New Avault review

[ashbery]

3/5 STARS is a good review score.

[booje]

Hmmm...the review was not as bad as I thought. I was actually a little surpised when, in the end, he could only recommend the game to die hard fans. It seems like the game is so deep that it might take more than just a few hours of playing it and then writing a review based on that.

I did note that a patch might focus on:

-Tweaking reserve build rules (which were already tweaked and fiddled with many times I think)

-Fixing Military Build AI. Seems like there might be an inordinate focus on building troop ships.

When it come to AI these days, it just can't compare to playing against humans. I love Medieval Total War but the AI even on the hardest settings is easy to roll over after playing against it so damn much!

[Yodasplat]

I am not a fan boy (been playing turn based strategy games on and off since the first Civ came out years ago) and I discovered MOO3 just a month ago. Never played a MOO game. Hardly the definition of a "fan boy".

I can't wait for MOO3 to come out. This review didn't make a rat's a$$ of a difference for me.

Why?

1 - because of this preview by Daniel Quick which was done without passing judgement on the game but simply relaying what he thought was his experience with it. What he described was a excellent (IMO) strategy game with great depth and lots of time-sucking potential.

2 - because reviewers are human beings and as such they have their right to like or dislike a game. To each his own. What is one man (or woman)'s trash is another man (or woman)'s treasure. He might not have played the game long enough or hard enough to get what he wanted out of it, and why bother to blame him? Maybe this game doesn't fit his vision of a good game. Many people dislike some of the games I enjoy most.

I for one will not argue if this review is good or not, true to the game or not.

I am waiting for tomorrow and I will go throw away my 50 bux. Eagerly.

[Alex-C]

I remember reading on another review (can't remember which one though) about the AI building odd DEA's where they shouldn't be built, and it was down to not understanding the interface properly. Perhaps this reviewer didn't take the time to fully explore how the interface worked and therefore didn't work out how to specify such things to the planetary AI?

[XentWraith]

I just read the Avault review and it's doesn't bring feelings of confidence for MOO3. The whole AI issue looks like it will be a problem. I see the problem in this very simple way, I like things my way when I play strategy games, and the AI often times has its own rules which are the ideas of whoever coded the AI. Now, granted, that person may have been brilliant, but the AI can still get in _my_ way. And let's face it, what do you think the chances of MOO3 AI being incredibly good are? I am not holding my breath... and it has nothing to do with reviews.

Avault is, by the way, a fairly old site (been going to it for 5 years). Contrary to what someone posted earlier, it is not based on video games. That part only surfaced a year or so ago. It has been reviewing games for a very long time, and is well known and respected in the gaming comunity. It has been my experience that they do not give unfair judgements on game, and I'd venture to say that most of their reviews have been quite on the mark. Three stars out of five does not make an excellent game, and I think MOO3 needs to be an excellent game to live up to its expectations.

We'll see.

Sincerely,
Xentronium

[Sarxis]

Well, no matter, I am still getting the game, since I really have nothing else to live for anymore.

Oh wait! I'm getting a RoN beta disc this week! Yay!!

[Pallidyne]

Originally posted by XentWraith
I just read the Avault review and it's doesn't bring feelings of confidence for MOO3. The whole AI issue looks like it will be a problem. I see the problem in this very simple way, I like things my way when I play strategy games, and the AI often times has its own rules which are the ideas of whoever coded the AI. Now, granted, that person may have been brilliant, but the AI can still get in _my_ way. And let's face it, what do you think the chances of MOO3 AI being incredibly good are? I am not holding my breath... and it has nothing to do with reviews.

Sincerely,
Xentronium

Maybe thats the point.. You are supposed to conquer your OWN empire first.

Restated: Maybe the game has nothing to do with any other empire. The whole "game" is learning to defeat your own viceroys.

-P

[XentWraith]

Originally posted by Pallidyne

Maybe thats the point.. You are supposed to conquer your OWN empire first.

Restated: Maybe the game has nothing to do with any other empire. The whole "game" is learning to defeat your own viceroys.

-P

Well, in that case maybe they should add an "Execute" button for the viceroys instead of the stupid checkbox...and this way we could be absolutely sure nothing gets changed by the stupid AI. Worth a shot, as I hear it they're planning patches already... how nice.

Sincerely,
Xentronium

[Kc7mxo]

Well, if we're going to get an execute button, can we get an "execute with extreme prejudice" button? Or how about just a little torment bar?

Instead of viceroys, maybe we should just have gigantic pets that walk around pooping and eating our villagers that we can mercilessy beat with very little affect on their actions whatsovever. . . .

oops, was slipping into my black and white bitterness. ignore that last bit.

All I know, is that the most irritating thing in Civ3 was the governors. I hated those bastards and as soon as they put in the option, I turned every one of them off. I just hope moo3's viceroys are remotely competant. I can probably live with that. Just please don't make them make tech 1 ships when i have tech 50. . . . stupid fricking swordsmen.

[Magus Flynn]

Yodasplat's comments on this thread deserve attention. Finally someone who comments on buying Mo03 (or not) based on their own interests rather than past prejudices or someone else's review.

I always read reviews before I buy a game. But never do I let a review stop me from deciding - I am after all the consumer, and I have a choice!

I loved Mo0 and Mo02 (still playing) and will buy Mo03 no matter what anyone else says. If the game isn't fun I won't play it long - but if there is at least 100 hours of gameplay (no doubt of that, is there?) it is worth the $70 Cdn I will spend in entertainment dollars. My family is still being fed and the bills are being paid. If I don't buy Mo03 I'd just spend that money on some other game that catches my fancy.

Mo02 isn't much of a splash in comparison with the look of some games I"ve played in the last year (Baldur's Gate series, Morrowind, Civ3, etc.) yet I keep coming back to it. I anticipate Mo03 will have at least the same long-lasting appeal if not much much more.

Peace be witih you and your puny homeworld.

[rhofman]

Well Magus, we share more than a puny homeworld.

Bang on. $70 for at least a hundred hours sounds good to me. I've probably spent close to a thousand hours between MOO and MOO2 already.

[Arnelos]

JonahFalcon brought up a good point...

Tom did seem to think that MoO1 and MoO2 were somehow very alike That's a disturbing sign about anyone's ability to compare games...

[Ghostbear]

Reviews and MP

Well, the negative reviews have been enough to make me wait a few weeks and start hearing player reaction.

Of course, the IG boards had me so mad I was looking for an excuse.

Also, isn't "he didn't review the MP" the same as "the AI sucks so go play a human"?

[ACEofHeart]

Been buying strategy games for 15 years and I take most reviews with a grain of salt.
I just read reviews mostly to find out what a game has or doesn't have. As most "personal" opinions are just that....

What one reviewer mentions as a "positive" , I might see as a negative in a game..

In any event, I already know 2 definites.. I do NOT like MOO3's interface and a "real-time" combat engine does not appeal to me in this type of game..

I'm sure I'll still buy it but I look forward to GalCiv more all the time..

[Harry Seldon]

Well, their names are very alike. And both are space-based. Oh, oh, AND turn-based. At least, that's what the boxes say.