Is civ2 the best civ there is?

[Sir_Lancelot]

I don't know, It works for me. Only T0T, though.

It was the original version that was incompatible, TOT I have never tried. The version I downloaded had another acronym I don't remember.

 

[stfoskey12]

I think 1, 2 and 3 are the best in their own way.

I think 3, 4 and 5 are the best in their own way. However, I think a lot of it is based on when you're introduced to the series. If you got introduced early and loved the early games, the new ones likely changed those things. However if you got introduced later and loved the newer games, the old ones wouldn't have the things you like about those games. I was introduced to Civ4 in 2010, and by that point Civ2 seemed to old to interest me, especially since now I have other Civ versions to play around with.

I feel like going more in-depth would just lead us to saying we like the features of our versions better and it wouldn't get us anywhere.

On an unrelated note, some people said the 3D games were very laggy. I think that is because they are incompatible with most computers made before 2005 or so.

 

[tolchicken77]

I never made it beyond Civ 2, which I still play. A buddy of mine from childhood plays Civ 2 Gold Multiplayer with me. Usually just us 2 vs 5 computers on Deity. Still a blast to play.

My other favorite game is FFVII so in many ways I am stuck in the 90s...

 

[Sir_Lancelot]

I bought a couple of games yesterday and got to choose one free game. I almost chose Civ4 as the free game, but chose some car game. What I have read about Civ4 have made me skeptical, but I almost chose it just to see with my own eyes how it is. Maybe I'll test out Civ5 some day, but for now I'm happy with Civ2 and 3.

 

[Catfish]

I only own the even-numbered versions of the Civ series. Strangely, I've spent more time modifying Civ2 than playing, and more time playing Civ4. I think Civ4 BTS is a fine game. I missed out on Civ1. I've got no interest in Civ3, which lacks any type of events scripting (BTW, I also think it's an ugly game), and Civ5, well, I've been turned off by the smell.

Not to speak about the bad images of most of the units, they forgot to add defensive animations in their sprites. I tried to improve the unit graphics by importing and adjusting Civ 3 unit graphics, what looks nice - until it comes to a battle: The attacking unit shoots or beats on the other unit like mad, but the defending unit only stands there without doing anything -until one of the units suddenly falls down or explodes. Nearly all civers disabled the new unit sprites (without noticing the mistake I explained above), but to make the desaster complete, the old Civ 2 combat animations were now disabled in the new programming.

No doubt Civ2 ToT was a rush job, but I think you exaggerate the importance of the combat animation's short-comings. For me, there were more annoying bugs and idiosyncrasies than that, eg, spies stealing restricted techs, buggy sprite overrides, poor implementation of new scenario features and multiple Midgard game events bugs. I agree that the graphics were hideous. I've replaced most of those. The Civ2 modding community is mature, so no problem finding better alternatives. Despite this, it's still superior to MGE.

 

[Sir_Lancelot]

I've got no interest in Civ3, which lacks any type of events scripting (BTW, I also think it's an ugly game),

What scripted events are you talking about? What happens?

No doubt Civ2 ToT was a rush job, but I think you exaggerate the importance of the combat animation's short-comings. For me, there were more annoying bugs and idiosyncrasies than that, eg, spies stealing restricted techs, buggy sprite overrides, poor implementation of new scenario features and multiple Midgard game events bugs. I agree that the graphics were hideous. I've replaced most of those. The Civ2 modding community is mature, so no problem finding better alternatives. Despite this, it's still superior to MGE.

So ToT is superior to MGE. And the standard edition is better than ToT?

There are some mods for MGE that changes the AI somewhat. I don't know if you used them. I play standard edition 2.42, unmodded.

 

[Catfish]

What scripted events are you talking about? What happens?

Events scripting (macro languages, XML, Python, Lua) for mods/scenarios. Civ3 has none.

And the standard edition is better than ToT?

Not in my view. The only real advantages that classic Civ2 has over MGE/ToT are the friendlier AI diplomacy model and the ability to play Deity+ games. There are patches for the aggressive AI.

There are some mods for MGE that changes the AI somewhat. I don't know if you used them.

I don't use MGE. What mods are you referring to?

 

[Sir_Lancelot]

Events scripting (macro languages, XML, Python, Lua) for mods/scenarios. Civ3 has none.

I thought you meant scripted happenings when you played the game.

Not in my view. The only real advantages that classic Civ2 has over MGE/ToT are the friendlier AI diplomacy model and the ability to play Deity+ games. There are patches for the aggressive AI.

I don't use MGE. What mods are you referring to?

You call it patch, I call it mod (because it is a modification, and I think of a patch as a bug fix). So we're talking about the same thing with different words for it.

 

[Catfish]

You call it patch, I call it mod (because it is a modification, and I think of a patch as a bug fix). So we're talking about the same thing with different words for it.

So you're referring to this thread? You only discovered this a few days ago and I provided the links. Excuse me for thinking that you were referring to something else. Note there are versions for MGE and ToT.

 

[Sir_Lancelot]

So you're referring to this thread? You only discovered this a few days ago and I provided the links. Excuse me for thinking that you were referring to something else. Note there are versions for MGE and ToT.

I had completely forgotten about that thread, so I didn't have that in mind now. But that was where I learned about it.

 

[Millman]

I'd have to play the others to render a judgment. There's a couple things that can be changed. I have a feeling the future/now installments lack options.

 

[nerdfighter13]

Something just occurred to me. This is in the civ 2 forum , so you are more likely to get positive reviews or civ 2.

 

[AngryB]

Civ 2 is pure genius. Although not absolutely perfect, required no remaking. The complexity of the trade aspect of the game is what really makes it for me.

 

[Sir_Lancelot]

Civ 2 is pure genius. Although not absolutely perfect, required no remaking. The complexity of the trade aspect of the game is what really makes it for me.

It needs no remake, but I would like to see some bug fixes. Trade is one area where a bug fix would be desirable.
It would also be nice if they released a new version with smarter AI, but is there any game where the AI is not flawed?

 

[civ2fan4lyfe]

Civ 2 is the best. All of the others lack strategy. This one has endless, countless endings. Think you're too good then raise the level.

 

[Lord Silverkey]

Well I guess I better get my opinion on here. I should note that I was born in 1990, and my dad bought the original civilization game back when it was released in 1991. As such I've literally been playing these games since I was 3. I've put the titles in order of release and included games which I consider to be part of the "Civilization" family without actually being in the numbered series.

Civ 1: A great start to a great series. For a long time I played this on an old 386 (type of computer) that my dad wasn't using anymore and gave to me when I was 11. Still playable today if you ignore the archaic graphics and live with the buggy system that can act up with too many cities.

Colonization: Not technically a Civ game, but uses a very similar engine. Remade using Civ 4 as a base in 2008. Very memorable, but didn't seem to have a lot of replayability. This one always felt like you were playing the same scenario over and over again without having many choices to change things up.

Civ 2: My dad's personal favorite. Still plays it almost every day. Very Mod friendly, I was editing stuff in this when I was 8.

Civ 2 Test of Time: The game in the series that I've put the most hours into. IMO has the best variety of all the games, with Original/Extended Original, Science Fiction and Fantasy game modes that really up the replayability. Was playing it last night and still enjoy it immensely. I know some people don't like it as much as Civ 2 vanilla, and have no problem with that but I like it more. Still very Mod friendly.

Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri: Not technically a civ game, but for all intents and purposes it is. This game has a lot of features such as elevation, terrain moisture, social engineering, indigenous lifeforms, faction rivalry, planetary council, unit design, and a plot line which give it a strongly distinct feeling from the rest of the games that I would consider to be in the Civilization family. I'd say this is second in line for number of hours played and one of my favorites.

Call to Power: Haven't played this in a long time. Sort of an awkward civilization game not made by Microprose/Firaxis. It had some good ideas and the tech tree went far into the future but it (in my opinion) was a bit clumsy and not as fun as most to play.

Call to Power 2: Never played it.

Civ 3: I didn't really like this one a lot, but I get a pretty potent feeling of nostalgia from playing it. It's right in between Civ 2 and Civ 4 in graphics, playing style, etc. but I felt was mostly a step backwards from Alpha Centauri. The only thing which I really liked about it was the resources and culture, of which I think both features are more developed and balanced in Civ 4.

Civ 4: A great game, if you like to keep track of a lot of things. Government is based off of Alpha Centauri but has more options and is more streamlined. The only game with religion. It's basic gameplay is a little easier to understand and manage then earlier games (for example, units cost gold per tern affecting your entire empire, rather than production "shields" in the city where they were built) yet has more depth of play it you really get into it. One of my favorites other than the lack of variety. I didn't like most of the scenarios, and the ones that I did like seemed quite short. Fortunately there are a lot of Mods available for download which do some interesting things. My favorites are ones that add revolutions to the mix so you can have civil wars. Loads of fun.

Revolutions: Never played it, other than the DS version which I've heard is very different.

Revolutions DS: Felt like playing civ 1 again, only shorter. This was pretty fun but I've only played a few games of it. (the DS is my brothers) I found some of the things frustrating. I seem to remember that the first person to research a tech gets a bonus. (for EVERY tech in the game, not selected ones as in other civ games that give you another free tech) This made you win faster if you were winning, and lose faster if you were losing which threw off the balance in my opinion.

Civ 4: Colonization: Remake of the 94'/95' colonization game. Again felt like just playing the same scenario over and over again. I remember losing my first game of this when playing on Chieftain. It wasn't fun. I got the founding father that gives liberty bells in each city, and that made my revolutionary sentiment go up at a fast enough rate that my "home" country kept building up it's military task force, but slow enough and early enough that I simply couldn't keep up with my military production or declare a revolution before being grossly outnumbered. I think this permanently gave me a negative feeling towards the game as I had 15 years experience with Civ games and a good 3 years with civ 4 yet couldn't win.

Civ 5: Pretty frustrated with this game. Its graphics are nice, but it's really streamlined. Almost every thing has been made global, (for example happiness is no longer city based, instead your empire has a happiness rating) you can only have one unit per space. (this was to stop the Civ 4 "Stack of Doom" which many people complained about but wasn't as bad as people thought, especially with the Beyond the Sword expansion.) Also, "squares" are now hexagons, a first from all the 13 games mentioned here. But while streamlining things they also made some things more complex than before, which I felt was counter-intuitive. For example, roads now cost 1 gold per turn in upkeep, making you only make roads connect cities, not placed on every space. My least favorite along with the colonization games and revolutions. I can understand why they made the changes that they made, but I don't feel that this is a true sequel to Civ 4, instead I think it should have been released as "Civilization: Revolutions 2." But that's my opinion. I know lots of people who disagree.

My favorites are Civ 2 Test of Time, Alpha Centauri and Civ 4. (in no particular order, it depends on the day and what mood I'm in. Yesterday Test of Time took the cake but today I'm in the mood for some Alpha Centauri) In conclusion I think people should have their own personal favorites which they like most and agree to disagree in discussion of which game is "best" when talking with others. Overall I'm happy that they've made all these games, even the ones I don't like so much as it will (hopefully) continue and I'll keep getting more of these games which I like so much.

If you've read this far thanks for your time and happy Civing fellow gamers.

 

[Lord Silverkey]

Something just occurred to me. This is in the civ 2 forum , so you are more likely to get positive reviews or civ 2.

So true, unless you get people like me who enjoy the variety of playing all of them at different times.

 

[Dadais]

If you've read this far thanks for your time and happy Civing fellow gamers.

Great experience of Civ-Games.
I wouldn't be as accurate as you, and don't have same tastes, so here it is in my opinion :


-Civ1 : played it few, finding it cool but still pretty simple (even if pretty at the time)

-Colonisation : Wouhou, played it soooo many times, even thought it's limits are ... (Independant Nation making useless gameplay is the worst !)

-Civ2 : REVOLUTION ! Top class game, playing it for more than 15 years, with great work from modder (great ressources), and so easy to mod itself !

-Civ2 TOT : just got it. Testing.

-Alpha Centauri : Couldn't immerge in it's games, then little time playing it.

-Civ3 : I was playing Civ2, getting with it's new gmeplay was pretty hard,good point with ressources and culture. I couldn't immerge in it still.

-Civ4 : The top, 5 years of playing it, great ideas, great modders' work, still a little difficult in compare with Civ2 to personalise it.

-Civ4 colonize : Commercial useless stuff. A great disapointment.

-Civ Revolution : Good for a DS game. No more. Pretty simple, and unbalanced.

-Civ V : Haven't given it a single try.

1st - Civ 4
2nd - Civ 2
3rd -Colonization

My holy glorious dream would be a Civ4 with 2D graphs, easy to mod like Civ2 is.

 

[PimpmyCiv]

Civ 2 takes the cake in the series for me. I started on Civ 1, which made me dive into civ 2 once available and I have never regretted. By far the best value entertainment purchase I've ever made.

Civ 3 I could never get into, and as such became a disappointment. Which resulted in me passing up on civ 4.

Civ 5 was an impulse buy, but I didn't regret it. Its the 2nd best in the series for me. Although I agree there are parts that are out of place (universal happiness is one aspect that seems wrong - why is my capital city happier because the circus showed up in some rather irrelevant town on the outskirts of my nation?) I actually love the new combat and think they did a good job with it.

In my perfect civ world though, I'd love a civ 2 that included some aspects of later games:

- cultural boundaries. The single most annoying part of civ 2 is when the AI sets up shop (builds a town or plants units) in a one or two squares in you 'zone'. It actually completely effects how I play the game.

- resource management. I really like the addition of strategic and tradeable resources.

- better AI reactions. I know this is always a sore spot and incredibly difficult to script and manage so I don't let it frustrate me (like the lack of boundaries do). That said it is a bit of a pet peeve to be BFFs with another civ and they seem to randomly flip you the bird and pick a fight they have no chance of winning.


Side Note: big fan of the original colonizations as well (own the new one, but that started collecting dust real quick). But as others have mentioned its not as replayable as the Civ series is. Still great to pick up once a year and play a game or two tough.

 

[Lectruck]

I don't know, It works for me. Only T0T, though.

You can get the Vista patch to work in Windows 7, but I haven't got it to work in Window 8 yet.

I like Civilization II the best, then 1. I have 3, 4, 5 played them but don't like them, I do like Colonization and have played it alot, I build 1 city on the coast and the rest inland and build up the coastal city and the home country doesn't stand a chance. You will keep getting the report that you are down to 1 coastal city. The home country lands troup and your multitude of cannons destroy them, you then sink the galleon with you fleet and duck back into the city. Next round...

But Civ 2 is the best, change anything, set up scenerios, modify them, never the same.

Don