Civ3 vs EU2

[DaddyCool]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
So, for a game with such extensive beta testing, why did a patch appear so fast?

Something doesn't add up there.

First, Paradox's distributor jumped the gun and released it before they and the beta-testers felt it was ready. Second, from looking at the list of fixes in the first patch, an overwhelming majority of the changes were little balance tweaks, and not really bugs...i.e. things they didn't really have to change...

[TCO]

Originally posted by 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.

Firaxis used to hang more on the very early branching thread forums (pre-owo). The level of discussion was a couple notches above what we have here.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by GP


...very early branching thread forums...

Had to get that one in didn't you GP

[Seneca]

Well, I don't have EUII yet (what did we do in Britain do deserve all these late releases? ), but I'd certainly say that EUII is more necessary. Civ3 seems like a sequel for sequel's sake, trying to improve on a game that's already fully formed - who'd want Chess 2? Or Football 2?

EUI, on the other hand, was immensely frustrating - an obviously great game besetted with numerous obvious examples of AI silliness and stupid gameplay. An unfinished masterpiece, in other words.

[Seeker]

I have EU2. It's great, there is a patch? Their website says next week.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Seneca
Well, I don't have EUII yet (what did we do in Britain do deserve all these late releases? ), but I'd certainly say that EUII is more necessary.

I was not too bothered by the late release of Civ3, even though it is out now I have not rushed out to buy it. With EUII its a different story, I was seriously tempted to download it for free. By my strength I have avoided temptationl.

Still think its a *dubious* decision

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I was seriously tempted to download it for free.

er.. where? (Not that I would )

[TheDarkside]

Agreed. Paradox certainly has higher regard towards their fans (heck they even have a nice splash screen before the intro "this game is dedicated to the fans" which I thought was a nice gesture) And I was quite surprised to buy the game on Sunday and visit the forums to find out the patch will be released early this week!

But nothing is perfect... I need to wait for the patch as my game crashes seemingly randomly. No error message, no warning- just I'll be playing for 15 minutes to over an hour and suddenly the game crashes. I ran EU fine and since the graphics are generally the same thing I don't see how it can be a graphics card problem- not to mention that a graphic card problem probably wouldnt allow me to run the game so long then crash randomly? So I pretty much can't play the game until the patch comes out. Then there's Civ3, which I at least can play, but then only up to about the beginning of the industrial age, as the turns just become too long by then. My computer is pretty slow yes, so I have to wait until I can buy new hardware before I can truly enjoy civ3. It's funny, as the game progresses how much longer turns take... when cities are captured it takes a good minute or two before the results are processed and I can continue with the game (I'ts like they are trying to solve the towers of hanoi problem everytime a city is captured.) And also if I bombard a last road linking a city, or it's habror/airport, then it also takes a really long time to process the results.

And in terms of gameplay, it's hard to compare them as they take totally different approaches, and stress different areas of empire building. I'm a big war fan, and EU's military aspect is really limited and abstracted, so I tend to have more fun playing Civ3. All in all, I both games are great and are eating up all my free time!

[shawng1]

Urban,

Part of the reason a patch is needed in North America is that the game is Euro in origin. Another part is because many of us are always bugging Paradox for options added that will let us tamper with the game more, and Paradox has always been willing to let us do this. that's why you see the IGC mods over there. Not because the initial GC is inadequate, but most of us think more options=more fun. (A fact that CIV could have remembered in the latest iteration, contrary to what a lot of people say, less is NOT NECESSARILY more).

BTW, I agree with DarkSide when he says comparing the gameplay of Civ and EU is apples to oranges. I honestly think both games combat models are too abstracted. Combined arms is virtually irrelevant in Civ, and you really can't personally get involved in the combat in EU.

If you want a combat strategy game, then Shogun:Total War is the game to play, IMHO, at least until I get to see Takeda.
But on the other hand, EU does represent the effect of leaders on combat and recruitment methods and its effect on combat better than CIV. Plus the morale issue and attrition feature make combat a more dicey proposition than simply out-teching your opponent or roos numbers.

You can have 5 times the troops at your command and if Frederick the Great is commanding the enemy, you will still probably lose--badly.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh


er.. where? (Not that I would )

Forget I mentioned it.

[Rictus]

Originally posted by Kautilya

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.

We get our fair shares of youngsters (myself included) and ridiculous and pointless posts as well, but its kept to a satisfying minimal...except when writing AARs, of course

[Whitey_1350]

The EU II patch is out now


PS - you can get hold of the takeda demo now...