Cast your vote......

UndertakerAPB · March 1, 1999, 21:57

If you have SMAC like me, and are somewhat disappointed.And expecting or hoping for CTP to correct those disappointments.
Please cast your vote here, and what will quell your thirst.....

DEVIL'S ADVOCATE,
Undertaker

P.S.: I am expecting better graphics and more involvement in space.

Captain Antilles · March 2, 1999, 12:18

I have SMAC, but I'm not disappointed.

Still, the color scheme and unit design could have been better. So I'm looking forward to CtP being a game I can play without going blind.

Utrecht · March 2, 1999, 17:37

Like Cpt Antilles,

I have SMAC and enjoyed it. However, I did not enjoy it as much as I hoped to. I rate it as a 9 (as apposed to the 9.5 I was hoping for)

For me what was missing was the granduer of the the game. However, that was more due to the sci-fi flavor. Civ/Civ2 and hopefully CTP will have it.

I suspect that I will keep both on my hard-drive and switch between. However, I will not run out and buy CTP the day it comes out (like SMAC) rather wait until Best Buy sells it for $29.99.

December Man · March 2, 1999, 22:39

Did I miss something?? Is CTP in the stores already?? How can I vote or compare between which is best (SMAC or CTP) if the other candidate (CTP) is only in the form of a few screen shots and avi's. Its like saying I'm going to vote for the Republican before the Democratic convention. Unless I'm already a steadfast Republican who will vote for such regardless.

connorkimbro · March 3, 1999, 01:04

I didn't see him say 'compare' did you? i saw him say expecting or hoping. .

I just got SMAC, and i am pleasantly surprised by it. I've read reviews from several sources, and i think its better than what most reviews say. . (player reviews, not gaming site reviews) . . Sure, the graphics can get a bit cluttered. . and it IS hard to distinguish between units. BUT, the fact that you can customize units MORE than makes up for that. Plus, i think that once you're familiar with the differen types of chassis, weapons, etc, etc that make up the units, it will be much easier to tell where a units strengths and weakness lie.
On the downside, i was expecting a BIT more originality. . theres quite a bit thats taken from CIV and just renamed, or only slightly altered. SO, i'm expecting BIG things from CTP, from what i've read in reviews, and especially the new wonder of the world descriptions put up.
The verdict?. . its tough. . SMAC is a great game. . But CTP will also be a great game. . if i had to make a call, i'd say Call to Power will come out on top. . simply because it preserves the grandeur of controlling earths history, and its more historically based. . enabling the player to identify and relate much easier to the game. . giving a greater sense of accomplishment, and more fun. . .

Now, if you'll excuse me, Lal of the U.N. peace keeping forces needs to be taught a lesson. . .

Pythagoras · March 3, 1999, 22:03

All the reviews (non player, "expert") are good, but then go to like Gamespot's player reviews and their are mixed feelings. I started out thinking that SMAC (the demo) was REALLY UGLY!(too redish-brown!) That too me is the only real downside to the game, but you eventually get used to it, and you get used to distinguishing the rocky from the rainy from the really rock and rainy.

Most other things (except cluttered units) can be fixed through the preferences, and cluttered units is cancelled out by creating your own units, they become a lot less "cluttered" in my mind when I am familar with each's design and capabilities, and when its not just another one of the hundred's of units a city pumped out on "Conquer" mode.

Beefcake · March 3, 1999, 23:37

That's the thing, though. You shouldn't have to get used to it. All shoes get comfortable with age, but most appealing is the pair that fit well the first time you try it on.

Beefcake · March 3, 1999, 23:38

Sorry, I didn't mean to make an analogy.

connorkimbro · March 4, 1999, 00:43

For those of you who were CIV fans since the original Civilization. . who didn't have to get used to the changes from civ to civ2?. . .just because somethings a little different, and something you have to learn, doesn't mean that its not better in some way. as far as the planet being an ugly reddish brown. . while its not very nice to look at, it IS more realistic than having a nice pretty landscape. . it IS an alien planet after all.

Pythagoras · March 4, 1999, 23:25

Yeah, thats why I think SMAC is the true Civ heir, the amount of changes from Civ1 to Civ 2 are about the same as the one's made from Civ2 to SMAC. Its a steady progression of ideas that have constantly been added/taken away from its predecesor.

CTP seems like a totally new game altogether, with a lot of revolutionary changes in almost everything. I'm not saying that CTP will be bad, I kinda look forward to challenging like fourty Civs, I'm just saying CTP will be a completly different game, so I think it is very hard to compare them. Its kinda like comparing Civ to Imperialism. Totally different.

In conclusion, SMAC is very evolutionary in its changes while CTP is revolutionary in its changes.

ticktock · March 4, 1999, 23:42

I was really excited about SMAC and downloaded the demo as soon as it came out. Maybe I didn't give it enough time, but I didn't enjoy playing it at all. I loved CIV and CIV II because they were empire building games. SMAC is an empire building game but it seems more sci-fi. Also, I enjoyed playing scenarios and creating the one I wrote. I am wondering how much you can really do with scenarios in SMAC. I am sure people will write good ones, but CIV II, and hopefully CTP, have the added dimension of being able to draw from the endless conflicts of the past. Half the fun of the scenarios was seeing somebody elses interpretation of the civilizations of a certain time period.

connorkimbro · March 6, 1999, 02:05

The true heir to CIV. . hmm. . thats hard to say.
I think that the amount of changes between the two games is sort of irrellevant. . . HOWEVER, i'd have to admit that since SMAC was written by the same guys that wrote civ2, it really is the true sequel. . even if they can't say it. HOWEVER. . the spirit and tradition of the game is carried on MUCH better, and i think that CTP will be a better game than SMAC.
anyway. . now that i've played SMAC quite a bit more. . here are a few things i DON"T like about it. . then a few things i do.

i don't like that you don't visually see a technological progression. . sure, theres lots of technologies. . but their really just names. . they get you things. . but you can't really visualize it. . as opposed to when you discovered tactics, and all your dragoons were upgraded to cavalry. . etc, etc.

things seem to move much slower (development wise) in this game. . or maybe its just me though. . lol.

you have almost everything you can do from the beginning, militarily. basically. . like, as you get military improvments, they just get stronger. . there aren't too many different, special abilities that are really original or fun. (there are some, ya, but not many)

i DO like. . contrary to most others. . the diplomacy. theres just so much you can do politically. . and i love that. the leaders seem SO much more personal, and that totally makes it more fun to whip them into submission...in my current game, i have santiago serving me, i send her to beat up on the believers. . and she does it. . and she's humble!.. . i get a kick out of that.

i LOVE the 4 ways to win. . economics and politics being added. . and them being two areas im interested in in real life as well. . so i love it.

i like designing my own units. . even though theyre not quite as pretty to look at. i tell ya what though. . its much easier to recognize units that you've personally designed, so that takes care of that problem that i've heard from some. . .

we'll, theres my two cents. .

CAB · March 11, 1999, 02:39

SMAC is a really great game. There are just a few things that has turned me away from it.
I don't seem to get any commitment to the game. The whole Sci Fi environment are dull. I like the Civ era much better, there I can identify myself with my empire.
And the customization of units are so boring I could cry. They give you no feling of originality.
Once someone make a real challenging Earthmod with those 2D units they say you will be able to use, perhaps I will pick up the game again. The game engine and the game itself are very good, it's just the environment that tick me off.

These are just my felings of the game, and I'm no Sci Fi fan, so perhaps thats the problem.

And if I'm going to compare what I know about CTP so far, the future of CTP seems more graspable and not so foreign as the one in SMAC. So my vote will go to CTP, because I think it will be a much more enjoyable game in the end.

mic · March 12, 1999, 06:37

I like SMAC. Very much so.

But, yes, it all seems a little depressing. Playing Fallout also gives me this post-WWIII feeling (and it should, I guess).

It remains to be seen if CTP is taking the forked CIV line far enough. Just adding new units and 1000 years might just do it.

The true heir? Just buy both. I will.

(especially now the Dutch are in :-)

Blade Runner · March 12, 1999, 08:51

I love SMAC. It's a realy good game. I think I will love CTP more, because I want something more sunny with full of light, like I sew on the preview pictures.

Blade Runner

aesopo · March 14, 1999, 02:55

Too bad the designers of SMAC let their names carry on their work than really trying to make a really good game that is more appealing than civ2. It was just plain laziness or idiotic thinking on their part. Too bad, SMAC could have been a great game. I never grew tired of playing civ2 over the years but playing SMAC even after a week or two - yikes! I took SMAC off my hard drive but I still have civ2. Well lesson learned, not just because of a designer's name you should buy a product. FIRAXIS I want a refund from your poor product!

crusher · March 14, 1999, 03:23

I don't like what pythagoras said. Because the changes arn't what they should be, the game probly wouldn't be able to stand up as good without civ and civ2 holding it up. oh, and is CTP coming out tuesday????

EdCase · March 15, 1999, 01:55

I cannot in good faith cast my vote for CTP after all its not here yet.But I can DEFINITELY say SMAC is not the game I expected.I AM a sci-fi fan,from the fantasical,raygun style of Hubbard through the hard science approach of Bear etc,but SMAC to me is decidely unexciting,I just can't relate to this game,oh how I wanted to,i really did,but its dull,dull,dishwater dull.

anti kanuk · March 15, 1999, 23:03

Greg Bear kicks ass. SMAC sucks.

St Leo · March 16, 1999, 12:09

SMAC is a great game, but I am tired of micromanagement which abounds in it. If they are smart the second Expansion Pack will make it into a historical game with chassis like Infantry, Chariots, Cavalry, Raft, Galley, Caravel, Dreadnought, Baloon, Biplane, and Aircraft. That would be awesome.:-)

Honor · March 17, 1999, 01:41

Just one thing to add to the discussion:
I know that this seems like a rather primitive desire, but I really don't like isometric graphics! Am I the only one that feels that this is the main problem with the Civ games? (and one of the reasons that the original is still fun: simplicity.)