Civ 4 - Excited? [UPDATED pt.2 - Game is out & now PATCHED! Share your thoughts.]

John Crichton

John Crichton

First Post
http://pc.ign.com/articles/628/628695p1.html

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilizationiv/preview_6128088.html

While I like Civ3, I have come to the conclusion that it's not as engaging as Civ2 was. The changes were really good but they seemed to be missing a little polish. From the looks of things for Civ4 it looks like they may knock this one outta the park.

The religion concept, culture tweaking, REAL borders, elimination of pollution squares (yes!) and fully accessable world map all sound like winners. Anyone else pumped?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

L

LightPhoenix

First Post
I'm pretty excited about it. By far the thing that gets me excited is the idea of real borders. I hated the way borders worked in the previous games.

The trailer is hilarious, especially "Edna".
 

John Crichton

John Crichton

First Post
Yeah, I thought that the borders issue would be fixed from the Civ3 previews but it still didn't keep rival civs from popping a city right in the middle of a small section of your area.

I think my favorite new feature is going to be the pollution fix. The late game was already too messy and the way pollution was handled always seemed somewhat out of place within the game.
 

S

Staffan

Legend
Personally, I wish they'd do an Alpha Centauri II instead. Alpha Centauri is better than all the other Civ games put together.
 

Jdvn1

Jdvn1

Hanging in there. Better than the alternative.
I'm a bit dubious about real borders. They've programmed 'real borders' before (IIRC, it was Civ1 where, after you finished the game, you could fast forward the game in a world view to see the borders) but it wasn't always quite right. I've also never seen real borders done quite right. If you could establish your own borders and maybe fight for them, that'd be great.
 

John Crichton

John Crichton

First Post
Jdvn1 said:
I'm a bit dubious about real borders. They've programmed 'real borders' before (IIRC, it was Civ1 where, after you finished the game, you could fast forward the game in a world view to see the borders) but it wasn't always quite right. I've also never seen real borders done quite right. If you could establish your own borders and maybe fight for them, that'd be great.
Click to expand...
It should actually be pretty easy to impliment. Instead of the gaps that were left due to culture in Civ3 they would be filled in. And they've already stated that unless another civ is at war with you that units can't even pass through your territory unless you have an alliance with them. Basically, it should work the way most of us assumed it would in Civ3.

And I think it's a tad unfair to go all the way back to Civ1 at this point. The comparisons are too far apart. But hey, at least they are addressing it as a real issue, ya know?
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
Call me a Luddite, but I think both Civ and SimCity aren't benefitting from later versions. I don't want a game that will take forever to learn (both of which are becoming increasingly the case) and require even MORE micro-management to even halfway succeed.

Civ2Net (single player) was pretty much the peak for me. Pretty that up with fresher graphics and sound and I'm a happy camper.
 

T

trancejeremy

Adventurer
I liked the first Civ a lot. But the rest, eh.

I want to like Alpha Centauri, but the political ideology in it turns me off, so I can't play it (the planetary conciousness stuff. <shudder> Makes me want to go club a seal).

What I want to see is a new Master of Magic. I would be happy with just a remake of the graphics, everything else unchanged.
 

andargor

andargor

Rule Lawyer Groupie
Supporter
I'm having trouble finding out what the scale is, looking at this picture.

Looks like you can generate any number of different worlds, but they seem "small" in size. Unless the smaller settlements appear when you zoom in.

Anyway, I'm cautiously awaiting it's release. I admit I've been spoiled by Rome: Total War, which I've been playing and replaying ever since I've got it. The main difference: the battle detail is such that you can get those "against all odds" moments and win a brilliant victory. If Civ4 is like its predecessors and "simplifies" combat, I think I will miss controlling my cohorts and archers in battle. :)

But of course, playing Civ is like playing about 10 games in one: ancient battles, roman empires, medieval campaigns, napoleonic wars, WWII, and then MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). ;) So I don't expect a lot of nitty-gritty on the battlefield.

On a side note, I've rediscovered Space Empires IV, a 4x space game in the same general genre. Horrible graphics, but incredibly addictive. A standard to measure all 4x games.

One more turn, one more turn, ... 5 am! ARGH!

Andargor
 

A

Andre

First Post
andargor said:
On a side note, I've rediscovered Space Empires IV, a 4x space game in the same general genre. Horrible graphics, but incredibly addictive. A standard to measure all 4x games.

One more turn, one more turn, ... 5 am! ARGH!

Andargor
Click to expand...

Gotta agree. Civ 3 isn't nearly as addictive as SE4. In fact, I haven't played Civ 3 in a couple years, but I'm currently playing a couple games of SE 4 Gold (my own version of DevNull Mod - fighters were too good).

I might look at Civ 4 when it comes out, but it's way too early to tell right now if it will be worth the time.
 

Remove ads

Top