I think what is statistically valid is that major fans of a game are very hostile to fundamental changes to the concepts of that game in a sequel. I can see that. I can appreciate that. However, that the lovers of 2 hate 3 is not an objective measure of the value of 3.
We've seen it all before, believe me. I mean, BELIEVE ME! The Civ2 die hards hated and hate 3. Big deal! There are a large number of people who like Civ3. There will be a large number of people who will love MoO3. I'll most likely end up liking it if they can fix some of the balance issues and the major bugs.
What I see in MoO3 is an attempt at an innovative new idea. I can see the value in what they are trying to do. What I hope is that they see it through and fix the problems in the initial release so that what was intended becomes a reality.
At the same time, I can see that many people will be put off by the differences from previous games, and the grade of the learning curve. Some good docs would help a lot with the later.
We've seen it all before, believe me. I mean, BELIEVE ME! The Civ2 die hards hated and hate 3. Big deal! There are a large number of people who like Civ3. There will be a large number of people who will love MoO3. I'll most likely end up liking it if they can fix some of the balance issues and the major bugs.
What I see in MoO3 is an attempt at an innovative new idea. I can see the value in what they are trying to do. What I hope is that they see it through and fix the problems in the initial release so that what was intended becomes a reality.
At the same time, I can see that many people will be put off by the differences from previous games, and the grade of the learning curve. Some good docs would help a lot with the later.
Comment