 |
|
SoHappy
|
|
Well played and getting tired of CivIII, waiting for patch and hoping will make it last a little longer.
I am now missing SMAC and hoping that the next project of Firaxis will be SMAC II as for me SMAC is better then CivIII as lets face it had better diplomacy, better units, prototypes, terrain elevation, factions .... the list goes on ... Civ is tired bring on SMAC II
|
|
| |
|
|
|
d_dudy
|
|
i don't see how they could improve smac that much. plus, they wouldn't be able to add enough good things to justify what would basically be a remake (like civ2) and it's not on a subject as great as civ (human history)
i'm doubting smac2 will be firaxis' next big thing. but hopefully dinos won't be
colinisation 2...that would be cool
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Simpleton
I thought most people hated SMAC because of the substandard AI, strange techs, strange wonders and non-intuitive improvements. Before Civ3 was released this is what I read most about SMAC. Why the sudden change? |
It's something new to complain about.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Herder
|
|
If anyone is interested in Tactical level WWII combat this is a good game:
http://www.battlefront.com/
It isn't a big company but it has a huge following of die hard wargamers (over 125,000 posts in the forum).
You can mod this game like crazy, multiplay, super realism.
Just FYI for any of you players that are into historical recreations.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Antonin
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Simpleton
I thought most people hated SMAC because of the substandard AI, strange techs, strange wonders and non-intuitive improvements. Before Civ3 was released this is what I read most about SMAC. Why the sudden change?
PS: I personally liked SMAC. However, as of now I still prefer Civ3. |
Why the sudden change? Because people like to complain. When/if SMAC 2 comes out, they will complain that it's either
1) not enough like SMAC 1 or
2) too different from SMAC 1
Me, I love SMAC and still play it often.
I think the problem with the whiners is that they have evolved (or devolved - take your pick) away from the turn-based empire-building strategy genre. They should move on to something that interests them.
I've bought numerous game that I haven't liked. Some of them I had very high hopes for.
What I then do is put the game aside or sell it, and move on to something else. If the game has a feature that I think makes it unplayable, I write to the designers and tell them, in a respectful tone, why I don't like their game. I don't spam fan forums with endless rants about how the game "sucks" or is "broken" just because it doesn't have my own little wish-list of features.
The Internet brings out the worst in people. It enables anyone to say whatever they want in near-anonymity, with no need to justify what they say or suffer any consequenses for rudeness.
It's pretty sad.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
greggbert
|
|
Seattle WA
Nov 2001
time: 21:16
|
|
They could build it as an add on to Civ III, with future techs so that your starship can colonize the planet and you can run both empires at once! The tech tree would just continue on at modern age, and you could bring reinforcements, fungus, strange luxuries, etc... back and forth! Hell even the 2 alien crossfire dudes could do orbital bombardment or land!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2001 06:39
I am not saying CivIII is a bad game, hell I bought it and play it! but just frustrating that after coming up with great ideas in SMAC they dont use some of them to make CivIII even better and really make it CivIII not CivII1/2 .... just seems they were a little lazy 
|