Rate Civ I, II, III, IV (relative to each other)

[taube87]

CIV 3 is unbeatable!
CIV 4 is really nice!
CIV 2 Multiplayer entertains me many years and
CIV Net is quite good, too!

 

[Jamesds]

Civ1 (I played CivNet which is quite similar): Great beginning
Civ2: Great sequel
Civ3: Even better
Civ4: The ultimate Civ game!

- The series improves with each new release!!

 

[maximus pianus]

Civ 1 was the revolution.

Civ 2 was great and Civ 3 introduced new concept (see culture and special resources)

Civ 4 simply is a different game.

CIV should be rated 10/10 for the modding possibilities, 9/10 for the strategic deep and 4/10 for the system requirements.
In CIV 4 I dont like very much the graphics: if you have a decent system it is smooth and nice (that's OK) but there is too much movement and contrast for a strategic game and you risk the blindness.

 

[Zebra 9]

CIV 3 is unbeatable!

What? Unbeatable!

 

[ic41213]

rank 1 - SMAC
+ great gameplay, many different strategies possible
+ great civics system
+ multiplayer incredibly fun
+ factions REALLY different
+ good interface

- graphics boring
- ki provides no challenge
- supply crawlers ruin gameplay


rank 2 - CIV4
+ well balanced gameplay
+ good ki
+ graphics look good (if you zoom in), polished look, nice interface, good blending of tiles, good looking units and terrain,
+ nice gameplay improvements (corruption, non-rioting cities, health, promotions)

- graphics: cities could be more varied: industrial/commerce cities. a lot of terraformed terrain looks a bit ugly
- soundtrack repetitive and boring
- civics should have been more like SMAC
- to little emphasis on trade, diplomacy


rank 3 - CIV 2
+ good diplomacy (reputation)
+ fun gameplay
+ nice graphics


rank 4 CIV 3
+ ...

- stupid gameplay (corruption, "right of passage", cultural backflips after conquering, AI outresearch you easily and gang up on you too fast)
- don't like the graphics



rank 5 CIV 1
+ amazing flawless gameplay

- battle system totally stupid


rank 6 CTP, CTP2
+ future!

- bad interface
- gameplay lacks a certain something


oh, and colonization is nice too, innovative but not flawless gameplay

 

[curtadams]

Two ratings:
What I would play today:
IV -> III -> SMAC -> Col -> I -> II
In comparison to their time:
I > IV > III > SMAC > Col > II

Civ 1: Absolutely a revelation. There had never been anything like it. Yes, the AI was dumb beyond belief and games took forever and there were a zillion ways to break the game but who cared? The atmosphere was so cool, the choices so varied and the background was just so evocative.

Civ II: Just Civ I with a few things added that made a slow game even slower. Oh, and some new graphics that required me to get a new machine. Somehow, the AI seemed *even dumber* than the Civ I AI, which I wouldn't have thought possible. OK, the advisors were funny the first time I played - but not as funny as the Civ 1 commie advisors! I spent less time than on any other Civ.

Colonization - pretty fun, and different, but Indian trading and especially the War of Independence redefined the word "tedium". Fun if you stopped about halfway through.

SMAC - very inventive and evocative but had an AI functionally *even worse* than Civ II. Better actually, but the game was so much more complex it was even more lost. But the storyline was different, and I enjoyed playing with all the new ideas. Later I enjoyed modding them out so the AI could play

Civ III - the first Civ which was really a game, in the sense that it was possible to lose other than at a ludicrous difficulty. It was so much fun to play against an AI that actually had some idea how to play the game! And playing games that weren't decided by the beginning of the Middle Ages! Loved culture flipping - conquering an enemy capitol no longer meant game over, you won. Lots of great ideas like culture and happiness resources that really added to the game.

Civ IV - by far the most polished; it's basically Civ III with all the wrinkles ironed out. Maintenence is a better solution that corruption. Love the modding, too. I wish conquest weren't quite so rewarding - too easy - but I am still quite content.

 

[Bluetooth]

Never played the first Civ game so for me Civ 2 is the magic game in the series. It was an outstanding gaming experience. Civ 3 was a disappointment, most of all because of the stupid corruption model. I’m a builder at heart so not being able to develop my cities wasn’t that fun. Nevertheless, thanks to the brilliant map editor, I played the game over and over again. Civ 4 is a very good game, some of the magic is gone of course but I believe I will go on playing it for the next few years. I’m very happy that it is a good game because this time around the map editor sucks.

 

[GIO888]

For me
Civ4, Civ2, Civ1, Civ3.

I loved the advisors in Civ2. I know it sounds lame, but I lived the animations in Civ1, especially your troops marching into conquered cities. Now that was cool.

 

[AncientPlayer]

Well since someone else dropped Civ's "cousin" SMAC in there then I'd go with:

Civ IV
SMAC
Civ II
Civ III
Civ I

 

[Perfection]

Sim City 2000 > SMAC > Sex > anything else

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Well, if I HAVE to rate them.
CivIV definitely comes top of the pile. Sure there are still places they can make improvements, IMO, but man are they off to a brilliant start. I haven't had this much fun with civ in over 10 years. Plus, its so very moddable.
CivI comes next, if only because it was my first introduction to the 'Empire to Stand the Test of Time' concept . Doubt it would look so good today though!
CivIII is next. Sure it was a 'lost opportunity', given that it could have been based far more on SMAC. However, the introduction of Strategic Resources and Culture/Borders really made this game a truly new experience for me.
CivII. This one should really be called Civ1b, as it really was just an enhanced CivI. Too many opportunities for genuine improvement were wasted and-though I definitely played it for a long time-I definitely don't recall the experience as being half as enjoyable as my experiences with CivIV, CivI, CivIII or SMAC!!

Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Danielos]

I don´t understand the bashing that Civ 3 gets. I agree that the corruption was crap, but it had so much great new stuff like culture, strategic resources and bombardment units.

Ratings:

Civ 4 (Warlords): 9
Civ 3 (Conquests): 8
Civ 2: 7
Civ 1: 7

 

[Ayatollah So]

Huh, maybe I should try SMAC then.

If I say that out loud, people will think I'm experimenting with addictive drugs. And they'd be right.

 

[Ihmemies]

4: 97/100
1: 96/100
2: 94/100
3: 87/100

No, I didn't like civ3, and didn't play it nearly as much as 1&2. I rate the games by how good they were when they were relased, not how good they are today. Then the order would be 4-3-2-1 (best-worst). Civ2 and 3 have some nasty gameplay issues, and civ1 is too simple by nowday's standards. Civ4 had too, like chop/whip etc; but I think Firaxis fixed most problems in Warlords.

 

[Stuie]

IV > I > Smac > II > III

 

[FuRRie]

SMAC (This one was just great, i'm playing it still)
CIV IV (Really didn't like it in the beginning, but now i'm loving it)
CIV II (My first real Civ game, played it so much on my old Apple)
CIV III (I really liked it, but City booming was just too easy)

I've never played Civ1 and its basicly just the same as CIV II, so i'll put i'd put it togheter with CIV 2

 

[qwert]

Hello, I am new here.

My clasification is the following (1=the best):
1) SMAC and SMAX: Mostly because the great variety of options, I liked the idea of terraforming and altering climate, the use of satelites ( a more realistic SDI) and most of all the social engieneering, the UNO system of this game and the alliens of SMAX.
Too many options for unit building.
2)Civ 3 Conquest: I like the diplomacy system, the strategic resources, the artillery, the airplanes and the idea of culture of this game. But AI can see everithing and i don`t like these medieval world wars.
3)Civ 2 ToT and Call to Power 2: I started with Civ 2 ToT. I liked the multiple worlds of the science fiction and extended scenarios. But excesive war wearines even if you are in peace.
CTP 2 is much like civ2 but more

I have played too few with civ4 and never played civ1