NOTE: This is The Column, a regular feature on Apolyton where anyone can write about anything to do with Civilization or the gaming industry as a whole. If you feel like writing, please visit the article submission page.

PREVIOUS ARTICLES

166# MEMO TO ISABELLA, QUEEN OF SPAIN Raingoon of the Chinese sends a memo to Isabella, his ally. Or is it Firaxis? 165# CIV3: WORST FEARS COME TRUE! Fiera is rather unhappy with recent civ3 news 164# APOLYTON: THE GAMER'S HUB If you saw the opening of the Earth 2025 and Trade Wars 2002 forums, there is more, as Father Beast talks about the benefits of the Other Games forum 163# VARIANCES IN GAME PLAY SETUPS Some ways to spice up your civ games 162# STRATEGY "BUGS" OF CIVILIZATION Some things from real world strategy are missing civ. Here are some. COLUMN ARCHIVE

Since Call to Power II was released, we could see many opinions about it on the forums. I'll try to outline them and perhaps explain what might cause people to think so. So, I think that basically we can split all the opinions there in four groups. Here they are.

Opinion number 1: Call to Power 1 is crap, so is Call to Power 2.

This is how many people think of those, who only like Civ II. They don't like the CtP branch at all, and they are fans of the original civ, sometimes SMAC fans, perhaps.

Why do people think so? I think that the most common reason for this opinion is that they've started with Civ I and Civ II, so don't like the other games, and the differences. For example, CtP branch has a different combat system - with health bars for the units, and the stacking concept is important, while the original Civ has no stacking at all. They think that CtP branch is too much different, and often look forward very much to the release of Civ 3, which is a sequel to the original Civ I and II. This is a pretty popular opinion, however, most of the people who think so, for obvious reasons, rarely visit Call to Power / Call to Power 2 forums.

Opinion number 2: Call to Power 1 is crap, Call to Power 2 rules.

This is less popular opinion, but it still deserves some attention. The interface of Call to Power II mostly causes people to think so, for CtP I interface, as many think, is hard to understand, and someplace it also looks chaotic. Then, these people appreciate the removal of the space layer in CtP II. These people play much more single player than multiplayer, for multiplayer hasn't been implemented in CtP II at a reasonable quality. Column #156 by me shows what I hoped to see in CtP II MP, but as I now see, there's no way to hope again. So, they play single player. And it's obvious that diplomacy is an extremely important part of single player games, and this is where CtP II is far more superior over CtP I. You can now buy techs for money, threaten the AI players, trade cities, pledge research pacts, and more.

My thoughts are that single player in CtP II is better than in CtP I in all areas except one - the AI, that is now much weaker.

Opinion number 3: Both Call to Power 1 and Call to Power 2 rule.

This is a rare opinion. Most of the people, who loved CtP, see no reason to transfer to CtP II. Either they play MP, what's close to impossible in CtP II, or if they want SP, the AI will be far too easy for them, even though they appreciate the new features.
A phrase I've often heard from CtP 1 players: "CtP 2 is about the same game, and the AI is worse, so there's no reason to upgrade". My first days of having CtP 2 I had the opinion number 3, but when I saw how hopeless the AI is, and lacked some things I loved from CtP I, I changed my opinion.

People who have this opinion love the CtP branch in Civ games, and in CtP 2 they get the things they missed in CtP 1, like borders and better diplomacy. And this is probably what people at Activison think :).

Opinion number 4: Call to Power 1 rules, Call to Power 2 doesn't.

This is by people who love Call to Power 1 multilayer features, like the PBEM, and this probably is the most popular opinion. Now, this is also my opinion. Why? It's simple - first of all, being the PBEM Ladder Administrator, I can't love the game so much, if it lacks PBEM. Second, in CtP 1 I was very excited about the space layer, and considered it to be the second coolest thing in the game.

Many CtP 1 fans, after reading the reviews and seeing screenshots, subscribed to this without buying the new game. Their arguments were clear - no multiplayer support, weak AI, little exciting new things.

Conclusion.

First, I've seen those big headlines at Apolyton - CtP 2 takes the genre to new heights, it's the best Civ title, and so on. But now, we can see this looks to be false. Second, the sales are very low - less than 30 000 copies sold, which is a very bad result nowadays. Second, the inactivity of the CtP 2 forums at Apolyton, which led to the recent merging of CtP 2 forums to only two boards - and still they aren't very active. I'm disappointed to see this, and all those hordes of people hating Activision now.

Actually, the game seemed very promising, but they've done one big mistake about it - it was released too early. If they'd release it a month or two later, it might really have became the best Civ title, with more than a million copies sold. To do that, they had to make the AI better than in CtP I, and add PBEM.

I'm afraid that many might consider CtP II being the black spot on the civ genre games. I hope Civ 3 will clean this spot.

---------
About the author: CtP/AC PBEM Ladder Administator

Comment on this article!

The opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of Apolyton CS or GameStats. They are just the personal opinions of the writer.