First off, let me say I was never into RTS games. I was put off by the thought of waiting for things to happen. Recently, I purchased Civ Rev for the 360 and was blown away. It was great, and was very rewarding. The multiplayer in that game was superb, although it moved at a horrendously slow pace.
My question is, how does this game compare? Barely anyone plays on the 360, and I could use a competitive PC game. I hear there is a lot more depth in the PC versions, and that the 360 version is basically a stripped down version for mostly newcomers to the franchise. Would it be hard to learn for a noob to the PC? The 360 game took me a while to figure out, but once I did, it was great.
How similar is the 360 game to the PC games? I'm not limiting my options to buying Colonization, because it sounds kind of shallow only being set in the set era. Which is the most accessible Civ game for the PC? If a Civilization vet can help me out here, I'd truly appreciate it.
Thanks!
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization
Game » consists of 4 releases. Released Sep 22, 2008
Sid Meier's 1995 turn-based strategy game about the European colonization of the New World gets remade as a standalone expansion to Sid Meier's Civilization IV.
How does it compare to Civilization Revolution on the 360?
It'd totally different. Colonisation deals with a specific thing; The New World, it does have a unique flavour about it however, and it isn't really shallow, you need to ferry colonists to your colony from your homeland, sometimes they're convicts, sometimes they're useful people, you need to establish treaties with the natives, pay a tithe to your homeland, secure your position and eventually declare independance from your homeland and defend it from your former country.
If I were you I'd grab Civilization IV, or Colonization and go here, CivFanatics, it is easily the best place to meet up with other CivIV or Colonization players, also a good place to read up on game information regarding the franchise :)
"If you aren't into RTS games, you should love Civilization...because it's not real-time strategy. It's turn-based strategy."Very true. Much slower paced and relaxing...it could eat away hours before you know it. ...and Civ games on PC last a lot longer than in the Civ Rev versions.
Why do you post the EXACT same thread in two different game's forums? You still show up under the most recent threads, you know.
"Why do you post the EXACT same thread in two different game's forums? You still show up under the most recent threads, you know."It was a glitch. The first one didn't show up for the first few minutes. You think I want that much attention?
I'll admit, Revolution was the first Civilization I bought.
And after I played it for a few months, I wanted more, so I was really looking forward to Colonization. Be cautious though, because Colonization is a completely different game from Revolution.
While Revolution is more casual and inviting, Colonization is for the most hardcore of Civ fans. I figured that out right when I started playing Colonization. It's hard. It'll take you at least a week before you understand the fundamentals of the game, and much longer before you really know the game. Right now, I'm at the point where I know the rules, but I still don't know how to play correctly. And I've had this game for a little over a week.
Micromanagement is big in this game. You have to control almost everything, unlike Revolution. I'd say the micromanagement is 30 times more complex in Colonization than it is in Revolution, which is not necessarily a bad thing if you have a lot of patience and time on your hands.
While Revolution is more of a military type game, Colonization focuses more on the economic side of things. You will frequently manage much of the trade between your cities and Europe. You can build up a military, but it's only really useful when you decide to declare independence against Europe and massive swarms of battleships and dragoons come marching in. You'll also have the choice of cooperating with the natives or killing them, but it's always better to team up, so you can get many benefits, like free training for your colonists and better deals on guns and horses. And of course, you can also attack other colonies, but it isn't really worth doing so unless you have a major advantage.
Overall, I think Colonization is a much better game than Revolution. It has a lot more depth. But I still enjoy Revolution from time to time when I feel like playing a more relaxing game.
"I'll admit, Revolution was the first Civilization I bought.Thank you very much, that's interesting. Hell, and I thought Revolution was stressful. Do you find that sometimes it's just a little too much to handle?
And after I played it for a few months, I wanted more, so I was really looking forward to Colonization. Be cautious though, because Colonization is a completely different game from Revolution.
While Revolution is more casual and inviting, Colonization is for the most hardcore of Civ fans. I figured that out right when I started playing Colonization. It's hard. It'll take you at least a week before you understand the fundamentals of the game, and much longer before you really know the game. Right now, I'm at the point where I know the rules, but I still don't know how to play correctly. And I've had this game for a little over a week.
Micromanagement is big in this game. You have to control almost everything, unlike Revolution. I'd say the micromanagement is 30 times more complex in Colonization than it is in Revolution, which is not necessarily a bad thing if you have a lot of patience and time on your hands.
While Revolution is more of a military type game, Colonization focuses more on the economic side of things. You will frequently manage much of the trade between your cities and Europe. You can build up a military, but it's only really useful when you decide to declare independence against Europe and massive swarms of battleships and dragoons come marching in. You'll also have the choice of cooperating with the natives or killing them, but it's always better to team up, so you can get many benefits, like free training for your colonists and better deals on guns and horses. And of course, you can also attack other colonies, but it isn't really worth doing so unless you have a major advantage.
Overall, I think Colonization is a much better game than Revolution. It has a lot more depth. But I still enjoy Revolution from time to time when I feel like playing a more relaxing game."
"TheJollyRajah said:I'll be completely honest with you- Colonization makes Revolution look like a baby's game. Colonization can be a pain to handle sometimes. For instance, just to make a gun, you have to mine some ore, send the ore to a blacksmith, have the blacksmith make tools with the ore, send the tools to a gunsmith, and then have the gunsmith make guns. And if you want a soldier, you need to equip one of your colonists with the gun. Then you finally have a soldier."I'll admit, Revolution was the first Civilization I bought.Thank you very much, that's interesting. Hell, and I thought Revolution was stressful. Do you find that sometimes it's just a little too much to handle?"
And after I played it for a few months, I wanted more, so I was really looking forward to Colonization. Be cautious though, because Colonization is a completely different game from Revolution.
While Revolution is more casual and inviting, Colonization is for the most hardcore of Civ fans. I figured that out right when I started playing Colonization. It's hard. It'll take you at least a week before you understand the fundamentals of the game, and much longer before you really know the game. Right now, I'm at the point where I know the rules, but I still don't know how to play correctly. And I've had this game for a little over a week.
Micromanagement is big in this game. You have to control almost everything, unlike Revolution. I'd say the micromanagement is 30 times more complex in Colonization than it is in Revolution, which is not necessarily a bad thing if you have a lot of patience and time on your hands.
While Revolution is more of a military type game, Colonization focuses more on the economic side of things. You will frequently manage much of the trade between your cities and Europe. You can build up a military, but it's only really useful when you decide to declare independence against Europe and massive swarms of battleships and dragoons come marching in. You'll also have the choice of cooperating with the natives or killing them, but it's always better to team up, so you can get many benefits, like free training for your colonists and better deals on guns and horses. And of course, you can also attack other colonies, but it isn't really worth doing so unless you have a major advantage.
Overall, I think Colonization is a much better game than Revolution. It has a lot more depth. But I still enjoy Revolution from time to time when I feel like playing a more relaxing game."
At times, yes, the game can be frustrating. But once you figure it out, it's addictive as hell.
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment