OT: Civ3 rant from MoO3 v GalCiv topic

[General Woundwort]

Originally posted by Cyrien:
Political and diplomatic model? You make one mistake in Civ3 or PTW and the AI NEVER forgives you. Play for thousands of years and in the year 2050 AD they still remember when you betrayed the Greeks back in 3000 BC.

OTOH, the way some places are in the world (like the Balkans), you could almost call this a realistic feature of the AI.

[Fyron]

Esp. since the UK is still overly pissed at the USA for declaring independance from them and refuses to work with the US to this very day. Wait... that is not right. Why does Civ3 do that?

[Xiodos]

Evidently that post was directed at me...

I don't know... I'll be honest when I say that Civ3 wasnt my favorite, but I had to disagree with Fyron when he said that it was awful. I find that I cannot argue for Civ3 anymore, simply because I guess I know you're right in what you say. Civ3 had its problems, and was put out to soon without proper time allowed for development.

Nevertheless, I stand by it as a good/ok game. Certainly, it was a dissapointment, especially after SMAX, but its not the antichrist.

[Fyron]

There is a huge difference between saying a game is awful and saying it is the antichrist (an unfairly biased term anyways...). Civ 3 had 1 or 2 good features, and 30+ horrible ones. The bad greatly outweigh the good.

[Xiodos]

stop over analyzing everything I say.

I stand by my view that Civ3, while not a great game, is certainly a good game.

You obviosly have a different view.

[oleg]

Originally posted by Cyrien:
...Colonization was a great game, SMAX was a great game, Civ2 was a great game.

Civ3 is at best an OK game.

Is it a coincidence all three have been made by Brian Reynolds with S.M. name on it for marketing purpose only ? Civ3 was the first game by S.M. after Brian left...

[Xiodos]

I think oleg hit the nail on the head there...