Discussion in 'Civ4Col - General Discussions' started by TheDS, Oct 12, 2008.
I want some of what he's smoking.
I think this one is actually on purpose. It could even make sense and be fun - early contact = more itneraction / close proximity = more tension - if the europeans were more than just easy prey.
Why do all the choices involve comparison to the original? I never played it.
I got bored of this one pretty quickly.
It's an enjoyable game - worth $30 to me.
Lotsa people complaining - but complaining is just what people tend to do.
Sid Meier's games never aspired to be chess even when there is some strategy involved, the checkers approach allows for learning by doing, it's widely appealing and not very punitive/frustrating (unless you ignore long term consequences). The underlying game mechanics is based on basic arithmetics and statistics, it's much like an animated board-game really.
It's near impossible to have much depth (or smart AI) for all those different starting conditions. Hence there is a new focus on multiplayer...
There are many possible strategies, and the "one trick pony" is the player who insists on applying one strategy every time i.e. conquering europreans screws up relations with the natives (-1 you attacked our friend), more so if you keep their cities (-2 you have stolen our land). And I can see how the game becomes boring if you eliminated all competition early on...
The King's cash demands are there to prevent one player piling up gold, to buy a frigate or army and wtfpwn the competition, refusing to kiss the ring increases the chance of early tax demands (sinking the enemy caravel, will also increase tax for the victim), or on a more basic level to remind the player to always invest all his gold into new units.
Criticism is exaggerated and often emotional, which rarely helps the arguments but at least shows that people care about the game.
Not much longer, I can assure you.
The fact that a critic is emotional does not add or remove reason of the arguments behind it.
Now, talking unemotionally, the core mechanisms of the game make the was to the win far easier if you forget to colonize, sell your guns to the natives for high prize and buy more, never push your colony population high and transform your city state in a Sparta in American lands ( including killing the unfit for war ). You can discuss whatever you want, but I highly doubt that the propose of the game is to penalize actual economical buildup and reward bloodthirsty and genocidal actions on your own ppl. Unless this is "Sparta in Colonial America" and they had putted the wrong name in my copy......
I must say this was one of the few games I was most excited about this year. I anticipated putting maybe a couple hundred hours into it over the next 2 or 3 months and yet it I found it to possess basically no replay value it was so broken. You know a game is bad when you go looking to buy a new one 3 days later...(speaking of which King's Bounty is really excellent).
Perhaps I may play it again if the comments are good after the patch, but I am sorely disappointed, and am starting to worry about Firaxis a bit.
I just bought this game recently, as a big fan of Civ which has never played Colonization. I thought it will be a nice way to discover this "brother" of Civ. I found it cool and enjoyable at the beginning, but after a while, I've been really disapointed. It seems that all you can do is trade and grab more ressources, then trade again etc...buying colonists, place them, then again & again & again ... this is boring! I didn't even start a war. Maybe the earlier version is better but well this one is a rip off. It would have been a great mod if it had been include in BTS. But 35€ ($50 almost) for that...ouch. I'll dig it more later maybe. But there's nothing transcendent in this game.
You should have tried Patricians online a few years ago, now THAT was a pile of crap. You could trade to make money to buy more ships. Then use more ships to trade more. Then take the money and buy more ships. Then use more ships to trade more. Then take the money and buy more ships. Then use more ships to trade more. Then take the money and buy more ships. Then use more ships to trade more. Then take the money and buy more ships.........
I never played the original.
On the face of it, it is an okay game. But as an avid Civ IV player it seems to - and I realize this is by design as it is not Civ IV - lack scope. Civ is a massive, immersive, flexible game. Colonization plays like a cleverly designed scenario with very narrow goals, more than a full blown game. I find it a difficult transition.
Separate names with a comma.