How do you think this compares to other Civilisation games

#1 Posted by babblinmule (1262 posts) -

I personally am still loving this game, despite not having played a Civ game since the days of Civ2. So I'm interested, how does everyone feel this game stacks up against Civ games from the past (and present).

#2 Posted by elliooo (293 posts) -

Yep I'm also loving Civ Rev and found it much more accessible than the previous games. I still love the complexities of the other games, but I find Civ Rev more fun to play, and for shorter periods of time - better for a quick fix of Civ rather than the weekend-long sit-down game of Civ IV.

#3 Posted by JoshuaN (71 posts) -

I think its awesome. I have Civ 4, all its expansion and those games can get pretty intimidating.  I find myself playing Revolution a lot more now.  The streamlined control and faster pace of them game along with its awesome visuals make it an easier game to enjoy.  I think its just a less frustrating, more enjoyable version of Civ.

#4 Posted by SarazinRuin (157 posts) -

It's easier and I still prefer civ 4.

#5 Posted by DreamR (50 posts) -

The only thing I don't like is the crazy-aggressive AI, which (seemingly) randomly declares war on me, even when I'm much more powerful and have almost decimated their empire.

I prefer the other versions (1,2,3,4 - not the side-branches Test of Time and Call to Power) to Civ Rev, but this one has that addictive quality too.

#6 Posted by Navster (51 posts) -

Civ Rev maintains the addictiveness of the series but makes it much easier to sink yourself into the game. So far for me this has been a dangerous combination. I'm just glad it came out in the middle of summer when I've got nothing to do!

#7 Posted by RVonE (4683 posts) -

Civ Rev is kind of fun, but I keep coming back to Civ IV. I love that game!

#8 Posted by Manks (836 posts) -

I have both Civ 4 and Civ Rev, but Civ Rev seems more fun to play because of the shorter periods of time.  I still go back to Civ 4 once ina while.

#9 Edited by OGCartman (4354 posts) -

Civ Rev is awesome but i still prefer Civ4, not sure why but i find it much better

#10 Posted by RVonE (4683 posts) -
Manks said:
"I have both Civ 4 and Civ Rev, but Civ Rev seems more fun to play because of the shorter periods of time.  I still go back to Civ 4 once ina while.
"
I guess that is exactly the reason why I prefer Civ IV. A game of Civ Rev is to short for my taste. But I can see why plenty of people would prefer a faster pace.
#11 Posted by almeida (70 posts) -

great game. it's fun to play and addictive

#12 Posted by Cook66 (227 posts) -

I think the "old fashion" civ's are way better, yet I still find myself wasting hours on this game.

I really wish there would be more to this game though, it feels really small. It could at the very least have had some more voice acting.

#13 Posted by RedSox8933 (2428 posts) -

really, nothing compares to civ IV. its just so goddanm amazing. civ rev is good, but you cant think about any previous civ games when you are playing it, or you will probably end up turning it off and going right back to your computer.

#14 Posted by Lombax (105 posts) -

after playing it a few times on the 360 it just really feels shallow [for a civ game] I still like the DS version but mainly because the "shallow" feeling feels ok there. 

#15 Posted by Slim (29 posts) -

While i don't plan on purchasing this game i feel that it is a good divergence from the normal formula for Sid Meier. I have played all the civ games and love the detail and open game play so this particular game doesn't appeal to me, i am much more excited about Colonization but  i'm glad that this game will give people who are intimidated by the full game a chance to experience Civ.

#16 Posted by PixieNinja (172 posts) -
DreamR said:
"The only thing I don't like is the crazy-aggressive AI, which (seemingly) randomly declares war on me, even when I'm much more powerful and have almost decimated their empire."

This is the first thing that stood out to me - I'd become so used to the varying levels of relationship you can have with multiple civs in the PC games, and then to come across the seemingly random aggression present in Civ Rev, which is poured upon you irrespective of whether you outclass your aggressor by a factor of 20? Seems like they need to tweak this a little!

I was a little apprehensive when I came across the game - sure, it's great to be able to knock out a full game inside a few hours, or even 10 minutes if you put your mind to it, but I do miss the depth of the PC game. At times it's good to have a dumbed down, yet still fun and accessible game, but when my civilization grows to more than a handful of cities, I miss the level of micromanagement and automation that the PC versions offered.

When it comes down to me wanting an epic game, too, the PC version is the superior choice.  It seemed like such a strange decision to not be able to choose how many civs, or what type of map you would be playing on.
#17 Edited by License_To_Bill (792 posts) -

I've played Civ 4 for a long time, and I miss a few things about it that are absent in Rev.
You should be able to choose how fast your games go.
When in a fight, it should have your odds of winning.
Choose Map size, shape, climate, etc. and how many civilizations you'll be up against.
More difficulties.
Less aggressive AI. I can't even play the game the way I want when everybody on the fucking planet is out to get me because I didn't bribe them otherwise.

I did notice that something was unchanged: I still can't get a fucking technology win. Ever.

#18 Posted by spragels (97 posts) -

Civ 4 is better but i like this game. It is different and still the same.

#19 Posted by berzem (4 posts) -

I'm a big gan of the new one, AI seems a little psychotic compared to PC.

Also I need some more options for my game.

#20 Posted by GhostCommander (6 posts) -

I think CivRev is awesome, but it meets a slightly different need than Civ IV.  Sometimes you just want a "quick" game of taking over the world.  Other times you want an epic, massive battle that takes days/weeks to finish.  Both have their place, and both are excellent games.

#21 Posted by HoldSteady828 (165 posts) -

I love the simplified and streamlined controls and presentation of the xbox game, but the AI is too dumb to keep me interested in playing again and again.  I think I need to try the multiplayer more before I give a fair comparison to Civ4.

#22 Edited by KingHippp0 (118 posts) -

I can say after a couple days of playing that my top 5 Sid Meier games stack up like this. Even though Civ Rev is low on my list, I consider it about an 80 out of 100 it's just that all the other Civs have set a very high bar. 


1) Alpha Centauri
2) Civ 2
3) Civ 4
4) Civ Revolution
5) Colonization
#23 Posted by KennyTheSober (50 posts) -

Civ Rev is a great game, very addictive but it feels too streamlined from Civ IV and its far too simple to finish with the overaggressive AI, suicidal fools. It's good for a quick fix of civ action, finishing most games in under a hour, and i feel the graphics are spot on for a console version. Still i've continued to play this over Civ III Complete which i think is the greatest Civ game made to date. Suppose its a great place to start if you are new to series.

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.