Sorry but I absolutely HATE Civ 4 !

[Creosote]

I got Civ 1 when it came out all those years ago. Loved it, played it to death.

Eventually I got Civ 2, never got quite into it like I did Civ 1 but enjoyed it.

Last year I finally came to Civ 3 and really enjoyed it. Played it a lot, used these great forums for advice and info, got Conquests and played for several months. Finally beat it at Deity and then put it down.

Just got Civ 4, and I cannot stand it! The graphics to my eyes are very confusing, the screens non intuitive (something I always liked about Civ was I could pretty much find my way round without having to bury my head in the manual), the whole look and feel of the game just looks tatty. And its SO COMPLEX! I realise that is a natural first impression but I find it totally daunting. They provide a fold out sheet I cant even fit on my desk with so much info I don't know where to start. The Tutorial is a friggin joke, that Sid character just is so corny and badly done and the Tutorial merely glosses over the surface.

I've now spent a few hours trying to come to grips with the game and have basically lost interest. Such an uphill struggle. While I was never a Civ guru or anything I could play the game and usually get to beat it on the highest levels, it somehow inspired me to improve my skills and game playing to progress up the difficulty levels. But Civ 4 just makes me wanna throw the thing at the wall.

Please excuse the vent! I am sure it is very successful and its legions of fans will love it. But I am gonna delete the thing off my hard disk and reload Civ 3 and have some fun.

 

[al_thor]

Take a valium. Try again.

 

[Efexeye]

I got Civ 1 when it came out all those years ago. Loved it, played it to death.

Eventually I got Civ 2, never got quite into it like I did Civ 1 but enjoyed it.

Last year I finally came to Civ 3 and really enjoyed it. Played it a lot, used these great forums for advice and info, got Conquests and played for several months. Finally beat it at Deity and then put it down.

Just got Civ 4, and I cannot stand it! The graphics to my eyes are very confusing, the screens non intuitive (something I always liked about Civ was I could pretty much find my way round without having to bury my head in the manual), the whole look and feel of the game just looks tatty. And its SO COMPLEX! I realise that is a natural first impression but I find it totally daunting. They provide a fold out sheet I cant even fit on my desk with so much info I don't know where to start. The Tutorial is a friggin joke, that Sid character just is so corny and badly done and the Tutorial merely glosses over the surface.

I've now spent a few hours trying to come to grips with the game and have basically lost interest. Such an uphill struggle. While I was never a Civ guru or anything I could play the game and usually get to beat it on the highest levels, it somehow inspired me to improve my skills and game playing to progress up the difficulty levels. But Civ 4 just makes me wanna throw the thing at the wall.

Please excuse the vent! I am sure it is very successful and its legions of fans will love it. But I am gonna delete the thing off my hard disk and reload Civ 3 and have some fun.

1st off, let me say that I agree with your right to post that you hate cIV.

1. I hate the graphics, too. To me, the 3D is totally unnecessary. I have found that setting the settings to "single unit graphics" helps get rid of some of the graphical clutter.

2. As far as game complexity- turn down the difficulty, and play a game where you DON'T try to get a super-high score right away. Let the game lead you by the nose a little, then, when THAT gets too boring/easy, you can go up in difficulty and/or try new strategies to win with. I use this technique to expose new people to cIV.

Try it again you may have some fun. The complexity is there if you want it to be, but the game can be played with a minimum of effort if you don't try to blow it out of the water on the first try.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Well, I suppose this is a change from the guys who complain the game is dumbed down.

I'll give you one thing - the manuals have gone downhill.

 

[henrycccc]

True, I think the "3D" graphics are worse than those of civ 3. The graphics for Age of Empires 3 are light years ahead. Play a sandbox or 1v1 to start.

 

[marioh]

I wish the graphics looked like the opening movie.

 

[jeremiahrounds]

single unit graphics, turn off animations, turn on the unit health bar (in the graphics options)
turn on squares, shield icons, and resource bubbles. (3 buttons in the rack of buttons to the right of the play map)

That list helps make the map alot faster to read and understand.

As for gameplay. Sorry i just find it more naunced and improved.

BTW i had 3 phases in this game.
Ok this is ok.
Ok this is boring.
Ok wow there is alot of subtle stuff to do this is a really good game.

Can i recommend the game of the month? Its a forum here. You download a common game then compare results with players. I find that to be really interesting. It gives learning the nuances meaning instead of it being tedious.

Im kind of interested in finding "common game threads" where everyone plays the same game and shares short notes. Kind of like gotm-lights. But instead of it being a formal thing its an informal thing that you post as you go or go look to see if theres a thread your interested in.

 

[GinandTonic]

A lot of the graphical clutter does transmit imformation. What squares am i using? Is that unit at full strength? Needing to go to the city manager screen 1/2 as often because in passing you can check they are using that resorce is a good thing. Having an imediate feel for what kind of state a unit is in is good.

You just need to get to the stage where that info is taken in without thinking.

I just need to get a computer where I done have to down the rez around the early industrial age...

 

[Instant_Cereal]

I got Civ 1 when it came out all those years ago. Loved it, played it to death.

Eventually I got Civ 2, never got quite into it like I did Civ 1 but enjoyed it.

Last year I finally came to Civ 3 and really enjoyed it. Played it a lot, used these great forums for advice and info, got Conquests and played for several months. Finally beat it at Deity and then put it down.

Just got Civ 4, and I cannot stand it! The graphics to my eyes are very confusing, the screens non intuitive (something I always liked about Civ was I could pretty much find my way round without having to bury my head in the manual), the whole look and feel of the game just looks tatty. And its SO COMPLEX! I realise that is a natural first impression but I find it totally daunting. They provide a fold out sheet I cant even fit on my desk with so much info I don't know where to start. The Tutorial is a friggin joke, that Sid character just is so corny and badly done and the Tutorial merely glosses over the surface.

I've now spent a few hours trying to come to grips with the game and have basically lost interest. Such an uphill struggle. While I was never a Civ guru or anything I could play the game and usually get to beat it on the highest levels, it somehow inspired me to improve my skills and game playing to progress up the difficulty levels. But Civ 4 just makes me wanna throw the thing at the wall.

Please excuse the vent! I am sure it is very successful and its legions of fans will love it. But I am gonna delete the thing off my hard disk and reload Civ 3 and have some fun.

lol, this is weird 'cause I constantly swear the game's less complex than its predecessors. I find myself ending turns much more frequent than the other Civ games. You must be trying to micromanage everything.

Graphics: I like the graphics; maybe they're not perfect, but they're good.

 

[jayeffaar]

single unit graphics, turn on the unit health bar

That would be fine if the health bars didn't spoil the combat result before it's over. I turned off the health bars as soon as I realized that they sucked the suspense out of the fighting (I wonder if they're going to fix that). And without the bars, you need the multi-unit graphics to see how healthy your guys are...

 

[Efexeye]

That would be fine if the health bars didn't spoil the combat result before it's over. I turned off the health bars as soon as I realized that they sucked the suspense out of the fighting (I wonder if they're going to fix that). And without the bars, you need the multi-unit graphics to see how healthy your guys are...

Or, you can mouse over them...

BTW, in the lower left corner, the combat results display immediately while the animations are still playing out, btw...SO DON'T LOOK THERE!

I just turned off combat animation altogether. I like the instant combat resolution, and it keeps my computer from wheezing too much.

 

[Andygal]

Um...if you don't like the game...why the heck did you post here?

Unless you are just looking to annoy people.

 

[Jimbo30]

I can understand why some players could get a bit taken aback by the game's difficulty. It's been designed to be hard and provide a huge challenge even at the lower difficulty levels (Noble at least, the lowest I've tried). Even at that level the AI builds a pretty big military and it's tech is fairly good.

I can only say 'try it at a lower level'. I played Civ3 on Deity at the end but my first few games at Monarch on Civ4 got my arse handed to me. I usually play Prince now.

 

[kattana]

the interface did take a little, oh ok..a LOT to get used to.

but after playing some LAN games it became apparent that everything is designed around MP play...which is totaly cool.

and since english is not yet the defacto official language of the planet, hehehe, the graphic icons representing everything makes a whole lot of since as well.

i've been playing it hard core since the day it was out and im still finding little surprises, usually good ones...

 

[BirraImperial]

True, I think the "3D" graphics are worse than those of civ 3. The graphics for Age of Empires 3 are light years ahead. Play a sandbox or 1v1 to start.

Dude get some glasses, or a better video card, cause Civ 4 graphics rule!!!

 

[ak91406]

I've been playing since Civ2 and have appreciated the changes in the program to date. However, I am wondering if the graphics are trying to be too pretty at the expense of practicality - for the graphically jaded reviewers (Gamespy etc) that supposedly have a big influence these days.

Case in point. In Civ2 the roads and railroads were easy to discern. In Civ3 they started to turn into spaghetti, but I could still see if I had a solid railroad connection from one city to another. In Civ4, forget it. Maybe I have to train my eyes more to get the hang of it, but that's the point. Down with spaghetti transport networks!

 

[Efexeye]

Dude get some glasses, or a better video card, cause Civ 4 graphics rule!!!

The graphics are not good. The units use very low-polygon models. The terrain graphics fare a bit better. The leaderheads are useless- half the time, their expressions don't match their attitude.

I think what most people are complaining about is that in a game like cIV, 3D graphics are TOTALLY UNNECCESARY. I can understand why they went 3D- they have to sell the game to people who haven't already played a CIV game before.

Too bad, it seems to have alienated a large part of the "non-gaming" Civ fanbase that expected to be able to play the game on their 4-year-old, 850 mHz emachines with 256 megs of ram and Intel onboard graphics.

[/end sarcasm] (sorry, couldn't resist )

 

[BirraImperial]

The graphics are not good. The units use very low-polygon models. The terrain graphics fare a bit better. The leaderheads are useless- half the time, their expressions don't match their attitude.

I think what most people are complaining about is that in a game like cIV, 3D graphics are TOTALLY UNNECCESARY. I can understand why they went 3D- they have to sell the game to people who haven't already played a CIV game before.

Too bad, it seems to have alienated a large part of the "non-gaming" Civ fanbase that expected to be able to play the game on their 4-year-old, 850 mHz emachines with 256 megs of ram and Intel onboard graphics.

[/end sarcasm] (sorry, couldn't resist )

I think 3d graphics are the next logical step for a game that has evolved as much as civ. The gameplay is basically the same, so what are you complaining about? My brother can play civ 4 on a crappy laptop that does not even meet the minimal requirements, so Civ4 does also work on crappy computers, In fact, much of the bugs and issues with the game have been experienced by users with super-high-end computers, while other people with lesser specs have no issues at all.

 

[Efexeye]

I'm not complaining. Did I complain?

Civ is basically a big board game.

Can you please tell me ONE benefit of 3D graphics in a board game, besides being eye candy?

 

[yatusk]

what's wrong with eye candy---it's fun. the next logical step would be to tie CivIV with Total War for battles---that would be fun too. and i've never played total war and don't have a super machine either.