Civ IV: Beyond the Sword...

[cignus_pfaccari]

One question...can I build mecha and power armor now?

Brad

 

[trancejeremy]

One question...can I build mecha and power armor now?

Brad

From what I've read, yes on mecha (apparently has an amusing description for them). Haven't seen anyone mention power armor.



Here's a comprehensive (if somewhat biased, since the author was a tester on the game) review of it

http://civilization4.net/3/263/

(It's broken up into several pages, just start with the first link)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Warlords was good, and added some needed elements to the game. I'm anxious to get this one, too. I'm a Civ-aholic from way back.

Civ III almost killed my love for the game.

Almost. Thank the gods that I still had Civ II.

Civ IV restored my faith, and destroyed much of my available free time. Warlords did not help with this problem. Now Beyond the Sword... who needs sleep anyway?

The Auld Grump

 

[irdeggman]

Civ III - Conquests was awesome (and started my addiction).

Civ IV didn't impress me as much as did conquests, Warlords was much better.

I just managed to get Beyond the Sword loaded. I have no idea why it gave me such trouble - I returned my first copy and it kept wanting to load a "newer version of Warlords", but eventually it managed to load up.

Now to start playing. . . . .

 

[Mercule]

Civ III almost killed my love for the game.

I don't understand this. You aren't the first person I've heard express disdain for Civ3, either.

Why?

 

[WhatGravitas]

I don't understand this. You aren't the first person I've heard express disdain for Civ3, either.

Why?

Dunno, but it was close to Civ II in many respects, a bit like a pretty and polished version of it, with some minor additions (culture stands out), but losing the original charm - it lost some feel of it, some originality. Especially after seeing Alpha Centauri, which was a HUGE step forward.

Then add the fact, that the Civ II expensions were great and added many colourful, imaginative scenarios - and the lack there of in Civ III.

Civ 4 re-introduced great concepts from Alpha Centauri/Alien Conquest, that lacked in CivII, but were, at least, expected. Additionally, Civ 4 added never seen before ideas, like promotions, religions - this made Civ 4 a real advancement and successor: It took all the cool stuff, and has thrown out all the stupid stuff!

Of course, that was my impression, YMMV.

 

[Elephant]

I'll second Mercule's "why"? I picked up a copy of C3C about two years ago, and it's been a bigger timesink than anything since Diablo II or maybe even Starcraft.

What in Civ 3 annoyed you, Grump?

 

[Nifft]

Civ III had a poorer interface, the choices didn't seem as rich, the units lacked variety, and the mechanics of trade routes seemed clunky. I enjoyed Civ III for a while, but it fell flat for me a bit too quickly. Hard to explain exactly why in a game as complex as Civ whatever...

This is from someone who loves Civ IV and Alpha Centauri.

Cheers, -- N

 

[WhatGravitas]

I enjoyed Civ III for a while, but it fell flat for me a bit too quickly. Hard to explain exactly why in a game as complex as Civ whatever...

As a side-note: Civ III was addictive enough to get by girlfriend hooked - but after playing Civ 4, she never looked back: She says, Civ III is boring and somehow slow and dull, compared to Civ 4 (though she doesn't like Alpha Centauri, because she hates the graphics and dislikes to setting... this makes me sad, especially, because the Centauri-fanmod for Civ 4 was ditched).

 

[DaveMage]

So I'm playing the new one - and I like it - but man does it get slow on my machine in the later years.

I'm playing marathon on a large map and it really is painful to get through turns - and I'm only in 1900!