Simcity vs Civilization

[Ultraworld]

Simcity vs Civilization

Which of the 2 is the best/more fun/etc.

Simcity:
- doesn't have a goal (you can build metropolises as well as little farming towns), the possibilities are infinite, do what you like.
- there is no opponent to play against
- a game doesn't stop, it goes on forever

These characteristics make me to chose Simcity as the best game ever (civilization is 2nd, also a great game).

What are your opinions

 

[Turner]

My opinion is I think you're crazy coming to a site name CivFanaticsCenter and saying that Civ sucks.

There are different games for different people. That's fine. Not eveyone is going to like the same kind of games. Yes, the two games are simular in the sense that you try and build something, but the simularity ends there. Two different kind of games, and two different kind of game players.

What I want to know is why you keep coming here and thrashing on Civ. This sucks in Civ and that sucks in Civ, and this should be done this way, and that should be done that way. I've said this before, but if you don't like what Civ does, write your own Civ-type game.

Sorry for the tone in this post, but I get tired of reading these kind of things. If you don't like Civ, don't play it! No one is holding a gun to your head saying 'Play this game.'

 

[Leha]

This is question of taste .

Personally , I like Civ much more .
Actually , IMHO , Civ is best game I ever played.

Edit : Turner , You're fast , man !

 

[Drewcifer]

They are somewhat similar and I have enjoyed them both but I would give Civ the edge. It is basically sim world with a plot and enemies. Sim City bores me after a while, this never happens with civ.

 

[Ultraworld]

My opinion is I think you're crazy coming to a site name CivFanaticsCenter and saying that Civ sucks.

I don't say Civ sucks. Were did you get that from?

 

[Shabbaman]

Originally posted by Ultraworld
Simcity:
- doesn't have a goal
- no opponent
- it goes on forever

That doesn't really sound like a lot of fun, does it?

 

[Ultraworld]

you never played Simcity, did you?

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Both are fun games but at least with Civ, you dont have to hook up all the plumbing yourself.

 

[Turner]

Originally posted by Ultraworld


I don't say Civ sucks. Were did you get that from?

Just about every thread you've started knocks civ in one way or another. Thread after thread after thread of your's I've read involves in some way shape or form how you think Civ3 is deficient. Add it up and one wonders why it is you even play this game.

 

[Ultraworld]

Add it up and one wonders why it is you even play this game.

I don't play it anymore. It becomes predictable.

 

[Turner]

Originally posted by Ultraworld


I don't play it anymore. It becomes predictable.

That's interesting. Weird little fetish you have there. You don't play the game, you don't like the game, yet you spend time going to one of the biggest sites devoted to that game and continuously bad mouth the game.

Don't you have anything better to do? Or does knocking the game here really bring you that much pleasure?

 

[Ultraworld]

Originally posted by Turner_727


That's interesting. Weird little fetish you have there. You don't play the game, you don't like the game, yet you spend time going to one of the biggest sites devoted to that game and continuously bad mouth the game.

Don't you have anything better to do? Or does knocking the game here really bring you that much pleasure?

I rarely post anymore. Open your eyes

 

[MadScot]

Major difference between the two games:

SimCity is pretty much 'real-time' - in the bizarre way 'real time' is used for computer games - while Civ is turn based. Even though you can pause SimCity, and Civ has a turnless mode, the games at heart have that difference.

Personally, I consider 'real time strategy' to be a complete oxymoron. Strategy means stopping and thinking, not reacting as fast as you can. On that basis alone Civ scores mightily in my books.

There are many interesting premises out there, but when I see 'real time strategy' on the box it pretty much goes right back on the shelf.

(and yes, I do have SimCity...bought while my civ was u/s)

 

[Shabbaman]

Originally posted by Ultraworld
you never played Simcity, did you?

Of course I did. And it isn't in the same league as civilization. It's a good game, but the precise things you list make it a dull game in the long run. I like caesar3 a whole lot better for the same reasons.

 

[Darkness]

SimCity is a fun game, but it's not even close to Civ...

 

[Civrules]

Civilization III anytime! It goes much, much deeper than Simcity which it is controling a city and not a civilization.

 

[scotland_no1]

sim city is fun... but i got bored of it after a while, but more people in the world like sim city to civ, since it has sold more. but i prefer civ, and so do most people who are using these forums, kind of a strange place to ask this question.

 

[Sha-Feer]

Originally posted by MadScot
Major difference between the two games:
Strategy means stopping and thinking, not reacting as fast as you can.

I wouldn't give it that deffinition. Strategy is using all your avaliable resources, the knowledge you have and anything esle you can find to best reach your goal with the most minimum of effort at the most maximum of efficiency, weither is thinking on your toes in real time( which is prolly more like it is in the real world anyway) , or taking your time..ala CIV3 turn based, chess, checkers. Cause I bet the generals in the far east wished they could hit the pause button or save and reload. But anyway they are two diff games in that sence and should not be compared in that way. Its just a matter of your play style....

 

[Turner]

Originally posted by Ultraworld


I rarely post anymore. Open your eyes

Is it safe? Did the Anti-Civ spam stop yet? whoo-hoo! [dance]


Alright, alright. . . I'm done with this thread. . . .

 

[Ultraworld]

>> Anti-Civ <<

well. It was not anti civ. It were only my ideas to improve the game. Shame you don't see that