Sims online wasn't good enough for you?

This game definitely brings back the magic... with the addition of having a HUGE depth of strategy. I've just beaten my second game (working up the difficulty levels) and can really see how much fun this game will be multiplayer as well as how many different strategies you could employ.

Very fun and VERY addictive.

Wow.... reviewing very old games...

Had a chip in a Dell catch on fire once... straight from the factory and out of the box... started smelling smoke and thought it was coming from the machine. Opened the case up (had an install automatically installing and saw the chip go POP! a puff a smoke and then a small flame... reached around and pulled the power cable out and fire went out... needless to say instant return with no questions from Dell.

This comment was edited on Nov 1, 14:09.

And in line with those futuristic games, what about the new Rise of Nations game... It looks very sweeT!

Any good?

I love their adverts for this game! civanon.org! Little girl crying hysterically in a heap... my dad loves civ more than he loves me.

I think there's enough. The town city adds a lot to the gameplay and adds a lot of depth to possible strategies. The trading posts give kind of a Battlefieldesque fight over the center which is nice as well. A lot of strategy extra strategies and it looks really nice.

For those thinking the UI stinks make sure to use the minimized and select all of the other options in the GUI options... options that should be enabled by default such as show population and number of citizens performing each task/idle and current research are disabled by default.

Oh yeah... its out... need to get back to reading!

Geez... the game description itself depressed me! If the game is half as depressing I still find myself questioning why I would want to play a game that would depress me...

Have to agree and disagree about zoos. The ability to keep endangered species from becoming extinct while maintaining a habitat close to their norm is kind of cool...

but after going on a few safaris I think that just keeping them locked up for your viewing pleasure is a little cruel.

Surprised no one has commented on the payment plan by playing style! What I wouldn't give to have a payment style that was based on number of hours played with a maxout at a certain amount. If I decide not to play for a month I shouldn't be charged, but if I want to pick it up for a day every two weeks then let me pay only $5 for the mont.

I know a lot of people here did not like the demo, but I actually had "fun" playing it. Sure it wasn't anything "new" but they somehow seemed to come out with a game I could just enjoy.

The other demo that everyone complained about that I though was absolutely brilliant was the COD 2 demo. The graphics, gameplay and sounds were awe inspiring. I let out a few loud WOW's!! while playing this one. Really enjoyed it and really look forward to this one.

too bad my gaming budget is nil until November.

I loved the first one, especially the multiplayer... actually I don't think I ever completed the single player. The multiplayer was extremely playable, especially with the maps, the user classes and the user community. Never gave the free expansion a try though.

Almost 50 posts and no one comments on the sub standard pricing? The price screams budget title, but is a little higher than this, which seems to imply they think they can get away with it since its an urban legend.

UT v. Q3? Before release my money was on Q3. I had no interest at all in UT. Turns out I played the UT demo much longer than Q3. The stats were part of it, truthfully, but the gameplay was just more fun. Q3 looked better and felt better produced, but UT worked better as a product. Something felt so right about it. Throw in mutators that gave you giant windup nuclear dolls, and, well, blew Q3 away, even when Q3 gave you incredible Homer downloads. Unfortunately every UT since has been ass.

I put more time into UT than any other game and loved it. Quake did look good, different than UT but good, but I still didn't like it's look. As far as gameplay it just never seemed right. Could never put a finger on it. Same as UT 2003, etc... Great games, but they just didn't have that same allure.

This comment was edited on Oct 4, 12:06.

UT Rulz!!! Quake Sucks!!!











Just thought I'd through in some nostalgia!

I enjoyed the AI in the first game. Looking forward to this one.

I just finished my first skirmish (played the texas map as the british) and thought I 'd share my opinion.

Start with graphics. This game is beautiful! My system isn't impressive, but it's OK and can run this on highest settings. I have a AMD 3200+, 1G PC3200 RAM, Geforce 6600GT 128 and ran at 1280x1024 with antialiasing on high with no problems. Load times were very quick too.

Gameplay. So much more than before. After my first game I can see that I've just started touching on the possibilities not just for strategies, but as to what all you can do with different units. The home city concept is great. I just finished my first skirmish and gained two levels and had to choose two new cards... very rpg like.

The physics of tearing down a building are just as you could imagine from the discussions. It really is nice to see.

For everyone complaining about the difficulty, the default selection for a skirmish is hard. I brought this down to moderate and won easily.

I also feel the interface is a bit much and couldn't find the current population limit (sure this is something I just don't know how to enable), but I can only assume this will change based on feedback. Not a deal breaker for me as I REALLY enjoyed my first skirmish... even though I had no idea what did what yet. Still so much to learn, see and do... and so much of the beloved attention to detail they always add to this series.. this game rocks.