Civ3 vs EU2

[Kautilya]

First of all I never said that Civ 3 was a bad game but that it was worse than it could have been because of the stated reasons.

I guess we can just agree to disagree about the relative merits of the two games but I don't think it's possible to deny that Paraxadox pays its fan base a lot more attention and that IMO is a good thing.

1. Who said anything about the game reflecting the personal preferences of the regulars. There is a wide mix of beta-testers. The good thing is that Paradox included some regulars in that mix. How can that possibly be a disadvantage?

2. Again there are more patches in the making.
If EU2 was somehow an unfinished product and Civ 3 was polished your point might be valid but if anything the opposite may be more true. All games have some bugs so why not patch them as soon as possible.

3. All this is beside the point that it was a nice gesture to include a map. Anyway no one claimed that EU was perfectly accurate. It's a good deal more accurate than any other game out there though.

4.Not sure what you mean here. There was a lot of interesting news about EU2 as well. The AAR's in particular were really interesting and there was nothing similar with Civ3 before release.

[Whitey_1350]

out in the uk?

this is EU's only problem...terrible marketing, its out in the US but not in the UK until around March time...

about the A grade and the F grade thing...I can't apologise for others opinions, we are not used to 'outsiders' reading our boards

about Firaxis in general - I was part, and still am part, of the 'ever diminishing' group of SMG/SMA admirers and was messed around enough for a lifetime back then

but it doesn't really matter, all history now...

as for the historical manner of EU vs Civ, I can see from both sides how we argue and you'r right, its an ideological viewpoint - and the lines are drawn

as for EU not being fun - I agree it doesn't have mass apeal, but to those of us who like it...well...it is better than sliced bread

[TCO]

Kautilya, I've discussed this same thing with Yin and in general there are two issues (what level of fan interaction makes the game truly better and what level makes the fans (the select ones who are on BBSes) feel better. Important to differentiate between the two.

WRT to your issues.

1. I think the game can be quite well-tested with professional beta testers in more of a secret atmosphere. The key issue is time spent.


2. Patches. We'll see if there is a huge difference. If it's just a month or so difference, I wouldn't think it so big a deal. Remember SMAC had a patch go out ASAP. I think it may be more of a case by case issue.

3. The packaging is important and Infogrames let us down.

4. Forum participation. This is not crucial to making a better game. This is more something that keeps the hard core fans and the "agitators" like Yin happy. And if the developers like doing it, that's fine...

[Maur]

Originally posted by Simple Girl
OK it doesnt have much sense to reply now when I do not have EU2, I will get it soon though, but:

1. with all my respect, I dont think game has to reflect personal preferences the forum mods like BiB and Vulture, even though they are the most active members of the board.

2. I just wanted to say that it is much serisous to make patch later to inculde as much bugs as possible than have patch already for not released game. It just says about beta-condition of EU2.

3. Civ3 is not so pretensious as EU2 and just sets approximate general settings, as the earth, nations culture etc. I though agree that some reasonable maps would be nice. While EU2 takes this responsobility to be historically accurate and fails not only in specific points i mentioned, but almost everywhere. Its just happened I know Russia better than any other country, and it is just not serious to have wrong map of such a huge country as Russia.

4. Again, I was trying to say that finding out every little detail about Civ3 was really exciting, there was some kind of intrigue, there were though lots of interviews with Firaxis, but till the end it was surpirse, while EU2 is "scripted " by its nature.

Cannot comment about multiplayer and editor, do not have game yet. Scenario editor is OK in Civ3, even not the best, and as I read now in EU board there is no scenario editor at all. Yes there is no MP, too bad for Civ3 , but still not essential point.

I think we just have different ideology about every point But it is just offensive to post here how bad Civ3 is comparing to EU, and it is offensive even more when you read in EU borad that EU gets " A+" and Civ gets "F" . Well, I played both and still find EU a very boring and straightforward game with lots of mistakes, less detailed, less intelligent, but well, I never went to EU board to express what I think, just because I know people there really love it, and respect is not that bad thing at all

Funny now, when we have links to each other
hmmm, i must say that apolyton forum have more smiles

Ok, first. Game doesn't reflect Vulture and BiB views. There were a lot of discussion. And i mean A LOT OF. And still, poeple there are already talking about IGC(improved grand campaign, mod from EU I, which practically replaced standart grand campaign). Well, actually Doomdark, person who lead the IGC project, (i mean lead, for many many forum members participated and discussed it-the largest IGC thread is much over 1000 posts), Doomdark became emploee of Paradex...

2. Well, i have CIV 3. And having air superiority not functioning is more serious that all things that were changed in patch.

3. About map of EU I. There were much complaining about it, almost everyone is not happy about it. Especially me .
Reasons? Map is very hard to change, it is compressed or something (well, i'm not computer expert ). And Paradox is small company, so there are prorities, you know...
Anyway, EU map is taken from old boardgame, and this map was made by one person. Who made some big mistakes, ESPECIALLY regarding eastern and central Europe. Bah, i posted my longest post at Paradox forums suggesting chages only to Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine provinces...
Sadly, not much of it has been made

4.Finding details???
I said i have CIV3. I rarely read this forum. I am one of the more active members of Paradox forums. Still, i wasn't surprised playing CIV 3...

About editor. I was surprised that Firaxis didn't make more things editable... well, perhaps i was spoiled by Paradox, because reaction to players saying "oh, ****, we can't change it, it's hardcoded" was making almost everything editable.

And about that grades...
Caralus Rex, you little....
Simple Girl, don't take those grades too seriously
(btw, have you participated in Paradox forums?)

Well, i played CIV from the beginning. It was the best game ever. Till EU . But i like it still. Nice. And better than most.
But it is nothing really new. Well, i myself would be better designer than Sid Meier, or someone who did this. CIV 3 is no way groundbreaking game. Only polishing. SMAC and CTP were much better in this matter, especially CTP, same settings, but many new interesting ideas. Too bad it was that much unbalanced.

Ok, that's all. Thank you

[Dauphin]

this is EU's only problem...terrible marketing, its out in the US but not in the UK until around March time...

Where did you get that from????

[Jools]

Paradox has the most friendliest crew and team that I ever stumbled upon. Initially I was shocked that team members are 'wasting their time' talking with mere mortals on the Forums and arguing with them about gameplay points and historical accuracy.

If you already have EU2 and wont to play a Multiplayer game with a EU2 producer just go over to the forum and ask him! (WOuldn't mind playing with Sid, would you?)

[Seeker]

I'm buying it. It looks more fun than Civ 3 to me.

I just hope that they make some way to annex great power capitals.

And I think ALL great powers should have access to merchants from the beginning.

[Whitey_1350]

in EU II you can now annex anyone and everyone, including great powers...

about the release date, not sure about the month exactly - but I know its around March...where did I get this from? Where does any EU fan get their information from?

Paradox. The horses mouth

the UK is covered by the same people as most of mainland europe - and they want a simultanious release, so we have to wai for translations of the game into French, Italian, German etc...before we get the game in the (original language) English...damn...

[Kautilya]

GP,
I have to disagree that interaction on forums like these just pleases the fans and doesn't help the game. The reason is that the best players here are probably the experts on the Civ genre and have probably played more than anyone at Firaxis. Many of them, like Velocyrix, are pretty intelligent and articulate as well. And many of them would be ready to both beta-test the game and just offer general advice on these forums for free. It seems a shame not to use that free expertise. I don't think the paid beta-testers will equal the best players here in either enthusiasm or expertise. It's one of the odd things about the gaming industry that the free stuff is often better than the paid stuff. eg. the best scenarios are the ones created by fans not released by companies, the best reviews are the ones on forums like these not by the paid reviewers at the gaming magazines.


About patching; I guess if Firaxis patches the big problems in a month or so it would be OK though it would obviously be much better if they could have done it in one or two weeks after the release. The problem is that they more or less refuse to tell us when and what they will patch which raises question marks about their commitment. A quick patch which fixed some of the bigger bugs like air superiority would have sent a much better signal.

[TCO]

K,

You've got some decent points. I do think that SOME of the complaints about lack of Firaxis prescence lie in a desire for recognition.

[DaddyCool]

Aaaah, Simple Girl....you should really look into becoming a lawyer instead. Your ability to skew things so out of proportion to suit your argument is a real talent.

You say that recruiting beta-testers from the actual fans of the game was not a good idea because they were chosen arbitralily (of course, you miss the fact that by merely signing up and participating regularly in the EU forums, one should be considered more than a casual fan of the game), while defending a game that looks like it hasn't been beta-tested at all. Air supperiority doesn't work!?! Come on...this is inexcusable. It's not like it's some obscure crash bug. A documented feature of the game doesn't work...no not sometimes...or in certain circumstances, but AT ALL!

You denounce the fact that Paradox has a patch ready to go, days after the game's release, and defend Firaxis' gracious foresight to allow 'players to explore thoroughly the [many bugs in their] game.' Don't get me wrong, Firaxis has said there would be a patch, and they're probably working their butts off over there, but how you can see a faster patch as being a bad thing...well....i don't know.

You argue about EU's small historical inacurracies, while defending a game which is only slightly more historically acurate than something like Heroes of Might and Magic.

And, here's the kicker, you view the participation of the EU2 lead programmer and game designer (among others at Paradox) in EU's forums as a stifler of...ummm...intrigue about features of the game. Imagine that! Fans can actually get to talk to the guy making the game, and he may even listen! The audacity! How dare they!

Ummm...ya-ok, whatever.......

[Kautilya]

"I do think that SOME of the complaints about lack of Firaxis
prescence lie in a desire for recognition"
That goes without saying.

I think another problem is that Civ forums have that annoying teenage element which makes interaction more painful for the developers. EU tends to have an older, more mature audience.

[shawng1]

K,

I have to say that Paradox has provided more support and community for its game than any designers have ever done before. And that is to their praise. They have consistently listened to the concerns of the audience--the people who will have to fork over $65 to buy the product.

I can't say I'm sure Firaxis did this with Civ 3. A LOT of features I liked from Civ 2 are gone, and the gameplay seems far more shallow. I can't help but admit that although I do like playing Civ3, I am somewhat disappointed in the product. I can't say I agree with the "A+, F" comment, but that is that person's own opinion. I find some of the comments about EU made here by Civ propagandists equally innane. If you think playing EU is like playing Risk or Axis, all I can say is that you obviously haven't looked under the hood of this marvelously complex game.

Honestly, I don't think Civ 3 is the game it could have been if it had paid better attention to its audience. I like the diplomacy options, but for all the talk of how Leaders would be a great addition, they have been made so hard to attain that only a total warmonger can get them, so how big a change is that? Air superiority doesn't work. I still find medieval units beating modern units far too often. In short, there are significant unresolved game issues. Let alone the multiplayer fiasco, which doesn't bother me personally, but does irritate others to no end.

EU2, by all accounts, takes the issues that were most frequently levelled against it, and deals with them. And it does so without dumbing down the game. If you're not a grognard, you probably will find EU too much game for you. However, if you love history, no game can compare to the EU series. Period.

[Urban Ranger]

So, for a game with such extensive beta testing, why did a patch appear so fast?

Something doesn't add up there.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by shawng1
However, if you love history, no game can compare to the EU series. Period.

Oh? Ever played any Koei games, especially the <em>Romance of the Three Kingdoms</em> series?