ctp?

[Darth Sidious]

I have bought civ call to power (not 2) about half a year ago for like 5$

I never noticed it was not produced by the same company as the original civ.

Also did i notice like everyone else, that a lot of things were better in call to power, even while i have never seen call to power 2.

Can someone explain me more of this, what is the relation between the makers of call to power and the other civs? and why didn't the makers of civ3 take the good things of ctp? There certainly must be a relation between the makers, because of copyrights and stuff.

I'm not too negative about civ3 by the way. Everyone is emphasing on the things that were better in other civs, but there also are improvements.
I really like the thing with the different kind of resources and the unit upgrades for example. Also did i always hoped for a more chalenging game since the other civs were way to easy on deity.

For me the game is still pretty much worth the money, i wont play it for months, but thats cuz i'm more of a real time strat player (starcraft)

[Locutus]

Okay, here we go (again ). As you may or may not know, the inventor of the Civ genre (Sid Meier) used to work for MicroProse (now Hasbro IIRC). He made the first two Civ-games (Civ1, Civ2) and a bunch of add-ons and expansion packs and stuff for that company. Then he and his team left MicroProse to form their own company, Firaxis, and that's where the mess started.

At that point it wasn't very clear (or at least not to me) where the rights were. MicroProse sold the rights of the 'Civilization' name to Activision, who then started making Civilization: Call to Power. At the same time MicroProse itself (with a new team of programmers) made Civilization: Test of Time, while Firaxis was working on yet another Civ-clone called Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. However, soon after the sale to Activision Sid Meier (i.e. Firaxis) got/took the rights back. So then MicroProse nor Activision had the right to make any more Civ games (but C:CtP and Civ:ToT could still be produced and sold). However, Activision had now established their name as a 'Civ-company' and they used this reputation to create and sell Call to Power II (note that the 'Civilization:' prefix was removed - legally speaking C:CtP is a Civ-game but CtP2 is not). While Activision was working on CtP2, Firaxis began making Civ3.

So there is no relationship between the teams that made Civ3 and CtP (and Civ:ToT), it's just a very complicated legal issue. That's also why there for example isn't a Chariot or Elephant unit in C:CtP and not even a Legion or Phalanx in CtP2: if these games had been too similar to other Civ-games there would have been a copyrights problem. This is probably also why Civ3 doesn't have PW or CtP's combat system, though Firaxis claims they never looked at CtP and developed Civ3 completely independently from it. I don't believe this though: when CtP2 was just released some Firaxian made a brief post in a CtP2-poll here on Apolyton so they must have known something about it. The real reason is probably a combination of copyrights-issues and not wanting to be accused of 'stealing' CtP's ideas.

Fortunately though, C:CtP and especially CtP2 (contrary to Civ3) are extremely modifiable (thanks to SLIC) so instead of mourning that Civ3 doesn't have the good things of CtP you can do like we do in the CtP2 forums: take the good things from Civ3 and add those too CtP. They can sue companies but they can't sue modmakers (although horribly enough they have actually threathened to do just that - but that was a Civ3 modder so us CtPers are safe for now ).

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Locutus
not even a Legion or Phalanx in CtP2

Fortunatly I have German version of CTP2, they translated Hoplite with Phalanx.

But back to the topic CivCTP was a thougth as a sequel of Civ2, therefore there is something missing in Civ3 as Firaxis made a sequel of Civ2 and not CTP2, that's the problem with Civ3.

-Martin

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
Fortunatly I have German version of CTP2, they translated Hoplite with Phalanx.
-Martin

Actually, for history buffs like me that's rather unfortunate, Sid had it wrong in the first place A 'Phalanx' is a battlefield formation, not a military Unit. The unit is called 'Hoplite', like in CtP2 (just like with Legion -> Legionaire).

On the topic, I agree, it was the same for me. I always saw C:CtP as the sequel to Civ2 (even though I knew it really wasn't). I know I shouldn't condemn Civ3 for not being a sequel to CtP2 and jugde it as a seperate game (or at least as a sequel to Civ2) but that *is* exactly why I don't like it (and because you can't mod it of course )...

[Martin Gühmann]

So here is my conclusion of these two ideas:

CivCTP = sequel to Civ2
CTP2 = sequel to CivCTP

Therefore:

CTP2 = the real Civ4

So why should I buy Civ3 there is no need to downgrade.

-Martin

[Peter Triggs]

I don't believe this though: when CtP2 was just released some Firaxian made a brief post in a CtP2-poll here on Apolyton so they must have known something about it.

Yeah, I remember that too, so I tried to look it up. Brief??? In a thread asking if you have a copy of CTP2 yet:

Got ours!

Jeff [Jeffrey Morris]

I also seem to recall another one where someone from Firaxis said that it's not a very good game, but I couldn't find it.

BTW, nice one Martin. As you pointed out in another thread there are references in Civ:CTP's files to it being Civ3, but I never thought of it that way.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Peter Triggs
Yeah, I remember that too, so I tried to look it up. Brief??? In a thread asking if you have a copy of CTP2 yet:

That's the one...

Heh? Where *did* you find that? I thought all posts but the ones of the last 2 weeks or so were unavailable because we're on a new server? Just this afternoon I tried looking for all posts by me in this forum and only found 2 or so

I also seem to recall another one where someone from Firaxis said that it's not a very good game, but I couldn't find it.

I remember that too. At first I was confused, I remembered the post you quoted above but wasn't sure whether it said 'got ours' or 'it's not that good' (or whatever) but now you mention it, it were 2 posts (no idea where the other is though)...

BTW, nice one Martin. As you pointed out in another thread there are references in Civ:CTP's files to it being Civ3, but I never thought of it that way.

The only problem here is: I don't really see CtP2 as a real sequel to C:CtP. I know it is, but it doesn't really feel like it - maybe it's because I've played alpha and beta builds too and the change for me was thus much more gradual than for you guys. Intuitively, it's more of an expansion pack (CtP1.5) than a sequel. But that would still make it Civ3.5

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Locutus
The only problem here is: I don't really see CtP2 as a real sequel to C:CtP. I know it is, but it doesn't really feel like it - maybe it's because I've played alpha and beta builds too and the change for me was thus much more gradual than for you guys. Intuitively, it's more of an expansion pack (CtP1.5) than a sequel. But that would still make it Civ3.5

From this point of view Civ3 would be something like a Civ2.5, as we know that Firaxis still use the same graphics engine and the same week tile improvement system.

So the gap would be still one. With the advantage that there would be a gap between Civ3 and CivCTP.

-Martin

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
From this point of view Civ3 would be something like a Civ2.5, as we know that Firaxis still use the same graphics engine and the same week tile improvement system.

Well, if you followed my activities in the Civ3 forums a few weeks/months ago you'll surely have seen the vigurous debates I've had some fanatic Civ2/3 fans, trying to convince them that Civ3 *is* indeed Civ2.5. So yes, I couldn't possibly agree more

[Keygen]

Originally posted by Locutus
On the topic, I agree, it was the same for me. I always saw C:CtP as the sequel to Civ2 (even though I knew it really wasn't). I know I shouldn't condemn Civ3 for not being a sequel to CtP2 and jugde it as a seperate game (or at least as a sequel to Civ2) but that *is* exactly why I don't like it (and because you can't mod it of course )...

I wouldn't call C:CtP as a sequel to Civ2. It might be a civ flavor but it is a new attempt to recreate a civ game with many and important differences like exellent graphics, extended modification support, different battle model, different approach in tile impoving, etc.

SMAC is somehow a sequel to Civ2, something between Civ2 and Civ3. Besides its story begins where the Civ2's ends. The journey to Alpha Centauri. Civ2 & 3 might be historic civs and SMAC a science fiction one but they are more relative to each other than with any CtP.

I like Civ3 quite lot but I expected more from it. I just didn't feel as I first felt when I played C:CtP. After 5 years from the release of Civ2 I expectd a far more improved and realistic civ game and I found another civ2 game with better graphics and some differences.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Keygen
I wouldn't call C:CtP as a sequel to Civ2. It might be a civ flavor but it is a new attempt to recreate a civ game with many and important differences like exellent graphics, extended modification support, different battle model, different approach in tile impoving, etc.

IMHO, this is what every sequel should try to do: recreate the original but 10 times better. Too bad most games don't...

SMAC is somehow a sequel to Civ2, something between Civ2 and Civ3. Besides its story begins where the Civ2's ends. The journey to Alpha Centauri. Civ2 & 3 might be historic civs and SMAC a science fiction one but they are more relative to each other than with any CtP.

I have to agree here. SMAC is a sequel to Civ2 in every way: story, gameplay, everything. It almost qualifies as a decent sequel too (story, atmosphere, unit workshop, diplomacy, SE), but it's still too similar to Civ2 in gameplay to me. I'd call it a Civ2.7...

I like Civ3 quite lot but I expected more from it. I just didn't feel as I first felt when I played C:CtP. After 5 years from the release of Civ2 I expectd a far more improved and realistic civ game and I found another civ2 game with better graphics and some differences.

I don't like it all that much and I couldn't agree more: it should have been much better. Barely qualifies as Civ2.5...

I'm just waiting to win the lottery so I can buy Firaxis and Activision and merge the three

[Keygen]

Originally posted by Locutus
I'm just waiting to win the lottery so I can buy Firaxis and Activision and merge the three

That would be the start of a new era in civ world. Far better products

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Locutus
I have to agree here. SMAC is a sequel to Civ2 in every way: story, gameplay, everything. It almost qualifies as a decent sequel too (story, atmosphere, unit workshop, diplomacy, SE), but it's still too similar to Civ2 in gameplay to me. I'd call it a Civ2.7...

Wow SMAC = Civ2.7 this sytem would give us enough space between Sid Myer's next civ clones and CivCTP.

So here is my last thought about the Civ numbers, all these mods for CTP2 could be conted as expansion pack:

CTP2 + mods = The real Civ4

So now we should have all these numbers right.

And I can now tell all these Civ2.5 loosers that I am already play the real Civ4.

-Martin

[Locutus]

Keygen,
You bet!

Martin,

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
Wow SMAC = Civ2.7 this sytem would give us enough space between Sid Myer's next civ clones and CivCTP.

That's the idea I'm not all that confident about Sid's capabilities (at least not when he's too occupied with gulf to focus on important matters)

So here is my last thought about the Civ numbers, all these mods for CTP2 could be conted as expansion pack:

CTP2 + mods = The real Civ4

So now we should have all these numbers right.

I couldn't agree more

And I can now tell all these Civ2.5 loosers that I am already play the real Civ4.

-Martin

Yeah, baby!

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Locutus
Yeah, baby!

Yeah, I am just trying to explain player1, why he posted a thread about Civ4 in the wrong forum.

-Martin