Need to choose between Civ IV and AOE III...

[Jonny]

I need a game to play over xmas break, since I have nothing else to do. I hear both games are great, but I have never played the Civ series, only Age, which I enjoyed a lot.

What game is better, and why?

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]
I need a game to play over xmas break, since I have nothing else to do. I hear both games are great, but I have never played the Civ series, only Age, which I enjoyed a lot.

What game is better, and why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Civ is a lot more immersive and a much bigger time waster. The AI is very good and can keep you challenged as you move up in difficulty levels. However, the graphics are "nice", but they're nothing to write home about. Most of the game is spent "managing" your empire -- negotiating treaties, trading with other civs, constructing buildings to keep your people happy, deciding how to budget your money, etc... It is not a war game. It is an civilization management game.

AOE is a much better game graphically. There is more action in AOE as it is first and foremost a "war" game. Everything you do is centred around building up your army and defences. It is more action-packed and doesn't take as long to play. However, it isn't nearly as immersive and there aren't as many new levels of complexity to discover as you get better at the game.

I don't think you can go wrong with either. I went and bought both when they came out, and haven't gotten tired of either one yet.

[henrikrh]

I saw some kid playing AOE3 in a netcafe today, looked like AOE2 with sweet graphics and slower pace. Havn't played Civ 3 or 4, but honestly can't see how any AOE game could match a Civ game. Unless you are a die hard RTS gamer go for Civ 4.

Edit: Hopey, why should graaphics figure into a game review? Magazines do this too and it confounds me. Gameplay is the ONLY factor in my mind. Like people would say 'Doom 3 is linear and lacks innovation, but the graphics are dope', and I feel that would basically be like saying it sucked ball but the same people would insist it was good. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[danzasmack]

I love AOE3. My buddy loves CIV4. from what i've heard CIV4 is turn based.

If you like any older AOE's then def get the new one as the maps are bigger, you start with an explorer, there are more game elements and it's mad fun.

[henrikrh]

[ QUOTE ]
I love AOE3. My buddy loves CIV4. from what i've heard CIV4 is turn based.

If you like any older AOE's then def get the new one as the maps are bigger, you start with an explorer, there are more game elements and it's mad fun.

[/ QUOTE ]

I havn't played it but I can safely say it is turn based. Hmm... starting with an explorer... I would dig that if it were a faction based thing.

[whiskeytown]

try Civ 4 - you'll like it -

very streamlined version of a game that's been popular for over 10 years...

RB

[wayabvpar]

They are very different games. As said earlier, if you are interested in real time strategy (frenzied clicking and scrolling, automating build orders, etc), then AOE III is definitely for you.

OTOH, if you enjoy a slower paced, deeper experience, Civ IV is absolutely fantastic. I happen to vastly prefer turn-based strategy over real time, but to each his own.

[mrkilla]

i like AOE3 , though I havent played it in awhile