Heresy

[Elowan]

I rather like Civ3. I'm taking to it like a duck to water. I enjoy the changes - especially the graphics and animations.

Do I care that it's not that big a step from Civ2? Not in the least.

Allow me to expand a bit. I rather like my wife. Is she perfect? Hell no! Neither am I in point of fact. But we've been married for 30 some years and we owe it all to 'patches' applied over the years to the original 'engine'.

Is our relationship better now than before? Yes. Do I miss some of the aspects of v1? Yes. Do I wish to go back? No. Can I add some aspects of version1 to the current version? Yes - in the next 'patch' - or use the editor.

What's my point? Simply this: anything can be improved given time and effort. I would imagine that Firaxis is aware of this. They gave us an editor - flawed though it might be.

I too consider the changes made to the Wonders poorly thought out but overall the concept is good.

We must - Grasshopper - possess ourselves with patience.

[Monoriu]

I agree

[Moraelin]

Elowan, the comparison with your wife does illustrate my whole point. Thanks.

The point is: you've stayed married to her, not got a new one that's an exact clone of the old one.

The point is: I already had Civ 2. And Alpha Centauri. And CTP and CTP2. And the other variations like MOO and MOM. I could have just stayed "married" to those, instead of paying for something that doesn't bring anything new.

Yes, I quite liked Civ 2 and the others. Yes, there's nothing wrong with playing Civ 2 again. But there IS something wrong when I actually pay for a NEW game, only to discovered that I could have just re-installed the old one for free.

And a second point is: I've paid for a complete game, not for an engine that might eventually get mods. I don't flippin' care if it has an editor. I've paid for the game NOW, not in 1 year when it might actually have something new in the form of user mods. And NOW, out of the box, it's a verbatim remake of stuff that I already had.

I'm not a happy camper.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Elowan
I rather like Civ3.

Me too. There is nothing basically wrong with this game that cannot be fixed within the realms of some dedicated bug- and gameplay-adjustment related patches.

I agree though that the current scenario-building support is hoplessly inadequate, and by that I dont just mean som few more symbolic checkboxes & input-fields in the game-editor. Basically, they only left some "passive hooks" for scenario-building and gameplay-tweaking. A LOT more "active muscle" must be added in the near future, in order to make anything useful out of this. Anyway, they should add a lot more checkboxes and input-fields also, in that editor, for anything controversial, like percentage-probabilities for "free shoots", bombardments and elite -> great leader-upgrades. Fortress-related Civ-2 style ZOC on/off option would be nice. Plus a lot more.

Also complete MP-support seems to be a "must have" by a lot of people.

[Jaybe]

Moraelin,
Did you have CtP when it first came out (before the 2 patches )? How about the others (I only know about CtP, personally).

Was the difference with the other games that you bought them after they had already been "fixed"?

Are you not a happy camper because of Civ3 birthing pains or because you are not a happy camper?
---
Sorry, these questions are for you to answer for yourself only.

[Elowan]

not the whole story.

This is my second marriage. I learned a lot from the first one (v1). Is there a big difference in v2? Not much - a different 'look and feel' perhaps. Surely she's more 'playable'. She's definitely more resilient but she still has only two eyes, etc, so I can't say that a whole lot has changed. The "Wonders" perhaps ...

Am I glad I made the change? Hell yes! There were insurmountable problems with v1.

[Rasputin]

it is very much like marriage...

When you first hear of the girl she sounds perfect, you see her and she looks too good to be true...

Then comes the marriage and the real girl comes out, the bugs become obvious, she needs patching!!!

This is why try before you buy is better. DL the game and try it out for a month, if you like it buy it, if not remove it !!!

[Moraelin]

Originally posted by Jaybe
Moraelin,
Did you have CtP when it first came out (before the 2 patches )? How about the others (I only know about CtP, personally).

CTP and CTP2 I got from the bargain bin, so they already had the patches. Maybe I should have waited with Civ 3, too. Even if it had "Sid Meier's" on the box.

About the other games, thing is, they weren't clones of each other.

For example Master of Magic brought not only a fantasy world, with two planes, but also it already had unique racial bonuses and units. It also had a tactical turn based combat, where you could command your armies (made of up to 8 units) on the battlefield and maybe use spells too, if you could afford the mana cost. It was a very good combat engine. It also had heroes, which were far more useful than Civ 3's "leaders", and it had magical artefacts to equip your heroes with.

Colonization brought a lot of stuff of its own. E.g., actually dealing with the native tribes, not just finding their huts to get a payment. E.g., it already had resources. E.g., a very detailed system of specialization, to make good use of those resources. Not just jester/taxman/scientist. You could have specialized lumberjacks, specialized tobacconists, etc. Back to the native tribes, some specializations could only be learned from them. E.g., it brought in the variable of having a home country that supplied you with colonists, was the biggest market for your goods, but swamped you in tax requests. Etc, etc, etc.

Master of Orion again, already had racial advantages (like Civ 3 has "Industrious", "Scientific"; etc), plus a setting that was in and by itself different enough. It also had bombardment that destroyed planetary improvements. It wasn't based on squares, it was based on whole planets for a start. It's hard to explain, but essentially the gameplay was very different from the building railroads and irigations in Civ. From the military side, again, it already had armies and a tactical combat that Civ 3 still doesn't have. But that's not all. You also had to design your own spaceships, and you could choose whether to make one huge ship or 1000 small fighters, or something in between. You also had to plan your defenses so they could deal with either one huge ship or 1000 small fighters. You also had to upgrade your ships all the time, because if the enemy's shields were stronger than your weapon, you'd do zero damage. There was no defeating tanks with spearmen in Master of Orion. You also had to plan for three different kinds of military technologies and events: space combat, orbital bombardment, or planetary invasions. And, of course, a well rounded defense to deal with any combination of them. And you HAD to use combined arms tactics, because no single ship could do all three of them. And so on, and so forth.

Alpha Centauri was in many ways a step back towards Civ 2, but even that had enough to call its own. And I don't mean just the different tech tree and SF setting. The Diplomacy and national borders of Civ 3, for example, were actually introduced by Alpha Centauri.

Now enter Civ 3, which is basically the old Civ 2 tech tree and units, transplanted on an Alpha Centauri game engine. Duh.

Are you not a happy camper because of Civ3 birthing pains or because you are not a happy camper?

I'm not a happy camper because Civ 3 isn't a new game, it's a remake of Civ 2, with an Alpha Centauri game engine.

That's not "birthing pains". You could say that the bugs and slowdowns are "birthing pains". And ok, maybe they'll fix those in a patch.

But re-releasing an old game with only minor tweaks, isn't birthing pains, it's shamelessly milking a franchise.

[Bubba_B]

I've seen a lot of people say Civ 3 is nothing more than a Civ 2 remake. Well IMHO Civ 3 has a lot more over Civ 2 than Civ 2 had over Civ.
Civ to Civ2:
- Combat system HP/FP (The only big change to game play, and was unbalanced in the players favor)
- Graphics
- New Civ's (I miss some)
- Wonder movies (clicked past after first 5 games)
- Talking advisors (ditto)
- A few new units and Govs.

The AI was still stupid and combat was still: "ram my battleship aground to attack that phalanx" or "damn I lost 10 units when he beat my 1 rifleman!"

Civ2 to Civ3
- Culture
- Resources
- Lux. trading
- Unit support
- War weariness
- War time mobilization
- Bombard units
- Workers
- Great leaders
- Minor wonders
- Colonies
- Air Combat (broke right now)
- Civ unique abilities

Combat I think has taken a step back, but it is more challenging than Civ2 and the AI is much better than Civ1&2.

Yeah Civ3 has the same basic gameplay but it certainly got a Boob Job and a Face Lift.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, The first Civ3 game I played I played it like a Civ2 game and got my arse handed to me.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Moraelin
Now enter Civ 3, which is basically the old Civ 2 tech tree and units, transplanted on an Alpha Centauri game engine. Duh.

More then 95% of the SMAC-code was trashed, and completely replaced by new code. This as been confirmed. So much for "transplanted" AC game engine.

I'm not a happy camper because Civ 3 isn't a new game, it's a remake of Civ 2, with an Alpha Centauri game engine.

SMAC in its inner core, it was basically Civ-2 style game-mechanics all over again. The AI for example was just as lame and foreseeable as ever. Yes, some alteratons where made, like the unit workshop & social engineering, but that was all rather superficial stuff.

Civ-3 by comparison, have admittedly retained many superficial features from Civ-2, although many things have been added as well. But when it comes to its inner core; the way the game-mechanics works; well, then we are talking about an entirely new game. One is really forced to revaluate previous old Civ-2 sleepwalk-tactics. The AI for example is much, much better then before.
I say, give these guys at Firaxis some slack. Let them come out with some bug- and feature-adjustment related patches - then wait yet another couple of months until they releases a really nice meaty extension-package, then everything is going to be OK.

Finally; remember that Civ-3 have got mostly 90%+ review-scores from game-magazines and game-sites all over the world. They can design new game-boxes and fill them all with nice reward-marks and positive review-quotes. Now, thats gonna boost continuing sale-figures.

[Moraelin]

Originally posted by Bubba_B
The AI was still stupid and combat was still: "ram my battleship aground to attack that phalanx" or "damn I lost 10 units when he beat my 1 rifleman!"

Yes. Both of which were major bugs, which should have been fixed. I thought fixing bugs was supposed to be in a free patch, not in a new game that you have to buy.

Civ2 to Civ3

- Culture

Well, ok. THIS hack is actually the only one which actually makes a difference in gameplay.

- Resources

Sid Meier's Colonization already had those, a long long time ago. CTP2 had those, too.

- Lux. trading

Just a variant of resources. CTP2 had trading already.

- Unit support

Units always needed support. That just got moved from city level to global level. Same as CTP2 already had.

- War weariness

That, I'm pretty sure existed already in Civ 2. Only again, it got moved to a global scale.

- War time mobilization

Which is a minor tweak.

- Bombard units

That existed already in Alpha Centauri, MOO, and a few others. And in CTP2.

- Workers

Existed already in AC, if my memory doesn't fail me. And I seem to remember some kind of engineer unit in Master of Magic, too. And CTP2 had the vastly superior concept of public works.

- Great leaders

Which do... what? A stupid gimmick, instead of just letting me just group units into armies whenever I darn well please. Either way both armies AND leaders existed already in the old Master of Magic. And CTP 2 also had armies.

- Minor wonders

Which are basically a minor hack, and have no signifficant impact on gameplay.

- Colonies

Which don't even work. The first settler that comes anywhere near it, takes control of the colony. For 1 more point of population, I could make a small city there. Which at least does have a radius of control.

- Air Combat (broke right now)

This would be the second thing that actually counts as a notable change... if it actually worked. But it doesn't, so...

- Civ unique abilities

Which existed already in Alpha Centauri. And in Master of Orion. And in Master of Magic. And even in the old Colonization. Gee, that's sooo NEW. Not.

[Moraelin]

Originally posted by Ralf

More then 95% of the SMAC-code was trashed, and completely replaced by new code. This as been confirmed. So much for "transplanted" AC game engine.

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... dunno, maybe it's not fish after all.

I don't care if they rewrote the code just for the heck of it. Rewriting perfectly working code just for the heck of it, and only ending up with new bugs is just bad practice. It doesn't make a new game, if in the end it does the exact same thing.

So I don't know and I don't care how many lines of code were changed just because the previous guy never put comments in it, and the new guy thought it's more macho to re-write than to maintain. I only care whether it actually works differently, or not. And from where I stand, it doesn't.

[CB2034]

Patches and marriage... what great symbolism.
Never would have thought about it myself.
that was too funny, except i went through a lot of beta testing (dating) before i released the finished product (marriage). It helped to make sure the produce lasted.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Moraelin
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... dunno, maybe it's not fish after all.

Look, Moraelin. The guys who designed "Half-life" made a very successful game. But they couldnt go on from there and design "Half-life so-and-so", and have it all look & play something like "Quake III". No developer can do such drastic radical changes to a famous sequel - then still have it all published as the same classic title, with only an updated roman version-number added.

If they netherteless release such a game, they must release that new game under a different title then "Half-life so-and-so". Otherwise many old fans gonna get confused and rather angry.
Just look how CTP-buyers reacted then they found out that CTP - despite its Civilization head title - had nothing to do whatsoever with the original Civ-2 game (except of belonging to the same genre, of course). That reaction did what it did to CTP-2:s bad sales-figures, over 2+ years later.

I believe that what you really wanted wasnt a Civilization III update at all, Moraelin. You wanted something just as radically different, as CTP/CTP-2 was compared to CIV-1 & 2. The same type of turnbased empire-building game, yes - but radically different then perhaps both those games.
The problem is that such a game could never be released as "Civilization III". Firaxis would have been forced to release that game under a different title altogether, dont you see?

[Bubba_B]

Originally posted by Moraelin

Well, ok. THIS hack is actually the only one which actually makes a difference in gameplay.

Sid Meier's Colonization already had those, a long long time ago. CTP2 had those, too.

Just a variant of resources. CTP2 had trading already.

Units always needed support. That just got moved from city level to global level. Same as CTP2 already had.

That, I'm pretty sure existed already in Civ 2. Only again, it got moved to a global scale.

Which is a minor tweak.

That existed already in Alpha Centauri, MOO, and a few others. And in CTP2.

Existed already in AC, if my memory doesn't fail me. And I seem to remember some kind of engineer unit in Master of Magic, too. And CTP2 had the vastly superior concept of public works.

Which do... what? A stupid gimmick, instead of just letting me just group units into armies whenever I darn well please. Either way both armies AND leaders existed already in the old Master of Magic. And CTP 2 also had armies.

Which are basically a minor hack, and have no signifficant impact on gameplay.

Which don't even work. The first settler that comes anywhere near it, takes control of the colony. For 1 more point of population, I could make a small city there. Which at least does have a radius of control.

This would be the second thing that actually counts as a notable change... if it actually worked. But it doesn't, so...

Which existed already in Alpha Centauri. And in Master of Orion. And in Master of Magic. And even in the old Colonization. Gee, that's sooo NEW. Not.

Thanks for backing my point up. I never said Civ3 was 100% original. It took alot of good concepts from other good Civ style games and put into one fun package. (Stacked movement would have been nice)

My point was Civ3 is much bigger step than Civ2 was over Civ.

P.S. Colonies do work on huge maps with a small number of Civs, but are usless in smaller maps or maps with a lot of Civs.