NOTE: This is The Column, a regular feature on Apolyton where anyone can write about anything to do with Civilization or the gaming industry as a whole. If you feel like writing, please visit the article submission page.

PREVIOUS ARTICLES

195# CIV III AND MOO3, PART II: TBS HAS A FUTURE We're here to stay! 194# CIVILIZATION III, A SHOE TOO BIG? The realistic faction speaks 193# THE ULTIMATE GAME? Is there such thing? #192 THE CIVILIZATION II ERA Just before Civ3 is out, Rasbelin summarizes the last 5 years 191# THE ALLURE OF CIV What's so cool about civ? COLUMN ARCHIVE

Why Am I Writing
CIV III started shipping yesterday. What triggered this need to write the Column was the Infinite Bribe Syndrome (IBS) posting. Like Infinite City Syndrome (ICS), it was reported that if you give the AI 1 or 2 gold per turn, they happily let you attack and capture their cities until they are eliminated, blissfully maintaining good relations with you. It was not this potential flaw, but the reaction posts that motivated this writing.

My first reaction to the post and the replies was fatigue. If this AI flaw is true, its sad. It will not prevent me from enjoying the game any more so than ICS did. I've just got tired of reading game slams, slams and flames against detractors, game defender flames in response, flames, slams and counter slams. I personally seem to find them addicting to read, and also debilitating. I decided to stop posting or logging on until I wrote this Column.

What I wanted was for every one to do the Rodney King thing, 'cause the game just started shipping, so few of us have played it, and I would prefer that everyone in the Apolyton community end up enjoying the game as a successor to CIV II. OK Annie, lets all sing "Tomorrow".

Of course, being very perceptive, it appeared to me that not everyone in the Apolyton community liked what they were hearing and reading about CIV III.

What Makes A Good game?
Its easier to find universals on what makes a bad game. In multiple CD games, if CD two will not load, bad game. If the game will not install, bad game. If the game crashes regularly, bad game. If performance is clunky on a high end machine, bad game. If the AI has no intelligence, bad game. You get the idea.

What makes a game good is not universal, especially in the case of CIV. One has to look at why you play CIV and why some one else plays. They may not be the same.

Why do you play CIV?
We do not all play CIV for the same objective. Some play for the challenge. They search for a stimulating exercise where within the confines presented, every means is utilized to achieve victory. Some play for the experience. Lo I am but the chief of my tribe, but I shall progress with wondrous accomplishments and dramatic setbacks, till I and my people alone are the masters of this world. Some play for the simulation, reveling in the nuances of trade, finance, battle, and development. There are purists in these categorizations, there are some that play with the attributes of all three, and even some that play one day one way, and the next another.

What Is Civ?
So to some, CIV is meant to be a challenge. When defects in AI or system mechanics enable sure wins, CIV is a bad game. To others CIV is a war game. When for what ever reason or combination or reasons you always conquer all, CIV is a bad game. If CIV is a simulation to you, having Stealth fighters in 1340 AD makes CIV a bad game. If CIV is role playing to you, if it has weak diplomacy and an AI that gets production and development cheats, CIV is a bad game. Even as generalizations these examples show how CIV being what it is allows for the maximum potential for disappointment. We love CIV because these same attributes allow for the maximum enjoyment potential. I know of no one who role plays Tetris. I know of no one who gets tweaked over the algorithms in Dues Ex. I know of no one who pushes back their chair to admire what they've made in Command and Conquer.

Attributes of Posting
So you've stayed with me on this so far. Good. When we post, we are different people looking for different things for different reasons in CIV. Human nature being what it is, there will always be flames, there will always be holier than thou attitudes, there will always be some who appear more sophisticated than others. What I concluded today, and what I wish to share, is that I will play the game, decide how much I like it and why that is, and share via postings my findings and opinions. * Stands on soap box * What's important to you is all that matters. If CIV III fails to deliver what is important to you, CIV III is not a bad game and the person who likes it is not a bad person. With the exception of the person who still loves CIV III even if it crashes regularly every 15 minutes of play. That is a bad person.

What makes a good car?
No one has made a car like Sid Meier's Civilization. It is the all terrain, high performance, muscle, classic, retro, avante guard, economical mode of transportation that has yet to be built.


---------
Civ I and Civ II player. It's professional. Harley owner. I own a "My words are backed with nuckear weapons" stein.

Comment on this article!

The opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of Apolyton CS or GameStats. They are just the personal opinions of the writer.