Which Do You Play Mostly:Civ:1, Civ:2, Civ:3, Civ:4 or Civ:5

Which Do You Play Mostly:Civ:1, Civ:2, Civ:3, Civ:4 or Civ:5

  • Civ:1

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Civ:2

    Votes: 9 3.9%
  • Civ:3

    Votes: 45 19.6%
  • Civ:4

    Votes: 129 56.1%
  • Civ:5

    Votes: 47 20.4%

  • Total voters
    230
I'm playing Civ4 for now but Civ2 will always be my favorite. I might play it bit of Civ Rev with a friend soon.
 
You're trying to start an argument.

No it's what I play. I like Civ 5 and SMAC better then Civ Rev, but I don't play them as much.
 
I've been playing as Peter or Frederick on Civ4 for about four years and am still not bored of it. I like what I like.
 
Mostly civ iv, its more enjoyable and i can complete games in less than 4 hours in it. Civ v is fun and they have made alot of good changes/improvements but it still needs alot of work, and its just too slow for me (Small map domination can take up to 6 hours for me)
 
I played Civ1 a bit way back when, then III quite a bit and IV a lot, but it has been at least a year since my last game.
 
Whats Civilization? Oh it was that computer game I used to play before I found this website.

Seriously though, I still play civ 4 quite frequently. I hardly ever play without mods or scenarios. I really like Rhye's and fall of Europe, the Sword of Islam, Pie's ancient Europe, or playing on custom maps like "the 50 states."

I first started with civ III many moons ago, the last time I played was a few months back. I did play civ v, but god the game pissed me off. I figured it wasn't worth being mad at the game all the time so I mostly play civ 4.
Edit: What I dislike the most about ciV is how they won't make any expansion packs. What they do instead is sell me one friggin civ for five dollars! It is such a ripoff!
I've been playing as Peter or Frederick on Civ4 for about four years and am still not bored of it. I like what I like.

You only play as those two?
 
I keep trying to get into CIV, but it hasn't happened yet. I scorn Steam, so I haven't purchased Civ5. As such, Civ3 keeps me civving.
 
5 lately, although Shogun 2 and HoI2 Armageddon trounce that easily in time and enjoyment.

Overall it's Civ 1 by a looooooong shot.
 
Spoiler :
It seems to me, that those who have only played 3, have not liked any of the others. If one started with 2, then 3 is ok, but 4 was better. If they started out with 1, and hated 2, then 4 is the only one they play. If they started with 4, then anything else does not cut it. If you started with 4 and like 5, then 2 may not be bad, but you may want to avoid 3. If you liked 3 and 4 and hated 5, then you may like 2, but it is not a guarantee.

2 was a "marathon" game with thousands of choices each turn at the end. 3 allowed shorter games, but left some things out. 4 added things back in. 5 is still in progress, but can be tailored to be another 4, 2, but not 3. 2 can be short, but you sacrifice the depth that is possible. 5 is sorta 4 (3 compared to 2), but a lot of the thought process has been automated. 3 is not bad, but you had to develope the "like" for it and it is not really "liked" after playing the others. 2 added to 1. 4 added to 3. If you are waiting for 6, playing 5 will probably get you ahead of the curve on 6.


tl;dr

Every one should try all of the versions at least 3 games, to get the whole perspective of the series.
 
Spoiler :
It seems to me, that those who have only played 3, have not liked any of the others. If one started with 2, then 3 is ok, but 4 was better. If they started out with 1, and hated 2, then 4 is the only one they play. If they started with 4, then anything else does not cut it. If you started with 4 and like 5, then 2 may not be bad, but you may want to avoid 3. If you liked 3 and 4 and hated 5, then you may like 2, but it is not a guarantee.

2 was a "marathon" game with thousands of choices each turn at the end. 3 allowed shorter games, but left some things out. 4 added things back in. 5 is still in progress, but can be tailored to be another 4, 2, but not 3. 2 can be short, but you sacrifice the depth that is possible. 5 is sorta 4 (3 compared to 2), but a lot of the thought process has been automated. 3 is not bad, but you had to develope the "like" for it and it is not really "liked" after playing the others. 2 added to 1. 4 added to 3. If you are waiting for 6, playing 5 will probably get you ahead of the curve on 6.


tl;dr

Every one should try all of the versions at least 3 games, to get the whole perspective of the series.

Thanks for the summary, I'm still trying to digest your second paragraph there... :crazyeye:
 
Civilization III--the best of the bunch.
 
In terms of time played, I think IV has finally surpassed III. V... I wasn't too impressed with it. Seemed like it was flashy and didn't have the substance of IV, but maybe it will get better.

I vastly prefer IV nowadays. Haven't touched III in years, but I still have fond memories of the Middle Ages and Rise of Rome Conquest scenarios.
 
In terms of time played, I think IV has finally surpassed III. V... I wasn't too impressed with it. Seemed like it was flashy and didn't have the substance of IV, but maybe it will get better.

I vastly prefer IV nowadays. Haven't touched III in years, but I still have fond memories of the Middle Ages and Rise of Rome Conquest scenarios.

I prefer IV. I wish to thank posters like you for saving me $50 on CivV.

I always find it amusing to see CivIII beating CivV in these polls. Tells us something about game development. I play IV more but enjoy III for a change of pace. Antilogic noted two of my favorite scenarios.
 
Back
Top Bottom