Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Are there other games out there like Civ Rev?

thefuzz

By thefuzz,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

o803oVaDeR Newbie

o803oVaDeR

Posted
Posted

Wow! I seriously just bought Civ Rev the other day. I have been playing the crap out of it everyday. Look me up on Xbox Live o803o VaDeR. Maybe we can play sometime. I havent had the balls to get online yet. I am sure I would get killed. Any Command and Conquer game is similar. I like the ones on the PC better though. Command and Conquer Generals is a great game, but only for PC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
o803oVaDeR Newbie

o803oVaDeR

Posted
Posted

I love Civ and I love my Xbox...but there is no way in hell I would want to play Civ on my Xbox.

In other words, if you love the game, you're doing yourself a disservice by playing it on console.

I would usually agree, but this game is different. It was designed for the console. It is not a copy of the PC game, like the Command & Conquer games.

I never played the PC one, but I am sure it is way more detailed and a better RTS, but my PC is crap, so Xbox will have to do, for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stankowalski Newbie

stankowalski

Posted
Posted

I would usually agree, but this game is different. It was designed for the console. It is not a copy of the PC game, like the Command & Conquer games.

I never played the PC one, but I am sure it is way more detailed and a better RTS, but my PC is crap, so Xbox will have to do, for me.

Xbox is fine if that is all you've got, but if you do have a PC capable of running the game, it's better on the PC...and I'm not a PC fanboy, I buy most games for my console.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
o803oVaDeR Newbie

o803oVaDeR

Posted
Posted

Xbox is fine if that is all you've got, but if you do have a PC capable of running the game, it's better on the PC...and I'm not a PC fanboy, I buy most games for my console.

Yeah, I always bought RTS games on PC. They are way better for some reason. I just dont have a PC that can handle gaming anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
  • Author
Posted

My computer is probably good enough to play on, but I have never used it for that, but I will give it a shot.

Civ Rev is the only game of it's kind that I find fun on XBox, but I have had a really good time with it for a couple of years now.

MaxZax, I am not into warlords, and dragons and such, are those titles pretty good games if I am just into building nations, armies, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SgtJoo Proficient

SgtJoo

Posted
Posted

My computer is probably good enough to play on, but I have never used it for that, but I will give it a shot.

Civ Rev is the only game of it's kind that I find fun on XBox, but I have had a really good time with it for a couple of years now.

MaxZax, I am not into warlords, and dragons and such, are those titles pretty good games if I am just into building nations, armies, etc.

Yeah ton of RTS's on the PC. I wouldn't play them on X-box unless that's your only option. Some that come to mind, Warcraft 3 series, Age of Empires series, Rise of Nations, Sins of a Solar Empire, etc.

Warcraft, no. Age of Empires, yes. Rise of Nations, yes. Sins of a Solar Empire, yes with the caveat that it's in space.

Also all of the above are RTS (Real Time Strategy) as opposed to Civilization which is technically turn-based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Warcraft, no. Age of Empires, yes. Rise of Nations, yes. Sins of a Solar Empire, yes with the caveat that it's in space.

Also all of the above are RTS (Real Time Strategy) as opposed to Civilization which is technically turn-based.

I am going to go get one.

Of the two (Age of Empires and Rise of Nations) which is the better game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SgtJoo Proficient

SgtJoo

Posted
Posted

I am going to go get one.

Of the two (Age of Empires and Rise of Nations) which is the better game?

I guess it's personal preference (people consider AoE a classic) but I had more fun with Rise of Nations. I would avoid Age of Empires III if you go down that route though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lumps Newbie

Lumps

Posted
Posted

I loooooove civ rev. I got all the achievements, played for hours on end. A couple games like it for the 360 worth playing are command and conquer and Lord of the rings: battle for middle earth 2.

Now I know LOTR BMEII is pretty old but I LOVED that game, it is so fun to play. As people said there aren't many good RTS or TBS games on the 360 and most suck really hard but those two were pretty fantastic.

If you have a PC try Civ 4, it is legendary and right up your alley. Don't expect anything to really be likve Civ, they have their own identity but the two strat games I mentioned should keep you gaming for a while. Course if you have a PC there are a ton of strat games, RT and TB. I like real time but Civ did a great job at the TB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LinvilleGorge
      Bryce's Achilles Heel Is Not What You Think It Is

      By LinvilleGorge · Posted

      Watching those throws Drake Maye was making on a dead run threading lasers into tight coverage on the sidelines over and over in that game against the Bills... these people need to go watch that and be honest with themselves. And yeah, I'm a Heels fan but I'm specifically using Maye here because he's another young highly drafted QB not an established top tier player. Seems like a fair apples to apples comparison versus using a Mahomes or Allen.
    • CRA
      Bryce's Achilles Heel Is Not What You Think It Is

      By CRA · Posted

      why rig the scenario with the "as a passer" tag.   I mean, I assume you do that because Bryce needs help in the argument.  If we are just talking players and no contacts?   I mean, give me Young over Russell Wilson.   That's it.   I'd put him on par w/ Penix, Fields, McCarthy and Rattler,  so that's a wash.  Give me everyone else over Bryce.  And I'm not handicapping the other players as passing only because when you start doing that it's really meaningless.   
    • kungfoodude
      Bryce's Achilles Heel Is Not What You Think It Is

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      McCarthy to date, for sure. That's a very early sample size, however. Russell Wilson is a backup. Not sure Wilson wouldn't be better suited to our offense specifically, but at the bare minimum it's basically a wash. Hurts I would generally disagree with. I do think Hurts is likely to be less than stellar in our offense. Justin Fields - Agree. Fields is a significant threat on the ground but he sees the field as badly or worse than Bryce. And that's with significantly more reps. Spencer Rattler - I honestly thought this would be an easier call that it is. TBH, right now Rattler looks a lot better. Really almost across the board. Kyler - Murray is better. Basically across the board. Not significantly better, mind you. Trevor Lawrence is more debatable than it seems. Low completion percentages, tons of TO's.....he really has been quite bad this year in Jax. He is considerably more talented than Bryce but the results have been marginally better. Tua - Tua is a little more dynamic of a player but he is a TO machine. Tend to agree. Caleb Williams. Not sure on this. Williams is still struggling to be consistent but his upper end is WAY higher than Bryce. He shows it fairlu frequently, as well. Probably would rather be working through Caleb's issues than Bryce. Penix - 100%. This guy stinks. Cam Ward. This is a little tough. Again, far higher ceiling on Ward and he shows flashes but it's been a mess there in Tenn. Probably lean towards Bryce here.
×
×
  • Create New...