Well, it depends. They are actually very different games.
If you like real-time strategy, more combat-oriented games, then age of empires 2 or 3 (1 is amazingly old now, 2 can be run by most computers, 3 is more high-end). If you are more interested in things like building up an empire, managing cities etc., and you like turn-based games, then civilization for sure.
If you go with civilization, get Civ 3 instead of 4 -- 3 is better and doesn't need nearly as good a computer to run.
2007-06-16 15:15:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mysterious Bob 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i would say civilization is like the new strategy game, while the age of empires is a 'Old Skool' game. the only bad part about civilization is that it take turns, while in age of empires allows yo to do whatever you want. However civilization have better graphics and featues and the new ones requires vista i think
2007-06-16 15:03:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by burp154 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Civilization is definitely the better one Civ 3 is like AOE 2 not mention civ 4, i own all 3 games, trust me.
2007-06-16 14:49:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you like Sims and Oregon Trail, you will probably like Civ IV more than AoE, but they are both really good.
2007-06-16 14:42:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I like them both but for different reasons. I like the advancement and wonders system better in civ. It's easier IMO to control the units on AoE and you don't have to wait for the other teams to take their turn (real time I guess).
2007-06-16 15:03:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by Nik 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
age of empires
2007-06-16 14:42:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
age of empires II was real good
2007-06-16 14:42:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by D-Boy 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
neither they both suck
2007-06-16 14:43:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by HUBBS 2
·
1⤊
3⤋