 |
| |
|
|
Zylka
|
|
Perhaps I was expecting a patch on civ2? This is not at all enjoyable, and the complaints far outweigh the compliments.
-No multiplayer
-Lack of Windows format, and alt+tab does not minimize the game
-Majority of development was obviously spent on trite, ridiculous, and useless 3-d animations which most definately do not "enhance my civilization experience"
-ALL basic toolbar options from civ2 dropped, you don't even have a choice to drop the retarded throne room garbage
-Terrain graphics were not in any way focused on realism:
--Those are supposed to be mountains?!
--"Water" looks like some ice-jade glaze, brighter than any tropical beaches in the world
--Ultra close up format, the hexes are WAY too big. The inability to zoom out - again another step towards AOEizing the series. It does not give that zoomed out, hollistic feel of looking at a world map and controlling an empire...
I just can't put in to words or identify what else is wrong with this game, but will add to the list as time goes by. Will you join me? 
In the end, this game is simply not part of the civilization series; it is not a grand step up as 2 was from the original. This is an overhall, a complete re-design focused on popular examples. It is closer to CTP or AOE than it is its predecessor. Core themes from the first two should have been kept, expanded and specified, but we recieved more outright changes than improvements. The key of development was to deny the abstract principles that made the first two so functional, so iconographically simple, so enjoyable. It feels like a set path, rather than a core of abstracts on which we choose our own...
Firaxis did pretty well in the PR department publicising "radical new features" that would appeal to the masses. Firaxis did pretty well in the marketing department as well, which probably led them to accept the fact that the market for a real civ3 was not large enough to justify the required development. How dirty and passe I feel in saying that this was about the money - that this was all about capturing a new audience in imitating recent successes, and raping the old with the power a civ3 logo exerts.
With that said, Sid has lost whatever integrity a lot of you argued he had and would display. He did not stick to and expand on the theme he so brilliantly dreamed up years ago, as if to deny the fact that it was ever effective. Ultimately, I question whether or not he actually had anything to do with this game. Forget it... Cheers, and back to playing CTP/AOE 3 in a civ vain.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
I have, and become more dissapointed as the hours add up. To each his own?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
The game itself is not constructed around a windows mode. That was ssshhhharp, this uber sucks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
Perhaps we're playing a different game, because mine most definately does not have the above options you've mentioned. And let's not kid ourselves, aside from the horrible display configuration, this game lacks in solid abstracts and realistic mechanics. It does not have the magic one and two did, only the greats of multiplayer (Kaak, Strategicking, Sean, Woke, Markus etc. etc.) who know this game inside out will ever understand that.
BOOOO-URNS on Sid!!!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Ever try reading the manual? Because you are lazy, I'll tell you. Hit 'Z'. |
Thanks, and I agree, I am lazy. My opinnion of this game has now gone from 80% sucky to 75%; let's not forget all of the other travesties that can not be changed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sn00py
|
 |
From New Zealand
Aug 2001
time: 13:15
|
|
Zylka, from what I know, you seem to be a graphic artist, and as a graphic artist myself, I can certainly understand your gripes against Civ3. I've learnt that Civ3 is not about it's graphics. Yes, you and I and others would love beautiful and well designed interface graphics (coz that's what you and I specialize in), but it's just not what the general amount of civers care for, they care about trade, diplomacy and war.
With our artistic skills, you and I can make it look good the way we'd want it, and others will like it too. But it's just not on their priority.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ozymandous
|
 |
Atlanta, GA
Aug 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zylka
Perhaps we're playing a different game, because mine most definately does not have the above options you've mentioned. And let's not kid ourselves, aside from the horrible display configuration, this game lacks in solid abstracts and realistic mechanics. It does not have the magic one and two did, only the greats of multiplayer (Kaak, Strategicking, Sean, Woke, Markus etc. etc.) who know this game inside out will ever understand that.
BOOOO-URNS on Sid!!! |
So... What "solid abstracts and realistic machanics" does the game lack?
Provide examples other than general whines and complaints.
What SPECIFIC things, other than the pastel graphics do you have a problem with?
It's amusing that people who like the game seem to be able to point out specifric good things, but the people who complain can only post broad generalizations.
THis is Civ3, not Civ 2.1, and thank god for that! If Firaxis had tried to foist off another clone (ala Civ2 vs. Civ1) with simply better graphics there would have been riots in the streets!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
31-10-2001 11:45
.
|