man plays single game of civ2 for 10 years

The usual pattern for strategy games is something like this:

Install the game
Start a New Game without knowing what to do so you tend to do it badly and probably quit.
Learn more about how to play the game better. Study the game mechanics. For a game like civ
learn about the game concepts, units, city improvements, etc. Maybe read a strategy guide.
Formulate a better strategy and start a new game.
You always do a little better after learning more about the game but you might still not win this game and start over.
If you put in enough time to study the game, formulate a sound strategy and play it well you will eventually beat the game. Then it's time to either up the difficult level or find a new game.

This guy seems like he was stuck at the earliest steps in the process refusing to abandon the game and learn how to play.
 
I dunno. Doing something over the course of 10 years with seemingly no desire at all to improve doesn't strike me as an interesting endeavour in the least. If there was some compelling reason to do it that way, then possibly, but not if it was just simply and unequivocally badly done.

Now here you sound like my wife witching about our sex life.

:lol:
 
Well, I'm not accustomed to seeing people come out and declare that they are dead fish without provocation, but I guess we're dealing with a special case.
 
My reaction was that it's kind of like a particularly stupid pet, like a goldfish or something, that you check in on from time to time but don't put a lot of effort into being "good" at. I was surprised to find that everyone was so humbug-y about it. :undecide:
 
My reaction was that it's kind of like a particularly stupid pet, like a goldfish or something, that you check in on from time to time but don't put a lot of effort into being "good" at. I was surprised to find that everyone was so humbug-y about it. :undecide:

About what?
 
Was that a Britishism? Sorry, I just mean "in their attitude".
 
My reaction was that it's kind of like a particularly stupid pet, like a goldfish or something, that you check in on from time to time but don't put a lot of effort into being "good" at. I was surprised to find that everyone was so humbug-y about it. :undecide:

Odd example. Goldfish die pretty quick unless you actively maintain their tank and feed them on set schedule. They don't have stomachs so a once a day feeding won't work.

Maybe a more fitting example would be a junk car you've had in the garage for ten years. You tinker with it now and then but in reality it's never going to go anywhere. It's just taking up space and wasting part of your time. But some collector might wonder by someday and offer you to take it off your hands, noting how interesting it is you kept it around and kept tinkering with it even though it was a lost cause.
 
Thought it was a good story, some of the people complaining need to get over themselves and lighten up
 
So imagine my disappointment when I open the save file and realise that, actually, neither of those things was true. It was very, very easy to avoid the stalemate in the first place, and it is also very, very easy to overcome. The world was a mess not because of some inherent feature of Civ that the human player acts against, but because the human player himself is just really bad at it. My interest turned to incredulity very quickly. What I thought was a really interesting science fiction story for which an entire community was helping to write the ending was instead a terribly written science fiction story with a very disappointing ending.

*cough* Mass Effect 3 *cough*
 
Back
Top Bottom