of war, is missing here. Furthermore, while the Diplomacy system is more robust than before, it's also a bit lacking in feeling. For instance, the use of nuclear weapons or razing a city is considered an atrocity and in Civilization II, the computer players would let you know it. Here, such things are par for the course, and many nations routinely go razing cities, nor do they get all that upset when you lob several ICBMs their way.

While I have dedicated several paragraphs to detailing what I found wrong with Civilization III, there is a lot here to like. When taken as a whole, the game is still very fun to play and quite addicting -- just not as much as some long time fans may have hoped.


4 stars.
 
It's really starting to sound like Infogrames made Firaxis shove this out the door.
 
:cry:

please stop taling about the negative parts. Let me live my dream of the perfect civ3 a little while longer :cry:
 
[/QUOTE][/B] it won't come until between Nov. 1-9. [/B][/QUOTE]
I went down to my local EB games and they said it was the 6th November. But some people are saying the 16th!!!
 
Originally posted by Jive
[BIn fact, some of what was in Civilization II, such as launching satellites into orbit and eliminating the fog of war, is missing here. [/B]

Maybe he was smoking shrooms? Civ2 didn't have satellites! :crazyeyes :confused:
 
During the enemy's turn, an Archer shot down my Cruise Missile, instantly destroying it. Just how an Ancient era Archer is capable of hitting a Cruise Missile moving at 300+ MPH and destroying it with an arrow is beyond me. Unfortunately this trend continues with other units; as experienced Civilization players recall, it was sometimes possible for a Phalanx to destroy a Battleship in prior titles. This is no longer possible in Civilization III, since sea units (like those in the air) can now only bombard ground targets. However, it is possible for Mechanized Infantry (the best defensive unit) to be destroyed quite easily by an Ancient Swordsman (an attack rating of 3 vs. a defense rating of 18, in case you were wondering). Allowing for some random chance, as the manual states will happen, such cases should really only occur once in a great while, but unfortunately, they happen routinely.

That's not a good thing, I'm rather upset about this. It seems getting swarmed by lots of cheap Ancient/Middle ages stuff and getting your butt kicked by swordsmen means quantity of units is FAR more important than quality, something very upsetting to tech-tree lovers like myself. Combining this with the fact that I don't like to produce tons of units under a peacetime defense strat and it looks like my style of play is gonna be in serious trouble. :rolleyes:

Corruption issues also serve to hinder Civilization III's gameplay to a great degree, as Firaxis has failed to provide any adequate way of dealing with it. Corruption has the effect of siphoning production and money from cities that are far away from your capital, so that the larger your empire becomes, the less able you are to actually produce anything in far away locations. To deal with this, it is possible to relocate your capital, build the Courthouse city improvement, change your government to one less susceptible to corruption and even to build the Forbidden Palace Minor Wonder which acts like a second palace/capital. Despite this and good placement, corruption will still bring your far away cities to a halt; and it was often the case that my distant cities would end up losing all but one shield of production to corruption.

Ok, so it seems pretty clear to me that Scientific and Industrious is unplayable, as if corruption doesn't kill you and render your extra prodution moot, hordes of swordsmen will come and destroy your tech advantage, especially in 16 civ games.

I guess everyone will be playing Militaristic/Expansionist/Commercial civs to avoid this, meaning that the English, the Romans, and the Zulus :eek: are the Civs to take, possibly the civs with one of these three qualities and Religious (Aztecs, Iroqouis, Indians, Japanese) as well.

Certainly my top choices (Chinese, Egyptians and ESPECIALLY the Persians) are going to have a very rough time of it according to this information. It's pretty clear that Industrious is only playable if you can control corruption, that means Commercial and Industrious, and that means the French.

Looks like I have to drastically change my play style. I'll try a few games with the Persians first to see how it goes, but I'm still not too happy.
 
Addendum to mild rant above:

...or this guy just really SUCKED at Civ to begin with.
 
No.. it sounds like he knew of the measures to counteract corruption and how to use them, and they weren't effective.

I hope a patch is released ASAP for this. Especially for NERFING units until they're nearing complete ineffectiveness when fighting superior technology.

If I ever see these headlines, I'm not going to be happy:
"AMERICAN F-15 SHOT DOWN OVER LITTLE BIGHORN!"
"AMERICAN TANK DIVISION ROUTED BY BOWS AND ARROWS!"
"5000 YEAR OLD IROQUOIS WARRIOR CAPTURES WASHINGTON!"
 
Top Bottom