Column #112: Civ3 Expansion Or New Game?

[DanQ]

Grier's grows weary as he explores the immense expectations imposed upon the upcoming Civilization III in his article
"Civ3 Expansion Or New Game".

Comments/questions welcomed.

----------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

[DirkZelwis]

Hello!
I agree with most what Grier said, though I might add a thing. I always enjoyed the thought of being "first among equals" ("primus inter pares"), in the case of Civ2, the leader of my people. So I like my people happy, I enjoy it when they're well fed, and multiply [I guess most of us have enjoyed this activity from time to time ]. Civilization to me is not only a game, but something made by humans and for humans.
Bye, Dirk
"Dirks and Daggers.
Sharp to the point."

[Roze]

Agreed, agreed. I've been thinking about this and, really, SMAC was CIV III. It was the logical progression of the story and had all of the things that made CIV II great.

The improvements have come at a price, though. SMAC is a far longer game, just as CIV was longer than RRT. For me, SMAC, or at least the end-game, is just too long, although I play it continually. CTP was ridiculous. I bought it on its' first day of release, played one game which lasted a month (month!!!) and have never played it since. Great graphics and sounds but unplayable.

So what should CIV III be? A tart-up of CIV II or something completely different? I vote for the tart-up because, as you say, CIV II is good enough already.

[Hawkman142]

CivilizationII is a great game and the main indea of the game should not be change, but CivIII shoould try to come closer to real life. The thing that keeps me playing is the connection between real life civilization relationships and the game. CivIII should not try to go far from the great games of CivI CivII, but advance the game play. Only a few people get chance to be world leaders in real life, but civilization gives us the chance to rule the world or create world peace!
[This message has been edited by Hawkman142 (edited May 01, 2000).]

[pris]

Realism be damned I want to have fun. Radically changing Civ could kill it.

[Father Beast]

Believe it or not, I still play the original Civilization from time to time. I think of it as "Civ II Lite". when I want a game that doesn't require as much thought. eventually, I miss my spys and engineers and go back to the real game. My hope is that Civilization III is good enough to make me think of civ II as "Civ III Lite".
Can that be said of AC?