CivIII was designed to look good at first sight - Page 2

DrFell · January 12, 2002, 12:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Surgeon

well find a game you like and PISS OFF.

Ok its rude but seriously this board is FULL of people that just cant stop whining. It's sick! If you dont like it, if its no fun just STOP. Some stores where I live even have a 7 day 'return it if you dont like it' policy.

Phew. I know I'm one of the rare people on these boards that like the game but seriously sometimes things just arent what you expect. GET OVER IT!

Obviously you don't know what it's like to have played and enjoyed a game for years, and then find the latest incarnation is a sick joke. Civ2 multiplay is really the only game that I still play now, basically Civ3 has killed my desire to play TBS games and I can't see it being viable for multiplay, which is the one thing that could save it. The rules are completely unsuitable, and are being further limited by Firaxis to appease the newbies. For example, palace costing 1000 shields? What a joke. The leaders system is a joke too, I think most people are whining because they cannot believe the game could be so bad.

Also, I notice it's generally the more serious players here and the ones who were lucky enough to have played games like civ2 who are complaining about the game. Maybe you should stop 'whining about the whiners', sometimes people don't behave the way you want. GET OVER IT!

kmill25 · January 12, 2002, 13:25

I am no a serious gamer. I may no even be a casual gamer. I bought Civ III because of some high reviews and The fact I got it off EBAY, so I didn't pay retail.

I like the game. It has some issues. All games do. Civ II had issues. Now while I will not enforce my opinion on anyone else view of the game, I have seen many negative views of the game. I belive that on this MB it has no effect on the buying public because I didn't come to the Civ III board until I had already bought the game. I think that your diplease with the game should spred onto Game Spot and other sites that allow reader reviews.

I also have one question? Do you have fun playing the game, because in the end that's all it is. A game for fun

DrFell · January 12, 2002, 13:45

No, right from the start I hated the game. I played it for awhile, but it seemed to be so set on limiting the human and dragging you down to the level of the ai (max tech speed caps? What the hell were they thinking? If that isn't the most blatant limiting of the human I've ever seen...). It's also very slow, there's little point playing the game past the medieval age becuase cavalry is by far the most imbalancing unit in the game (knights are good too). The ai is poor (perhaps good compared to the AI in civ2, nothing compared to even the worst humans I have ever seen without it's deity level cheating), basically I can't play a game that has no multiplayer option and sucks in single play.

Sure Civ2 had issues, but those were more minor and didn't adverely affect gameplay. Civ2 is fundamentally flawed, and the only way I can think for it to be fixed is if Firaxis release a patch which changed almost the entire game. That's not going to happen, this game will, in my opinion and many others, always be nothing compared to Civ2.

Zachriel · January 12, 2002, 15:16

Quote:

Originally posted by number6
"If you are unhappy, then leave". Well I would probably leave if I had not spent $50 on a game that falls way short of my expectations and I was way passed the deadline to get a refund. I am stuck with this game you see. Auctioning on ebay is not an option, because I will take a loss. I have a vested interest and I anxiously await a patch to see if the game will get any better.

Never throw good money after bad. And as time is money, why would you waste more time on Civ3 by hanging out in a Civ3 forum?

I have had many happy hours playing Civ3.

January 12, 2002, 17:14

I do not think it is a waste of time, especially when I see other people voicing similar concerns as my own. As long as people complain I have hope that one day soon the problems will be addressed. If you think the game is fine, oh well I guess you are easily amused. I on the other hand expect a whole lot more than what was released as a $50 game. If the game was just going to be fluff they should have thrown in all kinds of rendered cinemas for wonder movies and a cool ending movie. I could have lived with that I guess. Civ III is worth about $14.99 in it's current state.

Willem · January 12, 2002, 18:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Deornwulf

Why should any dissatisfied person piss off? If a majority of the posters are "whining" about the game and can't seem to stop wouldn't that mean that would mean you are in the minority and should be the person to leave.

However, I don't think you should and neither should the whiners. The purpose of a forum is to have debate and discussion. For it to be interesting, it takes dissenting opinions. If THAT is not want you want to read about then you should question your own motives for posting. What specifically do you like about the game?

Well then, let's have the critics engage in debate and discussion instead of the petty sniping and insults they're engaging in now. I'd welcome the change, instead of reading their constant whining all the time.

CharlesUFarley · January 13, 2002, 01:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

Well then, let's have the critics engage in debate and discussion instead of the petty sniping and insults they're engaging in now. I'd welcome the change, instead of reading their constant whining all the time.

But on the contrary, its all the little boneheads that are trying to supress preference and opinion by calling people "whiners" who seem to have more of a problem with reality and maturity than do the critics. But whats worse than a 'whiner' is someone who 'whines about a whiner' and from where I stand you're whining.

I've been in these posts since the release of Civ3, and I've read both sides of the poll, so far the upset and agressed fans have strong and valid issues with Civ3. Meanwhile people like yourself have nothing better to do but argue with people because they can't stand the bloody game. So instead of being part of the ****ing problem here's a hint, try being part of the solution for now on. And if that's not possible grab some pride while you still can and find something better to do yourself rather than thumb through hate-mail and argue with everyone for having preference and opinion.

Charles.

dungball · January 13, 2002, 16:07

"Don't go for the goodies - go for substance!" -- Lisa Simpson

http://www.europa-universalis.com

Comrade Tribune · January 13, 2002, 19:24

The substance is still somewhat buggy, though.

Otherwise, I agree.

PatMaster · January 14, 2002, 03:39

Quote:

Originally posted by dungball
"Don't go for the goodies - go for substance!" -- Lisa Simpson

http://www.europa-universalis.com

Yeah, I've played both Eu and Civ3, and I must say that Eu is better. I played Eu(1) for more than five months not getting sick of it, while I spent less than five days playing Civ3 not getting sick of it

And btw, I'm getting Eu2 later today from the US

A friend who have been in NYC bought it for me

Willem · January 14, 2002, 08:28

Quote:

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley

But on the contrary, its all the little boneheads that are trying to supress preference and opinion by calling people "whiners" who seem to have more of a problem with reality and maturity than do the critics. But whats worse than a 'whiner' is someone who 'whines about a whiner' and from where I stand you're whining.

I've been in these posts since the release of Civ3, and I've read both sides of the poll, so far the upset and agressed fans have strong and valid issues with Civ3. Meanwhile people like yourself have nothing better to do but argue with people because they can't stand the bloody game. So instead of being part of the ****ing problem here's a hint, try being part of the solution for now on. And if that's not possible grab some pride while you still can and find something better to do yourself rather than thumb through hate-mail and argue with everyone for having preference and opinion.

Charles.

Yeah well, I no longer find it amusing bashing trolls, so I'm not going to bother with a rebuttal. I have to ask myself why I come here, it's certainly not for intelligent conversation.

CharlesUFarley · January 14, 2002, 16:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem
Yeah well, I no longer find it amusing bashing trolls, so I'm not going to bother with a rebuttal. I have to ask myself why I come here, it's certainly not for intelligent conversation.

When you say something that reveals intelligence to me, I would be happy to lead you in that conversation. But I think you illusion yourself to that concept until you give yourself that 'reality check' I meantioned and realize that this isn't the "how many ways we can bend and distort the truth about Civilization III to increase sales" forum. Move along, nothing to see here.. hey! get that guy with the camera, hurry!

Charles.

Libertarian · January 14, 2002, 17:22

Quote:

Yeah well, I no longer find it amusing bashing trolls, so I'm not going to bother with a rebuttal. I have to ask myself why I come here, it's certainly not for intelligent conversation.

What laughable nonsense. It is always the final Hail Mary of a beaten debator: "Hey, you're just stupid!"

Willem · January 14, 2002, 18:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Libertarian

What laughable nonsense. It is always the final Hail Mary of a beaten debator: "Hey, you're just stupid!"

Blah,blah, blah. Wake me up when you have something of importance to say.

CharlesUFarley · January 14, 2002, 18:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

Blah,blah, blah. Wake me up when you have something of importance to say.

No, trust me, your better off asleep you make more sense that way.

Charles.

Libertarian · January 14, 2002, 19:14

Quote:

Wake me up when you have something of importance to say.

If you could cock an ear for just a moment, I think this is pretty important: holding a view that is different from yours does not constitute any lack of intelligence on the part of the person holding the opposing view.

I don't believe that you're stupid just because you like Civ3. My first presumption is that we have different tastes in games. I believe that Civ3 appeals to a particular fan-base. More checkers than chess, if you know what I mean.

Willem · January 14, 2002, 19:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Libertarian

If you could cock an ear for just a moment, I think this is pretty important: holding a view that is different from yours does not constitute any lack of intelligence on the part of the person holding the opposing view.

I don't believe that you're stupid just because you like Civ3. My first presumption is that we have different tastes in games. I believe that Civ3 appeals to a particular fan-base. More checkers than chess, if you know what I mean.

I have no problem with people having a different view to mine, in fact I welcome it. It gives me an opportunity to look at things in a different way, one that I might have overlooked on my own. What I do object to is people who feel the need to resort to insults and petty sniping in order to defend their position. That is not debate, that is not discussion. It is only an attempt to demean their opponents in order to make themselves look good in the eyes of others. Ad hominum arguments serve no purpose on a forum, they merely entrench the opposing views and leave no possiblity of compromise.

Ironikinit · January 14, 2002, 19:50

Maybe a good idea would be if whiners and fanboys (i.e., those who dislike and like the game) could stick to their own threads. That will cut down on the hard feelings. For instance, I'll stop posting in threads like this one if whiners will stay away from newbie questions, strategy threads, and generally favorable review threads. What do you think.

Comrade Tribune · January 14, 2002, 20:14

As far as I am concerned, you can post as much as you want in this thread. If nothing else, you will keep it on top.

Seriously: As CivIII Cheerleaders go, you are one of the least annoying; so be my guest.

CharlesUFarley · January 14, 2002, 23:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironikinit
Maybe a good idea would be if whiners and fanboys (i.e., those who dislike and like the game) could stick to their own threads. That will cut down on the hard feelings. For instance, I'll stop posting in threads like this one if whiners will stay away from newbie questions, strategy threads, and generally favorable review threads. What do you think.

First of all the term "whiners" comes from a childish name-calling category of people who can't stand criticism. And second, why should anyone leave? If you don't like it, don't read it!

Charles.

BanastreTa · January 15, 2002, 01:46

Charles,

You are correct in identifying that the term "whiner" is a rather childish name-calling response that usually comes from a select group of people.

I submit that the term "fanboy," however, is no different. This is also a childish name-calling response that usually comes from a select group of people. It is but the flip side of the same coin.

I think discussion would be more fruitful for all involved if participants could eschew the gratuitous name-calling. Otherwise, the "debate" hearkens back to the intellectual level of playground disputes.

Can't we all just get along?

BT

CharlesUFarley · January 15, 2002, 06:46

Quote:

Originally posted by BanastreTa
Charles,
I submit that the term "fanboy," however, is no different. This is also a childish name-calling response that usually comes from It is but the flip side of the same coin.

Wrong.

Fanboy: "Fan" to cheer or admire something, "Boy" pertaining to the individual's sex.

Whiner: "Whine" to cry, sob or complain in a childlike manner. "Whiner" to cry or sob constantly for personal gain.

There is a BIG difference.

But I do agree, name-calling of any sort ruins any progressive constructive discussion, so put me down for the vote against name calling and childish behavour.

Charles.

Willem · January 15, 2002, 13:30

Quote:

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley

Wrong.

Fanboy: "Fan" to cheer or admire something, "Boy" pertaining to the individual's sex.

Whiner: "Whine" to cry, sob or complain in a childlike manner. "Whiner" to cry or sob constantly for personal gain.

There is a BIG difference.

But I do agree, name-calling of any sort ruins any progressive constructive discussion, so put me down for the vote against name calling and childish behavour.

Charles.

Well nice to see we can actually agree on something. And thanks for slamming me BTW, you made me realize that I was starting to sound just like the critics. Heaven forbid!

Pilfur · January 15, 2002, 14:34

Simple solution to all of this. Put Civ3 away and pull out a copy of Colonization. You'll enjoy it. Why they never made a sequal to this Civ cousin (also created by Sid) I just can't comprehend. I still have it on my hard drive and still play it frequently. Its tiny compared to the games of today but better styled than civ 1 and just as addictive as civ2.

Lee Johnson · January 15, 2002, 15:38

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Colonization! was mostly Brian Reynolds' baby.

dungball · January 16, 2002, 23:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Pilfur
Simple solution to all of this. Put Civ3 away and pull out a copy of Colonization. You'll enjoy it. Why they never made a sequal to this Civ cousin (also created by Sid) I just can't comprehend. I still have it on my hard drive and still play it frequently. Its tiny compared to the games of today but better styled than civ 1 and just as addictive as civ2.

Agree! I rate it above civ too, and also STILL has it on my HD. But now since the phenomena of Europa Universalis I & II ...it mostly collects d...