Rating: 
Summary: civ 3
Review: civilization is a great game,chose which past ruler you would like to be and play until you fall asleep.You can be many past empires including he carthaginians, the egyptions,the aztecs and many more. You can take over the world,(my personal preferance),make peace with everyone or make peace with some tribes and to work together to destroy someone,the ... for instance. chose your preference,learn tecnologies slowly or cheat and reveal the map,build things like nuclear missiles and tanks,or just destroy a civilization...
Rating: 
Summary: Civilization3, a game?
Review: As you'll probably know, civilization continues and here's the newest version of the game known as civ3. Now don't get too excited about this game, as more often, you never know how it will end up as. I know, i know, it's enjoyable but just like civ1 and 2 were, i don't really think civ3 will make any difference. Gameplay and graphics changed a little bit from civilization 1 to 2. But overall, everything is the same. Whoever made this game is a person who likes to cheat people into buying this game and wasting their money on some garbage. I'd suggest buyers think more often about the sims and simcity 3000 and if they have these games, they should be thankful to themselves. Thank you.
Rating: 
Summary: Much new features!!
Review: Where Civ II is merely an add on of new improvements, units and graphical improvements to Civ I, Civ III will be that and a lot of new things.Civ III goes into areas that were not explored by its predecessors, mainly Civ II. In Civ III, economic and diplomacy will play a much more significant roles. In fact, economic, warfare and diplomacy will be interwined. Changes in one will affect the other. For example, ivory, a resources that is required to keep the civilians happy, will be indispensible to the success of any Civ III players. If the Civ III players do not have access to ivories, they will have to explore and colonize land that do have ivory, or negotiate trade treaties to obtain ivories. If colonization and trade treaties fails, then players can always opt for war. This feature will add a new dimension to the gameplay. Players will no longer be colonizing land randomly. They will have to give a careful consideration to whether or not it is good to build a city here to obtain resources. Diplomacy will also be greatly improved. Players will no longer be negotiating the same items. For example, players in Civ III can negotiate maps for technologies, money for maps, and so on. Players can also request a civilliation to stop exporting certain resources imperative to creation of certain armies to another civilization so that that civilization will not be able to build armies. There will be empire boarder and cultural points. The higher the culture rating that your civilization is, the more ilkely that a small cities of rival civilization may be assimilated into your empire, thus becoming a part of your territory. There are many many more new features that will make this game a much more of an empire building game than just a war game. It requires more tactical considerations in the areas of economic, diplomacy and war. no longer is this game just about war. It is aslo about acquisition of resources and development of economy. It is a major step in redirecting the focus of empire building games.
Rating:
Summary: GREAT GAME!
Review: I have seen the game's previews, and it is absolutely outstanding. It might have its flaws as all games do, but, in general, it is superb. The only problem with this release is that there is no Macintosh version; it will be great to have a Macintosh version as well; and even better if it would be compatible with the Windows version.
Rating:
Summary: REVIEW
Review: It is a great game. You finally have the power to conquer all! What a great game!
Rating:
Summary: Best game ever, but still much room for improvement...
Review: It's not often that I take interest in a computer game. I hate learning how to play a game, and have little time to spend on one. Yet Civilization has always been my prime exemption to this rule.
I first encountered Civilization I back in 1992, and fondly recall being confused about how to play it ("You need one of those 'mouse' things to play it"). It struck me as unusual because you didn't run around killing things or avoiding being killed by things. You made stuff (you could choose what you made!), you chose how you wanted to win the game (if at all), and you never knew what the enemy would do next. The possibilities for this game were endless (or so they seemed), and so Civ never stopped being fun to replay.
With Civ II (1997) and now Civ III (I hear IV is on the way), the possibilities have increased a thousand fold. Civilization is supposed to be a relatively accurate simulation of actual tribal development across history, from wandering nomadic tribes to modern day global empires. What began as a ground-breaking, but severely limited representation of only the most basic militaristic and scientific componants of history has since expanded to represent diplomacy and resource acquisition (with relative accuracy) and now, in III, it even includes some aspect of cultural influence (though this requires more fleshing out in later versions).
However, as fantasticly fun as Civ has always been, it still seems miles away from an accurate simulation. I get the sense that Sid Meier (the game's designer) approached this project with a sincere desire to relive history, exploring the past, as well as alternate presents with the click of a mouse. But, though the game has grown exceptionally more complex with each new version, the vision, itself, still feels rather limited.
For example, it amazes me that, thirteen years and two major overhauls later, we still see science, production, economics, and expansion dictated entirely by the central government. Name the last scientific breakthrough that was ordered by the United States Government. We fund SOME research, and conduct some of our own military research, but it was (first) individuals and (later) corporations that conducted this research, and that research was dictated largely by self-interest; something the government has no control over (even when funding). Economics and production are similarly controlled by private corporations. Even our military production is outsourced in a modern free-enterprise society. Finally, settling and expansion, while sometimes planned by a central government, often happen on their own (particularly in a democratic society).
Essentially, I think CIV needs to start incorporating some complex AIs to control the forces within a society that a government cannot. Much of the direct control CIV gives its players is fitting only for a Despotism, Monarchy, or Fascist Regime. Sure, a government can still persuade these forces, but that's a far more intricate and (I believe) more fun process. Setting interstate policies, offering economic incentives, conducting multi-national trade agreements, and raising and lowering interest rates are all weapons in a central government's arsenol. I'd like to see CIV begin to realize this and work toward representing it in future editions.
Civ is still the best game in the universe (one of the only few I consider worth playing, and certainly the only one I'm still not tired of after thirteen years), but it has so much unrealized potential. Here's to the next incarnation, then...
Rating:
Summary: Great Game - Avoid It
Review: Before addressing the specifics of the game, I'd like to state that it's impossible to live in the real world and the Civ III world simultaneously. If you decide to play it at all, make sure you have a window of time with no responsibilities to school, work, family, friends, girl/boy-friends, etc. Make sure to eat, sleep, and bathe. On to the game itself......
World conquest is far more difficult than in Civ II. Conquered enemy cities can be impossible to pacify, sometimes reverting back to their home countries at inopportune moments. I happen to find this aspect enjoyable for its realism. The United States is currently demonstrating in Iraq - as it did in Vietnam - that superior military might is often insufficient to pacify alien cultures. The increased difficulty of world conquest makes alternate paths to victory - technological, cultural, and diplomatic - more attractive. This too is more realistic. Of surviving countries on our planet, how many are here because they were able to conquer the world - or even come close (not merely hold their own militarily)? Conquest of the world consequently requires a "scorched earth" strategy - the decimation of cities as they are conquered. Think Fallujah.
Civ III's realism is also improved by the addition of strategic resources (not merely luxuries). Oil, iron, uranium etc. must be acquired by hook or by crook for the continued development of your civilization. I recommend Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel" for those who doubt the importance of strategic resources to the fates of civilizations. It is true the necessity of resources can make the game frustrating. Say, for instance, you need to send your forces to the other side of the map merely to secure a source of oil? Ah well, just tell your irritated citizens that you believe the owners were developing weapons of mass destruction.
While diplomacy and trade are greatly improved, they still leave much to be desired. Foreign leaders - especially late in the game - refuse to trade unless they are given an absurdly sweet deal. I suppose this acts to correct the (presumably) greater guile and intelligence of human players in comparison with the AI. Clearly, as computing power and programming improve, AI opponents will become both more clever and "human." Perhaps in Civ IV or V, this will obviate the need to create unrealistic distortions to keep the AI competitive. Civ III does allow a player to bargain with anything - tech advances, maps, resources, and even cities - a nice improvement on Civ II. Also, diplomatic maneuvering and alliances play a far greater role in Civ III than in Civ II. One of my favorite plays is to devilishly maneuver two or three rival civilizations into bloody combat with one another.
A major irritation occurring late in the game is the need to control massive numbers of units - military and developmental. This is a primary reason I gave the game 4 instead of 5 stars. One becomes bogged down in the micromanaging of boring aspects of the civilization. While it's important to build a mine here or to irrigate there, one gets really tired of directing an army of 100 workers to do so. Placing them on automatic is an inadequate solution, as computer-controlled workers rarely labor where they are needed.
Rating: 
Summary: Civ 3 Interesting, but poor user interface
Review: I know that Sid Meier is supposed to be a genius at UI, but the UI gets in the way of this game. It is sort of a real time, but turn based interface. When you get halfway thru this game, the number of cities and units that you need to control are large so that the games starts to bog down in piece management. You can't tell which piece has moved in the current turn, and you can't stop the automated action to move a unit or stop the preprogrammed movement of a unit which makes any coordinated attacks very difficult. You start to think about how to get around the UI instead of thinking about the game. This is really too bad because the game has some great ideas. The game takes a looong time to play, and in my opinion, not worth the effort.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best games I've ever played
Review: I am simply amazed at all the bad reviews this game has received on here. I have played all kinds of games, but prefer strategy. This is easily one of the best games I've ever played. The depth and the difficulty of the AI is remarkable, and quite challenging. Those who don't like to micromanage, don't have to. Those who do, enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: Civ III a game thats good
Review: This is one of my favorite games in the world, i am in my 20s and still play this game. it is so time consuming and fun that i go to sleep thinking of it after playing for hours. Sid Meier is a genius. i have a ps2 and play that as well but Alpha Centauri and Civilization are still the most fun.
|
