..upgrade to III..

soujourner

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
47
Has anyone upgraded to Civ III? If so, what do you think of the newer version? Are the difference dramatic enough to warrant expanding a system?:)
 
Hi soujourner. I was once like you; lingering in the wastelands of civ II and thinking it was the best game ever! Then I got Civ III and WOW, it is a totally different world. At first some things my seem frustrating or stupid (like catapaults can only move on roads) but then they start to make sense and you realise it is more realistic. One of my favourite additions to Civ III is culture which expands from your cities to form the boundaries of your territory. This makes it possible to feel like you are actually building a nation and you can tell settlers from other civs to buzz off when they enter your territory. This used to really annoy me in Civ II - when settlers would enter your landmass and set up camp and there was nothing you could do about it except go to war.

So, yeah it is well worth the upgrade and the best thing is I play civ III on the same PC I used for civ II - no hardware upgrade necessary. Just make sure you get Civ III conquests for all the cool "new" features and hopefully see you soon in the Civ III forums.
 
"Wastelands" of Civ II? What the flip are you doing in this part of the forums then?

To buy a computer/console/anything to play one game? I wouldn't do it, even for Civ. As for you, you must have a fairly ancient computer to have to upgrade to get Civ III to work, though. I can run Civ III on this computer, but I wouldn't because it's just too much ridiculous minutia.
 
"Wastelands" of Civ II? What the flip are you doing in this part of the forums then?

To buy a computer/console/anything to play one game? I wouldn't do it, even for Civ. As for you, you must have a fairly ancient computer to have to upgrade to get Civ III to work, though. I can run Civ III on this computer, but I wouldn't because it's just too much ridiculous minutia.

Look again, he said he didn't need an upgrade. ;)

I also play only Civ III, this is one of the first turns I've ever done on this corner of the forums. I have to say soujourner, there's a lot of opinion over which is best. Civ II used to be my favorite game but I finally got Civ III a couple years ago and its been my favorite game ever since. It takes like one game to get used to the changes but most of things from Civ II that I missed in vanilla Civ III were added in the expansion Conquests. You can get the whole thing for under 20 bucks. It was some of the best money I ever spent. Civ IV is actually what is played most nowadays but I've heard several things I don't like about it. I'll probably buy it someday but for now I'll stay w/ the surprisingly large group of old-timers (or medium-timers since those like Duke of M occupy the former spot) who are still addicted to Civ III. Come give us a visit someday. :)
 
Following the purchase of Sid Meier's Railroads, a new video card was required. This delayed my enjoyment of the game and was a purchase that I did not plan. With a tight budget such as my own, any unplanned purchase is not wanted.
 
There's really no way for me to know if you'll need an upgrade or not w/o analyzing your computer specs and checking the civ specs and thats something you can do. :)
 
I couldn't agree more. :)
 
If you can run Railroads you definitely run CivIII and judging by the system requirements Firaxis has posted for Railroads and CivIV you *should* be able to play CivIV...

Get CivIII anyway, it's cheap. And when you're done playing CivIII, CivIV will be cheap as well (well, even more cheaper than it already is...)
 
Hey common. Even my then (when civ 3 came out) top-end computer with 2ghz and 1gig ram laggs 2-3 minutes in the later turns on a huger map in Civ3.

I don't mean: Oh the computer is thinking, sure it takes time. I mean you can't move or click on anything and nothing ism oving for about 3 minutes after the computer has completed all its moves :P

So do watchout. You might not be able to handle the really big maps on an old comp.
 
Hey common. Even my then (when civ 3 came out) top-end computer with 2ghz and 1gig ram laggs 2-3 minutes in the later turns on a huger map in Civ3.

I don't mean: Oh the computer is thinking, sure it takes time. I mean you can't move or click on anything and nothing ism oving for about 3 minutes after the computer has completed all its moves :P

So do watchout. You might not be able to handle the really big maps on an old comp.

I never had those immense lags on a 1,6Ghz, 1gb system. Otherwise, install Rhye's fast-loading mod.
 
I have a system which can run World of Warcraft passably; hence the map in my sig.

I tried Civ III, admittedly without the expansions, but it just seemed like too much detail to worry about. Civ II hit the sweet spot for me, especially in terms of modability. If you want to add units all you need is Paint, and if you have something like PSP8 your potential to add really, really nice units was quite high.

Personally I think for gameplay, though, Alpha Centauri was the greatest.
 
I've been promising myself for years I'd buy a new computer and it's about to happen. It's going to be an iMac (since all my stuff is on an ancient mac now) and I've read about the horrors of Civ IV on a mac. I'm taking the plunge anyway. Civ IV's on the way. :aargh:

My son suggested Civ IV. He's played it and III quite a bit, and knows both well. He tries playing II, but can't figure it out. :confused:

I guess I'll be buying Civ III if things don't work out well, and also load up Civ II, because (metaphorically) they'll have to pry that game from my cold, dead hands.

I'll probably be spending a lot of time downloading patches and finding fixes. At least I'm in the right place.

rhall
ceaserhall@yahoo.com
""empty string

and heck, I might even buy some other program for the iMac too.:lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom