Announcement

**ChaotikVisions** · March 6, 2003, 18:34

Oh no! 60 people rating a game on Amazon have given a bad overall rating. This surely means the decline of strategy gaming as we know it. Nay, the decline of _society_ as we know it. This begins a new dark age one from which we might never escape...

Seriously, what the hell are you talking about? People rating a game at random on a website isn't exactly the most accurate standard for strategy game fans everywhere. http://www.gametab.com/pc/master.of.orion.3/1047/ 4 good, 5 mediocore, 2 bad. If you don't like the game thats fine, just quit trolling and go make whatever it was you started on.

**Asmodean** · March 6, 2003, 18:47

Which is exactly why RayK is on my ignore list

Asmodean

**Ianpolaris** · March 6, 2003, 19:39

Guys,

Actually 60 people on Amazon is a pretty good sample. Add to that the people at Games.com (avg rating 4.3 last I checked...out of 10) and Gamespot.com (similiar) and you see the same pattern with distressing similiar numbers. When you add up these three sites you get reviews well into the hundreds which makes it a fair assessment of the community reaction.

The fact is Moo III is failing on the open market. The sales figures right now are skewed by the tons of preorders....but word is getting around.

-Polaris

**Ray K** · March 6, 2003, 19:51

Originally posted by ChaotikVisions
Oh no! 60 people rating a game on Amazon have given a bad overall rating.

You are missing the point. Amazon.com is a *major* retail portal for casual buyers. Having almost 2/3rds of the ratings be the worst possible (1 star) is going to hurt sales of MOO3. There's just no way around it.

If you enjoy the game, good for you. But the reality is that QS really f'd up the MOO series by making a game that only a small minority of gamers will like. That is what bothers me about the whole deal, and the amazon ratings coming in are a clear indication of that.

Like I said... Thanks for nothing, QS. You have driven a stake through the heart of this brand.

**Ray K** · March 6, 2003, 19:53

Originally posted by Asmodean
Which is exactly why RayK is on my ignore list

Asmodean

Is this the online equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la I can't hear you la la la"

**duodecimal** · March 6, 2003, 19:57

After Ultima IX and Civ III, I thought I'd learned a lesson. MOO3 just about puts a lid on things for me.

So, no matter what, I will not pre-order Thief III or buy it less than a month post-release.

Can't say much more that hasn't been said.

**CharlesBHoff** · March 6, 2003, 20:01

Originally posted by Ray K

You are missing the point. Amazon.com is a *major* retail portal for casual buyers. Having almost 2/3rds of the ratings be the worst possible (1 star) is going to hurt sales of MOO3. There's just no way around it.

If you enjoy the game, good for you. But the reality is that QS really f'd up the MOO series by making a game that only a small minority of gamers will like. That is what bothers me about the whole deal, and the amazon ratings coming in are a clear indication of that.

Like I said... Thanks for nothing, QS. You have driven a stake through the heart of this brand.

Than poll on Amazon.com mean nothing. When was the last time than poller took your poll in a presidental race. The last time was when I was around 21 or 22 year old and I than now 53 year old.

**vee4473** · March 6, 2003, 20:16

Well, obviously a veteran gamer is not going to take Amazon reviews too seriously, but maybe there is a point to be made that a casual gamer surfing Amazon for a game that strikes his/her fancy might read the reviews and not buy if the reviews indeed are mainly bad.

Even if there are only 10 reviews posted and 7 are bad, a casual gamer would probably be turned off.

Who knows.

**ChaotikVisions** · March 6, 2003, 20:18

I love it when people tell me what reality is, does away with annoying things like other peoples opinions or free thought.

Anyway, since when was MoO3 even targeted at the "casual audience who base their purchases entirely on ratings assinged by annoymous users online"? That wouldn't seem to be a large group of MoO fans or strategy gamers. Hell, I thought even casual buyers would check a few game sites for reviews first, especially since they're buying online. But no, it appears i'm completely off base, silly me.

As for the reality, its whatever you make of it. Which right now its too early to tell. Are there people who don't like it? Yeah. People who do? Yeah. As to which number is higher thats kind of impossible to tell right now. So what this boils down to once more despite what you might otherwise claim is just opinion. Some like the game, some don't. You obviously don't, but I do. Why are you still on a MoO3 fan forum then? "Trying to save people from wasting 50$"? Don't bother, most people especially Apolytoners are competent enough to make their own decesions.

As for wether its failing on the market or not, just read what I already said. Its too early to tell since none of us have the information. Its gotten few good reviews, several mediocore reviews, and a couple bad ones. The fan reviews are mixed as always.

**vmxa1** · March 6, 2003, 21:22

Ray I do not think that the reviews will make any difference on the IF or WHEN for Moo4. It is the sales that will make that determination. If it is low rated and sells well, then someone will take another shot.
It is far easier to do sequels than to start from scratch. Just look at the movies or TV. The backers like to have a known, even if it less than stellar. That is wht we got Police Academy VI and will get Rock VI or whatever it is now.

**duodecimal** · March 6, 2003, 21:31

V is right - if the Star Trek franchise can survive a turd like #5 ...

I doubt the MOO series is in much danger. MOO3 is fixable, perhaps more so than Civ3 since it appears that many problems are simple spreadsheet entries and documentation. The interface and micro/macro issues would take a bit more effort to fix...

Maybe MOO3:Play the Universe expansion pack for $24.99

**notyoueither** · March 6, 2003, 21:50

On line polls will have an impact on sales, but not very large. Most of these boxes will be bought by players or parents in the big box stores. Most of them will be completely unaware of what is going on now on-line. In those stores, placement and availability will be far more important than a completely predictable hosing the game is receiving from casual on-line shoppers.

In the long run, what will make or break the MoO franchise is whether QS can stick around to improve the game. If they can the game will steadily gain a larger following and the prospects for a 4 will be good. If they can't stick around and finish it, then it will die a CTP2 death.

On the subject of a future, it seems that expansions are the latest rage for publishers. Thus an expansion for 3 would be a desirable thing from IG's point of view. For that to happen, the game will have to be fixed first. Thus, there is a dollars and cents reason for why the game will most likely be improved by QS.

**Booya2020** · March 6, 2003, 21:54

Don't forget a lot of people love this game. Im willing to bet the ratio of people who love it to people who hate it is 50/50.

**Corentor** · March 6, 2003, 21:57

really who gives a ****. If you enjoy the game right now. Thats good. If you don't enjoy it, return the game and get your money back. If you pre-order a game and you don't like it, well I hope that teaches you a lesson about handing over money before checking out the product.

Announcement

disaster at amazon.com

disaster at amazon.com

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment