Slashdot Mirror


400 Turns of Civilization V

Wes found a preview of one of the most anticipated upcoming releases by the inhabitants of my office: Civ V. It starts "This preview of Civilization V is incomplete. It takes more than nine Earth hours, you see, for the great Arabian empire — land of Mecca, Rio De Janeiro and Beijing — to assume dominance of the globe."

320 comments

  1. Slashdot Broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF is up with Slashdot?

    The last few times I've tried to post, I get a comment with a score of "?" which disappears on reload of the thread.

    1. Re:Slashdot Broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slashdot calculate your score on demand and you see it only after you posted

    2. Re:Slashdot Broken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slashdot calculate your score on demand and you see it only after you posted

      I get that part, but after posting it simply didn't "exist" for an hour or so. Seems like there was a glitch in the matrix.

  2. Just one question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    > It takes more than nine Earth hours, you see, for the great Arabian empire — land of Mecca, Rio De Janeiro and Beijing — to assume dominance of the globe.

    Why do you hate the USA?

    1. Re:Just one question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It takes more than nine Earth hours, you see, for the great Arabian empire — land of Mecca, Rio De Janeiro and Beijing — to assume dominance of the globe.

      Why do you hate the USA?

      Because you think everything is about you, or should be about you.

    2. Re:Just one question: by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Good thing the Europeans focus on disliking us, the Middle East mostly hates us (with a small fraction who love us), South America mostly hates us, Russia hates us, India is taking all our orders literally, and China is too busy making all of our stuff to hate us.

      Good thing nothing is actually about the USA, except for, you know, everything.

    3. Re:Just one question: by Mister+Kay · · Score: 0

      You forgot Canada.

      Everyone always forgets Canada... :'(

    4. Re:Just one question: by someone1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most people doesn't hate the USA. Except some (or rather, many) things they do.
      It is not specific to the USA, if China would do the same, it would be China's deeds that people hate.
      And there ARE deeds of China that are hated.
      So, nah, it is not about the USA, it is about deeds.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    5. Re:Just one question: by Netshroud · · Score: 1

      If you read Matthew Reilly's Seven Ancient Wonders, you would know Australia dominates the globe.

    6. Re:Just one question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think he does? Do you?

    7. Re:Just one question: by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

      > Why do you hate the USA?

      Because at the time you can make use of malls and navy seals, the game tend to be decided anyway.

    8. Re:Just one question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think USA is a pretty neat guy. eh, kills balanced budgets and doesn't afraid of anything

    9. Re:Just one question: by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

      They're not even a real country, anyway,,,

  3. Yay, FireAxis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I certainly won't be buying this or any of their games. Their buggy as hell "Sid Meier's Railroads" still irks me to this. Game was fun, but the CTD bugs were so annoying and they left their customers out to dry by never fixing the problems.

    1. Re:Yay, FireAxis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Civ 4 does too. Not until you've been playing a while it says 'Out of Memory' and dies.
      For a 5 year old game that says minimum requirements is 256Mb how can 3Gig (XP limit)
      not be enough. I dont even play on the biggest sized maps because it lasts a bit longer.

    2. Re:Yay, FireAxis by PatHMV · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, Civ 4 required 256Mb of VIDEO memory, not of overall RAM.

    3. Re:Yay, FireAxis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you're an idiot and are running windows with your page file turned off, and you have a rogue program that's allocated but not using a bunch of memory.

    4. Re:Yay, FireAxis by edjs · · Score: 3, Informative

      Per the CivIV Complete box: 1.2 GHz Intel Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon or equivalent, 512 MB RAM, 3.8 GB hard drive space, and DirectX 9.0c compatible 64 MB video card with Shader 1.1 support or better.

    5. Re:Yay, FireAxis by daveime · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would be Firefox.

    6. Re:Yay, FireAxis by LaRainette · · Score: 1

      Or a random malware. It's windows...

    7. Re:Yay, FireAxis by daveime · · Score: 2, Informative

      The funny thing is, most malware these days is designed to be stealthy. It mustn't slow down the system, or consume too many resources, otherwise it gets noticed too quickly and becomes useless after the next antivirus and antimalware definitions are released.

      I'd like to bet most malware these days is a hell of a lot better designed than Firefox, in terms of CPU and memory usage. You might not like what they do, but you have to give the malware writers some credit for coding skills.

    8. Re:Yay, FireAxis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Civ 4 does too. Not until you've been playing a while it says 'Out of Memory' and dies.

      Never happened to me. I play way too much and always on the Huge map size. And what's more its the OSX port, which you would have assumed would be buggier ... Hmm

    9. Re:Yay, FireAxis by Malnar · · Score: 1

      Maybe you need to point that finger more carefully? Several of my friends and myself play Civ 4 to this day, the original and various expansions. I almost always play the largest sized maps, I have not had the game crash on me in years, and never complaining about being out of memory. After 7-8 hours, it can get a bit slow, but thats a good time to save and go and experience human interaction. Until about a year ago, I ran in on a 2GB WinXP system, now it runs ona 4GB Win7 system with just about the same experiences. So, I doubt that the leaks were caused by Civ4.

    10. Re:Yay, FireAxis by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Same here. Civ 4, biggest sized maps, often run it 6+ hours. On 2gig 32bit Vista.

      I've had it crash once or twice, but never with it claiming it was running out of memory. I think all crashes have been me trying to Alt-Tab out and back in, in fact.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    11. Re:Yay, FireAxis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used Firefox and Chrome installed on my PC right now.
      I use Chrome maybe once a day, because my FF is always loaded with 15+tabs, and my Uni website is just crap and works like shit on FF.
      Aside from the daily reboot (save and quit et relaunch) FF is on 24/7 and it works great.
      FF memory leaks are so 2008...
      Don't blame FF for shitty Flash player please, when you have 10 tabs opened and 8 of them are flash based and your PC is slow don't blame FF, it's Flash who leaks memory all over the place !
      FF handles 50 tabs with now issues at all and for a LOOONG time.

  4. drools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  5. CIVV or CIV or CiV or Civ V by demonbug · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Stupid Roman numerals.

    1. Re:CIVV or CIV or CiV or Civ V by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      CIV

      So this is the 104th game?

    2. Re:CIVV or CIV or CiV or Civ V by morari · · Score: 1

      You make it seems as if it's part of The Sims series.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    3. Re:CIVV or CIV or CiV or Civ V by rrhal · · Score: 2, Funny

      Civ CIV - I wonder if they'll keep Sid Meier's frozen head around long enough to see that?

      --
      All generalizations are false, including this one. Mark Twain
    4. Re:CIVV or CIV or CiV or Civ V by JudeanPeople'sFront · · Score: 1

      Bloody Romans!

    5. Re:CIVV or CIV or CiV or Civ V by flanktwo · · Score: 1

      Why not go all the way and make the story title "CD Turns of Civilization V"?

  6. Advert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Mod op 'advert'.

  7. Nine hours? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I'd get bored after about five.

  8. Only 9? by Traze · · Score: 1

    I swear I have had 20-30 hours sessions. Often in fact.

    1. Re:Only 9? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I swear I have had 20-30 hours sessions. Often in fact.

      As the article states (I know, I know...):

      It takes more than 400 turns of Civilization V to finish one playthrough set on a "small" world, time passing at a "standard" pace with the game set to "chieftain" (not very hard) difficulty.

      Your game settings were perhaps different.

    2. Re:Only 9? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we need a mod for *get a life*

    3. Re:Only 9? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you could try actually reading the article before you comment. You would appear more intelligent.

    4. Re:Only 9? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      I know!

      Between me and my 2 room mates, we had a Civ4 Marathon game against us and 3 other computers that lasted about 4 hours a week for 10 months. Roughly speaking that game took up 160 hours of our lives, or 480 man-hours.

      Think of all the starving children we could have saved instead.

    5. Re:Only 9? by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Now that's what I call Tantric Civ.

    6. Re:Only 9? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I swear I have had 20-30 hours sessions. Often in fact.

      Sometimes several times a day!

    7. Re:Only 9? by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Heh. I still remember the first time I played Master of Orion. Started at 10 pm, stopped at 10 pm.

  9. Civ V almost here. by riskeetee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Time to say goodbye to the wife and kids...

    1. Re:Civ V almost here. by DamienRBlack · · Score: 1

      Hey me and my wife can't wait to play a marathon game together, you should invite her... ditch the kids though, especially if their too young.

    2. Re:Civ V almost here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to spend some time improving your grasp of English.

    3. Re:Civ V almost here. by capo_dei_capi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course you have to play it with your "wife", at least until they develop a hands-free computer interface.

    4. Re:Civ V almost here. by TheLink · · Score: 3, Funny

      > ditch the kids though, especially if their too young.

      Too young? Don't worry, time passes swiftly when you play Civ.

      --
    5. Re:Civ V almost here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hey me and my wife can't wait to play a marathon game together, you should invite her...

      Did you ask your wife how she feels about you inviting random strangers on the Internet to play with her?

    6. Re:Civ V almost here. by blai · · Score: 1

      wife?! kids?!

      --
      In soviet Russia, God creates you!
    7. Re:Civ V almost here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have written "they're" not "their".
      You are also suggesting that he invite your wife to play with him. Is that what you meant to say?

  10. I can't wait...... by drc003 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...to tell my wife: "Just one more turn" 15 or 20 times in a row before...


    ...she just gives up and falls asleep.

    1. Re:I can't wait...... by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...to tell my wife: "Just one more turn" 15 or 20 times in a row before... ...she just gives up and falls asleep.

      You stud you. 3-4 more turns is good but 15-20 more. Wow!

      Wait you mean a game. Carry on.

    2. Re:I can't wait...... by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      You might want to let her watch this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1329362959167995041

      --
      Donate free food here
    3. Re:I can't wait...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop sitting on Mrs Right.

  11. More and More excited by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The more I read about Civ V the more excited I am for it to come out. Sadly the review doesn't touch on much "new". But it could just be that most of the features are cemented in and the game is just being polished at this point.

  12. I can't wait... by drc003 · · Score: 1

    ...to tell my wife: "Just one more turn", before...


    ...she finally gives up and falls asleep!

    1. Re:I can't wait... by drc003 · · Score: 1

      My apologies on the double post due to /. comments being completely hosed for 20-30 minutes.

    2. Re:I can't wait... by nacturation · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, that was just like the comment you made on your last turn.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:I can't wait... by viking099 · · Score: 1

      Now give up and go to sleep!

    4. Re:I can't wait... by BryanL · · Score: 1

      I am sure he is going to say 13-18 more times before the day is through.

  13. Looks great. by Vetruvet · · Score: 0

    This looks pretty good. I definitely like the hex-spaces instead of squares - it gives more of a natural feel to the borders (although it'll pose a slight problem when converting civ4 maps...). Look forward to playing the actual game...

  14. Only Nine Hours? by spoilsportmotors · · Score: 1

    Not to put to fine a point on it, but somebody's doing something wrong. Remains to be seen if it's Civ V or the reviewer.

    1. Re:Only Nine Hours? by mooingyak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He did say it was a small map on standard w/ Chieftain difficulty, and he was probably rushing so he could write up a review.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    2. Re:Only Nine Hours? by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 2, Informative

      And that he didn't actually finish in that time.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
  15. 400 turns? How about 4000? by mfarah · · Score: 1

    If there's ONE change (one of many, but still) I could make to the different Civilization games, it'd be the ability to set an arbitrary end date.

    Yeah, I know Freeciv does it.

    --
    "Trust me - I know what I'm doing."
    - Sledge Hammer
    1. Re:400 turns? How about 4000? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can and has been done in Mods. So...you could make it, I suppose.

    2. Re:400 turns? How about 4000? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every Civ so far has let you keep playing past the 'end date' and have had mods that extend the end date and include new units to keep it interesting. Not to mention you can change the default end date by editing a text file.

    3. Re:400 turns? How about 4000? by IICV · · Score: 1

      You could just, you know, stop playing.

      (though with Civ, that's definitely easier said than done.)

    4. Re:400 turns? How about 4000? by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      This feature already exists in CIV. It's called turn limit. Of course, you must be familiar with the turn numbers as they relate to the game year in order to set an actual date.

  16. No comments yet? by AvitarX · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is everyone RTFA?

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    1. Re:No comments yet? by tool462 · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, we just all spawned in our mom's basements and it's going to take at least 20 turns to find another civilization to communicate with.

    2. Re:No comments yet? by True+Vox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Would that I had a mod point. Hell, I'd trade one of my smaller, crappier towns AND a tech for a mod point!

      --
      "Gratuitous complexity is akin to chaos" - True Vox
    3. Re:No comments yet? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      No, we just all spawned in our mom's basements and it's going to take at least 20 turns to find another civilization to communicate with.

      Which touches deeply on pacing. One thing that Civ4 taught me is that you need to consider the # of turns before the game is won/last during the design phase. This comes into play in numerous ways:

      - A player clicking "next" 50x in a row without changing anything or making a decision isn't having fun. They're just watching a movie, one frame at a time.

      - Your map size and travel speed need to be balanced. The world needs to feel large enough for those who want something huge, but it shouldn't take 1/4 of the game turns to travel from one end to another. At the same time, if you can get from one end of a large game world to another in 3 turns, you've probably boosted travel speed too much.

      - Consider how much micro-management has to be done each turn. Some players will complain if it takes more then 15 seconds to finish a turn, others want enough to do that it takes 15-30 minutes per turn.

      My personal preference is a size/speed where I have to make strategic choices 15-30 turns in advance. Which is why I always ended up playing Marathon speed on larger maps and taking 1500-2500 turns to finish (20-40 hours of gameplay). A big war might take 20-40 turns to setup, and then 40-60 turns to execute.

      The downside, is that at the beginning of the game, I'm spending a lot of time just clicking "next turn". My worker is busy, my city is busy, and my lone warrior is pretty much out of things to explore after turn 50.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    4. Re:No comments yet? by oiron · · Score: 1

      They'll comment after they've finished one more turn...

  17. Civ V: Off The Grid! by InfinityWpi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm actually looking forward to some of these changes now... paying upkeep for roads makes sense to me. They're more like interstate highways now, not the roads that go every-which-way. The new way to expand your cities and develop culture sound good, too.

    Well, there goes part of my 2010 and all of my 2011... just need to get a machine that can handle 3D graphics to play it, now...

    1. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      This game does not look too 3D-intensive. You can probably run it fine with a $70 budget graphics card.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    2. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus it has the 2D "strategic view", which the 2k community reps have said taxes the GPU significantly less and is still completely playable.

    3. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      bloody hell! I was just about to rant about the need for this exact feature as all the graphics of civ4, while astonishing at the time, are completely ignored after about 10 hours of gameplay.

      It's like I think it and it comes true...

      Quickly new found super-power activate! : Procedurally generated tech-trees with meaningful game-play changes that still jive with history!

    4. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by dave562 · · Score: 1

      The graphics are nice but it seems like most of the load would be on the CPU as it computes all of the computer opponent's turns.

    5. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, I believe the game won't even try to install with my Geforce 4 MX400. And AGP graphic cards are too expensive, so a full system upgrade looks like my best option. But whatever, it's Civ. It's worth it.

    6. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by kaoshin · · Score: 1

      I agree about the roads, or at least if you neglect your upkeep they could fall into disrepair instead of making road problems just a random event like it was in Civ IV. The only interesting comments to me in the review are:

      1) The vague explanation of social paths, which I'm confused now if these are just civics or if this has been made some kind of a victory condition such as culture in Civ IV. All he noted was that he just still didn't understand it.

      2) The zoom out to planetary view doesn't exist anymore. Maybe he skipped a branch of tech as this was enabled after tech researched in Civ IV.

      Some of the review is wrong. Anyone who has played through the first turn of Civ IV can tell you that hit points and experience points are not new and every unit has them, including the 2 starting units. He also made comments such as the game being boring and turning on automation. It would have been more helpful to get a review of a sequel from someone more than a gamer with a casual interest and questionable level of experience, but those are some really nice screen shots anyway.

    7. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      The vague explanation of social paths, which I'm confused now if these are just civics or if this has been made some kind of a victory condition such as culture in Civ IV.

      My understanding is it's victory condition. You have to crank out something like 6 of 10 bars (some of which are mutually exclusive) past some threshold and then essentially build a wonder to win that way.

      Anyone who has played through the first turn of Civ IV can tell you that hit points and experience points are not new and every unit has them, including the 2 starting units.

      FWIW, the review/article was later updated to clarify that part of what he meant (and failed) to originally convey with the talk of HP is that it's possible for a losing unit to survive a battle in Civ 5.

      Which, for that matter, can happen for units in 4 with a withdrawal chance and move to burn, but if I'm not misreading the article is more broadly common/possible in 5.

      He also made comments such as the game being boring and turning on automation.

      I agree with this -- the details of the Civ style games are some of where a particular game is great or isn't. In the better games, the automation/AI is good enough that it can handle details passably for you if you really want to just speed through things, but you can almost always turn things more optimally to exactly the direction you're trying to go if you micromanage. If you're someone who enjoys managing the details, you can get a game experience that plays slower and allows you to challenge a higher difficulty level than someone who doesn't -- whichever your preference is the game is enjoyable and challenging. We only get one side of that continuum in this article.

      The One City Challenge concept takes this to an extreme -- on anything but a tiny map, to win with one city while your opponents have multiple cities, it's necessary to manage the hell out of that one city and milk every drop of potential out of it. (If this doesn't sound fun, consider that a OCC game is also typically a full game in just a couple hours.)

      On the other hand, in a first playthrough, which this is, I tend to automate more so I can get the bigger picture first. So I'm not sure I'd have done any better.

    8. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by N0Man74 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had one of those cards when Civ4 came out 5 years ago... and it was awful even way back then. I bet you could find a much better card for less than $30 now.

    9. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      When is the last time a game has been slowed down by AI, rather than graphics?

    10. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dwarf Fortress?

    11. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the other poster N0Man74 said, you could buy a cheap card a couple generations up. Here's one of the cheapest, most bang for the buck AGP 4x/8x cards, at $60:
      ATI HD 3650 AGP 4x/8x

      Meets the system requirements of a ATI HD 2600 XT or better. All priced out for you. 120 vs. 40 stream processors and 128-bit vs. 64-bit for about $10 more than the $50 cards. Might as well.

      Yeah, you're better off long-term just biting the bullet and going PCI-Express but it's an option.

    12. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Ooh! I love that strategic view! So why did they put all the 3D stuff in?

    13. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by mcvos · · Score: 1

      But will it fit in his motherboard?

    14. Re:Civ V: Off The Grid! by RadioElectric · · Score: 1

      Dwarf Fortress?

      "This exact comment has already been posted. Try to be more original..."

      Beat me to it! Not sure how much of that is due to inefficient coding though.

  18. meh by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had a long hiatus from Civ II to Civ IV, and when I finally tried the latter I found it dull. The updates don't seem to add anything interesting, and haven't been any more fun than the original, or FreeCiv.

    Is there some reason we should expect more from V?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:meh by jmizrahi · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is obviously a personal preference thing, but I had the opposite experience. I played Civ II for many years, then had a long break, and years later tried Civ IV. I found it to be better than Civ II in a lot of ways. There were all sorts of annoying things in Civ II, like losing whole stacks of units when one gets attacked, or the ability to deposit entire armies outside your opponents city and then declare war, during which you could use his railroads. Civ IV has numerous small improvements, which for me added up to make a big difference. The basic gameplay, of course, is the same.

    2. Re:meh by raddan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I haven't played Civ IV myself, having found Civ III to be a nice improvement over Civ II (man, can we just get a new Alpha Centauri already?!), but I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop. The game got rid of some nice gameplay elements and expanded on others (diplomacy). That may be your kind of game-- after all, I loved the original Railroad Tycoon and intensely disliked the follow-up, but my opinion runs contrary to the masses there. But hopefully they've learned from their mistakes in Civ IV.

      Anyway, the way is see it is: Sid Meier is a fucking genius. I will buy anything he makes. If that makes me a Sid Meier fanboy, so be it. He's the only game maker who has consistently kept my attention over the years (Pirates!, Civ series, F119/F117A Stealth Fighter, Railroad Tycoon series, and so on). His games have HUGE replay value.

    3. Re:meh by Feyshtey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I actually found CivIII to be the most annoying of the franchise. I just couldn't get into it at all. Civ II and IV, while having some failing points, are superior to III IMO.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    4. Re:meh by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop

      Source?

      Anecdotal, obviously, but I don't know anyone who doesn't think 4 is the best one. I'm still playing it regularly (some single player, some multi with wife + friends) and if 5 isn't great I probably won't stop.

    5. Re:meh by Draek · · Score: 1

      Mildly off-topic, but have you tried Galactic Civilizations 2 from Stardock? plot-wise it's not as intelligent as Alpha Centauri (no game is), but in every other respect it was an incredible game, and more than good enough to satisfy my needs for a "Civ in space!" and make me forget about a potential SMAC 2.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    6. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't played Civ IV myself, having found Civ III to be a nice improvement over Civ II (man, can we just get a new Alpha Centauri already?!), but I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop. The game got rid of some nice gameplay elements and expanded on others (diplomacy). That may be your kind of game-- after all, I loved the original Railroad Tycoon and intensely disliked the follow-up, but my opinion runs contrary to the masses there. But hopefully they've learned from their mistakes in Civ IV.

      Consensus? Among who? Not the people at IGN. Not Gamespot. Not Gamespy. All three of those places gave it great reviews and awards. Not Amazon, it's still selling decently there. It used to be a #1. The fans? None I know. I suppose there may be some folks who don't like it, but there is no consensus of it being a flop. Civ 3 maybe, but not Civ IV. I don't know what nice gameplay elements you miss from prior Civ games, Civ 3 did have a bit of a different army system, but I can't say I liked it better. It was ok, and an improvement over prior games, but nothing special. What did you like about it?

      And no, I don't know what mistakes they made with Civ IV, you didn't name any of them yourself, so we're kinda left guessing there. At least offer useful criticism. Like, say, the religion system, it felt kinda of shallow to me, I can see why they wanted to do it, but it just wasn't anything useful to the game. I wouldn't call it a mistake though. Not quite. Maybe the Colonization expansion/game? I could concur with that. It wasn't as fun as the original.

      But it's been many years, and tastes change. I remember Civ 1 fondly, but I'm not going to go back and play it. Even if the floppies still worked for me.

    7. Re:meh by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much where I am, too -- I think Civ 3 introduced some great ideas, but in the form that they existed in Civ 3 they weren't actually fun. Civ 4 polished those ideas (while adding others) and made them good.

    8. Re:meh by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      What consensus is this?

      I really didn't like Civ III. I found myself playing Civ II after getting bored with Civ III. Civ IV, though, was great. It was different from Civ II and II had some advantages, but Civ IV is the one I'd keep loading up.

      The one problem with Civ IV is that it seems unnecessarily perf-intensive for a turn based strategy game.

    9. Re:meh by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Consensus according to whom? Everyone I know (including me) loves Civ IV.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    10. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Not Gamespot. Not Gamespy. All three of those places gave it great reviews and awards.

      What was the last highly-anticipated highly-hyped game they didn't lavish fawning reviews over?

      Take Starcraft II for instance. It's a great game ... for being more or less the same game as Starcraft 1. But they won't dare call it less than a masterpiece.

    11. Re:meh by edawstwin · · Score: 1

      I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop.

      Who exactly said that it was a flop? I have many friends who play Civ IV and we all agree that it's the best in the series, and I've never read anything published by a reputable source that claimed it was a flop. I could see people not liking it more if they don't get all of the subtleties or just want a simpler and faster game, but those people usually don't play Civ - they play something like Starcraft or Command and Conquer.

      I have played all four Civ games (and all the expansions), and Civ IV with BtS is a much more interesting, complex, and fun game than any of its predecessors. I would estimate that I have spent ten times as many hours playing Civ IV than any of it's predecessors as well. In fact, when I heard about Civ V, I just thought, "meh." I'm sure that I'll still play Civ IV well into Civ V's "lifetime". Maybe I'll check it out if it gets stellar reviews, but I am more than content with Civ IV.

      --
      I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
    12. Re:meh by Smauler · · Score: 1

      I've played them all extensively, and I found Civ II to be the least enjoyable. The original I've got masses of respect for, and I absolutely loved it at the time (I still partially blame it for my crappy GCSE results ;P), but I'd never play it now. Civ II I played a bit but never really got into - perhaps because I was at university at the time. Civ 3 I was slightly frustrated by, but loved in many ways - I only played a few games unmodded though - the mods made the game. Civ IV I thought was great from the start - I did again only play a few games through unmodded though. I _really_ appreciate the worldbuilder. I love epic games, which is one of the reasons why I love the mods - all the original civs run a bit too fast for me.

      Anyway, my point really was that unless you give reasons for why you found civ IV less "fun", you're just whistling in the wind - loads of people _loved_ civ IV, and with good reason IMO.

    13. Re:meh by manonthemoon · · Score: 1

      I have all of the Civ's on various computers, but I find playing IV a pain and revert to playing III pretty soon after trying IV yet again. Like the simpler overhead view on III mostly.

    14. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Not Gamespot. Not Gamespy. All three of those places gave it great reviews and awards.

      What was the last highly-anticipated highly-hyped game they didn't lavish fawning reviews over?

      Take Starcraft II for instance. It's a great game ... for being more or less the same game as Starcraft 1. But they won't dare call it less than a masterpiece.

      I wouldn't know, I don't actually follow them, but since the GP didn't give any names, I had to look somewhere for where they got their consensus, and I couldn't find it for Civ IV. What they do in general, or what they think about some other games, is beyond the scope of my interest.

    15. Re:meh by a_ghostwheel · · Score: 3, Informative

      GalCiv 2 is there to satisfy "Masters of Orion" hunger - not Civilization :).

    16. Re:meh by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Civ 3 just seemed to scream "THE COMPUTER IS A CHEATING BASTARD" at me, even on low levels. And when you add in that it seemed damn near impossible to get any of the necessary resources on a consistent basis (no iron or copper? You're screwed), I just stopped caring.

      Of course, Civ 4 is also nice for it's modability. Fall From Heaven 2 is really fun and is leaps and bounds more complicated than any of the Civ 4 offical versions.

    17. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From my PoV, Civ II was much better than Civ I, and CCTV was better than Civ II. Civ III did not add anything substantial, thus I never considered buying Civ IV. Oh, and contrary to others, I did not like Alpha Centauri.

    18. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi, I'm Anonymous Coward, so now you know someone who thinks Civ 4 wasn't the best, and thinks Civ 2 was better. And that Civ 3 was the worst of them all. I still have the box from the original Civ 1 for PC. I've sunk far more time into Civ* than I probably should have.

    19. Re:meh by N0Man74 · · Score: 0

      It's been my observation that Civ4 helped reinvigorate the franchise, and I believe the customization and modability had a lot to do with it. I actually have purchased the entire Civ4 series (with the 2 expansions) twice. Once retail, and a 2nd time during a Steam Sale so I don't have to worry about finding the CDs.

      Civ4 took a lot of ideas from Civ3, and really polished them. They also got rid of some of the blatant cheap exploits that were possible in Civ3, and included multiplayer right out of the gate (rather than requiring an expansion).

    20. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should seriously consider buying Civ IV. It is worth it.

    21. Re:meh by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      Civ II is clearly the best. Civ IV is good, but not as good as II.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    22. Re:meh by mjwx · · Score: 1

      but I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop

      Source?

      Anecdotal, obviously, but I don't know anyone who doesn't think 4 is the best one. I'm still playing it regularly (some single player, some multi with wife + friends) and if 5 isn't great I probably won't stop.

      Well 3 Million people including myself agree with you. 3 Million copies sold in 3 years (release 2005, 3 million mark 2008) is far from a failure when most games fail to break 1 million and are considered great successes.

      I dont like the idea that stacks are gone. There has to be a better way to deal with the old Stack of Doom then getting rid of them entirely.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    23. Re:meh by Carik · · Score: 1

      I don't think 4 is the best one. As much as I'm ashamed to admit it (well, not really... but I feel like I should be) I liked Call to Power better.

      I liked the culture-wars aspect of Civ 4, but combat in CTP was the best of any of the games. Building up armies of units that went into battle together, with long-range attacks and close-range attacks reinforcing each other, was great, and being able to drop asteroids on your enemies' cities was a lot of fun.

      If I could have the culture/religion wars of Civ 4, the combat and future-tech of CTP, and the ability to design my own units from Alpha Centauri, all in one game, I'd never need to buy another.

    24. Re:meh by Carik · · Score: 1

      Great game. It's not exactly Civ in space, but it's well done, and well worth it for anyone who enjoys turn-based strategy.

    25. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No Iron or Copper? Use Horses Or Elephants, they are easily equally as powerful.

    26. Re:meh by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop.

      Only for the old fogey's who refused to learn new things.

      Personally, I never got into the old Civ II/III games. The graphics were crude and I just didn't feel like doing a earth-based TBS (my preference at the time was either sci-fi setting or fantasy).

      Civ IV, OTOH, had enough graphical and audio bling to suck me in. It's the first of the Civ series that played, and I greatly enjoyed both expansions (warlords and BtS). I still ended up modding it slightly to remove annoyances (the better UI mod and the AI improvement mods were a must).

      I still dig out BtS occasionally and try out a Tectonics, 60% water map on one of the larger map sizes. Definitely worth the money that I paid and I'm looking forward to Civ V.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    27. Re:meh by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      GalCiv 2 is there to satisfy "Masters of Orion" hunger - not Civilization :).

      Eh... the thing I hated about MOO2 towards the end was that once you got some of the top-end engine techs, your ships basically had infinite range and nearly infinite speed. So you really couldn't setup a proper defense as space basically became tiny and almost dimensionless.

      I've tried to get into GalCiv 2 a few times - and I just can't do it. The flat galaxy, with a 2D playfield, and no bottlenecks is just too 1990s for me. GC2 Twilight of the Arnor is still sitting on my hard drive, gathering electronic dust.

      Maybe they'll switch to an actual stellar topography in GC3 or GC4. Something like what MOO3 tried to do, with semi-3D galactic clusters of stars (they kept the map very flat to keep it simple), with starlanes and choke points, etc. I was really looking forward to MOO3 because it was going to re-introduce the concept that terrain matters and you can't just fly from one location to another in 3 turns.

      Which also explains why I like Civ4 so much and why I play on very large Tectonics maps with complicated geography (lots of little inlets and unpassable mountain ranges).

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    28. Re:meh by netsuhi.com · · Score: 1

      I still prefere the origional Civalisation. Civ II just had too many prety visuals. Could they release Civ V with SVGA for me please I want to play on my old 386SX with 2MB of ram again.

    29. Re:meh by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      I haven't played Civ IV myself, having found Civ III to be a nice improvement over Civ II (man, can we just get a new Alpha Centauri already?!), but I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop. The game got rid of some nice gameplay elements and expanded on others (diplomacy). That may be your kind of game-- after all, I loved the original Railroad Tycoon and intensely disliked the follow-up, but my opinion runs contrary to the masses there. But hopefully they've learned from their mistakes in Civ IV.

      I'm still playing Alpha Centauri and for all its faults it blows Civ 3 & 4 out of the water. Didn't stop me from playing them though, my iMac screen actually got burn-in from Civ 4 UI elements (Apple replaced it though so it was all good.) I just wish they would concentrate on AI and gameplay instead of 3D effects. They are distracting, give me an isometric map and be done with it, it's a strategy game for fucks sake.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    30. Re:meh by Paranatural · · Score: 1

      but I think the consensus was that Civ IV was a flop. The game got rid of some nice gameplay elements and expanded on others (diplomacy). That may be your kind of game-- after all, I loved the original Railroad Tycoon and intensely disliked the follow-up, but my opinion runs contrary to the masses there. But hopefully they've learned from their mistakes in Civ IV.

      You could not be more wrong, actually. That's like saying 'I heard that Google project those guys were working on was a flop'

      Ever been to CivFanatics?

      http://forums.civfanatics.com/index.php

      Anyway, there are a few people out there who liked Civ3 more, but

    31. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree in a sense. While Civ IV is superior to II in most ways, I don't think I've ever got the same "thrill" from building and conquering in this latest version like that which I had in the earlier. Perhaps it was the difference of the few years in between. In any case, the Beyond the Sword version of Civ IV I find to be immensely playable (to this day, in fact) what with with the additions, available modpacks and scenarios; Colonization is definitely worth a look as well, for an interesting diversion from the usual gameplay.

    32. Re:meh by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I had a lot of fun with CTP, but off the top of my head:

      - Government/Civics choices are a lot better designed in Civ 4 in my opinion. Even if you could run all the 'last' choices in each category from turn one of the game, you wouldn't want to -- they provide advantages that are just sort of naturally good for what a civ looks like in the 1900s, not for what one looks like in 4000 BC.

      - I like the effects of wonders a lot better in Civ 4; my people don't spontaneously start starving because Stonehenge became obsolete. (I picture a bunch of peasants mocking Stonehenge and ceasing to take it seriously as they starve for some reason.)

      - I just found the lawyers in CTP too ridiculous. (Beyond that, they make One City Challenge, which I love as a variant game, just about impossible -- you have to literally ring your city with troops just to keep the lawyers out, and if anything ever happens to one of the stacks surrounding your one city, you will literally never produce anything ever again as a swarm of lawyers decends upon the city, madly slapping it with injunctions.)

      To one of your other points, if I could steal anything from Alpha Centauri, it would be the probe (spy/espionage) system. (Except for the part about the AI having no idea what to do about probe team boats.)

    33. Re:meh by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I love AC and dearly hope for an unlikely AC2, but:

      - Its UI has not aged well (not the graphics, just, how useable the controls are relative to a decent modern game), and

      - Its AI is really not equal to the task of how open-ended the game can be. For example, it's pretty mediocre at terraforming, it doesn't make effective use of supply crawlers, it can't defend against boat probes, and it makes terrible use of copters relative to a human player.

      I've love a near-exact port of AC on the Civ 4 engine. It's a shame the rights to make that came are so tied up.

    34. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's so much more like Civilization than Masters of Orion! (It's actually most similar to the MOO scenario from Civ2 Fantastic Worlds, but that was more Civ than MOO, too.)

    35. Re:meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think that Galactic Civilization 2 can be compared with Master of Orion 2 (at least this version in my case). The most interesting part of MOO2 which has still yet to be successfully duplicated in a 4x strategy game is the depth of tactical combat control. The technology itself offers many game changing mechanics that makes combat refreshing and interesting.

      In fact the more I think about it, the more I realize what it is that attracted me to MOO2; the economy was simple (drag and drop workers), but there was a lot of thought put into the role-playing elements of tactical combat (ships gained experience, leaders added further bonuses), as well as having an enjoyable selection of technology for which you could really customize your ship armada (Some weapons also had unique bonuses; like the Neutron gun killing marines aboard the target ship, Graviton beam doing bonus damage against structure, stasis field used to entrap enemies, only to name a few).

      GalCiv2 didn't offer very satisfying combat, even if you could customize how your ship looked. I bought the first expansion (which came with the original in any case), but still could not get into it. I'm sill waiting for MOO2's replacement.

    36. Re:meh by Draek · · Score: 1

      You should really try Sword of the Stars then, its 3D galaxy, the variety of travelling methods for each race and the changes that bring to the gameplay are its major selling points IMHO. It is, however, heavily oriented towards warfare, I don't think there's even a diplomatic victory in the game which is why I don't play it so much as I prefer to play researchers rather than conquerors on these kinds of games.

      It's a pity you couldn't get into GalCiv2 though, it's a great game particularly in its diplomacy and research aspects though the flatness of the map also surprised me at first, and I can see how one wouldn't like the game because of it.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    37. Re:meh by Carik · · Score: 1

      You're right about a lot of that... the civics in CTP were pretty poor, and the lawyers were a pain.

      I didn't really have a problem with the wonders, though; losing some of them sucked, but I don't think I ever ran into a situation where losing one caused that much trouble. Generally I knew I was going to lose Stonehenge, for example, in time to shift things around and compensate.

      The probe teams in AC were great... I haven't played in quite a long time, and I'd forgotten about those.

  19. No not again... by Midnight's+Shadow · · Score: 1

    I've already lost to much of my life to the first 4 civs.

    --
    "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. " -Voltaire
    1. Re:No not again... by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, you've even lost a vowel.

    2. Re:No not again... by Midnight's+Shadow · · Score: 1

      Wow, you've even lost a vowel.

      Se I tol yo Civ wa dangerou

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. " -Voltaire
  20. CAN'T WAIT by Pojut · · Score: 1

    SO MANY MEMORIES with the Civ series. Our gaming circle has always been huge into the Civ games, and we spent some loooooooooooong uninterrupted sessions with Civ IV. Hell, my first time playing through Mirror's Edge took place entirely in between turns during an extended Civ IV LAN weekend.

    I'm super excited about Civ V, not only because it's another chance to create even more memories, but because my wife will finally experience one of our LAN's centered around a game that no one has played before her. She got deep into Civ Rev on the DS, got super deep into Civ IV,and is equally excited as the rest of our gaming circle about Civilization V. Being married to a fellow nerd is awesome :-)

    On an unrelated note, I posted about this very article on my site barely an hour ago...go figure.

  21. First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turn

  22. The Tags are getting more absurd each day by Lars+T. · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "alternatehistory" - really?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    1. Re:The Tags are getting more absurd each day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know, in my last civ game the parthenon was built by the Aztecs in 1500 BC.

    2. Re:The Tags are getting more absurd each day by mjwx · · Score: 1

      "alternatehistory" - really?

      I dont know why you consider this absurd. Playing a game of Civ where the Indian civilisation violently conquers North American civilisations is the very definition of "alternate history".

      You've played Civ before, right?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:The Tags are getting more absurd each day by mjwx · · Score: 1

      You live in an alternate world, aren't you?

      Are you high today?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:The Tags are getting more absurd each day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You live in an alternate world, aren't you?

      Are you high today?

      I do.

    5. Re:The Tags are getting more absurd each day by DMorritt · · Score: 0

      Probably by the same people that use all their points modding up amusing posts rather than interesting or insightful, or down rate anything against Apple.

      Personally I'd love to see people use up all their mod points for every +Funny mod they make.

      /off-topic

  23. First! by longhairedgnome · · Score: 0

    Post? I may need to pirate Civ 4 again...

    --
    GENERATION O98346: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig and remove a random number from the generation. T
  24. I liked to conquer the Chinese by tempest69 · · Score: 4, Funny

    But I always felt the need to conquer them two hours later.

    1. Re:I liked to conquer the Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're allowed to conquer two Chinese cities from column A and one Chinese city from column B.

    2. Re:I liked to conquer the Chinese by CraftyJack · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can spend up to four hour conquering the Chinese, then you go home now.

    3. Re:I liked to conquer the Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer to spend four hours conquering just one Chinese, then send her home now.

    4. Re:I liked to conquer the Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can spend up to four hour conquering the Chinese, then you go home now.

      ... No waiting!

  25. Great... by DarthBling · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... another installment of Civilazation. I already know I have the leadership skills of Dan Quayle. Do I have to be reminded again?

    1. Re:Great... by ch-chuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good idea tho, actually, if we put politicians through a civ test or *something* we the voting electorate might be able to tell the actual skilled legislators from the big mouthed wannabees.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    2. Re:Great... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... another installment of Civilazation. I already know I have the leadership skills of Dan Quayle. Do I have to be reminded again?

      Props for mis-spelling a random word in a Dan Quayle joke.

    3. Re:Great... by need4mospd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Props for inappropriately using a hyphen in a post calling out another person's misspelling.

    4. Re:Great... by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      For one thing, it would be interesting to see how long they keep on whipping before switching to a more "enlightened" method of government.

      In any case, Civilization completely fails as a method of testing the abilities of a modern politician, since it refuses to let you spend money you don't actually have ;-)

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    5. Re:Great... by cashman73 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't feel too bad. Sarah Palin can't even score that high! She'd quit the game before getting the score!

    6. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, could be worse, they could rate our budgetary skills... with all the time I spend in the red, I'd get labeled with the "Spending Skills of Obama"!

  26. civplayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is going to be awesome!

  27. wtf? by Pojut · · Score: 1

    Did the site just crash? I wrote up a big-ass comment, but it isn't showing up....TAAACCCCOOOOOOO!!!!!!! /Kirk

    1. Re:wtf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did the site just crash? I wrote up a big-ass comment, but it isn't showing up....TAAACCCCOOOOOOO!!!!!!! /Kirk

      Actually, someone parked a cart on one of the network cables, kinked it, and the pressure blew the line. There are packets all over the place, it's a huge mess right now.

  28. really, first? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love it!!!!

  29. 1st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FRIST POAST

  30. Dupe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe I'm missing something but what's new here? The fact he was playing the game? Other than that this is all the same info we've read before...

  31. C64 by mseeger · · Score: 1

    I still remember the first version on the C64. And winning on the hardest difficulty settings is one of my fondest computer gaming memories (along with resurfacing once with real a Amulet of Yendor).

    CU, Martin

    1. Re:C64 by revlayle · · Score: 1

      What game were you playing and where can I get it?

    2. Re:C64 by Zedrick · · Score: 3, Informative

      Huh? Civilization was never released on the C64. Perhaps you're confusing it with the Amiga version.

    3. Re:C64 by mseeger · · Score: 1

      You're correct.... In my mind both machines have merged. I was so sure it was the C64 i didn't bother to check. Now i did...

    4. Re:C64 by v1 · · Score: 1

      oh wow. COMPLETELY ot I realize, but I was just looking that up... "Amulet of Yendor". From nethack. Never played that. BUT... played ultima 3, 4, and 5. and saw something VERY interesting...

      The amulet is possessed by the high priest of Moloch at the bottom of Gehennom. To reach it, however, the player needs several other items, known as the invocation artifacts. They are the Book of the Dead, Candelabrum of Invocation and the Bell of Opening.

      In one of the Ultima games, you required the Bell, the Book, and the Candle, to get into the final dungeon. I'm sure that can't be coincidence. Which came first, nethack or that ultima? Ultima also had an amulet naturally, (amulet of Lord British?) but I think that you obtained from LB's lockbox. Not a terribly useful item.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:C64 by biovoid · · Score: 1

      In one of the Ultima games, you required the Bell, the Book, and the Candle, to get into the final dungeon. I'm sure that can't be coincidence. Which came first, nethack or that ultima?

      Big Ultima fan. Just did some googling. Ultima 4 and Nethack were both released in 1985. However, the same three items are also found in Zork (1980).

      It looks like all three were pre-dated by something much older.

      Ultima also had an amulet naturally, (amulet of Lord British?) but I think that you obtained from LB's lockbox. Not a terribly useful item.

      British's amulet was a key item in Ultima 5 - it was needed to pass through the darkness surrounding the entrance to Dungeon Doom, and thus complete the game. Also appears in Ultima 6 in LB's inventory, but is a useless item.

    6. Re:C64 by v1 · · Score: 1

      iirc, the scepter was the item that dispelled the shadowlord's fields of darkness, but the amulet was necessary to illuminate the entrance to the dungeon, as well as the area immediately around it. (you could not [E]nter it even if you were standing on top of it, without the amulet)

      Beyond shades egress in the centre of the underworld there is a place of darkness. Beyond this darkness lies the gate to the core of the world. Whenthou art ready thou must call forth Veramocor to unlock the gate and venturepast ethereal words and stealers of souls. That which the world hath, dostawaits thy coming!

      I found that interesting, since "veramocor" was actually something you had to find (in three parts) elsewhere. This kinda gave that away.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  32. I've always wondered... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do I have to play these Civ games in one go? Or can I play a multiplayer game with a few friends for an hour or two one night, and resume the next day?

    1. Re:I've always wondered... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theoretically, you CAN play for just one hour or two and continue on another night. However, you'll probably play through it non-stop anyway. "Just one more turn".

  33. Looks good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i hope it supports wine.

  34. Incomplete by LordEd · · Score: 1

    If the preview is incomplete, then why should I bother finishing thi

    1. Re:Incomplete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOW, what a lame attempt at a joke!

  35. Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Seumas · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I love Civilization, but I always find that the "one true way" to play starts to bum me out and I end up not playing beyond the first couple of weeks. There's a great excitement in the discovery and exploration and surprise when you can meander through a game against real people. It's not quite the same when -- as is the case with Civilization -- the game becomes nothing but a competition to see who can speed through the spreadsheet containing the "one true path to victory" the fastest. The graphics become irrelevant and you may as well be sitting down to a multi-player spreadsheet.

    I'll buy it. I'll enjoy it. I just won't enjoy it for months or years like so many of the hard core do. I wish someone would figure out the special key to keeping the excitement and exploration part of the game long into the game's cycle.

    1. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by quantumplacet · · Score: 4, Informative

      Did you play Civ IV? There absolutely was no "one true path" in that game. Particularly with all the expansions and on the hardest difficulty, you absolutely had to play to your particular civs strength, and trying to get different victory conditions with each of the different civs was always a challenge. On top of that, playing the same civ with a different leader could be a very different experience.

    2. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? There is no one true path through civilization, this is just a garbage opinion. You and your opinion belong in the trash.

      Based on your starting location, based on random events and based on other people's locations you have totally different access to things. Different techs become more or less useful. Are you serious?

    3. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Rhys · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mods. Try "Fall from Heaven 2" -- for Civ4/BtS/Warlords. It was on huge discount when Civ V got announced on Steam, but it looks regular price now.

      --
      Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
    4. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You just have to play against the computer on an easier level, or against people who don't care so much about victory. There's nothing more fun than parking an aircraft carrier off the coast of a bronze age Australia and letting them have it.

    5. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I think his criticisms were pretty fair for Civ 3 (where I would say rapid expansion is much more feasible/optimal), but I agree with you on 4.

      On the other hand, if you play Civ 4 in multiplayer with all human players that's less true -- because typically other human players are much too aggressive for the game to end with anything but a relatively early conquest victory. It's be interesting to see tweaks or options that would make that less true.

    6. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Sevorus · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm optimistic about this in Civ V. The AI has been split up into layers, IIRC, with each opponent actually coming up with a strategy to victory based on personal preferences and game conditions. So one civ (Ceasar, maybe) might lean towards military action regardless of game conditions, but another could find itself in a strong cultural position and then aggressively persue that goal. This is a bit different from previous versions in that the AI is taking account of the ongoing game and the player activity better, and I'm hoping it makes the "one true path" harder to follow (since the AI will adapt better).

      IGN has a write up with a lot of the AI details: http://pc.ign.com/articles/107/1075587p1.html

    7. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      Damn, I was going to make a comment on how you didn't mention the Rhye's and Fall of Civilization mod, before I reread your name and realized you were missing a letter. :\

    8. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by StikyPad · · Score: 0

      There absolutely was no "one true path" in that game.

      And that was one of my biggest problems with Civ.. no two games are alike. A strategy that worked well in one game may be disastrous in the next, even with the exact same starting conditions. Which means it's essentially gambling. Worse, the risks and odds are unknown at the start. Are you on an island? Who will the other leaders be? What resources will you discover, and will you be able to incorporate them in your existing strategy or modify your strategy in time? In most cases a strategy shift is unworkable, meaning you have to start over or load a previous save, except as we said, you can't play the same game twice.

      It's all well and good for people who enjoy gambling with unknown odds, and I understand why that's addicting for some, but it's not my cup of tea, and I take no personal satisfaction in winning through chance. It's possible that what appear to be random events are actually determinate, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to spend weeks or months sorting the two.

    9. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by oatworm · · Score: 1

      It's not so much a matter of "gambling" as it is knowing that there's more than one way to win a game. In Civ II, for example, there was a fairly set formula that you could follow that would achieve victory far more often than not (basically, build lots of settlers and expand like crazy). There might be individual variations on that theme, but, for the most part, there was only one winning strategy ("one true path"), so, if you knew the way and everyone else around you knew the way, the only competition was in who had a better starting position to exercise this "one true path" and who could execute it more completely.

      That gets repetitive. It also gives the feeling that the game has been "solved". Tic-tac-toe would be a good example of a "one true path" game - there's a known opener and a known counter to the opener, so, if both people know the opener and the counter, the game will always be a "cat's game".

      With Civ 4, it was clear that they tried to come up with multiple paths of victory and each of them were similarly "optimal". If you weren't in a position to win with mass expansion, there were other ways you could still salvage the game and possibly achieve victory. That gives flexibility, but you have to know when to use which option, otherwise it can feel like "gambling with unknown odds". Granted, you won't have perfect knowledge, but that's part of the fun - how well do you understand your tactical and strategic situation given the information you do have? Is it enough for you to make a good decision?

    10. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by oatworm · · Score: 1

      In Civ 2 (running on memory here), the "one true path" basically amounted to...

      Get to philosophy before everyone else. Get free tech advance. Advance to Republic, switch government, then Democracy as fast as possible.. Switch government to Democracy once you get it (democracy was optimal about 98% of the time, unless you were in a war), build "Statue of Liberty" precisely to keep people from going to war with you. While all of this is going on, expand like crazy and set new cities to a Defending unit->Settler->Settler pattern, with the first settler being sent off on expansion duty and the second settler possibly being used for road and irrigation duty. Once Democracy is under way, get Factories as fast as possible, get industrialized, then steamroll the rest of the game into the ground.

      If someone wishes to refine this a bit, feel free, but, yeah, there was definitely a "one true way". Once you figured it out, every game was just a variation of a theme.

    11. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just have to play against the computer on an easier level, or against people who don't care so much about victory. There's nothing more fun than parking an aircraft carrier off the coast of a bronze age Australia and letting them have it.

      That's very generous of you, gifting a big unit like that to your opponent!

    12. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You'd think, hey? What they don't know is that there are subs surrounding it.

    13. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      Different maps, play as different civs, make sure you patch the AI with one of the AI mods to make it more aggressive or diplomatic and just better at waging war.

      Try a leader that doesn't come of age until mid-late game. Turn off different win conditions and go for a space or diplo win instead of whichever way your normally win.

      Play a larger map, with more civs. Which makes things much more difficult.

      Turn on raging barbs, and laugh as 1/5 of the civs get smothered at birth due to the barbarian hordes. Laugh harder when it's your civ that gets destroyed.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    14. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      The AI has been split up into layers, IIRC, with each opponent actually coming up with a strategy to victory based on personal preferences and game conditions.

      This already happens a bit in Civ4:BtS (especially with BetterAI). There was a lot of work in 2009 by the modders on making the pacifist leaders more likely to pursue diplomatic victory or culture victory over military victory. There's weirdly named variables that handle that for each leader, and things to be tweaked in the XML or data files that could impact warlike or peacenik behavior.

      The layering is new, as is the concept of an over-arching goal. It's something we saw a bit in various games this past decade though. So not a completely new concept. But any improvement to the Civ5 basic AI will be welcome, hopefully it plays as well out of the gate as the Civ4:BtS AI plays.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    15. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      In fairness to the game, I can't say that I played a ton of Civilization IV (a few weeks straight almost non-stop, but that was it). It certainly is a bit more open than Civlization III, but it seems to be that it has a very strong sense of "paths to the end" which you must follow. I don't just mean "diplomacy / culture / war", but StarCraft-esque "build order" type of paths.

      Discovering elements in the game grid certainly throw some sense of unpredictability onto the mix, like the roll of a dice on a board game. That doesn't really detract from the mapped-out formulas, though.

      I love Star Craft in addition to Civilization and Civilization is definitely more open and relaxed, but it still falls on the "one/two/three true ways" side of the play arc. Fortunately, Civilization is less of a "I can predict the end based on the first thirty seconds of game play" prone.

      I hope Civilization V blows me out of the water. I'm sure it'll be an improvement and I think they're aiming for that sort of more open evolution. I don't blame them for it not being there yet, though. I'm not a game designer of any sort, but it seems like an incredible task.

      I'll point out, though, that part of the reason I just built a huge beast of a new gaming rig after falling out with PC gaming for the past few years is specifically for Diablo III, StarCraft II, and . . . Civilization V. So I'm giving it a chance and buying into it. Just not getting my hopes up too much. :)

    16. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that there IS one true path, but with some cheap randomness thrown into the mix. Follow the same path you always follow, taking into account the random distribution and discovery of resources, treasures, and map position.

      How can you read through endless Civilization community sites and strategy sites and come away with the idea that there is anything other than certain set paths and strategies that you should spreadsheet-progression yourself through to win?

      "ONE true way" should perhaps not be meant so literally, but you get the gist.

    17. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I've actually found the experience against he AI to be not so annoying as against humans. When you reach a certain level of player in Civilization, they seem to follow certain established flow-charts, but do it faster than the other guy.

      I'm not whining because "people beat me so I hate the game". I'm just making the point that Civilization can often suffer from a very strong tendency to be predictable races along the same mapped path.

    18. Re:Time to repeat the brief love affair. by demonbug · · Score: 1

      I think his criticisms were pretty fair for Civ 3 (where I would say rapid expansion is much more feasible/optimal), but I agree with you on 4.

      On the other hand, if you play Civ 4 in multiplayer with all human players that's less true -- because typically other human players are much too aggressive for the game to end with anything but a relatively early conquest victory. It's be interesting to see tweaks or options that would make that less true.

      That was my biggest complaint about Civ 3 - every game was basically a giant race to build as many cities as quickly as possible on every single bit of available land. You basically had to do that to have any chance at competing, and teh computer was very good at rapid expansion. I remember it being a huge change from Civ 2, where it seemed you could expand in a much more leisurely fashion and still be very competitive. Civ3 just seemed like a race, and if you were hemmed in near the beginning you were completely screwed, whereas Civ2 you could connive your way out of such a situation.

      Civ 4 fixed a lot of the things I didn't like about Civ 3, though I never really had much time to get into it (and I don't think I tried multiplayer more than once or twice - early on I had massive connection problems with it, I lost interest by the time these were ironed out). I might have to pop it in this weekend and get back into it...

  36. frost piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    narf?

  37. Not sure about the new look by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The nice thing about Civ4 and earlier was that the appearance of the land quickly and clearly conveyed information about what was there and its role in game terms. In an effort to make the landscape look more natural, I worry that this information might be more hidden. If so, that would be a bad decision.

    1. Re:Not sure about the new look by moonbender · · Score: 1

      I think it's nice. I'm pretty sure that after a fairly short time you'll be able to "read" the new style just like the old one. And I'd be surprised if they got rid of the various informational layers that Civ IV had. TFA also mentions a new 2D overview mode which is more iconographic, he compares it to a board game. I just hope you won't end up playing most of the game in that mode after a while...

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    2. Re:Not sure about the new look by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      It seems they shared your concern, because there's a toggle between "Realistic 3D" mode and "2D Tactical" with a hexagon overlay and terrain etc. represented by 2D icons.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    3. Re:Not sure about the new look by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a new "strategic view" that shows a simplified overhead view of all tiles, with the ability to toggle on or off different things - resources, military, etc. I've seen screen shots and read about it in previews, and it seems that getting information about large swaths of the empire at a glance will be a piece of cake.

    4. Re:Not sure about the new look by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the Article:

      (One of the welcome options involving the hex grid is the support of a "strategic view" which flips the graphics into what looks almost like a board game full of flat simplified icons that represent terrain, units and resources in simple shapes. It turns the busy Civ V visuals into a very-easy-to-scan map when you are searching for the hex that has the whales the people of Damascus are demanding.)

      with a picture and everything!

    5. Re:Not sure about the new look by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are two modes.... one is the detailed pretty looking lanscape, and the other one is a more strategic/tactically relevant mode

    6. Re:Not sure about the new look by ben+there... · · Score: 1

      As long as they have the toggles for Resource bubbles (CTRL-R) and Crop Yields (CTRL-Y), plus military, strategy layers, etc., it's pretty easy to see what's going on.

  38. It's true, I'm perverted by dziban303 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I want to have sex with this game.

    I want it to bear my kittens.

    1. Re:It's true, I'm perverted by Jorth · · Score: 1

      I don't know which is more disturbing, that you want to procreate with a computer game, or that you are a tom-cat able to type in English on a message board with paws

    2. Re:It's true, I'm perverted by oji-sama · · Score: 1

      I'd say that the message board with paws wins.

      --
      It is what it is.
    3. Re:It's true, I'm perverted by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      Maybe he's spent so long looking at bestiality on internet porn sites. That he now things he's a cat that has sex with computers.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  39. How I play... by splatbang · · Score: 1

    Just... one... more... turn... ! arghstupidillfixyouandyourdamncannons

  40. Linux? by XanC · · Score: 1

    Any word on whether it will work in Linux? Natively, through WINE, none of the above?

    1. Re:Linux? by canajin56 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Windows only at launch, OS X version may eventually be released at some point in the future. No Linux version mentioned.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    2. Re:Linux? by isorox · · Score: 1

      Any word on whether it will work in Linux? Natively, through WINE, none of the above?

      I grew up with Civ and Civ 2. Civ 3 made me install windows onto my computer to play it. I've not tried Civ4, I assume it's too graphically intensive to run in wine or virtualbox, and probably even if I found a spare gig or two for a windows partition, especially on my old laptop (core due 1.2, Intel 945GM graphics). Love to hear otherwise.

    3. Re:Linux? by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Windows only at launch, OS X version may eventually be released at some point in the future. No Linux version mentioned.

      AKA Civ is still in the Linux Stone Age

    4. Re:Linux? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      Although specific patches and versions haven't run great, overall Civ 4 (and the full version with all expansions / last patch in specific) is supposed to run pretty well in WINE overall. I have this secondhand from a few people but haven't put it to the test myself.

      I can't swear that it would run great on that machine, though.

    5. Re:Linux? by ben+there... · · Score: 1

      Linux would be nice. As it is, Civ4 is the only reason I have to boot into Windows. Everything else I need from it runs in Wine.

      Civ4, not so much. I got it to work at first, then tried everything from making it windowed to disabling audio and it just kept crashing. That's with Beyond the Sword 3.19 and latest Wine from Ubuntu 10.04. No idea what the problem is.

    6. Re:Linux? by socrplayr813 · · Score: 1

      I successfully ran every Civ4 expansion/patch under various versions of Ubuntu with relatively little effort. A popular game like Civ usually gets enough attention that's it's not a huge issue.

      Civ5 might take a while with the overhaul it's gotten, but I'm willing to bet it will eventually run with WINE.

      --
      The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
    7. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've probably been encountering this problem for a long time, and it doesn't seem to be getting any better. Have you ever considered that the "year of linux" is never going to happen maybe it's time to switch to a real OS? I switched to Windows a few years ago and haven't looked back.

  41. Hex! by Saysys · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The biggest change in Civ V is that the Civilization world is no longer sliced into squares. It is composed of hexagons."

    This change is about 15 years late... but most welcome

    1. Re:Hex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also you can't stack units anymore (heard it from the IGN preview).

    2. Re:Hex! by NewWorldDan · · Score: 1

      I have a problem with that. My arrow keys only point in 4 directions. Also, the world appears to still be a flat rectangle. Is it that hard to make the game work as an actual globe with climate zones?

    3. Re:Hex! by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Of course, we're still playing on a cylindrical world. How about going spherical, so I could finally build that city beneath Antarctican mountains for explorers from future civilizations to find ?-)

      Other wishes: adapt the undersea and orbital cities from Call to Power, fix the border mechanism - it's rather weird that the first thing you build in a conquered city is a Theater to get cultural borders spreading again.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:Hex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The first thing the US built in conquered Iraqi cities was a barracks and that didn't work out to well for them. Maybe they should have built theaters showing American movies.

    5. Re:Hex! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid panzer general, whatever general wannabe. Hexagons were extremely bad in that game. Warwords made a better use of them

    6. Re:Hex! by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Of course, we're still playing on a cylindrical world. How about going spherical, so I could finally build that city beneath Antarctican mountains for explorers from future civilizations to find

      Assuming you don't want to use triangles as your tiles, that requires some tricks to do with a tile-based map (you could do what some pen-and-paper games with hex-based world maps do, and use an icosahedral projection where your twenty "corner" tiles are actually pentagons rather than hexagons.) This probably gets really ugly for keyboard-controlled movement, though with point-and-click it would be fine.

    7. Re:Hex! by cowscows · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm about to blow your mind. In the previous versions, if you can figure out how to use the number pad (or mouse) instead of your arrow keys, you can move diagonally. Woah.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    8. Re:Hex! by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Civilization has had climate zones for a long time. Have you not noticed there's more desert towards the middle and more tundra and eventually ice to the north and south?

    9. Re:Hex! by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 1

      Hexagons! Just like real life!

      --
      Yup...
    10. Re:Hex! by EdgeyEdgey · · Score: 1

      So they've reduced the directions you can move by 25%. Great.

      --
      [Intentionally left blank]
  42. Ha by atisss · · Score: 1

    If I first-post slashdot, can I get copy? Pleeese?

  43. Awww, man! by nanodroid · · Score: 1

    There goes my ability to resist PC games as a grown man.

    20,000,000 beard seconds and a divorce later...

    1. Re:Awww, man! by nacturation · · Score: 1

      20,000,000 beard seconds and a divorce later...

      Does only being 4 inches have anything to do with why you got divorced?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  44. Heh by akanouras · · Score: 1

    One of the welcome options involving the hex grid is the support of a "strategic view" which flips the graphics into what looks almost like a board game full of flat simplified icons that represent terrain, units and resources in simple shapes. It turns the busy Civ V visuals into a very-easy-to-scan map when you are searching for the hex that has the whales the people of Damascus are demanding.

    Seems the writer only played Civ IV or something.

    On a side note, is there a FLOSS clone of the newer Civ games?
    Freeciv is supposedly a clone of Civ II, not any less addictive though.

    1. Re:Heh by djp928 · · Score: 1

      I don't think he even played Civ IV. He crows about how units have hit points in Civ V. Civ IV had unit hit points too.

  45. Will you beable to mod in the old stuff that was t by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Will you be able to mod in the old stuff that was taken out?

    can you mod in more road types and make it so you can build super highway as well cheaper roads.

    Also same with rail like rail, high speed rail, electric rail, monorail and Maglev.

  46. Not another one! by RabidMonkey · · Score: 1

    I don't know if I can handle another iconic game this year, already the lawn is growing longer, and that's just Starcraft 2.

    Next up, a WoW expansion, then CIV5.

    A good excuse to upgrade the computer, but I can only handle one addiction at a time ... which ones are going to suffer?

    I'm going to have to see if I can get my girlfriend hooked on one to save me some pain. Thank goodness the winters are long and cold.

    --
    We emerge from our mother's womb an unformatted diskette; our culture formats us. - Douglas Coupland
  47. Civilization by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

    I spent so many freaking hours playing the original Civilization that it was affecting my college grades. I had to break the damn CD. Back then $50 was a significant portion of my free money... I swear I almost cried as the CD shattered into pieces...

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Civilization by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You had completely the wrong solution to this situation: Better would be to sell your Civ game to a jerk with higher grades than you for $45. Still cheaper than the full $50 for him, recovers your grades, ruins his, and means you only lost $5.

      Oh, and if you play real life like you would Civ, then club him over the head and take the game back, then repeat the process with another person you don't like.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:Civilization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original Civilization came on CD?

    3. Re:Civilization by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      In re-releases, yes.

    4. Re:Civilization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure it came on 3.5" diskette ... or maybe that was just the pirated version I had.

    5. Re:Civilization by MyLongNickName · · Score: 1

      I went and checked. It was Civ II which cost be a few tenths of a point off of my GPA...

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    6. Re:Civilization by XanC · · Score: 1

      My copy of Civilization came on 2 5.25" HD floppies! I still have 'em. Now get off my lawn.

  48. Frist Pots by rickb928 · · Score: 0

    Yea, it's just a game. Not a reiable simulation.

    Feh.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  49. If nobody else is going to say it, I will... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First Post!

  50. iPad version? by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Might not be a popular thing to say around these parts, but I think a Civ game would be awesome on the iPad.

    1. Re:iPad version? by Wiarumas · · Score: 1

      Civ is already available on the iPhone and iPad. A watered down, mobile version, but can't really complain for the price (I think I bought mine on sale at 2.99 or so).

      --
      I will bend like a reed in the wind.
    2. Re:iPad version? by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      It's called "Civ Rev", and it's awesome. It's basically Civ 1 with a lot of polish, and takes about three hours to play through a full game.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    3. Re:iPad version? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Troll

      Like this one: http://www.macworld.com/appguide/article.html?article=142206

      Seriously, why would you:
      1) Even post such a non-controversial, irrelevant thought
      2) Not even bother to see if the product you're proposing already exists

  51. OMGOMGOMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GAH WTBLOODYF BLOCKED AT WORK

  52. Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by Delusion_ · · Score: 1

    Civ 2 and Alpha Centauri are my favorite Civ games, because ever since Civ III, the developers have been pushing a smaller and smaller game at me.

    Now, I realize there's a lot of push to make the multiplayer game a reasonable experience that doesn't take more than one session to complete, but I'm not interested in multiplayer in the Civ series.

    I want an epic-sized map that takes a long, long time to complete. That "huge" is 160x160 is a joke. I want to be able to play a map 5,000x3,000 squares long, and if that means that civilizations come in contact in the battleship era, I'm fine with that.

    It doesn't mean everyone has to play this way. It doesn't mean I have to play this way every time. I just want the option to do so, without arbitrary map and city size limitations being imposed on me whose primary function is to make the multiplayer game a more streamlined experience. One should not exclude the other.

    1. Re:Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by demonbug · · Score: 1

      I agree somewhat, although I think the size limits in Civ IV were more hardware limited than anything else. Mid- to late-game on Huge maps the computer would start to take 5+ minutes per turn to figure everything out, which became pretty unplayable to me. This was with a pretty decent (at the time) computer.

      I do tend to think that they shouldn't put such hard limits in (as processing power will inevitably catch up), but from a playability perspective even the huge maps they offered were really too big for a decent experience in my opinion, at least at the time of release.

    2. Re:Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by Delusion_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't necessarily disagree. But if the choice is between animated, flowing wheat fields in the farming squares, or a bigger game, I want the bigger game.

      This is another case of not having to choose; let me play the big game, and if that becomes a five, ten minute turn compute-fest, let me turn off features I value less, such as terrain animation, in order to make that more practical.

    3. Re:Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      Agreed -- a guy I play multiplayer Civ4 with regularly still literally can't play a huge map game. It kills his sad computer, which doesn't have great specs for today, but they would have been pretty solid at Civ 4's original release.

    4. Re:Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by dancingmilk · · Score: 1

      I'm not a big player of the Civ games, but I completely agree. A lot of RTS games have infuriatingly small maps. I want huge, epic battles when playing an RTS. There isn't a reason they couldn't offer the option of huge maps, even for just offline play.

    5. Re:Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by ultranova · · Score: 2, Informative

      But if the choice is between animated, flowing wheat fields in the farming squares, or a bigger game, I want the bigger game.

      It isn't. The GPU draws the wheat field, the CPU handles AI and such.

      Anyway, I suspect that the 5000x3000 squares map you wanted would require making the game 64-bit. That's 15,000,000 squares; if you store just 287 bytes of info per square, you exhaust the memory space of 32-bit applications - and even that would require running on a 64-bit machine and having the proper executable flags set.

      Once you have reasonably spaced cities, military units, resources, improvements, borders etc. on the map, that 287 bytes per square starts looking pretty small...

      This is another case of not having to choose; let me play the big game, and if that becomes a five, ten minute turn compute-fest, let me turn off features I value less, such as terrain animation, in order to make that more practical.

      I remember each turn taking 15+ minutes with SimLife :). Someone really should make a modern version.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:Peeking down the Casual Gamer avenue. by Smauler · · Score: 1

      Animated, flowing wheat fields don't hit the CPU, which was what the problem was with huge games in civ IV was. The graphics card does the graphics, the CPU does the AI and pathfinding. I am simplifying here a little, but it's essentially true. They could have created an ASCII interface for civ IV, and it would still be about as slow as it is, because the graphics were not what were slowing it down. Map size increases also are not directly relative to CPU demands - it'll be exponential. A map with 2000 squares (or pentagons) will require more than double the processor power than a map with 1000 squares.

  53. Advert. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tag op 'advert', plz.

    1. Re:Advert. by hercubus · · Score: 0, Troll

      Tag op 'advert', plz.

      Oh hacker, please! A review of a new version of CIV? That's definitely "news" and that definitely "matters" you, you, script kiddie.

      I rewired my brain for CIV. I need CIV like I need oxygen and Cheetos. Go back to your Halo 3.1 or your Mario GoKarts or WTF, the grownups here are trying to <reverb> Build an Empire to Stand the Test of Time!!!</reverb>

      Sorry if you don't get it, kid...

      --
      -- How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
  54. Ya the rest of my year is shot for sure by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not only Civ V, but there's also Elemental War of Magic. I've been beta testing and it is great. So I'll have not one but TWO epic TBS games. I'll be lucky if I keep my job :D.

  55. Unfortunately it's still the Disneyworld by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never seen the game, but i can make some premonitions;
    No "ethnic cleansing" -button. Even as a dictatorship.
    No other ethnic issues. A border city with co-existing religions only gains in stability and prosperity. No refugees.
    Nuking someone still turns every other country against you. The effect of nuking on a city is somewhat similar to traditional bombing. No devastation.
    Spearmen can still destroy a tank.

    Study WW1 & WW2, and make an adult Civ for a change.

    1. Re:Unfortunately it's still the Disneyworld by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      Your existence is very joyless, isn't it?

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    2. Re:Unfortunately it's still the Disneyworld by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      You might want to take a look at a game called 'Hearts of Iron'

    3. Re:Unfortunately it's still the Disneyworld by demonrob · · Score: 1

      Of course Spearmen can destroy a tank. Didn't you watch Avatar? Use your imagination, if you had a spear and there was a tank you wanted to destroy, I'm sure you could work out several ways of doing it (knock on the hatch, spear the commander when he opens, ...).

  56. FIRST POST! by Imazalil · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    First Post Bia**es!!

    Just had to get one more turn in first.

    1. Re:FIRST POST! by Maarx · · Score: 1

      I have spare mod points. If you want me to use them to hide this post from the rest of the world, it's going to cost you. I accept Pay-Pal. E-mail me for details.

      ((Slashdot took a dump this afternoon and new comments stopped appearing for like, nearly an hour.))

    2. Re:FIRST POST! by Imazalil · · Score: 1

      Ah well, bad attempt at humour is lost on people I guess.

      Was getting one more turn (so really about 3 dozen) of Civ in before finishing my 'first post' comment, that's why it's way down the middle of the conversation.

      Ha Ha.

      Yeah, I'm not quitting my dayjob.

  57. I expected much more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The preview has disclosed little that we don't know, and is very light on details. It seems to be targeted towards very casual gamers who don't really know what the Civilization series is about. Too superficial.

  58. System Requirements? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 0, Troll

    The preview states

    Look for this game on September 21 and make sure you have a computer than can run it.

    So... fill in the details. Will it run on my PowerMac 6100?

    1. Re:System Requirements? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      So... fill in the details. Will it run on my PowerMac 6100?

      No, it requires a computer.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    2. Re:System Requirements? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Fine. I guess I should pony up for an Atom. Will the Intel chipset be sufficient, or will I need a nvidia ION?

  59. Re: I tihnk you will love civ 5 then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Civ 2 and Alpha Centauri are my favorite Civ games, because ever since Civ III, the developers have been pushing a smaller and smaller game at me.

    Now, I realize there's a lot of push to make the multiplayer game a reasonable experience that doesn't take more than one session to complete, but I'm not interested in multiplayer in the Civ series.

    I want an epic-sized map that takes a long, long time to complete. That "huge" is 160x160 is a joke. I want to be able to play a map 5,000x3,000 squares long, and if that means that civilizations come in contact in the battleship era, I'm fine with that.

    It doesn't mean everyone has to play this way. It doesn't mean I have to play this way every time. I just want the option to do so, without arbitrary map and city size limitations being imposed on me whose primary function is to make the multiplayer game a more streamlined experience. One should not exclude the other.

    Civ 5 is including a few things to help in this regard. First, they will be shipping with a 64-bit version. Extra memory will allow much larger maps, and the addition of the many cities, empires, and military units that go with it.

    Secondly, the engine will be fully multi-threaded. The engine is written from the ground up to support "job based" threading. In their testing they have found that this allows them to scale up to 12 cores (only because that's the max they tested on, they expect more.) However, they have said it will play better than civ 4 on a comparable system, including low end notebooks. Naturally, you will probably need a higher end machine to play the really large maps.

    The threading aspect should really reduce the amount of time it takes in between turns, especially on massive maps with lots of empires, cities, military units, etc.

    I am extremely excited because I also enjoyed large maps with many empires, but disliked that the game would bog down between turns the later I got to in the game. And i would look at all my idle cores wishing it had been multi-threaded from the get go. Civ is a great example of a game that would benefit heavily from multi-threading.

  60. Tssst.. Ahh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just inject it straight into my veins! Just like the Star Craft 2 Marine says when he gets the stimpack: tssst... ahh!

  61. Pet Peeve by Daetrin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why do so many people insist on using the roman numerals in casual conversation? The creators use them in the official titles for media because it looks "prettier" on a box or a poster or a movie screen, but roman numerals are unarguably inferior for actual communication. There's a reason we ditched that system for general use and went with arabic numerals a long time ago.

    What's especially vexing is people who abbreviate the title but still insist on using the roman numerals. FF XIII, DQ IX, Civ V. If you're _already_ trying to simplify the name then using arabic numerals will always be more clear and will often save space/characters as well. FF 13, DQ 9, Civ 5.

    Making things more difficult for yourself and for everyone else reading whatever you have to say in the name of a cheap marketing gimmick is just dumb!

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:Pet Peeve by osu-neko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Positional notation is unarguably better for doing mathematics, particularly on paper. For communications purposes, however, any arbitrary system for representing numbers is fine, and there is no advantage of one over the other for communication purposes save familiarity with the system by the intended reader. It is often assumed that any reasonably literate person can at least read from I to XII as easily in roman numerals as in arabic numerals, as these are the twelve numbers you see written on a clock face. It's also assumed that people can read clocks. I know in modern times there are a lot of particularly dull people who can't do either, but that's another issue entirely. In any case, I object to the notion that communications should always be dumbed-down for the sake of the semi-literate.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    2. Re:Pet Peeve by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      It's not "dumbing-down," it's an improvement in speed and efficiency, both for writing and reading. Less characters (on average) to write, less characters to read and parse, _and_ the ordering is fixed! And it's not like leet-speak where you're mangling the text. Arabic numerals are a commonly accepted form of communicating numbers. Why do you say it's better for math but not for communication? There's technically nothing stopping you from doing calculus or other higher mathematics with roman numerals, it would just be painfully slow and awkward. The reason it's bad for math is the same reason it's bad for communication, just to a greater degree.

      I can read roman numerals just fine. I can also read upside down and mirror text, or with the text in all caps or with no punctuation, or with the punctuation written out. But that doesn't mean i'd prefer to have my books written in any of those formats.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    3. Re:Pet Peeve by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      OS X

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    4. Re:Pet Peeve by toastar · · Score: 1

      There's technically nothing stopping you from doing calculus or other higher mathematics with roman numerals,.

      This is wrong. I'd like you to represent Lim x=>0 in roman numerals, you can't The romans didn't have a concept of zero.

    5. Re:Pet Peeve by Yert · · Score: 1

      What I love is how people (at least in my office) refer to Snow Leopard:

      "Mac Oh Ess Ex Ten point six".

      --
      Truck driver, plumber, Linux systems engineer.
    6. Re:Pet Peeve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      hehe - you missed the best part, limit as ten goes to zero? that makes no sense at all...

    7. Re:Pet Peeve by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      "This is wrong. I'd like you to represent Lim x=>0 in roman numerals, you can't The romans didn't have a concept of zero."

      I would, but i don't know Latin for "limit" and "goes to" or "approaches" :)

      The Romans knew what nothing was, they just didn't have a _number_ for it. The term you don't think exists is "nulla". You could argue that using it isn't using roman numerals, but that would be pedantic. The fact that they didn't have a numeral to represent 0 is what makes using roman numerals hard because it's what forced them to use the awkward system of totaling up a series of characters (using both addition and subtraction if subtractive notation was being used, which wasn't always the case) instead of having a placeholder for positional notation.

      However since it's not being used for positional notation the only use for "0" is when you're actually referring to the basic concept of zero, ie nothing, for which the term "nulla" is entirely appropriate and usable.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    8. Re:Pet Peeve by toastar · · Score: 1

      They absolutely did have a concept of zero, but in an ordinal counting system, the concept didn't have a place ... because it's ordinal, not cardinal.

      The system was modified by some to include a symbol for zero, notably Bede, who used N. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Zero.

      This arguably makes it almost a positional cardinal system of numerals, sufficient for doing mathematics.

      I wouldn't exactly call Saint Bede a Roman.

    9. Re:Pet Peeve by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      I don't know. OS ten sounds pretty boring to say in casual conversation. Mac OS eXtreme!, on the other hand, is a little over the top. OS X might be Goldilocks' "just right"

    10. Re:Pet Peeve by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 1

      other than the fact you tend to sound like you are saying "Oh, Sex"... i've defaulted to using "Mac OS Ten point whatever"

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    11. Re:Pet Peeve by steve_bryan · · Score: 1

      Using the Roman numeral emphasizes that there is a tectonic shift from OS 9 to OS X. OS 9 was the last true Mac OS connected with the API's in the venerable Inside Macintosh tomes. OS X was NextStep adapted to look like Mac OS. Mac OS died, long live Mac OS!

    12. Re:Pet Peeve by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      Why do so many people insist on using the roman numerals in casual conversation?

      Huh? Are you seriously telling me that you talk to people who say "Civ quattuor" and "Civ quinque" instead of "Civ four" and "Civ five?" Wow, you must hang out with some educated folks!

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    13. Re:Pet Peeve by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Less characters (on average) to write, less characters to read and parse

      Interestingly enough, that hasn't been true for the year since MM.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    14. Re:Pet Peeve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " FF XIII, DQ IX, Civ V. If you're _already_ trying to simplify the name then using arabic numerals will always be more clear and will often save space/characters as well. FF 13, DQ 9, Civ 5."

      You realize, of course, that in most cases you're saving one or two characters using Arabic numerals instead of Roman numerals? Abbreviating "Final Fantasy" as "FF" saves you ten characters (arguably 11 keystrokes if you count shift and space), replacing "XIII" with "13" saves you two. Roman numerals get unweildy in higher values (welcome to the year MMX -- shit, bad example), but until we get to Final Fantasy 97, I think we're OK.

    15. Re:Pet Peeve by atrain728 · · Score: 3, Funny

      MMVII and MMVIII would like to have a word with you.

    16. Re:Pet Peeve by CeruleanDragon · · Score: 1

      Personally I think we should all push to drop the inefficient decimal system and move to hexadecimal. Final Fantasy 15 would be FF F!

      --
      ad astra per alia porci
    17. Re:Pet Peeve by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      "Mac Oh Ess Ex Ten point six".

      I don't think I've met anyone who says "OS Ten" instead of "OS Ex" for half a decade or more. Even the oldtimers, for whom "OS Ten" is actually meaningful, all say "OS Ex" now.

      I'd be quite willing to lay down a hundred bucks betting that the next version of MacOS after 10.9, will be either MacOS X 11.0, or MacOS X 10.10, and not MacOS XI.

      (And since we're not going to find out until 2020 or so, even if I'm wrong that hundred bucks will probably only be as much as I pay for lunch each day.)

    18. Re:Pet Peeve by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Yes, i realize that, which is why it isn't the primary argument for doing so, it's just a small added bonus in some cases.

      When you get down to it there are a couple minor but good reasons to switch from roman numerals to arabic numerals when you're already abbreviating the name, and absolutely no good reasons for sticking with the roman numerals. If someone wants to type out the entire name they can argue that they're just presenting it as the creators intended. (I think it's silly to be that pedantic, but it's a logical and valid argument.) However you no longer have even that excuse once you're chopping "Civilization" or "Final Fantasy" down to just "Civ" or "FF".

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    19. Re:Pet Peeve by ppanon · · Score: 1

      "(on average)"
      MMVII and MMVIII - 2 out of 11
      vs. MM, MMI, MMV, MMX
      and the others are 4 letters in either Roman or Arabic numerals. So on average it hasn't been true since 2010.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    20. Re:Pet Peeve by ppanon · · Score: 1

      So on average it hasn't been true since 2000. And that statement will still be valid next year.
      FTFM.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
  62. if I had mod points... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would mod you +IV Interesting.

    1. Re:if I had mod points... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Let's change the slashdot moderation system to use roman numerals just to piss off Daetrin.

    2. Re:if I had mod points... by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pfffft. You're just hoping for a +V Funny.

    3. Re:if I had mod points... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naw, let's use it for CPAN releases and really confuse RPM packaging.

    4. Re:if I had mod points... by Sparks23 · · Score: 1

      Ah, then we can truly share the experience of those ancient Roman LINVX admins. :P

      janus:~% perl --version

      This is perl, vV.XI.I built for iCCCLXXXVI-linvx-thread-multi
      (With II registered patches, see perl -V for more detail)

      --
      --Rachel
  63. Alpha Centauri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd would prefer a new Alpha Centauri game instead of Civ 5. Civ 4 fixed everything that was wrong with with Civ 3 and Civ 5 doesn't sound that much of a upgrade to 4 to me.

  64. Life, sleep, work got in the way? by DaveGod · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Forgive the Kotaku previewer, will you? Life, sleep, work got in the way, despite the best efforts of the people at Firaxis who made this pleasure trap of a game. Thankfully, nine hours allowed for plenty of time to learn about the game.

    A good Civ game gets in the way of life, sleep and work, not the other way around. A good session of Civ finishes with the guilty realisation that the sun isn't setting, it's rising.

    And 9 hours is plenty of time to scratch the surface of a good Civ game, unless you spent it reading the manual (being the rare game where the manual is good reference, well written, and the size of a decent novel). Even a hardcore Civ player should be reading the pages where they explain what's new to the series.

    1. Re:Life, sleep, work got in the way? by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      A good Civ game gets in the way of life, sleep and work, not the other way around. A good session of Civ finishes with the guilty realisation that the sun isn't setting, it's rising.

      Been there, done that. :)

      Civ II I the reason I always have a clock set up within the eyeline of my computer screen.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  65. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  66. deeper than you expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    deep into... super deep into...

    I've been ultra deep into you wife! XD

  67. F******ck!!!!!!! by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    Now I want to play Civ V so badly! I can't afford it, though, time-wise. Wife and kid, and a full-time research position don't permit this luxury.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  68. Steam only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have to have a steam account to install it on your computer. Major turn off.

    1. Re:Steam only by demonbug · · Score: 1

      Lame. Why do I need to be a member of an online service to play a predominantly single-person game? This online check-in BS is getting out of hand. I guess I'll stick to Civ IV (as soon as I get it back from my friend that I lent it to a couple months ago...)

  69. Too many ways to count by ben+there... · · Score: 1

    Besides the 9 difficulty levels, the many expansions, the wildly varying victory conditions, and the improved AI in the expansions, there are some interesting economy strategies that aren't outlined in any way in the game's interface.

    You can use a "cottage economy", a "specialist economy", or an "espionage economy". Most people start with a cottage economy but using Great People and the new features of the expansions without using near-100% on the science slider are an interesting alternative.

    I'm still learning those after playing casually for years. The real pros are on CivFanatics.com. They could tell you more about those strategies than I ever could. They can be way more fun.

  70. And two thousand years later... by xded · · Score: 1

    /. discovers Roman numerals...

  71. DRM by strikethree · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What kind of DRM does it come with? I just don't buy games any more because of the hardcore DRM that messes with my computer. Furthermore, constant online checks are right out too as I do not have regular internet access. Further-furthermore, any DRM that says I can only install X number of times is so much not a consideration that I will forever blacklist any publisher or game series that has ever used it (Bye bye Rockstar and Grand Theft Auto, I used to love you.).

    strike

    --
    "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    1. Re:DRM by socrplayr813 · · Score: 1

      Standard Steam DRM only. Log in to install and/or update and you can run it in offline mode the rest of the time. There are no install limits.

      Personally, I like it as I use Steam anyway. Now I can play it on my desktop and laptop without having to fiddle with cracks/cd images/whatever.

      --
      The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
    2. Re:DRM by wbo · · Score: 1

      Civilization V uses Steam which means you can download and install it on as many systems as you like but you do need an active Internet connection during installation so you can login to your Steam account to verify ownership.

      You can play it without an Internet connection by putting Steam into offline mode.

      As far as DRM schemes go, Steam is one of the most customer friendly ones available.

    3. Re:DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of DRM does it come with? I just don't buy games any more because of the hardcore DRM that messes with my computer. Furthermore, constant online checks are right out too as I do not have regular internet access. Further-furthermore, any DRM that says I can only install X number of times is so much not a consideration that I will forever blacklist any publisher or game series that has ever used it (Bye bye Rockstar and Grand Theft Auto, I used to love you.).

      strike

      It uses steam. You only need a one time activation, then can play in offline mode forever if you want. You only need to go online if you want to get patches, buy dlc, play mp.

  72. Best video game ever by fritish · · Score: 1

    I disagree, it's a very good game, but I think Donkey Kong is the best game ever.

    --
    "Coffee is for closers."
  73. Heh Civ Heh! by DarthVain · · Score: 2, Funny

    Reminds me of college.

    One night I played Civ for like 9 hours while my neighbor got stoned on weed and watched...

    You never saw someone more excited to watch someone else play Civ.

    "WHOA! You like, totally kicked those Roman's asses!"

    1. Re:Heh Civ Heh! by demonbug · · Score: 1

      Many happy hours playing team Civ 2 at a friend's house (high school or junior high, I think). Early game we'd each (3 or 4 of us) take control of a unit. Sadly this was around the time of the movie, Last of the Mohicans. One guy of course would always go off in a different direction than we wanted him to go, or would run away when we wanted him to fight...

      "I ain't your scout, and I sure ain't no damn Militia!" - usually while said friend was controlling, what else, a militia (and refusing to do anything sane with it). It just got worse when he managed to take out a modern armor with his rogue militia.

  74. The game to beat is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Civ 3... it's graphics, and expansion pack are unmatched...

    Can Civ5 defeat it ?! time will tell ;)

  75. Roman Numerals vs. Arabic Numerals by BTWR · · Score: 1

    I think that the decision between Roman and Arabic numerals is more important than you give it credit for. It is an extremely important decision artistically. Whether to call yourself "The Godfather, Part II" or "The Godfather, Part 2" is more than just a marketing idea for a poster, even if from the studio's POV it might be.

    Like the movies Se7en or Face/Off, in calling someone John Appleton II instead of John Appleton 2 (or even John Appleton 2.0 - someone will do that soon) conveys a different meaning. So in conversation, while only an arse would correct you for saying "It's Warcraft II, not Warcraft 2, ASSHOLE!" it is technically and artistically correct. And if you're going to shorten Civilization to Civ or civ, you might as well keep the punctuation too.