Atari Sells Civilization Franchise!

[VetLegion]

Alex, this has nothing to do with freedom of speech or having cojones to tell developers what they deserve. Hell, we all post under nicknames -- internet is full of cojones

Secondly, I don't know what you do, but I doubt you would be very eager to log into places where you get lots of criticism of your work by anonymouses who compete how best to denigerate it.

Thirdly, none of the positions at Firaxis has "browsing Apolyton" as a job requirement. They will come here only if they feel comfortable.

I wont be doing the ass kissing personally, but there are always guys willing to do that, and I'm just saying, give them some space

[Alex]

Originally posted by VetLegion
Alex, this has nothing to do with freedom of speech or having cojones to tell developers what they deserve. Hell, we all post under nicknames -- internet is full of cojones

I didn't say this, I merely pointed out that there is space for everyone, even for those who are feeling ripped off by the developers, no matter how lame their arguments might be.

Secondly, I don't know what you do, but I doubt you would be very eager to log into places where you get lots of criticism of your work by anonymouses who compete how best to denigerate it.

That's true, but everyone who submits the result of his efforts to the public appreciation knows that this is a possibility.

Thirdly, none of the positions at Firaxis has "browsing Apolyton" as a job requirement. They will come here only if they feel comfortable.

They are not required to browse these forums, but this is what I would do if I were developing any civ game. Oh, but I'm not them.

I wont be doing the ass kissing personally, but there are always guys willing to do that, and I'm just saying, give them some space

I have to agree with you here.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by VetLegion
Alex, this has nothing to do with freedom of speech or having cojones to tell developers what they deserve. Hell, we all post under nicknames -- internet is full of cojones

Secondly, I don't know what you do, but I doubt you would be very eager to log into places where you get lots of criticism of your work by anonymouses who compete how best to denigerate it.

Thirdly, none of the positions at Firaxis has "browsing Apolyton" as a job requirement. They will come here only if they feel comfortable.

I wont be doing the ass kissing personally, but there are always guys willing to do that, and I'm just saying, give them some space

I post under myself.

Jon Miller

[VetLegion]

I do it on some other forums, and it ain't easy knowing that someone might put your name in google 2 or 20 years from now and read what you posted on a bad day - without knowing the context.

Ever tried to be politically correct with a fourth dimension?

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Civ3 has undergone considerable improvement since it came out. If you still have your Civ3 copy, you should look for some cheap copy of Conquests somewhere. Almost all features that make a good Civ-game are here, and the strategies are much more interesting than in Civ2 (the IA puts an actual challenge to unexperienced players).

I am one of those people who see Civ3 as a badly rushed product when it first came out, but thanks to excellent support, the game now has almost everything I expect from a Civ game

I played Civ 2 for years, but I've grown to love Civ 3 more than I ever loved Civ 2. Civ 3 with Conquests expansion is IMO the best version of Civ thus far. I simply can't go back to Civ 2.

[Dis]

I still consider civ2 a little better than civ3. But I can't go back to civ2 for a few reasons.

First is the lack of borders. And then the graphics. And then having armies supported by shields of each city- empire army support (using taxes) is better. And then diplomats and spies (I never cared for using them). And overpowered howitzers.

civ3 definately has it's flaws though. I wish the combat results were a little more predictable. And the modern age still doesn't feel right to me. And high corruption, and pollution that kicks your workers off the tiles they are working

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Dissident
I still consider civ2 a little better than civ3. But I can't go back to civ2 for a few reasons.

First is the lack of borders. And then the graphics. And then having armies supported by shields of each city- empire army support (using taxes) is better.

These are three of the main reasons that I can't go back...

civ3 definately has it's flaws though. I wish the combat results were a little more predictable. And the modern age still doesn't feel right to me. And high corruption, and pollution that kicks your workers off the tiles they are working

I've played many games of Civ 3, and I've never really had a problem with unpredictable battles. Every once in a while I'd get a bizarre, unrealistic result, but most battles would end as they should.

I'm not sure what you mean by the modern agre feeling a little off... I think that its improved considerably since Conquests. I've had incredibly fun modern age wars. Automating the workers to clear pollution is the way around that.

My 2 main problems with Civ 3 that still remain after Conquests are the corruption and the unusal cooperation between the AI. Corruption takes away most of the fun of building a large empire; there needs to be a more effective way to combat it. The most frustrating thing about Civ 3 is the cooperation between the AI civs. They're too willing to trade with each other, especially techs. It often feels like your playing against one giant civ rather than interacting with a number of intercompeting civs.

[Barinthus]

I actually like reasonable amount of unpredictability in my games.

Whenever I fire up an epic game 95% of the time I will leave all game settings (climate, water, age, etc) on random. And for SMAC/X I actually prefer Blind Research.

In fact I wish I could have blind research for Civ games. It doesn't make sense that my civ would know that i'd need this and that to get dat.

[Barinthus]

Originally posted by Wycoff
The most frustrating thing about Civ 3 is the cooperation between the AI civs. They're too willing to trade with each other, especially techs. It often feels like your playing against one giant civ rather than interacting with a number of intercompeting civs.

I can understand this yet in a way it's a good thing since it encourage the player to be more engaging with AIs instead of simply ignoring them like I would often do in Civ2.

[Dis]

most of my problems with the modern age are mainly to do with pollution, so I guess you can include that under pollution. Not that I think pollution should go away. There should be some balance for high production cities. And I don't think pollution should occur during the industrial age, another flaw of the game. It takes a while to build that stuff up to harmful levels.

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Dissident
I still consider civ2 a little better than civ3. But I can't go back to civ2 for a few reasons.

First is the lack of borders. And then the graphics. And then having armies supported by shields of each city- empire army support (using taxes) is better. And then diplomats and spies (I never cared for using them). And overpowered howitzers.

Ok, the border problem can't be fixed right now, but the graphics, diplomats, spies, and howitzers can all be changed to your liking.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle


Ok, the border problem can't be fixed right now, but the graphics, diplomats, spies, and howitzers can all be changed to your liking.

graphics will never look as good as civ3's. If so, post a screen shot.

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Dissident


graphics will never look as good as civ3's. If so, post a screen shot.

Well, are you hooked on the 3D units or could you live with isometric units?

[Dis]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle


Well, are you hooked on the 3D units or could you live with isometric units?

the animations are nice, but aren't a necessity.

I have seen some high res graphics mods, but I didn't like them. I want the resolution of the terrain to look crisp. Is there anything that does that?

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Dissident


the animations are nice, but aren't a necessity.

I have seen some high res graphics mods, but I didn't like them. I want the resolution of the terrain to look crisp. Is there anything that does that?

My personal opinion on Hi-Res is that they're to blurry, are not uniform, and generally look poor. Try looking at Fairline's graphics and some of the newer Civ2 scenario files out there, like my Gold Gulch scenario. All the graphics are hand made and very representational.