new cool stuff

[MarkG]

http://moo3.quicksilver.com/cool/060702.html

[Master Marcus]

Always cool to see the number of animations and movies the MoO3 team seems to code for the game, let's just hope we'll hear also some pro voiceovers like SMAC's ones, the technical stuff I utterly miss in Civ III. If they can combine this with a strong AI, we can still hope for a heck of a game.

Btw, have you noticed how the shadows of the klackon's body are moving upon the environment during the animation? Fluid details.

[Xentax]

Originally posted by Master Marcus
Always cool to see the number of animations and movies the MoO3 team seems to code for the game, let's just hope we'll hear also some pro voiceovers like SMAC's ones, the technical stuff I utterly miss in Civ III. If they can combine this with a strong AI, we can still hope for a heck of a game.

Btw, have you noticed how the shadows of the klackon's body are moving upon the environment during the animation? Fluid details.

I wouldn't get my hopes too high for voice-overs. I don't have an authoritative answer, of course, but I suspect that there was never a plan do to voiceovers of the tech encyclopedia or anything like that. For one thing, I doubt they've gotten final descriptions of the technologies in even _now_ -- the ones I assembled and delivered around February would certainly need revision in light of the subsequent changes.

[TCO]

Did you work there, Xentax? Give us some dirt on the project management!

[Spaced Cowboy]

Wow Mark!

Definately better than the RAS animation!

SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!

[Master Marcus]

Originally posted by Xentax

I wouldn't get my hopes too high for voice-overs. I don't have an authoritative answer, of course, but I suspect that there was never a plan do to voiceovers of the tech encyclopedia or anything like that. For one thing, I doubt they've gotten final descriptions of the technologies in even _now_ -- the ones I assembled and delivered around February would certainly need revision in light of the subsequent changes.

not even some voiceovers for in-game movies ( when discovering a X, winning a major battle, a successful rebellion ( new empire, or new race appearing ), a major event????)

[Xentax]

Originally posted by GP
Did you work there, Xentax? Give us some dirt on the project management!

No...I'm just one of the volunteers.

In roughly chronological order, I:

1) Compiled a chat into one of the 'mini-dumps';
2) Assembled (and generated some of) the Spy Code Names;
3) Assembled (and generated most of) the technology "techno-babble" descriptions for the Tech Encyclopedia; and
4) Became a moderator.

Of course, 2&3 are the only really interesting ones, and while 2 is probably mostly useful still, I suspect what I submitted for 3 needed/needs major revisions (maybe just simplifying, but I dunno).

I'm not saying they can't/won't do voiceovers for that stuff, but it doesn't seem likely given how much time (and therefore money) that would take (there are *hundreds* of techs, remember).

I'd be surprised if there *wasn't* voice content within some/all of the cinematics, though -- sorry if I implied otherwise.

[Master Marcus]

thanks for the input, Xentax.

[Xentax]

Originally posted by Master Marcus
thanks for the input, Xentax.

No problem; I'm here to serve (no ladies, not like that, sorry!! *duck*

[TCO]

Do you have any dirt, Xentax?

[Xentax]

Originally posted by GP
Do you have any dirt, Xentax?

Do I have any first-hand dirt? Nope. I've got a lot of respect for the people working on this project (all of them, mind you, not just Alan though he's the one I know the best, having had a few phone calls in addition to emails, posts, and chat discussion).

There are things I've heard, and inferences I can draw, and so on, but I don't think that would help anything or anyone, and given how much time has passed since I was really "in the loop" (say mid February), my last look under the hood doesn't necessarily correlate all that highly with the way things are now.

People like Sencho could probably say more -- he visited their offices, after all; or Stormhound or Alan. However, even if they had negative things to say, I doubt they'd do so, because they want MOO3 to suceed, no less so because they're no longer on the project (That's IMHO, of course, but I get the sense from both Stormhound and Alan that they're not Those Kinds Of People).

I suspect there were some personality conflicts, or disagreements about some decisions, etc. -- suspect, I never heard anything specific like "We're doing XYZ but Designer Bob thinks we should do ABC." In the end, I was given to understand that such decisions were at least reached with objections noted, if a consensus couldn't be reached, for whatever that's worth. I got the feeling that lots of time was spent debating the specifics of various features and/or changes, so if anyone is wondering if IG "proclaimed" changes X, Y, and Z -- I suspect that's at least a gross over-simplification, and in fact probably just wrong. IG probably had some say to the extent of "It's WAY too complicated".

Honestly though, have you ever seen even a small-
scale project where everyone got perfectly along? Success should be measured in how well people can put aside their differences and work for the common goal, and I think plenty of that went into MOO3.

Bottom line: Do I have any dirt? Nothing that wouldn't qualify as obvious rumormongering (at BEST). Is there dirt that I don't have? There's probably some, but I submit that there's ALWAYS some -- I'd say there's probably less surrounding the MOO3 project than, say, Civ3's release, probably less than Neverwinter Nights (even without considering the whole Activision side of things).

[Spaced Cowboy]

Xentax,

Any insight on whether or not they will hit the 9-20 target date for release?

[Xentax]

If by "insight" you mean "priviledged information", no.

If you mean "my esteemed opinion" (LOL yeah right), I'm ambivalent about it.

Basically, I think the game ought to have roughly 3 months of Beta testing -- public or private, the details aren't quite so important as long as it's more than a handful of people.

I like to think I'd know when a Beta Test is underway, and there isn't one to my knowledge.

So, we're either looking at later than 9-20 for a release I'm happy about; or a 9-20 release that's insufficiently tested by my estimation (of questionable value), or we're looking at a late September release that IS sufficiently tested but the testing at least began without ANYONE outside of IG/QSI knowing about it.

Coincidentally, I'd rate those 3 possibilities in about the same order by likelihood -- I think IG learned a lesson from Civ3's release and will see to it that MOO3 gets external beta testing; but that could go either way. I certainly don't have even an indirect insight of Infogrames' internal decisions.

Bottom line: My best guess is mid-October or later; I can see it getting delayed for a near-Christmas release for the obvious reasons. I doubt that'd happen unless IG provided funding for the extended beta testing, though (I doubt they'd _literally_ sit on it for a month or 2).

[Spaced Cowboy]

Yeah,

I was thinking that 9-20 was a pipe dream. Better to release it near the X-mas buying season to get the sales. If they release it too early, then people will have time to play it before X-mas. That might hurt sales somewhat if it is not as good as one was led to believe.

[timorange]

Originally posted by GP:

"QS screwed up the MOO3 project by being too ambitious"

"I'd be much more interested in the "kiss and tell" version of what happened during development..."

"Of course, given the way he exitted, it's hard not to think that both he and QS may be a little bitter. "

"Sounds like the publisher is getting screwed by the devleoper. Because of all the time wasted, they will get a worse game than expected."

"The project manager screwed up."

"Could you make some comments on the project management aspects?"

"Give us some dirt on the project management!"

"Do you have any dirt, Xentax?"

So determined to find out "dirt" on this project and its management... I notice that most of your posts gravitate towards the negative with regards to MOO3.

Trolling? Or something personal to gain?

I'll put my bets on trolling, considering you post to the Apolyton boards--in more than 3 forums-- what looks to be every 5 minutes.

Here's some "dirt" I heard on MOO3 the other day from an insider: everyone on the team gets along; everyone is working hard to finish the game; reports say it's coming along nicely and that it's even fun to play.

Why not wait until you play the game before you nay-say it publicly and risk looking like an ass?

Oops, too late.

[TCO]

Sure I'm "trolling", but these boards are for speculation. And lots of people are as interested in the game development process as they are in the game itself. nothing wrong with that.

FYI: Mike and Dan at Firaxis noticed my trolling and said it wasn't that bad (volunteered that last chat we had.) I've also been a bit positive about RON. Just cause they say they are ahead of schedule, etc.

And about the project management...it looks like I was right. The initial design was too complicated. So I do feel vinidicated. QS was very frank about that...and I repsect them for that.

[TCO]

but a little bit of dirt does get the juices going. These boards are for entertainment...


------------------

Just noticed...your question about personal gain...No. I don't work in gaming or have investments there. I just like to learn about the process and do a little evil rubbernecking...