Tweet
JADED CIVERS THREAD; super kewl/radical newbies keep out.
Perhaps I was expecting a patch on civ2? This is not at all enjoyable, and the complaints far outweigh the compliments.
-No multiplayer
-Lack of Windows format, and alt+tab does not minimize the game
-Majority of development was obviously spent on trite, ridiculous, and useless 3-d animations which most definately do not "enhance my civilization experience"
-ALL basic toolbar options from civ2 dropped, you don't even have a choice to drop the retarded throne room garbage
-Terrain graphics were not in any way focused on realism:
--Those are supposed to be mountains?!
--"Water" looks like some ice-jade glaze, brighter than any tropical beaches in the world
--Ultra close up format, the hexes are WAY too big. The inability to zoom out - again another step towards AOEizing the series. It does not give that zoomed out, hollistic feel of looking at a world map and controlling an empire...
I just can't put in to words or identify what else is wrong with this game, but will add to the list as time goes by. Will you join me?
In the end, this game is simply not part of the civilization series; it is not a grand step up as 2 was from the original. This is an overhall, a complete re-design focused on popular examples. It is closer to CTP or AOE than it is its predecessor. Core themes from the first two should have been kept, expanded and specified, but we recieved more outright changes than improvements. The key of development was to deny the abstract principles that made the first two so functional, so iconographically simple, so enjoyable. It feels like a set path, rather than a core of abstracts on which we choose our own...
Firaxis did pretty well in the PR department publicising "radical new features" that would appeal to the masses. Firaxis did pretty well in the marketing department as well, which probably led them to accept the fact that the market for a real civ3 was not large enough to justify the required development. How dirty and passe I feel in saying that this was about the money - that this was all about capturing a new audience in imitating recent successes, and raping the old with the power a civ3 logo exerts.
With that said, Sid has lost whatever integrity a lot of you argued he had and would display. He did not stick to and expand on the theme he so brilliantly dreamed up years ago, as if to deny the fact that it was ever effective. Ultimately, I question whether or not he actually had anything to do with this game. Forget it... Cheers, and back to playing CTP/AOE 3 in a civ vain.
-No multiplayer
-Lack of Windows format, and alt+tab does not minimize the game
-Majority of development was obviously spent on trite, ridiculous, and useless 3-d animations which most definately do not "enhance my civilization experience"
-ALL basic toolbar options from civ2 dropped, you don't even have a choice to drop the retarded throne room garbage
-Terrain graphics were not in any way focused on realism:
--Those are supposed to be mountains?!
--"Water" looks like some ice-jade glaze, brighter than any tropical beaches in the world
--Ultra close up format, the hexes are WAY too big. The inability to zoom out - again another step towards AOEizing the series. It does not give that zoomed out, hollistic feel of looking at a world map and controlling an empire...
I just can't put in to words or identify what else is wrong with this game, but will add to the list as time goes by. Will you join me?
In the end, this game is simply not part of the civilization series; it is not a grand step up as 2 was from the original. This is an overhall, a complete re-design focused on popular examples. It is closer to CTP or AOE than it is its predecessor. Core themes from the first two should have been kept, expanded and specified, but we recieved more outright changes than improvements. The key of development was to deny the abstract principles that made the first two so functional, so iconographically simple, so enjoyable. It feels like a set path, rather than a core of abstracts on which we choose our own...
Firaxis did pretty well in the PR department publicising "radical new features" that would appeal to the masses. Firaxis did pretty well in the marketing department as well, which probably led them to accept the fact that the market for a real civ3 was not large enough to justify the required development. How dirty and passe I feel in saying that this was about the money - that this was all about capturing a new audience in imitating recent successes, and raping the old with the power a civ3 logo exerts.
With that said, Sid has lost whatever integrity a lot of you argued he had and would display. He did not stick to and expand on the theme he so brilliantly dreamed up years ago, as if to deny the fact that it was ever effective. Ultimately, I question whether or not he actually had anything to do with this game. Forget it... Cheers, and back to playing CTP/AOE 3 in a civ vain.
.
Comment