Advanced Search Beta »
Basic Search Fields
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization PC
  • Publisher: 2K Games
  • Release Date: Sep 22, 2008
User Score
6.1 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 46 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 46
  2. Mixed: 9 out of 46
  3. Negative: 12 out of 46

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

view
per page
  1. PedroD.
    Oct 5, 2008
    5
    Is it too much to expect that 'some' changes be made to a classic game to evolve it into 2008 standards. I loved the classic version and to be honest there's not much different, the graphics are nice but the trading system and ai i think have moved backward. This got about 30 mins of excitement and by now I'm ready to give up.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. DzibanM.
    Oct 31, 2008
    5
    This game doesn't draw me in as much as Civ IV did. I get bored with it after 20 or 30 minutes of play; with Civ IV I would (and still do) play for hours and be angry about having to sleep so I can function at work the next day. Colonization doesn't offer very compelling gameplay. AI makes some strange decisions in putting your colonists to work (Master Ore Miner growing crops, even with an ore mine outside the settlement? Meanwhile a Master Farmer is fishing?) which requires lots of micromanagement. AI also misses some great industry growth...a settlement near a tobacco resource should be growing tobacco and making cigars, but the AI decides on cotton instead and doesn't bother putting settlers to work making coats. Interaction with your home country is irritating and can be as strange as the AI (King asks for 2500 credits on the 3rd turn of the game?) Trade route system is cumbersome. Growing your settlements while trying to create Liberty Bells (to attract Founding Fathers), building structures, and making money is difficult to achieve...which is the point, I suppose, but the "reward" for playing just isn't worth it. I'll stick with Civ IV and its expansions.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. JerryF.
    Sep 26, 2008
    10
    I was expecting a well-made Civ IV mod; what I got was a unique game with depth almost rivaling Civ IV itself. The historical aspect is superbly well-rendered, the interface is light-years ahead of the original colonization, and the game has that Firaxian charm they pull off so well (hell, even Railroads! had charm, despite its mediocre gameplay). Don't be fooled: this is not a total conversion, it is an entirely new game, and one I heartily endorse and recommend.… Expand
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  4. JonoD.
    Sep 28, 2008
    4
    I wasn't particularly impressed. Some of the best features from the original game such as trade have been made far more difficult to use (for instance, when you want to set up a trade route you must scroll through an unorganisable list of all the routes you've created and select the ones you want. Routes between each of my 20 or so cities, each with about 4 goods = (20*4)! = a lot of scrolling). There are also significant balance issues at the end of the game. I played through the game trying to declare independence quickly so the kings forces wouldn't be too strong (i managed mid 1600's which i was happy with) and was still confronted with 330, yes, three hundred and thirty royal man o war's (the most powerful ship in the game). To put it in context i had 5 military ships, which may have been enough to bring the enemy down to 328 if i was lucky. It's a bit of fun but i wouldn't recommend this game until a patch comes out.… Expand
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  5. KS
    Jun 8, 2009
    3
    The good news is that this is a remake of Sid Meier's amusing non-Windows Colonization. The graphics are much improved. The bad news is that overall, this game is worse, and far less fun. There is much tedious detail in play and less care was spent on the manual. You'd be better off starting with the beautifully done manual from 15 years ago! Critical assumptions aren't spelled out. For example, in the original there was a way, after angering the king about trade, to buy your way back into favor. Not here. The lack of a comprehensive manual is particularly painful, because as usual with Meier's games, the computer doesn't play by the same rules. So, first, your rules aren't explained, and then, once you've figured them, out, the computer follows other ones. For example: one of your units leaving a ship to open shore cannot move that same turn. The computers' can. But you may not find that out until many hours, and hundreds of turns have passed. Surprise! Another fun (and more realistic) aspect of the original was that developing virgin forest was an exploration. Something, or nothing might be found. Instead here, everything is laid out from the beginning, adding to the very complex planning process that a player needs to use soon into the game. Overall? A failure, except for those who will do anything to relive a few of their fond memories from a far superior game 15 year old.… Expand
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  6. Dave
    Jan 31, 2010
    3
    There is no reason to play this game when you could be playing Civ4 instead. The mechanics of trade, while interesting in theory, are just tedious in this game. You spend most of your turns loading and unloading ships and redistributing labor instead of actually exploring the new world and interacting with the natives.
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  7. Bob
    Nov 23, 2008
    6
    I am a fun of the original colonization. One of the greatest game by its time (more than 10 years ago). This version has improved the graphics and that all. It sticks with the original with no improvements in the game except better graphics. It is not worth money, I seriously expected much more than that. Technicallly the interface is awful, buttons respond too slow or not respond. The AI simply doees not exist and just make random and stupid decisions. The trade system is terribly bad conceived with some serious problems and bugs. The automatization of units make too stupid decisions. So, it is a great mod of Civ IV, but it is not the kind of game that you expected to pay off.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. BillH.
    Oct 5, 2008
    5
    This game has critical design errors in gameplay mechanics and many half-finished features. It's hard for me to say it's a product of laziness on the part of Firaxis as they have clearly upped the ante of the graphics for the Civ IV engine, however, it seems like that was their main focus, as they then failed to smooth out too many rough edges to make it worth mentioning in this review. I've played it through to victory for over a week straight, something in the neighborhood of 92 hours. My feeling is that they screwed up many gameplay aspects that needed to be updated to such an extent that it would've been better to leave it the way it was in 1993. It's great first, but as you continue playing and realise the many many small problems add up to a deeply flawed game, you find yourself cursing Sid Meier for sucking at the tit of another incomplete cash cow. My hope is they patch many of the problems as they did with Civ IV, but I'm not holding my breath on it. Another running problem I have with the Civ games is they have removed the capacity of Artillery/Cannon to bombard units and cities in the realistic fashion present in Civ II-thru-III. This is just a personal pet peeve and would've been forgivable if it were not simply one more problem in a sea of problems with this game's design, but I really do wish game developer's could get their head's wrapped around how you use Arty and why you would want it in the first place, rather than making it into an infantry unit that charges the front lines.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  9. [Anonymous]
    Sep 24, 2008
    5
    The game itself is decent. If this were an original game release I'd probably give it a 7. But for a remake of an old game using an existing game engine? The quality is just pretty poor and it comes off as nothing more than a cash in on an old IP that's been sitting in the closet. Based on my memory of the old colonization there's really nothing added at all with this release other than some minor stuff perhaps related to the civ 4 engine. As it stands though it's a short game based on a 14 year old game (not just it's concept) that adds nothing. It's certainly nostalgic but the poor ai, poor gui and limited options don't fit with a 2008 release. Sure they've put the price down ($29.99 on Steam) from a regular game release but at 30 bucks it's still asking to be taken seriously and it does nothing to earn it.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. DavidB.
    Sep 29, 2008
    8
    Top game when viewed through rose-tinted spectacles.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. JonathanS
    Feb 8, 2009
    7
    As a big fan of the original Colonization, I had high hopes for the remake. For the most part, these were met: they kept most of the basic mechanisms, including allocating workers. The graphics are very pretty, especially the water effects, and the music is good too. It's absorbing, like almost all Side Meier games it's very hard to put down! I do have some peeves, including a couple of big ones, that keep this from being a near-perfect game. First, as near as I can tell, the only realistic way to victory is Time. The King's forces are freakin' VAST, and each unit is more powerful than yours. Go ahead, put five or six soldiers in every city. A fortress, sure; cannons, why not; hundreds of muskets stockpiled. All you'll do is slow him down for a few turns. Even on low difficulty, achieving independence seems to be impossible. Related to that, attacking the natives doesn't seem to be a viable strategy either. In the original, you could take your starting soldier and start burning villages on turn 1. It was risky, one unlucky fight and you're toast, but it was an option. You could do quite well as the Spanish with this strategy. Now the natives have large armies and they grow over time to be even stronger. My final peeve, which for now has me giving up in disgust: in two separate games now, my "pleased" native allies have turned on me for no reason, BURNING MOST OF MY CITIES TO THE GROUND IN ONE TURN. No chance to mobilize defenses, no explanation for their sudden viciousness. Just game over. Has no one playtested this game?… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  12. DennisS.
    Sep 23, 2008
    9
    I have been playing Colonization for coming up on 14 years. I have enjoyed the game tremendously, and even went through the effort of finding, and playing the shareware version, FreeCol. This game is a faithful representation of the original. The learning curve is made much easier by the Civilization interface...it all seems very familiar. The gameplay is excellent, with an excellent balance between resource management and military/exploration. What makes this version better is the dramatically enhanced Founding Fathers system, where religion, political, exploration, and trade points can be built, saved, then used to purchase a variety of increasingly more expensive and capable founding fathers. So, you want Ben Franklin? Better start saving, 'cause his cost, and benefits, are both quite high! Graphically, this game is excellent. The music is what I would call light classical, and fits in perfectly with the game setting. Just enough to set the mood and tone, and light and breezy enough to escape your attention for long periods. Terrifically done! Another difference from the original that I REALLY appreciated is that you no longer lose production if your warehouse is above 200...they are automatically sold in Europe, albeit for half the going rate. Much better than just losing them. There are a ton of interactions with the natives, and the other colonizations. I also like that there will always be a minimum of one "hammer" for the settlement, which means that you will always be able to work on a project for your towns, even if you don't have the manpower or resources set-up optimally. I am really horrible at this game...and I find myself retiring and restarting. Before, there was no tracking your games...no "Hall of Fame" to chart your relative successes. There is now, and it is enough for me to know that I have done the best I have EVER done, when I retire a game halfway through. I am making good progress, and have done better than I have expected, even though I got the game four hours ago!!! Installation was easy, 800 mb install. My machine is 5 years old, although I did add one additional gig of ram, and a better video card. Windows XP Home, 2.4GHZ, 1.5 GB ram, 256MB video card, and it runs butter-smooth, even on the largest maps.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  13. JasonB.
    Sep 24, 2008
    7
    Certainly a departure from the Civ IV franchise. The graphics have improved somewhat (the water most of all). But there's a steep learning curve from starting out the game. When I played my first game, I didn't know what the hell I was doing. After a couple of games, I finally realized I had to import all the specialists I needed to actually get my colony to thrive. But the game makes it extraordinarily difficult since cities expand really, really slowly and their influence never increases (so far as I've seen). So the hardest part is trying to find a colony that's a good balance between food production (which is essential to getting new citizens and maintaining a colony) and goods production (which gets you the essential money you need to buy specialists and pay those pesky tributes to the King). I was also disappointed that you couldn't be any of the native civilizations, you only can choose between four European nations. All in all, things take forever to get going, but once they do, the game starts to gain a little steam. I have yet to figure out how to produce military units yet, but I'm sure that'll come soon. If you're looking for a really difficult challenge and a complete departure from the Civ IV experience, then Colonization is your game. If you're looking for something familiar, you're going to be disappointed.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  14. ehtehtG
    Nov 11, 2009
    0
    the original civ 4 was an amazing step up from civ 3, and the other expansions added a lot of cool new features, and then came colonization. They introduced a completely new gameplay with no tutorial! I don't know what made them think that was smart at all. I know it's called an expansion, but this was an implosion. from over 30 civs down to 4 playable civs.....wtf Sid Meier. And as far as I can tell they also scratched the concept of technology from the game.....wow.....this game already sucks, but wait there's more! There are even less turns then in the previous games. You can no longer travel the entire world, instead now the border of the map is "europe". And if europe attacks you, guess what, you can't do anything but fight them off and let more come because they aren't a destroyable civ. That's ok though because if you let them be your allie they suck the llife out of you in gold, and nobody else has to deal with it. There even less types of tiles!!!! There is only one type of ocean, and even less resources, and less terrianes...why....? Also the scenarios are all real places, but since they take up only parts of America now, the concept of seperate continents is gone now, so it's possible to meet every AI from the start.....great, but wait it's not so bad because there are only 3 other civs....genius. The only good things about this game are the very slightly improved graphics (oh joy) and the fact that the barbarians aren't always at war with you and have trading capabilities (the 1 actual good thing worth shit). On top of everything I perfer starting from ancient times, but that's just me. So, overall they butchered the game down in every gameplay view, and tried to make up for it with graphics, because graphics make the game sooooo much better (-.-). I think sid was high while making this because this could have been a decent game had he not taken out every last feature possible, but even then I still wouldn't like it because I like Civilization, not Colonization. Above all though a tutorial at least would have made my vote a 1 not a 0, but no Sid had to be high while making this.… Expand
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  15. Scottm
    May 17, 2009
    8
    A very good game. However, don't expect to play this for 20 turns and be good at it. Simply put, it takes some getting used to. Once you do learn however, managing your colony is one of the funnest game mechanics I'v played in a long time. This is not really Civilization, it's its own beast entirely.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  16. island
    Aug 31, 2011
    5
    I didn't expect this. Didn't really like the game. I loved the original one but this was a disaster. The changes made the game boring and expectable. I wasn't impressed.
  17. YeshuaAgapao
    Nov 2, 2011
    8
    Not much improved over the original DOS colonization game gameplay wise, but still a great graphical upgrade even if that is all it is (plus mediocre AI).
  18. ChoicestGames
    Mar 3, 2012
    7
    The new Colonization, although not a totally faithful remake, is pretty close to the mark and offers some fun gameplay for new and old players alike. However, the difficulty of the game maybe off-putting for some and the old-school micromanagement may seem annoying too. However considering the price, you really can't complain too much and if you want to play a game that simulates the colonisation of the New World and the War of Independence, there's no better game out there than this.… Expand
prev next
Page:
  • 1

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
83 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 28 out of 32
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 32
  3. Negative: 0 out of 32
  1. Game Informer
    90
    The random map generator, several unique factions and difficulty levels, and many approaches to the ultimate goal of independence give Colonization as much replay value as any title you care to name. [Oct 2008, p.112]
    Read full review
  2. NZGamer
    83
    What is particularly interesting about Colonization, as against the Civ games, is the relationships between the different factions. There isn't, for example, the same emphasis on war.
    Read full review
  3. PC Gamer
    84
    If you missed Col the first time around (and most of you probably did), now is an excellent chance to pick it up and dive into the colonial era. [Nov 2008, p.62]
See all critic reviews »