Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Worst fears coming true: Quarter to Three Review

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Its been said already in the last nine pages but I'll chime in on that side of the opnion. MoO2 created a galactic civilisation that could be run single handedly by a fairly competent person with one eye and half a brain. You could play and watch TV, chat to your partner or generally hop up and down from the PC without risking losing the plot in the game. It was heaven for micromanagers because every single task was a no-brainer but there were lots of them to do, just like in the Civ games that so inspired MoO2. You could be deeply absorbed by it if you had the opportunity, but it wasn't important to do so.

    Would I have liked another classic simple easy to manage space combat game? Well, sure. I've got at least a dozen of those of varying quality and playability in the cupboard however. What I don't have is a game that actually makes me feel like I really am the supreme ruler of the galaxy with hundreds of planets and fleets at my command. Why? Because I've got to get off of my Imperial throne every two seconds to play the flunky's flunky who twiddles with crop management on planet Plik and industrial output on planet Dweeb because there's absolutely nobody else who will do it for me.

    I want the chance to experience a truly BIG game. The way things currently stand that only happens at wargame conventions when you get thirty a side games of playing the high command, and there only one of the thirty can be the man in the big seat ultimately responsible for the big decisions plus a few on his immediate staff get to hear all the reports and offer advice. The rest are only there to interpret and report on their sector and apply whatever orders come down from above.

    This is the first computer game that attempts to take that game approach and apply it to the "civilisation" genre. Not long ago Combat Mission did it for wargames and it proved pretty popular. You can't move the men individually there, you cant dictate to them exactly when to fire each shot or override their decisions about whether to advance in the advance of fire or cower in their foxholes, and this AI is praised.

    I'm looking forward to accepting the challenge of MoO3 by picking up the reins of power and yanking on them hard. My job is to learn how to be the best Supreme Overlord, not to discover how many cherry pickers is optimum for each individual planet in my domain and order them buit on the optimum turn before moving on to consider the perfect weapons and electronics combination for my next generation destroyer. Do the President and the Prime Minister know the technical specifications of the warships or tanks they are ordering about, or just that they are the forces their generals think can get the job done? I think I know the answer to that one. If the generals screw up, I'm the one who gets to choose the manner of their unpleasant death. Now that's a decision befitting a Supreme Overlord!
    To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
    H.Poincaré

    Comment


    • There are time when the indisivable way down whom you have no control over does the right thing by not following your order blinding. In WW2 the allies want than brige over
      the Upper Rhine river caputer. Than platoon lead by than sergeant to captive than brige got lost in the night ( they have no night vision gear in large scale use yet or GPS to help detame where you are on earth accurate) they saw the Germany blow up than brige but it only weaken the brige not destory it so the platoon ran like hell over the brige to the other side to captive the brige. They radio hight command tell the command what happen and what they did
      and to spend help over to then to hold the brigehead on the other side of the Rhine river. All the troop and equipment that was to go to the other brige they where to captive instead went to the wrong brige which they did captive. The engineer also built two platoon brige over the Rhine river by the captive brige.
      By the year 2100 AD over half of the world population will be follower of Islam.

      Comment


      • Well put Grumbold!

        I actually like the idea that while I will provide direction, my subordinates will interpret that direction in their own manner. This actually makes more sense than being able to absolutely direct EVERY activity in an empire.
        "Stuie has the right idea" - Japher
        "I trust Stuie and all involved." - SlowwHand
        "Stuie is right...." - Guynemer

        Comment


        • Originally posted by vee4473
          wow,
          is this a little bit of evidence that game companies actually DO pressure reviewers or mags into writing good reviews?

          or hint in that direction.


          interesting comments i would say...
          Ah, no, it means that QS/IG wanted someone who would (at the very least) look at the game in a NEUTRAL/UNBIASED light and report on it, not someone who would deliberately look for every little flaw or issue and only report that.

          Reading comprehension is a good thing, you might want to try using it a little more often.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by vee4473


            wow,
            is this a little bit of evidence that game companies actually DO pressure reviewers or mags into writing good reviews?
            sorry to blow a rocket-sized hole in your conspiracy... we stated if you would read, that we wanted someone who would at least have the *pretense* of being objective.

            Someone wants to write bad things, it's their choice but journalism (jn theory) is about objective analysis. Or at least the ability to credibly *pretend* you are being objective.
            Rantz Hoseley
            Art Director
            Quicksilver Software, Inc.

            Comment


            • Or at least the ability to credibly *pretend* you are being objective.
              Ah, the Bill O'Reilly theory!

              Comment


              • I'm with Gumbold on this one, however only as long as the games pulls me in!

                My biggest fear is that, yes, we may be the supremely benevolent (or malevolent) rulers, but we will just be marginal observers.

                Please, I am in no way saying that this is the case, just afraid it might be.

                The community will let me know for sure in about 72 hours.

                Comment


                • If your Supreme Overlord is obviously incompetent, the best thing clearly would be to quietly marginalise the impact of his deranged rantings. Not that I'm suggesting that you will be one such "observer".

                  Now is my moon sized hot fudge sundae built yet, or do I have to incinerate another advisor for interpreting it as a request for a death star? Well, speak up!
                  To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
                  H.Poincaré

                  Comment


                  • .
                    By working faithfully eight hours a day, you may get to be a boss and work twelve hours a day.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Rantz


                      sorry to blow a rocket-sized hole in your conspiracy... we stated if you would read, that we wanted someone who would at least have the *pretense* of being objective.

                      Someone wants to write bad things, it's their choice but journalism (jn theory) is about objective analysis. Or at least the ability to credibly *pretend* you are being objective.
                      I can read just fine. Why can't you just have a dialog without veiled insults?

                      but whatever
                      While there might be a physics engine that applies to the jugs, I doubt that an entire engine was written specifically for the funbags. - Cyclotron - debating the pressing issue of boobies in games.

                      Comment


                      • Heh heh Grumbold has hit the nail on the head. Micro-mangement is kinda fun early in MOO but when I've got fleets bearing down on me and tech development to be concerned with, wondering what some backwater planet was currently building was kind of a pain. I think the goal in MOO3 is to let you see the big picture.

                        I can hardly wait to deploy a crack team of Bulrathi storm troopers on some hapless planet. "Die you dogs! Die! And where is my GIANT hot fudge sundae??"

                        Comment


                        • We'll all find out soon enough.
                          Veni, vidi, vici.
                          [I came, I saw, I conquered].
                          -- Gaius Julius Caesar

                          Comment


                          • Well, I had high hopes for Civ3, and ended up being put off by the early good reviews and criticisms, because I realized that the game was Civ 2.1. Still, after the initial flurry of good reviews, I've decided to take a shot and order MOO3. The biggest reason in ignoring this review is not just Tom Chick's hatred of Deus Ex (didn't even read the review), but rather that review of Eternal Darkness. I've just played through ED recently, actually, and his review is so far from the truth it's staggering. He totally missed the point of the game and I half wonder if he played a different one. The only thing I can think of is perhaps he always kept his sanity meter maxed with magic, but that's no fun. Anyway, that gave pause to this review for me, so let's hope for my money's sake that he totally missed the point of MOO3 too.
                            All syllogisms have three parts.
                            Therefore this is not a syllogism.

                            Comment


                            • Here we are New Year's Eve, hours away from the WORLDWIDE release, scrappin anda fonkin. Can't we all get along?

                              sorry to blow a rocket-sized hole in your conspiracy... we stated if you would read, that we wanted someone who would at least have the *pretense* of being objective.
                              What's this pretend bs? We want the the real thing. But really, I think Stormhound and Rantz and Sencho are great, man. I really do. Alan Emerich... Brian Reynolds... for auld lang sine (whatever that means).

                              The 1/4 to 3 reviewer missed the boat on specifying development plans. The "A" Vault reviewer, in a similar, but different, way was unwilling to suspend disbelief.

                              It may be like a movie or a novel (or an opera, not that I'd know anything about those). Just immerse yourself in the Galaxy and, then bring it on!

                              The more you put into it, the more you'll get out of it.

                              Of course, your mileage may vary.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by vee4473
                                I can read just fine.
                                The mis-reading he was probably referring to was that he said:

                                from Rantz on page 2:
                                ... we (QS and IG) told him that if they wanted to do another article or review/preview on MOO3 that they would need to get someone who could be at least semi-objective in his reporting.
                                and you responded:
                                is this a little bit of evidence that game companies actually DO pressure reviewers or mags into writing good reviews?

                                or hint in that direction.
                                All he said was that they were going for was "semi-objective" (as opposed to giving it a negative review out-of-hand because it isn't like Sid's work), whereas you transformed "semi-objective" into "good". I'll grant that your "little bit of evidence" and "or hint..." give the observation a more-appropriate tentativeness, but you still translated "semi-objective" into "semi-positive", which isn't quite correct.

                                Why can't you just have a dialog without veiled insults?
                                Good question. The answer is probably that Rantz has had to put up with an awful lot of aggravation from the fans, particularly those who misread his posts, and may sometimes get a a little snappy in a veiled sort of way. That doesn't excuse it, but it's a possible answer to your question.

                                ... why did I just take that much time to explain some things everyone probably already knew? ... that's right, I'm bored!

                                anyway...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X