Civfanatics, Apolyton and Firaxis.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Nikolai
yin: I didn't buy PTW, so I can't say how it is with that, but Civ3 is for me good, if not near what Civ1/2 was when they came. I will buy Conquests after a while though, as it seems good.(Must wait untill Christmas is over, as I have other games to try too, and Santa always seems to listen to my parents)

I would highly recommed you Europa Universalis 2 though. I have played that game since it came in 2001, and EU1 for a year before that. That game is AWESOME! And now a new game from the same producers(Paradox) is underway, which seems to be at least as good. Check Paradox' forums if you want.

Yin has already played EU2, it was based partly on his comments that I bought the game.

I hated it.

ACK!

[Harovan]

I bought GalCiv based on his recommendation. I hated it too.

[Nikolai]

Originally posted by Tuberski


Yin has already played EU2, it was based partly on his comments that I bought the game.

I hated it.

ACK!

He has? My bad...

[Alex]

Hm, Yin hated Civ3, and I actually like that game... I think that we have a trend here...

[notyoueither]

Yeah, he should be professionally employed as a reviewer.

Oh, hi Yin.

[Panag]

Originally posted by yin26
Markos: Well, by running the best site of its kind, you've somewhat managed to blur the line between playing Civ and life anyway! For that, you deserve a new server and a few hot babes to play against you in a late-night LAN game.

Player1: Yes, I said that very thing. Geez, I didn't realize the microphone was on at the time! LOL I think you are right that the Deluxe edition will be out early part of next year. That's when I'll show up again with something to say, but everybody will already have said it ... only better.

Panag: In my earlier pre-kids days, you would have push me over the edge and right to the computer store...

hi ,

look ya gone love it , and if you dont , well you shall have your 29 bucks refunded , okay , ......

have a nice day

[yin26]

Markos: God help me if I ever run a fan site. Please, Lord, no!!!

Nikolai: I liked EU2 a lot, but to those who hated it: SORRY! Both EU and GalCiv are pretty short on glitz and atmosphere, I agree there. Both companies run on relatively small budgets, so they are forced to focus on the underlying mechanics and superp fan support. Larger companies, on the other hand, go big on eye-candy and dole out fan support only on an as-absolutely-needed basis. So if you found it hard to really get into EU or GalCiv, you aren't alone. But once you give the games a good run-through, I think you'll find them some of the best strategy material out there. The first release of Civ3, by contrast, reminded me of little more than a badly written screen saver...

Theseus: Well, that's some great feedback. Seems like Firaxis didn't abandon the project after all. Good for them! Once the Deluxe Version comes out, I'll buy it for sure. Because while I certainly don't mind a lack of eye-candy and atmoshphere in my strategy games, a game that has all of that on top of great gameplay is certainly worth the money.

notyoueither: Hey, good to see ya. Well, on the review thing, if I ever did stuff like that, I'd use the 'Review Machine' idea you might have seen me post before--you answer questions about this and that, then based on your answers I provide a range of how likely you are to enjoy the game. Seems to me that's the only fair way...so for EU and GalCiv, I'd ask something like "Do you absolutely/somewhat/minimally need good graphics and atmoshpere in your games to enjoy them fully?" On this mark, EU and GalCiv would lose points if you answerwed 'absolutley' -- seems fair, right?

[vmxa1]

Yin26 that question is useful, but will not be enough. I had no problems with the graphics of Galciv and played several games, but it did not hook me, I can't say why. I have not been able to go back since the first week, even though I have keep up with the updates. People are more complex, so it is very hard to choose for them, unless you really know them well.

[yin26]

You can see the fuller version of what I posted when GalCiv first came out. It's precisely because I think people are complex that I don't think the normal way of reviewing games is always very helpful.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=82017

[Myrddin]

yin

The first release of Civ3, by contrast, reminded me of little more than a badly written screen saver...

I seem to remember you posting about getting seriously beaten up by the AI in your first Civ3 game, with an impressive naval invasion from halfway around the world, but then again memory is such a tricky thing

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by yin26
You can see the fuller version of what I posted when GalCiv first came out. It's precisely because I think people are complex that I don't think the normal way of reviewing games is always very helpful.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=82017

I remember reading it. I am not posing any counterpoint to the concept, but here is anomoly.

I have a friend that goes back to 1964 when we were in the Navy.
We have know each other so well that we even shared a couple of women ( a long time ago). We agree nearly all the time. So after almost 40 years, I still can hand him a game that I like and is similar to games he liked and find he does not like that game?
So it is really hard tell someone this should be right up your alley.

[yin26]

Myrddin: You have a good memory, in fact! I also had a disclaimer that I needed to test the AI more to see if it was luck. Well it wasn't really luck (the AI did launch a good attack with mixed arms), but it took all but another full game or two to realize that despite the hints of a good military AI, the surrounding elements -- negotiations, etc., -- were simply horrible. Then once you figured out how to manipulate the borders in the early game, the AI was back to nothing. Granted, this is an old Civ player reverting back to this bag of tricks. Many argued that Settler Diarrhea was gone, but I saw that it was alive and well. Old history. If they've really made the elements work well in subsequent releases...great!

vmxa1: Oh, I'm not arguing with you here. I just think something more like my system at least allows for the kind of variance you mention. Much better, I think, than some guy simply saying "I like the game so you will, too." At least here it's a kind of personality test.

[vmxa1]

True, your plan is as good as any.

[Asmodean]

Re: Civfanatics, Apolyton and Firaxis.

Originally posted by georges bonbon
Looking back at announcements about Conquests for the last weeks, I am under the impression that Firaxis considers Civfanatics as a preferred supplier for information to Apolyton.

Firaxis people are more active on Civfanatics than Apolyton boards.

Is this a correct impression?

If so, why?

Well when you look at the number of posts concerning Civ 3, you'll see that CFC is more active than Apolyton. True, Apolyton has more posts overall, but we do cover a lot more games than CFC, so that is no wonder.

But purely Civ 3 related, CFC is the place to go

That said and done, I almost never go there. Apolyton more than covers my needs

Asmodean

[vmxa1]

If anything special is posted over at CFC it will show up here.