The Other Worlds Shrine

Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about... 

  • I got Civilization IV

  • Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
 #93488  by Julius Seeker
 Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:04 pm
Not much to say rigth now, only that this is a GIGANTIC leap over Civilization III. So far zero complaints, it fixed all the annoyances (corruption, culture, etc...) that I had with Civ 3, and improved on just about everything else. Totally revamped battle system, IE. Archers better than cavalry on hills, cavalry better than archers on plains, pikemen beat cavalry, cavalry can out-maneuver everyone, etc... I want to see if I can make a similar system to Fire Emblem. Units gain experience and can be upgraded ALA Alpha Cenauri, Civ 4 takes a lot from AC, Civ 1, 2, and 3 and totally fixes it up. Much more thought went into this game than any Civ game before it. By far the largest leap as I said, it is a bigger leap than civ 3 is from civ 1. Anyways, this si what Civ 3 should have been. Civ 3 seems like a prettier version of Civ 2 in comparisson. Anyways, gotta go, bye! See you in Spring 2006

To see a funny trailer: Go here http://www.civanon.org/support.shtml#

Click the orange link at the top that says "CLICK HERE TO LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT CIVILIZATION."


I am not quite sure yet, but this might just be the best game I have ever played.

 #93493  by Imakeholesinu
 Thu Oct 27, 2005 2:03 pm
I want to pick this up but I also want to pick up Quake IV and Age of Empires III. Hmmmm

 #93496  by kali o.
 Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:05 pm
I thought AoE3 sucked...but other people seem to enjoy it. *shrug*

Still haven't gotten around to loading up Civ4, but I probably will sneak some time in tonight.

 #93515  by Julius Seeker
 Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:11 pm
Hmmm, it seems that they have fixed the early game exploration + settlement rush that unbalanced all of the previous installments, and they did this quite well; and it ties in well with the rest of the gameplay. Essentially, cities cost money to run, the more cities you have, the greater the cost to run each of them; these costs become somewhat minute once populations and incomes are higher; in the early game though, it is best to stay small and develop. Secondly, settlers no longer take away from the population to build them, instead growth stops, no extra food is produced, and all extra food goes into producing the settler/worker; the more food a city produces, the higher the production of settlers.

I started by playing the Persians, and once I got the hang of the game, I picked the Earth map and played as Germany. I will play through both games, traditionally, the Persians and Germans have always been my favourite civs (and of course Vikings when they are included).

 #93526  by Julius Seeker
 Sat Oct 29, 2005 5:36 pm
Converting the world to your religion is fun. In my Earth game, I am currently a Jewish Pacifist nation; India, Egypt, and Persia all belong to Judaism as well. I have an Alliance pact with Persia (they're my other favourite civ). Right now I am working on converting all of China to the religion, Rome and Greece used to be Jewish as well, but we fought two massive wars and now the Greek Civilization exists in Northern Asia and the Roman Civilization in Africa and the Americas. The Mongols were never friendly with me. The Romans, Mongols, and Greeks are all Hindu, a religion which originated in Persia, but Persia is a Jewish state.

The last, the Japanese, I have not had much contact with them, they hate me, and they are Buddhist, the religion is completely confined to their civilization which spans over Japan, Oceana, North America, and a few mainland cities. A lot of nations have their borders closed off to me, China is Hindu as well, they have open borders to me, but will not convert to Judaism because I co-operate to closely with their biggest rivals (the Persians). About all of Eurasia is colonized, Oceana is almost colonized completely by Japan, and the Americas have a few colonies of various nations.

Currently I am about to abandon the religious path, I have chosen to go the Nuclear path and bring on the Neon judgement against all of those who will not adopt my faith =)


I am going to say right now that this is easily game of the year in my book. FF12 and Twilight Princess aren't out until next year, so I don't anticipate any serious competition between now and March. There were some very strong titles that came out this year, but nothing else is Civ 4.

Oh yeah, a few more things, if you remember the fungi, or whatever, in Alpha Centauri, trees work similarly in this game; they grow back over time around places where a lot of trees exist, and they harbour wild animals (similar to how the fungus housed those mind worms in AC). I wonder why this wasn't in Civ 3? It is a great addition to the game I find.

This game actually does have a very Fire EMblem like strategy system, it is a good thing Sid was paying attention: you can upgrade units to fight more effectively against other types of units (IE. +25% against gunpowder units, +50% against melee units). There are many different categories of units as well; so it isn't like Civ 3 or earlier games where the key to success is building 30 Crusaders or 30 Swordsmen; because a smaller army of axemen would wipe out the swordsmen.

Siege is a factor in the game now (they had an early version of it in Alpha centauri) so when invading a nation, it is essential to bring along your catapults or cannons, otherwise there will be difficulties taking the city. Siege equipment lowers the natural defenses of places, and unlike civ 3, they also exist as a usable unit as they had in earlier games, rather than one to be captured (only workers seem to be capturable in the default game). Siege equipment is also good in cities as it can cause some minor colatoral damage to armies, which can turn the tide of the battle. Speaking of armies, you can finally group together HUGE armies and fight battles againstother huge armies, it is no longer a game about 50 smaller units, rather combining those 50 smaller units into one gigantic unit. Of course, the individual units can be separated at any time, but usually you would only do that if you need some units to garrison a place you captured.

Anyways, this game is fucking addictive, since I have got it I would estimate 15+ hours in two different games, my German game on the Earth map is almost complete though, my Persian game is in its beginning phases. Speaking of which. What I have observed with the flow of the game, the archaic age lasts a lot longer than it did in any of the previous civ games, I spent a couple of hours on it. The next age is the Classical era, which is essentially the Roman/Greco era, that also took about two hours. Medieval, Renaisance, Industrial, and now the atomic age; more eras, and they are much more even. It is not like Civilization 1, 2 and 3 where 90% of the game is in the Industrial and post industrial eras; it is split up fairly evenly. I am not sure yet, but I think there is an Information age coming up as well.

 #93570  by Julius Seeker
 Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:56 am
Yes, the game is TOO addictive. I didn't think a game could be more addictive than Civilization 2, this one is it. When I had Civ 2, I knew that I would still play Civ 1 again. When I had Civ 3, I knew that most of my Civilization play would be from Civ 2 (Civ 2 was a much more heavily modded and popular game, there was just way more to do). Civilization 4 though, this game is done so well that I could never go back to Civ 2, even to play my favourite scenarios (Silmarillion, etc....). This game makes the other three and Alpha Centauri look VERY outdated.

I have already pumped more than 25 hours into the game, at least 7 per day since I got the game; which means I have sacrificed a lot of sleep lately =)


The only issue that I have is that there are some minor graphical glitches, one is that Nukes do not look how they are supposed to, and projectiles do not display. I think it is perhaps a software error (possibly in my ATI drivers) because my graphics card is much more advanced than the recommended (recommended is 128 mb Radeon 7500, minimum is 64 mb, I have a Radeo X800 PRO 256 mb card, there should be no problems. Still, it doesn't take away at all from the gameplay experience, in fact, someone who didn't watch the gameplay videos wouldn't even realize there was anything wrong. I just thought I would mention it anyways.

 #93575  by SineSwiper
 Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:08 pm
The Seeker wrote:The last, the Japanese, I have not had much contact with them, they hate me, and they are Buddhist, the religion is completely confined to their civilization which spans over Japan, Oceana, North America, and a few mainland cities.
That sound about right... I wonder if it was the religion that caused them to be confined?

 #93825  by Julius Seeker
 Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:08 pm
kali o. wrote:I thought AoE3 sucked...but other people seem to enjoy it. *shrug*

Still haven't gotten around to loading up Civ4, but I probably will sneak some time in tonight.
I haven't looked into AoE3, but from what I heard they took all the worst elements from Civilization and Warcraft, rolled them into one, and then made it boring. I did hear this from someone who claims that the Doom and Quake series were fun; so I do not know how much weight to put behind his statements.

 #93834  by SineSwiper
 Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:32 pm
Well, somebody's like for FPSs shouldn't exactly discredit somebody opinion about RTSs.

 #93836  by Julius Seeker
 Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:01 pm
*blank*
Last edited by Julius Seeker on Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

 #93837  by Julius Seeker
 Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:01 pm
SineSwiper wrote:Well, somebody's like for FPSs shouldn't exactly discredit somebody opinion about RTSs.
True; but I have a very low opinion on Quake and Doom and I haven't wrapped my head around how people can find these types off games enjoyable =)

Then again, I am sure people think the same about people like me (possibly to an even greater degree), who like games like Animal Crossing and Harvest Moon.

So yeah, there's no logic to my statement, but it was fun to say anyways =P

 #93844  by Imakeholesinu
 Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:32 pm
There could be logic to it if the person who made the statement about Quake and Doom being fun was 12 when they played those games. I thought they were fun in my early and mid teens, but I want a smarter shooter now but something not too smart (Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon I find very teidious and slow.) like Battlefield 2. I guess that's why we'll never see another Duke Nukem game. I enjoy Unreal Tournament just because it whipped the shit out of Quake 3 Arena. I remember the days where mindless fragging was fun shit when Quake 2 and 3 were out and all the mods for Half-Life were just up and coming.

I doubt I'll pick up Quake 4 for it's "Story" since it looks exactly like Doom III just with different skins for the guns and different skins for the creatures and they finally figured out how to put a flashlight on the gun. It boggles my mind how id software could get so many people to buy the same game twice.