My adventure trying out Civilization clone FreeCiv
Because I love FOSS (free and open source software) and love the Civilization games (not all that keen on Civ 6 though), I decide to try the FOSS FreeCiv out to see if it's a decent replacement for the commerical product.
Note: Based on version 2.6.0 for everything below.
It comes in three versions using a different engine client for the user interface, though the underlying gameplay, heavily inspired by Civilization II, remains the same.
First, an overview of the pros and cons of each client:
GTK: The most stable one, and the one closest to the look and feel of Civilization II. The interface definitely is familiar to Civ II veterans, but mouse control is wonky, some UI elements scale poorly, but it otherwise feels like Civ II and players of that will adapt fairly easily.
QT: Less stable than the GTK version, but has a more updated, Civ III feel. I found mouse control better and the UI was more helpful in presenting useful information, but it has stability issues over periods of extended play.
SDL: The least stable of the three clients, it features a Civilization V style UI, and while it looks the nicest of the three, it's got the worst configuration for game setup (the other two mentioned prior are far better) and the UI could use a lot of work to be more useful presenting usable information, and the lack of a menu bar at the top drove me crazy.
That aside, you can get a pretty familiar Civilization II style game going with all clients, and I won't deny some elements are well done.
However, some flaws annoy me:
1. The diplomacy feature feels pretty halfassed. The original Civilization was much better than this.
2. The UI delivers message updates fairly poorly in all versions.
3. Their is no automated setup for tech tree advances, and the AI is pretty dumb when it comes to automating city governors. Hell, even treaty notices are easy to miss and even ignore.
4. Tooltips are pretty crappy on all versions.
5. Workers are not available at the start like in Civ II most of the time, and this can make city development painful unless you unlock them using specific tech tree advances.
6. Wonder development feels too easy to do.
These glaring problems aside, I'd call this a worthy effort to replicate the Civ II experience, and if you are not the type to want to spend money, it's a decent if flawed FOSS replacement.
Note: Based on version 2.6.0 for everything below.
It comes in three versions using a different engine client for the user interface, though the underlying gameplay, heavily inspired by Civilization II, remains the same.
First, an overview of the pros and cons of each client:
GTK: The most stable one, and the one closest to the look and feel of Civilization II. The interface definitely is familiar to Civ II veterans, but mouse control is wonky, some UI elements scale poorly, but it otherwise feels like Civ II and players of that will adapt fairly easily.
QT: Less stable than the GTK version, but has a more updated, Civ III feel. I found mouse control better and the UI was more helpful in presenting useful information, but it has stability issues over periods of extended play.
SDL: The least stable of the three clients, it features a Civilization V style UI, and while it looks the nicest of the three, it's got the worst configuration for game setup (the other two mentioned prior are far better) and the UI could use a lot of work to be more useful presenting usable information, and the lack of a menu bar at the top drove me crazy.
That aside, you can get a pretty familiar Civilization II style game going with all clients, and I won't deny some elements are well done.
However, some flaws annoy me:
1. The diplomacy feature feels pretty halfassed. The original Civilization was much better than this.
2. The UI delivers message updates fairly poorly in all versions.
3. Their is no automated setup for tech tree advances, and the AI is pretty dumb when it comes to automating city governors. Hell, even treaty notices are easy to miss and even ignore.
4. Tooltips are pretty crappy on all versions.
5. Workers are not available at the start like in Civ II most of the time, and this can make city development painful unless you unlock them using specific tech tree advances.
6. Wonder development feels too easy to do.
These glaring problems aside, I'd call this a worthy effort to replicate the Civ II experience, and if you are not the type to want to spend money, it's a decent if flawed FOSS replacement.
Comments
Post a Comment