 |
|
|
This thread is a worthy successor to my "Is CTP the worst game of all time" thread.
[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited December 08, 1999).]
|
|
| |
|
|
Steen
|
|
Sweden
Jan 1970
time: 05:12
|
|
1. Best Civ game?
CTP is the best Civ game IMHO though SMAC is great too. I have played Civ, Civ2, SMAC, CTP and Master of Magic(A great fantasy style Civ game).
2. Best TBS?
Now this is harder? I have played hundreds of them the past 18 years and I won't even try to rank them as many of them is greater than the others in some way. But I would like to mention games like Battle Isle 3 and EFS(Emperor of the Fading Suns).
Some SMAC vs CTP comparison:
Graphics: I would't care at all. I play for the challange not the eyecandy. It could all be made up in ASCII codes with signs running across the screens for all that I care. Sure it is fun to play with good looking graphics but if it has been to the cost of gameplay it is just sad.
Diplomacy: SMAC diplomacy is just wonderful compared to CTP and Civ2.
Borders: Not much to compare. SMAC has borders CTP does not.
Combats: Here CTP wins big way. Though combat in SMAC has improved alot from Civ2. In SMAC their still is unit against unit but now not whole stacks are lost just because one unit lost it's fight(they only take collebratal damage).There are also artillery as there is in CTP. But this has been much better utilized in CTP where stacks fight eachother.
Units: CTP has the classical already defined units while in SMAC you can create your own units from parts wich you have researched. While this seem like a great feature for SMAC it could have been much better done. (Though I like the Special abilities you can give the units).
Scenarios/Mods: This is by far the most important factor for me. And that is what makes CTP far better than any other Civ type game. Actually I haven't played Civ2 the whole game since 1997 when I discovered all the great scenarios on the net. CTP will make great scenarios since you can modify so many things. SMAC also allows you to modify gamefiles but not to the degree of CTP.
Oh one other thing I like about SMAC is the unit that can harvest/mine resources outside the city perimeters and send it back to their home cities. It would be awful if someone could make a similiar unit in CTP.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nordicus
|
 |
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Oct 1999
time: 21:12
|
|
Steen:
Hey, great comments--very well thought out and presented.  (BTW, any relation to Thomas Steen?--he used to play hockey for the Winnipeg Jets in the NHL back in the 80s. Good player. Born in Tocksmark, Swe., played for Leksand, Farjestad, and the National team, and many years in the NHL--first 9 years with Winnipeg, 574 total points in 667 games. Not bad--plus 554 PIM.)
Kyle:
Thanks for your vote Anything you like about CTP?
Thanks for the comments
T.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nordicus
|
|
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Oct 1999
time: 21:12
|
|
Kyle:
Yes, well, the more we've gone through the files, the more it seems clear that this bird just wasn't done cookin when they toss'd er on the table. I've bitten into some of these "raw" parts, and lemme tell ya, gave me nausea.
Yet the potential for this game is unreal--I've been through a lot of the code, and I've seen much more not being used for anything. Classic symptoms of being released too soon, IMO. I'm not here to change your mind, since I've never even played SMAC (so when I pick at it, it's just goofin), but I've very pleased with my current CTP setup and still interested in looking at further improvements.
Things like complying with agreements, though pretty choppy out of the box, have shown improvement with some adjustment.
Many people have said that we shouldn't have to......it should be.....the company should have......and it's hard to argue--maybe, could be, perhaps, but the bottom line is it (*place company name here*) did, we have a game that still can only get better. And lots of guys are doing (and have done) excellent work.
[/speach over] 
I'm pleased that there's things you like about it--I think if you've tried some of the modifications around, you'd like even more. If not, hey, that's cool, too.
Gotta run.
Later.
T.
[This message has been edited by Nordicus (edited December 13, 1999).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Maxwell
|
|
Uppsala - Sweden
Dec 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Well, I'll give you a run down of what I felt was the respective strengths and weaknesses of CTP and smac.
CTP has a better combat system. (It's almost as if armies are fighting. Not quite there yet, but almost.)
Ctp had (but no longer has it appears) a crappy interface, while smac has a great one. (Ctp has some features I sure would have liked to see in smac, like riot warnings.)
Smac's design workshop makes you dance with joy. Customizing units for the job at hand is just great. Gotta love it. (Esp in multiplayer, where you can expect some wicked combinations in return.) I never really liked static unit types again after that. (Off course, the best design workshop, as well as the best ai, goes hands down to a weird old game called Stars! (Of which there soon will be a new, and amazingly enough, commercial runnerup, Stars! Supernova.)
AI-Well, I never played CTP long enough to see how badly it cheats. I enjoyed that people who couldn't see cloaked units couldnät figure out who was responsible for the eco-rangers.
Smacs ai-well, it could have been better. But it was pretty good, best I have seen. (Lack in-depth analysis of ctp here, remember that I have some 400 hours playing smac behind me now.
Civilization feel. Well, I didn't quite enjoy all the things in smac, but neither did I like the entire tech tree in ctp either. A draw.
Movies-smacs wonderful, often sarcastic and humourous, movies win every day of the week. (Not that it matters much, but the beautiful filming from the inside of a chicken factory when you build cloning vats makes me heart warm every time.)
Best civ game- Neither!
Civilization, the very first one, wins it hands down. No contest. Ain't even close. Ok, if you play it today it sucks.
Neither would Da Vincis models make a very big impact today, but for it's time it was THE ´best game.
You have to compare it to contemporary games and technology. Nothing in ctp or smac is revolutionary in any way. They do not make use of modern development to any extent at all. (While civ had some nifty world building routines, which I think they pioneered back then.)
It just had the most bang for it's age. (A catapult hasn't got much to say in the modern age, but it sure dominates the game for quite a while.
Civ is the best civ game. Really. What are we debating here?
Now, I sure prefer playing smac today. (Might even get turned on to ctp now that some of the most tedious elements are gone.
But civ is the best civ game. Runner ups never compete.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nordicus
|
|
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Oct 1999
time: 21:12
|
|
LM:
Very well expressed and thoguht-out points. I respect your views, and I can respect anyone who has at least given it a shot without shooting it in the head just "cuz it ain't Civ2" or Civ1.
I have never played SMAC (personally, I like down to "earth" types, myself, so to speak ), so my bashing it is either jokingly, sardically, or to show SMACers how it feels when a game is accused of sucking unfairly. Hey, if someone thinks CTP sucks, well, that's their opinion--I'm not a crusader. But if it's attacked constantly without thought or reason or logic...then I must defend what's right, which is why I started this thread--> so that some positives can come out, so that some support can grow for what could very rationally be the best Civ-type ever, and so that we can stop (or pause, in some cases) pissing and moaning about and maybe do something about...since there's so much that can be done in CTP, having been thru a lot (but not all yet) of the files, I can say that we've barely touched the surface.
But I very much agree that the original Civilization was a classic, and always will be (can't count how many times I played it, it was, for its time, out-standing in so many ways), but those days are gone.
Anyway, I can appreciate your opinions
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaveVegas
|
|
las Vegas
Oct 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
I think you guys have a screw loose. CTP is a big disappointment as a turn-based game. I have been playing Civ ever since it first came out. CTP ends up being very boring and lacks the "whats going to happen next turn" addiction. I never even could finish a game. There isn't one magazine that gave it a good score! You guys should just forget the piece of crap game that it is! My opinion backed by all major magazines!
quote:
Originally posted by
Nordicus on 10-28-1999 01:54 PM
Okay, fellow Civers.
We've heard the complaints, know about the bugs, the *ahem* reasoning about how it's the 'worst' game of all-time, but this is question here: Is it the best Civilization, or Turn-Based-Strategy, game ever?
I'll vote first.
1. Best Civ game? Yes.
Despite it's faults, its bugs, and the Civ2 stuff they left out of it, I think that the logical view is that, without having tried TOT or SMAC, it kicks butt! Pound for pound, I think it's better than Civ and Civ2.
2. Best TBS? I don't know.
I haven't played every TBS out there, so I'll decline from giving an opinion on that side.
And...
3. If you don't have an opinion about either or don't think it's in 1 or 2, what's something you like about CTP?
...I like lots of things, which I'll include later, but for now...
What do you think?
|
------------------
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaveVegas
|
|
las Vegas
Oct 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Logically you think that CTP is a good game? Then where is your logic? I have been using computers since 1979 I have seen it all. I have played the best and worst. Turn based games are my favorite. CTP could have been good, but the way it is, logically you can not defend it. It totally sucks big time. I know of no one but you guys on here that seem to like it. List pros and cons and the cons will out do the pros. There are not enough good points about the game. I love SMAC and SMACX and CIV II and CIV I. They are the best turn based games. I have everyone that has been made since 1995. It is not an opinion really it is now a fact if you even look at polls. No rating over 4 out of 10 makes it a bomb!
quote:
Originally posted by Nordicus on 12-19-1999 12:18 PM
LM:
Very well expressed and thoguht-out points. I respect your views, and I can respect anyone who has at least given it a shot without shooting it in the head just "cuz it ain't Civ2" or Civ1.
I have never played SMAC (personally, I like down to "earth" types, myself, so to speak ), so my bashing it is either jokingly, sardically, or to show SMACers how it feels when a game is accused of sucking unfairly. Hey, if someone thinks CTP sucks, well, that's their opinion--I'm not a crusader. But if it's attacked constantly without thought or reason or logic...then I must defend what's right, which is why I started this thread--> so that some positives can come out, so that some support can grow for what could very rationally be the best Civ-type ever, and so that we can stop (or pause, in some cases) pissing and moaning about and maybe do something about...since there's so much that can be done in CTP, having been thru a lot (but not all yet) of the files, I can say that we've barely touched the surface.
But I very much agree that the original Civilization was a classic, and always will be (can't count how many times I played it, it was, for its time, out-standing in so many ways), but those days are gone.
Anyway, I can appreciate your opinions
|
------------------
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WesW
|
 |
Florence, Al., USA
Jan 1970
time: 23:12
|
|
I don't know why I am bothering to refute Mr. Las Vegas' list the things he likes better about SMAC (he *did* list some, didn't he?). Anyway, here are some quotes of mine from earlier in this thread:
I played SMAC for about a month or two, and got tired of it because it was so much like civ II.
The social engineering model was very good. It really made you think. This was about the only major improvement though, imo.
The diplomacy had more options, sure, but the attitude and actions of the AI was essentially unchanged from civ II.
The 3d terrain loses its novelty after a while, and the unit design shop gets to be a pain after a while.
The design shop and the faction advantages are from MOO2, btw, which I played for over a year, so maybe that is why they grew stale for me.
Utrecht's gripes are all valid, but most all of them have been corrected my the mod-makers here.
About SMAC: Look inside the AI cities- you'll see the same ineptitude that is in civ II. There is no co-ordination between the settlers and the cities, the improvements they build are stupid choices, a lot of their force disposition is the same way. If you could look at the source code for SMAC, I bet at least 90% at the AI routines are copied from civ ii. It's sad, because the effort put into the storyline, improvements, Planet and all that is very, very impressive. But you strip away the few added features, and it's just civ ii with new graphics, and the things from MOO2 I mentioned earlier. CTP out of the box wasn't any better, but it is now with the work the people here have done on it, and it just keeps getting better.
CTP's interface takes time to get used to, and could probably be improved, but a smooth interface don't mean beans if the AI is so incompetent it's insulting, and that's what civ II's became after I knew enough to evaluate it throughly.
------------------
Yeah, can you believe it. I got wiped out on chieftain. -Don Blevens (aka Scorpion59)
This last one is from the CtP II forum:
As far as gameplay and game engine and basic code go, I have played both civ I and II, SMAC, plus MOO and MOO 2, and many scenario-based games from Panzer General to Imperialism to the Heroes of M&M series.
It's CtP that I keep coming back to, because, with some mods I made, the AI in CtP can now clearly outperform that found in any of the Sid Meier games. If you were to pit the AI in Ctp with the AAips versus that in SMAC (which is almost exactly the same as in Civ II), the game would be over in less than 200 turns, imo.
When you get past the new-ness of better options to do this and that, and choosing govs and so-forth, the only thing that really matters is the competancy of your opponent, and the AI in the current Sid games is almost completely imcompetent in non-tactical aspects, imo.
[This message has been edited by WesW (edited March 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nordicus
|
|
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Oct 1999
time: 21:12
|
|
Oh...here's another one.
Great points, Wes. But I envision yet another "It sucks"/"It rocks" variety of *ahem* logical argumentation.
Everyone's entitled to their opinions.
(And, ah, yes, popular opinion is equated with factuality, isn't it?
BTW, here's one of mine:
quote:
But I think a few will eventually give it another go--how old is Civ2 already? And if they don't, oh well. They'll probably be that way until they're toothless old men, sitting in a park, yelling out to passers-by: "When I was young...Civ2 was the best! And SMAC is still better than this new-fangled Civ8 they have out now...."
|
------------------
"There can be no maximum of creation without a concomitant maximum of destruction, no supreme good without supreme evil"--Heller, paraphrasing Nietzsche.
"The more passion for the argument, the less evidence for it"--Russel.
"If you don't agree with me, you're in denial."
[This message has been edited by Nordicus (edited March 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-11-1999 18:34
|