I know I should probably create a new thread for this, but I just wanted to know if there has been a demand for a GOG release of Civ 2?

If there is a thread on the topic I could not find it. Apologies to all..

There was this one from a while back:

https://www.gog.com/forum/sid_meiers_civilization_series/how_is_the_legal_status_of_civilization_ii_who_owns_the_rights

I hadn't realised the 2k/Firaxis had the rights to it. Personally, I'd like to see the complete version re-release here. I've got it and Test of Time on disc, but wouldn't mind a digital copy as well. Until IV came out, II was my out and out favourite.

Thanks. I guess there still hope that one day it might be made. :-D

Out of curiosity, what are those bad mechanics?

I'm specifically referring to the special resource mechanics that had already been mentioned several times. I also liked Civ2 a lot, but it's not here on GOG. It's also been a long time since I played that one, so I couldn't really say what I enjoyed about it.

I never played Civ 5 or 6.

Oh God I agree with you on the issues with Civ III; the Corruption mechanic in Civ III was just anti-fun. It's a shame that Corruption and too-scarce resources made it in to the final build.

I don't play II or ToT much since IV came out, but still occasionally revisit them. III I haven't played in about 20 years.

Civ 3 could have been a fun game if they released a patch or something that removed that mechanic. They could have sold it to us as the Anti-Corruption Expansion, and we would have bought it.

I'd consider Civ 5 if it came here to GOG, but I will not touch Civ 6.

Establish and nurture a civilization that stands the test of time.

Make sure that there is enough food. Irrigation will help. Also make people content. Military units may help, but do not base order just in that. The basic trilogy of buildings to have is granary, temple, marketplace. Libraries, science is important or you will lag behind.

Eventually you might find yourself discovering patterns in the game that illustrate similar patterns in real world history. Some teachers used the game with their students.

Also, it helps a lot if you can build some World Wonders.

Another thing: try to make the most of the strengths of your civilization. They might be especially good for different styles of play. For example, republics are good for business and science, worse for conquering other lands. You do not need to conquer other lands. You might need to defend your civilization, though.

IV is great, really fun for large multiplayer games(18 players compared to 8!) but III has a more user friendly scenario editor.

I LOVE III, and I always make scenarios for me and friends, but i also love IV for huge games.

II was pretty good on what I got to play, V was absolute garbage(Chicago is upset due to nearby enemy territory, sooo your entire civilization hates you! wtf?, your roads cost more to maintain than trade brings in, resources are VERY scarce, you can only have one unit per hex... I could go on, but I won't), VI, I haven't played enough of it

IV has 3D graphics, but it is superbly optimized. I am able to run IV on an Intel Atom tablet for years. It's fantastic. It is the last CIV game that features culture flipping, my favorite method of conquest.

Out of those two I would definitely go for 4. After watching a video by the AI designer for 3/par of 4 I understand why 3 does not feel good. The guy was more interested in making a "good" challenge than the game enjoyable. The mechanics are annoying, especially the resource bit but the AI is what really kills it for me.

Out of the civs I like 2, 4, and 5 the most. A lot of people hate on 5 but it's pretty relaxing to play for me. Call to Power 2 is also nice if you want something more like what Civ3 should have been just beware its AI is really bad too (in the opposite way, useless).

The reason I always played much more III over IV was because I always liked more the graphic art direction. I considered it easier, cleaner, more comfortable gameplay wise and my only gripe was that the game was too easy to expand, too fast, too many cities possible in the end game and too cheats, probably. Hard too explan.

I recognize IV as an objectivelly better game but never really liked too much nor the interface nor graphics, the performance overall. But I liked more the flow, the epicness of games and the amount of content.

And also It could sound strange but between IV and V I had better feelings with V

Why?

I've only ever played Civ2 and Call to Power for any length of time, so I haven't kept up.

With IV it occurred to me that I spent overall more time in scenarios and derivations (like the magnificent 4X set in space) than in regular games, even if I played many regular games as well. Also, I welcomed the religions mechanics at first, but after some years it really jaded me, and I started thinking that it would be nice to get back to how religion worked before in the series.

With V, I played it, but eventually I wondered what was the point... Same with Beyond Earth (Alpha Centauri it was not, alas).