Review of Civ3 by Yin

[MisterMuppet]

I measure 0 on the Yin scale.

Excellent review, sets my expectations of the game rather nicely. Any idea if a patch is imminent ?

[Father Beast]

Allright! Got a Yin review. Got a Korn review. now all I need is a Raingoon review to make it complete

BTW, I score a +4 on Yin's expectation scale. I didn't expect to be that optimistic. now I just wish I had the game

The only thing about the game so far that is irritating me (just from reviews and hearsay, I don't have it ) is the lack of a decent editor. is it true that it's not even as good as Civ2's in a lot of ways? arrrgh.

[MDA]

Hmm.

+3

I guess that's accurate.

The manual was a dud, the LE add-ins (particularly the designer notes that weren't added in) were duds.

The scenario editor (dud) and lack of multiplayer really raise my ire, but more because I was lied to about them than b/c I wanted to acutually use them. *****y me.

I like the AI to be a little varied when it has an advantage, and I expect it will be based on the different leader "personalities". The few games I've managed so far seem to indicate the Germans are often aggressive, China has actually blatantly stabbed me in the back twice, and civs like France and India seem committed to pursuing peace and trade even when I'm ignoring them...

The interface is manageable, but I had to dig through the manual, the readme errata for the manual, the civilopedia, Apolyton, ACOL, and FFZ to find out some things. Initially annoying, but I've got it now.

Most of the bugs I've run across are mere annoyances, but the problems many people are having with popular video cards that won't run the game probably are evidence that Firaxis dropped the compatibility ball.

I've already turned the music off - sound effects are soon to go, because I'm getting tired of my riflemen shouting and shooting their rifles at every space I move them through. I only have animations on for units I myself are moving. That's not going to last much longer either.

I haven't had issues with game turn length since turning off enemy animations.

I haven't been on either end of a nuke, but they sound a bit underpowered considering the amount of time it takes to build one. Especially ICBMs - I imagine many of the great wonders cost fewer shields.

I don't find armies all *that* useful, and haven't seen the AI use one yet either.

Excellent review!

[mattcj]

Interesting review... I came out a +3. I have the game although have not had time to play it, yet. I tell you though, Yin... you'd never make it in the software industry. As a developer myself, I can safely say that the pressure from above to release something on time can be quite taxing. At my company, I have a director of marketing that was ready to release my stuff with no testing at all just because when he watched a demo, it didn't crash at all!! Luckily, somebody talked some sense into him.
You stated

but Firaxis has displayed such apalling disregard for keeping us informed throught the past 2 years that it comes as no surprise to me that they'd give us a next to useless manual.

So let me get this straight... you want them to develop a perfect game, a perfect multiplayer game, keep the world well informed of their progress, etc. In the software world, it don't work that way. The day you see that is the day the world grinds to a halt.

[Adm.Naismith]

Yin, you surely have a University attitude for test

Very good done, and IMHO hardly a source of angry comment: any player around can rate and gain her/his conclusion, without much room to attack Yin personal opinion. Smart and useful

Ok, so my quiz result put me at -2 points (I save for PM the detailed answer, if someone is interested).

Now I'll have some weeks of pain, because the game could still be good enough if well supported/patched/tuned and I'd enjoy to start a bit early, just before playing a proper finished/polished Civ III bunch of games.

Considered tomorrow is my birthday, may be I can buy it just convincing my wife to let me chose it as my own gift.

OTOH, I'll force myself to wait an official Firaxian to step in with at least a official statement about commitment to prepare a first patch and trouble/bugs/balancing/feature tuning they are working to address.

[Orlando]

This was a very clever review, indeed. If everyone who reviews entertainment media for a living (such as on websites, and in newspapers) gave you a scale like this and let you draw your own conclusions, I'd be very happy.

For the record, I scored a 0.

[knott]

Originally posted by Karol
About conquered cities and far away island:

Poland - is an excellent example - since 1795 Poland was conquered (without having small island) by THREE surrounding nations. There were NO Poland in 19th century. But its CULTURE was very high and in 1918 Poland APPEARED again on map of Europe and even now is quite big country in Central Europe.

Why it appeared again ?

Just because surrounding nations had not enough military power to prevent it. And after 100 years Polish culture was still in high level.

Maybe Civ3 is just good as is. Or maybe it should be like that in modern ages not ancient.

What do You think ?

Poland appeared only because of the Versailles treaty and no other reason.

[TCO]

Yin, great review!!

Really neat way of doing it. Was that your idea.

BTW, I'm at -3. And am in no rush to get the game. Although I'm sure I'd like it. I got Civ3 a couple years after it came out. I can wait...

[orange]

1) OVERALL EXPECTATIONS

[-2]I want Civ3 to revolutionize the genre.

[-1]I want Civ3 to be Alpha Centauri +

[/0]I want Civ3 to be Civ2 +

[+1]I want Civ3 to do some new stuff and keep some old stuff.

[+2]I just want Civ3.

-2

2) MULTIPLAY and EDITOR
[-1]I think Multiplayer/Editor ability out of the box is very important.

[+1]I don't mind the absence of MP/Editor since I am confident they will come later and I am happy with single player now.

[+2]I will only play single player, so with MP/Editor or without, I will simply play.

-1

3) BUGS
[-1]I want the game out of the box to be without any major bugs that affect gameplay.

[+1]I accept bugs as part of the process and am willing to wait for patches.

[+2]I am used to bugs and don't really care if a patch is released as long as it's playable.

+1

4) IMPLEMENTATION of GAME CONCEPTS
[-1]I want all game concepts to be readily understandable and open to strategic manipulation in a clear and intuitive way.

[+1]I don't mind having a bit of mystery behind some game elements and even enjoy coming up with odd or counter-intutive solutions on my own if need be.

[+2]I only need some basic idea of what's going on and will simply just ignore things that I don't like or don't readily understand.

+2

5) AI
[-1]I like an AI that, if it has an advantage, always presses it.

[+1]I like an AI that presses its advantage only when its chances of success are high.

[+2]I think there is no such thing as a really great AI and have no great expectations (and I assume there will be no MP and don't care about that, either).

-1

6) WEAPONS / REALITY
[-1]I like big weapons (like nuclear ones) to have big and atrocious effects on cities and the environment.

[+1]I like big weapons to be an important part of the game but not necessarily as important in game-terms as are their real-world equivalents.

[+2]I don't see these kinds of games as anything but an abstraction anyway, so I'll just accept whatever effects these weapons have and move on.

+1

7) GRAPHICS and SOUNDS
[-1]I think good graphics and sounds are a very important part of the gaming experience.

[+1]I think good graphics and sounds are important but not a defining part of the game.

[+2]I think graphics and sounds should just be serviceable.

+1

8) THE MANUAL
[-1]I think a manual should be thorough, accurate and stuffed with vital information about all aspects of the game.

[+1]I think a manual should at least cover the main concepts in some detail.

[+2]I don't ever read manuals.

-1

9) THE INTERFACE
[-1]I think the interface should make my attempt to do or find something effortless and intuitive.

[+1]I think the interface is good enough if I can learn it rather quickly, even if it's a little quirky.

[+2]I think as long as the interface isn't horribly flawed, I'll adapt.

+1

10) LENGTH of GAME TURNS
[-1]I think game turns should be swift from beggining to end.

[+1]I accept that the end game will necessarily see longer turns ... even very long turns ... though I hope for patches if needed.

[+2]I will give the computer all the time it needs without complaining since I can use that time to relax or chat on the Net anyway.

+1

Total: +2

[+1 to +5]: Civ3 has hints of brilliance and overall solid gameplay that will really intrigue you. A few patches will almost certainly make the game much better --even great-- for you.

Sounds about right. Good poll

[Garth Vader]

-1, good description of how I feel about the game. Plus all your comments are basically what I have observed as well.

Unless major patches fix things that annoy me I should be disinterested in the game before MOO3 comes out, which will be fine by me But I have sure sunk a lot of time into the game in my first week with it.

[korn469]

yin i loved your quiz!

now make another!

a revolutionary way of doing a review, and for those who care here is my score

OVERALL EXPECTATIONS
[-1]I want Civ3 to be Alpha Centauri +

MULTIPLAY and EDITOR
[-1]I think Multiplayer/Editor ability out of the box is very important.

BUGS
[+1]I accept bugs as part of the process and am willing to wait for patches. (this one is fairly obvious )

IMPLEMENTATION of GAME CONCEPTS
[-1]I want all game concepts to be readily understandable and open to strategic manipulation in a clear and intuitive way.

AI
[-1]I like an AI that, if it has an advantage, always presses it.

WEAPONS / REALITY
[-1]I like big weapons (like nuclear ones) to have big and atrocious effects on cities and the environment. |my actual score on this was -469|

GRAPHICS and SOUNDS
[+1]I think good graphics and sounds are important but not a defining part of the game.

THE MANUAL
[+1]I think a manual should at least cover the main concepts in some detail.

THE INTERFACE
[-1]I think the interface should make my attempt to do or find something effortless and intuitive.

LENGTH of GAME TURNS
[-1]I think game turns should be swift from beggining to end.

so i am a -4

[Steve Clark]

Re: Review of Civ3 by Yin

Ok, I'll play.

1) OVERALL EXPECTATIONS

1. [-2]I want Civ3 to revolutionize the genre.
2. [-1]I want Civ3 to be Alpha Centauri +
3. [/0]I want Civ3 to be Civ2 +
4. [+1]I want Civ3 to do some new stuff and keep some old stuff.
5. [+2]I just want Civ3.

+1 EU, imo, revolutionized the genre but it still wasn't much fun to play.

2) MULTIPLAY and EDITOR

1. [-1]I think Multiplayer/Editor ability out of the box is very important.
2. [+1]I don't mind the absence of MP/Editor since I am confident they will come later and I am happy with single player now.
3. [+2]I will only play single player, so with MP/Editor or without, I will simply play.

+1 It was unrealistic to expect both in such a relatively short development cycle (2+ years).

3) BUGS

1. [-1]I want the game out of the box to be without any major bugs that affect gameplay.
2. [+1]I accept bugs as part of the process and am willing to wait for patches.
3. [+2]I am used to bugs and don't really care if a patch is released as long as it's playable.

+1 As a software manager, I know you can never, ever avoid bugs in the first version. But the hardest thing to deal with is whether a 'problem' is a bug or just a design feature the user does not like. So far in Civ3, I see much more of the latter than the former.

4) IMPLEMENTATION of GAME CONCEPTS

1. [-1]I want all game concepts to be readily understandable and open to strategic manipulation in a clear and intuitive way.
2. [+1]I don't mind having a bit of mystery behind some game elements and even enjoy coming up with odd or counter-intutive solutions on my own if need be.
3. [+2]I only need some basic idea of what's going on and will simply just ignore things that I don't like or don't readily understand.

-1 That should always be the goal for all software and web products.

5) AI

1. [-1]I like an AI that, if it has an advantage, always presses it.
2. [+1]I like an AI that presses its advantage only when its chances of success are high.
3. [+2]I think there is no such thing as a really great AI and have no great expectations (and I assume there will be no MP and don't care about that, either).

+1 I suspect that most humans play like that as well. Can't expect the AI to better than an average human player.

6) WEAPONS / REALITY

1. [-1]I like big weapons (like nuclear ones) to have big and atrocious effects on cities and the environment.
2. [+1]I like big weapons to be an important part of the game but not necessarily as important in game-terms as are their real-world equivalents.
3. [+2]I don't see these kinds of games as anything but an abstraction anyway, so I'll just accept whatever effects these weapons have and move on.

+2 In all of my Civ2 games, I have never dealt with nuclear weapons (except for a few missiles here and there). It's stupid to even let it go that far. Plus, if you want to play with big weapons as a focus, do it in a scenario.

7) GRAPHICS and SOUNDS

1. [-1]I think good graphics and sounds are a very important part of the gaming experience.
2. [+1]I think good graphics and sounds are important but not a defining part of the game.
3. [+2]I think graphics and sounds should just be serviceable.

+1 I actually prefer them to be serviceable since we can change them to suit our taste (it is subjective as to what's a better graphics for unit or terrain X). But #2 is more accurate.

8) THE MANUAL

1. [-1]I think a manual should be thorough, accurate and stuffed with vital information about all aspects of the game.
2. [+1]I think a manual should at least cover the main concepts in some detail.
3. [+2]I don't ever read manuals.

-1 I wish I could score this a -2

9) THE INTERFACE

1. [-1]I think the interface should make my attempt to do or find something effortless and intuitive.
2. [+1]I think the interface is good enough if I can learn it rather quickly, even if it's a little quirky.
3. [+2]I think as long as the interface isn't horribly flawed, I'll adapt.

-1 We'll get used to it but the design choice to do everything through hotkeys instead of popups and pulldowns is not a good one (was that one of your brilliant ideas, yin? )

10) LENGTH of GAME TURNS

1. [-1]I think game turns should be swift from beggining to end.
2. [+1]I accept that the end game will necessarily see longer turns ... even very long turns ... though I hope for patches if needed.
3. [+2]I will give the computer all the time it needs without complaining since I can use that time to relax or chat on the Net anyway.

I don't understand this, so I'll give it a 0. Are you expecting that having 100 units on the screen to run just as fast as if there were 5? That doesn't make sense. If you think that they AI shouldn't take long to move all of their units, remind yourself not to play any of the custom WW2 scenarios that will be developed. As in Civ2, you could have turns that could take 10-15 minutes!

[+1 to +5]: Civ3 has hints of brilliance and overall solid gameplay that will really intrigue you. A few patches will almost certainly make the game much better --even great-- for you.

+4 That's accurate.

[Karol]

Originally posted by knott


Poland appeared only because of the Versailles treaty and no other reason.

Yep, but they allowed it mainly due to high culture rate. I just want to tell that conquered nations should make big problems for conquerors - and not be easily assimilated. It's real and it looks Civ3 works like that. Unfortunately, such a game has less fun when you deal with conquered cities. The question is: Is Civ3 history simulation or just game giving only fun for players ? As always the answer is in the middle...

Sorry for being out of topic... but I am just Polish

[raingoon]

Allright! Got a Yin review. Got a Korn review. now all I need is a Raingoon review to make it complete...

Father Beast, you put me in high cotton, here.

Actually, I'm doing my review in serial. As perhaps might be expected, it's a slightly less conventional approach... I'll be getting to the nitty-gritty in the last two parts, but it starts here:

Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate 30 Second Review Part 1 (Intro)

[Roland Ehnström]

Cool, I got +12! I guess I'll like this game!

But... Oh no, now my expectations go up, so my score goes down, and then I won't like it as much... Or?

Interesting review anyway!

Peace!
-- Roland