Pharoah: A huge disappointment.

[Jaguar]

I found Pharaoh to be the stupidest decision I ever made on computer games. I decided to choose it instead of SMAC, which was somewhat new at the time. I couldn't stand the graphics. Its OK to have larger-than-life people, but it was just ridiculous. The whole gameplay sucked too. It was just a continual process of building more houses, and then all stuff you need to support them. But I think that the graphics was the real killer. The color was also off.

So my question is, did anyone actually like it? And why?

[Lunnor]

umm

Grarphics: The graphics is actually good I think. It has its own style and if you don't like it, oh well. It may be cartoonish, but it has never called itself Real Life Simulator.

Gameplay: So, you bought a City Building Series game and umm don't like the building of a city? Let see what are there to do in game:1. build city. 2. build monuments.3. fighting.4.trading.The only "problem" that seriously affected the game was the prolonged monument building time, but some people like it that way, so it is more a matter of preference on that one.

Maybe you can describe in more details how you think the graphics sucked. And yes, quite some people like the way the series work, as the Caesar1,2,3, Pharaoh, Pharaoh Exp. Zeus, Zeus Exp, and the upcoming Middle Kingdom linage can attest to.

[FrustratedPoet]

bought it. hated it. it sucks.
your dislikes seem to match pretty close to mine. there was too much irritating micromanagement of your city IMHO.

i bought Diablo 2 at the same time though, so i wasn't too upset with the day's shopping.

EDIT: i did like Zeus, though. the gameplay was much better, the use of the heroes and monsters worked well, and i thought it wsa easier to keep your city running smoothly without crazy micro-ing.

[ixnay]

I liked Pharoah and the Caesar games...haven't played Zeus, tho. I didn't think the graphics in those games were bad at all.

[Kassiopeia]

I have Caesar 3 and Pharaoh. I got just what I had expected; city-building with some challenge and exactly the right amount of war-mongering. I don't care too much of graphics in this sort of games; as long as they do their work, i.e. give you a clear image on the state of affairs, I am satisfied.

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
bought it. hated it. it sucks.

it wasn't very fair of me to say that, actually. it doesn't 'suck'. i actually whiled away a couple of happy hours with this game before i realised it wasn't my type of thing.
serves me right really, i should know better by know than to buy games before i at least read a couple of reviews on them.

[Richard Bruns]

I got a Caesar 3 game that included the Pharaoh demo. I liked what I saw of it. But the Zeus game is far better. They really improved the interface and added fun new features that make the game interesting. The City Building series shows a continual improvement; each game is better than the last.

But I will agree that after the initial challenge of getting the city off the ground, it sometimes gets a tad tedious while you wait for the win condition to kick in.

[Jaguar]

I liked simcity 2000. I liked Caesar II. I didn't like pharaoh. It felt like I was spending forever managing food and rock quarries and stuff like that. I guess its because Egypt was a much older civ than Rome or the Simcity starting date of 1900. There is less technology, and therefore, less options. As you see, I am rationally ranting right now.

I suppose what I didn't like about the graphics was whenever I built a new set of houses, there would be massive lines of gigantic settlers bringing carts that are bigger than three story houses into my city, and with enough of them, they overlap. Like they are just little cutouts pasted on top of each other. The terrain is also way too dark, and it all looks the same.

The graphics are my big rant, but my secondary rant is that I spend too much time building farms.

[Jaguar]

BTW, Zeus sounds good. I've looked at reviews for it. I think Pharaoh was just one mistake in the series.

[Lunnor]

reply

Not much to say about the graphics issue, except desert being desert...hehe. It looks pretty drabby in the Damascus map in C3 too. I guess you would prefer the more...umm colourful Zeus.

Pharoah is known for its intensive micromanagement required. Some people like it, some don't. Again you may like Zeus better as it takes away some management like labour access.

Oh btw, the upcoming Middle Kingdom of the series has even more goods/food to deal with..haha. And there is gonna be multiplayer, a first for the series.

[moomin]

Couldn't really stand Pharaoh, even though I played for a
bit back when. Zeus is a blast, though.

[Leonidas]

Computer games can be a very subjective thing: one person's paradise is another person's purgatory. . .

Personally, I don't touch 99% of the games out there. But that's just my personal taste. There has to be something special about a game before I spend my time on it. Even then, I usually stick to the strategy/wargame genre. . .

That's why it's so important to read reviews and others' comments before buying a game.

The Caesar/ Pharoah series has a large, faithful following. So do the Diablo and FPS games.

It all comes down to personal preference. . .

[Juggler]

I also bought Pharaoh (about a year ago).

It all started with Caesar II which was simply great. Caesar III was even better so I decided to buy Pharaoh.
But I was quite disappointed. Pharaoh has a nice ancient setting but the game can be very hard and boring at times. Why do I have to wait 3 hours to build a piramid? And why is there so little fighting when you have an army with chariots? If you're an experienced builder you can build yourself quite a decent city but you have to be a master architect to please all your citizens and get a waealthy mansion.
So I'm not surprised they tried to improve the game with a sequel.

Then again Zeus is a much better game. Interesting and addictive. Can't wait for another sequel (with a chinese setting I think).

[Grumbold]

I loved Caesar 2 & 3 and Pharaoh was exactly what I was expecting except for the very extended monument building phases. Those I grew used to but it stopped me wanting to complete every single mission. Played back to back with the Caesar 3 game you can see the good things they introduced, like the workhouses, route blockers etc.

Zeus etc were a deliberate attempt to step away from the micromanagement a bit. In that I welcome them even though the level of detail in Pharaoh was not above my tolerance threshold. Unfortunately I hate the avatars. Each mission seems to centre around sucking up to the right Gods so that their avatars are around when they are needed and all your other city building skills are incidental.

What I hope eventually comes out of these games are true ancient city building sims that approach (and exceed) the SimCity series. The Pharaoh/Zeus reliance on walkers turning in the right directions just annoys me since it ruins the reality. Houses right next to a market will starve because it is built next to a crossroads while twenty mines can work at full speed because their walkers all encounter the same small clump of huts and are satisfied.

[Jaguar]

I actually tried it again, got a bit farther in the game, and now its go enough options that its gameplay is pretty good now. (I still can't stand the graphics, but I'm getting more used to it. If I weren't so lazy I'd mod the game to have proper sized people and prettier land.

But anyway, a question: I am supposed to build a monument, and I have the guilds, but how do I select a location for it? I haven't found an option to select the location anywhere.