Civ3 is not perfect, but it sure is fun.

HalfLotus · December 1, 2001, 14:44

I really enjoy playing civ3. It is because of this fun that I can tolerate a few bugs, a few mistakes by Firaxis, and bad PR from Infogrames.

Every game I play has a unique situation. Be it a resource thing, a mutual protection thing, a diplomatic thing or whatever. There will always be a moment or two of intense strategy and uncertainty that has built up over thousands of years (or many hours in my case). That is what civing is all about. There are many new types of situations that occur in Civ3 that were not possible in previous civ games. Namely resource and culture circumstances, but also the myriad of diplomatic options that are possible. The situations draw me in, and keep me thinking for quite awhile without even taking my turn. How many games are so fun when you're just poring over your cities, terrain, and units? I don't own any others.

I read the -stories- forum more often than most, and people write wonderful accounts of similar intense games. I won't go into the stories of my games, or the finer points of Civ3 that I like or dislike. Suffice it to say that I have a great time playing Civ3 every day. Congratulations on making an endlessly fun and replayable game Firaxis.

Rasputin · December 1, 2001, 14:56

it is defiantly fun, i jsut wish it had MP !!!!

Adagio · December 2, 2001, 08:49

Quote:

Originally posted by HalfLotus
Civ3 is not perfect, but it sure is fun.

You got that right, 2 bad it seems like most others inhere can't have fun with a game that contains more than one bug

GodSpawn · December 2, 2001, 09:11

Things will change over the next month or so. People who don't like it will drift away (after venting some spleen), leaving mostly people who like it. At least, I hope so.

Ok, everyone is entitled to express their opinion, but it does get just a tiny bit boring...

Yoleus · December 2, 2001, 09:22

The games is probably much fun, I agree.

HalfLotus, did you play any other civ game? IMHO CivIII fails just when compared to the other civ titles (my favorite now being SMAC) on topics such as combat, social engineering, lack of features (most of strategy/tactical game developers sell full games, with MP and scenario capabilities: StarCraft, or even SMAC, came out complete - with bugs, but COMPLETE).
Gameplay opinions are up to personal taste, anyway I did expect
CivIII to take a step from the micromanagement hell of (ALL) the previous civ games (maybe except MoO I). But it did not (stacks? public works instead of swarms of workers? Nope).

As you could tell me, I was expecting "too much". Maybe. maybe not. If MoOIII will be half of what Quicksilver promises, then my expectations will be even low. I am shifting my attention on that title, and (as I did with CivIII) I will accurately wait to buy it until I will be sure it is worth my money. I think now CivIII isn't: I prefer to play SMAC these days.

Matte979 · December 2, 2001, 12:30

Its fun and diffrent each time you play and of course very addicting. I am one of those that don't understand the people here that can't have fun playing it. I would like a patch but still the current version is fun.

/Mathias

Moraelin · December 2, 2001, 12:37

Precisely my point, Yoleus. It's not that Civ 3 is bad, or anything. It's that it's just SMAC with the old Civ 2 tech tree transplanted on it. Both SMAC and Civ 2 were GREAT games, no doubt, so the result couldn't be bad as such.

BUT... I've already paid for SMAC and Civ 2 once. (And for MOO, Colonization, MOM and a bunch of others.) I expected Civ 3 to actually be a NEW game, not a couple of minor tweaks to an old game. There was so much room for trying new stuff, but noone actually bothered.

Or if at least they had transplanted ALL the good stuff from the other Civ games, I still wouldn't have minded too much. I.e., the detailed specialization and dealing with native tribes from Colonization, the tactical turn based combat of armies from Master of Magic, etc, etc, etc. THEN, ok, it still wouldn't have anything new, but as a whole it would be a huge leap ahead of any of the other games. But even that's not the case.

narmox · December 2, 2001, 13:40

Quote:

Originally posted by GodSpawn
Things will change over the next month or so. People who don't like it will drift away (after venting some spleen), leaving mostly people who like it. At least, I hope so.

Ok, everyone is entitled to express their opinion, but it does get just a tiny bit boring...

just wait till civIII is released on Mac.... maybe we'll get less cause they'll have the patch included, but still...

FALVES · December 2, 2001, 13:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Moraelin
It's that it's just SMAC with the old Civ 2 tech tree transplanted on it.

That is SO reducing. I don't understand how can somewone say that about Civ III after playing it (and playing it not just for a couple of hours).

As somewone allready said, "Civ3" IS a very good game.

"Civ3" IS NOT "Civ2 + Extras" it is a game in its very own right!

Father Beast · December 2, 2001, 21:40

OK, This game is awesome. I mean some things still tick me off, like not being notified when my cities are in disorder, and lack of civilopedia links in crucial places, and a couple of other things.

BUT.

it has kept me glued to the screen more than any other civ game has. and as I said in my review, it makes civ2 look like the wimpy version of itself (except for the high council and wonder movies)

Long Live CIV3!!!