Civ 3 - Don't complain

[DarkForce]

i was looking at the threads and i noticed that too many people complain about almost EVERYTHING in civ3.

i played civ1 for hundreds of hours and then civ2 for thousands of hours!!!!

civ2 is my favorite game of all-time (together with doom2 & ufo enemy unknown)

but now that has changed.civ3 is already my favorite game of all times and it will stay this way until maybe civ4 is released!

and why is that?:

civ3 is much better than civ2 in many aspects.
-graphics
-sound
-animation
-civilopaedia is much better and useful
-far more advanced diplomacy
-more civilizations can be put on the map
-better intro!!
-civ3 is also much more realistic.why?
civ2 didn't have borders!!!
civ2 was not so dependent on resources
in civ2 you could acquire almost all the technologies from your neighbours in 20-30!! turns by using your spies
in civ2 the other civilizations were very friendly.i don't think in the real world countries are so friedly with each other.
in civ2 you could see all the resources on the map before you even discovered them.
in civ2 a phalanx could beat tanks and missiles!!
in civ2 you could send a jet fighter away and then you discovered you had no fuel to get back!!!

and many many other things.............



also about some of the complaints:

-win XP have problems with many other games as well.not only civ3 (try win ME).
-ALL games today require a strong pc.if your pc is not very powerful turns may take a long time.it's natural.
-corruption exists in all countries of the world.also, in some countries like russia, former soviet countries and some asian and african countries corruption is more than 90%!!it is not unnatural to have very high corruption levels.
-i think the interface of the game is much better than in civ2.it's faster, better looking and simpler.in civ2 the menus were just borrowed from windows 95.

i have many more things to say but i haven't got the time right now.

i will continue tomorow.

i didn't say civ3 is perfect but it definitely is the best of the civilization series.(at least I believe so).

[Simpleton]

I agree. Civ3 is now my favorite Civ game. It improves on almost every aspect of Civ2 with the exception of combat (i.e. Firepower + HP in Civ2 --> works great , Just HP in Civ3 --> Not so great)

That being said, Civ3 is not as large an evolution over SMAC. I thought SMAC had many great features. In my opinion, Civ3 is better than SMAC but not that much better.

[Blackadar1]

Another useless thread.

So since YOU like Civ 3, NOBODY should complain. Such an ego...

[Sinapus]

Originally posted by Blackadar1
Another useless thread.

So since YOU like Civ 3, NOBODY should complain. Such an ego...

Any better than the "I hate this part of Civ3, if you disagree you are denying reality/a toadie of Firaxis" and such from some of the people who are complaining?

[Sabre2th]

Originally posted by Blackadar1
Another useless thread.

So since YOU like Civ 3, NOBODY should complain. Such an ego...

So since some people don't like civ3, he can't say that he does?

[Raleigh]

Well, it is as useful to see what players enjoy as much as they don't particularly if the designers read these or the moderators send them to firaxis, and in terms of stimulating debate that might somehow reach the designers. If nothing else, they may take these suggestions for Civ4

[n.c.]

Originally posted by Sinapus
Any better than the "[1] I hate this part of Civ3, [3] if you disagree you are denying reality/a toadie of Firaxis" and such from some of the people who are complaining?

The missing comment #2 is a Firaxis fundie saying shut up or makinmg an insult.

Originally posted by Sabre2th
he can't say that he does?

Check the thread title agian.

[DarkCloud]

Graphics??? I'd go with Civ II's any day- they were much easier to see and modify.

[Deathray]

Well, Civ 3, is IMO, a great game. Not quite a great as Deus Ex, but better than all the other games, and I have to admit that the amount of childish whining in this forum is very annoying. "I can't handle corruption!" "The computer killed one of my more advanced units!" "I can't turn the mountains into fertile grassland!" "I don't know how to barter properly so the AI always ends up ripping me off!" "Whaaaah!". These and many other whines have been posted around the forums. Please don't mistake this for me having a dig at valid complaints, as they are there, this is just about whiners.

However, people have the right to whine. Sad, but true. We live in a free society. Quite honestly, I sometimes think that most people are to stupid to deserve freedom.

[n.c.]

Originally posted by Deathray
most people are to stupid to deserve freedom.

Like those who don't realize that there are quite a few valid complaints in comments disregarded as whining.

[splangy]

n.c. would you like to tell me WHY you hate civ3 but continue to mull around in a civ3 FAN forum? Im not telling you to leave but your complaining indicates that you must not have ANY life...just curious (No, im not a firaxis fanatic, not everyone who likes somthing you dont is a blind fanatic)

But I do have to say civ3 is probably the best game I have ever played, and it does have a few problems, but I haven't stoped playing it for the last 2 weeks...

[Ludwig]

Actually, I think it's good that people criticize the game, even when I don't agree with the criticisms. That's how games get better. That's how the best mod's and scenarios get developed [if only Firaxis would finish the editor]. I firmly believe that your ability to play on a gigantic map with more than 8 civ's is the result of the hue and cry raised in the gaming community when Firaxis initially announced smaller map sizes and the continuation of the 8 max number.

What I DON'T agree with are people who freak out, who want to organize a boycott, who accuse the company of deliberating producing a shoddy game, who think the designer community is composed of evil aliens, etc. But this is primarily because I feel computer games as a whole constitute an amazing entertainment value, dollar for dollar, and shouldn't really inspire people to get out of sorts.

I realize that 35 or 40 dollars is a lot of money for many people, but look at it this way: I bought "Caesar III" and only played it a couple of times before I decided that it was too repetitive to be that much fun. I enjoyed it at first, but then it got boring. By the time it got boring, however, I had played it for 12 or 15 hours. That means I got to enjoy it for the equivalent of 5 or 6 movies before I decided I didn't like it. I enjoyed it for 4.5 hockey games, 5 basketball games, and 3 baseball games. 5 or 6 movies, 5 b-ball games, etc. would have cost me a lot more than 35 dollars, even if I went alone, and my wife wouldn't let me get away with THAT.

And that is an example of a game I didn't get that much value from.

I really would be hard pressed to measure the ROI I got from buying CivII. I got CivII IN THE REMAINDER BIN. If I stop playing CivIII TODAY, I still have gotten more than my money's worth.

[n.c.]

Originally posted by splangy
WHY you hate civ3 but continue to mull around in a civ3 FAN forum?

1. I came to this forum while still a game owner/player.
2. I still hold out hope that it will become playable.
3. The conversations are interesting.
4. I enjoy tweaking fundies.

-"not everyone who likes somthing you dont is a blind fanatic"
I'd love to know where I said that.

[Spiffor]

Well, what is common to many whiners and valid criticizers (not all, but many of them) is that they wanted CivIII only to play CivII with. They idolize CivII as if it was a perfect game from the beginning, and that CivIII couldn't change a bit from it.
For example, many think that CivII didn't need a patch as soon as it was shipped. True if you wanted to play solo with regular games (which I personaly enjoyed), but terribly wrong if you wanted to play multi or correct scenario games : it took years to make a paying MP version of civII, and some fans released MP programs before this.
Moreover, CivII, with all these yaers to become better, still has flaws, such as incompetent IA when it comes to war and expansion (and some people whine because the IA in CivIII is expansionistic), too abstract and powerful caravans and so on...
Personaly, in a normal single player game, I couldn't play CivII anymore : having smart opponents who follow the same rules as you in Regent level (yes, they suffer about corruption and about the 2-pop.-points-for-a-settler too), an almost complete diplomacy and an intelligent trade (no longer can you make tanks with wood only) is simply the best I could wait for.
I'm waiting patiently for the paying add-on (which will hopefully contain both MP and powerful scenario editing tools). I'm waiting for it patently, because I don't want the addon to be rushed. I'm believing the same people who are angry for these lacks would have whined too if they were told they had to wait 6 months or a year more, just to have a game as complete as it should be.
CivIII is simply better than CivII, and more enjoyable than SMAC, and except the extreme conservatism of some and the will to whine of others, I can't explain why there are so many complaints about it (well, I uderstand the modmakers who feel cheated though, but instead of uselessly ruminating their hate, they should enjoy the game, which is plain great by itself).

[n.c.]

Originally posted by Spiffor
They idolize CivII as if it was a perfect game from the beginning, and that CivIII couldn't change a bit from it.

I have read a great many of these threads and not seen this once. You should find a more believable strawman.

What I have seen are brand-new complaints about Civ II from the Firaxis fundies, esp. wrt combat.