Will MOO3 ship on 30.1.2002?

[Jeje2]

Remember reading somewhere that MOO3 shall ship three months after Civ3, so is 30.1.2002 the shippingdate for MOO3 or not?

[Sencho]

Last I heard, though this is mui unofficial, was three months after Civ3 or the winter quater 2001, whichever was later. That pushes the release date as far back as late March.

And, as always, things are subject to change as conditions dictate.

[moomin]

I honestly would be pleased with a x-mas 2002 release. If it means a polished, balanced game.

After all, I'm still playing Moo2 after all those years, so waiting for the new game is insignificant compared to the pleasures awaiting us all if Moo3 really rocks.

But I guess the people over at QS would rather see a March release. They've got mouths to feed too, remember.

[Master Marcus]

For now they say "End of March".

[ravagon]

I think it depends upon who's calling the shots. The marketing lot would want to release on time to meet all of their commitments and "patch later" while I assume the programmers would rather get as much right the first time. Unfortunately the trend lately seems to be more in line with the former but I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

[Skeeve]

I just bought Civilization III, and the back cover of the Manual for the game has an advertisement for MOO3.

It claims a launch of 1Q2002. This could be as late as March 31st, but I'm eternally pessimistic when it comes to these things, so I'm thinking more like April/May.

[Swissy]

Infogrames seems to have all their strategy games on a timetable. So Febuary looks likes it fits into the release plans very well. The feature cuts sort of confirm this as Infogrames would want the game in beta very soon so it can go gold in january. Then they will have a couple of months before the Civ3 expansion is ready for release. Then may three months after that we'll get the MOO3 expansion with all the stuff they cut.

[Bleyn]

Originally posted by Swissy
Infogrames seems to have all their strategy games on a timetable. So Febuary looks likes it fits into the release plans very well. The feature cuts sort of confirm this as Infogrames would want the game in beta very soon so it can go gold in january. Then they will have a couple of months before the Civ3 expansion is ready for release. Then may three months after that we'll get the MOO3 expansion with all the stuff they cut.

Uhmmm.... If an expansion happens for MoO3, I don't expect things like Ethos will reappear in it.

I can't remember if Stormhound said it here or not, but on Quicksilver's MoO3 forum, the designers make if fairly clear that every thing that was cut would not reappear before a MoO4 sometime in the potential and hoped for future. But they have saved all that work just in case they do get to do a MoO4 sometime. Which implies that there was too much work remaining when it was cut for it to return in a MoO3 expansion.

And from some comments the QS team has made re. MoM2, I suspect they really want the chance to make that their next project. I hope so too.

[tniem]

If CivIII is any indication, than they will release the game before it is ready because Infogrames knows they can make the money off of it and that the reviewers will not give it a proper review. I bought it off of the glowing reviews and got bit in the ass. It needed a few more months to get the bugs out. I of course am soorly disappointed but not suprised, hopefully delays will postponne the MOO3 release date.

[Garth Vader]

Yeah after Civ3 I will be very wary about buying something from Infogrames unless I hear that it has actualy been tested and not just released due to some schedule.

[vmxa1]

Looking at the web site for MOO3, I can not see it making March. Since it is at least being made, I guess I can hang with MOO and MOO2 for awhile. I remember the long drought, when it was not even mentioned, so I am grateful to see it is alive. I hope it is not as frustrating as Civ3.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by tniem
If CivIII is any indication, than they will release the game before it is ready because Infogrames knows they can make the money off of it and that the reviewers will not give it a proper review. I bought it off of the glowing reviews and got bit in the ass. It needed a few more months to get the bugs out. I of course am soorly disappointed but not suprised, hopefully delays will postponne the MOO3 release date.

Out of curiousity, what "bugs" were in Civ3? Other than the air superiority and million gold trade thing? Oops, forgot about giving the AI cities thing, but other than that what bugs were there?

It's amusing to hear people complain the "game was rushed" then post no details to support their claim.

Just curious.

[Swissy]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Looking at the web site for MOO3, I can not see it making March.

Looking at the website, the answer is right there. It says "1st Quarter 2002". Now it depends on how Infogrames sets their fiscal year. First quarter could be Jan-mar, or Feb-Apr as many consumer product and retail companies do to completely capture the After Christmas sales into the 4th Quarter. Infogrames is if anything prompt in releasing their games, even if they aren't finished

[vmxa1]

When I say looking at the web site, I mean that they are not nearly far enough down the line to get a product out by first quarter. We will see what happens, but based on my experiences with games, it has very little change of being done and being good by that time frame.

[Zealot]

Originally posted by Master Marcus
For now they say "End of March".

Well, this makes me remember one thing!

Several months ago, I read an Alan Emrich article about games' strategy books (Can't remember the link; sorry. All I can remember was that I started on the old http://moo3.quicksilver.com web page, and ended on that site).
And from what I remember, Alan was talking about how usualy in the gaming industry a game's manual was sent to the printer of the publisher around one month before the game went "gold", which led to some inaccuracies between the sold game and its manual because a lot of things can change in one month.

Now, if Quicksilver is planning in releasing the game by the end of March, it makes me think wether they are really going to make an open beta test. Because either:

1. The open beta test will just start in early December, giving testers around 2 months (December and January) of playtesting, giving Quicksilver a great amount of feedback in order to have an accurate manual and a game with little and few bugs;

2. Because there isn't enough time, a "15-days" beta testing à la Civ 3 is made before MoO 3 goes gold - Hi buggies!

3. Neither the manual nor the strategy guide are all that important, so the time for (closed) beta test is the same as an "average" game, the number of bugs will probably be the same as another "average" game, and will certainly have some unbalanced features. But then again, so did Starcraft and MoO2, and they are definitely great games!

Of course, it's precisely to fight that (unbalanced features) that an wide open beta test should eliminate (or at least reduce).

I still expect a great game from Quicksilver, but I'm a little worried about some specs in MoO 3 that could resemble Civ 3, namely the unfriendly interface and some unbalanced features like resources, corruption and bombarding units.

Man, this looks more like a chronicle than an ordinary post!
BTW, great Chronicle MM!