An unfortunate waste of money

[AMC]

So, I'm a whiner. But, this game deserves it, it's crap.

For my 50 bucks I was expecting the next evolution of Alpha Centurai. Instead we get a dumbed down version of CTP II.

Diplomatic functions present in AC are missing in Civ 3, the most striking being the "leave my friend alone" function. Even Civ 2 functions like donating military hardware are conspiquous by their absence.

The game is painstakingly slow, even on a good machine, and for no good purpose. In fact, the game seems to have no worthwhile feature other than its overweight diplomacy system, which whilst bloated doesn't do anything like as much as it should.

The advisors are pitiful, again, even basic Civ 2 info is missing. It is, for example, impossible to definitively find out who is at war with whom.

So, diplomacy is worse than Civ 2 and embarrassing when compared to AC, perhaps there will be exciting new units to make up for it? Erm, no. But there is a fantasticly stupid combat engine that takes us back to the days of Civ 1 where a phalanx could defeat a tank. In Civ 3 I have actually had an archer beat one of my tanks. Absurd.

Now, whilst CTP was full of bugs, it was at least groundbreaking. Some new concepts were genuinely attempted. Underwater cities, cities in space... they at least tried.

This game on the other hand is utterly worthless. Firaxis, you ought to be ashamed.

[Yoleus]

Basically I am a fence sitter: I like the game but I have plenty of objections so I will wait for a complete full-features release. Anyway, it is probably nicer to post in an existing "criticism" (some call it "whine", but that's just an opinion) thread instead of starting ("spamming") new short ones when avoidable (there are plenty of thread quite similar to this, just take a look).

Am I becoming a nanny?

[Simpleton]

Re: An unfortunate waste of money

I hate to start a 'Battle of Alberta' here at Apolyton but I must disagree.

Originally posted by AMC
Diplomatic functions present in AC are missing in Civ 3, the most

BUT they replaced some AC options with others. I consider it a draw between the two games in diplomacy.

The game is painstakingly slow, even on a good machine, and for no good purpose.

Do you have a Nvidia graphics card? The game seems to run slow on these cards if you are running the latest drivers. Try reverting to older drivers if you do. If not, I don't know. I have a 233 MMX system and the game runs fine albiet a little slow when scrolling.

In fact, the game seems to have no worthwhile feature

I was doubtful after my first game but I tried it again and I think it's the best Civ ever. I think the reason for my feelings at first were due to the fact that the game has been changed much more than Civ2 or AC were as far as the interface, culture, and resource concepts go. This threw me at first but I got used to this and now I would find it difficult to go back. In fact, I have taken AC off of my hard drive and probably will remove Civ2 as well.

It is, for example, impossible to definitively find out who is at war with whom.

Actually, you just have to go to the diplomacy advisor screen. You click the buttons on the left (i.e. peace, right of passage, war, etc) and a coloured line cooresponding to what button you clicked will connect which civ's are at (war, peace, etc)

Now, whilst CTP was full of bugs, it was at least groundbreaking. Some new concepts were genuinely attempted. Underwater cities, cities in space... they at least tried.

That's the reason the CTP series failed is because they thought that underwater /space cities were "groundbreaking". Sorry, but they are not. They just extended what AC already introduced. If any game was groundbreaking it was AC. Civ3 also has introduced many exciting concepts such as culture and strategic resources.
Try playing a game where you have tons of pollution and you need rubber for Mass Transit and the only available rubber source is in your opponents territory. What do you do? You can try to trade, try to expand you nearest cities culture to swallow up your opponents city or you can go to war. This type of gameplay is much more advanced than what Civ1,2 or AC involved and I say this makes Civ3 much better than any of it's previous incarnations.

Go Eskimos!!

[AMC]

Perhaps I am being overly critical. I was expecting something extraordinary, I got something average.

Actually, you just have to go to the diplomacy advisor screen. You click the buttons on the left (i.e. peace, right of passage, war, etc) and a coloured line cooresponding to what button you clicked will connect which civ's are at (war, peace, etc)

Right, but get more than 8 civs and you're in trouble. It's messy, whereas civ2 was such beautiful simplicity.

If any game was groundbreaking it was AC

Agreed.

You know, I would have been close satisfied with Alpha Centuari on a world map and "terrestrial" more satisfying graphics.

Oh well, you live and learn, but my comment still stands, Firaxis ought to be ashamed. For a while there they really were standing out as producers of excellent games. Once a name gets dragged through the mud (a la Activision with their CTP debacle) it's hard to clean it off again.