安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
But I wouldn't equate the two. Civ is a nation builder, while GalCiv is a 4X game. There are similarities, but that's like saying that all RTS games are the same so why haven't the creators sued each other? It's not a viable way to do business.
So do people who's job it is is to know the difference. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-09-20-civ-5-designer-returns-with-a-fresh-approach-to-4x
;)
Do you see how messed up that would make things?
EDIT: Okay, I'll admit that I was wrong about Civ.
At the end of the day, this discussion was about whether Civ was a 4X game. I have been proven wrong. I can take that.
EDIT: It's probably the price shock, it generated a sort of post traumatic state!!
After that, MOO2 in its day was the best 4x out there. What Gal Civ 1 did was fill the gap with the failure of MOO3. Stardock then made Gal Civ 2 and all the expansions that surpassed MOO2 in my opinion.
With this early access, I'm confident that Gal Civ 3 will avoid the MOO3 mistakes and will be even better than Gal Civ 2.
The problem with Civ is that games keep getting less and less epic and give convoluted victory goals.
Meanwhile GalCiv they actively try and expand the epicness of it.
I've not met many people who remember this, but that is still one of my favorite space strategy games....if it counts as a space strategy.
Ah ha! That's what I was looking for.
Though I'm not sure if you actually believe that or were being sarcastic.