Avault review 4/5

[Mahdimael]

Hey all, there's a review up at adrenaline vault. They gave civ3 4 out of 5 stars. Go check it out.

Lots of positives mentioned, some negatives:

-AI was unreasonable in diplomacy.
-Modern age feels unfinished (lack of units, wonders)
-Modern units routinely destroyed by ancient units (mech inf vs swordsman) (a bug?)
-Screen scrolling is very jerky/slow (a bug?)
-Corruption/ War Weariness are problems (duh)

Overall, I thought it was a fair assessment, though I do question the reviewers comments about Corruption and War Weariness. I'll have to play to see if his complaints are valid or if they're just misguided.

The game sounds great, and if there's anything that sounds disappointing, it's the fact that the modern age seems unfinished. Again, I will have to play the game to see, so who knows

link:

http://www.avault.com/reviews/review_temp.asp?game=civ3

edit: interesting...the IGN preview says that the spearman/battleship thing isn't a big deal...be interesting to see who's right

[Jahi]

i hope its not like CtP where my stealth bomber was destroyed my a musketteer and a cannon.. i quit playing CtP because of that.

either way, my LE tin is on order

[Rakki]

The AI doesn't have to be reasonable in diplomacy. I mean, look at the state of our current modern world.... "reasoning" with someone doesn't always work.

("Screw the diplomacy ! We need that oil, so send in the Marines !")

I wonder how war weariness works... does it kick in if you lose a lot of units ? (Everybody loves a winning war ).

[yin26]

Holy God ... this review basically made me want to avoid Civ3 like a plague. Let me explain:

In fact, it's impossible to move smoothly when you drag your mouse pointer to the edge of the screen, so I ended up clicking on the mini-map to speed things along.

This is unacceptable in a modern game.

This brings me to the negative aspects of Civilization III's gameplay, and unfortunately there are many. For starters, a number of units -- mostly those in the Modern era -- are either underbalanced or unrealistic in their lack of potential. For instance, while relocating a Cruise Missile to one of my other cities, it happened to stop accidentally in an open tile. During the enemy's turn, an Archer shot down my Cruise Missile, instantly destroying it. Just how an Ancient era Archer is capable of hitting a Cruise Missile moving at 300+ MPH and destroying it with an arrow is beyond me. Unfortunately this trend continues with other units; as experienced Civilization players recall, it was sometimes possible for a Phalanx to destroy a Battleship in prior titles. This is no longer possible in Civilization III, since sea units (like those in the air) can now only bombard ground targets. However, it is possible for Mechanized Infantry (the best defensive unit) to be destroyed quite easily by an Ancient Swordsman (an attack rating of 3 vs. a defense rating of 18, in case you were wondering). Allowing for some random chance, as the manual states will happen, such cases should really only occur once in a great while, but unfortunately, they happen routinely.

I hope everybody reads that one carefully! Absolute garbage! And this is Civ3?!

Lastly, it seems as if Firaxis reached the Modern era and then stopped short. While there is a full slate of technological advances, this era is almost barren of Wonders and new unit types. In fact, some of what was in Civilization II, such as launching satellites into orbit and eliminating the fog of war, is missing here. Furthermore, while the Diplomacy system is more robust than before, it's also a bit lacking in feeling. For instance, the use of nuclear weapons or razing a city is considered an atrocity and in Civilization II, the computer players would let you know it. Here, such things are par for the course, and many nations routinely go razing cities, nor do they get all that upset when you lob several ICBMs their way.

Great. Yet another installment of: Bore yourself in the end game. Brilliant. Just brilliant.

Once Firaxis implements multiplayer, there won't be any reason to avoid this game, which again proves itself to be both fun and addictive to play.

In other words, SP sucks. That's what he's saying ... and your best hope for a good game will be MP. Any questions?

[Zanzin]

Yeah, I've got a question -

After having worked on Civ3 for so long, and supposedly being the masters of the genre, and having left out multiplayer all together to concentrate on single player, could Firaxis still have made this many errors?

[yin26]

There's only one hope: The guy is playing an old beta build by mistake. I'm serious. Otherwise this is just a horrid game. I'm not trying to exaggerate here. These are disgusting mistakes!

[Mahdimael]

It should be noted, however, that avault never reviews or looks at strategy games, so that may indicate they don't know how to play The corruption and war weariness comments lead me to believe that.

I don't take stock in any of these reviews...other civers will be my guide (and since all of those who got the game are not posting here, I'll assume they're enjoying themselves )

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yin, if you read a post above yours, the PC.IGN guy said the spearman/mech infantry thing is very rare.

And interesting:

note, however, that is it no longer possible to trade food as it was in Civilization II, so starvation can occur often.

[Zanzin]

Originally posted by Mahdimael

I don't take stock in any of these reviews...other civers will be my guide (and since all of those who got the game are not posting here, I'll assume they're enjoying themselves )

Which is why I'm thankful that Civ3 doesn't come out over here until the 16th of Nov - I'll be able to listen what people on Apolyton, voices I can trust, have to say about the game, instead of rushing out and buying it and (possibly) wasting my money.

....Still...I had plenty of time to listen about CTP2, and I didn't....For some reason, even if people on this board call it one of the worst games ever....I'll still probably buy it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

THIS is interesting:

As a last point, Civilization III does include full-motion video clips when you build a Wonder, but these are much shorter than those in Civilization II and only run for a few seconds.

Has anyone mentioned this who has the game? First I've heard.

[kittenOFchaos]

modern era units vs ancient units...let's guess the difficulty level he was on...MAYBE that is why he finished all the tech too early and felt his game barren.

I'm for deity.

[orange]

all that bad stuff and it got a 4/5? (8/10)?

Btw: I agree Yin. Sounds pretty bad. Lets hope it's not right

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, he did say he played games on Warlord and a few on Regent (ie, Prince) and that is what he used for the review.

[ixnay]

Actually, he said he played on Reagent difficulty...not quite the same thing.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Look here:

http://www.avault.com/reviews/avscreenshot.asp?pic=civ3&num=5

CARRIER