User Reviews (91 - 101 of 369)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Regular VS collectors ed.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 21 / 45
Date: August 09, 2001
Author: Amazon User

it seems that civilization3 will be out in the middle of Oct. but another version of it - a collector's edtion is due for release 15 days earlier... Well, that's what got me pondering, what exactly is this "collectors"? Since waiting for a game an exciting game to come out is incrediblity annoying, i thought i'd pick the verison due to release first. Besides, I've always been a Sid fan and most of all a Civ fan ;), so maybe my dedication will let me buy the game in collectors. However, when I found out that the first release was actually more of a market stratgy to make more money for basicly nothing, i had to give it another thought... You see, the game itself was actually decleared for release on the 15th - the original civ3, nothing fancy, they said it would be out on the 15th. Then suddenly appears another release date - the 1st of Oct - in the form of a collector's verison, which contains a big hand book for the game (although I can't imagine how much bigger it will be compared to the regular), and a video of "behind the making of Civ3"... So basicly they are advertising the 15 days release date to the Civ fanatics and charging them 20 bucks more just to be able to play early...

It's kind of good...

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 6 / 7
Date: January 24, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I really like the improvements they made on this game over the previous Civ games. I like the idea of getting resources in order to make certain units. I like the way they break down the Wonders, give you better options on productions, I like the cultural boundaries idea. What I absolutely hate is that I can't seem to have too many units or I lose money like crazy. And if I try to send a pretty large group to capture a city, the enemy always move about 20 units against my 10. And my ten get destroyed WAY too easily. Even if you play nice and have just enough military to keep your cities secure, the other civilizations will come at you with enough force to destroy all your cities in one sweep. And yes, this is at the easiest difficulty level. I have yet to find a way to successfully wage war, even if I'm using muskets and they have warriors. And they always seem to be right there with you in technological advances. Shouldn't the easiest level mean the other civs are a little stupid and slow?

This game is lots of fun

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 6 / 7
Date: December 05, 2002
Author: Amazon User

If you've played the Civ series you probably already know whether or not you will like this game. The reason I rated it five stars is the it is very fun to play which is basically the purpose of a game. This game could easily not appeal to many people that have different tastes. What makes a game fun for me won't always make if fun for you.

Firstly this game does not have any of the intense realistic graphics found in many 3D shooters. If you love to oooh and aaah over cool graphics this might not be your cup of tea. Also the game is turn based so there won't be any intense action that you would find in a real time strategy game. Some friends of mine who I have tried to turn onto this game didn't enjoy it because they said it was too hard. This isn't a game that you will sit down and be good at in an evening. Couple this with the fact that the game is slow on large and huge maps and you might not like it if you are the impatient type. You could say that it is a little like Chess, it's easy to learn how to move the pieces but it will take some practice to be really good.

Here is what I love about the game. I always seem to be able to learn something I didn't know and refine my strategy to be more successful. Also each game has different problems such as lack of resources or powerful neighbors that cause you to really think about what overall strategy to employ to win the game. I love getting down into the nitty gritty detials and this game has lots of them. You can zoom to every city and arrange the production of resources any way you see fit, decide what to build, what to trade with other civs, where to build roads, etc. Even though it's turn based it seems like something is always happening and you are always accomplishing goals and setting new ones. There are multiple options for victory conquest, domination, diplomatic, cultural, scientific and histographic. Depending on your mood, or more often your situation you can optimize your civilization for each victory condition. I like to play this game on the hardest possible level that I can handle. It's very exciting to be holding on fighting for your very existance and trying to find some way to win at the end.

Even though I said the game wasn't for everyone, I really doubt that anyone who takes time to learn the game and play for a few hours could possibly not like it.

Hope my review helped.

More like Call to Power 3

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 10 / 16
Date: November 07, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Don't be fooled by the overall Amazon rating for this game -- it's been skewed by people who reviewed it before they even played it. Civ III is a huge disappointment. It looks beautiful, it's more realistic historically -- and it's crushingly boring. Forget about Civilization Insomnia, this game will give you Civilization Narcolepsy.

Why does it fail? It all comes down to gameplay. Civ I and II were electronic heroin, you couldn't pull yourself away from the next turn. It was simplistic, sure, but who cares, you can't earn a PhD from a video game. But in Civ III, it seems like Sid Meier and his Firaxis team spent too much time studying Call to Power and Europa Universalis and completely forgot the simple things that made the originals great.

The empire building genre has run its course, it's time for this linear history model to be overhauled completely, perhaps with a game that builds the cycles of history. Whenever the genre re-emerges (and it will) Civ II will be the model for its revival. Civ III will be soon forgotted (except for the unfortunate folk who paid $50 for this clunker.)

DISAPPOINTING, TEDIOUS, and ANNOYING

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 9 / 14
Date: August 01, 2002
Author: Amazon User

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.

Civilization 3 commits the Ultimate Gaming Sin.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 9 / 14
Date: March 27, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Here are its problems:

1. The AI: The AI cheats! On any setting beyond chieftan (easiest) you will generally never be able to keep up with the production and military might of the game's AI controlled civs. The most powerful nation on the map will always be the AI controlled civ. Its military will be bigger, it will expand faster, it will beat you to great wonders, out perform you in the tech tree race, and it will more likely than not eventually single you out for extinction.

2. Units: Much negative criticism has been directed at the game's unit imbalances and it's all true. The game's units are terribly unbalanced--all of which is exacerbated by the random nature (random meaning more often than not resolving battles in the AI's favor) of combat.

3. Diplomacy: Again, terrible. Other civs make ridiculous and uneven demands and make it ridiculously difficult to engage in mutually benificial negotiations. It is very easy to find yourself at war simply because you rebuffed a demand for tribute.

4. Did I mention the unit imbalance?

5. Combat: Managing your units is tedious and burdensom. Its awfully irritating to have to manually select unit after unit after unit to move across the map. A patch helps a little, adding the option of fortify or wake all, but it's too little. Also, this game generally frowns on your civ being too miliaristic and aggressive. Your citizens should be assuaged by the fact that they stand to reap the spoils of your regime if you are successful in combat but instead, often despite the type of government, they turn all whiny if you play the combat hand too much. This seems out of place in a game ostensibly designed to simulate WAR!!!

6. Cities: You lose a city (a valuable city loaded with painstakingly developed improvments) to an enemy. You fight to get it back because of its strategic value. Almost all the stuff you built is gone, save for a granary. Gee, thanks.

7. Population mood: Okay, I'm playing peaceful, but with a large military just in case. My government of choice is Monarchy or Republic. I get attacked. I'm ready. I'm putting the big smack-down on my invader (and the one or two AI controlled civs that inevitably pile on). Suddenly, five or six turns into the battle, every single one of my cities falls into revolt. The reason: "Give peace a chance." Excuse me, I was attacked. The game seems to relish punishing the player by forcing you into classical darned if you darned if you don't.

8. Realism: Someone mentioned the pollution problems you experience later in the game. They are right on. It becomes a downright pain to constantly micromanage workers sending them from one pollution hot-spot to another. The AI civs always seem to locate themselves in a primo spot, next to all kinds of goodies like luxuries, raw resources, fertile land. The human player? Right next to the mountains and desert. Roam around a few turns to find a better spot and you're behind everyone else for the duration of the game.

At the end of the day, Civ 3 commits the ultimate sin by not being what it says it is: an epic game designed so you can match wits with other opponents all in a quest to dominate the world. Civ 3's shortcomings are also not what you'd call obvious and apparent. You could play for a few hours and say, what are they talking about--this games is great. No, Civ 3s shortcomings hide in the details--that area that separates great games from the bad--and come to forefront as you play. Though I admit, for moments, this game is outright brilliant (hence 3 stars for fun), but one simply cannot overlook such fatal flaws.

What could be the best turn-based strategy game ever made is instead beset by just enough flaws to make it nothing more than a lie encompassed on disc, with just enough unattainable potential to keep you coming back for a fresh kick in the teeth. Not me though. After over a year of frustrations and lemons-into-lemonade travails, I've uninstalled Civ 3 and given it a one-way ticket to the back corner of my office clost.

Do Not Buy!!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 11 / 19
Date: March 31, 2002
Author: Amazon User

This is the worst! I was so disappointed with civ-III! I love Civ-II. They made no improvements to the few areas that civ-II needed improvements. They only made the game unplayable to someone who wants a realistic game. I will list the sorry aspects of this game.

The diplomacy is beyond stupid and unrealistic!
After awhile all the rest of the civ's will form alliances against you and if you go to war with one you can count on them all jumping in. O yes and even the ones you have treaties with will attack you!

Forget about far trading! This concept is not realistic in this sorry game!
I was low on money so I figured I would sell a city to a "ally" for some quick cash. No way! I tried 100g, then 80g, then 20g, and just for laughs 1g! Guess what, they bought it for one gold. This was a city that was making money and expanding. This is a joke! All the rest of the diplomatic exchanges are the same, you get nothing in return for almost all you have!

Treaties with other civs are worth nothing as you grow because they will make treaties with the rest of the civs and attack you on the first provocation. Yes even after you go to war for them!

The only way to win this game, or even compete, is to use the cheat strategies that give you unlimited money. They are listed on all the civ sites, but who wants to win this way. Buy an army to fight the world! This concept totally defeats the diplomacy strategy that is supposed to work with this game (But does not)!

I could go on but I think I made my point. If you like strategy games go with CIV-II, its the best game out there. I would stay away from this sorry game!!!!!!

Please read, before your rush out to buy...

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 16 / 33
Date: November 02, 2001
Author: Amazon User

And it is a monumental disappointment!!! I am going to try and return it to the shop - if I can.

If you have never played Civilization, this may be a good buy, since you don't know what you're missing. It is merely a souped up version of Civ2 - nothing surprising there. However, they ignored myriad things that Call To Power (CTP 2) had improved upon that were not picked up by this version. CTP has been advancing this series under the flagship of Activision.

Here are some annoyances:

1. There is no concept of army. It is one soldier fighting at a time like the old one, even if you pile 'em up.
2. There is bare minimum you can configure on your display etc. No changing resolution. There are 10-12 things that you select/deselect - that's it!
3. CTP offers amazing array of options on every screen. Not here. For e.g., the file-save window is a joke - even I can design a better GUI!!
4. There is no defined trade route or caravans. So you have no idea what the hell is going on. You just negotiate "passage rights" then some magic might be happening!! To be honest, I don't know all the steps, probably, but it is 1780 AD and I have no sign of a trade!
5. You cannot design a build list. Each time a thing gets done, city is in focus. If you don't notice, you may be churning out warriors after warriors! No concept of a "Manager" either.
6. Can't check ranking from a menu. Wait from scholars to write stupid books. No warning when Wonders are getting done my opponents. Can't see your cash readily - have to talk to your "advisors".
7. The diplomacy is extremely complicated. After frustrating clicks, I could not tell the damned English to stop trespassing - sometimes it is there in the choice of dialogs, sometimes not! It is not like the standard menu that CTP uses where you can construct your dialog.
8. Can't exchange goods since there are not "sea routes". How do you make one? Read the thick manual - and I haven't found it yet!!
9. Can't toggle off grids.
10. Build list is woefully short even into advanced years!!
11. Terrain improvements are very limited as compared to CTP.
NN..... List goes on!!!...


Here are the paltry positives that I see:
1. Graphics is pleasant, but you see very little portion of the screen. It is like CTP zoomed into just few grids.
2. Your manufacturing requires that you have access to raw goods. Thus, without access to "iron" you don't get to make "swordsmen". Thus, it may become 1700 AD and all you are still making are "warriors" and "archers"!!! Gets tiring...
3. Cities expand when the culture in it grows, and it can engulf nearby rival's city - this is probably the coolest feature.
4. You can have more kinds of exchange with the neighbors.
5. You can make roads anywhere, not just within your own city limit like in CTP.


Overall, it is a travesty. They should've espoused all the advancements that CTP2 did, and some more. I know what I'm going to do. I'll be playing CTP2 until CTP3 come out, and this piece of junk is going back to the shop for a ("pray") refund.

Geez, I must have had all the fun of Civ 5 years ago!

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 7 / 10
Date: November 26, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Honestly, I'm not having fun with Civ 3 as much as I had expected.
Graphic is better, A.I. is better and Gameplay is probably better.
So what's wrong with it?
Nothing. Nothing I can think of. Maybe I am the reason.
Maybe it's me that's wrong.
Because I have had all the fun of Civilization style games
5 years ago.
Sometimes good memories are best left alone.

In the long run, the most fun was de-installing it.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 7 / 10
Date: July 12, 2002
Author: Amazon User

This was a fascinating and addictive game for me until I got the feeling that the AI is really biased against the "human" player.

What finally put me over the edge was when I noticed how, after becoming a "democracy", all my cities started burning all at once when I got into a war.

This happened nearly all the time whether I declared war on another civ, or they declared war on me, for whatever reason. I couldn't keep them productive for more than a few turns at at time. I had cities full of entertainers and they still weren't happy.

It became utterly predictable, and you can't really win a war when all your cities go off-line. (Not to mention the sheer monotony of always going into your cities to fix them.)

This isn't reality. Unjust wars cause civil unrest in a democracy, but wars considered "just" seem to bring everyone together to accomplish amazing things (speaking from the American experience in WWII, anyway.) Why isn't that historical fact programmed into this game?

I also noticed that the "right" price for negotiating a purchase of technology from another civ often seems to be exactly what it takes to complete clean out my treasury. That doesn't seem right either.

I'll grant that this game was not designed for kids, necessarily, and it is meant to be challenging, but the AI seems so tough, and arbitrarily so, that it stops being fun.

No matter how much I learn about the game, and there's a lot to learn, it doesn't get me closer to winning.

Ironically, when the de-install routine completed, I got a panel saying that install is complete, and offering me the choice to re-start my computer. Sheesh. That one seems to have gotten past QA.

In fact, I think this game should have been tested and tweaked a few more months before being released. It just doesn't seem quite right.

Review Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next 

Actions