I have recently discovered a true Gem..Civ 2..
I ran out like an idiot an bought Civ 3,because "It must be great,Sid Meier's name is on it"..I am a newbie to both games,
so I am able to give a somewhat objective opinion..
Well my opinion is that Civ 3 has better graphics and more options
such as culture,but the overall effect is far inferior to my experiences with Civ 2..Maybe I'm not an advanced strategist,but I can tell which game appeals to me more,which one draws me in more..
That game is Civ 2..
I feel like they were trying to make some money off a well known,well marketed product.Similar in the way the Rocky movie franchise developed..I also believe that there are probably some who are afraid to admit that they wasted $50 on a bad game,and are therefore compelled to justify their purchase.
In my experience,sequels generally suck..This is no exception..I will admit ,were I able to beat Civ 3 a game or two my opinion might be different..However,I simply don't feel like investing the time to do that..Hopefully Heroes of Might and Magic 4 will be a worthy sequel..I think I will trade off Civ 3 at EB and find out..
My Top 3 games based on addictiveness factor:
2) HOMM 3