|
Post by TheGoddess on Oct 27, 2005 16:25:31 GMT -5
Speaking of the new much anticipated Civ4 of course. Sure many of you here wont take my opinion of the game very seriously, and in truth I wouldnt take anyone elses too seriously either. However having played Civ1-3 for years, I can say that with my first impression I find the game clumsy and ill designed. Its not comfortable at all, its bulky in the sense that things are not laid out effieciently. Hey I can live with the 3D graphics since this evidently was a marketing decision, but the gameplay takes some real getting used to. I dont recognise this game anymore. Whats with all the different resources? Crabs, cows, fish, whales, wheat, wine, spices, sugar, sheep, rice, pig, bananas, deer, corn, and clams. How many food resources do we need, does it really need to be this indepth? Cmon, bring back "game", I think this could encompass the same things. All the constant movement is a CONSTANT distraction, ie squirrels or rabbits wiggly in the forrest. I dont like the idea of not being able to enter another persons land without declaring war, thats stupid, perhaps it was the setting, I played a normal game, maybe its defaulted to do that. Cant build in another civs land, even when I was at war with them, that sucks so much for quickly stealing a resource. I honestly cannot think of anything positive that has been added to this game since the PTW era. Wait, yes there are some positives. Give me a second Ill think of them, now I did not play a huge epic so I may have missed out on some gems within the game. Multiple golden ages sounds great, heck would even be great, but I didnt see my Aztecs get one when their Jag won its battle, did the requirement change from previous Civ's? On the flipside, 8 turn golden ages? Wow, thats hardly worth it. In past games you went to war specifically for a golden age, now thats kind of moot given its only 8 turns. Strength points or attack points? Bring back 3.1.2 it makes so much more sense. However this isnt the worst feature of this game. Are mountains always impassable in this game or did I not research the "mountain climbing" tech? Oh and roads evidently arent necessary so long as your culture borders touch. I guess they only come into play for resources. Dont take my word for it, I know many peopel here dislike me for my stance on other issues here, thats fine. But dont say I didnt warn all you regulars out there. THIS IS NOT THE SAME GAME YOU GREW TO LOVE OVER THE YEARS. THIS IS AN EMBARRASSMENT AND A DISGRACE.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Oct 27, 2005 16:39:53 GMT -5
Goddess this is NOT PTW or C3C, so stop comparing it to them, pretend you are a n00b and then give me complaints about what you found hard to learn. Your currents complaints are nothing more than "it's not just an improved PTW/C3C".....and you are right..so lets move on. I would suggest you read both the manual and the 'pedia entirely..especially the part of the 'pedia called Game Concepts. We spent countless hours refining gameplay balance during the test, so I know that overall this is a great strategic game. But your complaints are that you can't do your favourite PTW tricks, well I guess you will have to learn new tricks To quote Fried's first article: "The World As You Know It Is Changed Forever" CS
|
|
|
Post by sparta on Oct 27, 2005 17:07:41 GMT -5
Goddess... you have your opinion... and I have mine.
Mine? Well here it is....
I do NOT like seeing somebody saying this game is a waste of money in our ladder forums, thus scaring away some people. I also think its foolish of you to come to our forums and bring nothing but negativity. You get the game, play it for a day, and since it isn't the same as the game you have been used to for the last 2 years or so, you automatically go into badmouthing the game. Tell me... do you WANT people here to look at you like you are some kind of twit?
As for the garbage (and I DO mean garbage) that you are talking about, such as the no need for the roads, the extra resources, and the impassible mountains... that is all your total crap excuse just to bad-mouth the game in public.
It's different from Civ3. Get used to it. You don't get Golden ages that way. Heres a thought; read the fricken manual, eh?
This is one thing I do agree with. They do not seem to make it very clear as far as what the units stats are.
Is that REALLY that big of a deal? no.
Since you only played the game for a day, you wouldn't realize the true affects of roads. So how about you be quiet and play the game more? We do NOT expect you to love the game and understand every bit of it after the first day.
You're right, nobody likes you. And 'warn the regulars?' You actually think the regulars will pay any attention to you? C'mon.
This is really what pissed me off. TRUE Civ-fans love EVERY Civ, and they WOULDN'T call the game a fricken disgrace.
Okay. There is my opinion. Conclusion? Play the game for more than a day before you start bad-mouthing it, maybe lighten up, THEN-AND-ONLY-THEN will you have any opinion worth reading.
-Sparta
|
|
|
Post by soccermaster06 on Oct 27, 2005 17:32:20 GMT -5
how long till fried gets here?
|
|
|
Post by TheGoddess on Oct 27, 2005 17:37:29 GMT -5
Canuck,
I do plan to delve more deeply into the game, however its quite difficult to do so when your 1 year old $1,600 Dell laptop cant even play the game at an acceptable speed on the tinyist of maps and only 1 foe with most graphics minimised on single player.
Sparta,
You are supposed to be poilte. I said nothing to or about YOU personally, I would like to think you would reciprocate the favor. My opinion of this game is just as valid as yours. I admit that I do not know it inside and out since I have only had it 1 day, however it is NOTHING like any of us have played in the past.
If you removed the name Civilization IV from its box none of us would recognise this game, and only a few of us would stick around to learn it.
This game appears to be a nightmare from the begining. There are dedicated rooms in the Conquest lobby that are advertising how we have been ripped off and many people talking in the same lobby about their MANY dislikes of this game. Heck it appears that more than half of the people that bought this game cant even INSTALL this game due to numerous problems.
Like I said earlier, you dont have to like me, but my opinion of this game is every bit as valid as yours. And thus far it is a negative opinion. This is not what any of us wanted or expected thus far.
Perhaps this game will appeal to a whole different genre, definately not the majority of the regulars.
|
|
|
Post by sparta on Oct 27, 2005 17:46:55 GMT -5
I apologize for being impolite, but I just think people should give the game an actual try (not a day of playing it) before jumping to conclusions. People saying they hate the game and that its just a waste of money after day 1 will most likely come to enjoy the game IF they give it a valid chance.
|
|
|
Post by cantabrian on Oct 27, 2005 19:18:06 GMT -5
wow you play one game and call it a waste of money, a bit premature don't you think. This is a whole new civving experience so don't expect it to be able to play it like c3c or ptw. And to this im glad, who wants the same game repackeged with better graphics? not me for one.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Oct 27, 2005 20:09:56 GMT -5
Well, I can understand Godess's reaction. It's pretty close to my first impression with 1 day of experience. The game just seems incredibly sluggish. The enhanced graphics don't mean squat to me. Sure, it looks nice when you first see it; but that really means nothing to me. It's the logic and strategic game engine that is important to me. Maybe it's there and it's sound, I can't tell yet. If it's lacking and I'm forced to pay a couple of hundred bucks to upgrade my hardware I will be very disappointed.
The install glitches are also a major disappointment. There is no excuse for this. It is just plain sloppy. It makes me wonder if they just rushed it to market with cool eye candy and didn't really invest in the "meat". There is sloppiness everywhere I look. The disks are mislabeled, the manual has no technical reference section, the manual has page collation mistakes.
There is a lot of fluff and cuteness, and frosting here; but I'm wondering if the cake is not half baked.
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Oct 27, 2005 20:51:47 GMT -5
It's easy to turn off all the extra graphics stuff, why don't u guys look into that. And Btw, I'm running Civ4 on a Pentium 3, 512 mb RAM, 64 GeForce2 and I don't have a single problem, lol. Fix your settings and quit crying. Another thing, when I first started playing Civ3 the day it came out, I couldn't figure out all of the extra buttons and whatnot. This game is the same way, it'll take time to learn every nuance, and it looks incredibly detailed and complex. You might need higher than a 70 IQ and at least a high school education to figure this game out. (off topic: could one of you nice Admins change the text on the Quick Reply from black to some other brighter color, I can't see what I'm typing here)
|
|
|
Post by montana99 on Oct 27, 2005 21:13:29 GMT -5
At this point, I am dissapointed in C4. I have only played about 5-6 hours of SP. I will not give up as I remember now that Civ 1 was a new concept and it took quite a while to grasp it.
|
|
Trayk
Worker
Lets Party at your place!!
Posts: 148
|
Post by Trayk on Oct 27, 2005 21:23:10 GMT -5
Canuck, I do plan to delve more deeply into the game, however its quite difficult to do so when your 1 year old $1,600 Dell laptop cant even play the game at an acceptable speed on the tinyist of maps and only 1 foe with most graphics minimised on single player. funny, my 11 month old Compaq runs it just fine, and I was involved an a 20 player game during Beta test...Dude, you bought low end !!
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Oct 27, 2005 21:25:02 GMT -5
What disappoints you Montana? we do want constructive feedback.
CS
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Oct 27, 2005 21:32:47 GMT -5
It's easy to turn off all the extra graphics stuff, why don't u guys look into that. And Btw, I'm running Civ4 on a Pentium 3, 512 mb RAM, 64 GeForce2 and I don't have a single problem, lol. Fix your settings and quit crying. Another thing, when I first started playing Civ3 the day it came out, I couldn't figure out all of the extra buttons and whatnot. This game is the same way, it'll take time to learn every nuance, and it looks incredibly detailed and complex. You might need higher than a 70 IQ and at least a high school education to figure this game out. (off topic: could one of you nice Admins change the text on the Quick Reply from black to some other brighter color, I can't see what I'm typing here) I've seen no documentation anywhere about adjusting settings. It certainly isn't in the Technical Reference of the Manual as that is non-existent.
|
|
|
Post by Rhyanon on Oct 27, 2005 21:47:14 GMT -5
constructive feedback, well let me see if I can bring it over right. I play this game sp almost all the time since yesterday afternoon and well I was about to deinstall and forget it. Now so slowly it takes form and actually makes a bit fun. The civilization borders are difficult to see from the other civs. I provoked a war today because I entered a foreign civs land. I was warned but could not discern the border. Also I do hard to discern the units from other civs that stroll around disclosing the map. They look all the same. You really have to look very close zoomed in to differentiate them. A bit more color would be good to both points made yet. Multiplayer lobby is not good either. Windows are all small and you have to scroll a lot. Looking for buildings or improvements is real hard to do, since there are only icons and not the name of improvement. There is also no index in civilopedia, that's a real loss. It's difficult to find anything, least for me. And finally you again have to zoom in very close to see what tiles are improved already. I sent workers to the same tile again and was told I delete another improvement. The other things that annoy me are mainly things I need to get accustomed to, so I leave them out here. But maybe something can be done about my 4 above points in a future patch. Cannot imagine that I should be the only one to have problems with it. Other than that I like how this game works now with so many options what to do and how to win Well the graphics looks a bit childish, but is okay. Rhyanon
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Oct 27, 2005 22:43:36 GMT -5
There's a lot going on here, so this is what I'll offer: 1- Play more than one or two games. CIV's level of strategic depth is much, much deeper than C3C's, and it's also very different. Under a dozen games, you really don't have enough of a frame of reference. 2- There were a lot of rumors going around about whether Take2 rushed Firaxis. I can't confirm or deny, but realize that if the install process was rushed, it'll be fixed. Firaxis doesn't like anything but the highest quality stuff. 3- I can assure you that Firaxis knows all of this. I personally guarantee it. They're burning the midnight oil, quite literally. 4- This isn't a graphics-upgraded C3C. It was never intended to be. It's a whole new game, with new challenges and features. You have to accept that C3C expertise means almost nothing here, or you'll struggle a lot longer. Some skills still work: Sentinel nets, intelligent worker usage, build prioritizing. Many don't. That can be tough to accept. 5- It's still Civ... but it's a lot more than C3C. Give it a fair chance and get used to it.
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Oct 27, 2005 22:45:02 GMT -5
Oh, and please make sure to remain civil at all times. If you think the game is in rough shape, you're entitled to say so, and others are entitled to disagree if they wish; no one is entitled to take potshots at each other, and if they do, the Forum Nazi will show up rather quickly. That said, this discussion has been pretty civil so far. Constructive criticism will find the right ears, folks.
|
|
|
Post by StarlightDeath on Oct 27, 2005 22:49:44 GMT -5
If Civ4 were anything like Civ 3 it probably wouldn't sell and I wouldn't be posting here right now. However, I have reservations about the incredibly slow expansion rate. I'm used to civ2 where I'm building 100 cities per game by 1000BC. That being said, managing 100 cities got kind of old so I'm ok with less cities. I can't wait to play civ4 and see what exploits I can find. I remember when I found the bribe bug and the trade bugs in civ2, so much fun trying to find those things.
|
|
|
Post by jonbe54 on Oct 28, 2005 0:51:34 GMT -5
Hey you guys, from where I stand Civ is all about growth and adaptation, if you can't or simply won't then you should probably be sitting down watching daytime t.v and frying your brain with that nice predictable drivel the network executives see fit too ram down our throats.
Jonbe
|
|
|
Post by Snarf on Oct 28, 2005 3:50:15 GMT -5
So far I must be lucky. The game installed easily, runs smoothly (I just spent 1600 on a this years Dell so it better) my tech chart is in English, and though I noticed the no technical reference thing I also noticed a toll free tech support number. Gamewise I've played one game on chieftan (way too easy) won by space race. Took a bit to get used to the new interface and all but by games end I was doing alright. I really like the great people. I got several of them and never used one for a GA. Culture bombing the next civ over is great fun, blasting a tech out in 1 turn is very nice as well. Still haven't got the hang of warring, trading, or religion yet but also still haven't read the manual My overall impression so far is that like we have been told for the last few months now it is not Civ3 and frankly I like that. I was starting to get burned out on Conquests. I actually spent the last week while waiitng for CIV running through the conquests scenarios just for something different. Will probably give MP a try this weekend and hopefully my mistakes will be evened out by everyone elses For those of you who are really having fits about the game think back to when you first tried MP. I think most of us here are like me except a few of you old timers, you walked in thinking you were a stud from playing SP and then came the shocking realisation you were a noob. Well guess what? We're all noobs again. And when you get frustrated and find no redeeming qualities in the game at all, go look at the tech icon for The Internet, I literally laughed out loud when I saw it
|
|
|
Post by TheGoddess on Oct 28, 2005 6:54:31 GMT -5
Canta,
Did you buy Civ1? Civ2? Civ3? PTW? Conquests? All of these are the same game ingeneral. They all have the same components that we all seem to like with some tweaking along the way. Civ4 is nothing like Civ3.
Nearly all successful franchises stay successful because they identify their audience and stay loyal to them and to the game. I dont think this one has done that this time around and apparently I am not alone in this thought as it appears to be the consensus in the Conquests lobby.
|
|