• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Put coloniztion concept in civilization


Jan 28, 2002
Hello there:rolleyes:
I play colonization and i think that, by the time that they do the game, the game was pretty good. I think that it was a god idea to put in the civilization the concept of colonization because in the past history colonization have a big rule in the world.
what do you think?:goodjob:

Its time to kick ass and chew bubblegum, and im out of gum.
What is the concept of Colonization?

I remember the game, kinda old. But how would it apply to Civ 3?
Yeah! I loved Colonization, where eventually a raft of gameplay is locked out because "you're still in Revolution", and when you're finally successful and win your war of Revolution, you STILL can't do anything because the game still tells you "you're still in Revolution". :mad:
There were a few elements in Colonization that would have fit nicely into Civ III, such as a comprehensive specialization of labor (Distillers & tobacconists to compliment the entertainers & tax collectors), and as wide a range of luxury items (tobacco & sugar) that were available in Colonization.

Am I alone in wondering why a sequel to that Sid Meier classic was never attempted?
I also enjoyed colonization, though I must admit the details a re a bit hazy. I would guess it didn't sell terribly well so was not picked up for a sequel. If you already have a sure thing (Civ series) might as well put your energies there. Tis a shame, cause I would enjoy a sequel.
You´re definitely not alone Minuteman,I´ve been missing a sequel for years.For every stupid game known to mankind there has been a sequel,most of them ruining the original,examples like X-Com3, Panzer General (the middle parts),come to my mind,that was plain dumb.But not for this GREAT game,don´t gimme that revolution stuff,it had this little error here and there,but I found more annoying that in the non patched versions,some of the other nations would just quit playing after gaining independence.
Many on these forums adore Civ2,I don´t,was pretty dissapointed by that one,main thing that bothered me was that they went fr Civ1 to Civ2,leaving Colonization out,yet it had so much nice ideas that would have fit nicely in there.At least they have the resource part in Civ3 now,needing Iron for swordsmen etc.The way Civ3 is now I´m not sure what I´m missing from Colonization,would have to play it again to know,but would much more appreciate Colonization 2!!!The atmosphere was lovely, romantic caribe touch,loved the midi music,loved "you have found the fountain of youth" dideldideldidel... ahhh :lol:
Gawd I miss that game,played it like every day for more than a year.:love:

Thinking about it,there are some things that would be nice, first the fact that there were tribes,the Incas,Sioux etc. couldn´t build colonies,but they had a kind of civilization of their own,one could trade with them,attack and plunder them,alliance with them against the other nations,definitely better than the huts or barbarians in Civ.Give them a life!And another thing would be the trade system, much better,selling stuff to Europe or "foreign Investors",would be fun to sell more stuff in Civ3,at the closing stages of the game so many Civs are annihilated,it´s hard to make some money fr trades,way too many resources just wasted.And another thing that is missing,also was a lot of fun was plundering enemy ships,they´d carry stuff like silver or iron,one could capture these goods, would enhance Civ3´s poor naval sys.Subs aren´t really made for attacking warships,they attack transport shipping, supplies etc.Hmm think that was it... good thread :goodjob:
There's probably never been a sequel to colonisation due to the fact that the the reviews I saw wrote it up as basically a warmed over civ clone in a setting in which the game dynamics of civ didn't quite work. And just in my opinion, they were pretty spot on.

It probably didn't sell too well because of the luke warm reviewer reaction.

You know, the same people who complain reviewers never give negative reviews now likely complained back then of how biased the reviewers were for panning colonisation. :p
The colony system in civ3 is kinda boring, There should be another option when you build a colony, these colonies would be built by settlers, and you wouldn't have the ability to tax them (they would boston tea-party you for that) but they would produce as much and have a lower corruption. When your culture gets high enough, you would have the option to incorporate the colonys to your main "empire". maybe, I don't know...

Loved Colonization btw, I remember discovering the text file that gave me the option to edit all the stats. Boy what a lucky childhood...
Yeah found those files too,rules or game txt it was called right?
One would need that,cathredral to 8 pop points,and I cheapened the fortress so it would have an earlier effect in game.Remember building a fortress on a one square island,gawd that thing was cool,was a great base,just couldn´t be attacked.

But ppl shouldn´t bash this game it really was a great advance, more than Civ2 to Civ1.So bash that game instead :p
When i found the file it didn't take long before the dutch suddenly became the swedes...
Yeah that was sticky,tried making my own nation too,also tried opening certain diplomatic talks which were never used in the game.After that came a lot of messing about with the tribes.txt, the original game just wouldn´t let more than four Indian tribes be on the real American map.
But the hardest part,and had no succsess with that one,was trying to talk to the king,yes,in the game.txt or some file you could meet the king of your mother country and have a chat with him on all kind of deals and taxes,never found out how to revive that one, seems they took it out,before it was put on sale.
Reminds me of lines in Civ3 .txt files refering to multiplayer :p
Top Bottom