Did Civ2 have this kind of criticism when it came out?

[Strollen]

IIRC, when Civ2 came out it recieved very good reviews in the game press. However, comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategy was a mixed bag. Most everybody liked the game but it suffered from a number of bugs including a few crashes (I have had no crashes in Civ3), related to units crossing the dateline.

-Pathfinding was horrendous, to the point it was unusable until it got fixed by a patch.
-The Isometric view screwed up many people and resulted in a lot of dead air units which crashed due to lack of fuel
- People *****ed about lack of Multiplayer (I am sure people ***** to Micro$oft about the lack of MP support for Solitare and Minesweeper also)
- Governors were horrible (didn't ever improve IMO)
- Automated Settlers didn't exist
- They had to patch the game to increase unhappiness if you had too many Cities
- Later people complained about how unbalanced, diplomats, caravans, and Leo's Workshop were.
- The loss of the replay pissed many people off.
- Stupid AI and worse diplomacy were also blasted, AI got helped via a patch

My complaints were and still are how tedious the end game was. Nothing was more boring than waiting around tell your spaceship reached Alpha Centauri. In all the Civ2 games I played there was exactly one game where I need to capture the opponents capital to avoid losing the space race.

However, comparatively speaking Civ2 was pretty bug free. Overall Firaxis has a far above average record when it comes to bugs and stability of their products.

I think you just proved my point perfectly. Those things you just listed are so minor compared to what people are complaining about in civ3. The only people I have met so far that like the game are those that have never played civ 1 or civ2 (And even most of those don't like the game either), or they're pretty much casual civ newbies who really don't care what is in the game so long as it amuses them and helps the kill some time. I on the other hand have been playing this game since I was 10 years old for a total of 9 years. I look back at the release of civ2 and civ1 and realize just how clean a release it really was. I really wish ES had done civ3 instead of Firaxis. I think the game would have been 10 times better, and you count on them to make sure the game is perfect without any sort of fear of abandonment. Lets face it, this game was riding on it's name. It's like a movie with big actors but no story line. They sold the name, they didn't sell the game.

[Zylka]

Oh, so true.

[Yoleus]

Def: "fanatic war" - the only way to end a fanatic war is by having only one side surviving. Unfortunately ( ) here posters do not die by being replied. So we shoud work toward an M.A.S. (mutual assured spam) solution, don't we?

Aside jokes, does anybody care about GameSpy buy list and poll? I know, plenty of reviewers gave an excellent mark to CivIII, but the GameSpy opinion has more weigth, IMHO. Just waiting for your analysis.

[Strollen]

Well EngimaticGod, I guess your mind is made up regardless of the facts.

The first version of Civ2 had bugs which caused the game to crash/system hang, in my book a crash is worse than "I don't like corruption whine".

The CIV2 AI was far worse than Civ3 AI especially before the last couple of patches, which for me was a big deal .

The pathfinding bug meant you had to move each unit one square at a time using the keypad pretty tedious IMHO. (This got mostly fixed but the Civ3 pathfinding appears to be perfect).

The Civ2 governor was totally worthless. The Civ3 governor has some real problems, but I find it does a decent job managing citizen happiness and optimizing between food, or production.
(I agree the tendency of it to build obsolete military units is very annoying.)

Yes, Civ3 needs a patch. Air superiority is a real problem. I find I avoid wars at the end and just go for a space ship victory.

I agree that Civ3 lacks eye-candy, like wonder movies and few other bells and whistle and a more elaborate tech tree, which makes it seem like it wasn't fully polished.


However, most of the complaints about Civ3 are design decisions, which I find hard to understand. It seems to me that a valid criticism of Civ3 is that it is not different enough from Civ1 or Civ2. Yet, what is the #1 complaints are about things where there are big difference between Civ2, and Civ3.
- Corruption I vastly prefer the Civ3 approach, because it force you to consider the value of expanding (especially militarily)
- Resource: A great addition for all kinds of reasons, but primarily because it forces you to adapt. I am winning a game where I had no horses or saltpeter, it is require a different strategy than getting horseman, or cavalary and kicking butt.
- Combat system. I perfer the Civ2 hitpoints, but I understand the reason about not horribly penalizing a person if he is missing some key resources.
- Lack of MP support. Personally I could care less. I'd be willing to wager a lot of money that much less than 1% of all Civ2 games were playing mulitplayer.

Could Civ3 be improved? You bet. However, by and large I think Firaxis did a great job of getting rid of things which didn't add to the fun of the game (like Caravans, ZOCs, diplomats, terraforming), did a very good job balancing the wonders, and significant improved the AI. It has all of the great addictive qualities of Civ, a lot less of the tedium, and has required me to rethink my strategies. What more do people want?

CIV1 was a monumental leap forward in PC games
CIV2 was one of the best sequels ever made.
SMAC was a good refinement of CIV2
CIV3 is streamlining of CIV2 with some very interesting additions.

My favorite boss taught me this equation.

Satisfaction = Reality - Expectations.

Don't blame Firaxis because you had unrealistic expectations.

[TCO]

I don't understand the equation...

[adaMada]

not trying to take either side, but one more civ-2 bug I thought I'd point out:

When I got Civ 2 MPG for the Mac (back in 1998, my first civ game, and also my first strategy game ), it couldn't load games or scnerios until I patched it (bug for people running one of those phone-line networks between apple computers that seem to be out of date now -- I think it's called AppleTalk). Luckily, by the time I got the game, a patch was long out, but that day or two before I thought to look for a patch was, well, let's just say -- fustrating .

-- adaMada

[Ray K]

Originally posted by EnigmaticGod
I really don't remember hearing anything bad about civ2 when it came out. THere were no rantings of bugs or horrible game flaws.

Obviously, you were not there. I was.

The ranting and raving about Civ2 was so loud and went on for so long that MicroProse shut down their Civ2 feedback forum, permanently and without any warning.

Anyone else remember that?


Civ3 has some problems, but overall it has been a much cleaner release than Civ2.

I see mainly newbies talking about bugs in civ2, I don't ever remember a bug in it and I remember very few bugs in civ2 MPGE. Somehow I doubt hardly any of you played multiplayer, which brings me back to my previous point. Also I have never had civ2 crash on me.

"The Civ2 governor was totally worthless."

There was no civ2 governor????

"The Civ3 governor has some real problems, but I find it does a decent job managing citizen happiness and optimizing between food, or production."

Only a complete newbie would allow the computer to manage his civ.

"I agree that Civ3 lacks eye-candy, like wonder movies and few other bells and whistle and a more elaborate tech tree, which makes it seem like it wasn't fully polished."

Nobody really cares about wonder movies. I have wonder movies on civ2 turned off. My complaint is with far greater things than this. Obviously you have a hard time comprehending my posts.

"Lack of MP support. Personally I could care less. I'd be willing to wager a lot of money that much less than 1% of all Civ2 games were playing mulitplayer."

Refer back to my talk about Civ newbies who are content with the game so long as it kills some time. And obviously you are a complete rookie, or you like to lose money. I'd have to say you're both.

"However, by and large I think Firaxis did a great job of getting rid of things which didn't add to the fun of the game (like Caravans, ZOCs, diplomats, terraforming), did a very good job balancing the wonders, and significant improved the AI. "

Did I say you were a complete rookie? I meant you were a complete idiot. Silly me.

"My favorite boss taught me this equation.

Satisfaction = Reality - Expectations."

I'm with GP, what the hell is that supposed to mean? Did you learn that at McDonalds? If you were to do that, you would get a score in the negative range which is impossible to calculate. Sounds like a very useful equation.

[HalfLotus]

Some people play the game for fun; not to be the ultimate world dominator in Civ.

[Strollen]

The Civ2 governor was totally worthless."

There was no civ2 governor????

My point, but even the AI that assigned workers to work squares always maximized food even if that isn't what you wanted. There was an autobuild feature which didn't work well.


Only a complete newbie would allow the computer to manage his civ.

I generally micromanage everything but if the computer does a good job, it saves time. I guess you still move all of your units be hand because you find it fun. Of course on Civ2 if you didn't move them by hand cause you risked the computer moving your unit cross country instead of using your rail lines.


When civ2 came out it was so clean and polished. There were no bugs that I know of, at least not until the MP portion came out. And the original civ2 had 1 patch for its entire game life.


This statement is so blatantly wrong. Did you actually play CIV2? get it it on Day 1? Participate in the Microprose forums, or the Usenet discussions? I doubt it. Here is a simple test to see how wrong you are. Get the most recent versions of Civ2 and look at the patch.txt file. You'll find that Civ2 went from version 1.04 to 2.42 11 patches in all including six significant ones. Still want to stick with your claim of one patch and super clean release.



As for being a newbie you couldn't be possibly more wrong. I have being playing computer games for 23 years including 22 years playing MP games (started on Apple II, and played games on Mac, Amiga and countless number of PCs). I bet you were still in diapers when I was playing and even developing some games. I wasn't an active participant in this forum prior to a couple of weeks before the CIV3 launch, it seemed kinda of pointless to spend a lot of time talking about a game I couldn't play.

I like MP games, but I don't think the CIV series is a good for MP games. I bought CivNet and played a couple of games but neither my friends nor I found it very fun. There is too much down time while waiting for your opponent to finish his move. A game like AOE is pretty bad single player, but is much better MP, CIV is just the opposite.

There is obviously a group of hard core MP players, but I stand by my statement that it is less than 1% of the CIV games are played MP.



Satisfaction = Reality - Expectations."

I'm with GP, what the hell is that supposed to mean? Did you learn that at McDonalds? If you were to do that, you would get a score in the negative range which is impossible to calculate. Sounds like a very useful equation.

Gee, I didn't thing an expert CIV player would have trouble with simple algebra.

Your expectations for CIV3 was it would be a 10 a perfect game. In your view a perfect game would include MP support and a bunch of other stuff. The reality of CIV3 is doesn't have this so you think the game is a 7 (or maybe lower). (

Satisfaction = 7 - 10 = -3. Means your a dissatisfied, POed, upset etc.


Right before CIV3 was released I played CIV2 for the first time a couple of years. Although CIV2 was a great game when it came out ,standards are raised I doubt it would get a score much above 7 if it was released today. (No MP, some bugs, dated graphics....) I expected CIV3 to be better than CIV2. I give CIV3 a score of 9 so I am satisfied
Satisfaction = 9 - 7

I very easily understood your incredibly simple equation. In case you didn't notice, I said the score would be in the negative. However my point was that it wasn't a very good one.

"As for being a newbie you couldn't be possibly more wrong. I have being playing computer games for 23 years including 22 years playing MP games (started on Apple II, and played games on Mac, Amiga and countless number of PCs). I bet you were still in diapers when I was playing and even developing some games. I wasn't an active participant in this forum prior to a couple of weeks before the CIV3 launch, it seemed kinda of pointless to spend a lot of time talking about a game I couldn't play."

Until you play Civ MP, you're a newbie, plain and simple. I would be happy to give you a lesson in civ2 if you like.

[Evil Robot]

I see that evolution has not completed its course; EnigmaticGod is still in existance.

What you did was pure trolling, and is abhorrent to what I think this board was, and should be now.

[Strollen]

? If you were to do that, you would get a score in the negative range which is impossible to calculate


My humble apologies I'll withdraw my statement of your lack of math skills, I obviously misunderstood your statement as not being able to grasp the concept of negative numbers.

Of course when you said that Civ2 had one patch and the real number was a 11 I assumed that math wasn't your strong point.

Until you play Civ MP, you're a newbie, plain and simple. I would be happy to give you a lesson in civ2 if you like.


What part of I played CivNet but didn't enjoy it don't you understand. This forum is called Civ3-General, not CIV2 MP.
If I was posting in that forum than you could reasonably call me a newbie. They are different games and require different strategies we are all newbies with Civ3 .

So God what are your strategies for beating Civ3 at Diety? I'm just finished my 2nd Monarch game the ship should be launched by 1800... When you can answer that question than maybe I'll listen to you.

Please withdraw your opinion to the Civ2-MP Forum, I am sure your followers are missing your presence.
And as they say in Civ3 don't come back

"So God what are your strategies for beating Civ3 at Diety? I'm just finished my 2nd Monarch game the ship should be launched by 1800... When you can answer that question than maybe I'll listen to you."

Am I supposed to be impressed with that?

[Evil Robot]

Originally posted by EnigmaticGod
"So God what are your strategies for beating Civ3 at Diety? I'm just finished my 2nd Monarch game the ship should be launched by 1800... When you can answer that question than maybe I'll listen to you."

Am I supposed to be impressed with that?

Is he supposed to be impressed with you playing multiplayer?

Get a new argument, buster.

[DrFell]

Originally posted by Strollen
There is obviously a group of hard core MP players, but I stand by my statement that it is less than 1% of the CIV games are played MP.

The MP players are the most vocal community, will be the ones playing Civ3 in 6 years time (if multiplay is any good at all of course), and will likely devote more time to the game and be the most disappointed if it's poor quality. Frankly I don't think these most 'loyal' fans deserve to be disappointed, do you?

[Ray K]

Originally posted by DrFell


The MP players are the most vocal community, will be the ones playing Civ3 in 6 years time (if multiplay is any good at all of course), and will likely devote more time to the game and be the most disappointed if it's poor quality. Frankly I don't think these most 'loyal' fans deserve to be disappointed, do you?

Why should the most vocal 1% dictate the direction of the game design for the other 99%, especially if they are too cheap to buy Civ4 in 3-4 years?

[Freeze]

Originally posted by Evil Robot
I see that evolution has not completed its course; EnigmaticGod is still in existance.

What you did was pure trolling, and is abhorrent to what I think this board was, and should be now.

Better dial back the intensity algorithms brother. He's replying to someone going by "sTROLLen."

As for the arguments from single play, may I offer the simple observation that the main reason Apolyton is what it is, is BECAUSE OF THE MP COMMUNITY?

Seriously folks, you single play advocates are rightly considered dust in the wind by the vets here.

Just laying it out.

[Ray K]

Originally posted by Freeze

Seriously folks, you single play advocates are rightly considered dust in the wind by the vets here.

Just laying it out.

Seriously folks, you multi-play advocates are rightly considered morons for trying to bolt MP onto a turn-based strategy game.

Just laying it out.

[Tolls]

EG:
"I see mainly newbies talking about bugs in civ2, I don't ever remember a bug in it and I remember very few bugs in civ2 MPGE. Somehow I doubt hardly any of you played multiplayer, which brings me back to my previous point. Also I have never had civ2 crash on me. "

Then you either lived in a little world of your own which bore little relation to reality, or you picked up a later copy of the game...it crashed on me on the day of release (and on and off until a couple of patches down the line). How, though, this has anything to do with playing MP I don't understand...if the game crashes it crashes...MP or no.

For your perusal I post the list of patches released for Civ 2...(sorry for the length here). Now most of these are not major (simply niggling things), but some involve patching crashes (look at 2.4 for some of them, and the first patch for the sound problem), as well as important aspects of the game.

You ought to temper your use of the word "newbie" since your knowledge of the history of Civ seems to show a few too many holes for you to be a "vet" in any other place than your own mind.


Version 2.42 changes
====================

* Fixed the Heralds animation problem with 32-bit video for Windows.

Version 2.41 changes
====================

* If an auto-settler encounters a situation that the AI can't make a decision about (strange routes, etc.), then the auto-settler will return to manual control mode. This should stop most instances of auto-settler problems.

Version 2.4 changes
===================

* Changed version number to match labels on CD-ROM.
* Fixed another situation with auto-settlers hanging the system.
* Fixed crash on using help on SS MODULE.
* Fixed problem with checking intelligence of an emissary and high-resolution windows display. (Previously, this would cause what looked like a lockup but was actually just the window getting "lost" under the first window.)
* Fixed problem in which clicking on the help button while the UN Wonder is highlighted would bring up University help instead.
* The Civilization II chart says that the "Cruise Missile" attack is 20, which is incorrect. The correct attack value is 18.
* Fixed crash while accessing Civilopedia help from the city status advisor's display.
* Fixed failure to find @MERCENARY label in GAME.FRE (French version of GAME.TXT).

File changes
------------
We are currently working on a scenario disk for Civilization II which will be called Civilization II "Conflicts in Civilization" Scenarios. The disc will include a new executable with enhanced support for player-generated scenarios. If you are currently working on a scenario, the following file changes will be supported:

RULES.TXT
CITIES.TXT
UNITS.GIF
CITIES.GIF
TERRAIN1.GIF
TERRAIN2.GIF

Please do not make changes to other files. This can and will lead to conflicts with future game versions.

Version 1.11 changes
====================

French and German
-----------------
If the game is now playing in English only, make the following correction to reset the game in your language.

1. In Windows 95, double-click on the file CIV.INI in the directory C:\WINDOWS\CIV.
2. Change the last line from "Language Preference 1" to "Language Preference 0."
3. Save the file.
4. Then restart Civilization II and you should see the "Select Language" menu.

Customizing autobuild
---------------------
You may customize the domestic advisor's city improvement picks for the autobuild if you wish. Create a file in your Civilization II directory called CITYPREF.TXT. The first line should be:

@AUTOBUILD

Each succeeding line contains the name of a city improvement in the order you want to build them. You don't have to list every city improvement, but each improvement must be spelled -exactly- as it is in RULES.TXT. (For foreign language versions, use the exact spelling from RULES.FRE or RULES.GER as appropriate.) Your domestic advisor will then choose improvements from this list provided that technology is available and the city is otherwise eligible to build them. If nothing on list is available, the advisor resorts to his normal algorithm.

The military advisor will make his picks as usual. However, you can order him never to build "defensive" type units by inserting the line @NODEFEND at the beginning or end of the CITYPREF.TXT file (don't put it between the @AUTOBUILD line and the list of improvements).

An example file is below:

@NODEFEND
@AUTOBUILD
Temple
Marketplace
Library

The file is reread every time you click the "AUTO" button on the "What shall we build?" menu. If you wish, you can alter your priorities over the course of a game without reloading.

* The Supply/Demand equation for commodities has been revised somewhat.
* The AI for auto-settlers has been adjusted with less emphasis on railroads.
* Caravan "go to" orders aren't cleared by zones of control.
* A bug in Windows 95 which caused problems loading WinG if Windows 95 is installed on some other drive than C: has been worked around.

Version 1.10 changes
====================

* Further fixes have been made to smart settlers (looping settlers caught in loop should ask for confirmation once the loop is noticed).
* You should always be able to contact rival kings (with whom you have treaties) at least once per turn, even if patience is exhausted. This is to give you a chance to demand he withdraw from your territory. Once he's "thrown you out" for the turn, though, you have to wait until the next turn.
* Fixed problem with military advisor ("255 in production," etc.).
* Air units cannot be fortified outside of cities.
* Cities not spotted will not appear on Goto and Supply/Demand lists (An exception is that foreign capitals will appear on Supply/Demand lists only).
* Fixed problem scrolling between cities once more than 128 cities exist in the game.
* Engineers no longer have "ignore ZOC" ability. This is to help prevent computer-controlled engineers from slipping into your territory and building cities within your borders.
* The "mysterious teleporting paratrooper" problem has been resolved.
* Fixed problem in foreign language versions where some heralds didn't show up.

Version 1.09 changes
====================

* Smart settlers as of version 1.08 can loop infinitely if they are blocked by zones of control. That's fixed in this update.
* Attitude advisor: cities with sufficient happiness to put them into "We Love the King" day are shown in white.

Version 1.08 changes
====================

* Version 1.08 adds a much requested feature: Smart (or at least Automated) Settlers. Issue the "K" or "Automate Settlers" order to your settlers or engineers, and they will behave (for better or for worse) exactly as if the AI were controlling them, although they will not build cities. You can cancel the automate order the same way you cancel any order. Just click on the unit and/or selecting it on the unit popup.
* For those who don't like the white grid around your city radius in Grid mode, we provide ICONSB.GIF, which is a version of ICONS.GIF without the white grid sprite. If you'd prefer to run without the white grid, just copy ICONSB.GIF over ICONS.GIF.
* If you prefer "Zoom to City" to be your default action on city reports, you can now select this option by unchecking the "Zoom is NOT default" option at the bottom of the City Report Options screen.
* The foreign minister report (F3) now contains color-coding information about each king.
* When caravan is used to add-to-wonder, a report on how many shields are still required is given.
* The maximum effective science rate for Fundamentalism (hardcoded to 50% in previous patch) can now be user-configured in the RULES.TXT file (bottom of Cosmic Principles) for those who wish to work around this.
* Fixed some problems involving the autobuild.
* A few earlier fixes that didn't make it into the foreign language versions have been included in this patch.

Version 1.07 changes
=====================

* Aegis cruisers will defend their stacks against missile and air attacks as they should. Before, the Aegis ability was often overlooked when determining which was the "best" defender for a stack.
* As requested by many players, when the Grid (Ctrl-G) mode is active, the city radius of each of your cities will be shown in white.
* Population will no longer "loop around to zero."
* Under Fundamentalism, any science rate above 50% will have no additional effect on research. Below 50%, research still continues at half effectiveness.
* At some difficulty levels (for example, Prince), users were occasionally experiencing weird time-shifts (such as from A.D. 1 back to 1920 B.C.). This problem should no longer occur.
* Made some slight changes in ship logic to try to prevent wave after wave of suicide attacks against a city with a coastal fortress.
* Counterespionage has been fixed (previously it was less effective than intended).
* The AI will use slightly more discretion in approaching cities with attacking units.
* Corrected problems associated with replacing the CD-ROM during the game.
* The opportunity to poison water supply is not offered for cities of size 1.
* Increased the defense strength of fighters, stealth fighters and stealth bombers slightly.
* Changed the attack strength of cruise missile to 18.
* Corrected problem where new units were created with "NONE" as home after a large number of cities had been built.
* Fixed problem with plundering negative amounts of gold.
* Corrected problem where Windows 95 machines with 32-bit Indeo (Video for Windows) drivers installed showed heralds "frozen in place."

Version 1.06 changes
====================

* This version fixes the AI broken in version 1.04.

Version 1.05 changes
====================

* The "Winning" animation is no longer displayed when another civilization wins the space race.
* Double-clicking on unexplored territory no longer brings up the Civilopedia.
* User-created units will no longer play the wrong sound in addition to the CUSTOMx.WAV sound.
* When giving a unit to another civilization causes a technology leap, the technology given is no longer stuck on "Alphabet."
* Cruisers now (properly) become obsolete with Rocketry.

Version 1.04 changes
====================

* Corrected GPF that occurred for users who didn't have sound cards installed in their computers.
* Corrected problem where users received a black box or black screen when going to the Civilopedia (or when a new advance was discovered).
* Month-by-month turns now work correctly for scenarios set in B.C. (This is important for the Alexander the Great scenario.)
* Wonders of the World movies are now shown only when you build wonders (not when opponents build them). The Wonder movie cheat has been improved, however, so you can view any Wonder movie you want: hold down the Shift key while selecting "Wonders of the World" from the Civilopedia menu.
* The "Accelerated Startup" algorithm has been enhanced to correct some problems (such as two cities in the same square on some preset maps) and improve some features.
* Effects of Food Supplies trade routes are now displayed properly on the city information screen. (Formerly they worked properly but were not being displayed.)
* Corrected some problems with user-defined techs (where it was not recognizing that user-defined techs had been discovered).
* Language preference is now saved in the CIV.INI file. After you run the game once with this update, you will no longer be asked every time you play which language you want.
* Corrected the "endless drumbeat" problem.
* The Colossus now affects sea squares as well as land squares.
* The "Auto" feature can no longer be used to circumvent the 50% penalty for production changes.
* You will no longer be prompted to consult your high council if you have the feature switched off on the graphic options menu.
* Advisors will no longer suggest you build a palace when you already have one.
* The tutorial will automatically be switched off when beginning a scenario.
* RULES.TXT now mentions that custom WAV files have to be 8-bit, mono and sampled at 22050hz.
* Corrected some problems with "negative scores."
* Miscellaneous minor fixes.

[Freeze]

Originally posted by Ray K


Seriously folks, you multi-play advocates are rightly considered morons for trying to bolt MP onto a turn-based strategy game.

Just laying it out.

Never tried a succession game Ray? Big fun..

[Freeze]

Here's the google archives of Brian Reynolds' posts to the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic newsgroup. I've tried to select for the time surrounding civ2 release.

http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q...axy=1996&hl=en

Do we see someone dancing around issues and ignoring them or trying to make things better? Does that make any difference?

[Frito]

I just launched my ship on diety in 1745...does that mean you'll listen to me?

[TCO]

Originally posted by DrFell


The MP players are the most vocal community, will be the ones playing Civ3 in 6 years time (if multiplay is any good at all of course), and will likely devote more time to the game and be the most disappointed if it's poor quality. Frankly I don't think these most 'loyal' fans deserve to be disappointed, do you?

They are just as important as any other customer willing to part with 50 bucks. Who cares how long they play the game. This is a business. If they get so much enjoyment, than maybe we should sell MP seperately. They'll gladly pay for something they're so dedicated to, right?

[TCO]

Originally posted by Freeze
Here's the google archives of Brian Reynolds' posts to the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic newsgroup. I've tried to select for the time surrounding civ2 release.

http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q...axy=1996&hl=en

Do we see someone dancing around issues and ignoring them or trying to make things better? Does that make any difference?

This just goes to show you that they handled Civ2 just like civ3. NO MULTIPLAYER!!! (and they knew how, Civnet had been done.)

[Ray K]

Originally posted by GP


This just goes to show you that they handled Civ2 just like civ3. NO MULTIPLAYER!!! (and they knew how, Civnet had been done.)

Take a hint.

[Solver]

A very valid point is being rased about space victory in Civ 1/2. You built your SS, it had to fly some 10 years to reach AC, and the time was boring. You knew you will be victorious then, and had to wait for those turns. You knew the AI is way too stupid to capture your capitol. Just look, the Capitol is normally located in the very heartland of Empire, and the AI was always too stupid to even get to something in the heart of an empire, in the Modern Age. Now finally we only have to launch the SS in order to win.

SMAC late game disappointed me sometimes, too. I played on large maps, and hated it when I had an army of like 200 Rovers and 100 Infantry, that wiped out the whole Planet, but then there's Morgan sitting on a tiny island at the other end of the map. I had to load transports, wait till they arrive there, and once the transports arrive and unload, Morgan is dead within 3 turns.

I also did never like scenarios for Civ 2. I played included, I played custom, but I found myself bored every time. Multiplayer for Civ 3 is the same as for other civgames - good, but not crucial. Civ is and will remain an SP game.

Enigmatic God, I have to say something bad about ES. While it's true that they have guys like The_Sheriff testing AOM, it looks like it will never be released. They announced the title of AoM in April, and it's about another year till the actual release of the game. ES are stupid enough to want to make the game perfect, while it's completely obvious even for the fools at Activision that a game can not be perfect. AoM will have its flaws. But, it's just about ready now, still though it hasn't even gone Beta!

I love Civ 3 a lot. This is the best game I have ever played. I can finally say this, I wasn't able to say this for a long time. Civ 2 had flaws, and while probably being overall better than Civ 1, I couldn't say the above phrase feeling sure about it. And while I love Civ 3, I am civving for 6 years, and do consider myself a veteran. At least I'm not a newbie, for sure. It's probably just because the most common complaints are not the case with me.

And, for those of you that don't know. EnigmaticGod is Eyes of the Night, possibly the best player there has ever been in Civ 2.

[oedo]

Originally posted by Tolls
Version 2.42 changes
====================
...

Version 2.41 changes
====================
...

Version 2.4 changes
===================
...
...
...

it doesn´t really matter if civ2 was buggy or not. the bugs that were fixed by the patches were minor bugs. there´s always been a concrete solution for this.

civ3, however, is not only buggy. the whole concept is broken. it´s not only because it doesn´t include MP yet. this is sad enough.
it´s because civ3 will never be a MP-game. not only for the reasons eyes mentioned. the game engine is so slow it will most probably take several days to finish one turn in the late game.

plus, civ3 is extremely boring. I wonder how they will fix this.

[TheDarkside]

plus, civ3 is extremely boring. I wonder how they will fix this.

Heh, sounds to me like you are CIV-ed out. Do you still play Civ2 or SMAC? I remember when SMAC came out, I was still playing Civ2 so much that it was getting played out. Then I buy SMAC and I found it really boring... could that be why you are bored with civ3 already?