Civilization IV anyone? [Archive]

Boohugh

05-15-2006, 16:45

Having played Civ2, Alpha Centauri and Civ3, I decided not to get Civ4 as I don't think it has enough new content to keep me interested for an extended period. I got Galactic Civilisations 2 instead, and have been having great fun with that.

As for the expansion, I think the major innovation is the addition of hordes (sounds familiar doesn't it ~;) ) as well as a plethora of new units, wonders, scenarios etc. Here's the gamespy preview of it: link (http://uk.pc.gamespy.com/pc/civilization-iv-warlords/707249p1.html)

Keba

05-15-2006, 17:40

I've been playing Civ since, oh, Civ 2 ... and while I had some fun initially with Civ 4, after several centuries I could literally take on every faction in the world, at the same time, with one arm tied behind my back. I lost interest after that. It just lacks ... something. Don't get me wrong, the game is great, and I like it ... but I won't be getting the expansion.

That said, I don't even have it installed right now ... I rather play the old Call to Power and Alpha Centauri.

English assassin

05-15-2006, 18:38

IMHO the best Civ is the first Civ you play. Whichever one it was. I started on Civ II, then got CTP and Civ III and I'm not getting Civ IV. I'm sure its great if you are new to Civ, but lets face it, its all pretty much the same game really.

The only reason I'd upgrade (and I might at a discount) is for fan content, eg maps. I used to enjoy playing Civ III on Mars, but obviously all that action shofts to the latest version.

Somebody Else

05-15-2006, 18:41

I think more civilisation 4 every1 would be a good idea...

frogbeastegg

05-15-2006, 18:53

Got it, enjoyed it, played for several months and then got bored. I know I will go back to civ4 one day, when it will feel a bit fresher. The expansion has nothing which makes me want to buy it, thus far. I might pick it up if it sounds more appealing when its out on the shelves. Or I might not.

Lorenzo_H

05-15-2006, 20:59

I must compliment those of you who played Civ IV without having played any of the previous civ games, because as Will Wright put it in his critisism of Civ; because it is so huge with so much depth, so many features, it becomes almost too much to take in. "Daunting" as he put it. I think you should devote about 4 hours too it (but not nesesarily all in one go) to really "get into" it and learn all the features. I myself am still finding things I've never noticed before.

As for Warlords, it looks like it will only make a good game better. For those who don't know about it, it adds:

- Six awesome new scenarios all set in action filled periods of history.
- A new Great Person (a wonderful part of Civ IV): A great General, who in turn can become a fearsome Warlord who will be a Superunit when he attaches himself to a unit. He can also do other stuff as well.
- 10 new leaders, 6 new civs.
- 3 cool new leader traits - imperialist, protective and charismatic.
- Many new units.

For more info visit the already posted gamespot link or wander round CivFanaticsCenter:

http://www.civfanatics.com/

Lorenzo_H

05-15-2006, 20:59

Sorry chaps double post.

doc_bean

05-15-2006, 21:59

I like Civ4 but unfortunately have way too little time to actually PLAY it (or any other game for that matter ~:( ), the new expansion doesn't look like it will add a whole lot of new stuff.And as soon as i got Civ4 I was wondering why there wasn't a great general, and figured they'd probably build that into an expansion, I'm kinda pissed that they kept something like that out of the game, it was clearly designed with the expansion in mind.

But I'm not a warmonger, so I probably won't be getting it.

Ragabash

05-16-2006, 00:44

Been playing CIV series from very first of them all.

Lets not forget colonization either. I could easily still play it, even if it's ancient game. Actually, I might try it now :2thumbsup:

Lorenzo_H

05-16-2006, 11:25

Been playing CIV series from very first of them all.

Lets not forget colonization either. I could easily still play it, even if it's ancient game. Actually, I might try it now :2thumbsup:
We can definitly expect a Colonization 2 very soon down the road because Firaxis is definitly in a remake mood - think Pirates!, Railroads! and all the sequels to civ.

I have never played colonization but I have only heard good things about it.

screwtype

05-16-2006, 13:28

econ21

05-16-2006, 15:20

I like Civ4. It's as addictive as always, but more fun this time round - especially the Great People and the combat system (combined arms+promotions).

What I like best about it is that Civ in general is that it provides a competitive challenge from the AI that virtually no other strategy game does (certainly not TW, unfortunately) and yet diplomacy is still meaningful, with some scarey civs being a threat and others being nice to you.

I'm not sure about the expansion. I've never played Civ scenarios - they seem to want to turn Civ into a historical game and I just can't accept it from that point of view. The changes to the core game sound rather peripheral.

Lorenzo_H

05-16-2006, 16:48

I dislike CivIV. The glitzy 3D graphics are unattractive and irritating, and the movement, combat and city management systems are clumsy and dated. Somehow I enjoyed CivIII Conquests more even though the underlying gameplay is almost identical. Perhaps because the gameplay seemed more balanced.

I think CivIV was a very unadventurous iteration, they are obviously frightened to do anything but tinker around the edges of what they consider a winning formula, but the result is that the series looks very tired and dated. I won't be buying another Civ title unless major changes are made.
That is precisely why it is famous (because it didn't simply tinker around with a winning formula). It adds a lot of new features and gets rid of what wasn't fun in the last game. I don't think you've played enough, or else you are too used to the Total War gameplay.

Lorenzo_H

05-16-2006, 16:49

Viking

05-16-2006, 21:50

I have it. Felt great in the beginning, but I got soon tired of it.

Lorenzo_H

05-16-2006, 21:56

I have it. Felt great in the beginning, but I got soon tired of it.
Was there ever a game that you didn't get tired of even after playing it for ages? I can't think of one.

Viking

05-16-2006, 22:11

Was there ever a game that you didn't get tired of even after playing it for ages? I can't think of one.

I got tired of it soon...

Played RTW for six months several hours a day before I got tired of it.

Reverend Joe

05-17-2006, 03:55

I've never played Civ scenarios - they seem to want to turn Civ into a historical game and I just can't accept it from that point of view. The changes to the core game sound rather peripheral.
Actually, the scenarios were what kept the second one going for so long. The main point was to have as malleable a game as possible; after all, the origional concept was pretty silly. I only played the "vanilla" Civ 2 for a few months- but I ended up playing all the scenarios for a frickin' decade. I still remember getting excited when the next WW2 scenario (by far the most popular) came out.

In fact, I just recently had to stop playing; it was partly because the old Civ 2 following was finally dying out, but it was also part of a general lack of interest in the computer that has grown in me recently. Real life just proved to be too engaging and addictive. :2thumbsup:

Lorenzo_H

05-17-2006, 08:59

I got tired of it soon...

Played RTW for six months several hours a day before I got tired of it.
I played Civ3 for just as long. I haven't had a chance to play #4 as much though - I just bought RTW and its absorbing to say the least.

screwtype

05-17-2006, 13:01

That is precisely why it is famous (because it didn't simply tinker around with a winning formula). It adds a lot of new features and gets rid of what wasn't fun in the last game.

I disagree. I think the things they did tinker with were the wrong things - like getting rid of the human advisors, changing the method of choosing worlds (Civ3's method was completely intuitive, the new system is a mess) and changing the method of building workers and settlers, to name but a few which come to mind - whilst retaining the bad features of the old, like the clumsy city economy screen and the primitive army raising and combat resolution.

I don't think you've played enough, or else you are too used to the Total War gameplay

I played Civ3 quite a lot, so I'm more than familiar with the basic game system. But when it comes to Civ4, there's just something about it that I don't like. I feel that all the attention went into the graphics, while the rest of the game actually regressed. And the underlying game mechanics were already well and truly showing their age.

To me, it's a timid, cowardly product tailored by the marketing department and it shows. That kind of approach to games design really pisses me off, and we are seeing more and more of this sort of thing in PC gaming. Basically they are just milking their customer base. I've got no time for companies which operate like that. Game sequels should add greater depth and improved gameplay, not just the same old crap wrapped up in a shiny new skin.

BDC

05-18-2006, 20:24

I don't like it. Galactic Civilizations II seems better. I even liked Civ2 more.

It's just so boring and lacking in proper control. I spend three hours clicking next turn and then get killed/bored/win.

screwtype

05-19-2006, 08:49

I should add, another thng I don't like about it is the new combat system. With the old one units had a separate attack and defence factor which was quite intuitive, in the sense that it was pretty easy to figure out which units would do better and worse against one another.

The new one has just a "strength" factor combined with unique unit abilites. These unit abilites are difficult to remember and quite arbitrary. For example, there is no reason why an axeman should get a 50% bonus in melee over a swordsman, or why a swordsman should get a bonus in city attack instead.

Perhaps if the unit abilities actually made sense it wouldn't have been such a turn-off. My own feeling about the game was that if I spent a several months modding unit abilities and tweaking the tech chart and time factors, I could probably have created a pretty decent game. But I don't have the time or inclination to do that. The out-of-the-box experience just wasn't up to scratch in my view.

screwtype

05-19-2006, 08:59

It's just so boring and lacking in proper control. I spend three hours clicking next turn and then get killed/bored/win.

Yeah, all you seem to do for the first thousand years or two is click the end turn button, because it takes so very long to build new settlers and workers. In the previous game, the early years are actually a lot of fun to play. It's the later years that get tedious, when there is too much to do and the AI takes ages to move.

With Civ4, the early years go by in a flash with very little to do, unless you have a war, and then in the late game you research techs so fast that you are into one new era after another with no time to enjoy any of them. So, to my mind, the whole thing was just unbalanced and unsatisfying to play.

Lorenzo_H

05-19-2006, 11:46

Screwtype!?!?!? What is wrong with you dude? You obviously know a lot about the series and are well informed, but I don't see how its possible to dislike Civ IV?

Civ IV is very satisfying and extremely fun imo.

Ser Clegane

05-19-2006, 15:39

Civ IV is very satisfying and extremely fun imo.

And the bold part is exactly the point - whether you like the (or a) game or not is just an opinion.
While I share your view on Civ4 (I personally also very much enjoyed it and preferred it over Civ3) I can understand a lot of the issues screwtype has with Civ4 (e.g., how the battles work and how the different eras are treated).

You enjoyed it, he did not - you can continue to enjoy it and screwtype will (hopefully) find games he will enjoy - nothing wrong with either of you I would say...

Lorenzo_H

05-20-2006, 13:35

I was making that comment for precisely that reason! I don't want others to be put off what many consider to be a great game. I think screwtype was harshly critical in his analysis.

Lorenzo_H

05-24-2006, 12:02

hey, somhow this thread says it was started by Ser Clegane from the Arena Forum. I started this though!

econ21

05-24-2006, 12:37

hey, somhow this thread says it was started by Ser Clegane from the Arena Forum. I started this though!

Don't worry - there's some wierd bug with the forums whereby Admins posts are often not visible on the forum lists and where threads they participate in can incorrectly be assigned to them. They are working hard to track down the bug, but no luck yet.

Upxl

05-26-2006, 19:50

Does anyone know where I can get the music of Civ.4?
Band and or music name.
In particular the music that’s playing in the main and load screen

Keba

05-26-2006, 21:02

You can find it in the folder, it goes Civ4 (or whichever folder name you have, the main folder)/Assets/Sounds/Soundtrack

The music is divided by eras, with the non-era connected music in the folder directly (others are in subfolders). Music heard in the diplomacy screen is in the Diplomacy folder in the Sounds folder.

EDIT: a wrong folder name corrected.

Lorenzo_H

05-26-2006, 21:31

For any further information on CivIV go to www.civfanatics.com. Those guys are hardcore civvers!

econ21

05-26-2006, 22:40

In particular the music that’s playing in the main and load screen

It is the Lord's prayer in Swahili and it is magnificent isn't it? Try asking in the civfanatics forum - there used to be a massive thread devoted to it.

Upxl

05-27-2006, 14:15

Thnx guys for the fast replies.

It is the Lord's prayer in Swahili and it is magnificent isn't it? .

It sure is my friend.
I’m going to buy the cd anyway.
True art it is.

Lorenzo_H

05-27-2006, 18:39

It is the Lord's prayer in Swahili and it is magnificent isn't it? Try asking in the civfanatics forum - there used to be a massive thread devoted to it.
Thats correct. Are you a member of CFC? Look out for me "diablodelmar" with 700+ posts.

Here's the thread econ21 is refering to:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=123680&highlight=baba+yetu

NodachiSam

05-28-2006, 05:23

I resent your poll choices, I certainly have taste :P. I don't plan on buying Civ 4 because my experience with it turned so sour despite my initial enthusiasm and enjoyment with it. I played it every day for a few weeks, stopped and gave it away to my friend. Some of the limitations seemed so frustratingly arbitrary (like not being able to make armies in the very early stages) and the game over all so inflexible. Only a radically improved game could tempt me back. I've heard though Civ4 isn't really that different from the last incarnation.

I'd rather have a more flexible civilization simulator, mixing elements from the TW series and the good stuff from the Civ series. I yearn for something realistic (but still playable) and very dynamic where societies could rise, fall, splinter, transform, where economics, geography, environmental factors, and movement of technology all are important. Something that makes you feel like you are really playing with history, or something that is really involving anyways. It could easily ignore actual historic events, people and earth geography for all I care. Something I like about MTW is that your actions feel relevant historically, while CIV 3 is very abstract. Ahwell, it is a lot to wish for.

Ironically, I enjoyed the demo of Alpha Centauri a great deal and hope to aquire the full game somehow. Maybe I will check out this Galactic civilizations too. If there is a demo for Civ4, I will give it a try because I shall not spend money on it otherwise. I'm kinda still open to it though I have strong expectations.

Lorenzo_H

05-28-2006, 08:53

@NodachiSam. I like both Total War and Civilization, but I don't want them both to be the same game. The whole idea of the game is to do whatever you wish in the course of creating your empire. What version of Civ were you playing? #3? I definitly think, judging by what you have said, that you would enjoy the latest version, #4. You do feel you are dealing with relavent history, particularly when completeing wonders and also when Great People (great scientists, Prophets, Engineers, Artists and Merchants) are born. GPs are a new and wonderfully fun part of Civ4, each one having different talents and abilities to help you.

I would definitly recommend that you try it out.

doc_bean

05-28-2006, 11:22

I played it every day for a few weeks, stopped and gave it away to my friend. Some of the limitations seemed so frustratingly arbitrary (like not being able to make armies in the very early stages) and the game over all so inflexible.

A rather common complaint about the civ games, sometimes it feels like you're just clicking end of turn or building whatever the computer suggests. It takes a little time and some experience before you're able to really 'control' your civilizations long term evolution imo.

But about the lack of armies: I'm usually a peaceful player and I think Civ is at its best when you don't go warmongering all over the map, although that can be fun too, I usually find the slow movement speeds frustrating when making war. Galactic Civ doesn't really have this problem (or to a lesser extent) since you can upgrade your ships' engines to make them go further per turn. So if you are more into warfare than peaceful development I suggest you check that game out. (Both CIV and Gal Civ II have demos available)

Lorenzo_H

05-28-2006, 14:54

Lack of armies? Play warlords if your worried about that mate! In that you will have access to massive armies!

x-dANGEr

05-28-2006, 15:08

I think the best Civ is simply Civ III! :)

Edit:

And to stay on topic: I do have it, but it really haven't got me stickied except for 4 hours, and that's a total. So I think you know what my opinion on the expansion would be ;)

NodachiSam

05-29-2006, 05:14

It was Civ3 I owned. I'll look for the demo and give it a try I suppose.

screwtype

05-29-2006, 13:27

But about the lack of armies: I'm usually a peaceful player and I think Civ is at its best when you don't go warmongering all over the map, although that can be fun too, I usually find the slow movement speeds frustrating when making war.

Yes, both the absurdly slow movement speeds and the very slow army build rate are serious problems with the Civ paradigm IMO.

It shouldn't take you literally decades to raise a single soldier! You should be able to raise your entire army instantly, in a single turn, like you can in a game like Imperialism II. The size of your armies should only be tied to the amount of resources you have available to build them, it shouldn't be time dependent at all in a game where each turn represents years of time.

And yes, I agree the movement speeds of units are much too slow. I think Civ would be more fun if they gave all combat units the ability to move half a dozen tiles or so a turn, and that they had zones of control extending into each adjacent tile which forced opposing units to halt their movement. In other words, make the whole thing more like a conventional wargame. There'd be a lot more action, and it would be a lot more fun.

I was modding the game along just these lines at one stage but I got bored with it.

I've had wars in Civ that lasted over a thousand years and with maybe one or two cities changing hands. Ridiculous.

BHCWarman88

05-30-2006, 22:21

I loved this game........for like,2 weeks,hell,just 1 week,then I quit playing it....my Amazon Account is going to have a new Vistior....

NodachiSam

05-30-2006, 22:23

Screwtype: I think that feature of being able to train mulitple units at one time would benefit the total war series too. In RTW you would be able to control population growth more easily if you could summon a whole lot of peasants at once. I think another way to do it would be if you could train one of each unit type in a province at once, according to what facilities you have in there. So in one province you would be able to make an archer unit, a swordsman, a spearman, some calvary and be working on a ship at the same time. Historically, the docks wouldn't stop working because the barracks are being used.... That way you could pump out armies much more quickly in accordance to your resources of course. I think that that's a fine idea.

So I've played the demo a few times and it has its charms. I'll try to borrow it from my friend to see how it plays because the demo is really limited with 1 tiny map, 4 civs, and 100 turns. It seems really hard to play any type of military compaign due to the things you noted.

screwtype

05-31-2006, 04:13

Screwtype: I think that feature of being able to train multiple units at one time would benefit the total war series too.

You may not have heard, but M2TW will have this feature! Now you can apparently train multiple units in a city in a given turn. I can't recall the exact details of how they've implemented it but from what I read it sounded like a very positive new feature, and one long overdue IMO.

If you want a new 4x game, get Galactiv Civilizations II, not Civ IV.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "4x" game, but I did play the demo of GalCiv and thought it had some potential. However, I think it's too expensive at current prices. I'm waiting (hoping) for the price to come down a bit.

Lorenzo_H

05-31-2006, 07:59

You may not have heard, but M2TW will have this feature! Now you can apparently train multiple units in a city in a given turn. I can't recall the exact details of how they've implemented it but from what I read it sounded like a very positive new feature, and one long overdue IMO.
cooooooooooool

NodachiSam

05-31-2006, 18:14

Screwtype: That is really cool! I'm glad to hear it:)

So I downloaded the Galactic Civ2 demo and holy crap am I impressed! There is no contest here!:2thumbsup: Its 5 to 10 times as fun, longer, deeper, and half the file size of the Civ4 demo. Also it allows you to save and load your games. What really makes the game for me is being able to design your own spaceships. :D I am definitely going to keep my eye out for this if I see it in stores.

As for Civ, I'll wait for the next installment to see if its any better. I'm still looking for a copy of Alpha Centauri though. I'd buy it on the net but don't feel good about using my credit card.

Edit: Playing it a little more has tempered my enthusaism but I'll still buy it if I see if for a good price.
Edit2: Okay I just found the thread that was going around here :D I'll be picking this puppy up asap!

Lorenzo_H

06-02-2006, 11:27

You can save your games in Civ IV.

What is Gal civ? I've never played it.

doc_bean

06-02-2006, 11:47

Galactic Civ ! (http://www.galciv2.com/)

NodachiSam

06-02-2006, 17:02

I mean the demo of galactic civilizations 2 lets you save and reload while the Civ4 demo does not.

Tricky Lady

09-22-2006, 14:47

Is anybody still playing this game? I got it yesterday, but I haven't enjoyed it too much yet! The tutorial played fine but when I finished it I decided to play on for a while, but at a certain moment the game froze. Reloaded the savegame and it seemed to crash when autosaving.
Started a new game, but when I discovered "meditation", the game zooms in to the capital, plays a tune, starts autosaving and.... freezes. I tried to load the game a couple of times, but I always crashes.

Anyone has a suggestion? I couldn't find an option to turn off autosaving, so I'm afraid my Civ IV "career" will not have lasted longer than 1 hour. A bit an expensive game... :skull:

econ21

09-22-2006, 15:10

Anyone has a suggestion?

1) First off, check you meet the system requirements by using:

www.srtest.com

It's rather a demanding game.

2) I guess you've installed the latest patches? They improved performance, IIRC.

3) Update your graphic card drivers.

4) I would try posting for help on some of the Civ game sites - e.g. civfanatics. It seems to have a very large community. They might be able to suggest tweaks etc that help.

ChaosLord

09-22-2006, 16:33

Hmm, alot of people who disliked CivIV for some reason. I loved the game myself, even when I had it chugging along on my GF2. I also liked Warlords, especially the Warring States China scenario it included with it. But anyway, back to the matter at hand.

Yeah first thing is to be sure you've updated the game. Once you've done that i'd try turning off/down all the graphics. I believe what it crashed on was zooming to to the city that founded a religion/spawned a great prophet. I can't remember if it normally plays a movie there or not, might be the part you're having problems with.

Beyond that all I can recommend is checking the main game website for tech suport, or going to www.apolyton.net and www.civfanatics.com for the excelllant fan forums there. The devs visit and post on both, so if its a real serious thing you should be able to get help for it.

GiantMonkeyMan

09-22-2006, 23:10

i recently got Civ4 of a friend, for cheaper, who disliked it because he said it was like Civ3 but with 'pretty' graphics and a little less flexibility, i've been playing it for quite a while but i find it quite tiresome already... it is a good game i agree but it hasn't gripped me like rome has... or civ3 did, i've played alpha centauri more than both of them because i love the gameplay and would sorely like to try out the expansion 'alien crossfire' (or something)

what i would like in a civ5 would be a lot more dynamically changable units like if you discover bronze you get a bronze armed foot soldier, then you think about sticking him in a chariot, then you realise that you could armour him (basically this is similar to alpha centauri in that you have a 'workshop' and can alter/create units) and also a way to change the governments instead of having preset ones which are basically real life ideas and not things which come about from a different set of situations... its hard to explain but basically i didn't like Civ4 enough to continue playing... oblivion and rtw stopped that :2thumbsup:

Orb

09-22-2006, 23:15

I liked it a bit, I really think the longbowmen are imbalanced though. They just screw over virtually anything.

That said, I'm rubbish at the game, so maybe I just need to compensate for that ~;)

econ21

09-22-2006, 23:23

I liked it a bit, I really think the longbowmen are imbalanced though. They just screw over virtually anything.

Maybe I missed something, as I found archers - including longbowmen - pretty lousy units; good for city defence only.

If there was any imbalance, I thought it was the axemen/macemen - they seemed a little too good all round.

I did love my redcoats though. Sometimes unbalanced is good. :eyebrows:

Laman

09-23-2006, 07:02

CivIV is nice, better than CivIII atleast, but not not my favorite game.

Orb

09-23-2006, 21:34

[quote=Maybe I missed something, as I found archers - including longbowmen - pretty lousy units; good for city defence only.

If there was any imbalance, I thought it was the axemen/macemen - they seemed a little too good all round.

I did love my redcoats though. Sometimes unbalanced is good. [/quote]

Well, it was in city defence that they seemed to threaten cannon, musketeers, grenadiers etc. Otherwise they still had the advantage of first strike and hill defence. Those swordsmen were completely useless - just so vulnerable to axes.

On the redcoats... I should stop playing as yanks just because I like their leaders. I always preferred the more varied unique units. A little modding made it more fun for me, took a few hours to add five new civs (Anglo-Saxons, Normans, Seljuqs, Byzantines and Rus).

Tricky Lady

09-23-2006, 21:53

Thanks for some of the suggestions posted.

1) First off, check you meet the system requirements by using:

www.srtest.com

It's rather a demanding game.

Yeah, I actually read about the demanding part, so I checked my PC's specs with the link you provide. As it said that I could run the game, I decided to go for it & buy it

2) I guess you've installed the latest patches? They improved performance, IIRC.

Yes, the latest patch came with the CD. (161 if I remember correctly? I know I checked it with the Civfanatics website and I have the last patch installed)

4) I would try posting for help on some of the Civ game sites - e.g. civfanatics. It seems to have a very large community. They might be able to suggest tweaks etc that help.

Thought about this too.... after posting over here :oops:

Yeah first thing is to be sure you've updated the game. Once you've done that i'd try turning off/down all the graphics. I believe what it crashed on was zooming to to the city that founded a religion/spawned a great prophet. I can't remember if it normally plays a movie there or not, might be the part you're having problems with.

That's what I tried as a last resort, and luckily it worked. It was indeed exactly this whole prophet/religion spawned thingie that crashed the game. So it works now, thanks!

If there was any imbalance, I thought it was the axemen/macemen - they seemed a little too good all round.

I haven't played the game that much yet (but still too much to be healthy), but I've noticed this too. On the other hand, they seem to be quite vulnerable on the defensive side. But still, they're a bit too strong for my taste. Gotta go now, have to build some macemen and axemen in my Arab game :2thumbsup:

So far I think the game is pretty good. Perhaps not the best of the best but it certainly brings some nice entertainment.