quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-22-2000 11:43 AM [QUOTE]Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-22-2000 02:03 AM They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more.

"great game" is subjective. Once i read reviews from my trusted sources i shall make a final call, but even then it'll prob wait until civ3 come out and compair the two.

quote: Originally posted by Locutus on 11-22-2000 03:57 PM Well, I didn't see the name of that board game maker on the box of Civ1 either... And who said Sid never approved CtP? Did you ask him? A few days ago a guy from Firaxis (don't quite remember his name) came by these forums to announce they had a copy of CtPII too, so it's not like they resent Activision or anything...

Did sid have ANYTHING to do with ctp? Im pretty sure he didnt. Thus its not authorized by him. I am not saying sid hates ctp or such. But i doubt he thinks its a quality game by his standards either.

quote: Originally posted by wheathin on 11-22-2000 11:38 AM Actually, Activision bought the rights to the Civ name for one game. And there was some legal wrangling over that too... but still, Activision can claim the "Civilization" name legally. Note that since they only had one game to use it on, they used that game to launch their own Civ franchise "Call to Power", and CTP2 does not include Civ in its title. More importantly, since much of Civ2 and most of SMAC were Brian Reynolds' work, and he won't be involved in Civ3, how good can it be, Harlequin?

This is just a long, wasteful thread waiting to happen. We could spend the next 100 yrs debating how much of civ is BR and how much was SM idea. We will prob never know so lets not even go there.

quote: Originally posted by Dark Renown on 11-24-2000 01:06 PM Just because he didnt work on it doesnt mean it not authorized.

Your kidding me right? ummm you realize what you said makes no sense?

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-22-2000 02:03 AM They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more. Harle

As I recall, Activision got the rights to the Civ name for one game. It was a very shrewd business move to kick off what could be another franchise series. As of CTP2, the Civ name is dropped. I passed on CTP bkz of bad reviews, but was jonesing for a new Civ-type game too badly when I walked by CTP2 at a store. I bought it and love it. Although it still has some relatively minor quirks, I am so glad I don't have to deal with 50 pop-up windows, reassigning unit support to different cities etc. - the ugly side of Civ2. It's a new game now. It's not Sid's game. Get over it. Checkers, Chess, and Go may have all had the same common roots.

Too bad you got burned with CTP. As for your final decision, Harle, don't buy it now. Check the boards again in a few weeks and then make another final decision.

I agree that sid is the greatest game designer of all time and even if he is your god it doesn't mean you can't buy any other game just because his name isn't on the box.

Just try out CTP2 and when civ3 comes out buy that too.
CTP2 is probably increasing civ3 sales cause now more people are into TBS games and can't wait for the next to come out(civ3)...

Long message i'd better stop.

There is nothing wrong with fresh blood to a series like civ. Civ2 is a great game for 1996. A civ upgrade like civ2 from the origional will not be satisfactory this time around in 2001 or 2002 , whenever they release the damm game. I say enjoy ctp2 for what it is, another vision of civilization by accomplished designers, and quit trying to compare apples and oranges, it doesnt' work.

Difference is a good thing for the consumer, don't be afraid of change !!

quote: Originally posted by ak on 11-26-2000 02:25 AM As I recall, Activision got the rights to the Civ name for one game. It was a very shrewd business move to kick off what could be another franchise series. As of CTP2, the Civ name is dropped. I passed on CTP bkz of bad reviews, but was jonesing for a new Civ-type game too badly when I walked by CTP2 at a store. I bought it and love it. Although it still has some relatively minor quirks, I am so glad I don't have to deal with 50 pop-up windows, reassigning unit support to different cities etc. - the ugly side of Civ2. It's a new game now. It's not Sid's game. Get over it. Checkers, Chess, and Go may have all had the same common roots. Too bad you got burned with CTP. As for your final decision, Harle, don't buy it now. Check the boards again in a few weeks and then make another final decision. BTW, do you have a little shrine to sid in some corner?

Im talking BEFORE that recent legal mess. Civ1 is loosly based on a board game by avalon hill (AH is known in war gaming and RPG circles). Sid got the rights to the name from AH to based a pc game on it.

What your talking about is the recent legal nightmare that really was moot before it begain. As none of the parties involved had sid or his team working on it. Thus really isnt civ.

I have respect and appreciation for sid. Hes done amazing things for the genere. Some of you should give him the same as if it wasnt for him you wouldnt have ctp.

quote: Originally posted by Darkknight on 11-27-2000 08:43 PM i have never played ctp 1 or 2 and I grew up on civ 1 + 2 and i'm a great sid fan even got gettysberg to see what he's like designing RTS games, I didn't get ctp because i thought it was just another takeoff like TOT and it's only now that i'm realising maybe i was wrong with ctp maybe i should have gotten it because now i'm reading all this on CTP 2 and all the reviews and just look at any screenshot or forum and you can find at least 10 things different between civ and ctp in each one of them.I am personally drooling at the mouth waiting for this game to get here and i hadn't even heard there was a ctp2 coming soon until 2 weeks ago. I agree that sid is the greatest game designer of all time and even if he is your god it doesn't mean you can't buy any other game just because his name isn't on the box. Just try out CTP2 and when civ3 comes out buy that too. CTP2 is probably increasing civ3 sales cause now more people are into TBS games and can't wait for the next to come out(civ3)... Long message i'd better stop.

Im not going to buy something becasue a few biased ppl on this msg board said i should. I am awaiting the reviews. And the one i have seen thus far, daily radar didnt say anything really great about it to make me want to run out and buy it. It was a pretty much 50/50 (mixed) review. I rather not spend my cash on a 50/50 game.

BG2 is still keeping me busy anyways until civ3 comes out

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-28-2000 02:26 PM Im not going to buy something becasue a few biased ppl on this msg board said i should. I am awaiting the reviews.

what does "BIASED" mean, and why are the people who like "biased", while the rts-lover ign reviewer and the civ2-is-the-best-game-in-the-history-of-mankind-there-should-be-no-other-game-after-it gamepen reviewer "unbiased"?

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-28-2000 03:11 PM [QUOTE]Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-28-2000 02:26 PM Im not going to buy something becasue a few biased ppl on this msg board said i should. I am awaiting the reviews.

what does "BIASED" mean, and why are the people who like "biased", while the rts-lover ign reviewer and the civ2-is-the-best-game-in-the-history-of-mankind-there-should-be-no-other-game-after-it gamepen reviewer "unbiased"?

[/quote]

The reviews of CTP1 was right on the money. they all said the same thing. and if i read the reviews BEFORE i wasted my money on CTP1 then id be $50. richer with one less over priced coaster. Thus i am inclined to take a wait and see approach.

Forgive me if dont want to get burned again.

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-28-2000 03:12 PM i think you're biased towards player reviews

Probably