|
Wise Ass
|
|
Your Mom's House... Why?
Aug 2001
time: 00:31
|
|
I remember a thread a while back that had a bunch of posts from amazon, I believe they were of Civ III. I was looking around at EB games and found that they already have 2 pages worth of people who "reviewed" the game.
Let's look at what some of them had to say...
"COMPLETELY THE ABSOLUTE BEST!!!
Best PC strategy game ever made to date? Civilization 3. When Civilization 4 is released, it will be the new best PC strategy game ever created. There will never be a better strategy game then Civilization. Completely, absolutely, positively the single best no matter what anyone else would ever say. Nothing even compares to the depth, strategy, experience and AI of this series. So its been over 10 years now, and you won't find a better PC strategy game. I hope to be playing Civ 8 when I am 50 years old. "
This makes him about 7 now, considering his ability to reason and his acceptance to the views of others, but who am I to argue with him.
"BEST GAME EVER
I dont know what the other people are talking about......CIV 3 was absolutely the best game i have ever played. When I go to play a game I still reach for the Civ 3, even though it is like 2.5 years old or something. I have plenty of more recent Strategy Games, but this tops them all by far. If Civ 3 can still compete with todays games and, in my opinion, beat them, then Civ 4 should keep me busy for the next 30 or so years or at least until Civ 5 comes out(fingers crossed). "
30 years, is this guy serious? I like the game as much as the next guy, but I don't think I will be entertained by Civ IV in 30 years.
from the negativity palace-
"GOING TO HAVE TO EARN MY TRUST BACK.
After the huge letdown that was Civilization 3 it will take quite an achievement on the developer's part to make me run out and blow my cash on this game. The biggest problems with Civ 3 were the lack of viable winning strategies (every game was a race for land from the get go), AI opponents that conspired against you regularly, unit balance issues and the fact that it took two expansions to finally "complete" Civilization 3 as a product. I'm hoping for a return to some of Civ 2's strengths (AI's that turned against eachother, good historic map games with historically accurate starting locations) with the features included in 3's expansions as part of the retail release version of Civ 4. "
Not only has he not seen a preview, he didn't check poly for Civ III strategies.
This one is going to be really disappointed....
"CIV 3 WAS AWESOME....
Civilization 3 was awesome, so how could Civ 4 be a let down?? I mean, I found myself playing the first Civilization for the longest time, 5 or 6 years after it came out in the 90's. The game is addicting. Its great. Civ. 4 will have new leaders, troops, units, and civ's to use. Can't wait for June 1st!"
Hope he isn't let down by the slight delay in his plans.
"HAVE HIGH HOPES.
The previous civilization was good and I have high expectations for the new game. I hope that they take some of the units, technologies and maybe a civ from the conquests. Also the some conquests lacked in some areas. For example you could've seperated the Celts in the Middle Ages conquest and had the Scots and Irish (It would have been more fun). Also In the Rise of Rome Conquest you could have had the Britons occupy England instead of the Celts. Also put the Spanish in Spain, someone needs to occupy it in the Rise of Rome conquest. Here are some of my ideas for new civs; the Nubians, Scots, Assyrians, Normans, the Sioux tribe and the Mexicans (they had an OK nation before the US got there). Also the civs could have more than one unique unit if there was another really good unit that isn't its unique unit. For example, the US could have the G.I. and the F-15. It would make the game a bit more fun. "
I wonder where this guy was while the list was being created 
There are 18 in all they were pretty funny to see the extremes of people who loved civ III and are completely oblivious to its short comings. I enjoyed the game, but the best ever is a bit of a stretch.
|
06-09-2005 07:30
|