Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Good, the Bad & the Ugly

    Firstly, I love the CIV series, by far more than any other. Secondly, I bought it the 2nd day it was out. Thirdly, my system specs are comparable to or exceeding the recommendations. Fourthly, I have spent nearly 100 hours playing the game through.

    THE GOOD
    Intro is cool, sound is cool, religion is cool, the movies are cool and so is Leonard Nemoy.

    THE BAD
    Before I could actually play the game I had to address several issues that had me ultimately on the phone with ATI, CIV TECH and DELL, all of which were basically useless. The SPOCK opening is utterly annoying after the first game. I had to keep tweaking everything just to get a longer more fluid game. I had to turn of the bg music, set the graphics to low, put it in windowed mode, install the art pak, turn off services, lower my graphics to 16mb instead of 32, drop my accelerator down a notch, click single unit graphics, turn off speech, minimize pop-ups, chose a standard sized world, etc.

    THE UGLY

    Aside from the tech issues and all the other crap, these are the ugly points of actual game play. 1. I think every one should start with the same thing unit wise, ie. a scout, a settler and a warrior. 2. I find it utterly impossible to believe that it would take hundreds of years to make a single worker. 3. The tech tree is absurd - they should have left the old techs (all of them) and added new ones. 4. The game ends too early (typical of all CIV games). 5. I made military units that could not invade a city???. 6. China's boats freely entered my boarders yet I could not enter their's without engaging in war. 7. Most of my cities didn't even have a market until the 1900's. 8. Pop up recommendations are numerous and stupid and often screw up unit orders. 9. Workers hanging out in cities so on the next game I had to micro manage like a mofo. 10. Military units can not attack workers - that's lame. 11. Cities can be working on the same wonder - that's just stupid especially when you have 40 cities. 12. Trades are utterly stupid now - techs for techs and resources for resources. 13. If I wanna risk going into the ocean with a little boat so be it - risk is how all this came to be. 14. This list goes on and on.

    Recommendations and Afterthoughts
    1. People like Gamespot, Gamespy and the like should rate these games honestly and not try to get the users to buy crap just so they can earn their share of the profits. Loyal users who get screwed remember these things and look elsewhere for integrity. 2. This was at best a BETA version and we all know it. 3. The graphics were no better than CIV 3 nor the sound and in some cases they were worse, ie. leaders. 4. This wouldn't even have made a decent expansion pack for CIV 3. 5. CIV 4 basically screwed over it's core fan base but that can be a good thing. Why? Becasue, someone out there is taking all this into account and thinking to themselves "I can make a better game series than this and I will" and they will. I would guesstimate that within 2 years a new series will emerge from an independent that will ravage the lion's share of the market. Mark my words. 6. Number one rule of making a game is that it actually can be played. When one buys monopoly you can play it. You don't have to worry about six sided dice without numbers on them or missing pieces. Also, look at any game console. If you bought PS3 and a game that game is gonna work. That's because it can't come out unless it does - it has to meet the Sony standards etc. The game may suck but you will be able to play it guaranteed!!!

    Lastly, what I would really like to see at this point CIV 5 - Planetary Colonization - You build the Space Shuttle or whatever and go colonize mars or the moon or whatever planets are in your solar system. Multiplayer upgrades - Players actually get to play the advisors and control budgets and aspects under their care. So my team against your team. Leader changes through generations - Every 100 years or so your leader changes. I've always had a problem with say Roosevelt living for oh I don't know - 6,000 years. More realistic time frames - way over due - again it should not take me 100 years to chop down a forrest or 10-20 years for my destroyer to work its way across the ocean, even on a huge map. I'll stop here cause I could go on forever.

  • #2
    Have you ever played Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri?

    If not, I suggest you play it. It's pretty much what you described in your last paragraph.

    Comment


    • #3
      your beef with the graphics issues may be because you have them set to low. but i agree with you on some gameplay issues, but i do not see how you could get around wokors building for hundreds of years. gameplay must come before reality.

      some of your points like military units not being able to atack workers are void (they can attack them) and AFAIK the only unit that cant attack a citty is the machine gunners. as they are a purely defensive unit.

      but you are entitled to your opinian, as am I

      Comment

      Working...
      X