2.0 out of 5 stars
Eyecandy over substance, July 10 2003
First of all, let me make it clear that I am an old Civ series fan. I played it back in 1993 on the Mac and Amiga, and I've loved it since then.
But Civilisation 3 is a sorry affair. To make a long story short:
+ Good, detailed graphics
+ Sound less repetitive than Civ II
+ Generally simpler interface than precursors
+ Somewhat easier city management
+ Generally an interesting simulation
- As another poster wrote, the diplomacy system is a joke. It has an interesting form, but it is confusing in the end.
- Insane difficulty level, even at the lower diff. settings. Computer players get technologies way faster than you do, and their civilisation grows much faster, as well. Very unfair!
- as said elsewhere, the tech advances tree is almost the same as Civ I & 2, which is boring and disappointing! Same is to be said for city improvements.
- Boring and "accellerated" archaic ages... from 4000 BC to 0 AD, there are almost no advances happening, compared to the former Civ Games, and this part of the game feels very "hollow".
Summarised, I am thoroughly disappointed by this game, and I'm at a loss to explain why Sid Meier & the game designers did not include the huge advances we saw iN Alpha Centauri - highly customizable social designs, build-your-own units, etc.
It feels like Civ I with new graphics slapped on top. Oh, yeah, dont forget that the original Civ took up 5 MB of HD space. This gigant takes up 100 times that! :(