 |
| |
|
|
Silellak
|
|
Hello all,
As a disclaimer, these are all just my opinions, and I am open to hearing other points of view regarding my ideas.
As a bit of background, I am a computer science graduate student at the University of Arizona, and a huge fan of both MOO1 and MOO2. This being said, I've followed MOO3 for awhile, even through all the recent bad reviews, convinced that anything Master of Orion based could not be that bad. It must just be that the reviewers weren't fans of that type of game. Today, after having read the entire manual and the ReadMe file, I fired up the game. It started out well enough. The intro was cool and set up the game well (although if you hadn't read the manual you'd probably be left scratching your head). All hyped up, ready to spend most of the day before class lost in a brand new Master of Orion universe, I started a new game.
Four hours later, I sat watching the uninstall program running, wondering what went wrong.
Now, I know many of you at this point are thinking "Well, he didn't give it a chance. The learning curve is usually 10 or 15 hours," In reply, I say "So what?". I do not pay 50 dollars for games in order to force myself to play them, hoping eventually that will magically become more fun. I have no problems playing a game for hours to get the hang of them, but it should at least be fun in the process. That's the point of the game, isn't it? Besides, I am firmly convinced that my two big problems with the game would not fade with time.
The first of these is the fact that the game just feels unprofessional. It seems to me like a bunch of people who did not know how to program or design software, but were fans of the first two games, got together and tried to throw as much together as possible. Having no experience with software design whatsoever, they apparently did not judge how much time adding each feature would take, and thus the game ended up as a mess. They've taken everything that was good and well designed about the interfaces of MOO1 and MOO2 and removed them. Instead, I now have to dig through 4 menus in order to access the build queue for a planet. In the past, it took 2. Why? Why did they make things more complicated? They broke two key rules: 1) if it ain't broke, don't fix it and more importantly 2) KISS (keep it simple, stupid). Playing a game should not give me a headache. Rather than follow the example of MOO2 (take the good parts of MOO1 and build upon them), they redid everything, but they redid it all badly. Take, for example, the diplomacy screen in MOO2 vs. MOO3. In MOO2, just from looking at the screen, you can see what treaties you have, what benefit you are receiving from them, how many spies you have in the empire, what those spies are doing, and the overall relationship between your empires. All of this on one screen. In MOO3, you have to click through various tabs and on each leader icon in order to see the same information. This is not an improvement, this is a de-evolution. Compare either MOO1 or MOO2's interface to MOO3's, and it's obvious which one is inferior. However, even all these flaws in presentation do not necessarrily mean the game is bad. While they make playing the game more of a chore, if it weren't for the second major problem, it could still be on par with MOO1 and MOO2. That problem is simple - the game has no soul.
I think the developers did not understand a lot of what made MOO1 and MOO2 great. It wasn't just the deep strategy and the amazing gameplay, it was the fact the game had a soul to it. It was the little things, like your researchers popping up and explaining what advances you've made. It was seeing your spies tell you what they stole. It was the fact that alien races told you why they were mad at you, not just that they were. It was watching your colony ship land on a planet and then naming it whatever you wanted to. It was controlling each of your ships in combat and doing everything you could to keep every little ship alive. For some reason, MOO3 felt the need to remove all that. Apparently what they meant by "Simulating an Empire" was "Drowning you in tons of information with no personal touches." Reading "Your researches have completed research on Biospheres" doesn't give the same feeling of accomplishment that someone coming up and telling you what they've created does. Reading what happened for a special event doesn't have the same impact or feel as being informed over GNN does. The game relies too much on its SitReps, and I think that it one of the game's key flaws. Maybe it's just my personal opinion, but it seems to me that without these things, it's not a Master of Orion game.
It's sad that this happened, really. Creating a sequel to MOO2 would not have been that hard. Take some of the good ideas from MOO3 (the plot, the harvesters, the increased role of the Orion senate), improve on some things of MOO2 (the micromanagement), add internet support, improve the graphics, and you have a grand game. Perhaps some people would have complained it was not a true sequel, but I think it would've been worth 50 dollars for those improvements.
For those of you that do enjoy MOO3, I envy you, I really do. I wish the game could have liven up to its predecessors, but in my mind, it failed. For those of you sticking with it, good luck, and I hope you find a trace of the soul of the series somewhere undernearth all the endless, bland, boring menus.
Last edited by Silellak on 28-02-2003 at 04:13
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Craterus
|
|
4 layers to get to the build queue's?
I don't suppose anyone can tell me why they can't put arrows there to scroll through the build queue's for each planet, can they?
Is there a summary page showing the build queues for each planet?
Can you access the build queue's from that single page as well as going through the 4 layer shenanagans?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ray K
|
|
Allen, TX
Nov 1999
time: 23:26
|
|
Similar story from the Civ2 die hards re Civ 3.
Not true. I was a Civ/Civ2 diehard that loved Civ3.
I don't care if the look & feel changes as long as it doesn't detract from the FUN.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
booje
|
|
Los Angeles (Los Feliz)
Dec 2002
time: 05:26
|
|
Hey Silellak I totally agree. I have many many years of playing both board and computer and I'm a software professional with a technical degree as well.
I loved Master of Magic, MOO1, MOO2 (not as well as MOO1 but pretty darn close) and I have to agree with the points you make about MOO3.
Now I've been getting flamed about "I need to do this" or "I need to do that" to make the MOO3 experience better. But, notwithstanding a learning curve, why should I adapt and bend over backwards (or forwards in this case) to learn to enjoy the game when I should just be having fun automatically.
I'm certainly not saying it's easy these days what with the production values of Medieval Total War or the true honest depth of Europa Universalis 2. I'm sure everyone involved had the very best of intentions but it just seems like they shot for moon and really missed.
So what was the VERY FIRST thing I did when I loaded MOO3 you may ask? I looked at the credits. Yes the credits, to pay a small homage to everyone involved. Great graphics and a great layout (though lifted entirely from Homeworld). Hey they even thanked MOO fans everywhere nearly at the top. But where Homeworld had a sweet soundtrack (I copied it just to listen to the track it was so good), MOO3 has a bland soundtrack and the credits simply end instead of a nice loopback.
Do I really care about music? A nice touch but if executed poorly it becomes a distraction. The point is that the credits seem to be a mirror of the whole game. Copied well, but not original and lacking soul.
What I care about is gameplay more than anything else
and Silellak is right when he says this game has no soul.
Where's the love?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Silellak
|
|
"I think everyones biggest problem is they don't want to go through the learning curve, they want it as easy as MOO2 was, and what's the point in that?"
It's not just the fact that there is a learning curve, it's the fact that:
1) it's ridiculously steep - more so than it should be, because of the horrible design flaws
2) Learning the game is not FUN. I'd have no trouble fighting the learning curve as long as I was enjoying myself doing it. I'm not. It's like Me vs. the Interfance instead of Me vs. Other Races
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kalbear
|
|
The problem is that the interface obfuscates the fun. It's useful when you know what you're doing, and it's downright laughable how bad MoO2's is compared sometimes (aside from that damn build queue...grrr) but man oh man, does it fight you.
To think that it got dumbed down to this...gah.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kalbear
|
|
The design doc for MoO3 declared it was to be an A+ title to sell 500K copies or more. That's a mainstream game if there ever was one.
Regardless of whether that was their intent, it sure as hell wasn't what they got. I can't imagine any casual gamers even remotely liking it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Killazer
|
|
yer just not getting the point, programming games is all about keeping things simple even though they may be representing things that are complicated at a lower level, yet fun and engaging. The programmers just got carried away with the code and their ideas thats all it seems like. They missed some of the bigger picture and the fact that its just a game. I still like the game tho.
I personally like and enjoy the game, but I can easily understand where many people are coming from who simply got turned off by it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
slitherin
|
|
They should have taken their cues from Space Empires - editable files, all access menu, production, orders, research, foreign relations, etc right on the top of the main screen! Does anyone at Quicksilver have real software gaming expertise? These countless tabs and menus are maddening!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
slitherin
|
|
BTW,
Hopefully, Galciv will kick MOO3's arse!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kalbear
|
|
Well, so far for me, it's quite fun. Perhaps I had low expectations, or perhaps because I knew a lot about the game I knew how to deal with what I needed and what I didn't.
I'll not say that there aren't problems - there are problems a bushelload full. But they're mostly solvable problems. The AI does make good use of defensive structures that require massive force to crack, normally. Now, all they need do is make a lot of offensive ships and bring them en force. Fix diplomacy to be more informative and more logical. Or at least more understandable. Make build queues easier to access. Make the viceroy not emphasize troops so much. Change a few things here and there.
It's got a lot of potential, but more than that, it's a lot of fun as it stands. At least for me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Corentor
|
|
MOO3 did not go wrong.
The ideas of what the game was going to be were executed fairly well.
Just because it is not to *your* tastes does not mean the game sucks.
Just as the fanboys were wrong in trying to question the negative review's point of view, it is wrong to say that the game bad or that the developers went astray simply because you do not agree with the vision of the developers on what MOO3 should be.
The game seems to be 99% bug free and with the exception of bad documentation, there is little fault you can find within the game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
slitherin
|
|
You gotta be kidding me. The cluttered menu and the constant lcikcing to get to one view to another and back and forth are "no fault". Yes, the game is stable, but the interface and menus are cumbersome and very archaic.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Magus Flynn
|
|
I'm into my 6th hour of gameplay....and while there are still a few questions about how certain things work together, for the most part I'm done the learning curve and am into the strategy curve now!
You see, it all depends on how you come to the game. I taught my wife to play Mo02 and it took a looooonnnngggg time for her to catch on to how the game really worked. She was watching over my shoulder this evening as I played and you know what she said? "That makes a lot more sense than the other Orion game {referring to the star lanes, senate, and tech tree in particular}."
I'm not saying that QS couldn't have done better with Mo03. I agree that there are things I still like better about Mo02. But is Mo03 an improvement on Mo02? YES! Is Mo03 a true sequel to the others? YES!
For those of you who wished you'd get a picture of the tech you built or stole, what for - that's just eye candy that doesn't add to the playability. INstead of a picture, I suggest that a military advisor/viceroy advise you how new discoveries fit into your fleet planning.
In the end, however, whether you like Mo03 or not is up to you. This is the first time I've been part of a game forum and I'm not sure I ever will again. You'd think by the griping that people's lives are at stake or something.
________________
Who died and made you the Guardian?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
canamrock
|
 |
California
Nov 2001
time: 21:26
|
|
I have the game, and I like it. At first, playing as the Psilon, I was getting my butt kicked down on easy, and I was falling way behind. Now, after about 12 hours gametime, I am getting used to the controls, and am having a blast. I like the menu system, mainly because the planets don't move around any more. lol Also, I think the new system feels more governmenty than MOO2 did.
I loved MOO2, and was pulling my friends into it. I wasn't a fan of tactical combat in MOO2, and I appreciate the Star Trek TBS-like system for combat.
I got mindblasted when I realized the main galactic mapwas full 3D. It's fun to spin it around! 
So far, I think that MOO3 could be a really good game, but I guess you just have to see past the controls. If you are an Axis & Allies or Diplomacy fan, you know what I mean. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Corentor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by slitherin
You gotta be kidding me. The cluttered menu and the constant lcikcing to get to one view to another and back and forth are "no fault". Yes, the game is stable, but the interface and menus are cumbersome and very archaic. |
I happen to like the UI.....I don't find it cumbersome at all.
Everything you need is 2 or 3 screens away at most. Which is good when there is so much information to present.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-02-2003 04:07
ACK!
I have one problem tho... wtf is wrong with the diplomacy ?? lol I have species calling me up tellin me what a backstabbing maniac I am and they will NEVER forgive me... like I killed all their newborn children or something lol but I was in a non-aggression treaty and piles of trade treaties with them for dozen turns. Also, I get a non-aggression and declaration of war offer in the same turn from the same civ O.o. Wars just seem to end magically and then they are re-declared... wierd stuff. the AI needs to tell u WHY they are upset... its just too vague right now and doesnt make sense most of the time.
|