Jump to content


MoO 1 + 2 were awesome... but why does no one remember MoO 3?


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

Tom_Holsinger #21 Posted 17 October 2015 - 04:00 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 72
  • Member since:
    10-16-2015

View PostVaradhon, on 17 October 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

When it was released, the game was totally opaque. Figuring out what the consequences of your choices were was impossible. Combat was the perfect example: it was nearly impossible to figure out why a fleet was effective or why it wasn't. 

I disagree only a little bit.  Combat wasn't intuitive, and took me a week from release to figure out, but it wasn't impossible.  The original release was unplayable.

 

OTOH, I had vast experience with the genre, and helped design the bloody thing, so it taking me a week to learn why a MOO3 fleet was effective or not meant it was in fact nearly impossible for ordinary players to do so.  That coupled with the crippling bugs made it a marketing disaster out of the box.



Tom_Holsinger #22 Posted 17 October 2015 - 04:07 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 72
  • Member since:
    10-16-2015

View PostRayFowler, on 17 October 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

 

Tom,  I certainly appreciate your passion for MOO3! However, I think my point stands that players who think MOO3 is a great game are in a very small minority. Perhaps it is just because the game was so unplayable (your words) when it came out, followed by Atari's quick dumping of the game, that no one reconsiders it.

 

 

Ray, I said MOO3 with all of Bhruic's patches and judicious use of his mods is a great strategic military game once you get past the crap.  It then shines in the eXtermination Phase, i.e., the 4th X.  The diplomacy is pretty good too.  But getting there is horrid even with all the patches and mods.  As a game overall, it sucks.

JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #23 Posted 17 October 2015 - 09:36 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015

View PostEmP64213, on 17 October 2015 - 08:19 PM, said:

 

And there was space combat. Unexplained and unreliable stealth mechanics, longest range always wins design, virtually no special equipment and AI retreating all the time.

 

Oh, this last post of yours makes me feel, that MoO3 is a disgusting nonsense... However, manual looks mostly nice and self-consistent.


"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


Vahouth #24 Posted 17 October 2015 - 09:58 PM

    Vice Admiral

  • Players
  • 1,288
  • Member since:
    10-03-2015

MoO3 felt like a visit to a public service and having to fill a lot of paperwork.

The diplomacy screen and animations were pretty good though. I enjoyed those. :)



JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #25 Posted 18 October 2015 - 08:20 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015
This cake was taken of the oven too early...

Edited by JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, 18 October 2015 - 10:08 AM.

"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


Vahouth #26 Posted 18 October 2015 - 12:11 PM

    Vice Admiral

  • Players
  • 1,288
  • Member since:
    10-03-2015

Yeah, but oddly enough, having star lanes wasn't the issue for me in MoO3. It was everything else from tedious micromanagement to combat.

Same for Endless Space, I didn't mind the chock points, I embraced them simply because they added another strategic layer to the mix. ES lacked in the combat department and had no WMDs to boot. Lame...



AriochIV #27 Posted 19 October 2015 - 09:39 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 146
  • Member since:
    08-12-2015

If a game requires a fan patch in order to be playable... I don't think there's much worse that could be said about it.

 

First, it means the game was unplayable.

 

Second, it means the problems with the game were so easy to fix that a fan could do it, but the developers couldn't be bothered to (or, in this case, didn't know their heads from their asses).

 

I had followed MOO3 closely during its development, up until the point where it became clear to me that the developers had no idea what they were doing. I bought it when it came out, but 30 minutes or so of messing around with it were more than enough to know it was a waste of time.



JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #28 Posted 19 October 2015 - 10:08 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015
It definitely doesn't generate fun in any way... plenty of good ideas but nothing more (i'm telling this not as a player but as an analyst, as a player I would have said even worse). 

Edited by JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, 19 October 2015 - 10:10 PM.

"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


ElPozoleOlmeca #29 Posted 20 October 2015 - 08:31 PM

    Player Experience Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 598
  • Member since:
    01-28-2012

View PostAriochIV, on 19 October 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

If a game requires a fan patch in order to be playable... I don't think there's much worse that could be said about it.

 

First, it means the game was unplayable.

 

Second, it means the problems with the game were so easy to fix that a fan could do it, but the developers couldn't be bothered to (or, in this case, didn't know their heads from their asses).

 

I had followed MOO3 closely during its development, up until the point where it became clear to me that the developers had no idea what they were doing. I bought it when it came out, but 30 minutes or so of messing around with it were more than enough to know it was a waste of time.

I would like to think that KOTOR2 is an exception to this rule in that the fan patch made the game 10x better but the unpatched version wasn't completely horrible. 



Varadhon #30 Posted 20 October 2015 - 08:37 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 442
  • Member since:
    07-11-2015

View PostEmP64213, on 20 October 2015 - 07:32 PM, said:

 

I could spend hours and hours on pages like this: http://www.orionsector.com/pages/moo3/econ/general.php It's like opening random Wikipedia article and after a while realizing the browser can't handle that many tabs :). Manual had interesting lore but unfortunately contained zero info on game mechanics.

 

This was a problem that seriously contributed to the opacity of the game. I followed the development very closely and participated in the game fora from shortly after the announcement of the game and leading up to the release. The fora were exceptionally open and the developers were very willing to interact with fans and take their suggestions on board--until the departure of Alan Emerich at least. Even armed with all the theory and basic knowledge provided on the fora, half of the game remained a black box.

CaptainSpire #31 Posted 31 October 2015 - 05:54 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 10
  • Member since:
    10-31-2015
There was no Master of Orion 3.  Say it with me.  There was NO master of Orion 3.

Edited by CaptainSpire, 31 October 2015 - 05:55 PM.


DevinUp #32 Posted 01 November 2015 - 12:52 AM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 7
  • Member since:
    10-04-2015

People try to forget that MOO3 exists because it was a disappointment. I remember being active on the forums before the game came out. I went and got the game when it came out and I was really excited because I love MOO2 so much. However, it was not intuitive, and it seemed like my actions had little affect on the galaxy. I was just watching the game as turns went by. I soon stopped playing it. 

 

On the other hand, I still play MOO2 from time to time today. It's a great game, and it's completely playable in 2015. MOO3 is a bit like the new SimCity game, whereas MOO2 is like SimCity 2000.



diehardtwinsfan #33 Posted 02 December 2015 - 01:55 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 510
  • Member since:
    10-05-2015
MOO3's problem was poor implementation.  I liked a lot of what they wanted to do, but they did very little well.   I'm not sure I want MOO4 to be another MOO2 though.  Planets were taken too easily b/c quite frankly they were less armed than a couple of ships.  Combat was incredibly unrealistic, and honestly, it oversimplified what should have been more complex.  Of course MOO3 over complicated a lot of things while not giving ways to simplify it, so what do I know....  :)

JosEPh_II #34 Posted 23 January 2016 - 12:29 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 330
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

I played MoOIII from release for over 7+ years almost every day. And was a very active AtmoO forume member. Once the impatient and "it's not MoO2.5" "fans" left the game and the forum took off. Tom Holsinger gave me info about the games workings that allowed me to Mod the Game in a new way. So I put out the Random Gov't Mod.

 

That said I still have MoOIII on my comp. I did have to get Gog.com's MoOIII version when I updated to Win 10 in August. But with it all of Bhruics MoO3Pather and patches still work. As doe My Random Gov't Mod and Colts' Vanilla, Pedxing's Strawberry and Chocolate , and finally Danib's Tropical Mod. I supplied Moo3.at with Otsego's 0.85Mod (another great early Mod) to supplement his great Diplomacy Mod.

 

RayFowler, AriochIV, Vahouth, and others here and elsewhere who say we are a minority; even so we were a robust and creative minority because we saw the Potential and seized the Opportunity. We did not run away and diss the game as most of you here still do. And it's your loss. You denigrate still because you lacked the vision to see the rough diamond in the mud. Most of you wanted MoO2 remade and say MoO3 deviated too much. MoO2 was as much a different animal as MoO3 was to MoO2.

 

MoOIII thrilled and absorbed me. My Rambling AAR Evon1.25 was the subject of many late night discussions at AtMoO. I played that particular game off and on (mostly ON) for almost 2 years before the Tinmen were subdued and annihilated in the Cross constellation they came from. I have Never ever had a game like that on any other platform. And I started playing the MoO series right after MoO was released on a 486 comp with 4MB of ram.

 

No, you who still disparage are the ones who lost out. As the old proverb says, One man's "trash" is another's Treasure. And I found Diamonds where you found Mud.

 

JosEPh (AtmoO forum Keeper of The Roll Call) :)


Edited by JosEPh_II, 23 January 2016 - 12:46 AM.

Old and Slow.....Watch Out! It's Not Y'uns Turn!

Lucian667 #35 Posted 23 January 2016 - 03:22 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostJosEPh_II, on 23 January 2016 - 12:29 AM, said:

No, you who still disparage are the ones who lost out. As the old proverb says, One man's "trash" is another's Treasure. And I found Diamonds where you found Mud.

 

I dont think I've ever felt so relieved to have "lost out". Even Tom Holsinger has said several times on these forums that MOO3 was a badly designed mess of a game where you have to put up with an enormous amount of bugs and faulty design pain to find even a tiny grain of goodness, and that's after modding the hell out of it. Even Tom Hughes (A former MOO 3 dev) said pretty much the same thing. Bottom line: there's Waaaaay too much mud to wade through in MOO 3, in fact 99.999% of the game is pure mud and there's much easier ways to find diamonds than drowning in an entire ocean of mud.



JosEPh_II #36 Posted 24 January 2016 - 02:33 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 330
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

View PostLucian667, on 22 January 2016 - 09:22 PM, said:

 

I dont think I've ever felt so relieved to have "lost out". Even Tom Holsinger has said several times on these forums that MOO3 was a badly designed mess of a game where you have to put up with an enormous amount of bugs and faulty design pain to find even a tiny grain of goodness, and that's after modding the hell out of it. Even Tom Hughes (A former MOO 3 dev) said pretty much the same thing. Bottom line: there's Waaaaay too much mud to wade through in MOO 3, in fact 99.999% of the game is pure mud and there's much easier ways to find diamonds than drowning in an entire ocean of mud.

 

Lucian I know Tom Holsinger, have for many years. And yes Tom was and still is somewhat disappointed with How (implementation of various features) and When (rushed release) MoOIII was released. His posts here show that. But he also acknowledges that it is still a good game After the Fan patches (Bhruic's magnificient MoO3Patcher). We all can agree that Atari did none of us any favors when it came to MoOIII release state.

 

So we will have to agree to disagree. But consider this, your stance is based on a distant brief experience. But MIne and others like me are based on years of Playtime and Fun. I got and still get entertainment value from my $50 investment so many years ago.

 

Be well Lucian it's your right hold on to that old misguided rancor. :)

 

JosEPh


Edited by JosEPh_II, 24 January 2016 - 02:36 AM.

Old and Slow.....Watch Out! It's Not Y'uns Turn!

Lucian667 #37 Posted 24 January 2016 - 03:47 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostJosEPh_II, on 24 January 2016 - 02:33 AM, said:

So we will have to agree to disagree. But consider this, your stance is based on a distant brief experience.

 

Yes, the briefer and more distant the better as far as I'm concerned. In all honesty Joseph I'm glad you managed to find some fun buried somewhere in that digital cesspool of a game but even you must realize you are in the extreme minority. The game was a massive flop, the reviewers crucified it, almost everyone hated it, especially MOO fans. There are MANY, MANY other games out there that offer a far better experience with way less "mud" to swim through in order to get it. Games where you dont need multiple fan-made patches and tweaks to even make it work, let alone make it enjoyable.

 

Somebody on these forums once mentioned "Stockholm Syndrome" as an accurate description of the mental state of the tiny handful of MOO 3 fans who post. You've spent so much time being held prisoner by your herculean efforts to wring even a tiny ounce of fun out of that dismal train-wreck of a game, you feel emotionally compelled to sing its praises even when there are no praises to be sung for one of the worst, most boring, most badly designed games ever inflicted on an unsuspecting public.



M002mod #38 Posted 24 January 2016 - 12:14 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 241
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

View PostLucian667, on 24 January 2016 - 03:47 AM, said:

 

Somebody on these forums once mentioned "Stockholm Syndrome" as an accurate description of the mental state of the tiny handful of MOO 3 fans who post. You've spent so much time being held prisoner by your herculean efforts to wring even a tiny ounce of fun out of that dismal train-wreck of a game, you feel emotionally compelled to sing its praises even when there are no praises to be sung for one of the worst, most boring, most badly designed games ever inflicted on an unsuspecting public.

 

I really don't think its necessary or appropriate to make it so personal and burn somebody at the stake for liking something you don't.



Lucian667 #39 Posted 24 January 2016 - 01:36 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostM002mod, on 24 January 2016 - 12:14 PM, said:

 

I really don't think its necessary or appropriate to make it so personal and burn somebody at the stake for liking something you don't.

 

You seem to be finding personal insult where none was intended. I think the the paragraph you're at odds with is a good explanation as to why a tiny fraction of people end up liking MOO 3 (or any other lemon of a game) after investing enormous amounts of effort and becoming emotionally invested. I'm not even the only one to express it here.

 

View PostRayFowler, on 17 October 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Part of me also wonders if the Ulysses effect is not involved, since it's human nature to find ways love something after putting endless hours into it. For example, in the same paragraph you mention how great MOO3 is, you also mention "the dreadful slow boring planetary/empire development" and "crappy interface" along with the need to have "years and years of experience both playing space 4x games and designing them" in order to find the MOO3 diamond in the rough.

 

Ray may not have called it Stockholm Syndrome but the sentiment is pretty much identical and nobody accused him of stake burning. Re-reading my wording again though I can see how it could come across as a little blunt. My apologies to Joseph, I didn't mean any personal insult.

JosEPh_II #40 Posted 25 January 2016 - 09:11 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 330
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

View PostEmP64213, on 25 January 2016 - 04:05 AM, said:

 

Did fan patches solve following problems:

1. Ultra long turn processing time probably caused by excessive amount of ground troop without removing troop from the game.

2. PD bug where weapons ignore first incoming missile volley. (answered in other thread)

3. Non-functioning armor penetration weapon modifiers.

4. Lack of special equipment. There was absolutely no special equipment except stealth, detection and transportation capacities. Ship customization in previous games relied heavily on them (remember repulsor beam from MoO 1 and time warp facilitator from MoO 2?).

5. Remove DEA bug. In some cases it was impossible to remove or change DEA, it would stay marked for demolition forever. Not game breaking, just annoying when converting unnecessary mines and farms to industry and research.

 

I tried to like the game and did to some degree. Abysmal turn processing time did hurt but I pressed on anyway. What really made me to write off the game was lack of customization. I'm kind of person who doesn't enjoy watching the same movie second time. After a couple of dozen games I concluded I've seen ALL distinct ways you can play it. Mods I tried didn't help in that respect at best it was 1 new way per mod. Unmodded MoO 2 on the other hand still manages to surprise me.

 

1. Not sure what you mean by abysmal turn processing? It is after all,  iirc, a 32 bit game that used Excel spreadsheets. I never consider the End of turns to be excessively long at anytime. The time to play a turn on a huge map with 16 opponents could take hours mid to early late game before opponents become eradicated or subjected. Especially when you may have 20+ Space Battles and or ground Battles to play out. In my Evon 1.25 game I logged over 6,000 Space battles in a 3 month period. I played that game almost everyday for 6months straight and then several time a week until I finished it almost 2 years after I started it. Later part for the length of time to finsih that game was because of a series of PBEM games that a group of us from AtmoO forums played for several months. Those were fun and a great learning experience on how others played the game.

3. Fixed

4. Never saw a need for "special equipment". Better and different fighters, missiles, Beam, Rail, Plasma, and energy weapons combined with better armor, shielding, detection, and range is more than adequate as the tech levels advanced. As the Tech advanced so did they.

5. Fixed.

 

JosEPh

 


Edited by JosEPh_II, 25 January 2016 - 09:14 PM.

Old and Slow.....Watch Out! It's Not Y'uns Turn!




6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users