Swedishguy
Deity
Well, really? I played the game the other day, and hey! There definitely goes some kind of line when the graphics are too bad to play with. And the tech tree is badly constructed. What's so god damn good about Civ2?
What's so good about Civ2?
- Thread starter Swedishguy
- Start date
Swedishguy
Deity
Because they can't be trusted.
Lone Wolf
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,908
Well, there is some charm in the old graphics... althrough I think that the even more old graphic of Civ I has more of that specific charm.
What I don't like in CivII is these inpenetrable City Walls (A Phalanx behind the walls defeats a Rifleman!) and a not very good AI.
List of AI stupidies:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=43
What I don't like in CivII is these inpenetrable City Walls (A Phalanx behind the walls defeats a Rifleman!) and a not very good AI.
List of AI stupidies:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=43
magicalsushi
Prince
I don't understand how graphics which were considered perfectly acceptable in the mid 90s are now "too bad to play with". Human eyes have not changed significantly since then. Those of us old enough to have owned computers for more then 10 years managed fine.
Don't get me wrong; Civ 2 looks horrible, and I agree with Lone Wolf that Civ 1 was more visually pleasing, despite the graphics being less technically advanced. But it's ridiculous to say that the graphics make it unplayable. They didn't then, and they don't now.
On the other hand, there's a perfectly valid gameplay reason not to play it now: Civ 4 is vastly superior. Civ 2 is still playable, but it's a waste of valuable time which would be better spent playing Civ 4. It's great that Swedishguy has given it a try, but really, you can't expect it to be better than Civ 4 when you know that most former Civ 2 players now play Civ 4 instead. If you're wondering what the fuss was about with Civ 2, it's because it was one of the best games available at the time - but that was over a decade ago! You shouldn't expect it to amaze you now. If it were better than Civ 4, then Civ 4 would have been a step backwards.
Don't get me wrong; Civ 2 looks horrible, and I agree with Lone Wolf that Civ 1 was more visually pleasing, despite the graphics being less technically advanced. But it's ridiculous to say that the graphics make it unplayable. They didn't then, and they don't now.
On the other hand, there's a perfectly valid gameplay reason not to play it now: Civ 4 is vastly superior. Civ 2 is still playable, but it's a waste of valuable time which would be better spent playing Civ 4. It's great that Swedishguy has given it a try, but really, you can't expect it to be better than Civ 4 when you know that most former Civ 2 players now play Civ 4 instead. If you're wondering what the fuss was about with Civ 2, it's because it was one of the best games available at the time - but that was over a decade ago! You shouldn't expect it to amaze you now. If it were better than Civ 4, then Civ 4 would have been a step backwards.
I think you can upgrade graphics. ToT made better resoloution possable for all units and graphics. A good example below, look at how CIv3 evolved from uglyness that it was before. All refined 2d is better then low grade 3d. Civ4's zooming effects are useless for gameplay.
Any 100$ mouses with "ipoint" does the same tricks with Civ3- NOTE: for picture below, taken from Mod with 1000 plus units, some higher rendered then others. If you chose to use units on quality of rendering alone, they all could be zoomed in flawlessly like sail boats in the middle
Spoiler :
Civ3 Graphics 'Ares' version:
See? Notice the improved rendering of the desert? This can be done for all terrain types.(actually it is as we speak) This is only one of the three or 4 versions of terrain that became standard upgrade over the 5 years. Units have made huge leaps aswell.
Civ2 had just as long to perfect its trade so you can imagine it will have evolved to look much better then how you see it now, Civ4 has not improved( at least for now)
I would prefer Civ2 over Civ4 for a few games untill I figured the AI out. I hear it has the worst AI out of all the games.
Psyringe
Scout
The "line" you're talking about is simply personal preference. I'm still playing games with ASCII graphics (ADOM for example) because the gameplay is great. Great graphics certainly help me to enjoy a game, but they are a secondary factor at best. Your mileage may vary.
That said, I don't play Civ2 any more because I think it has been successfully superseded by Civ4. Civ4 has done away with most of the gripes that I had with Civ2, and the things that have been cut weren't that important for me.
Is is, however, rather easy to determine why people might still prefer Civ2. One reason are the advisors (your council), which many fans miss in the further installments of the series. Also, Civ2 had many special units (partisans, alpines etc.), again something that has been missed by some people.
Personally, as I said, those features weren't important for me. I always thought that the council, while being admittedly funny, detracted a bit from the seriousness of the game. And I rarely used the special units. On the downside, Civ2 had some game mechanics that weren't as well designed as the others (stupid AI, caravan micromanagement, only rudimentary diplomacy). But I can see why some players might still prefer Civ2.
sabo
My Ancestors were Vikings
Actually when I bought Civ II in 1995 I thought the graphics were amazing. Since I come from the days of 'pong' no wonder. I think alot of people look at Civ II as nostalgic, we had some good games on it back in the day. 
"What's so good about Civ2?"
Dare I say... because it's fun?
I play Civ ToT pretty much exclusively, and I'm not bored yet!
Dare I say... because it's fun?
I play Civ ToT pretty much exclusively, and I'm not bored yet!
Stormrage
Ever Present Taskmaster
I started out civing with Civ2 on Playstation. Now that was ugly. I`m prolly wearing glasses cos of Civ2 
Jones! High five! Even zoomed in so you can see the pixels, and it still looks better than civ4!
Jones! High five! Even zoomed in so you can see the pixels, and it still looks better than civ4!
Nylan
Characters Welcome
It's very streamlined and quick play. It moves along a lot faster than it's successors IMO, and it's just plain fun.
Kan' Sharuminar
Fluffy
The single-player game has, I have to admit, been surpassed by the Civ3&4 equivalents. However I was still playing it long after Civ3 came out, and multiplayer games with friends up until a couple of years ago.
More importantly for me is the fan-made scenarios available for Civ2, which is the main reason the game remains installed on my computer. I still play Red Front, Dominion Wars and the Lord of the Rings scenarios every so often, and I haven't really found any sort of similar scenario for the later Civ games that have ever captured my attention, or given me as much fun as these ever have
More importantly for me is the fan-made scenarios available for Civ2, which is the main reason the game remains installed on my computer. I still play Red Front, Dominion Wars and the Lord of the Rings scenarios every so often, and I haven't really found any sort of similar scenario for the later Civ games that have ever captured my attention, or given me as much fun as these ever have
same here. i played faithfully for years. every spare moment. i loved it. it's still fun. but i play civ 4 now. i growed up and civ grew up with me.
Swedishguy
Deity
When why don't you play a game like, say, Populous: The Beginning?
Swedishguy
Deity
"It's fun" doesn't say muxh to me. Why is it fun?
Stormrage
Ever Present Taskmaster
Why do some people find watching some freaks play Poker on the satelite channels amusing?? Cos they do!
We find Civ2 fun, you don`t. No one is forcing you to play it. What`s the point of this thread?
We find Civ2 fun, you don`t. No one is forcing you to play it. What`s the point of this thread?
Similar threads
