Highwaystar101s reviews

Game: Civilization revolutions

Platform: Nintendo DS

Publisher: 2K games

Developer: firaxis

I remember when I was a young lad who had just brought a fresh copy of civilization II all the way back in 1996, I thought that it was the greatest game of all time. I wasted endless hours attempting to overthrow those evil Zulu or furiously racing to reach Alpha Centurai first to win the space race. My love for civilization games has grown since then as I have brought all of the sequels and devoted hour upon hour of my valuable free time to play this game.

So understandably I was very eager to play this game. In the week before it came out I was getting a little impatient as it seemed like a dream to finally take my favourite game out with me wherever I go, I was excited to say the least. So as you can tell I have been apprehensive to play this game at last.

So was my wait worth it?

In a way, no.

The game has some great playability, but it’s not the civilization that I grew up with. A lot of the content that made the previous instalments such a pleasure to play has been lost. But what made this game like this?

First off the speed of the game was completely wrong. Gone are the days of playing for hours on end because this version sports a much more rapid approach. Whole games can be accomplished in a mere couple of hours. I could only see this as an answer to those unenthusiastic gamers who get bored of games the moment they have to commit any amount of effort or time. A measure, which I’m sure they used to expand their potential market to accommodate the “casuals” but instead has probably scared off the hardcore from this particular instalment.

It also changed so many features from the previous episodes of the game that I didn’t realise added so much value to the game play. For example

• The soldiers are plentiful so the combat is more frequent but less fun.
• Buildings are few and far between, halting the sense of any real progression.
• Smaller maps mean quicker play… I miss larger maps, slower play.

But the change that has most affected the game play is the pursuit of technology. You only have to achieve 47 advances and you have discovered everything, it happens so fast it’s almost frightening. But it wouldn’t be that bad if the enemies didn’t advance at a much slower pace. I have yet to play a round where I have 17 advances in technology and the enemy has 17 advances. No, it is much more the scenario where I have 30 advances in technology and the enemy has 6. There isn’t even any point in them trying to win after a certain point.

But that wouldn’t matter to them because the AI is terrible. It is obvious that Sid Meiers had trouble with the DS’s hardware, which is not really his fault, as we all know he is the master of strategy and the king of tactics. I was barraging enemies with mere warriors and taking cities by the barrel-full.

However, despite this the game had a certain charm that one could just not help fall in love with. Perhaps a rapid style of play is what is needed for a handheld version of this game. Perhaps more combat IS more fun. But all I knew was I enjoyed it despite the major differences from the previous games.

Graphics were not bad, but endearing instead, cute little 2D animations on the top screen and easy to read strategic maps on the lower screen. I would not expect anything else from my Nintendo DS.

The touch screen has been employed marvellously, literally every function can be utilised using the touch screen, another little brilliant innovation of Nintendo’s mini powerhouse of creation.

I have yet to experience the weekly scenarios that are downloadable once a week, but if they are any good I can see them adding a great deal to the games longevity. Packing it full of hours worth of pure fun.

Conclusion. It may not be the civilization me and many other people have been used to for the past 17 years since we first set foot in Sid Meiers wonderful creation but it is still a lot of fun. I can see how the Ds was approached with much care and attention to try and do it not right, but different, creating a playing style unique to the feisty little handheld. I could not imagine a game of this style to make it on the PSP.

My verdict

8.3/10

Better than: Age of empires DS – 7.0

Not as good as: Advance wars DS: 9.1

If you like this review I am thinking of starting a weekly article.

Hope you enjoyed this review…

Highwaystar101

bump, how has it fallen off the front page already? I would like any feedback please.

NIce review HIgh....

As a Civ fan, I like your review. The changes do sound a bit disappointing, especially the lack of challenge. But overall a nice review, though a tad on the short side methinks.

thanks elgefe

I'm sorta disappointed.

I purchased Civ 1 for my CPU 9,5mhz 8088, Tandy 100RL with only 768?kb of ram, 320x240x16colors(not 16k colors, but 16). The game came on a handfull of 720kb floppies to install on a 20MB HDD((your not going to hear me complain about multi discs).That's right that was my first Intel based computer. Note the power. I played for over 24 hours. I played part 2 and thought it had some nice improvements. Then I played part 3 and thought the game lost appeal.

I'm disappointed.  Civ 1 was hard on higher difficulties. The Maps were plenty big with a random map generator(a fractal map generator with the same seed would work).

To hear that the AI is poor? What after so many years and the DS having a 66mhz fireball having a poor AI?

The maps are small? What It took my computer 2 minutes to generate random maps. The DS has 128mb, I'm sure there is enough space to store some nice size maps. Heck even random maps should have enough storage.

There are only 47 advancements to me is a joke. Again give us options. Civ 1 ticked under 10mb. DS can have a 128mb to play with at a lower resolution.

I understand wanting to appeal to more people, but please add options. This is a case

With the restriction of the DS from size and speed I was hoping for a nice clean merger of Civ 1 & 2. Apparently that's not what we got.

If I could hug someone right now...It'd be you.

I think the issue is the PR people, and the "image" that certain systems, like the DS, are getting. The issue is that whe they (whomever made Civ:Rev - be it Fraxis or Infogrames, or whomever) they figure that the DS market, as well as (to a sickening extent) PS3/X360 fans are of lesser intelligence, and didn't like Civilization the way it was. So they hack away at it, to where you have a weak, smaller shell of a game that it once was.

Problem is, they forget that they came out with Civilization 1 for the SNES many years ago, and the game was very, very good. It was my gateway into the Civ series, and didn't provide incredibly dumbed down gameplay from the PC version, and was a pretty good game.

So as time goes on, instead of giving us a more robust product, they give us a dumbed down version. And my question is: Who the heck is THAT going to cater to?

Okay, so some questions about this game as I REALLY want to get it, but from all I've heard am not sure it's for me;

Is combat necessary to win?

That is, my favorite way to play is cultural domination. Even if I can't get the culture victory, I often pump culture to the extreme and try to take cities that way, etc. In fact, the fighting is my least favorite part of the game, and I go out of my way to settle wars as quickly as possible.

With only 47 techs and few buildings, according to your review, I am not holding out much hope that this is still possible, BUT I really really hope that I misinterpreted what you wrote, because I really want to get/like the game :-/

I've been playing this game for about 4 days now. All I can say is that it doesn't even hold a candle to CIV 2, 3, or 4. As stated the map is way too small (I had the whole map explored with my galley by medevil times in one game and acheived domination victory before I invented gunpowder in another).

All in all I'd say its worth a rent but not a buy.