[quote] Don't forget to actually look at the minimum specs. [/quote] They're amazingly low for the amount of eye candy in the game, you might be pleasantly surprised. Here they are: - Windows XP SP2 / Vista - 1.8 GHz Single-Core Processor - 512 MB RAM (1 GB RAM for Vista) - 128 MB 3D DirectX 9 Video Card (Radeon 9600 / GeForce FX 6600 and above) - DirectX 9.0c Compatible Sound Card - DVD-ROM Drive (for retail copi
Yeah, I did get a bit carried away with the exaggeration, didn't I? My point is that running an evil empire, no matter how well you cow the populace, isn't good for morale. Even if you appeal to your race's feelings of superiority, all the other groups will be pretty ticked off. For example, in Nazi Germany's empire, even though the actual Germans were pretty happy with the setup, everybody else was kind of angry. [quote] That's just silly. It's entirely possible to run an "evil" em
There should be a list of techs that just won't work for a civ, I agree, but it takes a lot of depth out if you can't trade [I]any[/I] unique techs. A lot of them could realistically be traded, and work well. Making those tradeable in games where people want to trade techs would be more realistic and make more sense, in addition to providing the difficult dilemma of whether to trade your unique techs.
[quote] If you are good then you do not have sin weighing on your soul. That IS the reward/bonus. I was wondering how long it'd be before someone was going to post that crap. [/quote] yeah, the reward should be not having to duck and cover when the rioters come for your head because there aren't any. That's a [I]real[/I] reward.
[quote] it's very simple, if you're evil, you don't have to care about anyone but yourself and how well you do. [/quote] You don't in games, which is a shame, because in real life, you also don't. That is until your 'citizens' revolt and freaking SHOOT YOU. REPEATEDLY. IN THE FACE. I hope stardock decides to include how unpopular tyrannical governments can get. But yeah, in most games, evil is easier. It shouldn't be, though because there are consequences. For
Absolutely. I think that the lack of techs in a certain area should make you find friends rather than crippling you. I really like the idea of only the originating tech being able to trade it because it solves all the problems and gives the really good impression that the trading civ is the only one that really understands the science. Imagine the US telling somebody that layering three chemicals in a certain way lets you absorb radar. It doesn't really give much help if you want something more
[quote] What a great story. It is excellent to see positive storeis about computer games for a change instead of the usual 'video games will rot your brain / will incite violent, sadistic behaviour / will turn you into a raving lunatic' articles. [/quote] But Jack Thompson said they will!
I feel that good civs should get morale bonuses for working to improve the lives of their citizens while evil civs should get approval penalties for not caring/abusing their citizens for profit. That, if applied properly, should help a great deal and stay faithful to real life. I mean, when was the last time a justly ruled kingdom had any royalty defenestrated? Most revolts in history were because the royalty just sucked and they were hungry. Oh so hungry. But the royalty didn't do anything, so
umm... the good/evil business is completely messed up in regards to real life. Sample event (real life version) A famine has just begun throughout the galaxy. Trillions are starving. What should you do? Put all necessary resources into producing food, and donate any surpluses to the less fortunate beings in the universe. (+30 influence, -300 bc, +5 morale for a while, -10 military production for a while) Encourage the production of food to feed our citizens, a
That sounds excellent, throw in another vote because I really don't want to see my opponents getting my unique techs.
Yep, same here. I bought it because it looked cool and because I wouldn't have to download a no-cd exe to make it run the way it should. It sucks having to go through most of the steps of pirating a game just so I have a product as good as the ones pirates have, but I don't recognize the DMCA as a moral law, so I have no compunctions about disobeying it, seeing as it violates the fair use laws and many more laws the US is built on. The DRM companies are just spinning a sugar-sweet fairy tale for
I know my conclusion. I saw a review of galactic civilizations 2, and I thought it was pretty cool. Then I saw it had no copy protection, I bought it... and Sins of a Solar Empire just because it looked sweet and I immediately liked Stardock. I still can't buy Bioshock because I don't have the money, but I feel I made the right choice, plus I won't feel nearly as many compunctions about pirating a game that doesn't trust me not to, probably because I'm contrary. But still, despite all the swill
