What do you like about civ3?

Lars-E · October 13, 2001, 05:46

Graphics...

Some of the graphics are good some are not..

I don't like the "view city" graphics. Tiny detalis like civ2. I liked the "view city" graphics better in civ1. Big pyramids, colossus, etc. I mailed Firaxis about this a few months ago. But it is too late too change anything.

I don't like those small scrolls either...They weren't there in civ2 - why are they added now?

No MP....not good.

The release date for civ3 should be the same for the entire world. Why should the Americans get a headstart?

Maybe I should continue playing civ2. And try to land in 76 AD...or 46 AD...

Col Bigspear · October 13, 2001, 06:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Lars-E
No MP....not good.

I would not have put that in there, it's going to turn into a MP discussion, like in every other thread.
MarkG PLZ make a Civ3 Multiplayer Forum for people to bi*ch in.

Inverse Icarus · October 13, 2001, 07:12

personally, i cannot recall of any game with a simultanious world release. if anyone knows of one please enlighten us.

and graphics dont matter. i'd rather have had still leader pics if it got me multiplayer

yin26 · October 13, 2001, 07:15

I like and GREATLY appreciate the attempts to cure ICS. If they prove effective, that ONE thing could make the game entirely worth playing again. And always remember: That change came from people here at Poly writing up the arguments, posing solutions, and making sure the issue never died.

Footie Mad · October 13, 2001, 08:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Jingo
personally, i cannot recall of any game with a simultanious world release. if anyone knows of one please enlighten us.

Diablo 2 I believe.

Asesino_Virtual · October 13, 2001, 09:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Jingo
personally, i cannot recall of any game with a simultanious world release. if anyone knows of one please enlighten us.

Dune2000 was released in simulatious with the rest of the world (even in Argentina!!

).

August Borms · October 13, 2001, 09:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Jingo
personally, i cannot recall of any game with a simultanious world release. if anyone knows of one please enlighten us.

Not that I consider a simultanious worldwide release important, but Arcanum was also released worldwide.

IIRC, the US version of Arcanum was "done" several months before the release and then it leaked (warez) and alot of people started whining and complaining (and "threatening" to download the warez version) why they didn't release it etc...
( I guess it was because of the localized versions for Europe )

Akron · October 13, 2001, 10:45

I'm interested by the new cultural and resource models, along with the fact that I can play with 16 civilizations.

Inverse Icarus · October 13, 2001, 12:30

thanks for the info, haven't wanted to play any of those games

Howling Chip · October 13, 2001, 13:31

1. That different Cultures will not only act different (aggressive, diplomatic, etc) but also have different game attributes (UUs, development bents, etc.) Whenever I would start a new Civ game, there was always this little pang or sigh that the only difference was what Face/Architecture I'd get. That and what I would name my cities. Although eventually I would always start naming my cities "Little Doggie Poop Pile" or something.

2. Cultural Influence and the whole borders thing. I liked aspects of that feature in CTP2 and SMAC.

3. Minor Wonders and the way Major Wonders are supposed to be directly influenced by culture. I like this because I almost always had 4 or 5 must have wonders, same over and over per game. This may take replay into another realm for me (see item #1).

4. Ability to make more varied and "customized" diplomatic offers.

The above is my "never thought about this question before" quick list reply.

Sabre2th · October 13, 2001, 13:38

Quote:

I mailed Firaxis about this a few months ago. But it is too late too change anything.

You expect Firaxis to change them just for you? I happen to like the new city view.

Quote:

I don't like those small scrolls either...They weren't there in civ2 - why are they added now?

This is not civ2. It is a new, different game.

Quote:

No MP....not good.

I don't think I can handle another MP b!tch session.

Quote:

The release date for civ3 should be the same for the entire world. Why should the Americans get a headstart?

Americans are making the game. Plus, worldwide releases cost money. Money that they may not have.

Quote:

Maybe I should continue playing civ2. And try to land in 76 AD...or 46 AD...

Then go do that. There is waaay too much complaining in these forums. If you don't like it, don't play it.

TechWins · October 13, 2001, 14:56

Well, my list about what I like in Civ3 is so incredibly long that I will only mention a few things:

1. The new improvements made upon capturing a city. This might actually make war strategical.

2. National borders will give more of a feeling of having a nation, rather than just having a bunch of united city-states.

3. Resources will prevent total war machines that don't have any other skills, such as the Mongols were in Civ2. Again this will provide more strategy to war.

4. Diplomacy has been improved enough that many deals can made. Also, diplomacy will play more of a role in war, which is a must.

5. Having the seperation of Major and Minor Wonders is fantastic. Now there can be super-powers that have the technology to nuke, while others are being left behind in the dust until they improve their national state. To put it into simpler terms, one nation can be smart without making everybody else smart. This is an underrated addition to Civ3.

6. Having the units of each era being much more powerful than the era that preceeded it is one of my favorite new aspects of teh game. An example of this is that a knight is now much more powerful than a horsemen. The large seperation in stats between each era's units' stats will do wonders for the game in the war realm, IMO.

7. Believe it or not people but all that Civ-Specific stuff will help the game. This will provide a certain flavor to the game that will make it even more re-playable.

8. Great Leaders appear to be a nice, little treat for the game. How cool will it be when you are playing the French and all of sudden one of your units turns into Napoleon? Then with Napoleon you could have the choice for him to lead a fiercesome army or help your nation build the Statue of Liberty!

9. The many new improvements made to warfare specifically makes me very happy. Armies are just one of those improvements that will make war more enjoyable. Bombardment and having airplanes doing 'missions' instead of acting like a flying, land unit is a gigantic improvement.

10. The animations and graphics seem to give Civ3 a great feel when playing the game.

I have only mentioned some of the improvements made upon Civ3 and I didn't even go into detail with them. Now if a pessimism can name more bad features of Civ3 than go ahead and try. Civ3 is going to be a great game, regardless of the dissapointment which is MP.

Shiva · October 13, 2001, 15:07

Quote:

Originally posted by TechWins
3. Resources will prevent total war machines that don't have any other skills, such as the Mongols were in Civ2. Again this will provide more strategy to war.

That has to be what I like the most so far without playing it yet. Most of the wars ever fought have been over Resources, Geography, Population. The Resource reason has been missing from Civ so far for the most part.

October 13, 2001, 18:14

So far, I like everything.

CobraA1 · October 13, 2001, 18:25

I like all of the improvements - I'm especially interested in seeing how culture affects gameplay. I think all of these improvements outweighs all of the complaints on this board.

Blake · October 13, 2001, 18:34

The things I'm most excited about:

The new diplomacy model, diplomacy AI, diplomacy everything

The addition of culture

Skanky Burns · October 13, 2001, 21:09

Culture!!
Resources!!!

Yay!!!!!