User Reviews (71 - 81 of 369)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

It could have been a contender

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 9 / 12
Date: May 02, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Sid is a great man. CIV/CIV2/SMAC just a few games to mention. He has revolutionized computer gaming. But sadly CIV 3 is a graphic make over. It is CIV 2.5. Even additions of the resources, unique civ specific units, and culture do not make this game stand on its own.
AI is lacking and very annoying (cheating too). Useless advisors. Slow game play (lag between turns could take up to 2-3 min). Constant warfare. No real scenario support. Editor is buggy. No multiplayer support.
I got this game the day it came out. I don't regret it. I like it. I play it once in a while. Upgrade immediately to at least patch 1.21 if you get it. Anything before that is rubbish.

Nice concepts, poorly executed

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 9 / 12
Date: June 30, 2002
Author: Amazon User

To give you an idea of my skill level, I can consistently win Civilization 2 at the prince level, occasionally at king. I was disappointed with Call to Power, mostly because it added a layer of micromanagement that made the game more tedious and less enjoyable. I have given Civ 3 more of a chance than Call to Power, mostly because I have a more powerful computer now (666mHz, 384M ram). I have played exclusively on Chieftain level.

The redesign features some changes in the rules that getting used to. Chief among these is the abandonment of zone of control. I still foolishly leave workers (a new unit; workers build roads and irrigation, leaving settlers nothing to do but make new towns) unprotected, and my enemies walk right by me and steal them. It would be interesting if you could alter the game by toggling ZOC on or off. Some of the units engage in combat differently. Catapults, cannons, and artillery bombard their opponents rather than directly assault them. But the units must still be defeated by other combat units. Certain fast moving units can pull out of a losing battle, and can take shots at enemies moving through what used to be the zone of control. There is not enough imbalance, however, between modern and ancient units, and I have suffered the same frustration other reviewers have with regard to watching an archer eliminate an infantry and sack a colony. I like the fact that each civilization has a unique unit. My favorite is the German panzer, replacing the tank.

The advance curve is very, very disappointing in this game. Every time I have played, advances come far too slowly. You have more control over the technologies you can choose, and can queue these choices just like your production queues in cities.

I have read several other reviewers comment on how slow the game is at the end. I'm reassured, at least, to know that this was not some problem with my computer. Playing with a lot of civilizations on the "very huge" map makes the late turns take three to four minutes. That's not my idea of a fun time on a computer game. The average size world is not much better.

One thing I have not noticed other reviewers comment on is some of the difficulties with managing unrest within the interface. I can't see any difference in the happy, content, and unhappy icons for most civilizations. This was easy in Civ2: the unhappy faces were Red. In Civ3, they are frowning, but it's very difficult to see the different faces. Why couldn't they have a red background? Also, the city management screen has a column showing the Happy and Content citizens, but not the unhappy. The Happy/Content stat is just about meaningless; what you need to know is the happy and sad comparison. And, unlike Civ2, the game does not pause after each city goes into unrest, so you have to go back to the advisor screen to check on each one.

There are other criticisms that I think have already been rehashed. I will close by saying I hope that Infogrames is making notes of what is written here and elsewhere about Civ3 and make some changes in Civ4.

A Great Game With Numerous Flaws

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 7 / 8
Date: November 12, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I'll start out by saying that this is the first civilization game I have played. Civilization 3 takes forever to learn. I read the entire manual but that was still not enough. The manual tells you what you can do, but not how to accomplishment it. It also has a horrible index so finding anything is a challenge. I then tried the tutorial which was even worse, at first it is ok but eventually it just stops guiding you through the game. There is also a civilopedia which is an in game encyclopdeia. This is useful for telling you what each advance does and unit stats but not much else. Another annoyance is the read-me file. In the read-me file it has about a page of changes that didn't make the manual. Some are rather major such as not being able to conduct certain tasks and new civiliztion characteristics. In my opinion they should have released the game a month later and combined the civilopedia, manual and read-me file into one super manual. This would have made the game much easier to learn. Another problem with the game is that the civilizations are not very unique. Sure each one has a unique unit and unique characteristics but compared to age of empires the civs are all the same.

However, the game is not all bad. The gameplay is great and you really get into it once you learn how to play. It is great how you can win without fighting(too much). This gives players all different ways to win. Finding a balanced strategy can be a challenge. Diplomacy is another great aspect. It is fun to wheel and deal to get just one more gold for whatever you have traded. There are numerous options and the people all have distinct personalities. The AI is relativly smart, for example if you sign a right of passage act and sneak attack an opponent nobody will even think of signing a right of passage act with you for many years because of what you did. This makes keeping your word in treaties important.

Overall I feel that Civilization 3 is a good buy if you are willing to learn to play the game. If you like games where you can pop the cd in and play then this is not for you. There are some bugs and no multiplayer support but I am sure that there will be numerous patches to fix all of this.

Pros:
Great Gameplay
Diplomacy
Numerous ways to Win
AI personalities

Cons:
Horrible manual/tutorial
High Learning Curve
Civs are NOT very Unique

A game tries to reinvent it self and miserably fails at that

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 7 / 8
Date: November 18, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I awaited this game as much as Christmas and after some playing, I have to say I am disappointed. Especially if you were expecting a souped up version of Civ II that adds on to what was there, I would suggest to hardly think before buying this game. If you never had a Civ game and you want graphics instead of gameplay go ahead. Don't get me wrong. The game is good it just does not live up to a Sid Meier Civilization. They changed a lot of things that were good and did not make the improvements one would have expected. Diplomacy, yes has been widened but unless you are willing to make deals where you pay three times and more of what you get you will as always end up at war. Appearantly fair deals are still not part of the Civ repartoire. The biggest set back are military units. Remember when in Civ I you were almost going crazy whan a knight had just ripped your tank apart. Well get used to it gain. Instead of a continuos health bar that was used in Civ II you now get a certain set of points (5 max.) so don't be surprised if that 13th century Pikeman just hacked your Paratrooper to pieces. How real is that??? Another weird thing is that you cannot utilise roads anymore that are not within your influence. So forget a fast advance because now your troops appear to be to stupid to find a road in a square controlled by your enemy so they cut through the forrest instead of using the streets..really smart! Positive is the boarder concept which works reasonably well. There are a few glitches to it but they are minor. The other thing that is bothersome is that somehow you always end up having 2 to 3 civs right next to you to start. So if the computer had the grace to start you in a corner you will be boxed in after a few moves and doomed to failure. Because the computer still alots himself an awesome amount of units so forget early victories especially if you are not technologically superior (see Paratrooper vs. Pikeman example).I am sriously considering putting this title on the shelf and go back to Civ II. To date the improvements don't outweigh the at times the severe setbacks for me. I'd be cautious with this game. When I saw that Infogrames released the game my alarm sounded because ever since I had a 286 Infogrames always manged to flush a good game or concept down the toilet..and they did it again. Too bad that it was Civ this time. If you have not bought the game yet I would suggest you closely look at Call to Power II as an alternative. I did not like CTP I but the second one can't be much worse than Civ III. Sorry guys. I don't mean to bust the fun but I highly anticipated this game and so far I've gotten only frustration out of it. Shame on them for bringing this on the market and selling it as a Civ game. Any other name and this would have made its way into the ranks of high average low good but if you claim to be third in a generation of games that each revolutionized gaming, it just does not meet that high mark it set itself and that the Civ team sowed into the Civ Community when they developed the game.

A little Buggy

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 7 / 8
Date: November 29, 2001
Author: Amazon User

A few crashes, a little buggy, and espionage is harder than any other version of this game.

...but I'm still addicted. The play is smoother, and the automatic upgrades of some of the soldiers/workers is good. I don't miss any of the event movies or other bric-a-brac that I used to turn off on the game.

Not a bad purchase (...)

Amazing. It truly deserves 5 stars.

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 7 / 8
Date: March 09, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Sid Meier and the other creators have accomplished quite a feat with their newest creation, Civilization 3 (Civ3). A sequel to the best-selling turn-based strategy game Civilization 2, and procalimed "Best Strategy Game of 2001", Civ3 truly lives up to its name.
First, for those not familiar with the Civ series: in civ, you guide your civilization through history from 4000BC to the 21st century. It is somewhat like a board game but much more involved, fun, exciting, etc. You take the game one turn at a time moving units, managing your cities (like what they will build next), researching new technologies, waging war, negotiating with rivals, and so on.
Now that you are familiar with the concept, let's go on to some of the specific merits of Civ3. The unit and technology tree is very balanced and accurate, making the game fun and realistic at the same time (which is more than I can say for some other strategy games...). The combat system is based partially on chance, and partially on strategy. It is wonderfully balanced, and although some people might say it is unfair and completely random, that is NOT TRUE. No, a tank won't lose to spearman.
The diplomacy feature is unique to the civ series in its depth, and it has been perfected further in civ3. You can trade virtually any resource with allies (or enemies), enter into military alliances or trade maps, you name it!
The graphics and sound are not the ones you'd find in today's 3D shooter or racing or similar games, but that is not the goal here either. Still, Civ2 players will notice SIGNIFICANT advances in graphics from the previous version. Check the screenshots if you dont believe me.
Also, the game gets updated often to weed out misbalances. There have already been 2 patches realesed (head over to www.civ3.com for details.)
The game itself has a great feeling to it, which can best be described as "balanced". If you like the genre (turn-based strategy, or just strategy), nothing to date comes closer to perfection. That's right. Perfection.
Despite all this, there are some minor cons of civ3, and my review wouldn't seem credible without mentioning these. In my opinion, the game ends too soon (in 2050AD). Although some would argue that this is a great feature to end some stalemates that might develop and decide on a final winner, i find this too early in terms of technology research. I always seem to fall well short of the maximum available technologies, although this might have been an intended feature.
Another con comes from the nature of the game - that you always start in 4000BC, and always against computers. Although there are a number of variations to the game settings, the startup can get very repetitive, especially if you enjoy the later periods (such as when you get tanks and planes).
Also, if your computer is a bit lower-end (like a 128MB RAM Celeron), you will experience considerable delays between turns towards the end of the game, as the opponents have longer thinking time. But this is all a factor of the map size, number of opponents, and turns elapsed, and of course of your system specs. And it isn't that bad, I play this on my 192MB RAM, 600Mhz Celeron laptop...

Bottom line - you can't get better than this in the genre. Don't listen to those who bash the game without providing explanations of why. Until someone proves otherwise, this is THE best game of its class today. But don't just drool over my (or others') words - BUY IT!

awesome

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 7 / 8
Date: November 08, 2002
Author: Amazon User

game is awesome.

They've down away with caravans for easier trade. NO longer do you need to send out units to trade, once you have a seaport or a road connection, trade occurs without any units once an trade agreement has been made between two civs. Spies...they sorta of have them. you create them at your capital and pick what civ they go to. When you conduct espionage, you can choose to use a spy to do several things.
1) steal map/troop information/tech
2) stake propagade (take over city) contrary to belief, you can buy out your opponent's city. but they need to be already leaning towards your cause before you can take over. this isn't alpha centauri.
3) disrupt construction

the spies are still there. but it takes awhile before you realize how to use them.

Problems: Don't build too many workers, i've wasted 5 minutes per turn waiting for all my workers to finish their jobs (automated), WASTE OF TIME. be careful of how many you build, it also affect your gold. In the preference, you can adjust how fast and if units are animated in movement, that can cut down time on opponent's turn.

Contrary to Todd's statement, alot of civ 2 things are still present, just in different forms.

What i don't like about the game is that the maps are rather stingy at times. When you have the tech to build tanks, you almost never have the 3 or 4 resources to build them. Like oil is extremely hard to come by, that also goes for aluminum. Sometimes (more than often) you have to go to war for a single resource.

But overall, the game is good. Anyone actually see the space ship take off cutscene is does that cutscene not exist?

awesome

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 8 / 10
Date: November 14, 2001
Author: Amazon User

It was a rough start when I first began playing Civ 3. Im a huge Civ fan and I was so used to the old version that I couldnft get accustomed to the new format. The instruction manual is painfully inadequate. It has zero specific information and the index is abominable. But I pressed forward and within a short while I figured it out on my own. Then it all started to feel too familiar, just a fancy version of Civ2. Again after more game play the similarities proved to be superficial as many new levels began to appear, like the complex diplomacy for example. The AI can be surprisingly cunning and I am now chained to my computer unable to leave, at least not until I sack Thebes and teach those evil Egyptians a lesson, just one more hour...

Like Working But Not Getting Paid

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 8 / 10
Date: December 17, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I am an extreme fan of the first two installments of the Civilization series. I enjoyed carving an empire with my own two hands and driving all others into the sea.

However, Civ 3 is such a disappointment. First you cities will riot by the time they get a population of 8, or sometimes as early as 5. This will cause you to stop production and deal with it. The worse is no matter if you have a temple or not, they wil riot because "its too crowded." I once had the misfortune to build my capitial near a flood plain. Well ever turn my citzens would die of disease and then would be replaced by the newly born. Therefore always making me lose my performs and keeping my capital in a state of muntiny.

Jungles and forests are everywhere and it will take you until the 1800s to clear them all out. It takes forever to do anything (even when changing the rules in the editor) and the game becomes mired by the fact that your cities become some crowded they riot and you can't "release the pressure" because you're still clearing all the jungles off your land. Therefore the only thing you can rule is a nation of complainers.

Another thing they ruined is the chance to have a "custom civilzation" as in the first two installments. To change the name of your people and your ruler you most use the editor. Thereby, increasing the chances you will create a bug that will cause your game to crash. I once suffered through 20 game crashes until I finally realized you can't change the name of your custom unit. Customizable indeed.

The game combat system is worse than ever. I sent twenty swordsmen against a single spearman in a city and lost all but four of them. My iron clad was sunk by a ancient boat made from reeds and it goes on and on and on. You have to work about fifty times as hard as the early verisons to do the same thing. It is frustrating to watch your elite Horseman to be wiped out by a conscripted warrior. The game cheats in favor of the computer even on the easiest level.

The "wonder movies" have been removed in exchange for a single frame of art. Other civs will not trade with you unless they are really "giving you the royal screw job." Did I mention the game cheats? Well let me tell you, you will hate the computer. You will develop "Tourette's Syndrome" because of some of the combat.

I sold my game back to the store I bought it from. I suggest you stick with the second verison which is completely superior to the tripe called Civ 3.

Slightly different, much improved.

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 8 / 10
Date: March 05, 2002
Author: Amazon User

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.

Review Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next 

Actions