Anyone still really Enthused about MOO3?

Yolky · April 21, 2002, 18:45

With all what was happening I have lost some enthusiasim about MOO3 now. I am worried MOO3 will not be as we expected.

I hope I am wrong since the MOO series is one of my favorite series of all times.

Davor

Sarxis · April 21, 2002, 19:17

I have trepidation.

But, I await the game's arrival nevertheless.

asleepathewheel · April 21, 2002, 19:45

is it still slated for release in the third quarter? Early or late 3rd?

still looking forward to the game, though not as much. of course, i have bought so many bad games, I'm just hoping that it will be something I can play everyonce in a while, rather than play for a week and then stick it in the closet.

LordEd · April 22, 2002, 00:04

I for one remain extremely enthused. I am still playing MOO2 every now and then and Alpha Centauri all the time. MOO3 looks like it will fill that special place in my heart - the sci-fi turn based strategy!

ravagon · April 22, 2002, 00:14

As far as I'm concerned:-

(i) the ethos system has been gone for some time so I wasn't holding out for that.

(ii) The IFP's I was never keen on so they won't be missed

(iii) The recent "gagging" of some of those in the know worries me a little. Maybe IG is just worried about the "civ3 effect" affecting sales ... Maybe not ...

(iv) The combat AI's I've always been concerned over. How this is going to be affected by the removal of the IFP system I wouldn't know ...

(v) The release delay can only be a good thing, although its something they probably should have realised much sooner.

Overall I'm still pretty keen on it though and will pick it up unless the player reviews are all awful.

LordEd · April 22, 2002, 22:11

Unfortunately, borders were kicked out as well. They were 'too confusing' so Infogrames just got rid of them instead of working to fix the problem. Other than that, there isn't too much that I'll miss.

player1 · April 23, 2002, 05:47

Regardless of everything I think MOO3 will be great game.

It still has many things which could be revolutional.

Some are takes out.

But most of the game is still there.

child of Thor · April 23, 2002, 09:56

My money will stay firmly in my wallet untill after it's release, and i'll wait to see what is said here. After Civ3 i don't think i'll be trusting any 'review' sites/magazines. I hope it's going to be cool - the Moo series is one of my favourites

Garth Vader · April 23, 2002, 12:25

Not as enthused as a few months ago. I am NOT going to buy it right away like I did Civ3

I expect I will wait for a while to see the reaction.

Spaced Cowboy · April 23, 2002, 13:50

I am waiting patiently, but I'm afraid that it will be another disappointment (like reach for the stars).

I will wait and play a demo and read reviews (as well as looking here) before I buy it.

R:PM

tniem · April 23, 2002, 23:50

I see this game going down hill faster than CivIII. Trouble ahead, I am afraid....

Uncle Thade · April 25, 2002, 02:13

I however am hopeful. I really hope they knock one out of the park. After CIV III's lackluster inspiration, I sure hope MOO3 makes an impact... I have since traded in CIV III.

*fingers crossed*

I don't expect anythig but I hope it turns out to be a great game!

General Ludd · April 25, 2002, 10:31

I expect the worst but hope for the best.

Sarxis · April 25, 2002, 16:24

Yeah... trepidation.

madmario · April 26, 2002, 16:19

I don't see any reason to be excited at this point. The game seems like many 4x games, but with very snappy graphics. What makes it different?

I haven't given up all hope, but the game sounds very traditional at this point and not very different from other games I own or have played. I liked the idea of IFP's, of putting the eye of government on people, of ethos, the idea that I could win without having to focus super heavily on any one particular playstyle (combat, micromanagement, etc). I am very not thrilled about the council, the reduced set of victory conditions, and some other changes.

Now I am not being entirely fair. The space lanes, random science, automatic colonizing, these are interesting features. I haven't played the game yet either -- it may play really well even though it is somewhat traditional. It -may- even play very differently.

But before I was going to buy it hands down, and now I am going to carefully consider the purchase after reading the more critical reviews (there are a lot of fanboys out there so like civ 3, it might be hard to find a good reviewer). It still may be good, but I wil have to see.

I guess I am reserved at best. Maybe I've just been soured by other games and companies, but such is what it is.

-mario

Master Marcus · April 27, 2002, 17:35

I'm still enthusiast, but I'm awaiting more for an awesome MoO2 2.5+++ than the revolutionary TBS promised. The project was too ambitious from the start considering the state of the business right now.

Sarxis · April 28, 2002, 00:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Marcus
The project was too ambitious from the start considering the state of the business right now.

Its really a shame, but this seems to be the case for most games released these days.

Many developers either don't have the resources to make 'The Next Great Game', or the guts.

Ozymandous · April 29, 2002, 08:07

Well I for one cannot wait to have MOO3 come out so all the folks who love Moo2, but can't adapt to change, can bash it like the folks who loved Civ2 but couldn't adapt to Civ3 did.

Ah, for the record, this is a GAME, not the second (or first) coming of (insert favorite diety here). Get a grip folks!

Why is everyone so down and expecting the worst? None of you (or I) have even PLAYED a demo, much less the full game, so how can you say the game "sucks" (to paraphrase almost EVERYONE) without having every even SEEN it???

Games change as they are developed, yet a lot of people don't know to what degree they do change from design to shipment because NO OTHER company has EVER allowed the public to be a part of the process until now, with QS.

I don't blame QS (or ANY game company after seeing all the complaining and crap they have had to deal with) for saying they will never again have this process as exposed as it is now.

Would YOU like to have a group of faceless people only know a small aspect of what you did in your personal or working life and yet offer NOTHING BUT complaints on all the stuff you're doing wrong?? I know I wouldn't.

So... Go out and get a hobby, get OFF these boards (Apoly boards are amongst the MOST pessimistic and negative boards I have seen on the 'net, not the worst but in the top 5 easily), and just get excitied about the game WHEN IT SHIPS.

Relax, it will make you better people...

player1 · April 29, 2002, 08:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Ozymandous
Relax, it will make you better people...

Stormhound · April 29, 2002, 09:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Ozymandous
(Apoly boards are amongst the MOST pessimistic and negative boards I have seen on the 'net, not the worst but in the top 5 easily)

Sorry, but they have a long way to go to compare to the Delphi MOO3 board. The negativity you're seeing now relates to recent decisions made on the game, and again didn't compare to the firestorm over on Delphi. Prior to that, things here were much more positive (except for a few people who've now gone into "told you so" mode).

So far as going under intense scrutiny, you do have something of a point, though that part of things could've been better managed and is inevitable once any serious publicity starts. Even on Delphi, though, it wasn't a case of "nothing but" complaints...there was also a good bit of fan input and positive commentary.

TCO · April 29, 2002, 12:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Stormhound

(except for a few people who've now gone into "told you so" mode).

Justifiably so...

Straybow · April 30, 2002, 16:12

TTTT, I am still somewhat enthused about MOO3. The colony model is still innovative, even if all the other innovative features have been axed. AI is always the weakest link, as nobody can tell what an AI is going to do until it is "in the box." It is difficult to get enough playtesting without a (somewhat) open beta. Unless early reviews say the AI and especially combat sucks (and can be specific on its major failings) I will certainly buy it.

Urban Ranger · May 1, 2002, 05:24

I think I am adopting the loinburger's criterion on this game:

If it is a good game, I'll buy it. if it is not, who cares?

Ozymandous · May 1, 2002, 08:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Stormhound

Sorry, but they have a long way to go to compare to the Delphi MOO3 board. The negativity you're seeing now relates to recent decisions made on the game, and again didn't compare to the firestorm over on Delphi. Prior to that, things here were much more positive (except for a few people who've now gone into "told you so" mode).

So far as going under intense scrutiny, you do have something of a point, though that part of things could've been better managed and is inevitable once any serious publicity starts. Even on Delphi, though, it wasn't a case of "nothing but" complaints...there was also a good bit of fan input and positive commentary.

Yeah, been over at the Delphi MOO3 boards as well, that's why this place was in the top 5, the Delphi boards are ranked in the top 3, right behind Battle.net's boards and another I remember looking at breifly and then walking away from (can't remember the game or message board but it was *horrible*.

I agree, QS could have handled their boards better but essentially anytime you put anything up for public scrutiny, regardless of what it is, you'll always have *someone* from the peanut gallery *****ing about something, even if everyone is happy.

Heh, good input over at Delphi? You might find it, if you do nothing but patrol those unorganized and hard-to-navigate threads but I prefer almost any BBS that has the ultimate BB or something like here at Apoly and Civfanatics MUCH better.

EDIT: Oh, and I am looking forward to the game even so. As long as it's not a poor sequal as Moo2 was to Moo1 then I'll be happy. I wonder if you'll be able to land on any planet right off the bat in MOO3 like you could in 2, or if you have to discover the tech's to land and survive ala Moo1, IMHO, Moo1 was the better game for a variety of reasons.

strategy · May 8, 2002, 07:01

Having not followed development for a couple of months, I must say it is really disheartening reading all that's been going on the past few months.

But frankly, what do QS care? After all, how much the game sells will not depend on the fans or how good it is (no judgements on that), but rather how many people they can get to buy the game based on the strength of its name and the reviews/adverts.

tishco · May 8, 2002, 12:53

i am a bit, altho medival total war, gta 3 and republic attract my attention more, until we get more peaks at what moo3 is like now i wont be that enthusiastic

Swissy · May 9, 2002, 00:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Yolky
With all what was happening I have lost some enthusiasim about MOO3 now. I am worried MOO3 will not be as we expected.

I hope I am wrong since the MOO series is one of my favorite series of all times.

Davor

Don't worry, the recent developements with Civ3 lead me to believe that MOO3 will be all that we expected and more. But, we will probably have to buy some sort of expansion pact to get to this.

Infogrammes is quickly learning that all those games with large followings, ones they got the rights to when they bought up all those other game companies, have hugh profit potential. This potential is realized when you release the game incomplete but playable. They then release the missing game components as an expansion pack, thus they get paid twice for the game.

They did it with Civ3, and so slickly that the vast majority of Civ fans are so happy to get the expansion pact that they don't seem to care that they will end up paying twice what essentially is a complete Civ3 game.

TCO · May 9, 2002, 02:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Swissy

Don't worry, the recent developements with Civ3 lead me to believe that MOO3 will be all that we expected and more. But, we will probably have to buy some sort of expansion pact to get to this.

Infogrammes is quickly learning that all those games with large followings, ones they got the rights to when they bought up all those other game companies, have hugh profit potential. This potential is realized when you release the game incomplete but playable. They then release the missing game components as an expansion pack, thus they get paid twice for the game.

They did it with Civ3, and so slickly that the vast majority of Civ fans are so happy to get the expansion pact that they don't seem to care that they will end up paying twice what essentially is a complete Civ3 game.

I think you are right on. This is not such an evil thing either. The games are complex and cost a lot to make. Also they give large amounts of replayability. So they may be worth the $100 instead of $50.

wmtrexler · May 9, 2002, 12:17

I am still very enthusiastic about MOO3. I loved MOO2 and still play to this day.

As for paying $100. I do not think I have seen an expansion pack that equaled the cost of the original.
Most games sell for about $50 and expansions for around $30.

If you do not want to pay full price for an expansion then wait several months and watch the price drop.

strategy · May 10, 2002, 07:59

I don't know when I've last seen a game that I though was worth $80. It's a couple of years since I last bought a game within 6 months of its release (haven't bought Civ III yet, though I probably will after the expansion comes out, as I expect it to drop in price).

The only reason publishers are able to release half-finished games and get away with it, is because people are dumb enough to allow them to, IMHO.