What do we think of MoO3?

H Tower · February 28, 2003, 02:11

how about an option for those who haven't played yet?

Corentor · February 28, 2003, 02:13

Everything you need to know about the game is in the reviews that have been released.

If after you read TChick's and Avault's review, and you say that you don't mind the things they mentioned, you'll have a blast.

Jamski · February 28, 2003, 05:55

Its pretty hard to choose "greatest game ever" after only 3 days playing it, but it is good.

-Jam

darcy · February 28, 2003, 06:04

how about an option for those who haven't played yet?

How about they wait with their vote until they do have an opinion?

smellymummy · February 28, 2003, 07:27

i barely played, but I know that this is one strategy game that I'll keep for a long time

Alex · February 28, 2003, 07:38

Hm, seems like the initial reaction, after the desperation caused by the overload of info, is being positive after all...

smellymummy · February 28, 2003, 07:53

Originally posted by Alexnm
Hm, seems like the initial reaction, after the desperation caused by the overload of info, is being positive after all...

the overload of info is good

H Tower · February 28, 2003, 09:11

Originally posted by darcy

How about they wait with their vote until they do have an opinion?

that could be a long while

GodKing · February 28, 2003, 09:51

Before you spam me, I voted second from best....

I like this game. I think that some things could have been done better. Diplomicy is a pain, and from what I can see I don't have enough info provided to do it well. Also, I think the menues could be better... organized? But overall it appear to be an excelent game.

vmxa1 · March 1, 2003, 00:38

I need more playing time to make a choice, so bump it again in a week. Else add another choice, that goes something like "just starting, but have hopes".

Asher · March 1, 2003, 01:48

I think it's terrible.

Amateurish, boring, poorly documented, incredibly bad UI, mystical AI.

I feel like I'm wrestling with the AI to play my own damn game.

Vince278 · March 1, 2003, 05:24

My first impressions are poor but I think its way too early to vote. I'm still willing to give it a chance before I cast my vote.

Artifex · March 1, 2003, 06:20

what are tchicks and avault reviews? What are the site urls?

dadacp · March 1, 2003, 07:59

I'm sorry to say this, but the reviewer who said that MOO3 is designed to let the intelligent computer do all the work while the stupid human doesn't know what going on and just clicks turn button was right. It's extremely difficult for the human to discover basic information and act upon it. AI however, knows exactly what's going on acts upon it generally quite well. Most of the normal elements of information presentation (e.g., no colony table with alterable build queues, diplomacy that is so confusing as to be almost useless) and gameplay (save doesn't work properly, real-time combat that's half over before one know what's going on, no method of pausing the game to do something else, a warning not to use basic windows functions hidden away in the readme) are either missing or poorly implemented. It seems that QS spent all of their energy on developing a complex, AI-controlled world and very little on assisting the human's interaction with this world. Documentation is almost non-existent and many basic bugs slipped through the testing phase.

MOO3 had a small pool of elite beta testers. It seems the beta testers climbed the vertical learning cliff, then didn't need the non-existent documentation and knew how to work around the bugs. Now many who bought the game feel like they are forced to be beta testers and are hoping that GQ will fix deciencies in a patch.

Proteus_MST · March 1, 2003, 11:07

I think the game is really great.

The worst part of it however is the documentation.
Really mportant parts are missing or hidden in the readme.txt instead of the Manual where they actually belong to (for example the Planet Specials).
I hope the revised Manual which the Developers intend place on their website will be a step forward.
Also the In-Game Documentation and Encyclopedia ist really uninformative. One thing I liked in MOO2 was to get Inforamtions by right-clicking on an Object.
In MOO3 I have to guess what you can do with certain Objects, because they aren´t mentioned in the manual or the encyclopedia.
Especially annoying in the Ship-Creation-Menu where you first have to open the Tech-Menu to find Informations about several Weapons or Ship-Systems and often have to search hundrets of entrys and often even several schools of science before you find what you´re looking for (it isn´t always clear to which field of study certain Weapons or other Objects belong)
Or one thing completely missing is to see further details of Ships in enemy Fleets as it was possible in MOO2 (at least in an After Action Report after battle).
But maybe the Developers had the opinion that you as a Commander of a real Spacefleet wouldn´t get to know such details, because the enemy would jam your Sensors so that you would know where the enemy is, but not the exact blueprints of his ships.

But aside from those points of criticism I think it is a truely great game.
I even found the AI-Viceroys useful enough to manage my Planets most of the time (although I often put my own DEAs into certain Secors of the Planet and regularly alter the military Building-Queue), and I am one of those People who truely liked the Micromanagement of MOO2.

I just hope they get to issue a patch which expands the Encyclopedia (at least the Planet Specials should be added) of the game and maybe adds a little Quick-Help like in MOO2 (right-clicking on an object and getting further Informations about the Object)

prisoner881 · March 1, 2003, 12:15

I've been playing this game for about three days now, and I think I can sum it up pretty well:

By this time with MOO1/2, I was having lots of fun, but with MOO3 I feel like someone's pulled some sort blindfold over my eyes, keeping all the interesting things away from me. Instead, it's been replaced with some droning radio voice from afar, telling me about ledgers, sitreps, budgets, and an endless stream of technology improvements that mean absolutely nothing to me.

High points? First, the viceroy AI seems to be pretty good at selecting what you want to do with a planet, and I like the fact that the AI won't let you run your empire into the ground too easily by mismanaging your budgets and priorities. Second, I like the star lane concept. Last, I like the concept (but not the execution) of the sitrep.

Low points? Where to start?

Macromanagement is one thing, but I feel like I have very little to do with my empire at all! Add something to a queue here, adjust a slider there, hit the "turn" button, and repeat ad nauseam. Things have been made too abstracted. The menu depth required to get to common functions like build queues is ridiculous.

Spies are far too powerful in offense, not nearly enough in defense. Why bother having leaders at all when they get assassinated within five or ten turns?

The galaxy map graphics actually seem a step down from MOO2, if you ask me. What was wrong with the old 2D map such that it required replacement? Or if it had to be replaced, why was it replaced with something that looks so bad?

And combat! The real-time decision was a great one, but the ships are so tiny it's kind of pointless to even have them onscreen. They might as well be dots. The 2D sprite graphics of MOO2 battles seem lush by comparison. Weapons effects are nice, though.

Diplomacy is a mess! After sixty turns of building up to an alliance, that same race suddenly (and inexplicably) declares war on me, only to cancel it two or three turns later. Then they start the whole process over again. Why bother forming alliances when they are so casually discarded?

How about refitting my older ships? Since tech advances come in such torrents, it's kind of stupid to not allow refitting. After all, by the time a ship is produced it's invariably five or ten levels out of date.

Lastly, the UI...bland, boring, and not the most intuitive layout I've ever seen. The text is too big, the use of whitespace is poor. There's simultaneously too much and too little info on just about every screen. Too much extraneous info, too little important info.

I am thoroughly and totally disappointed, the more so because I have been anticipating this game since the day it was announced. I can't understand for the life of my why QS made the design decisions that they did, because it seems they did absolutely no research on what made MOO1/2 fun to play and instead focused on "we're going to remove micromanagement and build a galaxy-wide business simulator". Congrats, guys...you succeeded. Now all you have to do is make the AI press the "turn" button and I can sit back and watch the game play all by itself. Oh what fun.

If you want an outstanding turn-based 4x space strategy game that allows you to get into the game, have interesting combat, and feel like you actually matter to your empire, I strongly suggest that you check out Space Empire IV Gold from Shrapnel Games. The computer AI isn't the best (mostly because it's predictable, not because it's stupid), but it's engaging. Tech advances actually mean something. Refitting is allowed. Combat is well executed (but turn-based). Best of all, it's well under the $50 pricetag of MOO3.

I'm returning my copy of MOO3 today. Perhaps in five or six months they'll have patched it to the point where it's interesting, but I doubt it. There's too much wrong here for patches to fix. I've now been greatly disappointed by my last two biggest anticipations: Civ3 and MOO3. What is it with folks who can't understand why the prior game was a success? Did QS even bother doing any polling, research, or studies of MOO1/2 players to find out what they liked and didn't like? It sure doesn't seem so.

And don't hand me the old "we wanted to start fresh" mantra. If you wanted to do that, don't call it MOO. It would've saved us all a lot of trouble, and allowed someone else to truly make good use of the name.

Arnelos · March 1, 2003, 13:50

As with any game that has the POTENTIAL to be "great", it will take AT LEAST a full month of play before any verdict can be fairly given on its greatness level.

bhaight · March 1, 2003, 17:14

This one stays on my hard drive for a long, long time. It's complex as hell, but most of all, it's FUN. Well done Quicksilver and Infogrames.

notyoueither · March 1, 2003, 17:21

My jury is out.

I am just getting the hang of the mechanics. I'll know in a little while if the game has staying power. Up to now I've been occupied by figuring it out, with a lot of help from the boards.

I would say that if I were not frequenting boards, it might not have survived more than 48 hours. Good manuals should not be seen as options. That will effect sales greatly.

smellymummy · March 1, 2003, 23:14

i think the boards, so far, have done nothing more than make me ask more questions about the game.

with one exception: on the official moo3 boards I had read some pointers about properly using the AI 'planet plans' (forgot the exact term).

I imagine in a few days there should be lots more info, faqs, stats and strategy on the forums. At least I hope so!

and manuals... pfft!

if anything, the master notes does the job perfectly for a tutorial. I didn't even start using the manual until today, only after I read the antares/orion story -pretty cool story btw- at which point I've kept the little book handy since.

even then, what I've tried to look up in the manual is really small things I'd try to figure out, for example, how many marines I can stuff into one transport pod - which BTW isn't written anywhere

but I think i figured it out, it's 4 per pod.

anyway, the whole hoopla about not enough information is just way over exagerated by everyone who's got a complaint to voice.

Imagine if you picked up civ3 and you never played the game before. if thats impossible to imagine, then try to remember when you first played civ1. I remember, and even after weeks of playing that game, I'd still be referencing the manual

this game requires some getting used too, thats all, and I truly think, and strat game player can learn it in no time, unless you get really stuck on micromanaging, but thats a whole different story

CharlesBHoff · March 2, 2003, 03:55

Well I love the game I think Infro could have a better manual written. I donot think the manual being poor have anything to do with Quicksilver. I goto the Tex Tech Family Care Clinde in El Paso as my GP doctor. Once time they have than student learning to be than doctor learn how to talk to patient by asking what is wrong with me and why I than here. He wasnot allow to diagore me or exaime me at all then the one who is almost readry to be than doctor does the rest of the needed job. I once have the head doctor of the clinic examine me as by law he or she must see so many
patient ayear. Texas Texas operate Thomson Hosiptal which must treat all people no matter what they abilites to pay is. This hosiptal is rate in the top 100 hosiptal in America.

Trystan · March 2, 2003, 06:05

I went for one of the middle choices. Though it didn't really have the way I feel about it. It is an ok game but frustrating in the lack of documentation and the forceful way that it makes you play it. Which makes it below ok. But, I think it could be made better.

I think the mistake with the whole macromanagement thing was that they used MOO2. This game is MOO2.5 with macromanagement tools rather than micro. The planet ques/sliders and ship building UI is not too much different that MOO2, though MOO2 did a much better job. The planet summary screen is still there, though a bit worse IMO. The victory screen is similiar to the race screen except most of the info is stripped out because QS felt that the emperor shouldn't know what their opponents are.

To defend my view on the macromanagement thing. Comments like set the Dev Plan and then tweak it show that micromanagement is still necessary.

Raion · March 2, 2003, 14:20

Well, maybe this will help some of yous!

http://apolyton.net/moo3/preview/part6_day.php

aiin · March 2, 2003, 15:33

insane dipo AI is not fun

cryptic research goals not fun

passive enemy AI not fun

just building spies is not fun

annoying ship design not fun

viceroys building ships and troops users don't want is not fun

the whole focus of "planning" and not "playing" is really not fun

I really want to ask beta testers how could they not bring up any of these points, I mean did they think Moo3 is perfect.

NeOmega · March 2, 2003, 16:39

Originally posted by aiin
insane dipo AI is not fun

cryptic research goals not fun

passive enemy AI not fun

just building spies is not fun

annoying ship design not fun

viceroys building ships and troops users don't want is not fun

the whole focus of "planning" and not "playing" is really not fun

I really want to ask beta testers how could they not bring up any of these points, I mean did they think Moo3 is perfect.

yes... and notice the NOT FUN part, which, is being nice, I'd rather solve calculus than waste any more time on this.

I am going to take this back to Fred Meyer and ask to exchange, if they refuse, (which I doubt) I will take the cd's out of the box, and snap them in half, rip the box and manual to shreds in front of the store guy and send the remains to Qucksilver. And believe me, I will.

Because $50 is 7 hours of carpet cleaning for me, I don't like cleaning carpets, I pay $50, I want $50 worth.

I have never felt ripped off buy a game I have purchased until now.

CharlesBHoff · March 2, 2003, 16:59

Originally posted by NeOmega

yes... and notice the NOT FUN part, which, is being nice, I'd rather solve calculus than waste any more time on this.

I am going to take this back to Fred Meyer and ask to exchange, if they refuse, (which I doubt) I will take the cd's out of the box, and snap them in half, rip the box and manual to shreds in front of the store guy and send the remains to Qucksilver. And believe me, I will.

Because $50 is 7 hours of carpet cleaning for me, I don't like cleaning carpets, I pay $50, I want $50 worth.

I have never felt ripped off buy a game I have purchased until now.

I than very happy with the game and I than not a fanboy at all . In my post also one time in the middle 70's doctor out of
med school where haveing problen communicate with their patient. The AMA ask some authour that write book on how to solved this major problen. The first thing their found out was that their where teaching bedside manner
too late in the training and only sent a hour or two on it.
The authour said their could start teaching bedside manner from the start as than on going process. I realy think that game programmer need to learn how to write than better manual. I know I have trouble commincate I was born with than damage speech center which can also
hindering writeing skill , what their excuse for writeing than bad manual.

NeOmega · March 2, 2003, 17:07

No, it cannot be fun to me. The artwork and layout is aggravating. The user interface is not very dynamic at all. Close this window, open that one, click on this button, there you are, now you want your newly built scout ship to go out and explore?

Well, easy,

MOO3

clear task force
add scout ship
change task force size to detatchment
change task force mission to recon.

press escape
press escape

now, wait a turn for the task force to be made
and next turn you can move it to the planet of your choice!

MOO
wanna move your scout ship?
click on the stack, select the scout ship, tell it to move to the next planet

MartinTrouman · March 2, 2003, 17:12

Well... I've only played a few days now and don't like it much.

I wish it would entertain me like #1 and #2. Maybe I've changed.. or the game styels has (or both). In any case I wish I could be entertained like I was with #1 and #2.

the biggest turn-offs for me are:
missing characters (assasins, fleet masters, ect.)
no fleet rearangement

..oh crap I'm too tired to write a decent post. The result of the game just made me sad... in a way.

I'm sure somebody will make a truly briliant strategy game again (like moo2)... someday. I were just hoping for moo3 to be one of these games.... but it was'nt (for me)

well... take care and enjoy what ever game that gets you off.

smellymummy · March 2, 2003, 17:22

Originally posted by NeOmega
clear task force
add scout ship
change task force size to detatchment
change task force mission to recon.

press escape
press escape

now, wait a turn for the task force to be made
and next turn you can move it to the planet of your choice!

NeOmega, I think you just described nearly every strategy game out there! in a broad general sense, they are all about clicking, menu'ing, info'ing, and waiting. And don't forget the ultimate strategy shortcut key, escape. it's such excitment, i gota get them all!

btw, did I mention yet that I like the game?

Bill_in_PDX · March 2, 2003, 18:57

Has any of the folks who post here saying that they like the game had a planet invaded by the AI yet in any of their games?

I am trying to find out if this is indeed a systemic problem with the AI.