Civ3, Value for money ?

[The Viceroy]

Do you think the game you have purchased was value for that money , as the game currently is .. V1.16f

In the UK I payed £35, and although there are hoped for improvements .. im pretty much happy with what Ive got.

As Ive read plenty of posts from people who love/like/don't care/dislike/hate civ3 .. I thought it would be interesting to see exactly how many feel which way ..

[Velociryx]

I'm happy with what I got. If I divide the cost of the LE by the number of hours I spent playing the game, I got quite a lot of entertainment bang for my buck.

However, the entertainment bang for my buck that I got is nowhere close to the value for Civ2/SMAC, which is, IMO, why there are so many people griping about the game. As a successor to an astonishingly popular series (arguably, one of the finest franchises in the entire gaming industry), Civ3 just doesn't live up to its predecessor games.

Again, I'm hopeful that it will, in the end, but based on the 1.16f patch, that's where my vote has to be cast.

-=Vel=-

[Heliodorus]

Oh, yes, absolutely, I got my money's worth.
More than I did out of CTP2, actually, even though I think of CTP2 as a better iteration of empire building (the AI sucked).
I have my disappointments, though. but those are well documented.

[Asmodean]

The absence of wonder movies, and the lack of a mini-map in the editor, make it impossible for me to vote "more than I expected". Bot other than that, I think CivIII is a great game. I've got no issues with this game, as far as gameplay is concerned.

Asmodean

[cassembler]

I want to find the one guy who votes "more than I expected" The editor... It's just so... not-quite-there-yet.
Anyway, maybe a sister poll about how optimistic players are about how good Civ3 WILL be...

I for one have faith and have created a cool map to playtest until my salivating glands are tamed with more meat...

[ColdWizard]

so far i've not gotten my money's worth, but i've also not played the patched version yet. Maybe i'll start playing again after i finish BG2

[BanastreTa]

Sure, from a sheer, mathematic "dollars per hour" standpoint, it's been a good value. I plopped down my 40 bucks, and I've gotten a pretty good hourly rate on entertainment.

I am interested to hear from anybody that voted in the "more than expected" category, though. One plausible reason is that they haven't played the previous Civ games very much--I think that if this was my "cold" introduction to the Civ series, I may well have fallen into that category.

BT

[Padma]

Sure, I've definitely gotten my 40 bucks worth of entertainment out of it. But that's about it. Sure, I love the game, and it's a noticeable improvement over Civ II and CTP, but it's still not quite as good as I expected.

Oh, well. I'll just keep hoping another patch will fix the things I want!

[Dis]

well it depends on how I or others feel what value for money is. I actually voted so-so, but I could have bumped it up a notch.

I played about 5 complete games and 1 partial game. I think I might be done with it. I think I played about 4 weekends (not during my work week).

I am happy that I got some play out of it. I only played games like Star Wars rebellion 15 minutes before I realized that game sucked . Black and White I only played 1 day. CTP2 I also only played 1 day. SMAC I played for about 3 or 4 months fairly solidly.

but I'll stick with the middle vote of so-so. I like to get 2 months use out of a game. Although I might eventually get that. If I see some really good mods out there, or a patch changes things, I may give it another whirl. I am looking forward to what Vel does with the game. Because I think my play style is similar to his. And he is very knowlegable about the the genre.

[Kassiopeia]

Did I get my money's worth? Yes. I have bought much worse games for a heftier price.

But not compared to Civ2 or SMAC, since I bought them so much after they were published that the added cost of the latter two games was mere fifty percent of what I paid for Civ3.