Civilization III or Civilization IV

C

Captain_Spanky

Member
Steam has Civilization III complete on sale for 74p and Civ IV complete on sale for £3.74. Which is better? Or should I just grab both?

Are their major difference between the two? Should I just get the newer one? Or is the 3rd more enjoyable? Help me decide! Tell me what you love about these games. Get me hyped for a game over a decade old. I've never played anything like this before but really want to get in to them. I bought alpha centauri from GOG and found it heavily overwhelming but I'm slowly picking away at it. Are these a better place to start?


I usually play PC games on a laptop from around 2008 if that makes a difference, but am currently borrowing a friend's netbook because my laptop needs a bit of a fix. Cheers for the help.
 
Don't even bother with 3. Just get 4. As long as your laptop doesn't use the shitty Intel integrated graphics from those days you should be alright.
 
Civ IV is (arguably) the best game in the series. Civ III was kind of a step back, though once again (arguably) Civ V was also a step back. So Civ VI should be the greatest Civ game of all time. As far as my two cents go I'd say go for Civ IV and don't even worry about Civ III; or if you are that curious, go ahead and buy both if you have the funds and experience what each game has to offer; for what it's worth I got my start on PC gaming back with Civ I, which I've long since lost to time; However, I still own Civ II, IV, and V...notice III isn't there. Heck, I even own Civilization: Call to Power (but not the 2nd one for some odd reason, should get that on GoG one of these days).
 
Civ 4 is superior in practically every way to Civ 3.

(Civ 5 is excellent as well, and 5 vs 4 is a matter of taste.)
 
diffusionx said:
Don't even bother with 3. Just get 4. As long as your laptop doesn't use the shitty Intel integrated graphics from those days you should be alright.
Click to expand...

I think it does, it's an advent 6552 with the integrated intel chip. It's just the basic one, whatever it came with back in late 2008
 
diffusionx said:
Don't even bother with 3. Just get 4. As long as your laptop doesn't use the shitty Intel integrated graphics from those days you should be alright.
Click to expand...

My laptop has some kind of integrated graphics chip and it runs Civ IV fine. It gets hot late game but there's very little performance hit as far as I can tell. I'm sure it would run better with a real card though.
 
If I may ask here: Is IV difficult to get into, if you have absolutely no experience in that series or even in that genre? The only game I ever played that is like building up civilizations and stuff is AoE2.
 
Captain_Spanky said:
Next choice: play Civ IV vanilla for a bit or just pile on expansions and go crazy?
Click to expand...

Get the expansions. If for some reason you can't buy both, then get Beyond the Sword. BtS includes Warlords' gameplay enhancements, leaders, and units. It's only missing the Warlords specific game scenarios.
 
Am i only one on NeoGAF who does not like Civ 4 or its expansions?
III has its issues but at least it is light.

Of course nothing beats Alpha Centauri. Just needs better AI.
 
I believe Beyond the Sword Civ IV to be the world's premiere turn-based strategy game. So, that one. Civ III was fun but it has some serious issues.
 
So what's wrong with Civ 5 then guys? I put in many, many, many hours into Civ IV back when it came out and was thinking of picking it up on the Steam sale for old time's sake. But I never see much praise for V, why is that?
 
sionyboy said:
So what's wrong with Civ 5 then guys? I put in many, many, many hours into Civ IV back when it came out and was thinking of picking it up on the Steam sale for old time's sake. But I never see much praise for V, why is that?
Click to expand...
The ai is shit and I hate the grid/unit stuff they did.
 
Civ V's combat is a big improvement imo. It's a smart, bold change that fixes a lot of the silly bullshit with combat with earlier Civs(including IV, sometimes). But I have a problem with a bunch of the other changed mechanics and tweaks. Also dat AI.

It's not bad(actually, in the spotlight of gaming in general, it's pretty good), but it just ain't as good.
 
Well, this thread has convinced me to spend more money I don't have on the Civ IV pack. I hope you people are happy with yourselves!
 
Gilby said:
Well, this thread has convinced me to spend more money I don't have on the Civ IV pack. I hope you people are happy with yourselves!
Click to expand...

Yr really going to hate us when you stay up to 3a Sunday night and you feel like shit at work the next day.

EDIT: Unless you're unemployeed, in which case game away!
 
Let me give you my order:
  • Civilization 2 Multiplayer Gold Edition: Because it feels like a tactical board game, not to complex to grasp but pretty hard to master. Also the mods, scenarios and the not ending games make it more like Risk with some improvements.
  • Civilization 1 (Dos): It has an ease of playing, it is well built and calculated. Really good.
  • Civilization 4 (with Expansions): Religion and culture makes up what huge 3Desque isometric graphics took away. You'll never have the same feeling of a Civilization 2 map from a Civ 4 one but the new mechanics help. The resource mechanism still not good enough although it has been added with Civilization 3. This is the one to choose if you need graphics.
  • Civilization 3 (with Expansions): Lots of new mechanics added but the game somehow boiled down to build as much cities as possible. It can give you some fun if you use CivAssist. It is not as easy as Civilization 4.
  • Civilization 5: The new grid system and the new graphics tries to lengthen the game. The map is really small and the new city system while breaking the need for spamming cities makes the game a bit dull.
A bit of update, Civilization 5 with all the DLC is actually on par with Civilization 4.
 
CIV4 Gold (Mod) is the best strategy game ever. It adds many new mechanics, like revolutions, region splitting, it's really fun. Civ3 is great, it has a lot of mechanics not present in IV but you can basically settler spam to win, something you cannot do in Civ4Gold if you don't want your empire to suddenly collapse.
 
Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword is the best strategy game of the decade.

Couldn't really get into Civ 5, it's still addictive but way too slow (both gameplay and performance).
 
DiZ_O said:
If I may ask here: Is IV difficult to get into, if you have absolutely no experience in that series or even in that genre? The only game I ever played that is like building up civilizations and stuff is AoE2.
Click to expand...

Civ IV has a deep learning curve, but the game's difficulty is adjustable and as long as you are willing to visit civfantics to learn how to play the game it's not hard to pick it up. Just be warned that Civ IV actively discourages combat and encourages winning through other means, so if you are looking for brain dead action you are better off picking up Civ V.
 
Lifetime Civ player (no joke, like almost 20 years at this point)

Civ 4 BTS or Civ5 Gods and Kings. I really wouldn't play anything else out this point. The Civ4 BTS and Civ5 G&K mod scenes are both very good if you are into that kind of thing, and Civfanatics and Youtube have a lot of resources that will help you get good at the games.
 
startyourengine said:
oh man i thought i was the only one doing it, but that's why i hate civ lol
Click to expand...

yep. I always say something like these:

It's 5. am and i need go to work at 7am. Oh screw that ! 2h is to little for sleep so i will play to 7.

And whole day i feel like shit from lack of sleep.
 
Mavromatis said:
Let me give you my order:
  • Civilization 2 Multiplayer Gold Edition: Because it feels like a tactical board game, not to complex to grasp but pretty hard to master. Also the mods, scenarios and the not ending games make it more like Risk with some improvements.
  • Civilization 1 (Dos): It has an ease of playing, it is well built and calculated. Really good.
  • Civilization 4 (with Expansions): Religion and culture makes up what huge 3Desque isometric graphics took away. You'll never have the same feeling of a Civilization 2 map from a Civ 4 one but the new mechanics help. The resource mechanism still not good enough although it has been added with Civilization 3. This is the one to choose if you need graphics.
  • Civilization 3 (with Expansions): Lots of new mechanics added but the game somehow boiled down to build as much cities as possible. It can give you some fun if you use CivAssist. It is not as easy as Civilization 4.
  • Civilization 5: The new grid system and the new graphics tries to lengthen the game. The map is really small and the new city system while breaking the need for spamming cities makes the game a bit dull.
Click to expand...

It's like you're in my head, reading my mind.

startyourengine said:
oh man i thought i was the only one doing it, but that's why i hate civ lol
Click to expand...

CivAnon is here to help.

That's too many erections. That's too many erections!
Click to expand...
 
Sim City and Civ both have the same progression:

1. Simple introductory
2. Classic
3. Black sheep mis-step
4. Recovery
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New Civilization VII trailer slays.
24
405
Avid Reading Horse replied
Is Sid Meier's Civilization VII salvageable?
48
713
vpance replied
Civilization VII | Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
96
7K
Radical_3d replied
LEGO Civilization was found in lost media. Very small video clip.
3
564
Puscifer replied
Civilization 7 PC Specs Revealed
24
2K
amigastar replied
Top Bottom