In-House Preview Online: Part 3

[niteshade6]

"Niteshade, sure you have your opinion, but how are you helping Dan by just saying its the worst preview you've ever read ?"

Well I was hoping to be more polite, but it was necesary to say that to emphasis just how strongly I feel about this, and show that I'm not just shooting from the hip like you seemed to be accusing people. As for how it helps him, I'd say it's far nicer to him to be honest. If we tell him he's a good writer when he's not, that is far more cruel in the long run. What if he decides to go into a writing career based on your input? Think of all the time and money he could waste on that, not to mention the false confidence which could interfere with actualy learning to write. Even worse, what if he decides not to take any writing courses in school because he is already such a good writer. By trying to be nice to him, you could be causing great damage to him and his career.


" Have you ever read such a long, indepth preview in your 18 years of computer gaming? "

Yes I have, although I will admit it's rare. But long doesn't necesarily mean good. You could easily condence part 3 to about 2 pages without losing any information at all.


"Or one with so many screenshots? (Already more than 50 screenshots, and only halfway through)"

Once again yes, and that's even a little less rare. I will say though that I do actualy like the screen shots. And I have said that I appreciate the effort he made, despite the poor writing.

"Give the guy a chance, hey? He's doing a good job. "

Well clearly most people don't agree. And we are certainly giving him a chance. We've read 18 pages of his stuff after all.

As for the wierd IG vs. apolyton thing, I've already explained why I don't agree with any of this. Nor do I think that this thread has in anyway become about this, only a very small number of posts have mentioned this.

[player1]

Geez, I never thougth that I would need to do this thing on Poly.

Clicking unsubscribe button....

Done.

[Arnelos]

This thread is starting to get seriously silly... and not in a good way. People, let's face the facts:

DanQ is new to Moo and he's not one of you guys that's been posting on IGMoo for the past 2 years... His preview is as taylored to people who are casually interested in the product as those of us who have been trying to get any scrap of information we can about it for over a year now.

I think DanQ did a decent job. I'll admit that I skimmed rather than actually read the first full two boring pages about the layout of the main options screen (who wants to learn about that?), but the rest of the preview was genuinely QUITE useful and interesting. Given that I don't have the game yet, hearing about how the oppressometer works and how the various colonization and financial options works was genuinely helpful.

As I posted on the past page of this forum, my suggestion is very similar to the poster MarkG quoted.

Please include as much detail about the differences between individual government types as you can reasonably do. That's an element of the game I've personally (don't know about others...) been wondering about since this game was ORIGINALLY on my mind over a year ago now... As much as Quicksilver and IG have shared with all of us about how they wanted religions to work and leaders to work, they've been very quiet about how governments work... so that's an area where both casual watchers of the game and those trying to get every bit of information they can would likely be highly interested.

I just happen to be more interested in most in that because that's my area of academic research - comparative government

DanQ did a pretty good job and his being "new" to the Moo games also makes the preview more accessable to those who are likewise new. I'm not one of those people, since I still play my original copy of the original Moo every once in a while , but that doesn't mean that I can't see how those not previously into the Moo games could appreciate DanQ's experience with approaching Moo3 and finding the interface not all that hard to figure out

So chill... not everything being written is being written with YOU in mind and if you're not interested in a section, just skim it rather than reading it like I did

Thanks DanQ - and I'm really looking forward to that Part 5

[Harry Seldon]

I've read some real crap in my day, but I don't think this qualifies. I have trouble concentrating on previews because I would rather wait and play the game itself and don't want to spoil anything. Maybe this contributed to my feelings on his writing style. The only complaint I see being valid is the slothlike pace of the previews. He's got three left; cut him a little slack about the content. He has other obligations besides producing the ultimate preview and, like every column writer in a newspaper, has a certain number of inches to fill. Plus I feel the shadow of an NDA hovering over his discourse. Let him get into the game a little bit and I'm sure some strategic points will emerge.

Please don't take this as a stinging reprimand; the last thing I want is to be the dottering grandmother of Apolyton. Just consider pulling some of the punches a bit. I'd rather b*tch about the content of the previews than b*tch that they were pulled due to lack of restraint on our part.

[DavesWorld]

If there's an NDA reason he's prevented from discussing *gameplay*, then he should say so.

1) it's not his fault
2) Potential customers should know when a game they're considering purchasing is refusing to release what surely gaming consumers would consider *basic information* about the game (which is what a NDA covering gameplay would mean).

NDA covering gameplay would be about the worst sign I can think of, for whether or not the game's any good.

However, that's content only.

[Hydro]

There are ways of offering constructive criticism: flamethrower, tactless, polite, and private. Dan has told us that some have sent him private suggestions, which he appreciates. Other suggestions have been polite and considered. Some, in my opinion, have chosen the flamethrower and tactless methods of delivering criticism. I think this does a disservice to Dan, and to future installments of Dan’s review, since criticism is less likely to be taken to heart if it is viewed as an attack.

I have valued Apolyton because of its polite and helpful forums and I will be distressed if certain forums and our valued moderators are subject to less than polite discussions. The sad thing is that it only takes a few to change the tone of a forum and scare people away.

Now, back to the ‘nice’ part of Apolyton – the SMAC forums.

Hydro

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by Hydro
Now, back to the ‘nice’ part of Apolyton – the SMAC forums.

The Civ3 part can be 'nice', too

[Alexfrog]

bah, civ, smac....

MOO tles over all!!!

and now its GOOOOOOOOLD!

[Hrett]

Originally posted by Hydro

I have valued Apolyton because of its polite and helpful forums and I will be distressed if certain forums and our valued moderators are subject to less than polite discussions. The sad thing is that it only takes a few to change the tone of a forum and scare people away.

Hydro

Hear, Hear!

Not everyone out here is as thankless, thoughtless or rude as most of the posters in this thread.

I, for one, am thankful for the information.

[LDiCesare]

Trying to say something useful:

This part of the review mostly shows that you have options in each and every domain like chosing one of 2 or 3 settings (for planet production, settling, finances...), or various options for warfare/research/budget.
Dan said he tried to handle the settling setting manually and found out the ai was better than him at that point. That is probably because he is new to that game, but that may also mean the ai is actually good enough so you can trust it. In which case it would be good news.

I wonder, however, on the gameplay issues. It looks like you can set an option to 'average' and forget it for the rest of the game. That will probably work quite well in SP, letting you concentrate on parts of the game you are interested in. That may, however, turn MP into clickfests, considering that, if you know how to use every setting, you may want to change them in each of your planets etc., which takes time... I am not sure, since it is not clear to me now how the per planet management works.

And, most importantly, what is the effect on gameplay? I understand these screens are lumped together because they are accessed from the same UI, but how does one access deeper control (micromanagement)? Do you feel in charge of your empire? For instance, does changing a setting have an impact on gameplay, and how long does it take for the consequences of that action to be seen?
It is nice for instance to know that setting planet production to specialized will make you vulnerable in case of trade problems (war), but is it possible to know how long it would take to change the economy of a specialized empire so you can turn it into something autonomous enough to wage war? I doubt strategic considerations like these can be obtained from a first skimming of the game, but I do appreciate the fact that the preview allows me wonder about such a question. Will I get stuck into a peaceful civ if I choose that most-productive option, or not?

[13Matt13]

wow, you're offering your free time for the pleasure of others? i wonder how many people do that....

if you are realy interested in make thing better, it might be better to mail dan personally

I spent an hour and a half after the first one came out searching for typos, misused words, grammar errors, etc, and just trying to make it more "readable", and 90% of the time was wasted, since about 95% of my suggestions were summarily dismissed.

[mactbone]

You want to see some really convoluted writing - check out the articles in this composition journal http://www.ncte.org/ccc/ex.html

I have to read that stuff in a rhetoric and composition class - messed up.

[Darkrenown]

Originally posted by MarkG
if you are realy interested in make thing better, it might be better to mail dan personally

Actually, we had a poster rewrite the whole preview and mail it to Dan in a friendly way (this was after he had talked to Dan a few times). Dan dismissed the poor spelling, bad grammar and long winded nature of his preview as 'style'.

This has nothing to do with Igmoo vs Apoly. In fact, I don’t really care for Igmoo at all.

[FredFnord]

It's not a beaker, either

It's not a test tube, and it's not a beaker. It's a flask. To be specific, a slightly distorted version of an Erlenmeyer flask.

Now, as to who cares WHAT it is, that I won't even speculate on.

--Fred

[ljw1004]

MarkG:
the fact that someone posts in this thread doesnt make him an accurate representative of the audience of the article. our moo3 preview has generated over 100,000 pageviews. somehow taking the total of 250 posts on the comments threads as the opinion of the moajority of the audience doesnt sound the correct thing to do.

Well, let me add that Dan's writing is so bad that I read the apolyton forums for the first time in my life, registered with apolyton, posted here, just so I could criticise it. I bet most of the 30,000 other readers felt the same but didn't go as far. (i.e. 100,000pageviews / 6pages, *2 because most readers would have given up before the end).

Sorry, let me rewrite that in Dan style.

"Contemplating the agnostication developed within my coil, mortal be it or not, impelled upon me the urgent priority to contribute, or append an article with my own words as it were, a commentary upon matters pertaining to the situation. ... [snip]"

You ask for constructive criticism, here it is: (1) don't use any complicated words unless they're necessary. Hint: they're not. (2) Never let a sentence contain more than one idea. If it contains two ideas, then split it into two sentences. (3) There's rarely need to use a complicated sentence structure. (4) While the game-designers needed to know precise details of the learning curve, that information is not relevant in a preview except as a one-paragraph summary. So, Dan, don't expose us in such excruciating detail to your own learning curve. (5) When writing a preview of a strategy game, play the game through at least once from start to finish before writing the preview. (6) Remove all comments about you personally, and about the general process of sitting at a computer and playing a game, and about the general process of sitting at a computer and writing a review, because no one cares.

Most importantly: (7) Stick to plain concrete descriptions of what stuff is in the game, of how it works. Only once you've played the game through at least once have you earned the right to give evaluations. That's to say, your evaluations are worthless until then.

--
Lucian