DS Fanboy Review: Civilization Revolution
Few games have inspired as many different reactions -- all heated, all extreme -- in me as Civilization Revolution. There are few aspects of the game that are just "okay" for me; everything is either really awesome or really annoying, and in the end, it's difficult to condense all of those feelings into a simple yea or nay. The short version is that Civilization Revolution is a pretty good DS game. As a Civ game ... well, it's different.
Civilization is an intense experience. After all, you're starting with a few guys dressed in ill-fitting skins and attempting to conquer the world through a variety of strategies. The games are often enormous, sprawling across a map that can take up most of the globe (oceans be damned), and due to the sheer size of the games, they've just never worked well on consoles. This game changes that, but in a very intriguing way. Civilization Revolution isn't a port. It's not a remake, or even really a reimagining. It's a complete rebuild, with such radical changes in some areas that it hardly feels like the same game, and yet, the base gameplay of one of the world's best turn-based strategy franchises somehow manages to remain intact. It's not without flaws -- and some are pretty serious -- but Civilization Revolution does manage to accomplish a very simple goal, and that's stripping down Civ and making it a manageable (and fun!) portable experience.
At first, I hated Civ Rev. It just felt so incredibly different that I couldn't wrap my head around it. The features I'd grown to love just weren't there. My preferred strategies often simply weren't possible. Time flew by. The gameplay was different. Combat seemed like Risk dice rolls on a particularly unlucky day. And then the DS accidentally fell right under my shoe ... or rather, I realized that it was supposed to be different. In order to make the games shorter and create a manageable experience, Firaxis had to make an all-new Civ, and that meant I had to, on many levels, relearn how to play. Fair warning to all other Civ junkies -- this isn't the game you're used to. It's, at best, a distant relative who happens to look eerily like your favorite aunt.
The fact that it feels and plays familiarly makes this harder to accept. On the DS, as opposed to the console versions (which I also fooled with), the stylus makes it very familiar. The stylus works more than passably well here as soon as you figure out the peculiar dragging controls used to manage units. The menus are a lot simpler; a few points, a few clicks, and your cities are under control.
But a lot of that control is taken away from you. No longer will you build roads tile-by-tile; drop some gold and it'll happen automatically, but beware: long roads will cost you. Want to develop the land around your cities in specific ways? Tough; that happens automatically here. You've got other fish to fry. Letting go of some of the control-freak aspects that make Civ such an attractive (and highly personalizeable) game is going to be a challenge for a lot of Civ lovers, but for those who are new to the franchise, or who like other DS strategy games (or both), that's part of what will make this version so palatable.
But there are some issues to be grappled with here, and they're not really gameplay issues. It's not the changes (which are mostly sensible) -- it's the interface. Civ Rev is littered with repetitive dialogue, irritating pop-up-style information screens, and empty screens that serve only to make you tap the screen or hit the A button. Luckily, there's no long, drawn-out dialogue, but as it is, there's a whole lot of extra clicking going on. A little quality control on that aspect of the game and maybe something else could have been put back in, such as manually-controlled workers. Yes, the extra screens and obstacles seemed to add that much to the game, and they were by far the worst aspect of the title.
The feeling of forced-combat I felt when previewing the title is definitely a design choice, but after I adjusted to the game, I learned to enjoy that more. I do miss the slower, craftier games in which I perch, spider-like, on my corner of the map, atop an empire of Wonders and workers, but that sort of approach just isn't possible in a fast game. In order to make the combat focus easier, adjustments have been made to Civ Rev that actually work quite well in making a combative more enjoyable, particularly in the scenarios -- which are usually my least favorite part in PC Civ. Here, they're awesome, and so well-designed that they're enough to merit a purchase without even considering the rest of the game.
The only problem with this combat-focused approach is that the combat here just isn't great. Like the interface issues, it would have benefited from a little tweaking. As mentioned above, the combat feels very like Risk and not much like the relative stats of units particularly matters. That's unfortunate, since so much of strategy depends on unit balance.
That isn't to say combat is bad, or it's all random. Terrain still has an effect (though sometimes different effects than Civ players might be used to), and certain units are still better against others. It just feels like there's a little more of an element of luck. But combat and unit management is more than workable, if not ideal, and after a few games, it becomes apparent that a lot of this Civ is about approach rather than adaptation on the fly.
Each of the sixteen civilizations available for play come with their own bonuses, and they're pretty serious advantages. At the point of deciding whom to represent, you'll be setting your strategy, and in order to win, you either need to be very on the ball, or just stick to it. While this is also a factor in PC Civ, here, you don't have the time to correct or change focus. Everything moves too quickly.
The speed of the game is one thing Firaxis got very right here. Technologies roll in, Wonders go up quickly, and there are bonuses galore. Find a river? Get paid. Discover tech before your opponents? Get a bonus unit or building, and not just for certain technologies, either. Rewards are common -- so common that you might be tempted to slack -- but they're necessary to keep things going, and to keep you in the game. At all difficulty levels, your opponents are pretty aggressive, and since space is tight, they're going to be looking to your land. You're going to need all those extras in order to defend it.
Civilization Revolution is still Civilization, but with a different approach and a different flavor. It's an interesting direction, and definitely the best non-PC attempt at Civ to date. It just may not be what longtime fans are looking for. That's okay -- the PC games aren't going anywhere, and after some necessary adjustments, this is a great alternative. After all, sometimes you have time to sit down and enjoy a steak ... and sometimes, you've only got time for a really tasty piece of beef jerky.
Visuals: The map and most of the menu screens are very simple, but effective; you can see everything that's going on and figure out where to go, which is really all you need. The combat, advisors, and leaders all look great, however!
Sound: If I never hear "Firaxlish" again, I'll be able to say my life was a good one. The sound here is simply nothing special, and after the first few sessions, I kept it turned off.
Story: Tale as old as time indeed -- this is pretty much the story of the Earth, and it's one of your design. Oh, but there's no traditional story, no, except for some slight elements that shape the scenarios.
Controls: Civlization Revolution is pretty excellent in the controls department. The stylus is accurate and easy to use, and you can switch pretty seamlessly between touchscreen and button controls.
Difficulty: All the old familiar levels of Civ difficulty are here, so at least you can choose that aspect of your game. In reality, though, it's just going to dictate how soon Gandhi or Elizabeth gets all up in your space, demanding your tech and money. Still, due to the differences from regular Civ, it's recommended that veterans start at a little lower rung than usual, unless you're in the mood for an ass-whipping of epic (but quick) proportions.
Final verdict: 8.0/10 -- if not for the sheer amount of content and replayability, this score would have been a hair lower for the pervasive interface issues. However, the problems, which are easily skippable (just annoying) aren't enough to outweigh the amount of gameplay packed into even a reduced Civilization.
Looking for a game? Be sure to swing by our extensive review archive, where you can easily jump to conclusions based on score alone, or access our full reviews, if you're so inclined.
Civilization is an intense experience. After all, you're starting with a few guys dressed in ill-fitting skins and attempting to conquer the world through a variety of strategies. The games are often enormous, sprawling across a map that can take up most of the globe (oceans be damned), and due to the sheer size of the games, they've just never worked well on consoles. This game changes that, but in a very intriguing way. Civilization Revolution isn't a port. It's not a remake, or even really a reimagining. It's a complete rebuild, with such radical changes in some areas that it hardly feels like the same game, and yet, the base gameplay of one of the world's best turn-based strategy franchises somehow manages to remain intact. It's not without flaws -- and some are pretty serious -- but Civilization Revolution does manage to accomplish a very simple goal, and that's stripping down Civ and making it a manageable (and fun!) portable experience.
Gallery: Civilization Revolution DS
At first, I hated Civ Rev. It just felt so incredibly different that I couldn't wrap my head around it. The features I'd grown to love just weren't there. My preferred strategies often simply weren't possible. Time flew by. The gameplay was different. Combat seemed like Risk dice rolls on a particularly unlucky day. And then the DS accidentally fell right under my shoe ... or rather, I realized that it was supposed to be different. In order to make the games shorter and create a manageable experience, Firaxis had to make an all-new Civ, and that meant I had to, on many levels, relearn how to play. Fair warning to all other Civ junkies -- this isn't the game you're used to. It's, at best, a distant relative who happens to look eerily like your favorite aunt.
The fact that it feels and plays familiarly makes this harder to accept. On the DS, as opposed to the console versions (which I also fooled with), the stylus makes it very familiar. The stylus works more than passably well here as soon as you figure out the peculiar dragging controls used to manage units. The menus are a lot simpler; a few points, a few clicks, and your cities are under control. But a lot of that control is taken away from you. No longer will you build roads tile-by-tile; drop some gold and it'll happen automatically, but beware: long roads will cost you. Want to develop the land around your cities in specific ways? Tough; that happens automatically here. You've got other fish to fry. Letting go of some of the control-freak aspects that make Civ such an attractive (and highly personalizeable) game is going to be a challenge for a lot of Civ lovers, but for those who are new to the franchise, or who like other DS strategy games (or both), that's part of what will make this version so palatable.
But there are some issues to be grappled with here, and they're not really gameplay issues. It's not the changes (which are mostly sensible) -- it's the interface. Civ Rev is littered with repetitive dialogue, irritating pop-up-style information screens, and empty screens that serve only to make you tap the screen or hit the A button. Luckily, there's no long, drawn-out dialogue, but as it is, there's a whole lot of extra clicking going on. A little quality control on that aspect of the game and maybe something else could have been put back in, such as manually-controlled workers. Yes, the extra screens and obstacles seemed to add that much to the game, and they were by far the worst aspect of the title.
The feeling of forced-combat I felt when previewing the title is definitely a design choice, but after I adjusted to the game, I learned to enjoy that more. I do miss the slower, craftier games in which I perch, spider-like, on my corner of the map, atop an empire of Wonders and workers, but that sort of approach just isn't possible in a fast game. In order to make the combat focus easier, adjustments have been made to Civ Rev that actually work quite well in making a combative more enjoyable, particularly in the scenarios -- which are usually my least favorite part in PC Civ. Here, they're awesome, and so well-designed that they're enough to merit a purchase without even considering the rest of the game.
The only problem with this combat-focused approach is that the combat here just isn't great. Like the interface issues, it would have benefited from a little tweaking. As mentioned above, the combat feels very like Risk and not much like the relative stats of units particularly matters. That's unfortunate, since so much of strategy depends on unit balance. That isn't to say combat is bad, or it's all random. Terrain still has an effect (though sometimes different effects than Civ players might be used to), and certain units are still better against others. It just feels like there's a little more of an element of luck. But combat and unit management is more than workable, if not ideal, and after a few games, it becomes apparent that a lot of this Civ is about approach rather than adaptation on the fly.
Each of the sixteen civilizations available for play come with their own bonuses, and they're pretty serious advantages. At the point of deciding whom to represent, you'll be setting your strategy, and in order to win, you either need to be very on the ball, or just stick to it. While this is also a factor in PC Civ, here, you don't have the time to correct or change focus. Everything moves too quickly.
The speed of the game is one thing Firaxis got very right here. Technologies roll in, Wonders go up quickly, and there are bonuses galore. Find a river? Get paid. Discover tech before your opponents? Get a bonus unit or building, and not just for certain technologies, either. Rewards are common -- so common that you might be tempted to slack -- but they're necessary to keep things going, and to keep you in the game. At all difficulty levels, your opponents are pretty aggressive, and since space is tight, they're going to be looking to your land. You're going to need all those extras in order to defend it.
Civilization Revolution is still Civilization, but with a different approach and a different flavor. It's an interesting direction, and definitely the best non-PC attempt at Civ to date. It just may not be what longtime fans are looking for. That's okay -- the PC games aren't going anywhere, and after some necessary adjustments, this is a great alternative. After all, sometimes you have time to sit down and enjoy a steak ... and sometimes, you've only got time for a really tasty piece of beef jerky.
Visuals: The map and most of the menu screens are very simple, but effective; you can see everything that's going on and figure out where to go, which is really all you need. The combat, advisors, and leaders all look great, however!
Sound: If I never hear "Firaxlish" again, I'll be able to say my life was a good one. The sound here is simply nothing special, and after the first few sessions, I kept it turned off.Story: Tale as old as time indeed -- this is pretty much the story of the Earth, and it's one of your design. Oh, but there's no traditional story, no, except for some slight elements that shape the scenarios.
Controls: Civlization Revolution is pretty excellent in the controls department. The stylus is accurate and easy to use, and you can switch pretty seamlessly between touchscreen and button controls.
Difficulty: All the old familiar levels of Civ difficulty are here, so at least you can choose that aspect of your game. In reality, though, it's just going to dictate how soon Gandhi or Elizabeth gets all up in your space, demanding your tech and money. Still, due to the differences from regular Civ, it's recommended that veterans start at a little lower rung than usual, unless you're in the mood for an ass-whipping of epic (but quick) proportions.
Final verdict: 8.0/10 -- if not for the sheer amount of content and replayability, this score would have been a hair lower for the pervasive interface issues. However, the problems, which are easily skippable (just annoying) aren't enough to outweigh the amount of gameplay packed into even a reduced Civilization.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kimiko @ Jul 3rd 2008 9:23AM
Wow, that was quick! :)
Sounds like it might be worth trying for me. I haven't played the more recent Civs, but 1, 2 and FreeCiv were kinda fun now and then. Of course I always cheated with infinite money.. ^^;
The cultural victory ending looks interesting. I haven't played a version with that before. Maybe my 'strategy' of building every improvement possible will have some effect there.
Thanks for the review!
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 3rd 2008 9:47AM
mian is gonna get me for putting this up today when I said the 8th. :)
Cultural is the easiest for me to achieve on this one. I think they made good choices with the victory conditions.
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:00PM
*sobs*
^ That's half-joy and half-bitterness. I'm thrilled with it being early, I just wish I thought to come by this morning. =(
How are your shins?
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:14PM
Shins are okay! I was wrong about when the embargo was up... so it was a good thing I hadn't put it off. ;)
Nigeria @ Jul 3rd 2008 9:56AM
This looks like one of those games that I'll buy when it drops significantly in price.
I always appreciated the PC Civilisations but I could never really get into them. It wasn't really my thing but I'm willing to give this a shot.
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:28AM
You are probably the exact target audience, then. I think a lot of people who never really got into Civ will find this interesting.
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:20PM
I'm a huge micromanager, and if a game of Civ 3 doesn't run into 70 hours and take a month+ to complete, I feel gyped.
But I don't really have a problem with the compromises as I've read them. I play Advance Wars and mini versions of Risk and Generals too, and as far as I can tell, there's no portable strategy that is like Civ Rev in scope. I expect it fill a nice void.
Wii60 @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:54AM
Yesterday, I bluetoothed 2 Wiimotes to my PC. One as a mouse and one for buttons. Hooked it up to my HDTV. Playing Civ 4 like that made me wonder if I'd want the console versions at all.
That said, the DS version is very interesting for portability.
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:08PM
What extra buttons did you need for that second wiimote? Worker controls? Is your script uploaded anywhere?
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:15PM
That controlled pretty well? I'd really miss the keyboard.
Wii60 @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:03PM
Well, as I progressed through the game, I added stuff I'd want. Off the top of my head, Build, Go, Enter and Fortify. Go and Enter are the two biggest ones. So they are set to A and B. I haven't finished playing through to figure out what I'd want most, but I'm sure there will be something.
When I'm done I'll be happy to post the scripts somewhere. This is my first outing with Wiimote to PC, so I'm not sure where I'd host it.
It feels REALLY cool playing Civ 4 on the big screen, and works surprisingly well. I find myself getting up and getting in depth with the gestures to send troops all over.
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:12PM
wiili.org used to be THE place to host GlovePIE scripts, and it's still there and still has a huge repository of scripts, but it's not very active anymore.
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:06PM
You talked about the quirks of stylus control... IGN's preview made it sound like after selecting units with the stylus, you had no choice but to use the dpad to direct them to their location. You make it sound like you can drag an arrow to where you want them.
Is full stylus control possible? Other than the spacebar, my PC civ games are completely mouse-driven. Do I have the option of full-stylus driven games? Do drop-down menus work more or less like their right-click PC counterparts?
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:14PM
You can absolutely move them with the stylus. You just have to keep steady screen pressure instead of picking up the stylus once the unit is selected. It took me a little bit to work that out, so maybe they just didn't figure it out?
I'd have to boot it back up to say with absolute certainty, but I think there are some things you can only do with the buttons (or at least, that was the way I found), like setting units to defend, directing great people to settle, accessing city screens. But you can attack and move with the stylus, yes, absolutely.
To me, though, this hybrid control felt really natural -- but I am a big keyboard Civ player (which I guess you aren't).
The menus are different. You're limited with what you can do with your units, and your city menus are pretty simple. Select unit or building, view information on it on the top screen, set it to build said unit or building. Control city focus or set to balance with a click or a button. Very simplified from regular Civ.
There aren't really good screens of the DS menu, but you can see the city menu here:
http://nintendo.joystiq.com/photos/civilizaton-revolution-ds/642997/
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:04PM
Thanks for the review, and and the answers. DS fanboy is the featured WiiHD review on Civ Rev.
http://wiihd.fortunz.com/news:070308-civ-rev-review
mian @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:25PM
I gather you couldn't work with the multiplayer (probably not that many copies of Civ Rev DS in action), but still a few questions:
1. How are Friend Codes implemented? Are they necessary? Is there some sort of random pairing if you're not looking to play with someone specific?
2. Voicechat is out, I know, but is there any text chat or messaging?
3. Can you save a multiplayer game and return to it later (I wouldn't think so, but it sure would be nice)
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 4th 2008 1:49AM
I couldn't test multiplayer (though I did try searching a few times, just in case!), but I did see how matches were set up. There's both friend-based play and random play. Couldn't tell about chat or saving games (though I doubt the latter).
With the way the games are set up, I expect multiplayer in this could be very exciting and very different from the singleplayer. If there's not chat, boy, there really should be. It would be interesting to see how alliances go.
2-4 player multi, also.
mian @ Jul 4th 2008 3:39AM
The lack of voicechat is a big hit. Me and my clanmates will be able to use Skype easily enough, but the big advantage the DS version has over the consoles, portability, is lost for most of us since we'll be tethered to our PCs.
As for text, well, it'd be better than nothing, and you're right, comm would be great for alliances.
plat @ Aug 6th 2008 8:09PM
Really? Voice chat is out? It seems like that would be a really good part of multiplayer.
To everybody, I saw some gameplay, and the graphics for the world map seem kinda cheesy, or simple. For example, the cities are basically a group of squares. Does this have any affect on how you like the game?
Also, some of you have probably played Civilization II Multiplayer Gold Edition. That is the one that I almost always play, although I have Test of Time too. Are there any major changes between those two games?
moo @ Jul 3rd 2008 4:38PM
i'm scared. been on since Civ 1, though i may have had skipped Civ 3 (completely out of the scene around that time, but i did get into alpha centauri).
I really liked the combat calculations implemented in Civ 4. The cultural aspect of Civ 4 was also different but acceptable.
but this -- on my favouritest of current gaming platforms, i really don't know. =/ i would have been perfectly happy seeing Civ 2 on the DS.
alisha, do you see yourself playing this regularly? or will it collect dust once the novelty has worn off?
Alisha Karabinus @ Jul 4th 2008 1:48AM
That's really tough to call. I will say that, I think for once, I might get really into the multiplayer. I usually much prefer single player games, but I think here the multiplayer could be as interesting as the scenarios are here. It's totally like Bizarro Civ, backwards in appeal for me, but it gave me a new appreciation for some things in the games I don't usually focus on.
I think that, yeah, I might add this to my regular rotation. I go through phases with Civ, so maybe when I'm not feeling like playing Civ IV, I can do this instead.
mian @ Jul 9th 2008 11:35AM
FYI, 2k confirmed there won't be text chat.
http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=302830&postcount=6
moo @ Jul 10th 2008 12:52AM
ok alisha. i tried this game out.
wow. it's so, so odd. so odd. My First Civ from Fisher-Price.
it's not bad -- it reminds me of the way MOOrion3 allowed you to macro-manage and delegate the micro-management, but this definitely takes getting used to. controls aren't as sharp and fluid, and there's only so much real estate available, they did the best they could (especially on the city management screens).
would definitely have liked to see the combat percentages pre-battle; also noticed that the unit descriptions during city management are random - sometimes they described the unit stats, sometimes they gave random tidbits.
you know what this game needs? achievements !! (i suspect the 360 has these) Each of the 5 victory conditions; Breed Like Rabbits (hit uber-population target); Tourist Trap (X number of wonders in a single city); Just Like Sid (get all 5 victory conditions); Pillage'n'Plunder (destroy/raze X cities) .. possibilities are endless!
also found it very odd that great people would be situated in cities, rather than being consumed by cities .. again, i've only gotten about an hour into the game, but those are the impressions so far ..
Patrick @ Aug 5th 2008 3:06PM
Great review! Wish I'd read it before some other, more negative ones.
My own experience with CivRev (having played all four PC versions of Civ) is mixed so far. I'm finding it as addictive as any other Civ game (and IMO it's the most addictive game I've ever played, hands down--but I don't always like that about it). But I hate the ultra-aggressive AI players.
Actually, I've hated aggressive AI players in every version of Civ, though. When I customize the PC game, I choose "least aggressive" or even "always peace." I'm an old wargamer, but to me Civ isn't a wargame; I just want to build my civilization and be too big to mess with.
However, I'm getting used to warfare in CivRev. Since it's a fact of life in this game, there's no getting around it. Thus, I'm learning to defend and sometimes attack. And along the way, I'm discovering that you don't need to be big to win; you can win with just a few cities if you're advanced enough in culture or wealth or tech.
Those who want to expand anyway can play as the Mongols. They take over the barbarian villages and can easily expand faster than anybody else.
That's one big plus about CivRev: each culture is very unique. It's almost like sixteen games in one in this respect.
But there are many other pluses too. Spies are back, and they're usable this time. And everything moves along so quickly that the whole game can be played in one comfortable sitting.
My only remaining complaint is the scanty documentation. The manual doesn't give enough info, so I'll have to root it out online if I want to know what all is going on.
Right now, I'm still just getting the hang of CivRev after a dozen games or so. And my perception has changed quite a bit. Early on, I was ready to throw it out, since I couldn't seem to win even on Warlord level and had to resort to Chieftain. Now I'm winning about half the time on King level; and the more I play, the more I learn and the more I like it.
plat @ Aug 6th 2008 8:55PM
Oh, and also, what are the new victories? Like, cultural, economic?...yeah I know, maybe they've been around a long time and I'm just playing an old version.