How does Moo3 compare with Civ3?

[Fistleaf]

Moo3 with the latest patch, that is.

[Stormhound]

Well, aside from being totally different games, in different genres...

MOO3 isn't really at its best unless you use some of the available fan-mods, and even then it's something of a struggle to get good with it (though as I recall, there were one or two complaints about getting used to Civ3, too). Feelings about the game tend to run far more toward the negative side in my observation than with Civ3, some very deeply so. The folks who enjoy playing the game are rather fewer than one would hope. The game just isn't what a lot of folks (myself included) hoped for. It pains me to say so, but there it is.

[General Ludd]

It's like comparing rotten apples to rotten oranges.

[notyoueither]

And he'd know rotten.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Stormhound
Well, aside from being totally different games, in different genres...

MOO3 isn't really at its best unless you use some of the available fan-mods, and even then it's something of a struggle to get good with it (though as I recall, there were one or two complaints about getting used to Civ3, too). Feelings about the game tend to run far more toward the negative side in my observation than with Civ3, some very deeply so. The folks who enjoy playing the game are rather fewer than one would hope. The game just isn't what a lot of folks (myself included) hoped for. It pains me to say so, but there it is.

It is hideously complex. Rewardingly so, once you get some things down, however I have never seen a learning curve like this in any product intended for the mass market. EVAR.

I hope it finds it's niche and makes a few bucks for the developers before all is said and done. It is/was a bold attempt to do something new, and it sure as shootin' is NEW!

[Fistleaf]

So can I say that the only good thing about Moo3 is that most of the bugs have been patched?

[Stormhound]

You can say it, but that wouldn't make it so. There's a decent game in there if you're willing to dig for it, but it's more work than most people are game for. YMMV.

[Killazer]

Civ3 in its latest state blows Moo3 out of the water easily. Civ3 had a lot of issues when it first came out as well, but it has gotten very very sharp, especially lately with lethal air bombardment and the like.. very fun and balanced/more realistic.

[Fistleaf]

So why are you still here?

[notyoueither]

Because this is a civ site?

[ChristopherC]

I agree with Stormhound. There a great, a classic game in MoO3 waiting to get out! It is an article of faith with me, and God knows my faith has been tested!

It is just a question of, if you have the patience, of working out which are the right MODs to apply. I have applied a lot with mixed results, better presentation in some respects and playability, but I have now hit another but have now hit another bug in 'the case of the disappearing Star Map', a thread I have just added.

I recognise the virtues of the Civilisation series and would probably be a less frustrated player if I just stuck with them but my heart lies in space!

Live long and prosper.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by General Ludd
It's like comparing rotten apples to rotten oranges.

That was funny, not true, but funny. More like crab apples (Moo3) to Delicious apples (Civ3).

[vmxa1]

I would agree with Storm as well. BTW the way Crab apples are edible, they are not rotten. Just not as falvorful as some other apples.

I struggled hard with Moo3 and did get some fun out of it. It has been so long that I am afraid to try it with the patch to see how much better it has become. I was hoping to find some decent strat threads to follow. I remember how many times I had to read and reread manuals and guides and still stumble around to figure out how to accomplish some things and do not want to do that again.

It has a very stiff learning curve, but I have lots of games that are not even worth playing long enough to learn anything. So it is not the worse game I ever owned.

[Bernie Rubber]

I don't mind it now actually. I was disappointed with it when it first came out, moved on to other games, and have just recently played it again. I think it is a fair game.

It could have, nay it should have been so much better, but that ship has already sailed.

[ChristopherC]

I dont think the learning curve with...

MOO3 isnt too steep in its learning curve, actually, compared with other games I have played. And I am no Einstein with computer games. I actually think the various control panes were quite well laid out and logical in their use but were unattractively presented until some MODs improved them.

MOO3, IMHO, has four major problems - though the MODs have tried to address these with some degree of success - well, I am still playing it, trying to improve it with just the right MODs! Though maybe I should be getting psychiatric counselling over this as it is becoming an obseesion!.

The faults are: it lacks game balance. Humans hopelessly the weakest race! I cant win with them on the easiest level!

Lacks a scenario editor. The model for a good game in this sort of genre which had one was Alpha Centauri-Alien Crossfire. Actually, IMHO, all good strategy games should have a scenario editor; it is a sin to omit one! I dont know whether Civ3 has a scenario editor?

Can be buggy.

Didnt get the follow-up and commitment by Infogrames for which, I think, we might reasonably have hoped. This I dont understand, an expansion pack, correcting game balance, bugs, improving the presentation and providing a scenario editor etc. would have made this game a classic and which wouldnt have done any harm, I believe, to Infogrames profits!

Live long and prosperl.