 |
|
woody
|
|
I bought CIV3 the day it came out. After that, I swore I'd never buy another Firaxis product until it had been out a few months and the bugs were fixed. I never bothered with PTW, due to all the quality complaints.
So, seeing that Conquests has been out for awhile, is it worth buying? I'm not at all interested in multiplayer, and probably will not bother with scenarios. Does it have enough new features to make it a significantly better game than the original CIV3?
Oh, and is it relatively bug-free yet?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
woody
|
|
I didn't get PTW because I'm not interested in multiplayer. (That, and all the bugs.)
I like vanilla Civ3. I'm not interested in the multiplayer or scenario aspects of Conquests.
What new features will be of interest to me in conquests? (Other than new units and civs, which sound interesting but really don't add much to the game.)
For example, I've heard there's a feature called auto-bombard. Is it useful?
What other kinds of improvements to the game have been made? A.I.? Diplomacy? Economic model?
Does the game run well on a low-end system? (As well as vanilla Civ3?)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Krill
|
 |
On a cold wet rock, in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Dec 2003
time: 05:35
|
|
It's not just the new civs, since the new civ traits have altered the game as well. Personally I think that PTW was the same as vanilla, but C3C is a completely new game.
The new features help to keep the micromanagement to a minimum, add more variety, etc
Their is a new corruption model (oh alexman, you explain it, you're better than me at this), and this changes the game slightly, but not much.
The AI and diplo is the same as before, not that difficult, but just as boring.
And if you don't go above standard size maps, this game will run fine on a low end system
Last edited by Krill on 08-05-2004 at 01:37
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proserpine
|
 |
London, UK
May 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by woody
I didn't get PTW because I'm not interested in multiplayer. (That, and all the bugs.)
I like vanilla Civ3. I'm not interested in the multiplayer or scenario aspects of Conquests.
What new features will be of interest to me in conquests? (Other than new units and civs, which sound interesting but really don't add much to the game.)
For example, I've heard there's a feature called auto-bombard. Is it useful?
What other kinds of improvements to the game have been made? A.I.? Diplomacy? Economic model?
Does the game run well on a low-end system? (As well as vanilla Civ3?) |
Well they fixed most of the bugs (then got new ones in a patch, then patched to fix those . . . you know how it goes).
Seriously, C3C is almost the game Civ3 should have been. Some things have been tweaked, there a couple of new governments (Fascism & ?), there are new "civ traits", resources are bit scarcer. I think the AI is much the same. Systemwise, its much of a muchness with Vanilla Civ3. Doesn't sound like much,does it? Trust me, just go get it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
woody
|
|
Hmmm... doesn't sound like much new, but might be worth picking up.
Does it have better editing options? One thing that bugged me about Civ3 is that you couldn't edit the game after you started it.
I like "playing God", and doing things like giving a poor wayward civ some high-tech military equipment. Stuff like that. That was great in Civ2 (via the "cheat" menu).
Is that possible with conquests?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-05-2004 20:42
- it's still worthwhile, and conquests - despite what some might say - counts as a worthy expansion. To be honest, you have to play it to appreciate it 
|