Another interesting thing from Civilization was the copy protection. Every so often it would ask you to guess the correct symbol off page N of the manual. If you got it wrong, rather than end your game, it simply removed all of your military units.
Being that I was in 6th grade when Civ (DOS version) came out, and the rich kid down the street had it, I played for about 6 months before my parents bought me the actual game as a christmas present.
By that time I got a legit copy of the game I was a master of all things Civ... All things except the fact that you could fortify units INSIDE towns. Imagine me, positioning 8 units in an array around a town and having those units disappear every N turns due to getting the copy protection wrong.
Once I got to keep my units and I fortified one inside a town on accident, I turned into a Civ monster. Once CivNet came out I proceeded to crush all comers in my small town.
Freeciv players might enjoy http://longturn.org - Freeciv games where one turn takes a day. Games usually last half a year. We've been playing it this way for ten years now, since around 2004.
> Meier was also a big fan of an early computer game called Empire, which combined Risk-like world domination with intricate city management. "At one point, [Meier] asked me to make a list of 10 things I would do to Empire to make it a better game," says Shelley. "That was some of his research on Civilization."
I'd always suspected that was the case. It's nice to hear an acknowledgement, and I'm happy Empire was an inspiration.
Speaking of Empire I've always loved this article about someone who was addicted to playing Empire and developed coding skills to process the email reports to win out:
Interesting story but I'm a bit offended by the description of the board game as "linear". Having played the boardgame extensively and then played the first couple of versions of the computer game to death, the inspiration was pretty obvious (the similarity between cards representing societal achievements and similar mechanics in the game is utterly striking; and the boardgame has a really clever trading game which the computer game in no way equals), and the idea that Meier didn't even play the boardgame until after designing the computer game seems to me to be disingenuous.
Sid Meier's career was built on producing computer-versions of classic boardgames.
Before 1991 (the year the first Civ came out), it's nearly all flight sims, with some original IP (Pirates!, Railroad Tycoon, Covert Action, Sword of the Samurai) near the end of that run, as he began to grow away from his partner Bill Stealey's focus on flight sims into a designer in his own right.
If anyone gets the chance - have a go at the board game - it's brilliant! (Also make sure to play it with the Advanced Civilization supplement).
For a game that can take 8 hours, it's surprisingly easy to learn. The way the game is constructed, you can learn it as you play because very few game mechanics are needed at the start. As your civilizations progress, more game mechanics become relevant. I wish I was playing it now...
As someone who lived through those times as an avid gamer, and spent countless hours suffering from "one more turn" syndrome, I really enjoyed this piece. I wish I could tell clearly when it was written. As for this line: "Meier began coding Civilization on the IBM PC in early 1990, soon after MicroProse killed a sequel to Railroad Tycoon that he and Shelley had been working on," all I can do is /sob.
same here, i think its probably one of the only franchises where i have played all of the sequels. playing Civ 5 a bit now until beyond earth comes out. Alpha Centauri was really fun and had some really cool features, i hope beyond earth really is a "spiritual successor" as they claim..
I really enjoyed 4X games back in the genre's heyday. Not only Civilization, but also Colonization, Master of Magic and Master of Orion 1&2.
Have there been any new turn-based 4X games in recent times? I remember looking for a 4X flash game in 2010 and coming up empty handed. I don't really have time to play that kind of game anyway, but those were good memories.
Colonization beats hand down Civilization for me, anytime. It's more realistic and coherent (the tech trees in civ feel completely artificial) and it's great fun to play as different nations. The manual itself was also a great read, teaching you many thing about how the actual colonization took place. One of the best games by Sid Meier.
Although it's not new now, you should definitely try the Frog City Imperialism series(they're on GOG). Very taut, economic-oriented 4X games, they're turn based and spiritually precede the Paradox games in how they move away from the wargame unit-movement and city-management trope in favor of mechanics around province boundaries, transit links, and centralized production sliders.
There are occasionally new 4X games that appear on Steam but I haven't found one I like yet.
Actually, maybe you shouldn't try Imperialism if you don't have a few days free. It is a dangerously addicting game, especially the second one.
Gal Civ (1 and 2) were pretty fun, and the AI is genuinely top notch; way better than typical 4X AI, in that it actually ran the different civilizations as having different interests, rather than all against you. Brad Wardell has garnered a lot of attention (not all of it good), but Stardock's stuff is generally pretty good.
The best 4X game I've ever played is called "business". It's incredibly deep and complex, never ceases to surprise me, has unbelievably versatile multi-player options, and requires constant creativity to come up with winning strategies. One of the great features of this game is that the points earned in-game can be spent in any shop in exchange for goods and services. For example, you could earn £5000 points in-game and, after paying tax (one of the more annoying features - who asked for that?) you can spend that at the Apple Store to buy a spanking new computer. How cool is that?
There are all sorts of scenarios available, and depending on your starting resources and chosen strategy the game can provide a vastly different feel. It's really good, I recommend it.
One big downside compared to traditional 4X games, though, is you're never really in control of anything. So if you really crave that sense of control that you get from having a well-organised empire and steamrolling over your opposition in the controlled environment of Civ-like games then you will want to go back to the traditional computer-based versions from time to time.
When playing the first Civ, my friends and I would start a game on one computer and then share the save file as a way to compete. Outside of MUDs and BBS games, I am trying to think of the first multiplayer game we played on token ring? Probably the Doom mod that let you do multi-player and run your own maps.
It is interesting to hear them talk about the game getting complex. I think in the latest version they hit that wall with the world government. It is probably one of the most unfun and distracting features that Civ games have gotten.
I do think they can add more complexity in other areas hough.
I would extend that to say that Diplomacy is still probably one of the weakest features of Civ.
It has been a joke since the original that dealing with the computer is like trying to barter with a schizophrenic, and sadly newer versions have only gotten a little better. AI's will still go from "I love you and want research agreements and luxury trades" to "I denounce you" and verge on war in the space of a turn.
Notably, the addition of the City-States was a big improvement, as they mostly respond logically, and their trend over time is to stabilize back to zero. They also provide you clearer guides on their emotional state and what actions will +/- it. If the main AI players were closer in the information they provided, and the options you had for interacting with them (ie, you could do things like destroy barbarians near them or gift them back their workers to increase your friendship) then the main AI might actually be reasonable to play with diplomatically.
"It is probably one of the most unfun and distracting features that Civ games have gotten."
It's controversial, but not without its benefits. Really depends on the type of gameplay you're going for, IMO. I enjoy a very diplomatic game of Civ4, for instance, and I try to squeeze every ounce of quasi-emergent diplomacy and even policy gameplay from what little I feel is there. But I realize I'm in the minority on this. Most Civ gamers seem to prefer a purely military game. In fairness to them, that's the clearest objective of the game. But I like that Civ allows you, albeit with a great deal of against-the-tide effort, to play a different type of game.
I never made the leap to Civ5, due to what I perceived as oversimplification, and a trend away from precisely those features I liked (but which everyone else seems to hate). So I can't really comment there.
[+] [-] NDizzle|11 years ago|reply
Being that I was in 6th grade when Civ (DOS version) came out, and the rich kid down the street had it, I played for about 6 months before my parents bought me the actual game as a christmas present.
By that time I got a legit copy of the game I was a master of all things Civ... All things except the fact that you could fortify units INSIDE towns. Imagine me, positioning 8 units in an array around a town and having those units disappear every N turns due to getting the copy protection wrong.
Once I got to keep my units and I fortified one inside a town on accident, I turned into a Civ monster. Once CivNet came out I proceeded to crush all comers in my small town.
Good times.
[+] [-] a3089268|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ramayac|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] twobits|11 years ago|reply
So you are still a noob? :-) :-P
[+] [-] WalterBright|11 years ago|reply
I'd always suspected that was the case. It's nice to hear an acknowledgement, and I'm happy Empire was an inspiration.
http://www.classicempire.com
[+] [-] zeristor|11 years ago|reply
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/26419/...
Is there anything comparable these days?
[+] [-] Tloewald|11 years ago|reply
Sid Meier's career was built on producing computer-versions of classic boardgames.
[+] [-] smacktoward|11 years ago|reply
What? No it wasn't. It was built on flight simulators and wargames. Look at the list of games he worked on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier#Games
Before 1991 (the year the first Civ came out), it's nearly all flight sims, with some original IP (Pirates!, Railroad Tycoon, Covert Action, Sword of the Samurai) near the end of that run, as he began to grow away from his partner Bill Stealey's focus on flight sims into a designer in his own right.
[+] [-] nevster|11 years ago|reply
For a game that can take 8 hours, it's surprisingly easy to learn. The way the game is constructed, you can learn it as you play because very few game mechanics are needed at the start. As your civilizations progress, more game mechanics become relevant. I wish I was playing it now...
[+] [-] bryanlarsen|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] markbnj|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] padobson|11 years ago|reply
And you should!
[+] [-] fencepost|11 years ago|reply
The original article is from 2007, so I believe it predates Civ 5.
[+] [-] schnoerkel|11 years ago|reply
It's awesome to see such a good writeup.
[+] [-] dlhavema|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bayonetz|11 years ago|reply
Even for these so called "stripped down / dumbed down" versions of the games, "one more turn" was very much still in effect!
I'd love to buy Sid a beer some time.
[+] [-] mihaifm|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xiaoma|11 years ago|reply
Have there been any new turn-based 4X games in recent times? I remember looking for a 4X flash game in 2010 and coming up empty handed. I don't really have time to play that kind of game anyway, but those were good memories.
[+] [-] ekianjo|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] a3089268|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 4k|11 years ago|reply
Its supposedly spiritual sequel to Alpha Centauri.
[+] [-] SDGT|11 years ago|reply
The last one I played was III, so it's been over 10 years, but they were always fun.
[+] [-] bane|11 years ago|reply
You should probably check out http://www.reddit.com/r/4xgaming
[+] [-] chipsy|11 years ago|reply
There are occasionally new 4X games that appear on Steam but I haven't found one I like yet.
Actually, maybe you shouldn't try Imperialism if you don't have a few days free. It is a dangerously addicting game, especially the second one.
[+] [-] msh|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kitsune_|11 years ago|reply
Then not turn-based, and not necessarily 4X, but the Paradox games like Crusader Kings 2 or Europa Universalis IV can be fun too.
[+] [-] crapshoot101|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drhayes9|11 years ago|reply
Slow, real-time 4x strategy game with no randomness and lots of fun.
[+] [-] xsmasher|11 years ago|reply
http://store.steampowered.com/tag/en/4X/
[+] [-] swombat|11 years ago|reply
There are all sorts of scenarios available, and depending on your starting resources and chosen strategy the game can provide a vastly different feel. It's really good, I recommend it.
One big downside compared to traditional 4X games, though, is you're never really in control of anything. So if you really crave that sense of control that you get from having a well-organised empire and steamrolling over your opposition in the controlled environment of Civ-like games then you will want to go back to the traditional computer-based versions from time to time.
[+] [-] roschdal|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ErikRogneby|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] presty|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] short_circut|11 years ago|reply
I do think they can add more complexity in other areas hough.
[+] [-] araes|11 years ago|reply
It has been a joke since the original that dealing with the computer is like trying to barter with a schizophrenic, and sadly newer versions have only gotten a little better. AI's will still go from "I love you and want research agreements and luxury trades" to "I denounce you" and verge on war in the space of a turn.
Notably, the addition of the City-States was a big improvement, as they mostly respond logically, and their trend over time is to stabilize back to zero. They also provide you clearer guides on their emotional state and what actions will +/- it. If the main AI players were closer in the information they provided, and the options you had for interacting with them (ie, you could do things like destroy barbarians near them or gift them back their workers to increase your friendship) then the main AI might actually be reasonable to play with diplomatically.
[+] [-] jonnathanson|11 years ago|reply
It's controversial, but not without its benefits. Really depends on the type of gameplay you're going for, IMO. I enjoy a very diplomatic game of Civ4, for instance, and I try to squeeze every ounce of quasi-emergent diplomacy and even policy gameplay from what little I feel is there. But I realize I'm in the minority on this. Most Civ gamers seem to prefer a purely military game. In fairness to them, that's the clearest objective of the game. But I like that Civ allows you, albeit with a great deal of against-the-tide effort, to play a different type of game.
I never made the leap to Civ5, due to what I perceived as oversimplification, and a trend away from precisely those features I liked (but which everyone else seems to hate). So I can't really comment there.
[+] [-] scott_karana|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pdknsk|11 years ago|reply
The subpage with the video (feat. Sid Meier) is offline now, but the video itself isn't.
http://www.civanon.org/movies/trailer.mov
[+] [-] tlo|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] personjerry|11 years ago|reply