Rasbelin:
I believe I have gained a lot from playing Activision's incarnations. Let me just point out a few "differences" between the two strains of Civ:
- Settlers vs Public Works (I prefer PW so I don't end up moving 100 settlers per turn in the endgame).
- Future Sci-Fi (I didn't like the sci-fi settings in CTP).
- More Civs in a game of CTP1 & 2 (up to 28).
- Hard to MOD vs easy to learn scripting language (As a MODder this was VERY important).
- CTP enhanced the "non-combat victory" situations from SMAC (I prefer playing diplomatically).
- CTP has many more Gov types (More variety and outcomes possible. Pity the AI didn't know how to use the Govs).
- CTP introduced "specialist" units (Some were good, some were too powerful. IE Slaver. You could kill a civ just with one slaver).
Basically, Activision introduced some good ideas onto the Civ platform. Unfortunately for them they implemented them pretty ordinarily and allowed MANY bugs to flow through that killed the gameplay. Of course Activision faced the same challanges that Sid 'n Co face, ICS, era-balance (phalanx kills bomber
), and many others. For the genre as a whole, Activision did a great job introducing new ideas, new ways to do things, and trying. Like Civ, CTP is a love-hate game. Those that stick with it love it. Those that hate it go back to Civ2 (Civ3 now).
For my version of Civ that I'm currently developing (see Alt-Civs) I've been able to provide better models based on Civ AND CtP.
My suggestion: If you believe you've missed out, you can now pick up CTP for $5 in the bargain bin.
It can't hurt. At least that way it'll broaden your view to the Civ-genre and understand what us CTP'ers mean when we try to explain that some options in CTP are better than Civ.