Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Civ III vs IV

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,000
Pathfinder: Wrath
Given GOG's current sale and my long-term desire to get into the Civs, I pose a question - which is better and why? Is Civ even good at all? Discuss.
 

LizardWizard

Cipher
Joined
Feb 14, 2014
Messages
995
IV has god tier mods.

Wouldn't play either vanilla, might as well just boot up Alpha Centauri
 

Trashos

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
3,413
Civ4 is a masterpiece of a strategy game, and I don't think it will be topped soon. Even better with the BTS expansion.
 

Starwars

Arcane
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
2,829
Location
Sweden
I think some of the BTS additions are pretty bad actually but even so, you can't really go wrong with Civ IV. It's a fantastic game.

III sucks.
 

oscar

Arcane
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
8,038
Location
NZ
Civ IV + expansions is perfection and even unmodded is a very solid, well-balanced yet fun experience. I'd get a couple of games under your belt before touching the mods (some of them do some crazy stuff with the engine).

III is a bit meh
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
8,862
Location
Italy
vanilla, 1.0, i remember civ4 having serious issues and lack of content. with patches, mods and all the nine yards, civ4 hands down.
 

and 8 others

Savant
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
128
As so many others have already written, Civ 4 + BTS is near perfection. I must have spent 100s of hrs playing it, and I still come back to it every few years.
 

Monkeyfinger

Cipher
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
778
I couldn't play more than 10 hours of civ 3. It's been decades so I forget why but I fucking hated it, it wasn't mere disappointment.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
6,818
Location
Mouse Utopia
Insert Title Here Strap Yourselves In
I am going to have to make a thread posting screenshots from a variety of civ4 mods and discussing some of the unique stuff they do. TREMENDOUS stuff
 

coldcrow

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,658
Best mods are: Realism Invictus, Dune Wars, K-Mod, Rise from the Ashes (fall from heaven modmod)
 

SniperHF

Arcane
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
1,110
The only thing I really don't like about IV is espionage's excesses. On top of that disabling espionage is kind of dumb in how it works as well because it converts the buildings into culture which somewhat Borks the culture system.
Thankfully there's the "End of Espionage" mod which removes all that crap.
 
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
1,853,705
Location
Belém do Pará, Império do Brasil
I never liked CivIII. I dunno why, honestly, I loved II and for years it was a constant presence in my HD when I was a kid and teen. III never sat right with me. The cartoony art, the "settler race" nature of the early game push, the boring doomstackish combat, the shit boring AI, etc. Honestly, only reason I ever touched it was to play the Fallout Mod, which was damn good.

IV would be pure perfection if it didn't run like ABSOLUTE DOGSHIT in modern systems, due to being an old-ass implementation of Gamebryo and full of other third-party programs and code that is simply OLD AS FUCK. Game suffers from massive performance and memory leak issues. Its doesn't even have 64-bit support.

Also, let's be frank here: IV was a good game, yes. But the truth is, IV exists mainly as a modding plataform. Nobody plays IV vanilla.

If those problems somehow went away, it could easily become the most absurdly epic civilization game ever. Imagine bigger-than-huge worldmaps with over fifty civilizations, ultra-detailed maps, giant tech-trees, vast barbarian hordes, etc etc. Considering how modabble IV is, the sky is the limit. Or would be, IF the engine was not ABSOLUTE DOGSHIT.

So, what this thread tells me is just to play Alpha Centauri instead? Sounds good.

The truth is that a good chunk of innovations in the newer civ games since SMAC is pretty much porting SMAC features.
Like Sociological Engineering -> Civics in IV.

Makes you wonder how Firaxis developed III after SMAC. Hard to believe it was the same developers.
 

Endemic

Arcane
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
4,326
Makes you wonder how Firaxis developed III after SMAC. Hard to believe it was the same developers.

It's worth noting that Firaxis initially produced an American Civil War game, and that was successful enough to merit a sequel. I remember playing the Gettysburg demo several times back in '97.

It wasn't the same developers each time - Reynolds left in 2000, and he was a big part of why SMAC is memorable. SMAC was inventive because of an IP issue, essentially. They had to rework a lot of things to avoid infringing on the Civ copyright and attracting legal' attention. Coincidentally some of the classic Civ mechanics (instant contact with other Civ leaders, that somehow survived the whole thousands of years game) made more sense in the scifi setting. Lead designers changed after each subsequent Civ game.

Incidentally, I think Call to Power's engine is a bit better for having the orbital layer.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom