Patch it soon!

[habadacus]

My experience with GalCiv has been very positive so far. Yes, it's a much simpler model, but after the headache MOO3 gave me I welcomed the simplicity. I don't understand the negative arguments about "terrain improvements" and "hiding in asteroid fields".
Although the starbases are the only non-planetary improvement you can make, they're build by ship called "constructors" which are totally modular. So 1 Starbase can be upgraded to provide some bonus in the sector with each constructor you dock. Plus the bonuses stack, so you can build a bunch of starbases in 1 sector, making the planets there kick ass production wise. Or you can spread them out along your trade lanes, and boost their %to trade and extend your travel range. . MOO3 doesn't let you do anything with all that space between the star lanes at, and it certainly doesn't have any "asteroid fields to hide in" or nebulas to shield you. At least that I've seen.
Alot of the improvements planetside that GalCiv lacks, are done only by the "AI", which you have no control over the shaping of strategically. So they might as well just be a % bonus to something coming from a starbase anyway. At least in GalCiv you get to build the starbase which is fun. The graphics suck in GalCiv, but at least they suck at 1024x768.
But more to the point of this topic, since I bought the game a few days ago, I have downloaded 3 updates, which have made the game better. THREE. Go look at the GalCiv board, you'll totally see the developers talking to the fans and soliciting suggestions, and then implementing them WITHIN DAYS. After the train wreck of public relations from QS/IG the enivornment is such a relief. So what if the game is simple? It's fun and it's got Battle Cruisers in it. And the AI will kick your ass. I'm playing on beginner and have had to think hard before I hit that gool ol' Turn Button.
But still, I like the complexity too, and I am pretty sure MOO3 can be fixed, cause it's a nice design overall, it just needs alot of polish. Which is why I wish they'd drop this whole "we need all this time to thouroghly test this and that blah blah blah" and just give us something already. The games broken now and we're beta testers anyway, so give us a new build already!!!!

now back to Gal Civ

[The Templar]

Originally posted by habadacus
The graphics suck in GalCiv, but at least they suck at 1024x768.

And if graphics are your first concern, don't play strategy. (Like the graphics are anything special in MoO3). Fact is, the AI in GalCiv will launch a ground invasion, and will win. The AI uses all of the features in the game. The AI pushes back.

GalCiv already has a patch. Of course, if the only thing to clean up is minor issues, I guess your first patch is easy.

[Cookie Monster]

The fact of the matter gentlemen is quite simple. When one purchases a computer game it should be fun to play.

I'm not saying that Moo3 is not fun to play but I am saying that a great number of people do not find Moo3 to be enjoyable. OTOH right out of the box many have found GalCiv to be loads of fun. In the end it is up to each individual to determine what's fun to them. The numbers, however, show that many are not happy about Moo3 and many are happy of Galciv.

The staunch fanatics will destroy Galciv for being too simple and they will prefer Moo3. That's great but QS/Infogreed will lose their shirts over Moo3 because most people find the game to be disgusting. For them there is no fun factor in Moo3. Galciv will be appealing to a majority of players and the arrogant elite few will not like Galciv. In the end the developers of GalCiv will make a good profit because they delivered a package that provides a fun factor that many can get into.

I really wanted Moo3 to be fun but the way it was put together is atrocious. I am also disgusted at the way the business is being run by Infogreed. They would rather put out junk under a hallowed name such as Moo or Civ and hope that past reputation will make a current product sell. My only hope is that this trend does not spill into other game developers.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Haupt. Dietrich
I really wanted Moo3 to be fun but the way it was put together is atrocious. I am also disgusted at the way the business is being run by Infogreed. They would rather put out junk under a hallowed name such as Moo or Civ and hope that past reputation will make a current product sell. My only hope is that this trend does not spill into other game developers.

I firmly blame Quicksilver. I doubt infogreed agents broke into QS HQ and frelled the diplomacy system and combat AI.

But other than that, I pretty much agree. I would like the game to be fun, but that will require an extensive patch. And given that this patch shows no sign of being released (and this game has been broken for over a month now), I have a vastly diminishing hope that the game can even really be fixed with a 100MB patch. Meanwhile, I continue to play Civ3 and GalCiv . . .

And of course visit Apolyton.

[Jack_www]

Infogreed did is as much to blame, since they knew how the game was going and how it would junk when they released and did it anyways hoping to make a quick buck before all the bad reviews came in. Which I dont blame them, I think they knew MOO3 was a failer and decided to relase it anyways to try to recover all the money they spent on it developing the game.

[Magus Flynn]

GalCiv has at least 2 patches already!!

How long was GalCiv in the making...anybody know? It seems to me that given the length of time it took to develop and release Mo03, we shouldn't be surprised if it takes many months to release a patch!

However, perhaps the quick patch releases for GalCiv indicates just how simple that game is...or perhaps how many people they have working on it!

I don't know. I DO know that I will hang on to my Mo03 copy in hopes a patch(s) will bring it closer to pre-release expectations. Otherwise I will avoid QS games in the future and hope that someone else picks ups Mo04 and MoM2!

[Jack_www]

Re: GalCiv has at least 2 patches already!!

Originally posted by Magus Flynn
How long was GalCiv in the making...anybody know? It seems to me that given the length of time it took to develop and release Mo03, we shouldn't be surprised if it takes many months to release a patch!

However, perhaps the quick patch releases for GalCiv indicates just how simple that game is...or perhaps how many people they have working on it!

I don't know. I DO know that I will hang on to my Mo03 copy in hopes a patch(s) will bring it closer to pre-release expectations. Otherwise I will avoid QS games in the future and hope that someone else picks ups Mo04 and MoM2!

Read the list of changes that they have in the patch. Most of the Changes, expect one is just addjusting things in the game, and only one if for a bug fix. On the other hand we have MOO3 which has taken years to complete and still has many problems with the AI, and you cant say the AI is great.

The only people I can see liking MOO3 are hard core fans, but for people like me, I just dont play the thing anymore and have no desire to play in the future. The sales continue to droop, and soon the price will too.

[Ghostbear]

Good will

Despite all their protestations about complexity, the AI "patch" was supposedly just restoring the too hard AI that was there originally.

How long would that have taken?

Given the instant and wide-spread complaints about the game, AND all the bad reviews, I would think they would have wanted to do something very fast, if only to show their intent to continue work on the game.

Instead, they retreated into the same old same old "we're going to take our time" crap that they fed us during pre-release.

I mean, come on, even if they release even a teeny little patch that might get some of the people who have given up on the game to give it another chance.

So, they are either just arrogant, or stupid.

I bet they won't even put MOO 3 on their resumes after they get let go.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Jack_www
Infogreed did is as much to blame, since they knew how the game was going and how it would junk when they released and did it anyways hoping to make a quick buck before all the bad reviews came in. Which I dont blame them, I think they knew MOO3 was a failer and decided to relase it anyways to try to recover all the money they spent on it developing the game.

I guess I've got a pretty low opinion of distributors to begin with. But yeah, I guess if infogreed had been on the ball, they would have shut the project down about midway through.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Jack_www
The only people I can see liking MOO3 are hard core fans, but for people like me, I just dont play the thing anymore and have no desire to play in the future. The sales continue to droop, and soon the price will too.

I don't know about that. I'm not a hardcore fan, but I think the game could be fun. Conceptually, MoO3 is a winner, it just doesn't work like its supposed to.

This of course begs the question of whether or not any amount of patching could fix the game. A question I now believe must be answered in the negative. I also believe we will either never see a patch or the patch will address very little (not even the PD bug), and then QS will say the game is complete (ala CTP2). My suspicion for this is that we haven't seen the patch and the game has been broken since its release a month ago. (And before that @$$hole ChaotikVisions starts up again, the PD Bug is an example of something major that is in fact broken - so suck it!)

[vmxa1]

It is hard to disagree with the idea that making some of the easy to change items in a first patch would be good publicity.
Waiting to come out with, I do not know what fixes in a patch seems an unwise path.
The longer it takes the better it must be to win over the people.
I mean just incorporating some of the things that players did with their mods and getting it out in say two weeks, would have made some people take heart.
Maybe I wrong here, but I do not see how any patch will be well recieved 5 months after the original release.

[Proteus_MST]

There is a great new Addition to the Fixlist:

Modified migration code so that Harvesters will prefer planets with edible population (similar to the behavior everyone seems to think they already have).

http://www.ina-community.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=277756

Now that´s something I like

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
There is a great new Addition to the Fixlist:

http://www.ina-community.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=277756

Now that´s something I like

And that patch may actually show up some day ...

[Kloreep]

Re: Good will

Originally posted by Ghostbear
I mean, come on, even if they release even a teeny little patch that might get some of the people who have given up on the game to give it another chance.

...and perhaps once again declare it trash.

I like MOO3; from what I've played of it, it looks like it could be one of the best games I've played in a while. But, there are too many frustrations - both little and small - and so I've CDs back in the box and shelved it until they're fixed. I suppose I'll try any new patch that comes out, but until PD and "send colony" work and some sort of shipbuilding macromanagement is added (and that last one is a tall order for a patch), I doubt it'll have a permanent place on my hard drive. As I said, I like the game, but it needs some major bug fixes and some new features.

So, a tiny patch may not help them much. I agree it would be nice for those still playing the game, but I think it'll take a large list of fixes to get the shelvers playing again and the naysayers actually giving it a second chance.

[Boris Godunov]

They STILL haven't patched this bird yet?

1 hour till I get to go home and play GalCiv!