Jump to content


MOO2 Remake.


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

Francois424 #21 Posted 10 March 2016 - 06:44 AM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 145
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Posttad10, on 06 March 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

If you want to play MOO2, play MOO2.  It comes with the CE.

 

Sorry but nobody would buy a reskinned MOO2, even people who say they would.  Why buy a game that you already own?

 

Oh I would.  Why?

 - Because Moo2 is dated.


 

 - Music is awesome but you can hear the faults in it's encoding, it could use a professional re-do, re-recording, re-encoding pass.


 

 - AI is broken and Diplomacy is mostly rigged, (One second the Sakkras are your allies bar going Above the frame, next second they declare war and atomize 5 of your colonies.


 

 - The progression pace was near perfect, with that many customizing options staying balanced like it was, was quite the accomplishment.


 

 - Exploration was limited by "fuel", which added a nice touch and you couldn't explore everywhere and blow up the dude on the other side of the galaxy.


 

 - IMHO, Telepathic was too powerful, and for creative should've paid 2x/3x for the science but still get all that science node.  But beside these 2, I had so much fun with it's customization.  My whole group of friends and I actually revamped bonus/penalties at some point, we set Telepathic to like 18pts, and creative to 10.  We all got our cake and eat it too, and we each got a bit shafted by changes we agreed on together.   Why am I telling you this story ?  Because 1- we could do it, and 2- EASY to do too.


 

 - Lots of races (Ironically enough, 5 ppl between me and my friends... 3 of us used the races not in this game (Trilarans, Elerians, and Gnolams).


 

 - Randomized starting system (eventally we used the /tag to give us each a 5 planets starting system; for balance issues), and lots of planets/opportunities


 

 - Did I mention the Music ?


 

 - Different NPCs for each area (Military, science, espionage) was a fine touch.


 

 - No space lanes (Yeah I'm one of these ppl).


 

 - The game could Cather to the explorer who gets 15 systems, or to the defender who gets 3 systems with 5 fully terraformed planets in it, and we would be pretty evenly matched.


 

 - The roaming leaders added a touch of strategy... the Antareans a bit of mix-it-up (and a good end-game strategy).


 

 - The new game would have better multi-player, maybe up to 16 players in big maps.  Less De-sync and more opponents == major fun.


 

- - - - - - -

This new MOO is *very good*  I can see the homage to both MOO1  and MOO2, I obviously lament the missing races, disappearance of the Creative trait, Starlanes and all.  But I'm pretty impressed.  The game is good and no crashes yet..

I bought it early access, stuff I almost never do, after seeing a few reviews/play sessions on Youtube.  I just hope all the missing stuff is poured over at some point, DLC or not, and that this game will rival Moo2, if not being better.

I hated the new UFO game, man that was pure garbage, money well wasted on my part.  The original is 25x better than it, being 20 years old.  This Master of Orion is not a bad remake, but it's missing stuff.


 

Wait and see, as it would be unfair to compare it in it's current state with 3 more major patches to be released and I am pretty sure some DLC in the future (please WG, give us these 3 Moo2 races, Antareans, No lane option and 16x multiplayer).



Jimster480 #22 Posted 14 March 2016 - 04:24 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View Posttad10, on 06 March 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

If you want to play MOO2, play MOO2.  It comes with the CE.

 

Sorry but nobody would buy a reskinned MOO2, even people who say they would.  Why buy a game that you already own?

 

Plenty of people would buy a modernized MOO2.
This is basically what they needed to make was a modernized MOO2.
More class diversity, better diplomacy, extended tech trees, more combinations, better ship pilots with other experience leveling, etc.
Instead we got half of what MOO2 was. This is like MOO1.5 on Unity Engine.

 

Having toggle-able Turn based battles & real time battles would be nice too for large/small fights.

To discover Star lanes later on in the game and maybe even be able to build them with late game technology would have been great.
Diversified ship classes / custom ship classes, etc....

 

I mean this game has literally NONE of these things, the races are less customizable. The tech tree is smaller, the worker placement is restricted, the customization of ships is limited....

Even most of the weapons have been nerfed/made useless so there is no real reason to upgrade your ships for most of the game.



Provinfistoris #23 Posted 14 March 2016 - 05:34 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 175
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

View Posttad10, on 06 March 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

If you want to play MOO2, play MOO2.  It comes with the CE.

 

Sorry but nobody would buy a reskinned MOO2, even people who say they would.  Why buy a game that you already own?

 

I would buy a reskinned MoO 2 any day of the week. Yes I already own MoO 2. I own it on the original floppy. That didn't stop me from buying it on GoG later. Which according to you, I would never do, because I already own MoO 2. 

 

It's funny... technology changes. I haven't had a PC with a 3 1/2" floppy drive in over a decade. I ripped the floppy files and burned them to a CD, and so the game has kept pace as my PCs have evolved, then later I bought it on GoG. A few bucks later and now I have a pre-packed DOSBOX version of MoO 2 that I can download and play practically anywhere. 

 

If I saw MoO 2 remade with amazing graphics and audio, AND all the mechanics intact? I'd buy it in a heartbeat. It would have to be true to the original though.


Edited by Provinfistoris, 14 March 2016 - 05:34 PM.


Pacioli #24 Posted 14 March 2016 - 05:45 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 30
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013
Biggest mistake they made was saying this game had anything to do with the others outside of name / ip.  Should have just go with MoO4 or MoO pure reboot and just been done with it.  People are to worried about it being the game they loved in the past instead of just letting it be its own game. 

BionicDance #25 Posted 14 March 2016 - 05:48 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 699
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

View PostPacioli, on 14 March 2016 - 09:45 AM, said:

  People are to worried about it being the game they loved in the past instead of just letting it be its own game. 

 

If it's going to be it's own game, don't call it Master of Orion.

 

You're just going to piss off and disappoint the fans of the series.



Jimster480 #26 Posted 14 March 2016 - 05:52 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostPacioli, on 14 March 2016 - 05:45 PM, said:

Biggest mistake they made was saying this game had anything to do with the others outside of name / ip.  Should have just go with MoO4 or MoO pure reboot and just been done with it.  People are to worried about it being the game they loved in the past instead of just letting it be its own game. 

 

The problem is that if you call it master of orion, you are playing to those who loved the series Namely 1 and 2. Because 3 was hated by basically everyone who loved the series and it marked the end of the franchise.
This game being a reboot, should have been based on MOO2 since it was so largely successful.

Building on what was already great about that game but adding in more dynamics and mechanics (like the spiral galaxies and more race customization). But instead its more like MOO 1.5 and doesn't have half the things that MOO2 had but borrows too much from MOO3.

 

 



BionicDance #27 Posted 14 March 2016 - 05:54 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 699
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

I'm I'm still calling bull on them having done any focus group research on this before they made it, or they'd know all that.

 

But I'm told that a prominent member of their dev team was on the team for MoO3...which explains a lot. I don't think this game was made for the fans...I think it was made for him.

 

But at least they seem to be listening to us now. Seem to be.

I just hope it's not too late.



Pacioli #28 Posted 14 March 2016 - 05:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 30
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View PostJimster480, on 14 March 2016 - 05:52 PM, said:

 

The problem is that if you call it master of orion, you are playing to those who loved the series Namely 1 and 2. Because 3 was hated by basically everyone who loved the series and it marked the end of the franchise.
This game being a reboot, should have been based on MOO2 since it was so largely successful.

Building on what was already great about that game but adding in more dynamics and mechanics (like the spiral galaxies and more race customization). But instead its more like MOO 1.5 and doesn't have half the things that MOO2 had but borrows too much from MOO3.

 

 

 

Not saying I don't agree.  I just am disappointed that so many people seem only interested in a texture upgrade to older games.  I want this to be a good game.  It can be a good game.  It might not be what certain fans with high post counts are looking for but it isn't really what should matter.  Yes.. 3 pretty much sucked in my opinion.  Yes.. 2 was an utter master piece.  Yes.. 1 is a timeless classic that started it all.  But this needs to be.. this. 

Edited by Pacioli, 14 March 2016 - 05:56 PM.


BionicDance #29 Posted 14 March 2016 - 06:03 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 699
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

Block Quote

 I just am disappointed that so many people seem only interested in a texture upgrade to older games

 

Oh, it's more than just that, and you should know it by now; enough people have said they want MoO2 plus improvements. As in, adding to the gameplay along with the graphics; don't fundamentally change it the way they have with MoO4, just put it MoO2 steroids. Make it the same plus more aspects.

 

Block Quote

 Yes.. 2 was an utter master piece.  Yes.. 1 is a timeless classic that started it all.  But this needs to be.. this. 

 

No. It doesn't. 

It needs to be something that'll attract the fans.

 

Or if it does, then it needs to be this with a different title, and thus allowing for different expectations by the audience.

You call it "Master of Orion" anything, you're going to paint yourself into a corner. Mind you, a rather picturesque corner for which many people would give you praise, but still...you've set a certain bar that people--your customers--will expect you to hurdle. 

 

I see no reason to "let this be this"; if you want to break the mold, make an entirely new game.

 

 

 



Pacioli #30 Posted 14 March 2016 - 06:10 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 30
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View PostBionicDance, on 14 March 2016 - 06:03 PM, said:

 

Oh, it's more than just that, and you should know it by now; enough people have said they want MoO2 plus improvements. As in, adding to the gameplay along with the graphics; don't fundamentally change it the way they have with MoO4, just put it MoO2 steroids. Make it the same plus more aspects.

 

 

No. It doesn't. 

It needs to be something that'll attract the fans.

 

Or if it does, then it needs to be this with a different title, and thus allowing for different expectations by the audience.

You call it "Master of Orion" anything, you're going to paint yourself into a corner. Mind you, a rather picturesque corner for which many people would give you praise, but still...you've set a certain bar that people--your customers--will expect you to hurdle. 

 

I see no reason to "let this be this"; if you want to break the mold, make an entirely new game.

 

 

 

 

Breaking the mold doesn't mean you have to carbon copy the game of the past.  If that was the case you never would have had MoO2.  Because it would have just be MoO1 with updated graphics.  But even then it wouldn't be a copy.  This has to be this.  You have your right to disagree.  But you will never get to change my opinion on that.  I am sure you will post 20 times on every thread for the differ.. but I will enjoy this game for it being it.  This.. being.. this... you can scream red in the face over it.  Even if you get your way.  I win.. because I will just enjoy it for what it is.  See how this work..

 

I win

 



BionicDance #31 Posted 14 March 2016 - 06:15 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 699
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

Block Quote

 Breaking the mold doesn't mean you have to carbon copy the game of the past.  If that was the case you never would have had MoO2. 

 

Except that MoO2 is what I'm describing.

They took MoO1 and added a whole bunch of stuff to it. Nothing particularly fundamental changed, really...a few things did, but they were largely trivial. It hardly "broke the mold".

 

...not like MoO3, which, let's face it, has quite the reputation for sucking.

 

Block Quote

 This has to be this.  You have your right to disagree.  But you will never get to change my opinion on that.

 

Then you are unreasonable, and not worth any more conversation on the topic.

 



Provinfistoris #32 Posted 14 March 2016 - 06:16 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 175
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

View PostPacioli, on 14 March 2016 - 06:10 PM, said:

 

Breaking the mold doesn't mean you have to carbon copy the game of the past.  If that was the case you never would have had MoO2.  Because it would have just be MoO1 with updated graphics.  But even then it wouldn't be a copy.  This has to be this.  You have your right to disagree.  But you will never get to change my opinion on that.  I am sure you will post 20 times on every thread for the differ.. but I will enjoy this game for it being it.  This.. being.. this... you can scream red in the face over it.  Even if you get your way.  I win.. because I will just enjoy it for what it is.  See how this work..

 

I win

 

 

What he's saying but you're not getting is that. Master of Orion was a timeless classic. Master of Orion 2 improved on Master of Orion. Master of Orion 3 was made by a dev team who wanted to do their own thing, and that turned out spectacularly badly. 

 

Master of Orion 4 is not improving on Master of Orion 2. It's following in the footsteps of it's late predecessor. However the devs are listening and posted a massive list of changes they're going to deliver on, because of user feedback. I am slightly optimistic that the game will be decent. However, I doubt it'll be the near masterpiece 2 was.

 

If you want to make a new game that is it's own entity. CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE. Don't call it Master of Orion, because the franchise fans will be expecting Master of Orion! It's not a hard concept. 



BionicDance #33 Posted 14 March 2016 - 06:19 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 699
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

Block Quote

 If you want to make a new game that is it's own entity. CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE. Don't call it Master of Orion, because the franchise fans will be expecting Master of Orion! It's not a hard concept. 

 

Quoted for truth.

 

Block Quote

 However the devs are listening and posted a massive list of changes they're going to deliver on, because of user feedback.

 

This too.

They might not give us everything, but it sure does sound as if the criticism has hit home and is influencing production. This is for the good.

 



Suraknar #34 Posted 15 March 2016 - 06:37 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 16
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

I have no issues with RT battles.

As much as I liked MOO2, and I can say that I played many many hours back in the day not only Solo but Multiplayer on LAN with friends, night after night to progress our Campaigns, in the late game battles were tedious.

What does disappoint is the choice to have the starlanes? How much more better would the game have been if with current PC technology there was Galaxies that are 2-3-4 times the size of MOO2 Huge galaxy setup, star systems with multiple planets and Nice Techs advancement in propulsion and fuel cell technology faster farther longer duration travels to reach the planets far and beyond the reaches of space. And then Being able to create huge Fleets, Home Fleet Expedition Fleet Assault Fleets. Like in previous MOO games, and then to have these #d Real time battles so exciting.

Has anyone seen the new  Battlefleet Gothic : Armada Real Time Battles? Simply Amazing, imagine that in MOO.

I just feel that in current set-up with starlanes etc the games lacks scope and awe...and it could have been something really Epic.


~ Duke Suraknar ~
Order of the Silver Star - OSS
*everyone dies, not everyone really fights*

Jimster480 #35 Posted 15 March 2016 - 03:30 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostPacioli, on 14 March 2016 - 05:56 PM, said:

 

Not saying I don't agree.  I just am disappointed that so many people seem only interested in a texture upgrade to older games.  I want this to be a good game.  It can be a good game.  It might not be what certain fans with high post counts are looking for but it isn't really what should matter.  Yes.. 3 pretty much sucked in my opinion.  Yes.. 2 was an utter master piece.  Yes.. 1 is a timeless classic that started it all.  But this needs to be.. this. 

 

Moo2 is a masterpiece so why would it not be a remake of the masterpiece with additional things added on considering that we are 21 years in the future and our PC's have the ability for things like smarter AI, better diplomacy, more tech trees, more race diversity, maybe realtime invasion mechanic's (similar to the RT space battles).
People have a right to be angry, this game is basically MOO3 with some stuff borrowed from MOO2. Its not its own game, its something that is currently unplayable.

Jimster480 #36 Posted 15 March 2016 - 03:33 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostSuraknar, on 15 March 2016 - 06:37 AM, said:

I have no issues with RT battles.

As much as I liked MOO2, and I can say that I played many many hours back in the day not only Solo but Multiplayer on LAN with friends, night after night to progress our Campaigns, in the late game battles were tedious.

What does disappoint is the choice to have the starlanes? How much more better would the game have been if with current PC technology there was Galaxies that are 2-3-4 times the size of MOO2 Huge galaxy setup, star systems with multiple planets and Nice Techs advancement in propulsion and fuel cell technology faster farther longer duration travels to reach the planets far and beyond the reaches of space. And then Being able to create huge Fleets, Home Fleet Expedition Fleet Assault Fleets. Like in previous MOO games, and then to have these #d Real time battles so exciting.

Has anyone seen the new  Battlefleet Gothic : Armada Real Time Battles? Simply Amazing, imagine that in MOO.

I just feel that in current set-up with starlanes etc the games lacks scope and awe...and it could have been something really Epic.

 

Sorry but RT battles suck for large amounts of ships. Back in the day with MOO2 doing 200x200 ship battles is simply not possible in this game.

RT completely ruins it, which is why I think that in each battle there should be 3 options, either RealTime, TurnBased, Simulation. This way for smaller ship battles you can do RT but not TB.
RT doesn't even have mechanics for things like phasing cloaks, sub space teleporters, tractor beams, ship invasion combat (capturing ships), Plasma webs, etc.....
It leaves many of the metrics of MOO2 out simply because RT cannot support those types of things.



Provinfistoris #37 Posted 15 March 2016 - 03:40 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 175
  • Member since:
    02-27-2016

View PostJimster480, on 15 March 2016 - 03:33 PM, said:

 

Sorry but RT battles suck for large amounts of ships. Back in the day with MOO2 doing 200x200 ship battles is simply not possible in this game.

RT completely ruins it, which is why I think that in each battle there should be 3 options, either RealTime, TurnBased, Simulation. This way for smaller ship battles you can do RT but not TB.
RT doesn't even have mechanics for things like phasing cloaks, sub space teleporters, tractor beams, ship invasion combat (capturing ships), Plasma webs, etc.....
It leaves many of the metrics of MOO2 out simply because RT cannot support those types of things.

 

Exactly, it's really dumbed down. I mean, ok, I'm not horribly anti-RTS, but I am anti-RTS when it fails to give us the depth we had with MoO 2 combat. 

 

Edit: Afterthoughts - I played MoO 2 multiplayer a lot for many months, with close friends. The game could get really draggy towards the end, but with 4 of us playing, it was bound to happen. It honestly didn't bog down as bad as Space Empires V though. When it takes 15-20+ minutes to process each turn due to combat, that's when the game bogs down. 


Edited by Provinfistoris, 15 March 2016 - 03:42 PM.


Jimster480 #38 Posted 15 March 2016 - 03:52 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostProvinfistoris, on 15 March 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

 

Exactly, it's really dumbed down. I mean, ok, I'm not horribly anti-RTS, but I am anti-RTS when it fails to give us the depth we had with MoO 2 combat. 

 

Edit: Afterthoughts - I played MoO 2 multiplayer a lot for many months, with close friends. The game could get really draggy towards the end, but with 4 of us playing, it was bound to happen. It honestly didn't bog down as bad as Space Empires V though. When it takes 15-20+ minutes to process each turn due to combat, that's when the game bogs down. 


You are right but basically any 4X game is that way. Having 3 options like I said offers you the ability to speed it up without some mechanics (in case you aren't using them) or slow it down if you want to be tactical.



Soylent_Greene #39 Posted 17 March 2016 - 07:40 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 99
  • Member since:
    04-12-2012

View PostDarian_DelFord, on 06 March 2016 - 04:24 AM, said:

 

Amen kids now a days would have no idea how to play the original or let alone the complexities of Masters of Magic.  While I understand why they went RTS, TBC should also be an option, there is no reason why both can not be implemented.

 

WHY? WHY?!?!?!?! You had to mention Masters of Magic!!!!! Just when I thought I had healed from that! You come along and rip off the scab! No I will go back to lamenting the loss of one of the best turn based games ever!

Edited by mmathat, 17 March 2016 - 07:40 PM.


Intothevoidagain #40 Posted 17 March 2016 - 09:10 PM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 1
  • Member since:
    03-17-2016
If you want a true successor to MoO2 you should play Star Drive 2 with ( this is important ), with the DLC Sector Zero. It's by far the best 4x on the market. It's everything MoO3 should have been and much more.
Without the DLC it's a pretty good game, with the DLC it's outstanding!

So while you wait for EA 2, do yourself a favor and play it




7 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users