Uninstalling Civ IV: Not buying BtS.

[Europhile]

I think Blitzkreig went off on a tangent. The Amazon reviewer did not distinguish between awards or professional criticisms. He was writing from the standpoint of a diehard Civilization fan (he's played every Civ game in every format since the beginning, logging thousands of hours over his lifetime for just such a franchise) who hit a snag with the latest title. His two main points were the following: (1) Civ 4 is nearly impossible to modify for almost all gamers (the exceptions being those who understand computer programming, etc.), and (2) the expansion inculcation is such a cheap shot (everyone tries to do it, the reviewer stated, not just Firaxis).

If you disagree with those two main points, tell us why; don't just trash the reviewer and resort to ad hominem. Blind loyalty to Firaxis and Sid Meier is what the reviewer was trying to overcome, I think.

 

[Smidlee]

To answer one of those questions in the amateur review which a professional reviewer would know right off bat is

Who needs 3D graphics for a turn-based strategy game?

And the answer is..... Firaxis did.

Also the expansion are good especially for hardcore fans. I paid today $40 to $50 for a new PC game just like I did over 20 years ago with my C-64. It's a no-brainer that games today, with all the art, cost a lot more than games did over 20 years ago. In order to make a profit and keep the price the same you got to sell a lot more copies than in the 80's. Thus game had to appeal to a wider crowd. Firaxis made it clear with civ4 they was trying to reach out to those who never played civ before so it's smart not to cram everything in the original civ4. Expansion packs adds more to the game for those who really fans which hardly ever sell anywhere close to the original game.

 

[T.A JONES]

Expansion packs adds more to the game for those who really fans which hardly ever sell anywhere close to the original game.

You say they add more, I say in this case, they take away more from the original game.
I guess thats the problem. Like you say, most only buy the original right?

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

I think Blitzkreig went off on a tangent. The Amazon reviewer did not distinguish between awards or professional criticisms. He was writing from the standpoint of a diehard Civilization fan (he's played every Civ game in every format since the beginning, logging thousands of hours over his lifetime for just such a franchise) who hit a snag with the latest title. His two main points were the following: (1) Civ 4 is nearly impossible to modify for almost all gamers (the exceptions being those who understand computer programming, etc.), and (2) the expansion inculcation is such a cheap shot (everyone tries to do it, the reviewer stated, not just Firaxis).

If you disagree with those two main points, tell us why; don't just trash the reviewer and resort to ad hominem. Blind loyalty to Firaxis and Sid Meier is what the reviewer was trying to overcome, I think.

Well, I tend to disagree, my friend. Many posters have discussed the comparison between this reviewer and how the magazines have dubbed cIV "Game of the Year". I was referring to this comparison brought on by the posters. No tangent, I just happened to read all the posts as this has progressed. Your point on his experience with prior civ games is correct and i retract that portion of my argument. However, I do not generally have any sort of blind loyalty to Sid Myers or Firaxis as I've only owned 2 Myers titles (Civ 3/4). The reviewer didn't simply state his point, he became belligerent, and frankly somewhat insulting. This multi-paragraph review which was mostly repetitive slander could have been cut down to one paragraph if he stuck to these two points.

1) He's terrified of brackets (XML)
2) He doesn't like the game-industry's methods of marketing. (most major titles have expansion pack marketing techniques.)

 

[Smidlee]

You say they add more, I say in this case, they take away more from the original game.
I guess thats the problem. Like you say, most only buy the original right?

It's awful funny then that in this thread (#48) you showed a civ mod which is trying to copy Civ4 Warlords vassal system. If civ4 is so dumb down like some here claim then why are there civ3 mods trying to copy from civ4?
In civ3 you are a powerful god which can have god-like units (C3C armies) as well as bend the AI to your will. You can even have the AI research all the tech for you if you like. You can cause world war then come from the back door and clean up each AI one by one if you like.
In Civ4 some of your god-like powers has been removed or at least weaken; no armies, now the red-out in AI trade where Civ3 AI would gladly trade their tech-lead away,etc.
Now I had fun at first with civ3 (C3C) with my mini-gods (armies) destroying everything in their path and the fact I can cause AI to war at will, and win a game where I was clearly in a losing position. But with time it got old.

P.S note that armies in civ3 vanilla was pretty much worthless.

 

[Armorydave]

Still blows me away that so many people play Civ 3. It seems so dated/antiquated by comparison to Civ 4.

My advice to someone that liked 1-3 in the franchise would be to give four a try. If you don't like it you can always go back to 2 or 3.

 

[mythmonster2]

Still blows me away that so many people play Civ 3. It seems so dated/antiquated by comparison to Civ 4.

My advice to someone that liked 1-3 in the franchise would be to give four a try. If you don't like it you can always go back to 2 or 3.

Hey man, we're loyal to civ 3! Never shall we bend to CIV! Our armies shall march over your troops and capture all your cities in one turn!

 

[T.A JONES]

It's awful funny then that in this thread (#48) you showed a civ mod which is trying to copy Civ4 Warlords vassal system. If civ4 is so dumb down like some here claim then why are there civ3 mods trying to copy from civ4?

Sorry pal but Vassels aren't civ4's to own Civ3 finnaly showed how to hold down a better version to improve strategy in the game. Its called Vasels n I say it did a better job improving the game then the other did for Civ4. It did after all cure corruption and did so by addin more realism and depth without buggy behavior.Lets call it " the better corruption mod" and it as much civ3 as "Better AI is to CIv4". Care to argue?
I know it 'runs' fine on your computer, but Have you heard any compaints that might say Vassels left alot to be desired in CIv4?

IM showin how the editer ends all issues talked about here. Like one of your favs, the 'Army unit is to powerful' whine fest.....

In civ3 you are a powerful god which can have god-like units (C3C armies)

Guess what? you can elimate army with one click of the button , or better, you change what smiddy plays, that is 1 army for every 2 cities To what people who don't like reamimng exploits play, try instead 1 army per evey 30 cities. Now you have a unit thats grossly outdated very fast. Why? cus the same editer added new units for higher changeover. So now not only is Army rare like Pattons (the way it should be) but any units locked in Army capsules are beatin back after a while by the AI's whos caught up with new weapons that crush "GOD" in his tracks

What else you got?

You can even have the AI research all the tech for you if you like. You can cause world war then come from the back door and clean up each AI one by one if you like.

So your sayin it better to let AI get all the techs first so you can buy from them? and lose the op for tactical adv of having a significant scientific advage on the battle feild? Who plays like this beside smiddy?

I don't even he think does. No hes seen this on some expliot thread much like the one where the guy won with only one city! Yes CIv3 sucks! ALL who built more then one city where playin wrong! Become the master reamer and you'll find civ3 a crappy game where your a god who overpowers all! .
Well I guess its the same feelin I had when I used a gamegenie

THis is dangerous for you to be spittin Smiddy cuz the same reamers are at work with Civ4 now as we speak and soon all the fun sucking methods to cheat and cancel all realism will be available for Civ4! You won't see me puttin down the game for others who need such despete ways to win they seek any 'ream n repeat' loophole off some 'net guy's' expilot thread, who's seeking a few minutes of civfame by sinkin t replay of an otherwise challangin game

 

[T.A JONES]

To answer one of those questions in the amateur review which a professional reviewer would know right off bat is And the answer is..... Firaxis did.

So the paid reveiwer knows 3d is needed for the company to make money at a cost to gameplay and they give high reveiws taking this into account

PLease explain how this lack of knowledge detracts and hurts the loyal civ fans opinion. Dosn't he rep an opinion closer to the truth regarding the status of the Civ series to date?

 

[Smidlee]

..



Guess what? you can elimate army with one click of the button , or better, you change what smiddy plays, that is 1 army for every 2 cities To what people who don't like reamimng exploits play, try instead 1 army per evey 30 cities.

I have also play the "merciful god" mode where I limit myself of how many unstoppable armies I have. Even then one army can send an AI civ back to the stone ages by pillage,pillage, then pillage again. Even mods are limited in covering up civ3 serious flaws.
the rest is the same old "I love civ3" "civ3 is so much better than civ4" or "civ4 run so good on my pc". I'm glad you love civ3 so much but I've played civ3 for years. I've bought Civ1,Civ2, Alpha Centura, Civ3, PTW, and C3C. then Civ4, Warlords, BTS, Galciv , Galciv2, Galciv DA, and will pre-order Galciv2 TotA.

 

[Smidlee]

So the paid reveiwer knows 3d is needed for the company to make money at a cost to gameplay and they give high reveiws taking this into account

PLease explain how this lack of knowledge detracts and hurts the loyal civ fans opinion. Dosn't he rep an opinion closer to the truth regarding the status of the Civ series to date?

You do know that before Firaxis could please their fans they had to please Atari ( or anyone else that going to invest their money) right? From my understanding Firaxis didn't have the choice of 2D or 3D ; the choice was 3D or no civ4.

Strategy games seem to be the last that the market demanded to go 3D. I remember how many gamers was disappointed when Castlevania, Zelda, and many other console games were force going 3d also. Galciv2 and Heroes 5 also went 3D along with Civ4. Like or not most big title from now on will be 3D.

 

[T.A JONES]

I have also play the "merciful god" mode where I limit myself of how many unstoppable armies I have. Even then one army can send an AI civ back to the stone ages by pillage,pillage, then pillage again. Even mods are limited in covering up civ3 serious flaws.
the rest is the same old "I love civ3" "civ3 is so much better than civ4" or "civ4 run so good on my pc". I'm glad you love civ3 so much but I've played civ3 for years. I've bought Civ1,Civ2, Alpha Centura, Civ3, PTW, and C3C. then Civ4, Warlords, BTS, Galciv , Galciv2, Galciv DA, and will pre-order Galciv2 TotA.

Man what you ramblin about. Stick with what I wrote. I never did anything but bring up the same ol common misconceptions you raise. I told you they were fixable much the same way you go on record all the time tellin others totry mods that improve CIv4, Im I right?

SHesH "I love civ3 clah blah blah, Galciv2 TotA, blah blah! " what the?? Sorry you must a got a lil unraveled but its better to repley with quotes then jibberish so I can go on refuting you. (for next time k son)

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Hey man, we're loyal to civ 3! Never shall we bend to CIV! Our armies shall march over your troops and capture all your cities in one turn!

CIVers will overwhelm you with our culture from great artists, massive selection of national and world wonders, and of course our wonderfully cultural civics!

Or we'll just run you over with Police State, Theocracy, Vassalage, and 10 great generals

I liked civ3, but it lacks the civic system which i love

 

[Europhile]

I just don't see where anyone can refute the ease of play, the ease of modification, and the ease on the wallet that Civ 3 Complete offers. If you like Civ 4, that is fine. If you think it is better than Civ 3, fine. But for Heaven's sake, realize that Civ 4 is validly despised by many who would call themselves diehard Civilization fans!

I was so let down by what Civ 4 turned out to be that I just got disgusted with the whole enterprise. (This after observing the "expansion pack craze" that has overwhelmed the video game industry.) The Sims was the first title to open my eyes to this craze, but it was Civ 4 that had me thoroughly disgusted because it came as such a cheap shot. (Kind of like those "stuff packs" that cost $15-$25 for The Sims 2.) It just really affected my views regarding Firaxis because the cheapshot was so blatant, even in this expansion-prevalent market. It was like, "We dare you not to buy our Civ 4 products!"

Again, let me just say that without an easy, efficient, and overwhelmingly powerful customizing interface (like an awesome map editor that allows FULL customization), we are simply asking for "re-tread" products. The fact that Firaxis did not include a kick-butt map editor proves in my mind that they expect us to wait for their "expansions" to come out and spend at least $150 each before they move onto Civ5.

For this, we should hold out with Civ3 Complete and wait until Civ4 goes away. Give me the Map Editor, and I will give you a converted Civ 4 fan.

 

[Underdawg]

EDIT: Damn it, I bit on the flamebait.

I am ashamed of myself.

 

[AnaNg]

Am I the only one amused that a guy with, essentially, a mummy for an avatar necro'd this post?

 

[Smidlee]

nm.............

 

[troytheface]

A strange op post and stranger still- the reference to an obscure critique.
Comparing civ3 (complete) to Civ4 is dated. BTS vs Civ3 is where we are at.
Civ3 (complete) was a great game. BTS is better. More options, better graphics. Unless one prefers older graphics and less options.

 

[azzaman333]

Except for the complete lack of decent and fairly simple editor, BtS is overall better than C3C.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

I just don't see where anyone can refute the ease of play, the ease of modification, and the ease on the wallet that Civ 3 Complete offers. If you like Civ 4, that is fine. If you think it is better than Civ 3, fine. But for Heaven's sake, realize that Civ 4 is validly despised by many who would call themselves diehard Civilization fans!

I was so let down by what Civ 4 turned out to be that I just got disgusted with the whole enterprise. (This after observing the "expansion pack craze" that has overwhelmed the video game industry.) The Sims was the first title to open my eyes to this craze, but it was Civ 4 that had me thoroughly disgusted because it came as such a cheap shot. (Kind of like those "stuff packs" that cost $15-$25 for The Sims 2.) It just really affected my views regarding Firaxis because the cheapshot was so blatant, even in this expansion-prevalent market. It was like, "We dare you not to buy our Civ 4 products!"

Again, let me just say that without an easy, efficient, and overwhelmingly powerful customizing interface (like an awesome map editor that allows FULL customization), we are simply asking for "re-tread" products. The fact that Firaxis did not include a kick-butt map editor proves in my mind that they expect us to wait for their "expansions" to come out and spend at least $150 each before they move onto Civ5.

For this, we should hold out with Civ3 Complete and wait until Civ4 goes away. Give me the Map Editor, and I will give you a converted Civ 4 fan.

Yes, Civ4 lacks an easy-to-use visual interface map editor. No, this does not effect game play at all for me. Yes, others might disagree. No, it doesn't make sense to put down a game for not being easily altered. Yes, previous versions made it easy to do. No, I don't find it overtly hard to edit the XML. Yes, I understand people don't like to code sometimes. No, I don't really care