Sid Meier's Civilization III

I confess without hitting that when I start writing a review of the third part of "Civilization", I feel small and unimportant. After all, what clever can I write about the game - the legend of computer wars and the queen-mother of all strategy games, to which millions of people around the world have devoted billions of hours of their time to its installments? Probably nothing. However, I can (and only) devote a few next paragraphs to consider whether the third stage of approximation to the ideal brings something new, something even more valuable, and whether it has a chance to meet the considerable and monotonically growing expectations of a large community of addicts. And that's what my intention is.

First of all, I am in a hurry to reassure the nervous waiting and to assure you that, according to the title of the game, we are dealing with an old, good "Civilization", which does not contain any oddities beyond measure, another milestone in its development .. Of course, if the third part was nothing new with by its appearance, it did not ask, then it would question itself about the meaning of existence. As before (i.e. five years ago - here's the real test for intelligence: when will part four come? - complete the date string: 1991, 1996, 2001, ...), when some rules were put in order, others were added and appeared not too many new concepts, so this time "Civilization" has rejuvenated, bearing fruit with new ideas and a contemporary setting. Luckily for the old folks, the authors of the current project have managed, I believe, to keep the spirit and playability of the previous parts, while at the same time giving players a lot of new possibilities for consideration. That's why, when I asked myself whether it was worth spending money to buy CIV3, I replied to myself (after playing all day, at least) that yes, it's worth it, if you are still playing the previous part, and in the meantime our computer (very) definitely rejuvenated as opposed to ourselves. But to the point ...

We fire up. Intro - nice, very suitable, menu - aesthetic and well known to us, new game, choice of map size, terrain diversification - everything presented much more elegantly than last time (read: in the second part), choice of nations and first surprise - individual nations differ from each other (oh, if my historian read it, he spent four years - his success, only four - struggling hard against my ignorance). They are not - and it is very good that they are not - any big differences, but just enough to consider for a moment what approach to our civilization and military development suits us best. Each nation displays two, out of six possible, inherent abilities - merchant, expansion, industrial, military, religious or scientific, and each of them translates into specific benefits or disabilities during the game. This adds up a certain bonus, usually resulting from actual historical conditions, in the form of having a unit appropriate for a given nation, towering over the neighbors. In the case of the Romans, they are legionnaires instead of the standard Swordsmen, the Germans have better tanks, and the Zulu impi are terrifying among the ranks of ordinary spearmen. Each nation, therefore, has its characteristics set in advance and thus at the beginning has the same human and intellectual resources - the game ended several times in anticipation of two Settlers. I think it's good, because it simply saves a bit of nerves, and for those who like surprises there is always a random choice of their civilization.

Another surprise comes with the first units that we get our hands on. Here, next to the time-honored Settler, stands an undaunted Worker (and in the case of expansive nations also a Scout), whose job is to do all the work that Settler already disgusts: building roads, irrigation, cutting trees, etc. The differences between them are even greater - Settler's training requires the sacrifice of two citizens, while the Worker will settle for one, as it used to be. But the biggest surprise is about to attack after the founding of the first city around which the borders of our country appear. And they, I think, are the greatest concept of the third part, so much so that after a few days of playing I can't imagine how diplomacy (and warfare) could have happened without them. They determine the actual area of influence of each civilization and this crossing them is a signal to declare a war, and not only the approach of enemy troops to the walls of the player's cities. Likewise, in our territory, no one will establish a foreign city for us, and, finally, the enemy cannot use our roads and railways unless we grant him such permission. At the same time, the borders are not determined by the range of arable fields (as it can be assumed to have been so far), but by the cultural development of cities. Culture is raised by selected buildings, such as: a palace, temples, or wonders of the world, and thus there is one more, very important reason for investing in the latter - greater coverage of the country, greater control over the area and - attention, attention - easier access to strategic resources. I have somewhat mixed feelings towards them - on the one hand, the idea is noble and broadens the perspective on planning, management and strategy in general, on the other hand, it contradicts one of the basic assumptions of the original "Civilization", so that starting the production of specific units does not require other outlays apart from making proper intellectual and technological progress. Now, in addition to caring for the rapid development of your civilization, there is also the need to provide yourself with raw materials for production and a fierce fight for them. Acquiring this principle does not come by itself, and I personally did it only when I suffered irreparable losses with units stronger than my opponent, and only because the enemy managed to cut me off from the iron ore deposits I needed to produce them. Nevertheless, I like this new strategic aspect (I would like to point out that these resources do not need to be mined, but only connected with them), although I realize that not everyone has to like it.

All these novelties and modifications to the already existing rules boil down to a simple fact: "Civilization III" is clearly more difficult than the previous parts, even after getting used to it. In combination with the noticeably higher intelligence of the computer opponent, this can become somewhat depressing. Here you are, dear old stager player, to a game that you know well, you choose the level of difficulty for a good start, on which you won with pleasure and without much trouble in any way you choose, and meanwhile, still stuck in the deep Middle Ages, you start to have serious problems with ... survival.

Although CIV3 gives you more options to win, because apart from winning the race into space and conquering the whole world, we still have a diplomatic, cultural win or by gaining dominance over the rest of the world, although in practice you will need some time for a stager player, to have any victory on a reasonable level of difficulty, of which I am deeply convinced. Of course, bigger challenges have their advantages, as long as they lead to the search for new opportunities to gain an advantage. One of them is a slightly developed diplomacy compared to the previous part. In fact, anything can be exchanged between nations: money, resources, cities, inventions, information or treaties, although the golden rule of all human contact remains the same: the stronger is right. During a few days of the game, I even got the impression that my computer rivals are more inclined to keep contracts than it used to be. It can, of course, only be an impression - nothing more appeals to the imagination of neighboring monarchs than an appropriate show of strength, for example, razing several of their border towns to the ground.

The latter is not easy. It is even much more difficult than we are used to - there is an opposition in the conquered city, which, if not suppressed by the introduction of appropriately strong troops into the walls for a few turns, is ready to take the city back without the slightest hassle on the part of the enemy. It turns out that in the case of a planned more extensive offensive, it will be easier to set a captured city on fire (yes, yes, it is possible now) than to spend time and resources on its complete control and submission to your will. The very conquering of cities is greatly facilitated by another concept that we have not experienced in the previous parts - armies. In short, it works in such a way that three units can be grouped under the command of the commander into one, powerful and durable, capable of dealing and receiving much more damage in battle. The units themselves also gained a much nicer pattern of their development - their strength is now increased in four stages, so that even a Veteran trained in a barracks can gain an even higher rank in combat: Elite (the previous ones are Conscript and Regular, respectively). Thanks to this, it finally started to make a real difference, which troops we send to the fight, which we leave in the cities we heal, and which can be used as cannon fodder.

The rest of the changes made to the draft are rather cosmetic in nature, but it can be felt that they appeared as a result of well-analyzed experiences from the previous parts. The characteristics of some units changed, including the further weakening of the chariots, which in the first part were extremely effective weapons, suitable even from poverty to fight tanks, which was, to be admitted, a slight exaggeration. Similarly, catapults have now become essentially siege weapons, although they are still suitable for annoying the enemy in certain situations. The improvements have also reached areas, the types of which are slightly more, and some of them can have a detrimental effect on the health of the people living there. Rivers, on the other hand, now flow between fields, so even without the ability to build bridges, roads can be built anywhere, and only they will not have connections across the rivers until you acquire the appropriate knowledge (which can be of great importance in terms of the availability of resources).

The existing types of exercised power differ more and more attention should be paid to whether our nation is prepared for its change. The costs of maintaining units look different, the methods of accelerating production are different (for example: in despotism, such a move has to be paid for with the loss of a part of the population, and you can't buy wonders at all - right, but it's a pity). It would take a long time to list smaller or larger changes - but enough to say that all this is good for the gameplay and such an increase in the level of difficulty, to force the player to think a little more intensely, and sometimes it just goes to hell when learned strategies go to the head and many tactical solutions come reinvent. Well, this is not a remake of the two, after all, but part three.

I decided to devote a separate attention to the interface of "Civilization III", because both the first and the second part seriously suffered from the syndrome: "everyone uses keyboard shortcuts anyway". Of course, the abbreviations and fortunately remained the same (well, for example, Shift-T does not work, but that's only because the distribution of taxpayers' money is organized here a bit differently), or new ones, but beginners (read: not civilized yet) subjected to the queen-mother of computer strategies, he can easily control his growing civilization with the help of the mouse. All menus are easily accessible, very functional and aesthetic at the same time, and on demand they disappear from the screen and the player can enjoy the eyes with a full-screen view of his power or waste - it is different in life and in games. In general, the legibility of the information provided to the player leaves little to be desired. An ordinary signature of a city carries not only its name and size, but also data about what is under construction in the city and when the construction will be completed and when the city itself will reach the next stage of its development, or whether it is dying out. behind our backs. In the same way, the organization of the menu of individual advisors is, I believe, excellent and usually one glance is enough to find out about the situation. Civilopedia has always stood at a high level (it gave rise to all something-tam-pedia scattered around many other games), and now it has climbed even higher: full hypertext, rich descriptions, graphical patterns of dependence - it's just nice to look at it from time to time even if there is no need for that. The same applies to the refined menu responsible for the construction of the world at the beginning of the game - clear, vivid, comfortable and ... short. Like a trifle, but making a dozen or so clicks when starting each game really irritated me in both the first and the second. To make the player's life easier, the authors went even further and introduced two extremely useful mechanisms, which I certainly do not need to convince any old savvy: first of all, the workers who beautify the vicinity of cities can make (let's add: the most accurate) decisions about what to do next (even they stop their work and take refuge to the cities in case of an attack), thanks to which it is finally eliminated how tedious: build (i) rigors, build d (r) oge, move to the right, build irrigation, build a road, move down and. .. everyone to the circle, ladies ask gentlemen ... ep. Secondly, a player who is very lazy, or who has many cities under his control, gets a tool called the governor, who will take care of the proper development of the city, make the inhabitants happy and build what is needed and as needed.

On the entire interface praised by me, I saw only one scratch, minor but troublesome. Namely, messages about riots in the city do not pause the game to give the opportunity to immediately react to the situation and the player is forced to remember what is happening where until it comes to the vote, and then find the rebellious city - that's all, of course, if not will forget. If he forgets, it's his loss.

Not only the interface has been neglected so far (the times were different, the games looked different and maybe this statement is a bit too sharp), as it was similar with the graphics. The first part of "Civilization" was simply ugly even at the time of its appearance, while the second, much more elaborate, frightened with ugly Windows windows. The third is a real breakthrough in this graphic field, because from the beginning to the end and in every nook and cranny, it is pretty. So much so that when I fired it for the first time, I noted a slight drop of puppies: my "Civilization" is NICE. And this is the main reason why I believe it is worth replacing the tenth copy of a two with a fresh third part - not that the enriched rules and improved relations between this and that, but that it is pretty. The intro is nice, on which rises skyward, built over the centuries and still unfinished pretty Tower of Babel. The menu and grounds are nice. The units are animated and they fight nicely (if we wish). And it only seems to me that all this goodness should run at a hundred megahertz, instead of getting out of breath for five hundred, as sometimes, and the rumor spreads that it also happens to her on much faster machines. But, it was not, "Civilization" is a game as awkward as it gets, and it really doesn't matter much.

It is high time to try to make some inspired summary. To summarize in one sentence the idea of a great and dignified game he describes. Meanwhile, I cannot think of anything more than a simple confession of a humble worshiper of this all-time strategy: I am glad that the third part of "Civilization" has been created, I am delighted with its form and its content suits me, and I really see no reason for the fourth part to be created ... earlier than in the next five years.

Borys "Shuck" Zajączkowski