Rightful Heir to the Civ Crown? - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Rightful Heir to the Civ Crown?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Rightful Heir to the Civ Crown?

Kalanis posted 02-18-99 02:24 PM ET
IMHO, no matter WHAT Civ:call to power turns out like, SMAC will always occupy a soft part of my heart as the rightful Civ3. This is Sid Meier's work, and it has the basic fundamentals that we all associate with the Civ line. Come on, the GAMEPLAY is virtauly identical to Civ2. But with so many improvments that it boggles the mind. If I was Activision, I would be shaking in my boots.
iratheous posted 02-18-99 02:35 PM ET
Good think Activision didnt get rights to the name "Sid Meier's" heh.
Scrubby posted 02-18-99 02:47 PM ET
As a diehard CIV1 player who hated CIV2 (oh boy I can't wait for the flames.. hehe) because it was "more of the same" I have really latched onto SMAC as the true heir. Yes, yes I know that in many respects the changes in gameplay and such are cosmetic but it just *feels right* to finally progress to a new planet...
Try this, play a full game of CIV and build to Alpha Centauri and then at that point start a game of SMAC. It's that kind of continuity that really got me back into the CIV style games.
Or am I just talking nonsense?!
clockhammer posted 02-18-99 03:25 PM ET
Scrubby,
I understand exactly what you mean about the sequel aspect. In Civ:CTP, you will start back at the same 5000 or so BC with a the same tribal explorer and will work your way back to the similar modern power base in 2020 hat you had in Civ2. What's new is: the 1000 year extension, various new units along the way, and some new wonders of the world. IMHO, that doesn't seem like a true seqiel to me.
SMAC, on the otherhand, starts where Civ2 left off and actually projects forward where humankind could be in the future. Civ:CTP may also have its own version of the future in the year 2000+, but some problems remain. One for CTP, will be a very similar game to Civ2 from the years 5000 BC to 2000 AD. That's alot of redundancy, even though new units and new wonders of the world have been added in. I hope for Activision's sake that they are truly trying to rework the game to make it interesting instead of assuming that "more of the same" and the Civ name will get them their acclaim. Had Civ:CTP come out first, many would have been pleased with it (it remains to be seen if we would all have been blown away by it), but SMAC has raised the stakes for Civ:CTP to succeed as a classic game to be remembered 10 years from now.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Rightful Heir to the Civ Crown?
Kalanis	posted 02-18-99 02:24 PM ET IMHO, no matter WHAT Civ:call to power turns out like, SMAC will always occupy a soft part of my heart as the rightful Civ3. This is Sid Meier's work, and it has the basic fundamentals that we all associate with the Civ line. Come on, the GAMEPLAY is virtauly identical to Civ2. But with so many improvments that it boggles the mind. If I was Activision, I would be shaking in my boots.
iratheous	posted 02-18-99 02:35 PM ET Good think Activision didnt get rights to the name "Sid Meier's" heh.
Scrubby	posted 02-18-99 02:47 PM ET As a diehard CIV1 player who hated CIV2 (oh boy I can't wait for the flames.. hehe) because it was "more of the same" I have really latched onto SMAC as the true heir. Yes, yes I know that in many respects the changes in gameplay and such are cosmetic but it just feels right to finally progress to a new planet... Try this, play a full game of CIV and build to Alpha Centauri and then at that point start a game of SMAC. It's that kind of continuity that really got me back into the CIV style games. Or am I just talking nonsense?!
clockhammer	posted 02-18-99 03:25 PM ET Scrubby, I understand exactly what you mean about the sequel aspect. In Civ:CTP, you will start back at the same 5000 or so BC with a the same tribal explorer and will work your way back to the similar modern power base in 2020 hat you had in Civ2. What's new is: the 1000 year extension, various new units along the way, and some new wonders of the world. IMHO, that doesn't seem like a true seqiel to me. SMAC, on the otherhand, starts where Civ2 left off and actually projects forward where humankind could be in the future. Civ:CTP may also have its own version of the future in the year 2000+, but some problems remain. One for CTP, will be a very similar game to Civ2 from the years 5000 BC to 2000 AD. That's alot of redundancy, even though new units and new wonders of the world have been added in. I hope for Activision's sake that they are truly trying to rework the game to make it interesting instead of assuming that "more of the same" and the Civ name will get them their acclaim. Had Civ:CTP come out first, many would have been pleased with it (it remains to be seen if we would all have been blown away by it), but SMAC has raised the stakes for Civ:CTP to succeed as a classic game to be remembered 10 years from now.