It's about time, and the fancy graphics are good also!

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I have found a game better than CIV II. Yes, it's true. I went out and got 1602 last night. Now, I've only played about 3 hours worth but it seems to be the best of CIV and Simcity together. It's an empire building game like CIV (trade, war...) and the city management detail like Simcity (only much better). Also, I'm always saying how crappy fancy graphics are. Just give me gameplay... the graphics in this game are tip top. The makers of CIV III better be checking this game out. It is MP and REALTIME!!! Throw that turn based crap out the window I say. It held me all night and I'm looking forward to playing again (3 day weekend comming up!!). I buy a lot of software and this one is worth the money - it's just fun. If anyone wants screen shots let me know.

[Scouse Gits]

I have no opinion myself - but there was a previous thread : http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum22/HTML/000462.html which had an opposing view

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Sounds like they were messing with the demo and I can't say what that was like. I've tried Caesar3 and didnt like it. It was just missing something. Now, 1602 is very much like it but there are just a few things a bit different. You'd have to play it to see what I'm talking about. True there is no pause but I think that adds to the game. It's realtime and every bit as detailed as CIV II (more so IMHO). If you're a pause every 2 minutes, save/restore when things go bad player you might as well play in cheat mode. If CIV III looks/plays like 1602 than CIV will live on, otherewise I'll be playing this game. Someone (and it's about time) got fancy graphics right without throwing gameplay away. I think those who really like micromanagement in CIV would love this game, but I don't mean that in a bad way (the micromanagement part).

[Steve Clark]

That almost sounds blasphemous, MWHC.

I know there are fans and enemies of every game that has ever been developed. Heck, there are people here that raves about The Sims (go figure). As I mentioned a few times, I thought I would like 1602, but I really dislike that style of RT play. It's not just the pause button, but the interface and information screens, imo, are poorly done. Recently, I really took hold of Pharaoh, which has a superb interface and you can slow the game down to, not to reload, but to THINK. 1602 plays too much like a reactionary video game: click-build-click-build-build-build-wait-click-build-build-etc.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Whats the difference between that and CIV... click, build, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, click, build, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait... oh s* it's 11:30pm I'm going to bed!

I like it. The info screens are fine but the interface is a little hard to figure out. As soon as you get that down it's really pretty cool. Like I said, I buy a lot of software and I'm pretty picky. 1602 has many good points. I like the RT play, but, at the time it's still a thinking game. You can't just build anything anywhere. This is where it leaves Simcity behind. The graphics are also very good. Makes CTP look sick. I sure do hope CIV III looks like this.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I'll have to check when I get home. I was looking through the book that comes with the game. In the keyboard short cut section there is a pause command.

[Steve Clark]

A point on the graphics. Saying that you want 1602 (or Pharaoh or Caesars3) graphics in Civ3 is like comparing apples and oranges. It has to do with scale. Civ is NOT meant to be a city-building game, it is too high-level for that. Each city in Civ represents a certain level of resources based on terrain. Perhaps the closest comparison would be Railroad Tycoon II where you don't see the individual buildings of a city and it is programmed to display at 1024x728 covering an area similar to Civ2 maps. The details of terrain and resources are the best I've seen for that scale.

Overall, I take your points. It's just that of all games of that style, 1602 forces you into clicking and building much faster than I like. Much faster than Age of Kings, Pharaoh, Caesers3 and SimCity.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I've been playing now for the last 30 or so hours. This game is good. Blows CIV II away.

It's got the empire building of CIV, real time war of AOE and the city management/layout of SC3000. It's not to the scale of CIV (having 20 or 30 cities), but there is so much more detail to each city. It's not a real complex game to play (as far as interface) but it's got lots of detail. The graphics and animations are the best I've seen. Why couldnt CTP have been like this?!?! It's a great balance. I have not tried MP yet but the real time part of the game is a big advantage over the turn based crap in CIV. I want to play - not wait while everyone else is!

The battle graphics are pretty neat also. Everything moving around and fighting it out adds to the game. You have to stay alert. Navy battles are good also.

There is no pause where you can look around. Pause takes you to a pause screen. Thats the only bad thing about it. But, that in itself adds something a little different to the game.

So far this is the best game I've purchased in some years. If you like CIV you should try this game, it's pretty good. CIV III??? whats that?

[Smash]

well I'm thoroughly confused.Not that isn't normal.

I've read 1602 is absolute piece of crap and not worth any attention at all.But you say it is very good and worth every cent.

I don't know

[John-SJ]

Well, I played the demo and had some reservations about this game. Then, at a time when I was temporarily bored with Civ (GASP! You were WHAT?!!?) I broke down and bought the game. Unfortunately, my impression was just the opposite of MWHC.

I found that I really didn't care for the play style at all, and for some reason I just couldn't get into the game. I was bored by the second evening I played and haven't played since.

Maybe this is one of those love it or hate it games, but personally I could not recommend it.

John-SJ

[My Wife Hates CIV]

The combat part is what I like best. It's real time. It's always moving. It's not a chess game, you have to be able to think and move at the same time. Meanwhile, you have an empire to look after, people to keep happy and supplies to stock. I would think if one liked CIV they would enjoy this game. Unlike CIV a game does not become dull after a few days because the AI is a lot better. In fact, there is AI (they forgot about it in CIV).

I've always been one to say forget fancy graphics and give me gameplay. I like the fancy graphics in this game.

I also liked SC3000 but I dont play it anymore because the game has so many flaws. 1602 is actually a better city simulator than SC3000. It's also a better war game than CIV. The city management is also WAY better. There's just so much to do.

[Steve Clark]

But Civ2 is not a city simulator or a war game, it is a civilization-building game. Why do you keep comparing apples to oranges?

I think it's great that you found a game that you like, but I do find it humorous that you caught on to 1602. I would guess that you will get tired of this game and move on to something else or dare I say, back to Civ?

I've been playing Pharaoh alot recently but I don't say it is better or worse than Civ2, it's just a different style of game offering a different experience. However, Civ2 is the only game in my 12+ years of playing PC games that I have kept and will keep replaying every month for years.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I disagree. This game is an empire building sim. True, maybe you dont have 30 cities to control, instead only 5 or 6 but it's very much the same kinda game. Now, the detail of each city is where it leaves CIV II behind, and I do think of CIV as a city building game.

Both games are very much alike. Cities, trade, units, exploration, war, diplomacy... not really apples to oranges.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Eww... A real time, Civ-like (even though it is only 5-6 cities, which really doesn't compare to a great game like Civ) game. Sorry, but the only real time I like is for war games.

[Par4]

Oh god 1602 what a load of crap I hate this it was such a waste of money, Pharaoh is soo much better. The trade is screwed up, ships are screwed up they get stuck on 1 side of an island, you can't make enough money, mines mysteriously dry up, logging camps mysteriously run out of logs when theres a freaking forest right next to them, fisheries never catch any fish. Please MWHC tell me how you put boats on auto to move goods from island type to island. Combat sucks, taking over islands is evil you can just wall in and be impenitrable if you have enough cannons, and having to destroy market places that just keep getting built argh I hate this game.

Get Pharaoh instead, its way way way better, so much better, this game blows 1602 out of the water like a nuke blowing up an orca whale.

The 1602 blows, well I can't say that just don't buy it it sucks a big one. Any bad review about it is true, this game sucks. But be on the lookout for 1503 it looks to be ok.

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon,
But there is a knife