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

Anguille_1 #41 Posted 26 January 2016 - 09:23 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

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

 

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.

 

I am with JosEPH here...I am one of the biggest MOO1 fan you can find. I still play it today on a regular basis. But i've also loved to play MOO3 for many years. I had ordered the strategy guide (even if there are lots of changes in the game, it helped understand it). As the game came out, i quickly noticed the problems and decided to stop playing until they released the patch. So my real first experience started with 1.2.5 where the game is really playable. It is a complex game, and this is what i like. Many races, many techs, large battles, many types of planets, excellent artwork on the races etc.  It is an excellent game. It is not because you don't like Tolstoï, that his work isn't good. You don't like it, fine....but don't think that your taste is the only one...this is really arrogant. The Master of Orion 3 forums were full of people for many years until they closed all the Atari forums.


Edited by Anguille_1, 26 January 2016 - 09:29 AM.

Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


JosEPh_II #42 Posted 26 January 2016 - 03:49 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 336
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

View PostLucian667, on 24 January 2016 - 07:36 AM, said:

 

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.

 

 

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.

 

Lucian I'm sure you actually did, but I accept your apology anyway. :)

 

I still have a list of over 500+ AtmoO forum users that played the game After players with your stance left. The community that was left was robust and world wide. So I'm not sure where you get your figures on what constitutes a "tiny fraction". And it is general statistical knowledge that ppl that have a 1st bad impression over anything will be 10x more likely to gripe and diss it publicly  than 100 ppl who enjoyed it. Take that for what you will.

 

All I ask is to just stop with the labeling and profiling.  There is an old saying and it goes like this; "the fire of anger only burns the angry, and I smell smoke in this house." We can amenably disagree over it and that is just fine.

 

Be Blessed Lucian. :)

 

JosEPh (Keeper of The Roll Call)

 

 


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

Lucian667 #43 Posted 27 January 2016 - 10:38 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostJosEPh_II, on 26 January 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

I still have a list of over 500+ AtmoO forum users that played the game After players with your stance left. The community that was left was robust and world wide. So I'm not sure where you get your figures on what constitutes a "tiny fraction".

 

lol 500 people is an infinitesimally tiny fraction when compared to the vast number of MOO 2 or even MOO 1 fans. But you're more than free to love whatever you like, no matter how horrible everyone else thinks it is, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree and I certainly never meant to insult you personally, I was aiming more at ALL MOO 3 fans collectively, not any specific individual.  :D

 

I realize how much time and effort you have invested in even getting it to work. Hopefully you wont have to invest as much in MOO 4 before it becomes playable.  :)



JosEPh_II #44 Posted 27 January 2016 - 05:29 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 336
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

View PostLucian667, on 27 January 2016 - 04:38 AM, said:

 

lol 500 people is an infinitesimally tiny fraction when compared to the vast number of MOO 2 or even MOO 1 fans. But you're more than free to love whatever you like, no matter how horrible everyone else thinks it is, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree and I certainly never meant to insult you personally, I was aiming more at ALL MOO 3 fans collectively, not any specific individual.  :D

 

I realize how much time and effort you have invested in even getting it to work. Hopefully you wont have to invest as much in MOO 4 before it becomes playable.  :)

 

There is a caveat to the list of 500+ users, they were the ones that actually added their names to the Roll Call Thread. Many more would not because they considered the Thread to be spam. Even though the Mods allowed it to stay open after several complained.

 

If MoOIII dissenters, such as yourself, would actually listen to what those that found fun and satisfaction with that particular game have to say about it and why you might learn what worked well and what was a struggle to overcome. Thereby giving you a better stance when a new game such as CtS is being developed.

 

Example, I keep seeing many posters here hating on star lanes and wanting only free travel. But I would wager that only a very small % know that you did not have to use SL's in III. You always had the option to go straight to your point of interest (system).  So why be so objectionable if given the options here. And then to blast the Devs for "putting in failed MoOIII parts" when they (those posters) are lacking in info and understanding? That's just petty and rather blindly arrogant too.

 

I'll I want to see is for those just like you, that even after 13 years just keep hammering on a game they never really got in to, to just let it go. Stop the malice and stop the rancor for the game and finally towards those that did enjoy it and still do. 

 

JosEPh :)


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

Lucian667 #45 Posted 28 January 2016 - 12:33 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostJosEPh_II, on 27 January 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

 

There is a caveat to the list of 500+ users, they were the ones that actually added their names to the Roll Call Thread. Many more would not because they considered the Thread to be spam. Even though the Mods allowed it to stay open after several complained.

 

I still remember the Roll Call thread on the Atari forums and I still remember you. Yes I was there before and after MOO 3 was released and I remember how the forums became a major war zone because of the abysmal state of that "game". I always approved of the Roll Call thread though because it promoted a sense of cohesion and solidarity in a badly fractured, brutally betrayed community that really needed it at the time.

 

View PostJosEPh_II, on 27 January 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

Example, I keep seeing many posters here hating on star lanes and wanting only free travel. But I would wager that only a very small % know that you did not have to use SL's in III. You always had the option to go straight to your point of interest (system).  So why be so objectionable if given the options here. And then to blast the Devs for "putting in failed MoOIII parts" when they (those posters) are lacking in info and understanding? That's just petty and rather blindly arrogant too.

 

As I (and at least one other person) pointed out when you made the exact same statement in another thread, off-road travel in MOO 3 was so slow it was functionally and practically USELESS. Please dont call people "petty" or "arrogant" if you dont fully understand the reason for their position. A game feature which is completely useless is not a feature at all. I have no objection at all to them adding off road travel in MOO 4 but hopefully they will make it a practical option worth using as opposed to being utterly broken and pointless like so many other things were in MOO 3.

 

View PostJosEPh_II, on 27 January 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

I'll I want to see is for those just like you, that even after 13 years just keep hammering on a game they never really got in to, to just let it go. Stop the malice and stop the rancor for the game and finally towards those that did enjoy it and still do. 

 

NO! for one very simple and good reason. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. It is important - especially for the WG devs - to remember how awfully bad MOO 3 truly was so that nobody ever makes the mistake of resurrecting that rotting corpse from the grave again. You may want to see MOO 3 (or its broken design concepts) resurrected, but I and many other people dont. Ever!



JosEPh_II #46 Posted 28 January 2016 - 01:03 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 336
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016

@Lucian,

You do know that 1 simple spreadsheet variable change made Off road = or better than SL's don't you? It was so easy to do and to change.

Quote

Please dont call people "petty" or "arrogant" if you dont fully understand the reason for their position.

If you demand that then I demand the same. It's a not a 1 way affair by any means Lucian.

 

I still do not understand the vehement anger over the game and holding on to it for sooo long. :( So sad really. And it makes me ask why isn't this anger directed at the source instead of those fans that found pleasure in it. This is what I truly am saddened over.

 

May I ask what your name was at AtmoO? Did you add it to the Roll? I treasured every name that was voluntarily added.

 

Did you ever read any of Longspur's posts? Or read the Fantastic AAR's that forum produced? At least 2 of those that wrote AAR's became published authors. Or visit the OT thread Pirates of the Dwarf Cove? Those were some funny ppl. All good memories.

 

JosEPh


Edited by JosEPh_II, 28 January 2016 - 01:06 AM.

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

Lucian667 #47 Posted 28 January 2016 - 02:19 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostJosEPh_II, on 28 January 2016 - 01:03 AM, said:

@Lucian,

You do know that 1 simple spreadsheet variable change made Off road = or better than SL's don't you? It was so easy to do and to change.

 

If you've modded the game so that off-road is better than starlanes then there's really no point to having starlanes at all is there? But then you're not working with the game as designed, you're modding to fix a BROKEN MECHANIC because the off-road mechanic was utterly BROKEN by design. As I said. So I'd appreciate it if you stopped telling people that off-road was an easy option that everyone simply forgot about, when the truth is that it was just another unusable, broken game mechanic to add to MOO 3's long list.

 

View PostJosEPh_II, on 28 January 2016 - 01:03 AM, said:

 If you demand that then I demand the same. It's a not a 1 way affair by any means Lucian.

 

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge I have never called either you or any other poster on this forum a name and I would ask that you do me the same courtesy. We can have different opinions and productive conversations without resorting to name calling.

 

View PostJosEPh_II, on 28 January 2016 - 01:03 AM, said:

I still do not understand the vehement anger over the game and holding on to it for sooo long. :( So sad really. And it makes me ask why isn't this anger directed at the source instead of those fans that found pleasure in it. This is what I truly am saddened over.

 

I mentioned in my last post why I feel it is important to continue to criticize a bad game, particularly on a new game forum where bad ideas from that game seem to be cropping up with alarming regularity. I'll repeat it below if you missed it.

 

View PostLucian667, on 27 January 2016 - 04:38 AM, said:

NO! for one very simple and good reason. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. It is important - especially for the WG devs - to remember how awfully bad MOO 3 truly was so that nobody ever makes the mistake of resurrecting that rotting corpse from the grave again. You may want to see MOO 3 (or its broken design concepts) resurrected, but I and many other people dont. Ever!

 

My primary criticism is not - and never has been - directed at MOO 3 fans specifically, just the game itself. My only concern with MOO 3 fans is that if unopposed, a few vocal ones might eventually convince a MOO 4 dev that MOO 3 actually wasn't so bad after all. This is to be avoided at all costs and the best way to do that is to remind people what a train-wreck of a game MOO 3 really was so that the horror is never again repeated.

 

View PostJosEPh_II, on 28 January 2016 - 01:03 AM, said:

May I ask what your name was at AtmoO? Did you add it to the Roll? I treasured every name that was voluntarily added.

 

Did you ever read any of Longspur's posts? Or read the Fantastic AAR's that forum produced? At least 2 of those that wrote AAR's became published authors. Or visit the OT thread Pirates of the Dwarf Cove? Those were some funny ppl. All good memories.

 

I'm sure I posed on the Atari forums and I've been wracking my brain trying to remember my avatar's name but it was just too long ago, I cant remember and frankly with the launch of that game, the blatant betrayal of thousands of MOO fans and the resulting flame wars, there were not that many good memories to be had.

 

I dont think I ever added my name to your Roll Call thread, even though I thought it was a good idea community wise, I just couldn't bring myself to endorse that travesty of a game by signing my name there.



Anguille_1 #48 Posted 28 January 2016 - 09:39 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

View PostLucian667, on 28 January 2016 - 02:19 AM, said:

 

My primary criticism is not - and never has been - directed at MOO 3 fans specifically, just the game itself. My only concern with MOO 3 fans is that if unopposed, a few vocal ones might eventually convince a MOO 4 dev that MOO 3 actually wasn't so bad after all. This is to be avoided at all costs and the best way to do that is to remind people what a train-wreck of a game MOO 3 really was so that the horror is never again repeated.

 

I think you're totally wrong here. The MOO4 team has never been a fan of MOO3 nor is anyone from MOO3 working with them (as far as i know). The idea of starlanes (which i don't like as much as you do) is their own idea. There's no incidence on MOO4 whatsover if people say they like MOO3. There's no need for a crusade.

Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


Lucian667 #49 Posted 28 January 2016 - 10:07 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostAnguille_1, on 28 January 2016 - 09:39 AM, said:

 

I think you're totally wrong here. The MOO4 team has never been a fan of MOO3 nor is anyone from MOO3 working with them (as far as i know). The idea of starlanes (which i don't like as much as you do) is their own idea. There's no incidence on MOO4 whatsover if people say they like MOO3. There's no need for a crusade.

 

Nothing would make me happier than to be proven totally wrong about this. But I'm guessing you haven't heard the rumor that WG have employed at least one former MOO 3 dev as a consultant? I think its pretty likely that we have them to thank for our beautiful starlanes, even as they swear blind in public that they are remaining faithful to the spirit of MOO 1 and 2.

 

The last thing we need now is to get more recycled "presents" from the debris of MOO 3 added to the new game just because the powers-that-be look at the forums and come away with the impression that more people liked MOO 3 than they thought.



Anguille_1 #50 Posted 28 January 2016 - 01:50 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

View PostLucian667, on 28 January 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

 

Nothing would make me happier than to be proven totally wrong about this. But I'm guessing you haven't heard the rumor that WG have employed at least one former MOO 3 dev as a consultant? I think its pretty likely that we have them to thank for our beautiful starlanes, even as they swear blind in public that they are remaining faithful to the spirit of MOO 1 and 2.

 

The last thing we need now is to get more recycled "presents" from the debris of MOO 3 added to the new game just because the powers-that-be look at the forums and come away with the impression that more people liked MOO 3 than they thought.

 

As you said, it's a rumour. So who is this MOO3 Dev supposed to be? This is nonsense. As far as i see NOTHING has been taken from MOO3, not even the Starlanes....they are creating their OWN thing with a few things from MOO1 and MOO2 which are the base for their inspiration (and i am not even sure they played them very much especially when i hear what they say sometimes).

While there are people like me who enjoyed MOO3, it is OBVIOUS that MOO3 isn't the most popular and had a rough start. The reviews aren't good. They are NOT stupid and even if some of us like and have a few good things to say about MOO3, they are NOT going to take anything from MOO3 (even if i wished they'd take a few things like the new races). Mind you, for MOO4 i want the SAME GAME as you do. STILL, i have my fun with MOO3 without having a psychological problem. It is a complex and working game.


Edited by Anguille_1, 28 January 2016 - 01:54 PM.

Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


Endsor #51 Posted 28 January 2016 - 02:50 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 118
  • Member since:
    11-01-2015

View PostAnguille_1, on 28 January 2016 - 01:50 PM, said:

As you said, it's a rumour. So who is this MOO3 Dev supposed to be? This is nonsense.

 

WTF? how can you say something is nonsense if you dont know whether its true or not? You have alot of nerve. I've heard that they're using consultants too, it would explain the starlanes.

Anguille_1 #52 Posted 28 January 2016 - 03:07 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

View PostEndsor, on 28 January 2016 - 02:50 PM, said:

 

WTF? how can you say something is nonsense if you dont know whether its true or not? You have alot of nerve. I've heard that they're using consultants too, it would explain the starlanes.

 

They have consultants who worked on MOO1 (they are even in the Devs videos). I've seen nothing of someone from MOO3. If you find any reference to a consultant who has worked on MOO3, i have no problem to admit that i am wrong. As far as i can see, the starlanes are their own idea (i don't like starlanes either). I believe they want to go on the Endless Space train....


 

 


Edited by Anguille_1, 28 January 2016 - 03:27 PM.

Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


Lucian667 #53 Posted 29 January 2016 - 03:28 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostAnguille_1, on 28 January 2016 - 03:07 PM, said:

 

They have consultants who worked on MOO1 (they are even in the Devs videos). I've seen nothing of someone from MOO3. If you find any reference to a consultant who has worked on MOO3, i have no problem to admit that i am wrong.

 

Well Tom Hughes worked on MOO 1 AND MOO 3. He designed and programmed MOO 3's universe generation system.... including the starlanes. Also he has posted on these forums several times.... food for thought. Now I have nothing but the utmost respect for Tom, he's a very talented guy and has done some absolutely amazing work and co-wrote the two best strategy guides I have ever seen. But lets face it, MOO 3 was NOT his finest hour and to his credit he understands that.

 

But the very last thing we need is for people like Tom to look at these threads and conclude that MOO fans would probably be fine to accept even more MOO 3 game design concepts and then go whisper in the WG dev's ears to make it happen. MOO 4 is already enough like MOO 3 with the starlanes, the very last thing we need is magical teleporting mob centers or other equally broken and bad game design elements.

 

We need to send the WG devs a loud, clear message that MOO 4 MUST inherit its DNA from MOO 1 or MOO2 (I dont care which) and MOO 3 needs to remain buried in its grave where it belongs. I'm not just talking to you Anguille, but to what I believe is the vast majority of MOO fans who never want to see MOO 3 rear its ugly head again.



Anguille_1 #54 Posted 29 January 2016 - 06:07 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

Yeah, Tom did post on these forums but as far as i know, he came here because he likes the MOO universe, not because he is working as a consultant for WG.

 

I think you still don't get it. WG doesn't want to do MOO3....they said it many times! I don't see where you take that idea (apart from their stupid idea of starlanes). I don't even think they have ever played it! And anyway, it's too late now, they're not going to change anything in the game mechanics now imho.

 

I don't want a copy of MOO3 either. It is a fine game but will remain a unique attempt at something bigger (we'll see what Stellaris brings). 


Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


Lucian667 #55 Posted 29 January 2016 - 06:37 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostAnguille_1, on 29 January 2016 - 06:07 AM, said:

I think you still don't get it. WG doesn't want to do MOO3....they said it many times! I don't see where you take that idea (apart from their stupid idea of starlanes).

 

Are you serious? Who cares what they said, they say one thing and do another. Of course the starlanes are transplanted directly from MOO 3! Where else do you think they got the idea from, all the other wildly successful starlane-based 4x games? There haven't been any!

 

It doesn't really matter anyway, you now know my reasons for continuing to criticize MOO 3 (to try and prevent MOO 4 from being any further polluted by recycled MOO 3 ideas). Whether you agree with those reasons or not is frankly irrelevant, I didn't expect a self-confessed MOO 3 fan to agree anyway. :)


Edited by Lucian667, 29 January 2016 - 07:39 AM.


Anguille_1 #56 Posted 29 January 2016 - 08:07 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

I am serious. It has nothing to do with MOO3. They don't even call them starlanes. Listen minute starting at 14:40 of the video below. I have no idea where they did they research cos i've never seen anything. They even think it's the first game to do it!
 

 

 

I've been following this since it's been announced. AGAIN, i want the same game as you (more or less). My favorite game is the first Master of Orion....that's the game i want and i understand VERY well why you criticize MOO3 but think there's no reason to do it because there isn't any link between this game and MOO3. I don't like starlanes in 4x games.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Endless Space had lots of success and is recent. While i think it's a decent game, i also find it very boring and i don't like the starlanes in that game.

Star Wars: Empire at War has starlanes

Sins of a Solar Empire has them too.


Edited by Anguille_1, 29 January 2016 - 08:19 AM.

Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


Lucian667 #57 Posted 29 January 2016 - 09:35 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostAnguille_1, on 29 January 2016 - 08:07 AM, said:

I am serious. It has nothing to do with MOO3. They don't even call them starlanes. Listen minute starting at 14:40 of the video below. I have no idea where they did they research cos i've never seen anything. They even think it's the first game to do it!

 

I've been following this since it's been announced. AGAIN, i want the same game as you (more or less). My favorite game is the first Master of Orion....that's the game i want and i understand VERY well why you criticize MOO3 but think there's no reason to do it because there isn't any link between this game and MOO3. I don't like starlanes in 4x games.

 

Endless Space had lots of success and is recent. While i think it's a decent game, i also find it very boring and i don't like the starlanes in that game.

Star Wars: Empire at War has starlanes

Sins of a Solar Empire has them too.

 

Anguille, I honestly hope you turn out to be right because it means I'm worrying about nothing and that would be great. Btw its obvious why they dont call them starlanes, because they want to disconnect it PR-wise from the stigma of MOO 3, lol even Randy called them starlanes by accident and couldn't think of the officially correct buzzword. They're starlanes. They were starlanes in MOO 3, they're starlanes now. Calling them something different and using pretty blue graphics doesn't change that.

 

Also I find Randy's claim that extensive fan research resulted in us begging for starlanes because we're all too stupid to defend properly to be insulting. If they wanted starlanes they should just have been honest about it instead of making crap up. Same goes for the often quoted WG claim that only 10% of MOO players used tactical combat. It was just invented by the PR department for their own purposes, nothing more, nothing less. I cant believe they ever thought they would actually get away with it. Finally the games you listed are - for the most part - not what I would consider to be "wildly successful".

 

Endless Space: A very boring, mediocre game, not even close to MOO 1 in popularity, let alone MOO 2.

Star Wars: Mostly about tactical combat. The strategy layer had almost non-existent strategy elements and forcing constant real-time was a horrendous blunder. Reasonable tactical combat though.

SOASE: This is the closest one to supporting your argument. Starlanes actually worked reasonably well in this title and it was moderately popular. Not "wildly successful" (like MOO 1 or 2 or Gal Civ) but a lot closer than anything else.

 

I dont know about you but if I were creating a brand new 4x space game, I wouldn't crib ideas from any of the above titles based on their popularity or success. I would however copy from MOO 2, Gal Civ or Distant Worlds.



Anguille_1 #58 Posted 29 January 2016 - 09:56 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

I would copy from MOO1, MOO2, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds and Horizon. I only like the first Gal Civ...never managed to get into the second one nor the third one (i have them all). I just started a new game of MOO...it's such an amazing game...simple and elegant.


 

 


Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.


Lucian667 #59 Posted 29 January 2016 - 10:01 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015
I'm not a huge fan of Gal Civ either. I only mentioned it because it is a very popular and successful game (for some reason) whether I personally like it or not. I do like the other games you mentioned although I dont have Armada. I think I'd buy a game with ideas cribbed from them.  :)

Anguille_1 #60 Posted 29 January 2016 - 10:08 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 288
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

You really should check Armada 2526 Gold....shouldn't be too expensive anymore. I've spent many hours with it and still play it...it's an excellent TBS and in many ways similar to MOO1 and MOO2. I think you might like it.

 

I forgot one of my favorite games: Birth of the Federation


Edited by Anguille_1, 29 January 2016 - 10:24 AM.

Playing MOO since 1993

 

Playing MOO Conquer the Stars on GOG Galaxy

 

4x space game CV: Master of Orion, Master of Orion II, Master of Orion III, Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain, Reach for the Stars, Imperium Galactica, Imperium Galactica II, Armada 2526, Distant Worlds, Star Ruler I and II, Endless Space, Horizon, Stardrive, Stradrive II, Sword of the Stars, Sword of the Stars II, Galactic Civilization I - III, LotBS, Lost Empires: Immortals, Space Empires IV and V, Starships Unlimited, Star Wars: Empire at War, Star Wars: Rebellio, Birth of the Federation and Stellaris.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users