Rating: 
Summary: 5 stars just because Sid Meier is back and runnin' the show
Review: Hopefully this piece will be everything that Black and White wasn't.
Rating: 
Summary: DISAPPOINTING, TEDIOUS, and ANNOYING
Review: DON'T BE FOOLED BY THE HYPE! This game is not like Civilization 2. It is very different and not for the better. The game is more tedious and boring, and A LOT LESS FUN, although they did slap on splashy graphics, as if I care. The game when released was a beta unplaytested version filled with bugs and even typos. It has had to be patched FOUR TIMES by the company just to make it playable. If you don't take the time to get the patches from the company site it will really be bad. Compared to Civ 2 it stinks. Much less fun. There is no longer a Cheat Mode; scenarios are poor; plus they have DUMBED DOWN the game for the 12 year olds and ignored History. They have idiotic concepts such as "Culture Flipping" where you can lose half your army if a city suddenlly decides to join another civilization because it has more "culture" (military strength doesn't count). It's ridiculous. They made naval warfare very simplictic and simple-minded. And turned Espionage and trade into tedious abstractions. User interface is poor. The basic values for units and resources are silly and wrong. Lots of things make this over-hyped game a bust - unless you're a kid who loves those graphics and doesn't care a thing about reality and history, and loves to micromanage a game hour after hour. NO SALE. Civilization 2 was better and more fun.
Rating:
Summary: Civ3
Review: Civ3 has raised the bar on the Civ line-up of games. For those that have played Civ2 or the original, I believe that Civ3 has made the game interface and game (city/troop) management easy to handle without changing the core concepts of Civ. While I have met some people who are still "holding on" to the "old way" of doing things in Civ2, all of those that I have met who have been willing to move on and give Civ3 a try for a while have found the game to be more enjoyable for the time required to put into a game. Still for Civ2 players: Civ3 moves faster than Civ2. This is not because it is an easier game to play or that the strategies are simpler, it is because of the improved interface and management system. Also, in Civ2, no matter what difficulty I was playing on, I found that taking out all my enemies by power was the only practical way to win. I only participated in the Space Race once - and only to see what it was like. In Civ3, I believe it has become more complicated to wage a world domination war (which is a good thing, especially for those of us that enjoy militaristic conquest). For those of you new to Civ games, Civ3 is similar to many of the RTS (real-time strategy) games on the market like Age of Empires, but the game moves in turns instead. In my experiences, Civ3 is a game for the more military minded strategist, and RTS games tend to be more for the fast paced strategist. Civ3 features the top of the genre quality and quantity. It has great replay value for a strategy game and provides the ability to add-in and design Mods. For those of you who enjoy a strategy game that may last on average anywhere from 2 hours (on a tiny map) to 30 hours (on a huge map), you'll only discover that the longer the game, the more intense the action. For those who buy this game, don't even consider purchasing the "Play the World" add-on. Instead, go straight for the "Conquest" add-on (which includes the first add-on as well).
Rating:
Summary: A splendid but more isolating CIV--A comment
Review: CIV III is a powerful update of the CIV series. For those who haven't played Civ, here is a brief explanation. The CIV series challenges you to build a civilization made up of cities which you found and build. You can battle other computer controlled civilizations, trade with them and engage in diplomatic relations. There are many paths to victory as you strive to become the preeminent force in the world. This is a turn-based game (some of us like that) which means that you have time to plot and plan before making a move. While the various possibilities make the game rich and complex, actually playing is relatively simple and enjoyable. The graphics are pleasing--but remember, this isn't a real-time role playing game or first-person shooter so don't expect graphics like that. The Civ Series has been around for a long time and this one is, overall, the best to date. If you want a turn-based civilization building game combining warefare, economics and diplomacy with a sophisticated yet easy-to-use interface, this game is for you. Warning--it's addictive--days go by without notice as you try to squeeze in "just one more" turn before dinner. Assuming that you are already familiar with CIV II, let me make a comment on the downside of Civ III. What surprised me in playing the game is that it seemed a more solitary experience than CIV II. For a time I couldn't figure this out and then it hit me--no high council. I understand that the new advisors give more detailed information than in CIV II, but the lack of real people talking with you--and arguing with themselves--takes something fine away from the gaming experience. As a player who sometimes does find himself saying "just a little more" at 3 AM, I can say that there were times when what kept me going was the complaint "My talents go to waste, noble leader" from the foreign affairs advisor or the tipsy "no complaints, Sire" from the chain-mailed military advisor. All gone in Civ III--and missed. This is a small thing, but it says something about the trade-off between large scope and personal scale which makes CIV III, while brilliant, perhaps not quite as satisfying in some ways as CIV II. I'll continue to play both--but I'll keep hoping--hoping--that the latest patch will include the high council--perhaps in an expanded form. Update: 6 Months later. OK, I admit it, I haven't played CIV II since I wrote the review and I'm still playing CIV III. I still wish the High Council existed but the game is so rich in other ways that I'll have to live with it. Civ--You got me again. And I've changed my rating from 4 stars to 5.
Rating: 
Summary: So far, so good!
Review: I was up until 12:30 this morning playing this game. As I said, so far, so good! That "gamer" guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He's obviously too in love with Call to Power (which I didn't like) to make an objective analysis. You can zoom in and out with no problems. Check your progress by hitting F8 (as I remember). You can toggle off grids from the Preferences menu. I do, however, agree with the calls of "bad Manager" on this game. I have Alpha Centauri (another Sid Meyer game) and the Manager there gives you a queue of 8 or 10 items. Why couldn't Sid use the Alpha Centauri manager? It works! I'm also not a big fan of the endgame. If you don't win, you lose! I came in second (my Greeks behind the English), among seven civilizations (my favorite way to play Civ I and II) and the graphic showed me all bandaged and losing. Those are my only two gripes. Learning that Wonders do different things than they used to is a fun challenge! The game is incredibly addicting and the "worker" units are a welcome change. Two hints: Build libraries and universities quickly and discover Republic (then Democracy) fast. That's the only way you'll get to Alpha Centauri before the game times out at A.D. 2050.
Rating:
Summary: Years of civiliaztion.....years of waiting
Review: Great game, incredible remake of Civ 2. the culture idea is particularly good, as is the cultural (national) borders- no forts and military units crawling everywhere now. i like the civ-specific abilities, the stragetic resources make a really neat factor in the game, and i love that you can play 1 vs 15 now as a max instead of 1 vs. 7. however, there are some problems. first of all, in addition to the irritating typos in critical places in the manual (not many, but enough), there are three world wonders that double scientific production (Copernicus's Observatory, Newton's University, SETI). isn't that a tad excessive? second, the city governers tend to change production to whatever they want, without even asking you (i.e. you've been building modern armor here for the last 70 turns...and each successful thing produced changes the prodction list to.....spearmen.) this becomes particulary irritating in that after a wonder is built, all other cities building it have 1 turn to change- after that, like with the modern armor, shields are irrovokably lost in switching say from SETI (1 turn away, or like 950 shields) to your freindly neigherbood police station..only to find out that, as the third or fourth action of the turn, that you can now build another world wonder of 1000 shields...oopps, wait, you just lost all that progress!! darn (sarcastic tone of voice here) third, the waiting. in the maps i like to play (huge, 16 culture) it takes, literally, about 2 minutes inbetween turns, 1-2 minutes during your turn, for 15 seconds of commanded action. that wasted time piles up REAL fast. fourth, unless you get the great library (for all difficulty levels Regent and above, or about 5 or 6 of them), you never make it to the industrial age with even a shadow of a chance of winning, partly because of cultural walling in, partiallly because of corruption and the like (hey, look, i have 10 cities and they have 16 and im supposed to beat them on cash and scientific knowledge?) great game, overall....just bring a good book along too, 'kuz you will need it.
Rating:
Summary: Great strategy game for most (but not all)
Review: Civilization 3 is the long-awaited followup to Civ 2, the fantastically successful empire-building simulation. As a result, there were bound to be lots of people disappointed, because you can't please everyone. For most people, however, Civ 3 is an excellent game and one that will definitely give you a lot of entertainment for your money. If you've never played Civ 2, you're in a good position to jump into Civilization 3. Players of Civ 2 will have more to adjust to, such as a revamped combat system (which some say is woefully unbalanced with spear carriers occasionally defeating tanks) and expanded diplomacy/trade options. Civ 3 seems to more about land masses and continents instead of a "nation" comprised of a bunch of random cities. Also, a new culture model lets you personalize your civilization while also using culture to form your national border. These might seem like subtle changes, but I think most people will agree that they eventually lead to a drastically different and more satisfying game experience. So should you buy Civ 3? There are a few downsides that might not make it a perfect choice for everyone. For example, if you're looking for top-notch 3D graphics, you'll be disappointed, but nevertheless this is still easily Sid Meier's best-looking game ever. The animations are particularly good, but a vocal minority seem to miss the video clips that populated Civ 2. There are also some bugs in the initial version of the game, but what game doesn't have bugs upon initial release these days? Perhaps the biggest omission of all: no multiplayer support. THAT is a big surprise and it is the reason I can't give this game a five-star review. Going into 2002, it's just unacceptable for developers to leave out multiplayer support. Still, the positives easily outweigh the negatives. The game has an epic feel that most games never come close to achieving. The user interface isn't completely mouse-driven, but it's still excellent and incorporates good features (such as city queues to help you plan ahead) from Alpha Centauri, its predecessor. The new civilizations are much improved, and each one has unique units for further variation. Bottom line: this is very fun strategy game with a LOT of replay value, but if you buy it early, remember to expect a few bugs. A patch will be released for download sooner or later to tidy up the loose ends. It's just part of the territory with PC games these days.
Rating: 
Summary: New paint job on an old car: We've been here before.
Review: Other reviewers have (or will soon) enumerate the details and differences of Civ III as compared to its previous versions; you should read those if you're looking for specific information. However, this is for other long-time fans of Civilization and its children (Civ 2, Call to Power 2, Alpha Centauri, Test of Time, CivNet), who are wondering if they're missing something. They are not. We've been here before. Unfortunately, even though I hadn't played a Civ 2 game in a couple of years, and therefore should've been ready for Civ III, I never got the feeling that one gets when discovering a brilliant and surprising gaming challenge. I should've been warned: all the previews, screenshots, interviews, designer diaries, didn't look or sound all that compelling. There's a lot of new stuff and improvements, and you'll need to refine your strategies somewhat, but not enough to say, "Half a decade since Civ 2 was worth it! The concept of culture or elimination of unit zones of control has given me new reason to take up the pen or sword!" I don't regret buying it - I wouldn't have believed negative reviews - it is a solid game, but I could've (woulda, coulda, shoulda) waited. Civ III can wait. I keep remembering that old Saturday Night Live skit where Jennifer Aniston tells David Spade (about his movie "Black Sheep"): "I really liked it - the first time I saw it, when it was called "Tommy Boy!"
Rating:
Summary: Slightly different, much improved.
Review: Civilization 3 is a spectacular sequel to one of the best games of all time, Civilization 2. Civ 2 had some botched concepts, such as zone of control and war weariness. Civ III properly implements these features, and steps up the difficulty that was lacking in Civ 2. It took me a few games to get up to speed with the new features, but now that I've gotten the hang of it, the whole game is a blast. There are many new features, but Firaxis managed to capture the addictive nature of the games before it. There are some strange parts, like rampant corruption and massive AI advantages, that can be frustrating at times, but it is possible to get around these blocks. The AI could be better in some parts, such as move orders for your units, but everything is a marked improvement on Civ II, and is addicting even for my friends that had somehow never even heard of Civilization. The gameplay is smooth, and I have had zero crashes. Infogrames, Macsoft and Firaxis have provided excellent support for it, and I have heard of an upcoming multiplayer patch that will allow people to test their wits against each other. This game looks to have an exciting future, and is definitely worth 5 stars and your money.
Rating:
Summary: Keep Looking
Review: I loved Civ 1 and Civ II. I played those for days as a time. I itched to see what this one was going to be like. After 2 weeks of playing the game, I find several things..that I think are not yet cooked.
Yes, nicer graphics... like the culture idea...
AI is extremely difficult, even at the lower levels. I had to play at warlord just to get into the industrial period. Little control over the governor and that bugs me. I spent way too much time trying to figure out how to queue up builds and finally found the answer on a fan website. Here I am getting pounded on 4 sides and the AI says the people really think I should build the Forbidden City.. hah... use 50 turns while 4 civs are bearing down on me.... You must have at least a 700mhz machine.. preferably something faster with lots of RAM if you want to play on one of the huge maps. There is no way to a manage the corruption... goverments, police stations, courthouses, all that make a little difference. I actually found a fresh continent in the industrial period.. put up some cities.. it took 150 turns for a pop 10 city to build a temple.. .that's how bad corruption is. I think I like the Call to Power version better, in spite of their bugs...
| 
