First Impressions

[TrainWreck20]

Well, the original topic says first impressions, so here's mine....

I have been playing on difficulty '3' (Regeant?) for a couple of games. The first few times were abreviated attempts due to my lack of understanding some of the new rules



However, I am in about 1800 on a 'Large' map, med continents, with 6 opponents + myself. The Germans died an early death between the French and myself (American). The French and me have a dangerously mingled border, but no chances of cities for cities so far!

Those Agressive Aztecs attacked, and the French and I teamed up to wipe them off the planet next. French/American alliance is now pretty solid - we are trading, have mutal access, and they are gracious.

Well, now getting to mid game and all sides seem to be competing culturally for the moment. The continent I am on is occupied by the Russians and Iroqois to go along with the French and Americans. The damn Persians have an Continent to themselves and will not trade maps......hmmm...they are leading at this point by a slim margin.

Eventually, the peace breaks down as I am forced to taunt the russians into war, with the short sighted goal of acquiring that coal just across the border from one of my cites. I have no saltpeter, but have advance to riflemen for defense. The russian Cossack onslaught is fierce, and the Iroqois had a mutual defense pact! My artillery mauls the Russian army and I entice the French to enter the fray for a tech and some goodies. The French do the mop up duties while I get most of the cities, although they get a few.

As public unrest grows in my fledgling democracy, I am forced to make peace, which is harder than you think when the civs have a mutual protection agreement. Gotta make peace with them both on the same turn, or the re-declare war on you and won't talk for several turns!

Entering the modern age, I have passed the Persians in score, but they are slightly ahead in tech. I need to acquire aluminum to build a space ship....and again, what is just across my border....looks like gearing up for war, but I have to install the patch first, 'cause of the damn bombers.....

Love the game, AI seems so much more 'real'. Am growing to like the combat, takes some getting used to. Frustrated by losing cities to 'culture' after the war ended, but will deal with it as well......

[Satis5d]

I'm glad I waited a week into playing before I posted here.

After hearing how so many people were experiencing difficulties at chieftain level, I decided to "work my way up" beating each level before moving on to the next difficulty setting.

Chieftain is VERY easy. My only guess is that the strugglers were those who played strictly using the ICS strategy (which I abhor). I didn't bother to finishe that game, but by the AD's I was so clearly in the lead that I would have had to self-destruct to lose. I absolutely creamed the Indians (didn't even get to see the war elephants ) Played as Japanese (set to random - that's what I got.) Samurai are very cool and I like the timing of the Japanese golden age.

My next game I played as Persians on Warlord. Played on small map against 6 civs (I think.) This too was a laugher. Once I got those Immortals I was mopping up anyone I wanted. I was starting to think all this talk about the improved AI was hype. Again, didn't finish but was clearly in the lead when I quit. (Records that as a low-scoring win in the high scores - okay.)

I moved up to Regent, not wanting to waste any more time on these "EASY" levels. Played as Nova Scotians (radically customized Iroquios: industrious, religious; civ-specific unit: Schooner 2/1/4 (replaces caravel) -got rid of Iroquis unit.
Anyway, with no great early unit, I was still confident I would win with confidence at Regent level. BOY WAS I WRONG. The loss was so humiliating that I have repressed most of the experience already. What I do remember was making the mistake of picking on the Zulus unprovoked. EVERYONE attacked me at once! I was playing on a pangea and I got swarmed. It seemed that even the Barbarians were on the rampage. I learned a lot about how to fight (or better, how not to) in this disaster.

I tried Regent again. This time I went with continents on standard size map and played again as Nova Scotians. I was put at the top of a large island with the Aztecs right below me, the French below them and the Americans at the bottom. I made the mistake of not settling fast enough and before long all three of the other civs were combing my land for arable land. I quickly ran out of space to grow. However, the Aztec cities in my territory were very poorly defended so I attacked. I got a couple of Aztec cities, but also got a war against the French and Americans. At first things went well. I picked off several settlers in my territory and put the workers to work in the back. I had all the iron on the island so my swordsmen were doing serious damage to their units until the French and Aztecs started to pillage all my roads. When I was down to one source of iron (and the Aztecs now with one) the Americans offered peace in exchange for a city. I said "no" thinking that the Americans were too far away to be a real problem anyway. BIG MISTAKE. The Americans sent in about a dozen horsemen who took two of my border cities and it was all downhill from there. I got dissected.

I am now back to WARLORD level for my next game. I obviously need to reconsider my battle tactics. So far I have yet to see:
any unit past musketman
any civ at war with anyone but me
an army
a great leader
the Nova Scotian civ-specific unit, the Schooner ship
the renaissance age
a city converted by culture.

The good news is that I have many, many more hours of challenging fun ahead of me.

[maxpublic]

impressions

Impressions about the game:

It's about 80% finished and hasn't been play-tested. That's my impression after putting in quite a bit of time on it. As a programmer it seems painfully apparent that most of it just wasn't completed and tweaked, and that a number of elements were 'rushed' without being fleshed out (e.g., the editor). Furthermore there are some elements which are so obviously problematic that the programming team couldn't possibly have not known about them (e.g., the need for a 'stack' command; since the algorithm for designing a stack function is easy and can be implemented in several different ways, the only excuse for not doing so is a lack of time).

Given another 3-6 months of development I think the game would've been pretty good. But something happened, somewhere along the line, where it had to be pushed out the door incomplete. The programming team slapped in some patch code to wrap up the elements that weren't finished and crossed their fingers. Unsuccessfully, it appears.

It's rather unfortunate as it reminds me more of the quality of CTP 1 than Civ 2 or SMAC. SMAC was an excellent game right out of the box and only got better when patched; Civ 3 is a broken game out of the box and the current patch doesn't address any of the burning gameplay issues - it's all about making sure the game doesn't crash on fairly common hardware setups.

I'm just not impressed. I expected better of the development team. I expected something as solid as Civ 2 or SMAC, not a game which feels like a company's first effort, over-budget and past deadline. In other words, the game seems like the work of amateurs, not professionals.

(Fan-boys: save your breath. Just my opinion. If it gets your blood in a boil, try whacking off more.)

Max

[CharlesUFarley]

Re: impressions

Originally posted by maxpublic
Impressions about the game:

It's about 80% finished and hasn't been play-tested. That's my impression after putting in quite a bit of time on it. As a programmer it seems painfully apparent that most of it just wasn't completed and tweaked, and that a number of elements were 'rushed' without being fleshed out (e.g., the editor). Furthermore there are some elements which are so obviously problematic that the programming team couldn't possibly have not known about them (e.g., the need for a 'stack' command; since the algorithm for designing a stack function is easy and can be implemented in several different ways, the only excuse for not doing so is a lack of time).

Given another 3-6 months of development I think the game would've been pretty good. But something happened, somewhere along the line, where it had to be pushed out the door incomplete. The programming team slapped in some patch code to wrap up the elements that weren't finished and crossed their fingers. Unsuccessfully, it appears.

It's rather unfortunate as it reminds me more of the quality of CTP 1 than Civ 2 or SMAC. SMAC was an excellent game right out of the box and only got better when patched; Civ 3 is a broken game out of the box and the current patch doesn't address any of the burning gameplay issues - it's all about making sure the game doesn't crash on fairly common hardware setups.

I'm just not impressed. I expected better of the development team. I expected something as solid as Civ 2 or SMAC, not a game which feels like a company's first effort, over-budget and past deadline. In other words, the game seems like the work of amateurs, not professionals.

(Fan-boys: save your breath. Just my opinion. If it gets your blood in a boil, try whacking off more.)

Max

Well said.

Charles.

[Ironikinit]

Re: impressions

Originally posted by maxpublic

(Fan-boys: save your breath. Just my opinion. If it gets your blood in a boil, try whacking off more.)

Max

Interesting tactic of trying to defuse any possible flames by insinuating that those who disagree need to jack off, maxpublic. Tell me, if I jack off enough, will I agree with you? Is chronic masturbation the key to whiner status?

Anyway, I agree with you in part, although I really like the game: They shouldn't've released it as a semi-beta. However, I seem to remember that the patch did a lot more than just reduce crashes, judging from the list of fixes. And I certainly haven't seen a game produced by amateurs that comes close to Civ 3. I'd be willing to take a look at any examples you'd care to provide.

Charles, while your input is a fine example of me-too-ism, a quote to content ratio of 100 to 1 or worse is to be avoided. Just saying.

[CharlesUFarley]

Re: Re: impressions

Originally posted by Ironikinit
Charles, while your input is a fine example of me-too-ism, a quote to content ratio of 100 to 1 or worse is to be avoided. Just saying.

Sorry, come again?

Charles.

[Admiral John]

I cannot say how truly dissapointed I am in this title. I wasted good money and cannot even return it. So many problems, already been covered by many posters. Corruption is the one that eats me, and how rediculously hard it is to take over cities after a while. This game in Not too hard, it's too untested, and undone.

I have some feeble hope that they will do the right thing, and give us a real "Patch" that completes the game, and includes reasonable playtesting.

It's so sad to see people defending this title without even hammering this company for putting out a Not Even Freaking Done product. Just goes to show that it's harder and harder to get the "TRUTH" to companies with the armies of vocal minorities blowing smoke up their butts about how good they are. Yes men are so popular. Sigh.

[yin26]

Well, I did my absolute best to help you save your money.

[athelstan]

Re: impressions

Originally posted by maxpublic
Impressions about the game:

It's about 80% finished and hasn't been play-tested. That's my impression after putting in quite a bit of time on it.

snip excellent commentary

Max

I've always been a huge fan of civ, having played Civs 1 and 2 so many more times than any other game.

I'll go back to Civ 2 rather than play this again. You're right, this is CTP again.

Some of us are simple, sad people, who play at Chieftain level and like the idea of crushing tribes with stealth fighters. But the tech cap stops that. Why take away the opportunity? If people want to be heavily challenged, that's what deity level is for. Chieftain level should be as easy as pie.

The end game is tedium personified. Frankly, I have a job and a life - I don't have time for a game that takes 5 minutes to move your automated workers and it takes about 15 minutes total between moves (Pentium III). I get annoyed at losing tanks to spearmen (it can happen) and cities on culture to les advanced civs with crappy cities near mine. I hate the resource distribution which is unnecessarily harsh. I hate the way other Civs get to build marines in 1 go in a size 1 city. I hate the fact that bombers cannot kill units. I hate the ... you get the message, and they've all been covered at length.

The game promises much, but at the end of the day it's unbalanced. They've managed to make it tedious instead of engrossing, and it frankly needs a lot of work that it should have had before they rushed it out to get the Xmas shoppers. Their reward - they will never be able to do Civ 4. They've damaged the brand too much. All because they failed to play-test it properly on a variety of potential purchasers. The opportunity of making the Chieftain - Deity levels the real pivot as to what game experience you get, instead of just how much the game cheats on you, was lost.

I looked forward to this game so long, got it the day it came out; played two games to get used to it and then went into a long huge one. I'm still playing it and bored rigid; it's become a test to see how long it can take. Soon as I've finished, it's coming off the hard disk and I'll wait a few months & see if they've revamped it. If not, it ain't coming back on.

End of a legend.

[The Mad Monk]

At this point (halfway through one chieftain-level game) I find it engrossing, yet simplistic. I am disappointed that that AIs can trade stuff on your turn (something I worked out independently before reading it here), and that there is no way to rush wonders other than by using leaders. Wonders are supposed to be the work of an entire civilization, not just one city--the Egyptians brought in workers from all over for the pyramids, universal suffrage was the result of the work of women all over their respective countries, not just one city, etc. Plus, the waiting gets real boring, real quick. Bring back the 50% penalty for switching and allow rushing as in civ two.

It's interesting to play so far at chiefain, but my level in Civ2 was King, so I'll work my up to there before I evaluate any further.

I don't think it'll kill the series, but it does need work.

[Raion]

CIV III is "F" for Fun!

Glad its not your world, the real world will make CIVIII more "F", fun, not **cked!



That is what all CIV games were, "Fun"!

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Raion
CIV III is "F" for Fun!

Glad its not your world, the real world will make CIVIII more "F", fun, not **cked!



That is what all CIV games were, "Fun"!

"Were".

[Colonel Kraken]

Due to all the comments at Apolyton about the game (and my experience with past titles) I had decided not to purchase Civ III --at least until a "Gold" version of some sort had come out. I had set my mind to it, and was going to do it until . . . Well, lo and behold, I got a $25 gift certificate to Electronics Boutique at the beginning of December and had a couple of older games to turn in for some money. I decided to go in and get a game.

I had a real desire to get Stronghold because I had really enjoyed the demo. However, CivIII kept tugging at me. My final decision was made when I saw EBs $10 gift certificate rebate on the box. I effectively got the game for $15; I couldn't pass it up.

Well, I could not have been more surprised. I thought I was going to be in for a real disappointment. I am so glad I chose CivIII over Stronghold (not that it would not have been fun). I find CivIII fun and challenging. My wife and I both find ourselves so engrossed that we notice little going on around us (including when one of us tries to talk to the other ).

I am really pleasantly surprised. Oh, sure, there are a few things that could have made the game much better, but in the end it *is* enjoyable (well, at least until modern age tedium ). You guys made it sound sooooo bad.

All of you here who rant about how bad CivIII is, do really find no enjoyment with the game? I find that hard to believe. I understand there may be several things you find lacking, but you don't' like the game at all? Maybe I'm easily amused, but something as simple as the Aztec leader saying " . . . we've noticed your cute civilization" makes me laugh still. There are a lot of things to like about Civ3. Give it its due credit and then mention those items that you find lacking and in need of improvement.

Reading through all these comments, I see a lot of complaints that can be taken care of with the editor. I know, I know "I shouldn't have to use the editor to make the game right." That's an old, tired argument. Maybe the person who said on these forums (and I paraphrase) "it seems the people who MOST complain about things in CivIII are the *least* likely to use the editor and those who find themselves generally satisfied with the game, the MOST likely to use the editor."

Well, that's certainly true in my case. In general I *do* like the game, but I cant' resist the urge to use the editor and tweak it. The first thing I did with the editor is change ALL the military unit stats including movement. Now everything seems to make much more sense and work out much better. (I especially love somebody's suggestion to give units like archers a bombardment value with a range of '0' so that they get a pre-shot when an enemy unit attacks the stack they're in. It works BEAUTIFULLY. ).

I don't pretend to apologize for Infogrames pushing the game out the door and rushing the Firaxis team to complete it without testing and tidying up the loose ends. I agree that there may be a couple of fundamental problems that should not have made it out to the public. Are we beta testers as Yin would suggest? Probably. But it sure is one HECK of a beta!

I am confident that the Firaxis team is truly devoted to provide continued support and improvement for the game. Will they come out with an expansion pack with features that we believe should have been in the original and charge us for it? Probably. That's kind of stinky of them, but I'll probably buy it anyway if it's chuck full of cool stuff. I don't' have a problem with that. Expansion packs come out all the time in order for companies to make more money on their titles. You feel kind of cheated when you buy the first game, later get the expansion pack, and then find the "gold" version some time later incorporating both titles and costs less than you paid for the two separately. I get over it *if* I've really enjoyed the game which in this instance is the case. (It was the case for Age of Empires also). And this way I get to play it NOW instead of later. That's got to be worth something. Well, it probably doesn't mean anything to those who "hate" CivIII . (Sorry, no offense) Oh well. Everyone has an opinion. I know; that just totally opens me up to flaming remarks. Bring it on.

[CharlesUFarley]

All of you here who rant about how bad CivIII is, do really find no enjoyment with the game? I find that hard to believe. I understand there may be several things you find lacking, but you don't' like the game at all? Maybe I'm easily amused, but something as simple as the Aztec leader saying " . . . we've noticed your cute civilization" makes me laugh still. There are a lot of things to like about Civ3. Give it its due credit and then mention those items that you find lacking and in need of improvement.

You said it, easily amused and your probably an overly optimistic fellow. Perhaps you only choose to see what is right with it, and therefor discarding whatever it is that is deemed wrong with it. I know many people like that in person, it often bothers me that everything in their world is always perfect. Kind of a utopian delusion. But I assure you there *ARE* problems with every corner of the game; editor, gameplay, micromanagement, graphic blips, lack of features, corruption/bugs, to name a few. Ofcoarse I'm a perfectionist and very picky when it comes to games so I'm always looking to first see what is wrong with a product before I look for the good in it. And the only way we're ever going to get Firaxis to improve this product, is to get down and dirty with all the game flaws and report them early so that they have enough time to sort this mess out, and give us the all mighty expansion pack. With all of that said, I guess your pleased by Civilization III the way it is, and the rest of us just simply want more! Sad but true, Sorry.

Charles.

[Colonel Kraken]

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley


You said it, easily amused and your probably an overly optimistic fellow. Perhaps you only choose to see what is right with it, and therefor discarding whatever it is that is deemed wrong with it. I know many people like that in person, it often bothers me that everything in their world is always perfect. Kind of a utopian delusion.

Wow, you're able to deduce all that about my personality just from that little bit, huh? Not only do you misjudge me, you follow the path of most others on these forums who criticize the game. Namely, belittle others who disagree with you and misrepresent them in an absurd way.

Perhaps if you had read the rest of my post: "I don't pretend to apologize for Infogrames pushing the game out the door and rushing the Firaxis team to complete it without testing and tidying up the loose ends. I agree that there may be a couple of fundamental problems that should not have made it out to the public." you would not have been so flippant in your remarks.

But I assure you there *ARE* problems with every corner of the game; editor, gameplay, micromanagement, graphic blips, lack of features, corruption/bugs, to name a few.

As I said, I know there are problems as well. But to listen to you and others like you, many would tend to believe the game is a POS. Well, I'm sorry, but it is not. It's a very decent game that can be made even better. There is no doubt it is not everything everyone had hoped for, but it would seem that the Firaxis team is dedicated to make the effort to improve it and resolve some more of the pressing issues --as I stated, "I am confident that the Firaxis team is truly devoted to provide continued support and improvement for the game." This is certainly evident with the recent announcement from Jeff Moris.

Ofcoarse I'm a perfectionist and very picky when it comes to games so I'm always looking to first see what is wrong with a product before I look for the good in it.

Your descriptions of my personality make me chuckle because the way you describe yourself ("perfectionist", "very picky") are the same words others would use to describe me. I certainly am able to pick out glaring flaws in the design of a game. Unfortunately, many of these "flaws" that are stated about Civ3 are nothing more than disagreement on the design of the game (I'm talking about fundamental design decisions). Many of the other perceived flaws, as I stated "can be taken care of with the editor." Not all, mind you, but many. As far as the other issues, they should be pointed out to Firaxis in the hopes that they will be resolved.

I'm not opposed to your getting "down and dirty with all the game flaws", but in this post I am merely attempting to give my take on playing CivIII as my "First Impressions" --consistent with the title of this thread. I wished merely to give at least some sort of positive feedback to others who may still be considering buying the game. From your posts, it would seem that CivIII is not worth one red cent and certainly not worth one second of your time. Tell me, then, if the product is so bad, why do you care to even bother with it? I have purchased games in the past that I thought were going to be terrific. I had such a horrible time with them, I don't care how much patching they would have done, I would not have bothered myself with playing it anymore. In the case of CivIII, I want a good product be made into the best product of its kind.

That's the viewpoint I approach it from. So, take you flawed cynicism,

With all of that said, I guess your pleased by Civilization III the way it is, and the rest of us just simply want more! Sad but true, Sorry.

and bury it.

I want Firaxis to make a product I enjoy into a wonderful product. You want Firaxis to take a product that has "problems with every corner" and make it into something it is not. If I found a game with so many problems, I'd ditch it. Why don't you? I guess you're too busy "looking to first see what is wrong with a product before I look for the good in it." The rest of us will encourage Firaxis to make their good product better. Sad but true, Sorry.

Colonel