23 replies to this topic

[ot4gaming]

Hello, 

all I ever want is a Widescreen HD Updatee of the original Master of Orion 2, same grafics just highere resolution, with easy Online Multiplayer build in with Chat and Lobby, create new games (similar as Kali is/was, just directly build in). 

Will this never happen? I dont need any fancy 3D grafics, the original MoO2 grafics are even today still amazing just Widescreen and better Resolution would be awesome. 

 

Are there any Fan-Projects working on somthing like it? I remember Free Orion, any News on that one? 

I wonder if Wargaming ever makes this happen, this would be a dream come true. I still play MoO2 at least twice a week since now about 20 years and there is still no game that can compare to it. I dont need any Voiceacting, just BGM is enough, its the same effect as Minecraft has, just play, some music and you dont even realize how fast the time goes by. Isnt it nice if you can just by listening to the music find out if a Opponent is affresiv or friendly to you?

 

Or are there other 1:1 Clones? Not like Galactic Civ. just MoO clones, why is it so hard to get this simple game with those simple grafics up to HD? Isnt that what everyone wants?

Edited by ot4gaming, 24 March 2016 - 03:12 PM.

[ot4gaming]

Damn, thats really sad to hear... i just loaded Open Orion, but last Update was a half year ago.

Did you ever hear of "OpenRa"? They made Red Alert with a new engine that looks pretty much exactly the same as the old one but supports High Resolutions and new mechanics like waypoints that wherent used back in the days. 

If I had the skills like all those Indie game developers that pop out everywhere right now, I would make a 1:1 copy of MoO2, surly you need someone that can make new arts & grafics becaus eof copyright. 

But the GAMESYSTEM is so amazingly simple & good, its hard to understand that noone can learn from it. 5 Million poplation = 5 people to move into 3 seperate fields for food, building & research, thats amazing. 

I saw the new MoO is using a similar system and I really hope they get this right. For sure I will buy its final version no way arround it but no matter what I'm still hoping for a MoO2 remaster update.

Edited by ot4gaming, 24 March 2016 - 04:51 PM.

[mikeva1]

remnants of the precursors  (http://remnantsoftheprecursors.com/) (formerly know as JavaMoo) goes into alpha testing this spring or early summer. Looks really good they contacted WG and got permission to do it. they have to avoid using Master of Orion, Moo or similar names.

Edited by mikeva1, 24 March 2016 - 11:31 PM.

[ot4gaming]

So many remakes and clones seem to focus on MoO1, even the new Master of Orion game is a tribute to the first game right? 

Was the first game so much better? I only ever playd Master of Orion 2 because it had Windows 95 Support. I can't believe you could make anything better then what Master of Orion 2 made, its perfect. If you also did play the first game, whats your thoughts on the differences?

[RayFowler]

ot4gaming, on 25 March 2016 - 10:43 AM, said:

So many remakes and clones seem to focus on MoO1, even the new Master of Orion game is a tribute to the first game right? 

Was the first game so much better? I only ever playd Master of Orion 2 because it had Windows 95 Support. I can't believe you could make anything better then what Master of Orion 2 made, its perfect. If you also did play the first game, whats your thoughts on the differences?W

 

What?

 

The only MOO1 remakes are Remnants of the Precursors and Dominus Galaxia. All other MOO-inspired games, including the new MOO4, are obviously derived from MOO2. This includes Star Drive, Lord of Rigel and M.O.R.E.

 

Here's how you can easily tell... does it have a build queue for colony improvements? If yes, then it is definitely NOT based on MOO1.

 

And seriously, MOO1 is a better game than MOO2. It has older graphics, but the gameplay is far superior with almost no micro whatsoever.

 

Here are a few comparison threads:

http://www.freeorion...c.php?f=1&t=222

 

https://www.reddit.c..._moo1_and_moo2/

 

http://apolyton.net/...te-MOO1-or-MOO2

 

Edited by RayFowler, 26 March 2016 - 12:08 AM.

[ot4gaming]

Well you didnt actually tell what points in your opinion make it so much better, but i will read thru some of those links thanks. 

 

*EDIT* So from what I read it seems MoO 1 is just the a lot simpler game and people that dont like to think to much prefer the simple gameplay while others that like more death for the gameplay prefer MoO2, thats interesting, thats the usual American versus European thinking.

WarCraft 2 and WarCraft 3 have a similar situation, while 3 is the better game there are also people that prefer WarCraft 2 because you dont need to think about to many attributes and things while playing it.

 

Now I really want to give MoO1 a try because that is far more interesting then just MoO2 with older grafics. 

Edited by ot4gaming, 26 March 2016 - 12:57 AM.

[RayFowler]

MOO1 is a simpler game because it was made 3 years before MOO2 at a time when hardware capabilities of computers were increasing dramatically each year.

 

However, it's simplicity is a blessing because there was no way for developers to bog down the game with too many features. Whether this was by design or luck, it's hard to say, but it ended up making for a brilliant strategy game.

 

MOO2 sold tremendously when it was released because the "Master of Orion" series was already very well regarded because of the first game.

[RayFowler]

EmP64213, on 26 March 2016 - 11:37 AM, said:

Presence of building queue doesn't make the game equal to MoO 2.

 

That's not what I said. I said that presence of a building queue means the game is not based on MOO1. He had never played MOO1 and probably didn't realize that it didn't have building queues. Those belong in the Civ/MOO2+/GalCiv genre.

[JosEPh_II]

I hope Bret and you Ray actually get your games to the point of being playable. And any Dressed up MoO with a tweak or 2 would be very good with todays Graphics and processors. Also made so they can be Modded/Tweaked would be good too.

 

JosEPh

[Zeraan]

JosEPh_II, on 26 March 2016 - 11:09 PM, said:

I hope Bret and you Ray actually get your games to the point of being playable. And any Dressed up MoO with a tweak or 2 would be very good with todays Graphics and processors. Also made so they can be Modded/Tweaked would be good too.

 

JosEPh

 

Dominus Galaxia is currently playable and has formidable AI.  So we're already past that point  We're fixing things up, polishing the visuals, implementing extra features, etc.  We're trying to make it as enjoyable as possible (playability != enjoyability) by adding UI for players to more easily manage their empires as an example.

[Francois424]

Technically WG holds the rights to Master of Orion II.

 

Nothing prevents them of remaking that exact game (using assets from the current ones, and adding to it).

I would love a perfect clone with updated graphics, and 16 human multiplayer.

 

Everything must be the same, tech trees, races, racial picks, re-mastered original music (needs a lot of cleaning).

Making optional new content such as bigger maps, starlanes, anything optional that you want.

But remastering the original game would be an awesome project in itself.

 

That's why so many of us are pushing this game to head in Moo2 direction, getting the best from Moo1 and 3.

Looking orward to what happens with this one, and any future project/DLCs

[RayFowler]

Francois424, on 29 March 2016 - 10:29 PM, said:

Technically WG holds the rights to Master of Orion II.

 

Nothing prevents them of remaking that exact game (using assets from the current ones, and adding to it).

 

Economics prevents them from remaking it. Would you pay $50 for a graphically updated MOO2 when you can buy the original for $1 on GOG?

[RayFowler]

EmP64213, on 31 March 2016 - 03:36 AM, said:

No but I'd pay 25 euro without thinking. Why downgrade gameplay and increase price because of "AAA quality"?

 

See? You made my point.

 

If Wargaming made a MOO2 clone with better graphics SPECIFICALLY for the MOO2 fanbase (such as yourself), not only would they be selling to a smaller audience but they would be making LESS money per game while doing so. It makes no economic sense.

 

AAA quality costs a lot of money. A niche gaming market like 4X Strategy simply does not have enough customers to justify cranking out a clone game every few years with updated graphics. That's something you see in the realm of shooters & sports games.

[RayFowler]

EmP64213, on 31 March 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

I ask again, why increase costs with AAA production? Whole AAA industry is pushing itself over a plank by inflating expectations. And to actually profit they have to sell at high price to as broad audience and for some reason dumb the things down. I'd be more then OK if production level of new MoO is similar to Space Pirates and Zombies.

 

Speaking of audience, previous Master of Orion games were not exactly for everybody, they were not niche but also not exactly for every FarmVille and Call of Duty player. If we mark universal game (made for maximally broad audience) as 1 and absolute niche game as 0 then I'd place MoO 1, 2 and 3 around 0.3.

 

Games need to be AAA to sell to the largest possible audience. Everyone expects AAA quality if they pay $40+ for a game.

 

Everyone always wants "my favorite game from the 90s with modern graphics". Remaking MOO in 2016 with sub-AAA graphics would generate a lot more outrage among fans than star lanes, imo.

[Francois424]

RayFowler, on 30 March 2016 - 07:00 PM, said:

 

Economics prevents them from remaking it. Would you pay $50 for a graphically updated MOO2 when you can buy the original for $1 on GOG?

 

Yes.

 

 

Assuming the game is almost exactly the same, Multiplayer works reliably, better graphics (already developed in this iteration), and re-mastered original music.

It was the best Multi-player experience that my friends and I ever had the joy of playing together.   We miss it since it does not work in MP anymore since Win7/10.

 

Of course the new on might evolve into a better Moo2 eventually.  But barring that (maybe devs don't want to directly do that)  I'd be very fine with a 50$ price tag.

I'd cough it up without thinking about it and would probably buy 3 different licenses so each of my 3 PCs could run the game when we organize a lan party at my place.

 

[ot4gaming]

even if they just sell the original grafics with widescreen support i would instant pay 9,90 for it, if they add modern multiplayer 19,90 for sure, moo2 has no real storymode, they have only to focus on the gameplay, i want it so much.

[Zeraan]

ot4gaming, on 08 April 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

even if they just sell the original grafics with widescreen support i would instant pay 9,90 for it, if they add modern multiplayer 19,90 for sure, moo2 has no real storymode, they have only to focus on the gameplay, i want it so much.

 

The one million dollar question is, do they have the source code?  If so, they could easily make changes to modernize the game to work with widescreen and fix the multiplayer.  If not, they'd have to basically re-do the whole game.  Even if they get the looks the same, internally it could feel different.  Formulas would be a bit different, things will feel a bit "off".  The amount of work required is not trivial.  We do not know if they have source code to any of the previous MoO games (1, 2, or 3).  If they don't have the source code, why invest the amount of work just to fix widescreen/multiplayer that only a few will re-buy when they could invest that same effort into a new game that will generate more profit? This is apparently the route they went with as seen from the new MoO reboot.

 

The fact that they didn't announce a HD edition of previous games in the series seem to indicate that the source code is lost  I'd be happy to be wrong though.

[JosEPh_II]

EmP64213, on 11 April 2016 - 11:52 AM, said:

 

That question has been asked and I think the answer was that source code was lost. Even with source code it wouldn't be a simple task, MoO 1 was pure DOS game and difference between Windows and DOS application is huge and they probably had to pull of various tricks to make game even work with limits of that age which would probably make code more convoluted and harder to update. MoO 2 Windows version used old DirectX and new versions have changed a lot since then, it would probably be 50% rewrite. Who knows in what state was MoO 3 code, difference between patched and unpatched game may suggest it was a hard to maintain mess which would be also hard to update. But it may also mean that development team was whipped by management.

 

To this day I can not stand Atari and what they did to MoOIII and other older games( they had code for MoO2 and 3 and lost it all). They had access to Microprose and Hasbro source codes and foolishly did not protect them with their short term/short sighted "management".

 

Quicksilver has the MoO3 source code. BUT...it's not in one location. It's, from the report I was given, on several different computers/tapes/CDs in different locales. The head guy at QS has been approached about the source code but the Old Quicksilver much used response was the same "Time and Money" for re-compiling it. And how much time and how much money I was not privy to.

 

There was 1 remaining copying of MoO2 from the original developers that did contain it's source code. That was given to WG.

 

I'm hoping I've not said too much as this info was given in confidence and why I've not mentioned any names.

 

 

 

 

 

JosEPh

Edited by JosEPh_II, 13 April 2016 - 05:20 PM.

[CaptainSpire]

Wow.  I'm gona sign up on the Precursors site.  I have a ton of questions and a lot of hope for this.

[plasmacannontime]

RayFowler, on 30 March 2016 - 06:00 PM, said:

 

Economics prevents them from remaking it. Would you pay $50 for a graphically updated MOO2 when you can buy the original for $1 on GOG?

 

​Yes. Take my money. Next question.