The Civilization franchise has had a cult-like following since its initial release by MicroProse in 1991. It was developed for DOS, those of you born before 1985. I remember sitting at my friend Evan's house on his 1st generation Gateway, looking at the encyclodepia-sized box while we figured out the best possible spot to place our first city, by which time other civilizations had already built armies that eventually came and wiped out our little village. Since then the company has changed, the franchise has gotten bigger and more complicated, and has even produced half a dozen spin-offs, but it's still going strong. I can't think of another game that has survived the twenty years since PC gaming's infancy. It has, and in no small part that is due to the game's fanatical following. Now, with the development of CivWorld, the Facebook adaptation of the game, it is being met with optimism and some major criticisms.

     First, the game. CivWorld, due out sometime this summer, is an attempt to bring the complexities of the Civilization strategy game to the Facebook platform, which will necessarilly bring some major changes. This is Sid Meier's second attempt to replatform the game, the first being for video-game consoles with Civ Revolutions in 2007. The biggest change in CivWorld is the online multiplayer "constant play" feature. Like many of Facebook's games, CivWorld continues to be played even when you're not signed on to manage your civilization. You city can go into riots, you can be attacked by other players, or you could create massive surpluses of gold if you don't consistantly check in on your civilization. Of course, this is to increase the number of times players sign on to their Facebook accounts, thus increasing advertising revenue, but it's also a fun experience for many gamers; the anticipation of what happened to your budding little civilization while you were gone. In addition are the inclusion of mini-games; puzzles, memory games, and other little diversions for you to earn gold, science points, or other types of currency to help your little civilization along. Other than that, expect a fairly pared down version of the regular Civilization (technology trees, units, buildings, etc.), particularly since your civilization now consists of one super-city to manage.

     I first had CivWorld described to me by a die-hard Civilization player like this: "Like Farmville mated with Civilization, had an ugly, deformed bastard child, mated again with the bastard child, and called the resulting lizard boy 'Civilization World.'" At the appropriately named civfanatics.com, the forum showed similar enthusiasm for the game. Most of the criticisms are of players that enjoy the Civilization games precisely because they are complicated strategy games, the simplification of which is an affront to their loyalty to the brand. The same criticisms applied to Civilization Revolutions, the Sid Meier's version for the console platform; less decision-making, less strategy, more streamlined for weaker players that like glossed up graphics over gameplay.

     However, CivRev and CivWorld were not designed for the hardcore Civilization fanatics. These games were designed to reach a broader audience. Sid Meier no doubt recognized that his games had a very loyal, but very defined niche following in the world of gaming and to broaden that audience he would have to make his incredibly intricate games more accessible. A typical game of Civilization 3 or 4 could take days, even weeks to complete. By making the game faster, simpler, and more streamlined, developers will be able to bring a larger market into the Civ gaming world, and maybe even manage to convert a few into the already substantial population of "real" Civilization gamers.