CIV comparrisons

[Colonâ„¢]

No Lordstone you misunderstand me, I do not mean codes but the basic ideas of the game, the way how the game works.

The basic ideas are just thesame as in Civilisation I, only largely expanded.

This will likely to be good game, but there are a LOT of realism errors.

To give another example of something that's one of the basics of the game, but is unrealistic, cities.

Without cities no empire and that already is not true, ok people say "just imagine that it is not a city but a larger area" but I don't want to imagine things, I buy I game so that I don't have to fantasise.

Another thing, here cities (or wider areas if I use my imagination) only grow if there's enough food around it, but history has shown that the availabilty of food only is a basic condition for large cities, in the 20th century it's not even a condition anymore, food can easily be bought foreign.

[Beefcake]

That's why in civ, there is such a thing as food caravans.

[Squamp]

I must admit I'm glad to have read this thread. It brought me back down to earth a little after all the 'hype' everywhere else.

The good news for me is that I only played Civ2 for about 150 hours total (and not for a year now). I have ensured that CTP will be new, fresh and exciting!

[Kingfish]

Personally I am looking for an improved Civ2, but a game that also has a good multiplayer capability. IMO, multiplayer is what will set CTP apart from it's predacesors. (I hope.)

Kingfish

[Atahualpa]

To Zerg:
You are talking of games only getting a face lift and nothing more, but that is not only with computer games! Just imagine a car! A car is a car and I think you will prefer a new car (e.g.: Mercedes new S class) instead of an 12 year old wracky car (lets say Al Bundy's dodge) with less comfort (unless you are no fanatic old timer or Al Bundy fan!). Or take computers. A computer is a computer, wether it is a PIII or a 486 or a 286. A PIII is just an improved PII or 486 but I think you will prefer the PIII over the 486, wont you? So, somebody has invented the turnbased strategic game genre and it will be like thousands of other things too developed and developed to make it better.
Humans develop too, or do you want to stay with Homo Erectus? Just think of that, we (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) are nothing more than improved Homo Erectus, but would you say Homo Erectus was better? Everything develops, but the basics remain, else we would see a completely new form of tree every year.
Its logic that something improves, but if you want to stay with civ1, stay with it. Dont you sometimes think: this could be improved, that could be made better, ... . Because if you have this thoughts you make your whole argumentation ad absurdum.
You agree?

Ata

[Crimson238]

ive been reading the posts and i think that any new civ game will be a good one. No im a person who takes everything into consideration..yes baisically it is the same game, but i also includes some fetures that you couldn't even imagine to find in civ I or II. Look at the new places to build, Space and Under sea bith with differant pros and kahns. this game also have alot of new AI as well as new types of tactics. in this, unlike in Civ 2 you can engaage in piracy, propraganda attacks, as well as convert an entire city to your religion. now il admit civ 2 was a GREAT game one of the best... it was revolutionary in the field of gamming, but i think that even tought civ CTP is just a newer additionto civ 2 i think that it will far surpass civ 1 and 2 and will be a fine addition and a worthy monarch to the civ family