User Reviews (1 - 11 of 369)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Civilization3, a game?

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 5 / 111
Date: June 12, 2001
Author: Amazon User

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.

A Surprisingly Weak Sequel to the Civ Games

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 53 / 62
Date: January 02, 2002
Author: Amazon User

While Civilization III *should* have been a significant update to the Civilization games, it is not. In short, it is a huge disappointment. If you already own Civilization II, stick with it--you'll be happy you did. And if you don't have any Civilization game yet, try to get a copy of Civilization II on Auctions first before you you actually give your money to Infogrames.

The problems with Civilization III outweigh its advances:

1. The game was released with a series of bugs worthy of a beta version at best. For instance, cavalry units can vainquish tanks, archers can vainquish bombers. It's just not realistic.

2. There is new AI for a more fulfilling and complex diplomatic side to the game. That said, you can keep track of only eight civilizations in your diplomacy screen--while you are playing with 16 civilizations in the game. Furthermore, the diplomacy and trade screens are clunky to use. They are reminiscent of Windows 3.1 approaches to UI, not Windows 98, 2000, ME, XP, etc.

3. The Cheat Mode feature has been removed, which was an important learning tool in the last version.

4. No animations in the diplomacy and Wonders. When you build a Wonder, you find yourself profoundly disappointed with the popup window telling you you did it.

5. True alliances are possible, but they are in general worthless because your allies do not consult you on their military maneuvers. You enter an alliance, and you are sucked into a war you didn't want in a turn or two.

6. Air units are less fun to use in this version of the game because of a new one-turn "range and return" approach. You feel like your air units just never fly!

There are some important and meaningful improvements to this game (e.g. diplomacy, cultural wins, culture in general) that should have been in Civilization II, but overall Civilization III is a flavorless and insipid "update" to Civilization II that Infogrames and Sid Meyer released at least 6 months too early. As I said, the game is more like a beta than a final product (there are already three patches to download to correct all the problems). It's just not as fun as Civilization II.

I would dissuade anyone from spending their money on this game--Infogrames and Sid Meyer should be punished for this sloppy and uninspired release. Let's encourage them to focus on quality assurance and creativity for Civ 4. But if Civ 3 portends the future of this series of games, Civ 4 will be a profound disappointment as well.

I cannot recommend this game.

Sid Meier, bow your head in SHAME!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 41 / 61
Date: January 13, 2002
Author: Amazon User

While all the Sid Meier apologizers are rating this atrocity of a game with five stars, good people are still being tricked into thinking this is a good game. This game is terrible on so many levels it will be hard to list them all. Personally, I have truly enjoy Civ II and its true sequel, Alpha Centauri. With the exception of better graphics and sound, there is nothing enjoyable about this slop.
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS:
Watch the system requirements carefully. This game is painfully slow on even the fastest computers. It will take up 500 to 700 megabytes of hard disk space and will not work well on anything less than 600 Mhz processor. Even with fast computers, the game will crash a couple of times during game play, especially after the game year 1900.
GAME PLAY:
Slow and a step back from Alpha Centauri. The production queue is supposed to be very easy to use and instead it is impossible. The city governor will not deactivate when prompted on and the computer decides for you what unit to deal out next. The lack of game options the player has is indicative of the dictatorial manner of Sid Meiers. He refuses to let the player decide and his whole attitude is reflected in the fact that although Sid Meiers doesn't mind his likeness being used for advisors he refuses to extend that to let the player be the actual leader of their civilization instead of what Sid Meiers wants.
THE "STRATEGIC RESOURCE" SCHEME.
You can't build units until you have the resources. This makes the game unplayable since the maps generated have very little of these resources. I am reminded of the old Sid/Microprose game "Colonization" which had that problem. Sorry, Sid the idea of this promoting trade doesn't work. The idea that 4 or 5 strategic resource not be plentiful on the earth is not reasonable at all.
THE CORRUPTION BAFFLE:
As soon as you build your third or fourth city you will see it: 5 out of 6 shields wasted to corruption. This ratio remains static no matter if you switch to a republican government and build courthouses and other improvements. That is absolutely unacceptable because you need shields to build your empire. That’s the whole point, right?
THE AI:
No matter what you do or what skill level you play, the computer’s nation will be bigger, stronger, and have more units and wonders than you. Sloppy programing makes the AI squeeze cities into every corner of the world so that by the time you have the knowledge to explore the seas, there is no point because the computer has all the territory. If that wasn't bad enough, the enemy can build a city right next to your capitol, drain your resources, and this is not an act of war. At least Alpha Centauri dealt somewhat with this issue.
WAR AND COMBAT:
If you like winning by global conquest, forget about it in Civ III. Even if you can build units after all the corruption and manage to mobilize your troops (quite hard to do in Civ III), the “Cultural Influence” aspect of the game takes place. Say you conquer a town, and surround it with troops, on the next turn the town will change hands back to the enemy, including all your troops. So occupation is unrealistically impossible.
DIPLOMACY:
A joke in Civ III. It appears they tried to make it more interesting with increased options like trade agreements and rights-of-passage as opposed to bonafied alliances. At least it was a good idea, only thing is it has to work. Here, there is a simple flowchart the program follows in negotiations, plus there no need for diplomacy if the only way you can win is by taking strategic resources from the AI. The diplomacy is worthless since the AI is so aggressive and demands ridiculous things and declare war on you in a whim.
THE PATCH:
Recently Firaxis Games has release its first “patch” to the public. It has a huge list of complete and inexcusable mistakes in their beta version. I still have not figured it out and they won’t instruct the lay person how to use a “patch”. This is just another example of the lack of any kind of competency you can expect from those people.
CONCLUSION:
I know most of the Sid Meier apologizers are smart folk who know a rotten deal when they get one. I would only hope that you to have the courage to tell the world that this game is terrible. And to you who have not yet bought into this Sid Meier craze or remember only better days of Alpha Centauri and Civ II, I would encourage you to spend your hard earned money on something more worthwhile. Of course Alpha Centauri or the original Civ II is very good. Also try the adventure comedy “Monkey Island” or the real time strategy “Empire Earth”. ...

I'm so lonely I could cry

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 33 / 36
Date: April 28, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Ok, so in eager anticipation of the release of the third installment of the best, and most time consuming, game in computing history, I went ahead and did the logical thing: I dumped my girlfriend. It would have happened eventually I figured, the choice being the game or her and I figured I might as well make a clean break of it-lest it interfere with the countless months of fun that lay ahead. I eagerly installed the game. A short while later I watched breathlessly as a warrior with a stone axe defeated my conscripted infantryman armed with a modern firearm. Then he defeated a second infantryman and then a third and a fourth. Later on still, I tried to exhale slowly as my hardwon accumulation of ironclads were ambushed and sunk to their last rivet by a lessor fleet of aggressive wooden galleons. Appealing to my neighbors for aid I discovered that it was too late, if only I had accepted their earlier diplomatic proposals-but I had foolishly found their requests for the entirety of my treasury and the secrets of Engineering, Masonry, Conscription, Physics, Combustion, Communism, Democracy, Chivalry, Flight and Gunpowder to great a price to pay.
Now my long empty nights are not filled with the chirpy soundtrack of civ 3 but of the lonely ghostly ballads of Roy Orbison as I cry myself to sleep.

A real disappointment

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 19 / 28
Date: November 10, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I had high hopes for this successor but they were dashed almost immediately. The game is like an emasculated version of Civ II that runs far, far slower. By emasculated, I mean that there are actually FEWER game options than Civ II. For example, there are fewer city improvements available and no more units like spies and caravans. Combat is confusing with tiny icons that are difficult to tell apart. It is also impossible to zoom the map beyond three different levels. Diplomacy is a tricky nightmare. The graphics are glitzy but they do nothing but eat up drive space.

Some may find this picky, but one of the things I loved about Civ II was the refrigeration improvement that allowed a second level of irrigation. That's gone too. Also, the game opens each time with that annoying animation. It was cool the first time, but not EVERY time...

There is literally nothing I enjoy about this game that isn't offered in Civ II. I find myself playing Civ II instead of its successor. Civ III is a strangely cold, remote, and utterly soulless product. It is oddly telling in Civ III that when I pressed the "retire" button, it offered me the option to "end this nightmare." I gladly clicked "yes".

Sid Meier tries hard to imitate Bill Gates...

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 18 / 32
Date: December 26, 2001
Author: Amazon User

By putting out software (just in time for the holidays as others have noted) that should have never been released in such a buggy state. Crashed on all three of my machines (one a brand new Dell) within the first minute of starting a game. I am giving up for the moment and calling it a night.

Also I just noticed that they have redone the civ I was trying to play (Persians) completely from what it is in the rulebook. Who knows what other "enhancements" I will learn about tomorrow. Rushing unfinished games to market should be a federal crime. It always pisses me off that 8-year-olds playing video games on the TV get such stable code while we... Oh forget it.

Good potential, terrible outcome

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 18 / 26
Date: November 13, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game has a great potential. I bought the game and planned to spend my whole weekend to play it, but it turned out, I spent whole saturday trying to go around the bugs and numerous other design flows.
- you can't group units together and send them that way, instead you have to move each unit one by one to the destination.
- you use workers to do tile improvements, but their way of doing thigs on automated mode is 99% of time not what you want, so you're forced to do it all yourself manually. Call to power, had this aspect done much, much better.
- you have to watch enemy or friend units move if they are close or within your borders. This is really annoying later in the game, when there are hundereds of units, as you have to just stare at your screen to have computer move them. There is no way to turn that off either. This was the main reason I stopped playing.
- Taking enemy cities is something that should be avoided as the city most likely will revolt back. Best thing is to reduce it's citizens to 1 and start over with it.
- Your tanks can be killed by ancient units like phalax, etc.

there are many other annoying things about this game, but too many to list. Just go to any civ3 message board and you'll see many, many people complaining.

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.

A complete waste of money

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 16 / 24
Date: December 13, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Having played Civilization and Civilization II since 1993, I was looking forward to Civ III. It was surely time to replace Civ II, but not with this.

Always prefering to begin with the positive, they finally got one thing right: the "go to" feature.

The graphics aren't better, unless you like the 1980s Japanese animation-style "battles". The game itself is not improved or made more realistic. It's simply more difficult. If you're successful, any city not near your capital (or capitals) takes a century or more to build an improvement. I suppose someone at Firaxis thought this was realistic, but I'd bet our friends in the Yukon (far from Ottawa) or Seattle (far from DC) would beg to differ that their production levels are lower than in or near their nations' capitals. Also, if successful, you'll encounter tons of pollution (each turn) about a century before you've the technology to do anything about it. And pollution can never be eliminated, or brought to acceptable levels. Not very realistic.

It's inferior to Civ II in nearly every way imaginable, except the "go to" feature. It's tedious when doing "well". You're left wishing the other civilizations would come kill you off. Some might think it's more challenging. I thought it was both frustrating and a waste of money.

Looks fun but won't run

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 14 / 41
Date: November 02, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This program should've been through a few more rounds of testing. I've got a new system that runs plenty of hard-core programs (Think Half-Life, SC3000, Unreal) and has plenty of guts (1ghz/256mg ram/PIII/Gforce) but Civ 3 still freazes-up, errors out, and (this is the most frustratingly stupid) it layers words overtop of each other making important information impossible to read. I'm returning my copy tomorrow.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions