«

[Eagle of Fire]

Civilization III is better than the second part in every aspects. The original Civilization was better than Civ II, and I am very happy that they made Civilization III. The best so far.

The worse game I ever played yet (and I actually bought) is MoO III. Heroes of Might and Magic 4 is also extremely weak but not enough to beat MoO III.

[Rogue]

Originally posted by Eagle of Fire@Nov 22 2004, 02:05 PM
Civilization III is better than the second part in every aspects. The original Civilization was better than Civ II, and I am very happy that they made Civilization III. The best so far.

This is very true. They fixed all annoying things from first two, and they made it look much better and more interesting. In the first one it was just matter to get couple of important wonders including Leonardo’s workshop and you beat the game. In this one battle system is much more realistic. (Yes, sometimes weaker can prevail!)

And most importantly, there is nice and easy to maintain building queue! k:

And MOO is really terrible, but I paid anyway only couple box (used ones). :whistle:

Originally posted by Eagle of Fire@Nov 22 2004, 08:05 PM
The original Civilization was better than Civ II, and I am very happy that they made Civilization III.

And I thought that Civilization II was better than Civilization... :eeeeeh:
What did Civilization 1 have that Civilization II didn't have then?

[aaberg]

I think Stroggy is right about, Enter the Matrix beeing a crappy game. I also used money on that piece of crap.

But it is not the worst game I have ever played. The worst game I have ever played is Might & Magic 9. :not_ok: Bad graphics, bad story, bad engine, BAD EVERY *dirty word* THING. And I used money on that one too. I'm not suprised 3DO went down, when they made that piece of sh*t.

[Havell]

Also from 3DO, let's not forget the Army Men series. I didn't waste any money on them but I have a friend who spent over ?200 on loads of the games, I still laugh at him LOL

[aaberg]

My littlebrother bought one of those games.. they whern't the best games ever made, no doubt about that.

[Fawfulhasfury]

The GC verion didn't have so many glitches, making it the better version of Enter the Matrix. I actually liked it, but not as well as the movies.

[Sebatianos]

My biggest disapointmens (besides Destini - since I think Picard said a mouthfull with that one) was Afterlife (not really a bad game - but I expected much more from LucasArts).

[Rogue]

I even forgot that I own that piece of sh*t?!

Install - try to play - don't know what I am doing - read the manual (usualy last solution) - try again - did not like it - uninstall - and put CD away... LOL (make a small minus for lucas arts...

[Eagle of Fire]

What did Civilization 1 have that Civilization II didn't have then?

It's the other way around, it's what CIV II had that Civilization did not have. Nothing was worth the time needed to complete CIV II while you could easily beat a game of Civilization in one afternoon.

CIV III is better, more complicated, and make it worth the time to take several days (if not weeks, at the huge world - I love to play that settings with all civilizations at once) to complete a game.

I personally consider CIV II as an experiment which leaded to the third part. But it's nowhere good enough to beat the first and nowhere as great as the third in any aspect.