OT - Civ 3 anybody?

Menschenfresser · #1 November 6th, 2001, 04:37 PM

Heya,
Just fired up Civ 3 Last night for the first time. I love the look and feel of it so far. I can see some differences, but I can also see a lot of similarities to 2.

You can really have a crowded world now that you can add up to something like 15 computer civs (not sure of the exact number).

After 2 hours of playing I can tell, it has no chance of knocking SE4 out of most played.
My biggest gripe with the Civ series has always been tech. Before 3, the tree was too narrow, and now, I am pretty sure the tree has been choked down, so that it expands and contracts as you progress through the different eras.

It's too early to give a final reading though. Just want to know what you think.

mac5732 · #2 November 6th, 2001, 04:52 PM

I've been thinking of buying it, but I've heard mixed reviews, I have both 1&2 and liked them both, do you tk 3 is worth getting
I'll keep cking this post for other reviews before I decide to get it or not.... tks for update on the game

just some ideas mac

Atraikius · #3 November 6th, 2001, 05:11 PM

So far I really like the race specific units, and the addition of resource requirements for producing some units/buildings.

chewy027 · #4 November 6th, 2001, 05:58 PM

got it two days ago and i like it a lot. I'd say buy it if you liked one and two. Gameplay is great. Ai is pretty smart even on easiest level. Tech tree is shrunk a little and there are no more wonder movies. Having a 16 civs in one gane is great. New resource and trade aspect adds a nice component to the game. As well as the culture rating. Makes individual cities more important. All in all much more realistic then the first two, music isn't that bad, graphics are pretty good. I'm gonna go play some more right now

mac5732 · #5 November 6th, 2001, 07:36 PM

Tks Chewy for the input, I was going to get it at first but then started reading some of the reviews both for and against, didn't know what to believe, thought I'd wait and see what those on the forum said before deciding.

just some ideas mac

Menschenfresser · #6 November 6th, 2001, 08:14 PM

I agree, the AI does some pretty cool things. My first game is on the easiest level, with max amount of civs. I started on what seems to be a narrow but long (north to south) continent. Germans to the north, French to the south. Their borders extend across the continent so I cannot expand any further.

I noticed that as I moved fighting units near to another civs borders, they would immediately mass a group of units just inside their border.

And I cannot get a fair trade out of these bastard AIs. They always want about 150% the value of what I am requesting.

Yes, if you still play 2 occasionally, get 3. Think of it as an expensive and worthy upgrade. If you have no real use for 2 anymore, then keep weighing the consequences. It is definitely (so far) not worse than its predecessors...question is, is it better?

chewy027 · #7 November 9th, 2001, 01:30 AM

ok now that i've played a few games i have a better feel for it. along with what i posted before here are some other things. The AI is a lot better than i thought. It expands so fast and builds up real quickly. It uses every diplomatic feature available effectively like making mutual protection pacts and embargoes and trades frequently. Very tough. And thats just on the easiest level. Plus it will build up a large army and attack all out if it declares war on you. You can sometimes catch em off guard but expect a huge retaliatory offensive in return unless of course you have lots of allies to attack simultaneously. Likewise, expect your enemies to grow very quickly as the AI will seek out allies to attack you. Very smart. Again this is all on the easiest level. As of right now my only gripe is that once you get into a game the turns can take a while to process. Of course i have been playing on a huge map with all 16 civs so thats part of the problem.

All in all I say get this game

Atrocities · #8 November 9th, 2001, 03:56 AM

How would you rate the game on a scale of 1 to 10?

Assuming that SEIV is a solid 10

Puke · #9 November 9th, 2001, 04:08 AM

i dont think thats a fair rating system. C3 falls into a brutally over-done genre. it should be measured against games of the same type, such as civ 1, 2, call to power, SMAC, etc, etc, etc, ad nausium. while you can compare features and game play with those other titles, you also begin to realize that the biggest failing of C3, no matter how good it is, is that its basically more of the same.

that entire line needs a genre-breaking title, and they have not had one since the original civ.

in my oppinion, the same is true of RTS games, from dune-2 all the way through C&C-25 (or whatever the hell they are up to now). the 3D space RTS games (homeworld and friends) were neat for a while, until you realize that the gameplay is EXACTLY the same. harvest, build, kill, repeat.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

chewy027 · #10 November 9th, 2001, 07:45 AM

Puke's right, not the same kind of game, but i will say i haven't played se4 the past few days and thats a first in about 5 months

.

It's better than the call to powers. IMO has a better diplomatic model and the AI is a lot smarter. Also it has some cool features like culture, resources, and great leaders (which are hard to come buy). Anyway in this genre i give it a 9.5. Why the .5 lacking you ask. Well as puke said there is a lot of the same, but the aforementioned features make up for that. They probably could have added some more techs and wonders, but then it would have gotten to much like call to power II. Anyone else have an opinion? I've rambled enough