Why Civ2 & Not SMAC, Civ3 or EU?

MattyBoy · July 16, 2002, 17:50

I notice that many old names are still playing Civ2 MP and still frequenting the Civ2 forums. I moved on to SMAC pretty happily, but have finally lost interest in both Civ2 and SMAC (after many playing hours).

I hear too much bad stuff about Civ3 to start that and am not sure whether to start up an EU addiction. Do any of you Civ2 folks think I am missing much?

To rephrase, are any Civ2ers also happy with Civ3 or have enjoyed EU? I presume that you have given these or SMAC a decent try since they came out?

Jawn Henry · July 16, 2002, 23:17

I originally typed this on the Civ 3 forum. Fits perfectly here:

I was really disappointed with Civ 3 when i got it. I still have a gripe or 2 about it that won't likely change. The 1st time i played, i had a rather hard time winning at an easy level (1st or second, don't remember), but eventually, i did win. When i finished the game, i said: "YUCK!! I don't like this." and put the CD away. I almost took it off my machine, but then i relented. "Ya never know, maybe one day..." i thought.

And i let it sit there.

And waited. Played many other games.

But my Civ 3 was still there.

Then, just this week, i decided to give it a run. But with a different attitude. You see, the problem (as i suspect is with most disenchanted people) was my expectations vis-a-vis the game. "Was this not Civ 3 ?? Why is it so different? It doesn't work right!" SMAC was quite different, but i liked it. I was expecting different. While Civ3 may not be as different to Civ2 (as SMAC was), there are significant changes. If it was called, say "Civilization: World Domination", or something, i would have expected different, just like i expect Civ:CTP to be quite different (no, i havent seen it, so i don't know if it really is different). But to call Civ3 something else, well i imagine it would lose a certain amount of marketability.
All this to say Civ 3 didn't meet my expectations, which irked me a bit. I knew it was a good game, just not what i wanted.

Last week when i played, i treated it like a whole new game, similar to Civ2, but still different. It's a new game to learn. Know what? It's fun. I'm getting to appreciate it. Now i have 2 "world games": Civ2 and Civ3. And yes, i will play both.

If you going to play Civ3 with the attitude that it's an improved Civ2, you will likely be dissappointed. (one or 2 "s"es in that??) But if you view it as a whole new game, chances are, it'll be fun.

That's my 2 cents (3.5 Canadian

.)

And i still play Civ2. And Panzer General 2, and Pacific General... all (including Civ3) when i have time, of course!

JH

Jawn Henry · July 16, 2002, 23:20

BTW, getting Civ2: ToT adds a fresh look and perspective on the game, with multi-map capability...

JH

MattyBoy · July 16, 2002, 23:38

Thanks for the response, Jawn.
I'm willing to treat it as a new game and would actually enjoy seeing a new balance to a Civ game. Maybe I'll just pick it up and try it when I have more time.

Smash · July 18, 2002, 12:44

Nah just forget it.Civ3 is one of those games you play to see the new stuff.Once you've seen it....there is no need to see it again.....kinda like the wonder movies of Civ2 cept you turn the whole game off.

Scouse Gits · July 18, 2002, 13:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Smash
Nah just forget it.Civ3 is one of those games you play to see the new stuff.Once you've seen it....there is no need to see it again.....kinda like the wonder movies of Civ2 cept you turn the whole game off.

Brilliant...that quote should be your signature

---------------------

SG(2)

Rasbelin · July 18, 2002, 15:57

Quote:

Originally posted by MattyBoy

Do any of you Civ2 folks think I am missing much?

At least I can't say you would be retarded just because you don't play Civ III, but at least you're missing quite many new and improved features (do I really have to list all of them? that would take some time, so I'll leave it).

Quote:

To rephrase, are any Civ2ers also happy with Civ3 or have enjoyed EU? I presume that you have given these or SMAC a decent try since they came out?

I'm pleased with both Civ II and III ( OT: why didn't you ask if folks are pleased with Civ I, if you compare these two?

). I don't know what to say about my civing habits, but let's just say that everything named Civ and not made by Activision goes for me.

MattyBoy · July 18, 2002, 21:21

How could you not be pleased with Civ I?
Besides minor bugs it was awesome.

Ecthy · July 18, 2002, 21:23

I play all of the games mentioned in the thread title.

Rasbelin · July 18, 2002, 21:49

Quote:

Originally posted by MattyBoy
How could you not be pleased with Civ I?
Besides minor bugs it was awesome.

Me? Not playing Civ?

*Rasbelin gets a stroke*

Don't even ask...

Yes, I do, or actually did play the original Civ. And it was truly awesome. And it's still captivating. One more turn, but just one more...

MattyBoy · July 18, 2002, 22:35

An admirable use of your time, as long as your are playing at your best every turn.

Jac de Molay · July 19, 2002, 11:28

Been playing more civ2 and smac that civ III, which is just too slow to play on my clunker computer.

Dave

Juggler · July 19, 2002, 14:16

Quote:

Been playing more civ2 and smac that civ III, which is just too slow to play on my clunker computer.

Same here. I still keep playing Civ2 (mostly scenarios) and my computer is so old it should run on gas or wood (so no Civ3 for me

).

Marquis de Sodaq · July 19, 2002, 15:41

CivII has stood against time - it is endlessly alterable, and thus can always be made fresh. As most of the seasoned players here, I have at times taken months off from playing it. But it is always fun to pick up again, in particular to play scenarios and succession games.

Civ3 is fun, but not addictive in the way CivII is. There are cool new features, but some of the key 'civ' selling points fall short. If you go into it expecting an improvement over CivII, you would be disappointed. If you approach it as a different game in the same genre, you may find it enjoyable.

War4ever · July 19, 2002, 17:57

civ1 was the first real game that kept me up 24/7
civ2 did the same, even more so when i multiplay
civ3 once i beat it on deity and learned a few of the tricks..i realized that this game grabbed me the way the CTP series did.....NOT AT ALL
SMAC i like, but way too slow for MP which limits its staying power
EU1/2 both are great games, complex, but even they don't grab me the way civ2 does...but i enjoy them.

In a nutshell, for SP purposes only, civ1 blows all the games away.....civ2 b/c of scenarios, and more importantly MP is IMO the best gaming experience for me that is out there.

Being burned by Co.'s in the past (activision) makes me sour on buying new games.....

if i truly must own it, i will dl it first, and then buy it....

civ1/2 are the only games i have ever felt i got my monies worth ....

Jac de Molay · July 21, 2002, 08:37

Quote:

civ1/2 are the only games i have ever felt i got my monies worth ....

Hey don't leave Smac out

All kidding aside, I still prefer civ 2 for MP action. I'll hold off on Civ 3: PTW to see how this aspect of the game pans out.

Dave

MattyBoy · July 21, 2002, 20:02

Thanks for the feedback folks.
I think I will reinstall Civ II before I buy Civ III

Rasbelin · July 22, 2002, 07:44

Jawn Henry · July 23, 2002, 13:17

Quote:

Originally posted by MattyBoy
Thanks for the feedback folks.
I think I will reinstall Civ II before I buy Civ III

Of course, you're on the Civ2 forum. Everyone will pull for "their" product. Ask the same question on the Civ3 forum, and you might leave convinced to buy Civ3.

It all depends on attitude and expectations. I have both games and i find i'm in a win-win situation. I enjoy Civ2 for all the scenarios you can play/build with it, and it's scripted events, but i also like Civ3 for it's different approach to the game. It's fun to have a change of pace now and then.

I don't think you should avoid Civ3, nor should you dump Civ2 - they're sufficiently different to keep them both, IMHO.

JH

geofelt · July 24, 2002, 00:07

I play civII and civIII. I think civII is a better game, but there are some nice features in civIII. Pardon my ignorance, but what game is EU?

Rasbelin · July 24, 2002, 11:33

Universal Yurop, or perhaps better known as Europa Universalis. A sequel, Europa Universalis II, is also available.

http://www.europa-universalis.com

MattyBoy · July 24, 2002, 23:19

Good point, JH.
I did intentionally post this on Civ2 rather than Civ3, where they might not see the forest for the trees.

Jawn Henry · July 28, 2002, 14:31

If you're really unsure, the best thing to do, might be to just wait a bit, and see if you can get a Civ3 on eBay for less expensive.

JH

Apocalypse · July 28, 2002, 16:33

I play Civ2 MP still to get an multiplayer civilization fix. SMAC MP is fine, but it isn't Civilization. EU would be nice, but that is pretty hard to set up, not to mention my modem sucks.

St Leo · August 14, 2002, 05:25

I play EU2. I design for Civ2. Meh.

Julius Brenzaida · August 16, 2002, 17:12

Civ2 is (with chess) the most addictive game ever

I bet that in 50 years, I am still alive, I shall still play it

MattyBoy · August 29, 2002, 22:10

Yes, chess is fascinating, but bad for your mental health. I cannot stand the clash of egos. I can see that it has turned your smiley insane.

Gelvan · August 30, 2002, 04:38

I'm with Jawn Henry, that in the beginning I just hated Civ3 - I expected much more invention, I hoped for a game which has all the abbilities of ToT and even more! This wasn't true. CTP1 had more new features as Civ3 I thought at first.

After playing a bit Wiz8 (which really was good), I returned to Civ3 and found out how interesting resources and culture can be. But before I could get addicted to the game, I became addicted to modding it and was eventually frustrated how complicated this is - even with an editor.

No I'm back to Civ2! After playing Lalande several times I felt the urge to create scenarios again (last time I did this was in the year 96 or something

)- and one thing is for sure, scenario editing is - at the moment! - much more interesting witch Civ2: TOT than it is with Civ3.

BUT, I'm sure in a few years when all bugs have been killed and the final patch is final, when players made utilities and all this stuff, Civ3 will be worth modding.

Regarding (re-)playbility I can only say, that Civ2 keeps me starting it over and over since it came out, and therefore it's clear, that my highest regards go to Civ2. EVERY game is different from the game before and the Science Fiction and Fantasy games that came with ToT (at least after modding it a bit) are a whole new experience.

So my advice is to buy ToT - I think it's available for 10$ or something? And in a year or two Civ3 is worth buying.

mrboo123 · September 8, 2002, 08:56

I play civ2 because I got for chirmas, (yes, they still sell the game) I 1st got in to the game with civ1 (how I miss it) I played that game for over 5 hours (and my 1st time to!) After that I begged by mom to get it like a 5-year old begging to see Barney, Pokemon or some piece of crap.