OT: Civilization 4

[Strategia_In_Ultima]

One question tho:

Why the heck does everyone call Civ3 rubbish? I seem to be the only person here who actually liked the game. Next to Makinus, but I haven't seen him here in a while.

[Caduceus]

The best recommendation I can give Civ IV is that on "Warlord" difficulty, it plays like Civ II with a better graphics engine. And Leonard Nimoy, of course.

I have an ATI card and had the "render" error that is now on the Civ IV website. I managed to fix it myself, doing essentially what they said - update drivers and reload direct X.

EDIT To reply to Strategia - I can't put my finger on it, but I didn't like the way culture was implemented in Civ III and I just couldn't seem to do well in the more advanced levels of game play. It was frustrating and I couldn't ever seem to get an edge on the AI. Civ IV isn't like that and I can't be more specific than that.

[Fyron]

Perform a forum search for the game to see many reasons. Repeating them here would only clog this thread, which is not about Civ 3.

The ATI card problem with Civ 4 smacks of a rushed release... I wonder what other critical problems are in the initial release?

[Wolfman77]

I liked the idea of culture, but I wanted it to be more like borders where the other empires couldn't cross without declaring war. They always plopped down their city 2 squares from mine. I also thought corruption rose to fast after a certain distance. Also, after modding in SEIV, Civ III seemed constrained a bit. I did enjoy the game, but I only played it for a month or so then got bored.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

So far, two thumbs up for Civ4, no thumbs down.
Up: Wildcard06, Kana.
Down: None.

[Caduceus]

I am still eating, sleeping and going to work, so it can't be that great

[narf poit chez BOOM]

I just found out that combat has been reduced to a single defence stat.

Blarg.

Well, hopefully someone will mod that.

[jeffel]

narf poit chez BOOM said:
I just found out that combat has been reduced to a single defence stat.

This is a highly misleading statement.

I have been a big Civ fan since Civ 1 and am awaiting delivery of Civ 4 right now.

Each Unit does have only one combat strength, but almost every unit has special abilities that modify combat. Plus victorious units earn "promotions" that can be things like a free shot in combat, +50% vrs Mounted Units, etc...

So while each archer has the same base strength, two different archers can have vastly different combat capabilites.

Since I haven't played yet, I can't judge yet, but I expect the new combat system to be a double edged sword.

[Strategia_In_Ultima]

wildcard06 said:
The best recommendation I can give Civ IV is that on "Warlord" difficulty, it plays like Civ II with a better graphics engine. And Leonard Nimoy, of course.

Err OK..... what's up with that?

[Makinus]

Strategia_In_Ultima said:
One question tho:

Why the heck does everyone call Civ3 rubbish? I seem to be the only person here who actually liked the game. Next to Makinus, but I haven't seen him here in a while.

Yes, i liked a lot Civ3 (especcially conquests), but only after i modded it a lot to suit my tastes... and if what i hear is tru, that Civ4 have a lot of modability in it i´m sure i´ll like it even more...

Other thing you must realize about my taste for civ3 is that i bought it when it was already in the Conquests expansion, that had a lot of bugs squashed and new things to play with and, even then, i bought it in a bargain bin for $15 dollars or so (i don´t remeber the exact value) and found a very good game for the price...

That aside, the best incarnation of civ to date is Civ2 Test of Time, as it had a lot of modability in it, specially the capability of playing in 4 map "layers" at the same time...

I´m waiting to see Civ4, but the reviews to date are making me hopeful that i´ll get a good game... now i only need to wait for my friend in Germany to come home (Brazil) for christmas and bring me the list of games i sent him...