To start off some of you people think little of Zouave. or think that he's the most annoying, whining member of this forum. don't deny this. I'd often see posts with:
'Forgive me if I start to sound like Zouave...'
or start quoting zouave in the hopes of getting laughs. I admit I also felt that way to Z' after the first few weeks I was in here but if you ask me now where I stand I'd say I'd be beside him on most if not all points he has shared here against Civ3 and Firaxis. Firaxis made a mess of this game and the patches are just not doing it.
Now for my monologue. This is the first time I'd be posting after exiling myself from Civ3 almost two weeks now. True, I got addicted to Civ3 but I can also say that of the plethora of games I've played through the years. But my Civ3 addiction is not the same as say my Settlers2 addiction. Playing Civ3 just doesn't go through me as if I was playing for fun. Rather it felt like work -- Initially hard, at-length Boring, all the way Frustrating work.
And why did I feel that way? because Civ3 is just Civ2 with better skins (no offense to Civ2 fanatics). It doesn't break new ground - Gameplay-wise or Story-wise. On gameplay. Why stay with a Turn-based engine when they could easily have turned this into realtime gameplay? Look at Settlers 2 for example. Hell, when I started playing S2 I was shocked to find it in realtime. I was thinking "How could they pull this off? It would be too hard to manage everything!" But they did. And the secret is not having to have to do everything everytime. Wouldn't you rather have the adrenalin pumping at not being fast enough to do all the things you want? rather than going yawning-ly cold doing everything all the time eventually boring yourself and cause you to postpone games indefinitely.
So why do I suggest realtime? Because gameplay becomes faster. Because it limits your ability to control everything at once so you don't start thinking that you should. Because there are more strategies involved in realtime play. Because combat can then be remodeled to avoid one-on-one battles that digress into 'killer-spearman' victories. Because combat in real-time allows for timely counterattacks which is the backbone for defense of any militarily-able countries. Because Defensive Nuclear Second-Strikes is the 99.99% deterent against Nuclear First-Strikes. Because time stops for no one. Because multiplayer realtime Civ3 actually becomes a reality and quite a very enjoyable one I should think. Because each turn in a Turn-based Multiplayer Civ3 Game will take ages and all games eventually get buried in unfinished boring oblivion. Because Multiplayer is the true measure of a good Civ3 player. and so on and so forth. Don't believe me on the MP issue? Wait for PTW and see. If it's not realtime - then you're screwed. What would you do between turns? Play starcraft? Maybe a game of solitaire? Oh, but of course, Go to the forums and chat! Now that is fun, huh? Bullsh*t!
Story-wise? any new grounds? Did they create new storylines? Or should the question be - Was there even any to begin with? Should I rely on games made by others to really say that I accomplished something the developers intended? Maybe Civ3 did break new ground. I think Firaxis should have said something like:
"Features:
Play scenarios made by your fellow Civ-ers!
(We can't do that for you because we must release the beta.. err.. game on schedule.)"
So Civ3 is a beautified Civ2. Polish the skins and wow! You got Civ2.1
Face it. Each and every game that is not Civilization has undergone serious changes in their follow-ups. If not for gameplay then in storyline. Even the makers of Exile made more and more mindboggling storylines as the series went on even if gameplay was 100% the same. And those people did not even number 5. Compare that to the 30+ people on Firaxis' payroll.
So what was Civ3 to me? The game that lead me to the fruitful idea that if a game isn't any good don't stick to it because it might just cause your early death (who knows how many have died of heart-attacks to constant CF'ing[Culture F*cking]) or eventual recession to acute raging berserker syndromes.
Civ3 - the game that lead me to Warcraft III.
'Forgive me if I start to sound like Zouave...'
or start quoting zouave in the hopes of getting laughs. I admit I also felt that way to Z' after the first few weeks I was in here but if you ask me now where I stand I'd say I'd be beside him on most if not all points he has shared here against Civ3 and Firaxis. Firaxis made a mess of this game and the patches are just not doing it.
Now for my monologue. This is the first time I'd be posting after exiling myself from Civ3 almost two weeks now. True, I got addicted to Civ3 but I can also say that of the plethora of games I've played through the years. But my Civ3 addiction is not the same as say my Settlers2 addiction. Playing Civ3 just doesn't go through me as if I was playing for fun. Rather it felt like work -- Initially hard, at-length Boring, all the way Frustrating work.
And why did I feel that way? because Civ3 is just Civ2 with better skins (no offense to Civ2 fanatics). It doesn't break new ground - Gameplay-wise or Story-wise. On gameplay. Why stay with a Turn-based engine when they could easily have turned this into realtime gameplay? Look at Settlers 2 for example. Hell, when I started playing S2 I was shocked to find it in realtime. I was thinking "How could they pull this off? It would be too hard to manage everything!" But they did. And the secret is not having to have to do everything everytime. Wouldn't you rather have the adrenalin pumping at not being fast enough to do all the things you want? rather than going yawning-ly cold doing everything all the time eventually boring yourself and cause you to postpone games indefinitely.
So why do I suggest realtime? Because gameplay becomes faster. Because it limits your ability to control everything at once so you don't start thinking that you should. Because there are more strategies involved in realtime play. Because combat can then be remodeled to avoid one-on-one battles that digress into 'killer-spearman' victories. Because combat in real-time allows for timely counterattacks which is the backbone for defense of any militarily-able countries. Because Defensive Nuclear Second-Strikes is the 99.99% deterent against Nuclear First-Strikes. Because time stops for no one. Because multiplayer realtime Civ3 actually becomes a reality and quite a very enjoyable one I should think. Because each turn in a Turn-based Multiplayer Civ3 Game will take ages and all games eventually get buried in unfinished boring oblivion. Because Multiplayer is the true measure of a good Civ3 player. and so on and so forth. Don't believe me on the MP issue? Wait for PTW and see. If it's not realtime - then you're screwed. What would you do between turns? Play starcraft? Maybe a game of solitaire? Oh, but of course, Go to the forums and chat! Now that is fun, huh? Bullsh*t!
Story-wise? any new grounds? Did they create new storylines? Or should the question be - Was there even any to begin with? Should I rely on games made by others to really say that I accomplished something the developers intended? Maybe Civ3 did break new ground. I think Firaxis should have said something like:
"Features:
Play scenarios made by your fellow Civ-ers!
(We can't do that for you because we must release the beta.. err.. game on schedule.)"
So Civ3 is a beautified Civ2. Polish the skins and wow! You got Civ2.1
Face it. Each and every game that is not Civilization has undergone serious changes in their follow-ups. If not for gameplay then in storyline. Even the makers of Exile made more and more mindboggling storylines as the series went on even if gameplay was 100% the same. And those people did not even number 5. Compare that to the 30+ people on Firaxis' payroll.
So what was Civ3 to me? The game that lead me to the fruitful idea that if a game isn't any good don't stick to it because it might just cause your early death (who knows how many have died of heart-attacks to constant CF'ing[Culture F*cking]) or eventual recession to acute raging berserker syndromes.
Civ3 - the game that lead me to Warcraft III.
Answer: no playtesting.
