Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will there ever be a MoM2?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    What the hell? Why would Sid Meier do MoM2? Keep him away from it!
    Rethink Refuse Reduce Reuse

    Do It Ourselves

    Comment


    • #17
      Rjak, link to source please. Or is this just another unsubstantiated random rumor?

      Sid didn't have much of anything to do with MOM 1, why would he be interested in picking up someone else's franchise? Sid seems to have lost his golden touch with Civ3, anyway.

      Comment


      • #18
        Last year's E3 Sid said he would do Pirates.Then MOM 2.Atari has the rights.If MOM 2 is coming out Firaxis will be doing it.It's couldn't possibly be any worse than MOO 3.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Rjak
          It's couldn't possibly be any worse than MOO 3.
          That's not a very optimistic sentiment.
          Rethink Refuse Reduce Reuse

          Do It Ourselves

          Comment


          • #20
            Thanks for the information, Rjak.

            I'm very wary of Sid doing MOM2. I think he would do a poor job of it because it doesn't play to the strength of the Firaxis people.

            Even when they were doing Alpha Centauri, Sid stressed that their strength was in extremely detailed research. They're ability to do in-depth research helps with historical games like Civ and even Pirates. And they used their research to help create a plausible future tech tree in Alpha Centauri. You can even see evidence of their research skills in the science fiction books they used for inspiration and to ground themselves in the field.

            MOM, being a fantastical work, has less reliance on researched details, and thus Firaxis would be unable to bring their strength to bear.

            In the gameplay department, I think they lost a lot of good people when Brian Reynolds left. Brian designed SMAC and also was responsible for the bulk of Civ2. His departure along with a lot of other Firaxians was the reason Civ3 wasn't up to par. Thus, Brian Reynolds may be a superior game designer to Sid, who mainly relies on his name recognition.

            A MOM2 from Firaxis may be as much a disaster as MOO3 was.

            Comment


            • #21
              Steve Barcia would be the right man to do it.But I have not heard much about Steve or Caspian-Kaufman.Since we won't see a MOM 2 till 2006 the earliest I just hope MOM 2 isn't made in realtime.Meanwhile I'm waiting for E3.Hurry up and wait.

              Comment


              • #22
                MOO3

                The team that built MOO3 had the rights to build MOM2 and said they would if there was enough sales of MOO3. The money men thought that sales of MOO3 would indicate buying interest in MOM2
                “It is no use trying to 'see through' first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To 'see through' all things is the same as not to see.”

                ― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

                Comment


                • #23
                  Unfortunately sales of MOO3 went down the toilet.Quicksilver is out of the equation.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: MOO3

                    Originally posted by pchang
                    The team that built MOO3 had the rights to build MOM2 and said they would if there was enough sales of MOO3. The money men thought that sales of MOO3 would indicate buying interest in MOM2
                    This is the best example of faulty logic I've seen in a long time. Hope it isn't true.
                    "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." -- JFK Inaugural, 1961
                    "Extremism in the defense of liberty is not a vice." -- Barry Goldwater, 1964 GOP Nomination acceptance speech (not George W. Bush 40 years later...)
                    2004 Presidential Candidate
                    2008 Presidential Candidate (for what its worth)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      It's true. QS did indeed say that they wanted to ask for the rights to do MOM2 after MOO3. The money ppl wanted high MOO3 sales to prove that classic discontinued TBS games (i.e., MOO/MOM) were still money makers if remade, and that QS could do the job.

                      Since QS failed miserably with MOO3, there's no way their request for MOM2 would be approved. And it's unlikely that the money ppl would want to do a MOM2 after getting burned on MOO3. Basically, the financers see MOO3 and MOM2 as the same thing -- remakes/sequels of ancient turn-based-strategy games that have been discontinued for a longtime. They took low MOO3 sales to indicate that there was little interest in this genre, and thus little profit in doing a MOM2. (They judge on $, and don't care that the real reason sales sank was b/c MOO3 sucked. They just decided there was no profitable market interest for MOO3/MOM2).

                      If Sid wants to do MOM2, he's got an uphill battle to convince them it would be profitable.
                      Last edited by ApolytonGuest; May 4, 2004, 06:23.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Vince278
                        This is the best example of faulty logic I've seen in a long time. Hope it isn't true.
                        That's a pretty bold assertion to make on this forum, but you may be right. I already knew about it, but my respect for corporate planning strategies was already sufficiently low that I wasn't too surprised when I found out.

                        If you change it to mean "if Quicksilver can't make MOO3 fun, we ain't letting 'em touch MOM2," it makes perfect sense, though. They have no reason to assume the series is bad, but everything I've heard about MOO3 makes it sound like a graphically intensive spreadsheet program. "A game to simulate bloated bureaucracy on a scale never before imagined! It'll be fun!" The fact that they didn't shoot down Quicksilver the second they heard that proposal indicates that they're dumb enough to think anything...
                        1011 1100
                        Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Not so bold really. It sounded like they were saying (1) MOO3=MOM2 and (2) MOO3 sold poorly therefore so will MOM2 (regardless of the reason why). The first is classic faulty logic (apples and oranges) and the second is a kind of corporate logic that would make sense if it was well thought out but that does not appear to be the case. Personally, I will continue to be optimistic and keep my fingers crossed.
                          "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." -- JFK Inaugural, 1961
                          "Extremism in the defense of liberty is not a vice." -- Barry Goldwater, 1964 GOP Nomination acceptance speech (not George W. Bush 40 years later...)
                          2004 Presidential Candidate
                          2008 Presidential Candidate (for what its worth)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Vince278
                            Personally, I will continue to be optimistic and keep my fingers crossed.
                            Now who's guilty of faulty logic?
                            1011 1100
                            Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              It sounded like they were saying (1) MOO3=MOM2 and (2) MOO3 sold poorly therefore so will MOM2 (regardless of the reason why).
                              Yes, this is exactly what they're saying. Where we and they disagree is on the reason. We think it sold poorly b/c MOO3 sucked, and that this is not an indicator of MOM2 sales. They think MOO3 sold poorly b/c there is no interest in this genre of remaking old TBS, and that therefore is an indicator that MOM2 will sell poorly.

                              Whether you like their logic or not, they're the ones holding the purse-strings. It's their investment money at risk. So, you need to convince them they'll make a huge profit if you want them to risk their money investing in MOM2. I'm sure the sales pitch for MOM2 sounds very similar to MOO3 to their ears -- remake an old classic, TBS, huge hit in past, fan following, discontinued for years, nostalgia, etc.

                              Now convince them why they should put money into another classical TBS remake after losing money on MOO3, instead of investing in an RPG or RTS or first person shooter or something else.

                              It's not so much that MOO3=MOM2. Rather it's that they see MOO3=unprofitable genre/no buyers, and MOM2=same genre.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Elok
                                Now who's guilty of faulty logic?

                                Not so. But I may be guilty of being optimistic to the point of being naive. I was excited and disappointed with MOO3 and am trying to be hopeful about MOM2.
                                "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." -- JFK Inaugural, 1961
                                "Extremism in the defense of liberty is not a vice." -- Barry Goldwater, 1964 GOP Nomination acceptance speech (not George W. Bush 40 years later...)
                                2004 Presidential Candidate
                                2008 Presidential Candidate (for what its worth)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X