At 11:08 AM 1/17/02 -0800 Jeffrey Miller wrote:
>No comparison for me. I really didn't like AC terribly much; I
>appreciated the games theory improvement made in the game, and liked the
>storyline attatched to game play idea, but I found, in the end, that
>since I have no space of reference to their made up future technical
>advances that I had a hard time deciding if building a creche or a
>holodeck was better, or whether I should be researching Nanotubes or
>Cryolasers. Also, I disliked the entire "munchkin your own army" idea
>contained within the Design-A-Unit section - not only did I get left in
>the dust in higher difficulty levels if I didn't optimize every last bit
>of my military units, but it was buggy and crashe prone.
I'm in the same boat, and had the same problem with Master of Orion. All
those future technologies just don't inspire me in the same way as the real
thing, and watching the vast scope of history unfold before me. For me,
the greatest feeling was creating cities with familiar names and vast
achievements. Some of the "Buffalo"s and "Shleswig-Holstein's" that I
built were truly amazing. :)
Unfortunately, I can't comment on CIV III as I'll have to get a new
computer before I play that one.... and that probably won't be for at least
another year yet....
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Our campaign against international terrorism does not represent some
sort of 'clash of civilizations.' Instead, it is a clash between
civilization and those who would destroy it." -Amb. Richard N. Haass
