User Reviews (1 - 11 of 53)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Proof that Sid Meier is a mortal

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 11
Date: October 25, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I've played and liked (and usually loved) every Sid Meier game.
This one is not on the same page as CIV, etc.

poor graphics
poor balance
absolutely horrid game play
This is one annoying stinker.
This is one of the rare games that makes me wish that I could return software.

One of the worst games yet!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 11
Date: April 13, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I wish there was a -1 to rate it. This game is the worst game I have ever played in my life! You may think it's not all that bad, but once you actually get into this game, and have lots of units to control, it becomes very boring, and time consuming. You have to watch Every Single unit on the entire screen move its little squares. I have got to give them credit for making the game, but they needed to spend just a little more time on it! To tell you the truth, I wouldn't have even wanted this game if I got it for free based on my experiance.

I'd give it negative stars if I could.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 6
Date: March 21, 2001
Author: Amazon User

I've played every game by Sid Myers and I've loved them all. I've spent years of my life playing Civilization and its sequals, so I was very excited when SMAC was announced and I promptly bought it.

This game - despite all hype to the contrary - is one of the worst ever made. Technically, the diplomacy model is as bad a anything in Civ, the graphics are extremely poor, and the planet will rise up against you no matter how green and harmonious your faction is. The plot is something right out of a hippie's drug-enduced dreams of eutopia and does its best to be a far-left political statement no matter how you try to play it, even to the point of hamstringing factions that don't agree with extremeist athiest and environmental views.

I gave it a fair shake regardless, and beat it with most factions, but the plot structures that it forces on you limit replayability and the game is just an eyesore. Skip the game and hope that Civ 3 won't follow the same disastrous path.

Its ok

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 13
Date: April 24, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game is complex its not even fun to find out all the options. What is anoying is that when u in middle of the game u have so many units and u have to give a command to every single one of them, yes u can automize them but that will do no good to ur military units. Some times if ur lucky the gamefun will be 3 stars but most of the levels i played turnd out to be boring either i lost fast or it was 2 easy. Also sometimes when the game is over anyways and one of the leaders has clearly won, the game still goes on for an hour. Dont forget the game is more then 3 years old get something better for ur money for example:"Warlords Battlecry" or "Cossaks European Wars". I dont recommend this game though its not catastrophic either!

Too Bad!

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 18
Date: May 06, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game looked really good for the price, but IT DIDNT WORK! I changed my PC but still having problems with TERRAN or whatever that is. Maybe I'll try it again

Hope you have lotsa time on your hands.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 8
Date: February 13, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This game has a super thick book full of instuctions and with everything there is to control, build, and change, this game can be overwhelming. It takes forever to learn what each function is and to read the instruction book. This game is a case of a little too much. A friend I work with had played Civilization 2 which is another Sid Meier game that did exceptionaly well, but after he played this game for 2 weeks, he gave up. there was just too much stuff to learn and what certain things did was not clearly described which left alot of guessing. What he and I did learn while playing the game was that the story was good, the graphics are good, and the game was well thought out. But the overwhelming things you had to learn just took it's toll which probably explains the lackluster sales of this game.

In theory great but in actuality just ok

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 7
Date: September 30, 2001
Author: Amazon User

This is one of those games that looks great on paper but when you actually sit down and play it, is not all that fun after a while. I've played "Gettysburg", another Firaxis/Brian Reynolds game, and these games are very similiar in that both have a lot of detail, great ideas, a lot of cool things you can do, good multiplayer ... and both are not that fun.

The game is basically Civilization 2 at the core but that seems to be it's strong point. Other than that there is not much to recommend. Although there's all sorts of options you can use diplomatically, economically, and militarily, I believe you will find that you will find you are for the most part funnelled into a fairly narrow set of behavior by the way the other nations and the planet act towards you. I'm sure you can beat the game many different ways but that doesn't change the fact that 1) all your allies stab you in the back in the end, 2) the beginning battles are won by the first to impact rovers, 3) the computer has no clue with air warfare, 4) the planet basically kills you immediately if you use nukes. There are all sorts of other little balance issues throughout the game that just get on my nerves as well. The sheer number of options you have are spoiled because the game just isn't put together well. I read an interview with Sid Meier recently and he said when he put together Civ1 he was just trying to make a fun game, making changes by ear. Maybe that's what went wrong here.

I must say, I DID have some fun in the multiplayer games I played. Diplomacy and combat are actually quite fun when there is another human on the other end. That said I never finished a game (too long), and there is no online community (that I can find), so your mileage may vary.

Bottom line, it's a flawed game, and not tons of fun. But it is Civ2 at the core, so at a low price, it might be worth it for you.

Okay

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 3 / 9
Date: June 29, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Alphacent is an okay game that answers the question of what happened to the colony ship sent to alpha centuari in the civ series. The back story is well done, 7 different fations from the ship with differing political views decide to seperate upon arrival at the planet, and start their own civilisations.
The game is similar to the civ games, but if offers numerous improvements upon civ2. The controls are far more streamlined, and the computer interacts with you far more than in previous civ games. If you want, you can automate every unit and just manage city production, or vice versa, which saves times for those players with little.
The entire story and details of the game are a little weird to get your head around, this game starts off from a very high technology level, so naturally higher levels are hard to understand.
One thing I had a problem with in the game was that one of the political factions was a religious fundamnetalist group called 'The Believers', who's religion was christianity. So if you went to war with them, you were effectively fighting christianity, by destroying cities with names like 'The Hand of God' and 'New Eden'. As a christian, I had a problem with this, and it was one of the reasons I only gave this game 3 stars. It was my understanding that game designers tended to steer away from involving christianity heavily in their work, particularly in opposing it, simply out of respect for the religion. ...
Overall though, the game isn't too bad, but its simply too complex and full on for a newcomer to the civ universe to understand. Only for the die hard civ fanatics, if you're a casual strategy player, leave this one be.

I don't think this is as good as some others say

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 8
Date: November 24, 2002
Author: Amazon User

I played all the other Civ like games and this is the type of game I like, but I just didn't get Alpha Centauri. I played this one enought to get good, but the whole feel was just too much like Civ II and I seemed to get into Civ II like end games too easily.
Having now played CivIII for six months I given it a 5 start rating I don't understand my own review, but that was the feel I had.
I guess if you can get it for $10 now then it should be worth a try.
Maybe I'll try this again another day.

Conquor

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 0 / 10
Date: July 31, 2001
Author: Amazon User

Well im not exactly sure why it takes these other people so long to beat this game. It has alott to do with your character, and the way you set your objectives. I often fight from the begening from start to end large map by myself on normal i can beat this game in under 4 hours with the remaning forces on the earth uniting behind me.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next 

Actions