Was Civ4 a success gameplaywise compared to earlier installments?

[Loppan Torkel]

I'm wondering if those who played civ1, 2 and 3 think that civ4 was a step in the right direction, or if mostly new players like it...

I like many of the new concepts that's been brought to civ, but somehow it's not as fun as the earlier games. There were some faults with the earlier games, like civ3's endgame, but I think several of the new concepts in civ4 weren't very fun, like upgrading the units or the religious aspect, both sounding good in theory.
Should they continue evolve the game from civ4, go back to civ2 or civ3 and develop the concept from there or start all over?

Poll coming...

 

[hecubus]

Absolutely. Even as much time as I spent with earlier incarnations (III especially), when I think of Civ now I think of IV.

 

[Iranon]

I definitely think so.

It's still plagued by the main problem of the series (sheer volume usually triumphs over anything else), but I find the game allows for much more strategic choices than the predecessors.

 

[Supr49er]

I Voted Yes.
Put it this way, I've never gone back and played the older versions once I got Civ IV. In fact, I don't even play Vanilla or Warlords.

 

[Joshua368]

I like how it supports growing your cities over a mindless tiny city sprawl, by making maitenance based on cities themselves rather than buildings. Nice change from Civ II, the other Civilization game I've played. (and really enjoyed as well, though I was never that good at it)

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I played II for a while, but I didn't really like it. Civ IV is much better IMHO. The graphics are better, and I think there is more replayability and depth to it. The maintenance aspect is also more challenging.

And like Supr49er, I don't play Vanilla anymore. Or Civ II for that matter.

 

[hexem3117]

Civ IV is a lot better IMO than either II or III. I haven't had much experience with I.

Though I agree the religion part can be heavy-handed and as usual a large, high-tech army trumps most other things mid-through late game, I think this game allows you to win in different ways more so than any of the previous iterations.

I actually feel that while Civ III had a lot of good changes, in my heart Civ II was a much better game and I felt it was a step backward. It could be nostalgia, but I think Civ III had some problems:

1. Culture spread was slightly annoying...And it was worse if a city you had been building up got flipped to another civ. Very unrealistic IMO: cities don't just flip it another side "just because" they're culture is stronger than yours.

2. If you got a few certain tech/weapon upgrades i.e. Calvary, Tanks, and Modern Armor, you could absolutely decimate the competition.

3. This coincides with reason 2, but I think in Civ III and II it was hard to have a victory besides conquest (II and III) or domination (III). The military part could really kill you if you had been building a bunch of SS parts and you get attacked.

I think Civ IV balances everything a lot better. You are not completely up you-know-what creek if you don't have one crucial tech at any one point, and I think religion is a fun addition to the game. Adds a touch of reality. With the variety of ways to win and the even-handedness of civ traits (though some are still worse than others; I'm looking at YOU charismatic), plus the different kinds of units and upgrades you can build, Civ IV is a big improvement to an already great series.

Joshua368 I totally agree with you about maintenance in IV...It makes building new cities enjoyable and more profitable since you can actually *BUILD* in cities a good distance away from your capital

 

[Loppan Torkel]

I might need to give civ4 another chance, I haven't played it a lot and it was a few years since last time.

If we look at gameplay-aspects alone, graphics for example is of course better in civ4...
- Do you think religion makes the game better? I want religion to be in, but I'm not sure this version makes the game more fun.
- Do you get the same sense of exploration as you did in civ3?

 

[Davor]

I say a big resounding NO! Yes the game is fun, but it's not as good as Civ 2. I remember doing marathon sessions with Civ2 that I havn't done with Civ 4.

I guess the problem I find with Civ 4 that it dosn't play smooth enough too keep going. There was sometimes I had the bug to keep going, but because of poor programming the computer runs too slow to make it fun. Is it my fault the game dosn't play properly? I got the spec and exceede the specs mentioned, so I don't think it's my fault. If they made the game playable properly, then I would say this was the best Civ game of all time, but because of poor programing I say Civ 2 is the best.

I also like Call 2 Power 2 alot better, but that is with users mods to make the AI better.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

It's the most dynamic game by far ---> it could do with performing better, given the type of game it is, but it's definitely the best GAMEPLAY wise, hands down.

 

[Joshua368]

I might need to give civ4 another chance, I haven't played it a lot and it was a few years since last time.

If we look at gameplay-aspects alone, graphics for example is of course better in civ4...
- Do you think religion makes the game better? I want religion to be in, but I'm not sure this version makes the game more fun.
- Do you get the same sense of exploration as you did in civ3?

Personally I find religion well-implemented. It helps set diplomacy in the early game, setting your friends and enemies, pretty realistic in that respect. Plus it starts to lose its importance in the late game.

Never played Civ3, but the sense of exploration is the same as Civ II in my opinion. Exploring the unknowns from a blank map, looking for great city locations and valuable resources, popping goodie huts. Though now there are dangerous animals running around in the wilds and you have to be a bit more cautious than before, no unescorted settlers!

 

[Turquoiside]

I say a big resounding NO! Yes the game is fun, but it's not as good as Civ 2. I remember doing marathon sessions with Civ2 that I havn't done with Civ 4.

I guess the problem I find with Civ 4 that it dosn't play smooth enough too keep going. There was sometimes I had the bug to keep going, but because of poor programming the computer runs too slow to make it fun. Is it my fault the game dosn't play properly? I got the spec and exceede the specs mentioned, so I don't think it's my fault. If they made the game playable properly, then I would say this was the best Civ game of all time, but because of poor programing I say Civ 2 is the best.

I also like Call 2 Power 2 alot better, but that is with users mods to make the AI better.

Yes.....
How old is your computer and are you sure you have the right requirements. I've never heard of anyone with the right requirements having a problem with performance that wasn't something they needed to do.

 

[weekend_warrior]

I say a big resounding NO! Yes the game is fun, but it's not as good as Civ 2. I remember doing marathon sessions with Civ2 that I havn't done with Civ 4.

I guess the problem I find with Civ 4 that it dosn't play smooth enough too keep going. There was sometimes I had the bug to keep going, but because of poor programming the computer runs too slow to make it fun. Is it my fault the game dosn't play properly? I got the spec and exceede the specs mentioned, so I don't think it's my fault. If they made the game playable properly, then I would say this was the best Civ game of all time, but because of poor programing I say Civ 2 is the best.

I also like Call 2 Power 2 alot better, but that is with users mods to make the AI better.

I play CIV 4 on a laptop that barely meets the min. requirements and its perfectly playable up to a standard size map. It slows down a little late game but nothing close to being a deal breaker.

 

[Pluvo241]

Without a doubt Civ IV is the best yet and BtS is the best Civ IV yet. More options, less nagging (in the form of pollution, riots, population caps...), and Leonard Nemoy narrates. What's not to love... except the narration not done by Spock....

For those who think they have or exceed the game specs but are having problems with lag, you might like to know that the Civ IV Complete DVD released in the UK lists the recommended RAM at 1 GB and not the 512 MB listed on the US versions of the game.

 

[whitelaughter]

Civ IV has lots of good ideas, but they haven't be implemented evenly, and that hurts the game.
Consider the freebies for being the first to discover a Tech. Very nice: but because only a handful of techs give these bonuses, your tour through the Tech tree is going to be the same every time. The fix, I feel, is to remove UUs from nations and add them to the tech tree: eg if you are the first to research Guilds, you get a variant Knight (hopefully, of your choice). Many early UUs are only useful in unusual situations (frex, Jaguar is great if you don't have iron, useless otherwise) so this would allow you to select them when needed. Also, if a tech renders a wonder obsolete, this shouldn't occur if *you* are the first to develop that tech.

Unit promotions look cool, and if you never enter combat, you can happily waste time tinkering with your favourite units. But so what? In Civ III, a guy with pointy stick could kill a tank. In Civ IV, a guy with a pointy stick can kill a carefully upgraded tank. So why bother?
Combat is far too random, and improvements in weaponry have only minimal effect. The basic tactic in Civ III - rely heavily on fast units - has been nobbled by crippling the ability to withdraw. So everybody uses SoDs, because there's no alternative. So the designers have added completely unhistorical siege units as stack killers: so we build stacks of catapults!
Ridiculous.
One obvious fix: units get a huge bonus when fighting opponents who don't have the tech needed for building them: this reflects the shock value of the new weapons. Historically, elephants have only been effective in these circumstances. However, every battle against the new unit type should give beakers towards the new tech, to reflect captured weapons/seeing the units in action/defectors etc. And yes, this should allow access to techs that you don't have the pre-reqs for!

Adding religion was a good move; it is one of humanity's primary obsessions. It is handled in a wussy PC fashion, but if they hadn't, they'd have been sued off the face of the earth. So we should be grateful for what we've got, I guess. The thing with religions is that:
a) they aren't the same, or even similar. A Jewish or Christian democracy looks nothing like a Islamic theocracy and neither look anything like a Buddhist military dictatorship.
b) most 'new' religions are old religions that have crossed national boundaries. Christianity has become the world's most successful Jewish sect by spreading amongst non-Jews. Islam (and other forms of Arianism) occurred when garbled ideas of Christianity spread into the barbarian world. Buddhism is dodgy Hinduism for non-Indians.
Now, (b) could be coded! When a religion spreads across a border, give it a (high) chance of mutating into something unrecognisable by the home country. That would encourage deliberate seeding of your pet religion by missionaries to prevent heresies.

 

[vhhawk]

My first impression of Civ4, looking over my son's shoulder as he played, was "gah, they've gone and dumbed down the Civ series and made it cartoonish for the kids." But when I sat down to actually try a short game, I completely changed my opinion. I find the cultural borders concept to be enormously addicting, as is the music used in the game. I used to play Civ and Civ2 a lot and still have their soundtracks deeply ingrained.

The one big thing I miss is that when I take over a city, it doesn't spawn all these revolutionaries around it like it once did. I always thought that was a stroke of genius, and it enriched the conquest part of the game.

 

[Joshua368]

The one big thing I miss is that when I take over a city, it doesn't spawn all these revolutionaries around it like it once did. I always thought that was a stroke of genius, and it enriched the conquest part of the game.

That happens in the latest patch of Beyond the Sword, after civilizations adopt the Emancipation civic.

Personally I find it annoying though and modded it to Nationhood.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Certainly preferred it to Civ III
I miss the ease with which Civ II could be modded but overall I feel Civ IV is an improvement

 

[King Flevance]

I might need to give civ4 another chance, I haven't played it a lot and it was a few years since last time.

If we look at gameplay-aspects alone, graphics for example is of course better in civ4...
- Do you think religion makes the game better? I want religion to be in, but I'm not sure this version makes the game more fun.
- Do you get the same sense of exploration as you did in civ3?

Religion is a mixed bag. It makes the game better and it also makes it worse. I have never personally been a big advocate for it. It's just tedium really. And overpowered in the hands of the player as tedium usually tends to do in all incarnations of Civ. Caravans, tedious with a huge payoff if you messed with them. Same goes for religion. Only instead of just cashflow bonus, religion works as cashflow AND relations. And actually there is more benefits to it than that. I personally only enjoy the religion if I don't allow myself to abuse the snot out of it.

If you are comparing it to exploration in Civ 3, Civ 4 falls on its face IMO. There are no sea tiles which I miss so much it hurts a teeny bit. But also there is just something 'clunky' about the map generator or something. Running into peaks, tundra, or desert are such heavy disappointments and numerous.

However some things I think that do add to the fun are the unit classes, promotions, alternate tech paths, and the diplomacy model as a whole. The AI intrigues me with some of its actions in 4 moreso than 3 did with its enhaced version of diplomacy over 2. They did manage to make that better. I am also happy to see the original space victory put back into practice.

 

[markieness]

Civ 2 consumed more of my hours than Civ 4 ever will, but Civ 4 is the better game.