The good and the bad of Sid Meier's Civilization series

Call to Power isn’t a civilization game. It was meant to fool people into thinking it was Civilization game (they actually had to change the name from Civilization: Call to Power), and it’s not well rated.

Now, granted, even if it’s not a real civ game, if people liked it, they’re free to discuss it, but I’ve never heard it mentioned as a good/important/whatever game. I think it’s mostly forgotten.

@SenorBeef explained why, a better question would had been why we have more than 100 posts and no proper explanation of the bug that caused Nuclear Gandhi.

YMMV about if that was a good or a bad “feature” to have, but the curious thing about it is that it was reported many times in the past that peaceful Gandhi became a warmonger thanks to a bug in the earlier games; however, recent word from the god (Sid Meir’s) is that it wasn’t.

So, a retelling of the origin to make it mysterious or wasn’t planned? AFAIK some programmers reported finding the bug that caused it in the earlier games, but that in later games it was done on purpose for tradition’s sake, what do you guys think?

It sure looked/acted like one to me.

Well, you currently have the Warlock franchise and the Endless franchise. And Humankind will be launching soon. That’s not counting the blatant low-effort Civ clones for mobile, etc. But I guess they all try to add to the formula rather than take away since, even for a new title, “Civilization but with less” is a harder sell than “Civilization, plus [Whatver]”

So it succeeded in fooling at least one person.

Humankind looks so close to Civ IV they might get sued.

As a kinda related sidenote I see Humankind already won a “Best Game” award from, well, someone. A game that HASN’T BEEN RELEASED. Don’t trust video game “Reviews,” kids.

I still own stock in Battlecruiser 3000 AD. Is that bad?

One will note the lack of “Sid Meier’s” on the box. The original Civs were done by Microprose. Sid Meier, Jeff Briggs, and Bryan Reynolds left Microprose and founded Firaxis Games in 1996 (and released Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri in 1999). Call to Power was produced by Activision and released in 1999.

So the reason Call to Power wasn’t a Civilization game is because it literally wasn’t. It was Activision’s attempt to create a Civilization game.

If you started exploring the discs, you could find the video files for the advisors and get some clips that represented highly-unlikely scenarios. I remember the Trade advisor wearing modern clothes and frantically advising the leader to discover trade. I don’t know if it’s even possible to get to the modern era without trade, but the writers of the game must considered it.

You can find all the “Civilization II Council” clips on YouTube.

When I see lists for worst game ever I always think of this game but few remember it and certainly not the younger generations.

I remember being so excited for that game too and shocked at what a complete ass Derek Smart was about it.

I only know of it because of its terrible reputation. Everyone loves a train wreck (or is that spaceship wreck?), see this glowing review:

Wait, it was worse than Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing?

By orders of magnitude, due to the fact that BC3K was supposed to be so much more complicated than driving a truck from Point A to Point B.

Which explains why Derek Smart has been such a vocal critic of Star Citizen. Battlecruiser 3000 was the Star Citizen of the 90s.

Is Star Citizen any good?

It doesn’t technically exist. It’s been in development since 2012, and still has no actual release date. It may or may not be a scam.

Here’s an active thread about it that was started in 2015.

It is very good…

…at emptying wallets!

There’s a Civilization 6 sale going on now and I’m going to take the leap. Was curious if anyone had any opinions of if the Platinum Edition is worth the extra money?

On Steam you can get the base edition for $15. The Platinum bundle for $40, both big discounts on retail.

I’m leaning towards the cheaper base option simply because I’m a) not very good at the game and b) I’m honestly unlikely to play the game often enough to make the most of the expansion campaigns and civilizations. If history is any guide I’ll probably play the game 5 or 6 times in the next year at most…I just don’t have the time or energy to invest 5+ hours on a game on a regular basis. But, I can afford the extra $25 without trouble and if the big expansion packs fix any major problems with the game it might be worth it to me.

Any suggestions?

sometimes the platinum version has all the fixes like 4 had a much-improved version called "beyond the sword "included with its final version (i think it was a separate download originally )

in fact, some civ fans used to joke "don’t like something? give it a couple of years and it will be changed )
get the 15 for practice and wait till Xmas when you can get the plat version for 19.99 or less

One thing i don’t care for in this cycle is they charged for each extra civ …and the map creator for the custom games needs work … (no island continents …i like everyone having their own Greenland or Australia…) on and the district thing should be optional if possible)

Too bad you dont have an epic account … they gave it away free about 5 months ago…

I’d get the Platinum Edition, which includes some important repairs and more civilizations. You will find some civilizations in all editions to be totally unplayable to your style, so you wanna get a lot of them.

If you can afford $40, go for that.