The game of Civilization has grown and has been Game of the year more times than not. The second version is still my all time favorite game.
What vexes me is that while growing up; Nelson and I would play every last type of turn based strategy game made; Chess, Balance of Power, Risk, Etc, Etc. Nelson not only had a high winning percentage of these types of games; but he had a passion for them as well. This is why I cannot figure out why he NEVER got into the Civ Series. It is the ULTIMATE turn based strategy game. It's never the same twice, and it's got a hypnotic power, whether you're playing alone against however many opponents you want, or multi player. The article I'm jumping to has a very interesting paragraph leading into the whole series of the game. it goes as follows:
Few games are as additively fun and as infinitely re-playable as Civilization, a turn-based historical strategy game where a player single-handedly guides the development of a civilization over the course of Millenia, from the stone age to the space age. The game feels uncannily accurate, as if it actually represents the way the world could have unfolded if the course of history were nudged over just a bit.
This article is long, but the series has been out growing steadily for about 15 years. Read, and come back to the article if you can't finish up all at once; just like the game; save when real life interrupts. Here's the jump.
"I cannot figure out why he NEVER got into the Civ Series"
ReplyDeleteIn the Civ Series, I couldn't see my opponent when I played, that took a lot of the fun away for me. I do like the strategy of the games, but playing against a computer, or on-line just isn't fun for me. In those type of games, you can tell a lot about how your opponent thinks by there body language. Maybe I'll give it another chance, but it would have to be a hell of a game.
The upcoming game that I believe Malcolm alerted us to which is built to be played in under 3 hours and I guess comes 2nd quarter 2008 is going to be revolutionary. I don't think there is much that can be done about not being able to see your physical opposition. However, you can see the opponents starting position if you wish to check that option since version 2. Multi-player in the console, again, I think it's going to be a lot like playing Risk online; You can communicate by typing; but I seriously doubt you'll be able to see your physical opponent. One thing that's also true though is when you have a diplomat talk to another competing civilization; you see the leader of that opponent (physical or not) and mood/facial expression can easily be read. They even bluff sometimes. The main thing to remember is that you can tweak almost every aspect of the game prior to start, or during the game. To really start out with a bang; it might be good to have another person with you to take you through the paces; then you can see all the things that go on and have them explained; and have possible strategy explained (but truly you can do so many things, strategy would depend on who was training. Sid Meier has never put out a Civ game that didn't win game of the year. I've got to believe the Console version, though different, will probably end up the same.
ReplyDeleteActually, I wouldn't be surprised if the 360 version used the vision cam like Uno, and now the Poker game do.
ReplyDelete