Civilization 4 was good at launch. Naturally it got even better over time.
Worth a mention that 4 is the most recent of these games released primary on physical hardware. That meant patching was a more difficult process so they actually had to hire a bunch of play testers to test stuff (and fix the problems they found). Contrast that to the approach of the most recent three games, which had their customers pay $70 for the privilege of being beta testers.
This is a shitty way to develop games. We should be mad about it because we deserve better.
Asetru@feddit.org 6 days ago
Does Alpha Centauri count as a civ game?
46_and_2@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Or the 1996 Colonization?
OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 6 days ago
46_and_2@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Oops, you’re right, corrected.
CuriousRefugee@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
I remember being very frustrated in that game, but I was also probably like 12 and dumb. So I can take your word for it. I’ll count it!
Asetru@feddit.org 6 days ago
You should replay it. It is imho the highlight of the series because of a few changes compared to other civ games:
Although there are more differences, like eg a unit design workshop, the game loop feels quite similar to civ. It’s like they took civ 4, polished it and just decided to make it… Dunno, meaningful. And while that’s not per se relevant for in game decisions such as “where to settle” or “what to build”, it just makes the whole experience so much better. It’s still my comfort game that I boot up for another play on my deck every now and then.
CuriousRefugee@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
I did just hunt through my old CDs, and I’ve still got it! Along with Diablo 1 and some weird burned copy of Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 that has a black bottom, like it’s a PlayStation CD. Anyway, I’ll try to check it out; thanks for the recommendation!