C3C REVIEW thread - Post yours here - Page 3

Brundlefly · April 1, 2004, 09:41

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
Here is look at how the game mags and sites saw C3C. 4 A's and 3 B's, not bad.

Game mags and sites = vapid shills of the software companies. If you think you are getting objective analysis from these media then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you....

vmxa1 · April 1, 2004, 15:01

Quote:

Originally posted by bfg9000

Game mags and sites = vapid shills of the software companies. If you think you are getting objective analysis from these media then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you....

Very clever. good thing you pointed out all your wisdom, thanks.

BTW I don't see why they are any worse than your opion or anyone elses. It is merely a consensus. Your accusation of mags being in the bag is specious. They do make very negative reviews of major games. They also come back later and change positive reviews. It is neither here nor there anyway, it is just an opion no better or no worse than most. Better than some as they are probably better educated than many. They do also have to answer to the public or go out of business.

Anyway it was presented as an FYI, not gospel.

asleepathewheel · April 1, 2004, 15:06

Yeah, I've read mag reviews which ridiculed big name games, which also had adverts in that magazine. ex: Enter the Matrix. Also see N-Gage. that thing has been bashed endlessly, yet they still are buying the adverts.

vmxa1 · April 1, 2004, 17:02

Here is a link to Gone Gold and it has a bunch of reviews from the web for PTW and they had many at 2/5.

http://www.gonegold.com/gguide/civ3.shtml

darkprophet · April 13, 2004, 00:34

ive been playing conquest a week or two now. Anyway i made a mod from bits and pieces of others and started to play with 31 civs. I must say it is so slow.Why?Civ 3 vanilla wasnt this slow. Dont get me wrong the scenerioes(typo) are great with no problem on turn speed but the epic game (31 civs) seems lagging. Why would fixaris make this expansion if one could not play with all 31 civs on a huge map(306x256 or so)?

vmxa1 · April 13, 2004, 00:53

darkprophet one big problem is the trade routes. They have to be recalculated each time a city is added or lost As the number of civs grows, this becomes a big problem.

If you add in the likely hood of more wars you get more troop shuffle.

It was done because so many players wanted more civs. So they added 8 more in PTW and 7 more in C3C. They could only handle 31 + barbs.

Little can be done to avoid the trade route problem with the current implementation.

I am not sure that the map size matters much after large. You will run into the 512 city limit anyway.

DrSpike · April 13, 2004, 18:32

I've never actually tried a 31 civ game. Isn't, say, 16 enough for you?

bob rulz · June 20, 2004, 22:48

The new civilizations and civilization traits are great. (Seafaring is underrated and agricultural is overrated, but fare better than most in deserts obviously. Industrious is still best). The new bonus resources add more food production to hills and deserts. Very helpful.

I've tried Mesopotamia (I had a lot of fun, and I kicked everyone's ass, but it was on Chieftain, so, ya...), doing moderately good on Rise of Rome, just started Fall of Rome and Japan. The new music is great (especially the Japan music). I absolutely revile the WWII Conquest though. Too much ocean, not extremely well-designed. However, the new options and units presented are great (you finally have upgrades to swordsmen).

I have four gripes-
1-CivEdit still not fully customizable. No biggie, but it would be nice if it was.

2-Communications trading to Printing Press! Grrr...I never have time to get the non-required techs, except for Nationalism, Espionage, and Monarchy (practically required). By this time in the game, on Pangea (which I always play, gonna start to play other types soon), you already know everyone by this time.

3-Map trading to Navigation! This is even worse than the communications. It is actually LESS realistic. Before people had a sense of real navigation they still made maps based on simple observations, and it's not like they HAD to have accurate maps to trade them. No matter what you can walk up to someone and hand them a map.

4-There's this damn bug in the Espionage Screen that makes it so that often it won't let me build embassies! Obviously this is a severe problem in my games (happens almost every C3C game). Does anyone else experience this bug and was it fixed with the latests patch? Or is it unique to me? This bug is really annoying and obviously it sucks when it occurs.

Besides these four MOSTLY minor gripes, I have nothing against it. It's great, especially with the variety of civs (there seems to be a greater variety in maps as well). Overall a real great addition to Civilization (expect for the damn espionage bug!). I rate it 9/10 overall. It would get a 10/10 if it weren't for the damn espionage bug that I keep getting! Sorry, but I have to emphasize that.

vmxa1 · June 21, 2004, 01:28

I am not aware of any embassy bugs. Are you sure you had the tech, had the gold and was not at war with the civ you wanted to build an embassy with?

bob rulz · June 21, 2004, 15:31

Okay, heh, false alarm. I just got the game, and now that I look back at it I realize that It doesn't TELL me when I don't have enough money, like it did in the original. Well then, I guess Conquests gets a full 10/10.

Maybe 9.5...but that's still damn good!

vmxa1 · June 21, 2004, 15:43

Cool, glad it was nothing to worry about.

foxfire4321 · May 4, 2005, 17:06

My Review... of course totally biases towards what I personally think, so don't take offense if you don't agree.

Overall I found Civilization 3 (with expansions) to be a rewarding if not completely compelling gaming experience.

Graphics: Though I applaud Firaxis's idea of making the game playable on even slightly dated systems, I feel the graphics could have been tuned up a notch. Overall they were servicable, but not outstanding. The level of detail was acceptable and units were distinct, but I wished for a little more animation in the avatars as the game went on. I hope for Civ4 Firaxis realizes that even the base model intergrated Intel graphics solution can handle far more than these graphics. (3/5)

Sound: Acceptable, usually I play with the sound off. (4/5)

Gameplay: Standard Civ fare, there is little innovation in this iteration and it feels more like a rehash of a classic than a game trying to move to the next level. While SMAC/AX brought some truely original ideas and play elements, the Civ3 game just left me with a prettier version of the old... not that this is all bad (4/5)

AI: Fairly good, with a few minor quirks (4/5)

Expansions: Both expansions added some good detailed material to the game, but in the end I am glad I waited till the Civilization III Complete edition came out as I feel the price point on the expansions was way too high for what you got. (3/5)

Intangibles: I loved the Civ3 experience as much as when I played Civ2, but I just wish Firaxis would try and innovate in the franchise. The company has shown it is capable of innovation with SMAC/AX, Pirates, and SIMGolf... so why not bring it to the gold standard of their company. Second, though I am sure numerous people will scream herasy I really think that CTP/CTPII handle nontraditional warfare and tile managment in a much better fashion. Third, please at some point move the end of Civ farther into the future, the oceans are underutilized in the game and there is no place to go after the modern day. Last, but not least, would some one please get rid of the annoying copy protection schemes... while I know you can get cracked files, it shouldn't be neccessary to play your game without the CD in the drive every damn time.

Overall I'll give the Civilization III Complete Edition a 4 out of 5.

Toby Rowe · May 5, 2005, 10:43

Pirates?

I'm in the woods a bit as I have an ancient P833 - has a Pirates 2 been released? (Can I play it if so!!)

Civ 3? Railroad Tyocoon 3?, Sim City 3000?, Warcraft III etc, all have really disapointed the buyers- all are the third sequel- gaming companies hold onto the title to make money on the strength of the second version, which is usually the best- It incorporates what the customer of 1 wanted in the way of improvements.

On the third version the house says "make us money by April/December", as Ver 2 earnt us shedloads.

The result is rubbish, the programmers have run out of idea's, but the company won't licence the idea to a different company (thus fresh idea's), due to paraniona (It may sell many but they only get 60% not 100% of the profit: Sales are bad and gamers refer to Civ 2 as a benchmark from which to start, not Civ 3.)

Toby

vmxa1 · May 5, 2005, 11:44

Yes a new versionof Pirates has been released.

Dis · May 5, 2005, 15:47

someone has been living in a hole. Pirates 2 is out.

here's the list of req's from their website

Quote:

ystem Requirements

* Operating System: Windows® 98/Me/2000/XP

* Processor: Pentium® 1.0 GHz or higher

* Memory: 256 MB RAM

* Hard Disk Space: 1.2 GB Free

* CD-ROM Drive: 4X Speed

* Video: 64 MB video card* with Hardware T&L support

* Sound: Windows® 98/Me/2000/XP-compatible sound card*

* DirectX®: DirectX® version 9.0b (included) or higher

* Indicates device should be compatible with DirectX® version 9.0b or higher.

(These preliminary system requirements are subject to change before the final product release.)

bg boom · November 8, 2005, 21:17

This game sucks! several civs all against you a human player. Waist of time.

The easy level is too easy. The next level up WARLORD is too hard.

vmxa1 · November 8, 2005, 23:15

Too hard? If you said Deity was too hard, I maybe could agree. Warlord/Regent/Monarch are too easy. Emperor is not a challenge, but you have to work some.

Do you mean you suck at CivIII?

bg boom · November 9, 2005, 15:25

Yes thats it I suck. Although the game did need a patch, and seems to work very slowly on my computer. You got to admit the AI cheats.

vmxa1 · November 9, 2005, 15:44

No the Ai does not cheat. It has one feature, that it knows the tiles. That means it knows where oil will be and when you have units here or there or not.

That is a handicap for the programmers as it would be a nightmare to code the logic to track that stuff. Humans can do it easy.

Then the levels have different bonus items. Chief/Warlord it is the players that get a boost and the AI a handicap.

Regent is straight up. After that the AI gets more and more handicaps. This is not cheating it is discribed in the editor.

Cheating is not following the agreed rules.

Now you can get lots of help and guides on the board. To get you at least to the point that you beat Monarch. I always felt that no help is really needed above that, if you are beating Monarch.

Maybe some tips for Sid, but most likely nothing a strong Monarch player does not already know.

Take a look at the must read stuff or look for a good game at say Regent. I think a few are here.

If nothing looks good go to CFC and read a training SG for Regent or Warlord. Lots of details.

Another place is some of the AU courses. They have reports that often give the thinking on what was done.

I know it is some work to find them and read them, but often they are good reads.

At leat find the Opening Moves thread by Cracker. It is in the topped must read.

bg boom · November 9, 2005, 17:51

How come when I get ahead in tech., the goody huts will give me nothing but deserted hut or 25 gold? coincident. How can other civs produce so many cities so fast? It seems fixed to me.

bg boom · November 9, 2005, 17:59

Also if you get stuck on an island. You might as well give up. You'll be so far in the hole you can never catch up.

vmxa1 · November 9, 2005, 20:41

Quote:

Originally posted by bg boom
How come when I get ahead in tech., the goody huts will give me nothing but deserted hut or 25 gold? coincident. How can other civs produce so many cities so fast? It seems fixed to me.

You did not give any parameters, so it is hard to knwo what exactly is going on.

For instance, if you are an expansionist civ, you can not get barbs.
If you are on highj levels, you have reduced chances for tech and at some you cannot get settlers.

So the level is important and the civ traits. After that it is the RNG.
I seriously doubt that if you tracked the results over a long period, it would be all maps and 25 gold.

Can you get crap for a individual game, sure can. Play at say DemiGod or higher and you cannot afford to even pop huts early in the game. The risk of barbs is too great, close to home.

As to cities, again what is the level and the map and the start locations as well as civ traits.

In level like Monarch or lower, experienced players will not be out expanded by the AI. Of course as you move up, it is hard to match the AI early. They just have too many bonus items, such as workers and even settlers on some.

It is not uncommon for me to not have my second town at Sid and the AI have 5 or more. Not a big problem, most of the time.

So if you cannot match the AI race of growth at say Regent and you have decent start, you need to get a better understand of what to do and when.

vmxa1 · November 9, 2005, 20:49

Quote:

Originally posted by bg boom
Also if you get stuck on an island. You might as well give up. You'll be so far in the hole you can never catch up.

Depends on the island and the level. Most players prefer island maps for levels like deity and sid and we can play them better than the AI.

Now if you are on a smallish island and the others are on a big fat contients or pangea landmass, then it can get ugly.

Many games have been posted with such starts and won.

You want to see how a bad start can be played and won, look for "So very cold" by Aeson.

Look I understand you probably had the game and no one to get experiences from. That makes it hard for most to master a game, any game.

If you had come to Poly or CFC when you first got the game, you would see how it is not hard to crack it.

I strongly suggest you go to CFC and read a game or tow of the legendary games: http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=47

bg boom · November 10, 2005, 10:13

OK thanks. Yes I have noticed a few things. Like if your a militeristic civ, your people celebrate when you declare war.

Daddy-O · November 10, 2005, 13:45

Great advice vmxa1.

Good to see that new players are still learning the game.

vmxa1 · November 10, 2005, 14:09

Still trying to pitch in a little as I too want them to enjoy it. I got a ton of help on these two sites, so just paying back.