I started with Civ 2 after playing a demo from a computer mag. I was pretty hooked straight away and never really looked back. For me civ 4 is by a considerable distance the best of the Civ series. the computer just doesnt know how to play with 1upt and the diplomacy is pretty rubbish. That said, 5 does have some better concepts and parts of it work really well, so yea, im still a fan who is willing to invest a considerable amount of time into it.
1. How did you first hear about Civilization?
I learned of Civilization when Civ Revolution came out.
At the time I entered a contest to win a Civ faceplate for the Xbox, and I won. I sold it on eBay because I thought the art on it looked dumb. Too cartoony for my taste. I never played that game.
2. What got you into it/kept you into it as a loyal fan?
One day I was bored and I searched the internet for videos to watch.
Giantbomb.com did this video showing and explaining Civ V. I got very interested, because I always enjoyed the building part of strategy games more than the war part. I happened to get a new laptop at the time which ran the demo pretty well on the lowest settings. I bought the LE of the game online, and I bought all the DLC that was available at the time (I think they were up to Spain/Inca at that point) which happened to be on sale on steam. I enjoyed the game so much, I bought all new content on release. I bought a gaming PC recently and I was finally able to see all the leader animations instead of the stills. I love this game.
My dad bought a copy of Civ III and played it for a bit. I looked over his shoulder and didn't think much of it honestly. For some reason he stopped playing it. I was bored one day and decided to install the game on my computer. I was pleasantly surprised.
2. What got you into it/kept you into it as a loyal fan?
Just the fact that the series seems to be trending towards greater refinement. I was very disappointed by vanilla V's simplistic interface and game mechanics, but the expansions have helped it along greatly. I'll be in for VI; hopefully it starts off less simplistic than V.
i started to play civ1 on 1993, i was 13. I was totally captured by the evolution themed intro, and play massively up until 1997 when 2 is released.
Then indonesia plunged into anarchy and economic crisis, the rupiahs fell, thus price of games went over the ceiling, and my fathers cotton factory went to bankrupt. I have to stop playing and have to work for money to go to college. I stopped playing any games.
Up until a couple years ago, i stumbled to a review of ciV vanilla. Then memories comes flashing to me, i bought the game afterwards. Been playing heavily until now.
First played in 2011, steam summer sale, I'd been randomly looking at the top-rated pc games on metacritic and saw civ gold edition for £5. Now my favourite game, 700 hours and counting
I had an Atari ST in the early 90s and my dad bought a copy of civilization from a mail order games company. It came on 4 3.5" floppy disks I believe, and we didn't have a hard drive to install the thing!
I wasn't very attentive to all the mechanics back then but had fun trying to get a lot of "round things" (gold) and build roads on every square!
I've since played all Civ games in vanilla, but not all expansions.
My uncle gave me a copy of Civ II when I was in high school. I played it for a while and kept coming back to it. I skipped III and played IV when BTS came out.
I was searching for a copy of empire earth on steam, but i'd forgotten the name. In my search to find the game i was looking for, i came across civ v, downloaded the demo and fell in love. I haven't been with another strategy game since <3
Since then, i've been kept a loyal fan through multiplayer games with the tens of people i have subsequently converted
I began to play with Civ Revolution. I played it a lot on my Nintendo DS but never bought Civ IV. Even now I don't like its graphics at all compared to those in CIV V. When Civ V came out, I began to play with it. I stuck loyal and enjoyed both expansions.
My uncle gave me civ 4 gold edition. That is the first civ game I heard of and when I heard of civ 5 I bought it because of the better graphics and I think it was a good purchase because I'm still playing.
1. 1992 we played CIv in computer club in Community College (was it already out in 1985). Wow Civ has been around a little longer than half as long as I.
2. I always loved the exploration, building and science discovery. I was never into the warfare and absolutely hated the spy spam in the earlier versions. Espionage is getting cooler in CiV, especially with BNW.
I really liked CIIv ToT. I wasn't really excited about CIIIv when I found out I needed resources to make stuff. Not that that directly annoyed me, but that I could never find what I needed. There would be like one rubber on the entire map. Same like coal in CiV
1. 1992 we played CIv in computer club in Community College (was it already out in 1985). Wow Civ has been around a little longer than half as long as I.
1. One day this past March I got bored playing AoE III (having only started playing THAT in May of 2012. 7 years after it was released? Not a bad turnaround for me...) and thought I'd see if this game I'd heard about, Civilization V, was any good. So I downloaded the demo for the Vanilla game from Steam and got hooked. Then I tried the Gods and Kings demo and got more hooked, and then I purchased the game and have been enjoying being a CivFanatic ever since.
2. It's really fun! Do I need another reason?
1. For me it was Civ3. A few months after the release date (so, late 2001 or early 2002), one of my roommates in college picked it up. I was still into Age of Empires 1 and 2, and at first I thought, geez, he's wasting a LOT of time playing that stupid game. But then I tried it, and I was absolutely hooked. I do remember my first game, I was Iroquois - I won, but I don't remember with what victory condition. We had a mini computer lab set up in the basement of the house we rented, so there would often be three of us playing at the same time on our different PCs. We would even do simultaneous turn multiplayer games. So many hours spent playing Civ3. Also bought 4 and 5 as soon as they were released, along with every expansion. So, I've played, 3, 4, and 5 extensively, and have actually enjoyed each and every one.
FYI - this site has been a godsend for me strategy-wise for Civ 4 and Civ 5. Thanks to everyone who posts!!
2. I dunno what it is... it's just so... addicting! No two games are ever identical. It literally is "just... one... more... turn..."!!!!
In 1997, with Civ II. A friend gave me his copy and told me "You should play this, you're going to like it." My first game lasted 25 hours in a row, it consumed me entirely (I was 15 years old). I had never played something like this, the feeling was unique : growing your empire, conquering other civs, launching your SS, the music, the advisors, the land... everything was as it was tailored to meet my tastes. A giant slap in the face at the time.
I then stuck with the series, all these years. I like all Civilization games, although II & IV are my favourite. I really thought the series was lost with Civ V Vanilla (I'm one of these people who think it was a complete disaster at the time), but they managed to salvage it brilliantly : I had a lot of fun with G&K but especially with BNW, even though it still needs a bit of fixing.
And now I can't wait for Civ VI (or a SMAC II, but it will never happen).
This is my story more or less exactly. Civ 2 changed my life, and set me on the (probably doomed) path I've taken, professionally. I don't think that Civ 5....in any form....is a game worth playing, but I still hope Civ 6 might be good.
Civilization II was my first game. I'd heard about it from a friend and picked it up on a whim. Fell in love with it on the first playthrough. I think that kept me hooked on it was the ability to play with history. Granted, in II the historical basis wasn't much more than the unit/civ/city names but still, if you've got an active imagination, then that's all you need.
Civilization III... I hated this game. I kept trying to play it but damn, it was hard. I don't like being shoehorned into doing the same couple things every game to have a chance at success, and in CivIII, you were pretty much required to ICS. If I tried to play my way, I'd do great til the Middle Ages, then my economy would tank. Every. Single. Time.
Civilization IV was a great game, I played it sooooo much. You weren't required to stick to certain strategies to have a chance or even run away, and the historical flavor was increased by a lot. Being able to put markers to name land feature tiles was awesome, too.
Civilization V... I like this game, but I think it suffers from a bit of the CivIII "you must do this" syndrome. I can't play my own way and have any shot for not getting steamrolled - and yes, this includes playing militarily. The Tradition opener that's been updated for BNW is pretty much the only way to play the early game if I want to make it out of the Medieval Era, and I hate that with a passion. Even on Chieftan (yet, using the Tradition opener, I've won an OCC on Prince). It baffles the everloving hell out of me. Past that, I love pretty much everything about this game other than the diplomacy complaints. The diplomacy really should be a lot better than it is.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.