Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate 30 Second Review Part 2 (Ancient Era)

raingoon · November 5, 2001, 16:48

In the first era of your game you really don't get what all the complaints were about the graphics -- why, for instance, some players can hate a mountain that you find perfectly mountain-esque -- and you did not want to read the manual so trying to queue your first production does make you think the user interface yields some of its best secrets rather stubornly -- You remember a poem by ee cummings: "If you and I have lips and mouth with which to kiss and sing with / Who gives a damn if some one-eyed son of a ***** invents an instrument to measure spring with?"

You open the manual to the shortcuts page and you discover that many of the early reviewers are missing great stuff -- and Firaxis have themselves to thank for not giving them a simple shortcuts card. Soon you discover workers can be instructed to build roads to any destination -- and they do -- they can be told to network your resources together -- and they will. Your queue not only exists it can be saved and loaded but you also quickly discover that there isn't much need for saving queue's because this is not a rubber stamp game, it changes in new ways throughout the Ancient Era. At some point you become enamored of the new unit ranks -- it's fun to see an elite unit be born (harder to see a leader created, MUCH harder) and you briefly wonder if in Civ 4 units can be made to literally GROW as they increase in rank and that's when you know you like Civ 3, because it begins to inspire you to want to change it the way Civ 2 inspired you -- It's called ICS: Infinite Creativity Surge, and it quickly overwhelms any locked computer algorhythms they can throw at you.

You love the unique units -- and Firaxis, for putting them in over our objections. And you are intrigued by your first discovery of iron. You build a colony on them and wonder if it's possible for that little colony to revolt (it's not -- stunning disappointment?) Is this really Civ 2.5??? Oh my GOD!!! Sid, you've ruined my HOUSE! Oh, wait a minute -- that's right -- I'm N*U*T*S. YOu decide that resources alone are enough to debunk all the jump-the-gunners who call Civ 3 a facelift on Civ 2 -- You admit to a sense of thrill that you might be sitting on the uranium equivalent of a real-world gold mine and now, stone sober, you wonder what the hell all the early critics were talking about? Did they think the game would be better off departing from Civ 2 altogether? And departing for exactly what destination?

There are over 500 pages in the List 2 -- Was there some specific vision in there that Firaxis missed? You have read some players and critics declaring Civ 3 a makeover. You think it must be like declaring the world would be better off without lawyers -- everybody will rush to agree with you, but nobody admits how truly awful that would world be. You bide your time and play the game for a week, concentrating on just the Ancient Era. You wonder why you are enjoying the game so much. The editor and the multi-player shortcomings have engendered some wrath. You cannot speak to those issues, you never really used the Civ 2 editor and from the two occasions you did play multi-player Civ 2 you learned that even God doesn't have that much time.

End of Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate 30 Second Review Part 2.

Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate Review Part 1 (Intro)
Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate Review Part 3 (Middle Ages)
Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate Review Part 4 (Industrial Age)
Raingoon's Unusable-but-Totally-Accurate Review Part 5 (Modern Age/The End Game)
Last Word & Final Score
(to be continued...)

P.S. You edit your post to say that one zoom level closer would've been nice.

raingoon · November 5, 2001, 20:25

You bump your thread.

Skanky Burns · November 5, 2001, 20:30

Looking forward to part 3

MidKnight Lament · November 6, 2001, 03:48

Me too. I've come to respect your opinion, raingoon. I'm looking forward to your comments...

civmonger · November 6, 2001, 04:45

Very well said

morb · November 6, 2001, 23:55

where's part 1?

morb · November 7, 2001, 00:05

but its obvious the game isn't finished or playtested/playbalanced. Its really sad to see so much potential go to waste (just like those damn shields). I really hope, most of our niggles will be fixed in the patch (which can't come out soon enough), but in the mean time, civ3 is making me appreciate civ2 that much more.

PC Gamer gave civ2 a score of 97/100, possibly the highest score this mag ever gave any PC game they've reviewd in their history. civ3 will not be 98/100. By my guestimation, they'll tare it down point for point as it deservs to be and give it no more than 82/100. And the thing is, I would have to agree with them.

dainbramaged13 · November 7, 2001, 00:08

Quote:

Originally posted by morb
where's part 1?

hehe really link please? i wanna read it too... thanks raingoon for the refreshment from all the glom and doom, which btw seems to be dieng out thank god now that more ppl actually HAVE the game

dainbramaged13 · November 7, 2001, 00:13

Quote:

Originally posted by morb
but its obvious the game isn't finished or playtested/playbalanced. Its really sad to see so much potential go to waste (just like those damn shields). I really hope, most of our niggles will be fixed in the patch (which can't come out soon enough), but in the mean time, civ3 is making me appreciate civ2 that much more.

PC Gamer gave civ2 a score of 97/100, possibly the highest score this mag ever gave any PC game they've reviewd in their history. civ3 will not be 98/100. By my guestimation, they'll tare it down point for point as it deservs to be and give it no more than 82/100. And the thing is, I would have to agree with them.

and ya know why? because of graphics/sound, which were never the best in any civ game anyway. tons of games came out in 95 with better graphics than civ2.. but the mags didn't care then... the games now are rated on rubrics, some of which 3 out of 5 are fluff-related (graphics, music, sound afffects) ! of course, civ isn't going to win any awards in these subjects, its not supposed to! And yet, while civ gets 8s and 7s in 3 out of 5 categories, the reveieweras all seem to be giving it 9s, so wheres the logic in that? i say theres much more.

sorrry if im not understandable...
its 12 mikdnight here im going to bed now

raingoon · November 7, 2001, 00:34

For those who asked -- added a link above to Part 1.

Baloo · November 7, 2001, 00:56

Quote:

Originally posted by morb
By my guestimation, they'll tare it down point for point as it deservs to be and give it no more than 82/100. And the thing is, I would have to agree with them.

That's what Firaxis & Sid Meier should get for scaring away Brian Reynolds and not getting someone who is creative enough to replace him.
It seems that Sid is more interested in making that cartoony golf game for Will "Sissy Game Designer" Wright rather than to sit down and think about Civ III.

LaRusso · November 7, 2001, 05:20

Quote:

Originally posted by morb
but its obvious the game isn't finished or playtested/playbalanced. Its really sad to see so much potential go to waste (just like those damn shields). I really hope, most of our niggles will be fixed in the patch (which can't come out soon enough), but in the mean time, civ3 is making me appreciate civ2 that much more.

civ2 had MANY patches

WarpStorm · November 7, 2001, 07:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Baloo

That's what Firaxis & Sid Meier should get for scaring away Brian Reynolds and not getting someone who is creative enough to replace him.

Yeah, right. I know that Brian was burned out working on Civ games. When he was told he would be doing Civ3, he said "Adios, I'm makin' an RTS". And took the whole SMAC team with him.

Altuar · November 7, 2001, 08:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Baloo
That's what Firaxis & Sid Meier should get for scaring away Brian Reynolds and not getting someone who is creative enough to replace him.

Oh well. Brian can be safely away and Civ III will still be a great game.

IMHO, these games fall into two categories:

1st: Civ I, II, SMAC.
2nd: Civ III.

Yup, I do believe, and this is from someone who has played games since Lotus: Turbo Espirit on Amstrad in 1989 onwards, Civ III is a MUCH better game than the first impressions allow for. Most of it is rethought and well integrated (except for that damn culture: the idea is good but execution is flawed) and the result is something better than the sum of its parts. This stands in stark contrast to SMAC, which was overly complex and most of its atmosphere hid behind its awful interface. The game could not decide between being a micromanegers (all those power players among you) wet dream and an atmoshperic space opera - and in my personal opinion suffered from it.

Well, I hope Civ III pleases us both. It seems that it will. After the patch that "cannot come soon enough."

morb · November 8, 2001, 05:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Baloo

That's what Firaxis & Sid Meier should get for scaring away Brian Reynolds and not getting someone who is creative enough to replace him.
It seems that Sid is more interested in making that cartoony golf game for Will "Sissy Game Designer" Wright rather than to sit down and think about Civ III.

Quote:

Yeah, right. I know that Brian was burned out working on Civ games. When he was told he would be doing Civ3, he said "Adios, I'm makin' an RTS". And took the whole SMAC team with him.

right on. I've been saying the same thing all along. I'm glad someone else recognizes this as well. Brian and his crew were the true masterminds of the Civ games behind Sid. I said this somewhere else, Sid thinks we're going to be interested in his silly dinasaures. If Maxis dropped SimVille, I doubt a dinasaure game is going to be "it". I think he had a great idea with the original Civilization, but it was really Brian Reynold's execution which brought it to pedistal type levels. SMAC is so far my favorit "Sid" game. It "makes my micromanagement-type-self cream my pants."

Thanks Brian. We know you're working on something even better.