Is MOO3 going to suck

[yin26]

Well, maybe I'm so positive BECAUSE I haven't followed it closely? But seriously, some things I really like about the effort at QS so far:

** Directly and consistently working with the public to get feedback. I can't stress how important and how rare that is. It's amazing to me that companies have a virtually free means of finding out what their consumers want...and yet they design in a vacuum and hope. Makes no sense.

** The decision to release MOO3 3 months AFTER Civ3. Not only does this mean they are not worried about the Christmas window, but they will be able to play and learn some things from Civ3, watch the reception of its various features...and at the very least have the opportunity to polish and tweak. So while Civ 3's first major (and most likely NECESSARY) patch will be coming about 3 months after its release, MOO3 will be hitting the market. If the timing is good, they'll attract a lot of frustrated Civvers who otherwise might not have bought the game if they were released at the same time. Great move.

** Trying new stuff. Let's face it: This is industry is often sooo damn conservative it's a wonder it still makes any money at all. I will be the first to say that MOO3 could flop because of its "messing with the forumula." 10 times out of 10, I would rather buy a polished game that tries something new than a cookie-cutter game that takes another 4 months for patches because the designers and publisher never really cared about the gamer to begin with.

** Sending the message that the game is a labor of love. This is important. I want to think the a game's designers are loving every minute of the project and not just clocking in time or looking at this game as a step to the next one. Firaxis, if you ask me, has been a cold fish. Infogrames has forced them to a holiday (heck, OCTOBER!) release, and I have heard basically NO excitement from them about working on the project. Jesus, even Sid comes out and says stuff like: "Well, I thought Civ was behind me, but what the hell."

Hardly inspiring by contrast.

[tniem]

Originally posted by yin26
Well, maybe I'm so positive BECAUSE I haven't followed it closely? But seriously, some things I really like about the effort at QS so far:

To the same token, I am probably really positive about MoO3 because I played the original two only on a rare occassion. I was more of a Civ and Stars! player. So for me MOO3 really represents a new game for me. So that is probably the reason I am most excited.

** Directly and consistently working with the public to get feedback. I can't stress how important and how rare that is. It's amazing to me that companies have a virtually free means of finding out what their consumers want...and yet they design in a vacuum and hope. Makes no sense.

I think this is in big part because Alan is really a game player not a game designer. He always wanted to be a part of the process and now that he has gotten that chance he is letting us all in on the ride. Which means that the difference is because they came from different places.

I think for MOO it is really important to have a big involvement of the community. It has always lived in the shadows of Civ. Now it is listening and caring about consumers, building a community before release. Firaxis said something about learning how to build communities from Maxis, they choose the wrong company. They should have looked at Quicksilver within the Infogrames umbrella.

** The decision to release MOO3 3 months AFTER Civ3. Not only does this mean they are not worried about the Christmas window, but they will be able to play and learn some things from Civ3, watch the reception of its various features...and at the very least have the opportunity to polish and tweak. So while Civ 3's first major (and most likely NECESSARY) patch will be coming about 3 months after its release, MOO3 will be hitting the market. If the timing is good, they'll attract a lot of frustrated Civvers who otherwise might not have bought the game if they were released at the same time. Great move.

To me I agree with Christmas stuff. Most great games are released after Christmas when companies missed their window. Blizzard is always doing so and they still sell a ton during the spring season. Maxis and the Sims. Black and White. Spring is the time for the best games, the ones that missed Christmas because they were still polishing and not in a financial rush to release the game.

But I must say the three months after Civ III release window is some what cheap. I mean if it is coming from Infogrames than I would say it is just because they don't want two TBS games competing against each other. But coming from Quicksilver it is kind of saying were going to come out after and do better. I don't know, it to me is kind of petty.

** Trying new stuff. Let's face it: This is industry is often sooo damn conservative it's a wonder it still makes any money at all...

Agreed.

** Sending the message that the game is a labor of love. This is important. I want to think the a game's designers are loving every minute of the project and not just clocking in time or looking at this game as a step to the next one. Firaxis, if you ask me, has been a cold fish. Infogrames has forced them to a holiday (heck, OCTOBER!) release, and I have heard basically NO excitement from them about working on the project. Jesus, even Sid comes out and says stuff like: "Well, I thought Civ was behind me, but what the hell."

Hardly inspiring by contrast.

Again a big agreed. Quicksilver really wants to do this game. They are dedicated to it. It is this or none of them have a job. Many came within the forums and are now on developement. They love this game. This is their life.

I think similar things happened at Blizzard. There one of their map editor designers took a labtop to the hospital. He had to work on the game. Of course the problem with this is that his wife was in the hospital giving birth.

When she came out of labor he was still plugging away on the labtop working on the game. She asked him why didn't he put the damn game down for a little while. He told her that it wasn't a game, it was StarCraft.

Love for what you do is big and it shows in how the game turns out.

[yin26]

I think similar things happened at Blizzard. There one of their map editor designers took a labtop to the hospital. He had to work on the game. Of course the problem with this is that his wife was in the hospital giving birth.

LOL! Yes, I read about that. Reminds me of Phil Steinmeyer's comment when his baby was born and the same day that Tropico was released. He said, basically, that the release of Tropico was a bigger deal to him because he has the rest of his life to see his son grow.

Thank God for those nut-case game designers / programmers who sacrifice everything for what they love!

[Master Marcus]

The Savior of The TBS Genre

For what I know right now, I'd say ...the best feature is the combination of RTS battles and TBS overall management. I think it is THIS kind of gameplay mechanics, melted togheter on a powerful and highly playable engine, that should make MoO3 a great space-opera game. The IFPs are only there to allow playing in a galaxy of 10,000 colonies ,and thousands of ships around...and maintaining your leaders in line of course!

To answer the meaning of this thread, not only MoO3 is NOT going to suck ( perhaps the thread's title should have been more positive oriented: is MoO3 to be a huge hit???), it's going to be a surprise hit if they can implement all the inputs shown on the official site.

[Master Marcus]

Originally posted by dainbramaged13


Also, while I like the idea of IFP to some extent, and for some purposes, I really wish that there were an option to turn this off, for both you and the AI, like if you really wanted to have an incredibly long game, and micromanage everything.

dainbramaged13, I've just read a reply from Stormhound answering that and I quote him in my own words: you will NOT be able to disable the IFPs, either on multiplayer and single-player. He says that the whole game is constructed upon this points system.

[Stormhound]

Originally posted by tniem

But I must say the three months after Civ III release window is some what cheap. I mean if it is coming from Infogrames than I would say it is just because they don't want two TBS games competing against each other. But coming from Quicksilver it is kind of saying were going to come out after and do better. I don't know, it to me is kind of petty.

It's entirely Infogrames' call; they're the publisher, and they didn't want the games competing directly for sales. We're not in competition with Sid; if anything, we want both games to sell well as it increases the chances for a MoM2, which we're quite keen on taking a crack at. Both games need to be good sellers, so that Infogrames will remain committed to the TBS market.

[yin26]

Stormhound:

Their decision makes perfect sense to me. I'm just damn happy that MOO3 is the one being released LATER. You guys are really going to be in a sweet spot.

My only concern: What are the advertising plans? Seems like Civ 3 is getting better coverage just for being a Sid game. This is understandable, but PLEASE don't let MOO3 go quietly into that good night...

[Kc7mxo]

Hmm. When I read that moo3 was coming 3 out three months after civ3 i didn't think it was because of any strategy. i thought it was just because civ3 was still supposedly a long ways off, like the holy grail, and they were just a bit farther. Sorta like ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.



While I only breifely played either moo1 or moo2, i am willing to give the ifp system a chance. but it all depends on their implamentation of the ai. if they hired proffesionals (of which there are quite few ) for the ai, or put out a LOT of effort of their own, then it will work. If the ai is even the slightest bit stupid, then people will scream bloody murder.

Personalyl after following black and white with breathless anticipation for 3 years, only to be utterly disaspointed, i've avoided reading about moo3. as i did with diablo2exp. unfortunatly i couldn't contain my curiousity abotu civ3 and i'm already disapointed.

anticipation is a *@#^@.

[[LordLMP]]

Okay, I haven't read the whole thread as first several posts are just down right Negative and close-minded....typical conservative who is afraid of change. So i may repeat some things. If you don't like MOO3, then simply go back to play MOO, simple as that. I can see how Negativity would annoy the Designers. Instead of complaining and repeat it all over the place, make suggestions and think POSITIVE. Give the team good karma, not bad

I wouldn't mind allowing the Governors run things...aslong as the AI ain't stupid. IFP will work, aslong as they have a good AI system. if MOO3 has bad AI, then of course the IFP will not work.
And there won't entirally ONE AI for the Overall thing...there will be multiple AI algorithms...one for the Emperor(which would be the most complex...hopefully), each Governor, each Minister, each Leader, each Admiral, each Captain, etc...

If you end up having one stupid Governor, then its your job as a Emperor to Fire him and get a new one...if you don't or cannot do to IFP, then the fault goes to the Emperor

As for the RTS thing, i prefer RTS then turn base...aslong as there is a Pause, Play, Fast-Forward, etc... buttons like in X-COM: Apocalypse. I rather have the Ship battles run something like Homeworld, Harpoon, etc then Turn base, which is unrealistic. In r/l, i wouldn't not allow the enemy to get into range and destroy half my fleet before i get a chance to Fire back. Thats one of the annoying things about MOO2. You practicly have to build Defensive and Offensive ships. Defence will be geared to have the ships be able to take heavy punishment and then whatever left for weapons. Where in Offensive, gear the ships to have the biggest guns in numbers s you can blast the enemy before they a get chance to fire back. That, in my opinion is pathetic.... sure may try a variety of designs in a fleet, but in Moo2, won't allow you to place the ships...so the darn game ends putting your offencers with low armor in front then the defencers with low guns at the back. Pretty annoying. Also, RTS allows the players to get through battles a lot quicker then spend an hour on some pathetic battle...... Birth of the Federation had the right idea about ship-to-ship battles, but they could of done better... but had fun with anyway....hey, i was able to get a small fleet of raider type ships to cause a lot of damage to the enemy battleships before being eliminated in BOTF....

If RTS battles in Moo3 will be something like Harpoon which Stormhound used as an example, would be hoot of lot fun
All little battles will leave to the Admirals...but the big huge important ones i want to be able to lead

-LMP

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by Fyunch(click)

IFP and handing control over to AI leaders has always the first and foremost topic people complain about. One thing you guys should remember though is that the enemy AI has the same problem too. It too has to issue commands to it's empire through the IFP system.

get the mote out of your eye

the AI has to use the IFP system? that means it has to hand a lot of the micromanagement over to the AI. That means handing the job to itself.

Irrelevant in the big picture. I picture a game with large complexity I can't enjoy because of this ridiculous IFP.

[Stormhound]

(answering various bits)

AI: We hired someone specifically for that a year ago. More people are working on it now.

AI handing the job to itself: Not quite. There's an AI that makes the "big picture" level decisions, simulating what the player does (trying to decide what's most important to do at any given time, and how to respond). Then there's the AI that simulates subordinates, which both the player and the AI-player have to deal with.

Advertising: I just answered much the same question on our forum. Infogrames has to gear their campaigns carefully. Besides, Civ3 is the big flashy title with the Grand Old Man of TBS at the helm, and all the pomp and circumstance. MoO3 will get its share of the limelight, don't you worry.

KC7MXO: That a Ham call sign? (g) KC0EKV here.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by [LordLMP]
Okay, I haven't read the whole thread as first several posts are just down right Negative and close-minded....typical conservative who is afraid of change.

Nope, all wrong. Branding those who disagree with you?

[loinburger]

What an incredibly loaded polling question.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Father Beast
I don't know which way to go. MOO2 sucked, and the original MOO was one of the greatest games ever made. I still play it.

but this is being made by an entirely different team. it might be good. I doubt it, though. this imperial focus thing looks like it would limit the player's ability to manage his empire. governors are OK, but they often would go and do things I don't want them to do.

When playing the moojr scenario for fantastic worlds, my governors would often build police stations (under a fundamentalism!!) and I would have to go in and tell them to knock it off. I try to imagine the horror as my governors go and do some crazy things and I can't get them to fix it because I've run out of imperial focus.

eventually, I predict the game bogging down into me screaming at a few of my governors to do something right, while the rest of them go ahead and do what they want, acting pretty much like any computer AI. not something I look forward to.

in the recent discussions on RTS vs. TBS, it has been pointed out that the greater strategy depth is in TBS because of the ability to look at everything that's going on, and tweak it minutely. Some people have played AOK on slow and pausing a lot, making it somewhat like plaing a TBS. it looks like MOO3 will take a TBS and force you to play it like an RTS. step backward, I say

You need to learn to win with disadvantages. In the real world, top brass has to let lower-downs make decisions. Some of them will be wrong. you just nchalk that up to size of empire and move along. Who cares about some police stations getting built if you are moving howies for an important battle.

Breath in deep. "LET THE PERFECTIONISM GO!"

[TCO]

Originally posted by Stormhound
KC7MXO: That a Ham call sign? (g) KC0EKV here.

Hey cool! I couldn't get him to tell what that meant. Back on the AOL Civ boards, 4 years ago. Now I know!