"Civilization" and its contents

Rod- I've got good news and bad news about Civilization. The good news is: it will probably be all you want in a game and more. The bad news is: you will want to play it so much that the DMN will forget what you look like, your posts on this blog will dwindle into nothingness, and your wife will come to know you has "that smelly, unkempt beast who grunts at me while shuffling between the bathroom and the computer."

Please take the advice (or orders) from Chris and your wife! This has the potential to consume you. Fortunately I've managed to avoid games like this for years now, and it taking a lot of willpower NOT to follow that link to the Matus story. Don't become the beast :)

Rod Our family has traditionally been doom on video games, but we made two exceptions One was the Myst series, which was simply to literate and sophisticated to miss out on. The other has been Civilization, which my youngest son has played since he could wield a mouse. We do put limits on his time, but Civilization engages the player on many levels and brings home that ideas have consequences. He's now in AP World Civilization class at school and excelling. I doubt it's because he played Civilization, but I do know he has a sharp eye for how the various levels and resources of a region interconnect in creating a culture. Like anything, it can be useful or detrimental, depending on the use. It's a fallen world, there are no unambiguous goods, we have to be stewards even of the sacraments. That said, I've not seen anything in my son's life that made me regret him playing Civilization. My daughter BTW is about to join me on the Crunchy Con bandwagon. I'm thinking of raising my own beef...

From Friday, September 30, 1977: "I am quite convinced that the fundamental error of the contemporary man is his belief that thanks to technology - (telephone, Xerox, etc.) - he can squeeze into a given time much more than before, whereas it's really impossible. Man becomes the slave of his always growing work. There is a need for rhythm, detachment, slowness. Why can't students grasp all they're taught? [Note: Schmemann was Dean of St. Vladimir's Orthodox Seminary] Because they do not have time to become conscious of, to come back to, what they heard, to let it really enter their minds. A contemporary student registers knowledge, but does not assimilate it; therefore that knowledge does not 'produce' anything. A downpour of rain is immeasurably less useful for a drought than a thin, constant drizzle! But we are all the time under a thunderous downpour - of information, reports, knowledge, discussions, etc. And all of these flow around us, never sticking to us, immediately pushed away by the next deluge." (I can guess what Fr. Alexander would have thought of the Internet. As brilliant and productive as he was, he was nevertheless hounded by thoughts that most of what he did was useless and beside the point. His reference point for everything was Christ's Kingdom, and the numinous light that he describes as piercing his world at various times. His JOURNALS and his GREAT LENT are great reading for this time of year.)

Rod, your videogame experience mirrors mine, except that I got off the videogame train at Space Invaders. But then a couple years ago I heard about Civilization and went hurriedly to the Apple Store to buy a copy. I was hooked. I played constantly for a couple of weeks. Then I just lost interest. I look at it sitting there near my bookshelves, think about playing it every now and then, but in the end, there are still too many books to read. And bread to bake. Speaking of which -- The Bittman bread is incredibly forgiving. I let it rise for 12 hours or so, pulled it out and let it sit for the two hour rise under a towel. But I fell asleep so it sat under the towel for 9 hours. I decided to give it a shot and -- presto, it wasn't as good, but still better than most bread you'll buy in a store. The wonders of this recipe never cease.

Sid Meier's PC version of Civilization is arguably the best PC game of all time. It's intellectual components are as strong as it gets; the online historical info is as informative as any good history text, and alot more fun to look at (they used actors to "animate" certain aspects of the game). Like any good thing, a mature approach will mitigate the "addictive" potential. The game is file based, in that you can save it at any point regardless of where you are in the play of the game, unlike many games that make you reach some milestone before even offering you the ability to save. But a good alternative is to look for the original board game, created by Francis Tresham. It is accessible to youngsters, you can play it in an afternoon (if you keep the negotiations within a time limit), and it can be very entertaining. It's called "Advanced Civilization", and as I recall Avalon Hill publishes it in the US. Tresham also created the "18xx" class of games, an economic model (think Monopoly without the boring parts) based on the development of the steam railroads. The first US version of it is 1830, and is also available as a one-player PC game from Avalon Hill. For a general overview of this segment of the gaming world, see if any of your local colleges have a "wargamers" club. You can learn alot about it from them. It's a heck of alot more than D&D. Oh, and Diplomacy would be a very different game on the PC. I enjoy it for being able to stab people in the back without being arrested for it (or having to take it outside, since they can stab me right back at any point). :)

Rod- I have had Diplomacy sitting on my shelf for about eight years, never having gathered more than 3 people willing to play it. I played the board game of Civilization in high school and college, and I think my friends and I finished the game exactly once. We played from about 8 p.m. to dawn. Other times, we played for 5-6 hours with no resolution. It's a great game, but very slow and very complicated. Like you, I'm not much for video games, but I enjoy the Civ games. As for the computer game, Rod, I will admit it's absorbing, but I think people are overestimating its addictive powers. I haven't played #4, but I have played #2 and #3, and yeah, they ate up about 2 weeks of my life each, and maybe kept me up late 4-5 times total, but I think it might be worthwhile diversion for a short chunk of time. Maybe if you have more than 1 computer in the house, you can play with your kids, as I've heard the multiplayer feature is vastly improved in this version. Just force yourself to stop after 2-3 weeks, max.

Allow me to add my 2 cents - Sid Meier's Civilization series is one of the most engaging gaming experiences available. Time suck? Oh yeah. Worth it? Depends on what else you have goin on in your world. Your plate seems pretty full, Rod, so it's probably best you stay away. That being said, if you're ever in Grand Forks, ND - look me up, I'll let you come over so you can demo it. Bring Doritos.

Civ IV was cool. I once gave the computer opponents a run for its money when I managed my civ as a theocratic christian communist vassal state with representative government. Alas, Civ games become to monotonously involved; afterall it is a turn based strategy. Rod and his kid would really like Microsofts 'Age of Mythology'. Yep, real-time strategy is where its at... if not for just the shorter, quicker games.