09-06-2002 18:38									#1
	What is going on??? Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Could someone who has been following the recent progress of MOO3 step forward and share a quck rundown with the rest of us.

What has been cut?
What has been changed?


A lot of posts have claimed that the heart of the design has been ripped out. That doesn't sound good. So what is really going on?

	09-06-2002 21:56									#2
	Tired of ads?

QS messed up. They came back to their publisher saying they couldn't deliver on schedule. Publisher got mad and ordered sacking half the team, amongst others lead designer Alan Emrich. The rest ripped out every piece of the game not yet done and are working their tail off to ship what's left in Q3.

That's what it looks like from the outside anyway. Fasten your seatbelts, gentlemen.

	09-06-2002 22:14									#3
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Great. Sounds like the publisher is getting screwed by the devleoper. Because of all the time wasted, they will get a worse game than expected. Probably QS and IG will both lose money on the deal. Just great Emrich...the "lose-lose" solution!

	09-06-2002 22:25									#4
	Suffering from ads?

danger: ugly translations of greek phrases ahead



1) three little birds sitting

2) when you're outside of the dance, you know many songs

	09-06-2002 22:29									#5
	Support Apolyton

I kinda get the gist of the second one, but what's the first supposed to mean?

	10-06-2002 22:28									#6
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by moominparatrooper QS messed up. They came back to their publisher saying they couldn't deliver on schedule. Publisher got mad and ordered sacking half the team, amongst others lead designer Alan Emrich. The rest ripped out every piece of the game not yet done and are working their tail off to ship what's left in Q3. That's what it looks like from the outside anyway. Fasten your seatbelts, gentlemen.

That is SO far from the truth, it's hilarious.

1) Both Infogrames and Quicksilver reviewed the game in Q1/Q2 and BOTH deemed it unplayable. Hard-core strat gamers could not figure it out. So they jointly decided that changes needed to be made. They also wanted the game to be FUN. Go figure.

2) Half the team did not get sacked. The design phase of the project was over in Q1, hence the lack of need for two of the designers.

3) Every piece of the game "not yet done" did not get ripped out.

I think there were a couple of announcements stating all this stuff on QS's official web site.

	11-06-2002 00:46									#7
	Got spare money?

Well, you may be an insider, but I don't think so. Unless I'm wide off the mark you've just given a brief precis of the official statements. And you know, we've actually read them as well already. But kicking the main designer in normally Just Not Done, so we feel free to do some creative interpretations over here.

	11-06-2002 02:27									#8
	Jerks Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Don't listen to the whinners. The game will be better then ever with out all the extra crap they were going to include to make it unplayable except for those nuts that need to manage every creature that exists on a planet,including growing their own crops, by hand.

	11-06-2002 14:58									#9
	Put an end to popups!

Oi, I resent being called a nut

Call me a hardcore SF idiot, but I would've preferred to see more storyline in MOO & MOO2. The interludes in SMAC give it a nice atmosphere...

	11-06-2002 22:41									#10
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Just an FYI. Officially there was never a lead or head designer on MOO.

There were people that were more visible and less visible, and folks who were more vocal and less vocal, but the design of MOO was very much a team effort.

To state otherwise is doing a disservice to the men and women who have worked their butts off on it.

	11-06-2002 22:47									#11
	nut Full PM-box? Change here!

I should rephrase what I said. MOst 99% of gamers want to play a fairly uncomplicated game that will not takt the rest of there lives to play. The game companies for the most part realize this and tend to make the games easier and with less micro management that is to say if the companies have the brains to realize this. Because sale is the bottom line and to sell to a few grognards will put them out of business real quick. Unless you are in it for the hobby and only need small sales then manageing each soldier in a division is fine. But if you are in business to make a PROFIT and produce more then one game then you must carter to the majority. Most people want the computer to feed the troops,mow the lawn and plant the seeds and I am one of the many who want the computer to run the errends. If I play a game like Pacific War I shure as hell do not want to manage every plane and ship in the world plus each company of troops. I may take one small area and do this and let the computer ,under my supervision, take care of the rest. AND even with that it takes 150 hours to play the game.But we wargamers are a group unto our selves anyway. MOO3 is a Strategy game and not a war game.

	12-06-2002 03:08									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Rantz,

1. Having a "team" is not mutually exclusive with having a "head designer".

2. What was Alan's role on the team?

3. If you feel we are getting it wrong, tell us a little more about what is going on. Shoot. Of course, we don't have all the details and have to speculate. But the reticence to talk about some of these issues (layoffs, game design changes, etc.) tells a story in itself. Anyway, we may be taking it TOO EASY on you, because of lack of knowledge also...

	13-06-2002 02:33									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by GP Rantz, 1. Having a "team" is not mutually exclusive with having a "head designer".

Never said it was. Simply stating that Alan was not ever Lead Designer for MOO3. MOO was designed as a team design effort.

quote: [SIZE=1] 2. What was Alan's role on the team?

Alan was one of the designers, and he's great at ideas, communication and words, so it became obvious very early that he would be the likely choice to 'get the word out' in terms of communicating with the fans and such.

I couldn't even break in down blow by blow as to who wrote what, or who designed what because so many people contributed to it.

quote: [SIZE=1] 3. If you feel we are getting it wrong, tell us a little more about what is going on. Shoot. Of course, we don't have all the details and have to speculate. But the reticence to talk about some of these issues (layoffs, game design changes, etc.) tells a story in itself. Anyway, we may be taking it TOO EASY on you, because of lack of knowledge also...

it's not a reticence to talk about issues. especially in term of the design revisions. The design got completed, and we started the tuning/editing phase. Until we had actual details pinned down in terms of our assessment of what 'felt right' in terms of gameplay, we thought it premature to say 'oh we're doing this...' when it might turn out, no we're not.

layoffs are company business. It is a tight time in the games industry. I get about 10-20 resumes from artists a week that have recently been laid off.

It obviously is not a preferred option, and obviously you would rather keep folks on staff, but the fact is, when you are a small company with a need to keep a minimal overhead, the amount of time you can keep someone on staff who is not directly billable at 100% to a project is minimal. I'm not using Alan as an example here, I'm saying that is an axiom of the realities of the workplace.

We've recently gotten to a point where we can talk about the game some due to solidification of elements, and time becoming more available. Hopefully, you'll find more information and discussion in the near future... (note the Apol interview as an example)

thanks for your interest.

	13-06-2002 04:40									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Interesting reply. Didn't think I'd get one. Got to give you credit for some balls.

1. I don't know how we got confused regarding Alan's title. Seems a little funny that we are just getting straightened out now. Or maybe I'm the only dunce who didn't understand that and it's just a GP thingie. If I was screwed up I'll be happy to admit it.

2. I'm interested in learning more about the "team approach". I would think that having a (good) head designer specifically designated would add sanity/clarity to the project. Doesn't mean that you can't have a "design team". But means that there will be some leadership. A leader can focus the team's efforts and can help interact with non-design functions. My experience (lots of "team projects" in the business world) has been that formless teams are very inefficient.

3. Could you make some comments on the project management aspects? Specifically, did you all try to do too much? Did you leave too many features in too long? From the outside, one might wonder if a strategy of "pruning more earlier" (being realisistically limited in approach) would have been more effecient--delivering both better bottom line results and a tighter game. My worry (from the outside) is that lots of time and money were wasted. This could damage both QS and IG financially. And could also result in a worse game for the fans. You may want to reply to my earlier thread (admittedly provacatively titled) on this subject.

	13-06-2002 20:23									#15
	Increase the size of your Attachments

roalan, some of the whiners actually whine because they are afraid there will be more micromanagement than initially expected (IFP cut). Note also, that I am not advocating IFPs. I am just afraid a system that used them to avoid micromanagement may be hard to macromanage without.

Rantz, GP has a point about leaders and team work. I can't think there was no leader. If there wasn't any, then it is little surprise that you had to delay the game and tune it longer. You can still do team work with a lead.

	14-06-2002 00:17									#16
	Micro Suffering from ads?

I hope not. I also hope that with the delay there will be fewer bugs less patches.

	14-06-2002 00:35									#17
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GP Great. Sounds like the publisher is getting screwed by the devleoper. Because of all the time wasted, they will get a worse game than expected. Probably QS and IG will both lose money on the deal. Just great Emrich...the "lose-lose" solution!

Interesting. This approach if the theory holds that IG is holding QS's feet to the fire is indeed a lose-lose proposition.

While QS is culpable for delas and setbacks isn't IG similarly equally culpable for rushing a project that if not properly done means lower sales units and potential damage to the series brand equity.

Seems to me, at first brush, IG may be succumbing to crying over spilt milk syndrome. Lesson of sunk costs. Incremental costs and rewards unfortunately are the ones that matter, leave emotion out of it. Unless one suspects that lessons learned, weren't.

Og

	14-06-2002 00:43									#18
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It was never stated that Alan was the lead designer. He certainly was the most public face of the design team, and so it's understandable how some people might assume that. Didn't think it needed to be stated until it recently became apparent that *many* people held that perception.

All of the areas on QS projects have a lead/head person. That person becomes the arbiter of whether something works or not, or holds to what the stated and unstated goals of the game are. That holds for programming, art and design.

In the case of design, no designer holds that position, it's a position held by the producer. So, there is someone who holds ultimate responsibility for it, it eliminates a lot of the issues that arise like the conflict of interest that can occur with two designers trying to promote their design idea, but one of them has the ability to veto the other due to their being lead.

Agreed on the need for leadership. Nature (and projects) abohr a vacuum, and things or folks will rush in given the opportunity.

Was the project too ambitious? In hindsight, yes. Could we have pruned earlier? Questionable. When the choices were made, we had reached alpha, and until then you never saw all of the components working together as a wholistic gameplay experience. All of the parts and models worked by themselves, but until you see the whole, the 'how does it feel'? part to say if it delivered the intended gameplay experience... that's a hard thing to judge, even for the most experienced amongst us (and we're no rookies with Bill Fisher being in this for 20 some years and myself and Cory having been in it for around 8-9 years)

so, hope that answers some questions...

	14-06-2002 01:40									#19
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Thanks for the answer, Rantz. It does make sense that the publisher have the final word in terms of design decision, since that can impact the game a lot and it is easier to manage than programming or art, which are respectively incomprehensible and too much a matter of personal preferences for an outsider to step into.
Since you're around, any bit of info about the ai? Has it already undergone tweaking of the sort "oops that's too powerful a strategy, let's counter it"?

	14-06-2002 03:37									#20
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Rantz Never said it was. Simply stating that Alan was not ever Lead Designer for MOO3. MOO was designed as a team design effort. Alan was one of the designers, and he's great at ideas, communication and words, so it became obvious very early that he would be the likely choice to 'get the word out' in terms of communicating with the fans and such. I couldn't even break in down blow by blow as to who wrote what, or who designed what because so many people contributed to it. it's not a reticence to talk about issues. especially in term of the design revisions. The design got completed, and we started the tuning/editing phase. Until we had actual details pinned down in terms of our assessment of what 'felt right' in terms of gameplay, we thought it premature to say 'oh we're doing this...' when it might turn out, no we're not. layoffs are company business. It is a tight time in the games industry. I get about 10-20 resumes from artists a week that have recently been laid off. It obviously is not a preferred option, and obviously you would rather keep folks on staff, but the fact is, when you are a small company with a need to keep a minimal overhead, the amount of time you can keep someone on staff who is not directly billable at 100% to a project is minimal. I'm not using Alan as an example here, I'm saying that is an axiom of the realities of the workplace. We've recently gotten to a point where we can talk about the game some due to solidification of elements, and time becoming more available. Hopefully, you'll find more information and discussion in the near future... (note the Apol interview as an example) thanks for your interest.

I have an uncle who tells me that this is a great time for the gaming industry. When people dont have jobs, they have lots more spare time and want to buy games. At least that was his justification. I told him I thought taht it would be the opposite - people wouldnt spend time on frivolous things when their wallets are tight. Of course he invests heavily in the gaming industry (EA mostly) and I dont.

	14-06-2002 04:11									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Interesting response, Rantz. thanks.

Some further questions.

1. Who was the producer? (If I read you right, you are saying that he was the de facto head designer. If so, I hope he spent time on that task and concentrated on it.)

2. Just to clarify, you are saying that the design was too ambitious but that features couldn't have been pruned earlier. If I read this right, the optimal approach would have been to upfront scale the design back. (Like pruning before you even start.) This seems fine. Basically it's what I've been saying.

3. Thanks for being upfront. Hope you guys can get as good a game done as possible, given the time and resources remaining. Good luck.

	14-06-2002 17:54									#22
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

[Jumping in]
Cory Nelson is the producer...I can't speak to the rest of it.
[/Jumping in]

	14-06-2002 22:32									#23
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Bill Fisher was the producer for about the first year of the project, then Cory Nelson came on as producer and has been on MOO ever since. Great job he does, too.

The design was too ambitious, but that couldn't be confirmed until the alpha build. We could have taken the safe route and not attempted to be as ambitious, but enthusiasm can be a dangerous thing

thanks we're busting ass to make it happen.

	15-06-2002 04:58									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Rantz Bill Fisher was the producer for about the first year of the project, then Cory Nelson came on as producer and has been on MOO ever since. Great job he does, too. The design was too ambitious, but that couldn't be confirmed until the alpha build. We could have taken the safe route and not attempted to be as ambitious, but enthusiasm can be a dangerous thing thanks we're busting ass to make it happen.

Any time frame on a release date? I only check in every couple of months and last time i looked it was rumored to be may

	15-06-2002 09:25									#25
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I believe the release date is set for Q4 2002.

	15-06-2002 13:00									#26
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Ho-hum I twiddle my thumb.

Like I said: I refuse to get my panties in a bunch over MoO3. If its spectacular, great! If not, oh well.

[And I didn't say panties]

	17-06-2002 06:32									#27
	Re: nut Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by roalan Because sale is the bottom line and to sell to a few grognards will put them out of business real quick.

Untrue. Have you ever played 'Combat Mission'? Brilliant WWII Company/Batallion Tactics Game for Grognards. Absolutely uncompromisingly realistic/detailed. Sold very well. I wish there were more companys like Battlefront.

	17-06-2002 09:09									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Combat Mission is a beautiful work, but has had limited numbers. I read an article about this. You wouldn't understand, in free enterprise, one needs to make the money to recoup an investment.

	17-06-2002 18:39									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Last I heard it was still Q3 -- I'm personally interpreting that to mean mid-September.

Until some sort of beta test starts, however, I'm not really putting a lot of stock in ANY date. IMHO, the game should have a good 3 months minimum beta testing, so I'm holding out for either 3+ months from the start of beta test.

The game could always come out sooner and be less than as bug-free and balanced as I'd like, of course.

Just my .02 AU worth...

	17-06-2002 21:11									#30
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Well thanks to everyone for bringing me up to date. The interview and cut list from Rantz also helps. It doesn't sound as bad as some people have pitched, although it is unfortunate that some of the more adventurous ideas did not work out.

I think the 5th "X" being the Experience was what has held my interest in the game from the start and I am sure many people agree with me. With that I thought I'd post this quote from Todd Howard when he was talking about the design of Morrowind. It seems to really apply here, and I'm sure it is relevant to a lot of companies design process.

"With something this large it's all of those things at once. You try to come up with a high level goal. What kind of experience do you want the user to have? It's one of the three rules I have in game design. One of them is: "Define the experience. Never ever define your game as a set of features." You get married to features and it could end up that that feature doesn't matter … and needs to be removed. Programmers say, "But you designed it, and it took me weeks to program it!" To which I reply with, "Sorry, it sucks, it's not serving our big goal." So we define the experience. With the Elder Scrolls games we want you to be able to freely play the role you want to play and feel the choices you make are as important and the choices you didn't make are interesting. Anything that doesn't serve that gets cut out of the game."