Tweet
Why the Anti-Civ3 Attitude?
While playing Civilization III today, I realized something. So I go through the Civilization III forums, and I mainly see messages that are slamming, insulting, or are otherwise deragatory messages towards Civilization III. I have to ask the question: Why?
In December, I was shopping for a game because playing SimCity 2000 was getting quite boring. I had recently read somewhere that Civilization III was the great sequal to a Sid Meier legend, and although I didn't really know anything about Civilization, I bought it.
But before I even opened the box, I began searching the internet for reviews. Most of them were negative, but the ones that were positive promised a great game. I took my chances, and opened the box. I installed the game, and began to play it. At first, I was disappointed. What was the goal of the game? The tutorial wasn't very helpful, and I didn't want to read the manual.
About two weeks later, I was bored of my newly purchased Empire Earth. The only game I hadn't played in a while was Civilization III. Why not give it another shot, I asked myself. I began playing again, but this time I set everything low and NO other Civs. I began experimenting with everything. Soon, I figured many things out. This does that, which causes this, which effects that, etc...Soon, it was quite fun!
The diplomacy was easy to execute once I added other Civs. The graphics werent groundbraking, but they made me feel really comfortable with the game and in many respects were much better than anything I had encountered before. The sounds were okay, sounded like sounds I encounter in SimCity. I liked how the combat system made it so you couldnt just go up the tech tree and fight with a superior army, it always kept me on my toes. The advisors were actually helpful, and the game was just so fun.
A few months later, I recieved Civilization II as a gift. I was appauled. The diplomacy really sucked, you couldn't even technology for money! The graphics were so bad I couldn't tell what was what. Moving the units was a hassle, becaues they often landed on the wrong tile. National borders weren't clear, and I couldnt tell what was two or three or whatever amount of squares away. Enabling the grid just made the graphics worse. The movies IMO were horrible, the Civlopedia wasn't helpful at all...I had to learn about "home cities" and "unit support" which still confuses me to this day. I can't tell wheather my citizens are happy sad or indifferent because of the 'beautiful' graphics. Throne room? I'd rather have a palace. The music was horrible. It sucked...It REALLY sucked.
However, there are people who prefer it to Civilization III. I ask myself how they can do that, when Civ II is obviously inferior. How can they slam Civ III while tolerating the many imperfections of Civ II. And then I realize.....They were exposed to it before Civ III. There are always exceptions, but isn't that the major majority of it? I mean, after reading all the praise for Civ II, I was very excited to play it. But then I felt the same feeling that other forumers say here, I felt betrayed. How could my friend give me such garbage? How could Sid Meier have designed such a piece of trash?
But again, I was exposed to Civ3 first. I like it more because of that. I'm willing to deal with the corruption, and the crashes and the lack of wonder movies. Because to me, the pro outweighs the con. I love the clean graphics, and the diplomacy. I love the national borders, and I really love culture. I love the peaceful methods of winning. But some people love Civ2 lack of culture. It's cheat menu. But I hate it. I hate it so much....I can't begin to describe it. I keep it on my hard drive....I don't really know. But I can't bring myself to play it for more than a few minutes, unlike Civ3 which keeps me here for hours on end.
And then I have another question to ask. Why are people actually turning Civilization into a religion? All over Apolyton, I've seen people insult others just because they Like CivIII over Alpha Centauri, or they want Brazil in Civ3 XP, or they actually support the Americans...Why? It's just a game for heavens sake. To me, that just indicates that they really have nothing better to do, which in some ways can be very sad.
Sitting here right now, I don't even know why I'm typing all this up. Maybe I'm just tired of seeing people continuously slamming Civ3, maybe I'm just trying to rationalize their behavior. Or maybe in my subconcious mind, I just want to be a part of slamming something so I designed this message to slam Civ2. Or maybe I'm just trying to tell everyone that it's all because I started with Civ III whle otheres started with Civ II.
Well, whatever the reasoning behind this post, I do know one thing. I have an unfinished territorial dispute with the Americans (I'm the Chinese...I can smell a conquest victory on the horizon).
I am going to leave now. Farewell, fellow Apolyton peoples......
Tassadar
In December, I was shopping for a game because playing SimCity 2000 was getting quite boring. I had recently read somewhere that Civilization III was the great sequal to a Sid Meier legend, and although I didn't really know anything about Civilization, I bought it.
But before I even opened the box, I began searching the internet for reviews. Most of them were negative, but the ones that were positive promised a great game. I took my chances, and opened the box. I installed the game, and began to play it. At first, I was disappointed. What was the goal of the game? The tutorial wasn't very helpful, and I didn't want to read the manual.
About two weeks later, I was bored of my newly purchased Empire Earth. The only game I hadn't played in a while was Civilization III. Why not give it another shot, I asked myself. I began playing again, but this time I set everything low and NO other Civs. I began experimenting with everything. Soon, I figured many things out. This does that, which causes this, which effects that, etc...Soon, it was quite fun!
The diplomacy was easy to execute once I added other Civs. The graphics werent groundbraking, but they made me feel really comfortable with the game and in many respects were much better than anything I had encountered before. The sounds were okay, sounded like sounds I encounter in SimCity. I liked how the combat system made it so you couldnt just go up the tech tree and fight with a superior army, it always kept me on my toes. The advisors were actually helpful, and the game was just so fun.
A few months later, I recieved Civilization II as a gift. I was appauled. The diplomacy really sucked, you couldn't even technology for money! The graphics were so bad I couldn't tell what was what. Moving the units was a hassle, becaues they often landed on the wrong tile. National borders weren't clear, and I couldnt tell what was two or three or whatever amount of squares away. Enabling the grid just made the graphics worse. The movies IMO were horrible, the Civlopedia wasn't helpful at all...I had to learn about "home cities" and "unit support" which still confuses me to this day. I can't tell wheather my citizens are happy sad or indifferent because of the 'beautiful' graphics. Throne room? I'd rather have a palace. The music was horrible. It sucked...It REALLY sucked.
However, there are people who prefer it to Civilization III. I ask myself how they can do that, when Civ II is obviously inferior. How can they slam Civ III while tolerating the many imperfections of Civ II. And then I realize.....They were exposed to it before Civ III. There are always exceptions, but isn't that the major majority of it? I mean, after reading all the praise for Civ II, I was very excited to play it. But then I felt the same feeling that other forumers say here, I felt betrayed. How could my friend give me such garbage? How could Sid Meier have designed such a piece of trash?
But again, I was exposed to Civ3 first. I like it more because of that. I'm willing to deal with the corruption, and the crashes and the lack of wonder movies. Because to me, the pro outweighs the con. I love the clean graphics, and the diplomacy. I love the national borders, and I really love culture. I love the peaceful methods of winning. But some people love Civ2 lack of culture. It's cheat menu. But I hate it. I hate it so much....I can't begin to describe it. I keep it on my hard drive....I don't really know. But I can't bring myself to play it for more than a few minutes, unlike Civ3 which keeps me here for hours on end.
And then I have another question to ask. Why are people actually turning Civilization into a religion? All over Apolyton, I've seen people insult others just because they Like CivIII over Alpha Centauri, or they want Brazil in Civ3 XP, or they actually support the Americans...Why? It's just a game for heavens sake. To me, that just indicates that they really have nothing better to do, which in some ways can be very sad.
Sitting here right now, I don't even know why I'm typing all this up. Maybe I'm just tired of seeing people continuously slamming Civ3, maybe I'm just trying to rationalize their behavior. Or maybe in my subconcious mind, I just want to be a part of slamming something so I designed this message to slam Civ2. Or maybe I'm just trying to tell everyone that it's all because I started with Civ III whle otheres started with Civ II.
Well, whatever the reasoning behind this post, I do know one thing. I have an unfinished territorial dispute with the Americans (I'm the Chinese...I can smell a conquest victory on the horizon).
I am going to leave now. Farewell, fellow Apolyton peoples......
Tassadar
Comment