simulation
Civ IV: Colonization Review: Once More, With(out) Feeling
Posted by Luke Plunkett at 3:00 AM on September 23, 2008
The 2008 version of Colonization seems like it's too good to be true. Like, a remake? Of 1994's brilliant strategy game Colonization? Pure remakes of games are rare enough, but remakes of such a niche, underappreciated title? Its like the PC gaming gods took a break from the usual fire and brimstone and were instead dispensing smiles.
Problem is, in going for a pure remake - as opposed to a sequel with big additions and/or changes - they're also taking a big risk. A straight-up remake will beg the question: why bother? Why go to all the trouble of shoe-horning a 14 year-old game into a modern engine, changing some art assets and pushing it onto the market when the original was nearly perfect as it was?
LOVED
Nip and Tuck - Civ IV's engine, though still good-looking for a game of this type, has had a bit of an upgrade, most obvious in the added detail of the settlements and the new water textures. Nothing OMG there, but hey, it's nice to see.
Smallpox Blankets, Beads For Land - There's a bigger emphasis on dealing with the natives in this version, as they're both more numerous and more capable, acting as fully-fledged nations (you can negotiate diplomacy, enter into alliances, etc) on a par with the Spanish, French etc. This makes them a far deeper and more useful aspect of the game than they were in the original.
Not Broke, Don't Fix - Aside from the natives, above, and the war of independence, below, most aspects of the game remain unchanged. Settlements, economy, war, diplomacy, it's all pretty much as you remember it. You choose a European power, you settle the New World, you deal with the locals, you fight a war of independence. Seeing as the original got all those things right, it was a smart move not to attempt wholesale changes to the mechanics.
Civilization IV: Colonization - For the most part, the game's resemblance to a regular game of Civ IV is a bad thing. But there's two aspects that benefit. First is the national borders. The original game had no borders, so rival settlements would pop up throughout "your" lands. Very annoying. Now that it's got Civ IV's border system (generated by your liberty bell production rate), you can more easily stake out a patch of dirt, removing perhaps my only major criticism of the original. Second is multiplayer. First one had no multiplayer, so that's a big plus right there.
HATED
Civilization IV: Colonization - We were told this would be a standalone title. A "total conversion" of Civilization IV. Its not. It's not just based on the Civ IV engine, it's built entirely on top of it, even down to the fact it reuses most of the interface, as well as some leaders, units and even sound effects from Civ IV. Bit of a cop-out, when there are enthusiastic mod-makers out there who do this kind of thing for free. Would have been nice to see a bit more of an effort put into making the game stand apart.
Brown Brown Brown - The biggest departure from the Civ IV engine is that, while Civ IV lets you game full-screen, menu buttons reduced to the periphery, for some reason ΒΌ of the screen in this game is occupied by an ugly brown menu system that could easily have been half the size, since it consists mostly of brown canvas and not, as you'd expect, buttons. An amateur mod wouldn't have had something so awful in there, not quite sure why a retail product does.
Cold As Ice - The original was full of charm, the result of a passion for the history of the period and countless little touches. Your Continental Congress, for example, was represented as a literal congress, members seated within. The European management screen was literally a ship at the docks, your immigrants lined up on the jetty. This version has nothing but bland menu screens. It's cold and lifeless, with these constantly-used menu screens looking more like a 1995 CD-ROM copy of Encyclopaedia Britannica.
War Of Inde-Oh We Lost Again - This new version seems a bit harder. Not the initial stages of the game, they're just fine, but the revolutionary war aspect is a more daunting prospect, as your home monarch scales his army a little unfairly to keep ahead of your own. So for every soldier you build, the king will put 2-3 to stay ahead, resulting in a war where you're unfairly outnumbered. Not only that, but in the original, upon declaring you were granted veteran units, which at least stood some chance against the European forces. You don't get those here, and your rubbish militia stand little chance. It makes what should be the most enjoyable aspect of the game a chore, and is - perhaps damningly - a lot less fun than the war of independence scenario that comes free with Civ IV.
Look, don't get me wrong, there's little that's glaringly wrong with this version of Colonization. You've probably noticed most of the points above are fairly minor. If you've never played the original game, this is, new coat of paint aside, the same thing. Same goal, same mechanics. You'll probably love it. But for me, a Colonization veteran, just replicating the nuts and bolts isn't enough, and in choosing to remake the 1994 original they're leaving this game wide open to comparison.
And, like most remakes, this is little but a facsimile of the original. It lacks the clarity of purpose, it lacks the little touches that made the original - and not this Civ IV-branded exercise - a truly unique, standalone product. If you've never played the original Colonization, try and track down a copy of it instead, because this feels more like a Civ IV mod than the standalone game a Colonization remake deserved.
Civilization IV: Colonization was developed by Firaxis, and published by 2K. Released on September 23 on PC. Priced at $30. Played to completion of war of independence on three difficulty settings.
Confused by our reviews? Read our review FAQ.

Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
Pwnieboy
Posted 3:55 AM 23/9/08
Totally looking forward to this, now if they would just slap a fresh coat of paint on Alpha Centauri...
Pwnieboy
Forkball
Posted 3:38 AM 23/9/08
Have any of you played FreeCol? How does it compare to the original?
Forkball
tslothrop
Posted 3:30 AM 23/9/08
@ReadNLearn: It's already starting at $30. Pretty cheap regardless...
tslothrop
ReadNLearn
Posted 3:15 AM 23/9/08
Both the Pirates remake and the Railroad Tycoon remake dropped in price pretty quick after the initial release. This may be worth noting if you want to give this a go. Just wait a couple of months and it is probably a fair bit cheaper.
ReadNLearn
homernoy
Posted 3:12 AM 23/9/08
Well, maybe they are planning to see how this remake does, and if it's a sales success, there will be a more ambitious, completely new, modern game that comes later. Fourteen years is a long time, maybe they are trying to kick start some fresh interest in this game, as well as lure fans of the original to purchase this version.
homernoy
badasscat
Posted 4:24 AM 23/9/08
The American Revolution is perhaps one of the biggest examples of a perfect storm in history because they managed to beat the world superpower when that superpower outnumbered them and had a clear and present supply line.
Not to mention that a lot of Brits will still argue that they didn't "lose", they just "left". And it's true that we did not score a decisive military victory over them. It was not much different than modern insurgencies in that they simply decided it was too costly to continue fighting given the benefits, or lack thereof, of keeping us as colonies. But they could have kept fighting pretty much indefinitely if they'd wanted to; it's not like we destroyed their army. We just put up more of a fight than they had the stomach for.
I don't remember how the original Colonization modeled the war part and I don't really know how this game does either, but it would seem to me that if the game were at all accurate in the way that it portrays this kind of insurgency, the end of the war would be pretty anti-climatic in gameplay terms. If victory is defined as independence, then there doesn't really need to be a pure military victory at all. The enemy could simply decide to up and leave in the middle of your grand strategy to drive them off your soil, leaving you with a half-executed plan and the feeling that you just wasted a bunch of time and effort.
badasscat
GodBen
Posted 4:20 AM 23/9/08
The original ate away quite a bit of my life back in the 90s. I didn't stop playing it until I got a new XP machine back in 2001 and I couldn't get it to work properly anymore. So when I heard about this remake earlier this year I leaped for joy!
But I am worried about the fact that they are marketing it as a Civ game as it seems to close the door on the possibility of a real Col II. Why not just use the Civ IV engine and release the game as a completely different title? Why not add the Portuguese, one big thing left out of the original.
I'll still buy it if only for the fact that I gave away my Col disc and it probably wont work in Vista anyway. I just wish it was a real sequel rather than just a remake.
GodBen
Eldragon
Posted 4:03 AM 23/9/08
I couldn't get into FreeCol due to the lack of sound. So I'll probably pick up this new Colonization sometime soon. But the reviewer's opinion on the lack of charm in the remake is scaring me off a little.
As to the end-game difficulty, what setting did the reviewer play it on (assuming there are multiple settings)?
Eldragon
perronoesasi
Posted 4:00 AM 23/9/08
Any idea if this is going to be up on Steam at some point?
perronoesasi
Nik in NOLA
Posted 3:59 AM 23/9/08
Just to be a history nerd:
" as your home monarch scales his army a little unfairly to keep ahead of your own. So for every soldier you build, the king will put 2-3 to stay ahead, resulting in a war where you're unfairly outnumbered. Not only that, but in the original, upon declaring you were granted veteran units, which at least stood some chance against the European forces. You don't get those here, and your rubbish militia stand little chance. "
Uh, yeah. That's what Revolutions tended to be like. The American Revolution is perhaps one of the biggest examples of a perfect storm in history because they managed to beat the world superpower when that superpower outnumbered them and had a clear and present supply line. Really, the French did more to win the American Revolution than anything else (gunpowder, trained soldiers, supplies, navy) along with Britain having its forces stretched out in several worldwide campaigns (and thus not entirely focusing on the New World).
Though it sucks that they didn't make that aspect enjoyable. Not sure about paying $30 for this though. Seems a little high for what seems like a slightly fleshed Civ IV scenario.
Nik in NOLA
patsfan07
Posted 4:34 AM 23/9/08
Did u make sure to beg France for more troops and supplies?
Because i'm pretty sure that's how we REALLY won that war... and this game sounds more true to history than past Civs
patsfan07
Bort
Posted 5:12 AM 23/9/08
The "Hated" section could have been twice as long, and I'd still get it.
My only issue at this point: Do I get it now and risk not getting any work done for the remainder of this semester, or wait a couple of months and risk having a mental breakdown in the interim due to anticipation overload?
Bort
Sandbox_Emperor
Posted 5:07 AM 23/9/08
I think I'll be picking this one up! sounds pretty great.
and on a side note, is anyone else having trouble accessing the Kotaku main page? Whenever I try to go I get a 404 error :S
Sandbox_Emperor
SunKing
Posted 5:00 AM 23/9/08
*ahem* We didn't LOSE, we just left.
...I'll go away now :P.
Seriously though, I've got this on preorder as I never played the original and this has been getting decent scores so far.
SunKing
Chupakun
Posted 5:19 AM 23/9/08
I really want to get into Civilization but the amount of micromanagement seems quite daunting. Can someone give me some reasons to get Civ IV?
Chupakun
GodBen
Posted 5:40 AM 23/9/08
@Chupakun: I has a big manual. Most games these days have only a couple of dozen pages, but this manual has hundreds!!
If you're not a manual buff then I suppose there are other reasons to buy it. It has excellent re-playability value. No two games are ever the same and it's fun to try different strategies for victory. There are some very good mods for it that completely change the game, from fantasy worlds with magic to incredibly accurate historical scenarios.
I wont lie, there is quite a bit of micromanagement but you get the hang of it after a few games. The late game can be a bit tedious at times, but the latest expansion pack, Beyond the Sword, added some features to make the game more lively in that stage.
It's not perfect, I still wish they would just include stack attacks as used in the unofficial Call to Power Civ games as it's more fun and more realistic, but even there the fan community provides with mods to add that feature.
GodBen
sluissa
Posted 6:04 AM 23/9/08
@Forkball:
Freecol is pretty much the original with Civ 2's graphical style. It's pretty much a complete remake of the original and at this point has nearly all the functional features of the original. All they have left to do now for the last few versions before 1.0 is refine the interface a little and add some visual polish.
Once they finish with 1.0 then they'll start adding on features they think should be added, but the idea is that 1.0 will be an exact port of the original just slightly upgraded visually.
As for my opinion of it. It's great. A few minor interface gripes, but what game doesn't have those.(And there's a chance it'll be fixed later, PLUS the source code is available, so if it makes you mad enough, you can simply fix it yourself. I fixed one minor thing which was keeping me from being able to play it on my EEEPc 900 due to the funky resolution.)
Anyway, give it a try, it's free. Can't beat that, really.
sluissa
hammerhand
Posted 6:00 AM 23/9/08
@Chupakun: I dunno, I found the micromanagement to be not so bad. Some reasons to get Civ IV: GodBen said it, replayability. You can go back again and again and have a new experience each time, sometimes even after reloading an old save. Also, the satisfaction of growing your civilization and crushing all opposition with it, then looking at the time line map at the end of the game and seeing your influence spread across the world consuming all other. Megalomania!
I think the best way to learn Civ games is to play a small game on a small map with few opponents and work your way up. I can't decide if I like Civ II or IV better, but I like them both better than III for some reason, and I don't recall ever playing the first one.
@GodBen: Isn't there an option in Civ IV to enable/ disable stack attacks? I swear I saw one in there somewhere.
hammerhand
KenB525
Posted 6:36 AM 23/9/08
@GodBen: I still play it, just google it and you can find it that will work on XP. Ship It!
KenB525
GodBen
Posted 6:56 AM 23/9/08
@hammerhand: I know you can give an entire group of units a single order to attack, but they still attack in sequence, one after the other. I much prefer the Call to Power system where all units attacked all the enemy units in one go. Dale's combat mod includes it but I haven't tried it out yet.
GodBen
autosuggested
Posted 7:06 AM 23/9/08
A Colonization remake? Oh well, there goes my social life until November.
autosuggested
tcolberg
Posted 8:23 AM 23/9/08
@Nik in NOLA: Except that he's comparing CivIV: Col to the original Colonization, where your units stood a better chance against European forces and you had the flexibility to build up a sufficient force on your own to defeat the expeditionary force rather than having to always rely on securing allied support.
tcolberg
Luke Plunkett
Posted 8:40 AM 23/9/08
@perronoesasi: Yeah, it'll be on Steam. In fact, that's where I got the review copy from.
Luke Plunkett
Slatz_Grobnik
Posted 8:49 AM 23/9/08
Is the internal city management more like Civ IV (like all the other Civ games), or is more like Colonization (build buildings, assign individuals to them, have citizens with different specific skill sets)? To me, that element, which could have been irritatingly micro-managementish but for the smaller scale of Colonization, is what made it such a distinctive game.
That, and the whole "arm the criminals, and let them learn the values of hard work by killing the native populations."
Well, those two, and the time I found three Fountains of Youth.
Slatz_Grobnik
Nik in NOLA
Posted 9:14 AM 23/9/08
@tcolberg:
Guess it depends what's more important to the player: slightly more accurate depiction of fighting a mother country that causes you to rethink strategies or just making it a basic strategy game thing of outbuild and outnumber the AI.
Nik in NOLA
darbonne
Posted 10:36 AM 23/9/08
@Chupakun: it's the best game ever made (and you can put micromanagement on cities on auto)
darbonne
midnightz
Posted 11:44 AM 23/9/08
Bring on Civ V; Colonization has very limited appeal to me as a non-American. Shame, because I love the Civ franchise.
midnightz
Trystero
Posted 12:41 PM 23/9/08
@Nik in NOLA: It seems as though there's no way to get foreign powers to help you in your war. That seems like a golden opportunity missed, gameplay wise. Independence would have been a great place to make diplomacy mean something. If you've fostered good relationships (or made sure your enemies never made good ones), you get some continental backup. Or maybe forge an alliance with the natives in a grand (if unlikely) "What if" scenario.
Trystero
Chupakun
Posted 1:36 PM 23/9/08
@hammerhand and @GodBen: Thanks GodBen and hammerhand! It's nice to get a more personal perspective. I'm hoping that diplomacy and other non-violent methods can still help you earn a victory. I was enjoying the Civ: Rev demo on the PS3. I could guess that it was a highly streamlined version. It was almost perfect bar the diplomacy options which adopts a very rigid false dichotomy (you're either with or against). And even if you're "with", it doesn't matter since entering "allied" territory is a declaration of war. Ah, well. Anything you can tell me about those gaming routes less traveled in Civ IV?
Chupakun
Nik in NOLA
Posted 1:28 PM 23/9/08
@Trystero: Yeah, that does sound like a missed opportunity and it makes me see the point. If you're not going to allow, using the Americans as an example, French assistance against the British, it makes the overwhelming force patently unfair from a game-design point.
Nik in NOLA
Slatz_Grobnik
Posted 3:20 PM 23/9/08
@Luke Plunkett: Thanks.
Slatz_Grobnik
Luke Plunkett
Posted 3:08 PM 23/9/08
@Slatz_Grobnik: It's the same as Colonization. You get a town screen and drag the settlers around to have them farming, making tools, etc.
Luke Plunkett
Luke Plunkett
Posted 3:07 PM 23/9/08
@Eldragon: There's about 7-8 settings, same as Civ IV. Can't remember the names, but I played on the easiest (1), 3 & 5. The fifth one was freakin impossible.
Luke Plunkett
Emmanuel Goldstein
Posted 3:37 PM 23/9/08
@homernoy: Never happen. Sid works on whatever the cool new thing is. They take half a dozen of their weakest guys and have them dash out some marginal game every few months to pay the bills. I doubt we'll ever see this again. Or more maps for Railroads--or an actual working map editor. Or a reasonably deep version of SimGolf (which was still hella fun). Guessing next time Alpha Centari ships it'll be a half-assed Civ mod. The new Pirates, I thought, was not an improvement, and it could just be me, but I found it hard to like.
Do want to like this...not sure if I will.
Emmanuel Goldstein
perronoesasi
Posted 7:11 PM 23/9/08
@Luke Plunkett:
Thanks for confirming Luke, didn't see anything on the coming soon tab but it seemed odd as all the other Civ 4 products are on Steam.
perronoesasi
GodBen
Posted 11:22 PM 23/9/08
@Chupakun: Yeah, I didn't like the diplomacy in CivRev at all. If you tried to get a tech victory by building a spaceship then every other empire in the game would attack you. Very frustrating.
Civ IV's victory options are way more advanced than CivRev, I hardly ever go the combat route as I much prefer to build an empire than to destroy one (although sometimes that can be fun too).
- There is the space race victory which is more complicated in Civ IV as there are extra parts and far more technologies. This is the victory I try for most often.
- The diplomatic victory is also better. The UN elects a secretary general, and whichever empire is elected leader gets to choose which resolutions go up for a vote. To have any chance of winning the vote you need to be a powerful empire and have enough allies willing to vote for you. You can choose votes that effect how empires are run, and if you defy a resolution other empires dislike you and consider you a rogue. Eventually you get the option to vote for the game's victor, and if you have enough votes you win the game.
- The religious victory was introduced in Beyond the Sword and it works like the UN only it comes much earlier in the game. If you have a state religion you can build the Apostolic Palace and you vote with other empires that have your religion. If your religion has spread to every empire on Earth then you have the option to vote for a winner. However, the palace becomes obsolete in the modern age.
- The cultural victory is where your culture becomes the dominant culture on the planet. It requires that you have three cities that reach the legendary culture status.
- The time victory is where the winner is chosen when the game ends in 2050 with no clear winner. The winner is chosen by the person who has the highest score and that score is judged by a number of factors such as the size of you empire, your culture, your technology...
- Domination is when you haven't quite killed everyone off but when you control most of the planet's surface area and population. It is normally by military means, but it doesn't have to be.
As as for diplomatic options, they are way better. You can have open borders, defence pacts, proper trade negotiations and so on. Beyond the Sword also added vassal states and colonies. Vassals are empires that you have forced to be subservient to you after beating them in a war, and colonies are cities on another landmass that you granted independence to but they act much like vassal states.
CivRev was very combat focused, but Civ IV is more about building an empire in the way you want it.
Thus ends my longest Kotaku post ever. :-)
GodBen
0tak1n9
Posted 7:19 PM 24/9/08
Ok, now they should go for a remake of SMAC! imo this is the bst civ clone. Even more: in most parts it was better than civ.
0tak1n9
CityBuilder
Posted 4:13 AM 24/9/08
Its seems to me it's rather simple. The game was not designed to appeal to those that have played the original 1994 game of Colonization. It doesnt have enough improvements for those people and hell, they've already got a game that they love so stick with it.
On the other hand the game is designed for people that either
1. Want a major graphical update to the Colonization game as well as some more minor points of gameplay or
2. Have never played the Colonization game before and are interested in this genre of game.
I can only hope that this isn't as big of a flop as the Sid Meiers Pirates (the most recent release, not the original game) was. That was a complete abomination of a CD disk in my opinion. And which is an example of what happens when you take an age old game that was great in it's initial release and try to put a new coat of paint on it wihout updating it's gameplay mechanics for the more savvy game players of today.
CityBuilder
CityBuilder
Posted 4:12 AM 24/9/08
Its seems to me it's rather simple. The game was not designed to appeal to those that have played the original 1994 game of Colonization. It doesn't have enough improvements for those people and hell, they've already got a game that they love so stick with it.
On the other hand the game is designed for people that either
1. Want a major graphical update to the Colonization game as well as some more minor points of gameplay or
2. Have never played the Colonization game before and are interested in this genre of game.
I can only hope that this isn't as big of a flop as the Sid Meiers Pirates (the most recent release, not the original game) was. That was a complete abomination of a CD disk in my opinion. And which is an example of what happens when you take an age old game that was great in it's initial release and try to put a new coat of paint on it wihout updating it's gameplay mechanics for the more savvy game players of today.
CityBuilder
ei8th
Posted 5:10 AM 23/9/08
Meh, I'll get it anyways. If it does have the brilliant music from the first game, it's a win for me.
ei8th
chekt
Posted 4:47 AM 23/9/08
I'm definitely going to get this game because I missed out on the original.
chekt
Daggyter
Posted 3:28 AM 23/9/08
You made a grave pass of judgement:
"HATED
Civilization IV: Colonization - We were told this would be a standalone title. A "total conversion" of Civilization IV. Its not. It's not just based on the Civ IV engine, it's built entirely on top of it, even down to the fact it reuses most of the interface, as well as some leaders, units and even sound effects from Civ IV."
This is completely wrong from your part. The game is a standalone EXPANSION, and not building Colonization in Civ IV's Engine would completely defeat that purpose. Same goes for shared assets such as the interface and etc... had they made the assets all over again, they would probably have to sell Colonization for $50, not $30 (you failed to mention on your review the fact that the game is really cheap)... twice as cheap and better than Civilization Revolution.
Daggyter
Daggyter
Posted 3:21 AM 23/9/08
You made a grave pass of judgement:
"HATED
Civilization IV: Colonization - We were told this would be a standalone title. A "total conversion" of Civilization IV. Its not. It's not just based on the Civ IV engine, it's built entirely on top of it, even down to the fact it reuses most of the interface, as well as some leaders, units and even sound effects from Civ IV."
This is completely wrong from your part. The game is a standalone EXPANSION, and not building Colonization in Civ IV's Engine would completely defeat that purpose. Same goes for shared assets such as the interface and etc...
Daggyter
mikeys2k5
Posted 6:41 AM 23/9/08
I was very excited when I read about the sequel to one of my favorite games of 1994 (lol). I cannot wait to get it.
I was even more excited when the November (Current) issue of PC Gamer came, because the disk included a copy of the original! They packaged it nicely with an installer which automatically does everything, including install and configure DOS Box for the specific application. It works fine on my computer with Vista.
Just thought I would give a heads up to other fans of the original. I am sure that you could find the game elsewhere, but the easy install makes it worth picking up PC Gamer imo.
mikeys2k5