User Reviews (201 - 211 of 369)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Not Happy

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: February 17, 2002
Author: Amazon User

After playing stratagy games such as AoE, Empire Earth (Amazing), C&C, and many many more, i first touched CivIII without playing the first 2. My word:- it's bad. Its so boring, the only person i could see enjoying this is an old person with nothing better to do than spending 20 'turns' creating a warrior. Do yourself a favor, do not buy this game, empire earth is 200% better than Civ, go and spend your hard earned cash on that.

Laughable crap

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 19
Date: September 07, 2005
Author: Amazon User

So this game costs 0,70 cents. Hah! I thought so. Who could buy a game in which

It takes a century to train 1 spearman?

It takes half a millenium to build a fort, and the enemy can just walk around it?

Units can walk around other units, taking cities without even fighting even if they are surrounded by enemies on all sides?

A caveman can destory a 21st century tank?

This kind of crap makes me laugh. Get Victoria: an Empire under the Sun, Hearts of Iron II or Europa Universalis II. Search for them here in Amazon, to at least know what you are missing.

GREAT GAME!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 12 / 65
Date: June 03, 2001
Author: Amazon User

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.

Solid

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 9
Date: October 09, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Civ3, from the information that has been given out to fansites, looks to be another solid game from Sid Meier and the Firaxis team. It takes the best of Civ2 and adds much more and whats real nice is that Firaxis has listened to the fans ideas on some things. Unlike childs games like the sims and simcity that you tossed on the shelf after a few hours of play this is going to have you going to work with no sleep because you stayed up all night thinking "just one more turn" or "well if I play for another hour I'll still get two hours of sleep". Your life outside of this game will be over.

No skin off Call to Power's back!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 3 / 9
Date: November 02, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Oooh! Horrible Horrible game! I saw reviews here way before the game was released. Come on have you played it before you gave it 5 stars? Just the prospect of the game?

Feel free to spend your money and see how it stacks up to CTP2. Of course, Call to Power 2 was not perfect but this is abysmal. You WILL notice that the playability is extremely hard and vague compared to Activision's CTP2. Wars are strange with no stacking and each soldier fights another one!! How realistic is that? Trading is so vague with no idea of what's going on unlike CTP2 where trade routes are clearly shown. Diplomacy is also toothless and you do not get to compose a message nicely like you can in CTP. And there are many more instances that show Sid Meier is losing his touch or he doesn't have enough resources to hire enough programmers and do a good job.

Mark my words, you would be better off saving your money for CTP3!!

This game is as raw as the materials that made it!!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 4 / 15
Date: May 02, 2002
Author: Amazon User

First things first! I own AOE2 and play earth-consuming amounts of time on it, and love it! AOE2 has strategy mixed in with great gameplay and respectable graphics, as well as a special sense of unique civ. individuality--The best PC strategy game ever! Civ. 3 has none of the above going for it. There are many down right quirky unit inaccuracies in this game. (A knight defeats a tank--I don't wanna hear it).
Also, it needs a much more commanding, loose-cannon feel - like you're the Emperors or Kings themselves ruling all, easily! But no, you're up in the sky about a mile (bad camera views) playing a bad game... within the game. Sadly and simply put: it needs more realism, etc. I recommend this game only if used to break someone's fall.

THE-END

Call To Power is better

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 5
Date: January 11, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Wow, was I disappointed with this version of Civ. I LOVED Civs I and II, but this one is a step backwards. Activision's Call To Power is much better, even though it had plenty of flaws. Civ III is VERY biased towards the computer. You will be hard pressed to build wonders, take cities, expand, advance, and negotiate. Even with the latest patches. In this version, they introduced the cool idea of having to have resources to build units. That's great, but the other civilizations will NOT trade them to you, even when you offer cities, technology, luxuries, resources, etc!

A great, confusing game

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 2 / 5
Date: November 09, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Love this game, a good time waster, if one has the time to waste...only wish that the action would slow down a bit, all that running around so fast is confusing for an "oldie" like me.

Some much potential

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 5
Date: November 24, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I was a big fan of Civ 2 and so I should be a fan of Civ 3 (especially since, without the graphics upgrade, it's essentially a patch release for Civ2) but I can't do it - simply too much waisted potential here. Are there things I like? Yea. I appreciated the concept of culture - especially when an enemy placed a city very close to one of my largest ones and a few turns later the people revolted and wanted to join me. But these were few and far between. For those with experience with Alpha Centari (a game many consider a Civ 2 sequal) think about some of the advances of that game (now years old) - shouldn't we have expected this game to be an evolutionary step above that? Why can't I combine a settler with a horse for movement advantage or add some military characteristics to a worker so they can defend themselves - more shields for a better unit. Imagine the advances in play if you could invest a ton of resources and tech into a small group of "Super Units" and then watch an enemy's numbers try to overcome you. Also, why no method to start mid game (IE - you have X amount of points to spend on cities and units in this region while your enemy does the same) or challenges - Two equal societies approach a rich land mass with the winner kicking the other off. Lack of network play is another negative but with the game left in the shape it's in I can see why it was left out. I find it hard to imagine that any significant amount of game testing went into this!

There are better games to spend your money on!

-Eric

Buyer Beware!!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 5
Date: November 14, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I am a fan of the Civs and am very disappointed with this game. I will keep this very short. I have never written a review before and thought that I would never have the desire to do so, but I feel that it is my duty to stop others from making the same mistake I did. Do not pay a lot of money for this game!! There are so many problems and so many short falls that you will end up disappointed, especially if you are an avid Civ fan. Don't believe all the pre-sales hype, the game is not very good.

Review Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next 

Actions