I would not get MoO3 if I were you

PrinceBimz · March 8, 2003, 12:18

I have never seen a game get so many negative comments and very bad reviews as MoO3 has gotten. I would wait and get Galactic Civilizations. Go to www.galciv.com and you will see why I say wait and get it instead.

Proteus_MST · March 8, 2003, 12:27

Yes, there are some bad comments.

But there are also a lot of people who enjoy playing MOO3 (some of them already addicted to the game

), just look around at his Board.

I´d get this game if I were you

Kc7mxo · March 8, 2003, 13:28

i'll be purchasing the game in a couple months when the patches have been released and plenty of developer faqs and such have been posted.

i played the game for a while, but it just didn't interest me for basically the things everyone has said.

incomplete encyclopedia, documentation.
mixed up diplomacy
bugs / oddness

moomin · March 8, 2003, 16:14

I bought the game and wish I hadn't. Oh well, at least I prevented several other people from doing the same mistake.

SINISTER1974 · March 8, 2003, 16:23

It doesnt sound like you have bought and played this game yet. How can you judge a game buy impatience and speculation. People play the game for 5 hrs and tell everyone that it sucks. 40% is probably due to bugs, weak AI-but other 60% is probably due to people that dont understand it, didnt read manual, and have no strategic gaming. I have bought this game--im still learning. My first game i didnt think i would like it. But i kept from forums till i got a better hang of the game. After a few more games, i have learned more. I bought this game basicaly for multiplayer and my first game was fun. Except for 3 of the 5 players that quit mid game. Oh well was still a blast. This game has room for improvement--and you dont know if galactic civs will be better or worse. I say if you dont like it--dont buy and play it--if you want to wait for galactic civ--wait, then fill the forums with more childish remarks and negative remarks and wait for the next game in line. game has been out about a week now- you cant judge a game after a week. Every game on the market requires atleast 1 patch of not 10 to fix it up. Give moo3 a chance and see how it goes.

S1974

SINISTER1974 · March 8, 2003, 16:33

But gal civs does look real good. But i hear its only single player and not mp

wilebill · March 8, 2003, 16:45

MOO3 has gotten bad reviews at sites like amazon and ebgames, but it has gotten good reviews as well.

I can agree with many of the criticisms of MOO3 and I think that the use of the Master of Orion series name is inappropriate, having now sampled MOO2 for myself. They should have called this game Master of Capricorn!

Fact is, though, I myself find MOO3 to be fascinating and I continue to play and find it absorbing. So do many others. You have a right to your own opinion of the game, certainly, and I will go so far as to say that your opinion is likely to be that of the majority when all is said and done. But by the same token, those of us who like the game have a right to our view as well.

I am serious about the name, though. I think they ought to have called it Master of Capricorn

asleepathewheel · March 8, 2003, 17:45

I'm glad that I don't pay attention to these "reviews" I would have not enjoyed the last week playing MoO3, probably more HOI (another dog out of the gate) and Civ3 PTW ('nuff said)

reviews are good, to a certain extent, but I know what I look for in a game, moreso than any reviewer can tell me.

ChaotikVisions · March 8, 2003, 17:47

Civ3 is still getting whiners, any sequel that isn't a rehash ends up getting it. And damn people, quit trolling GalCiv. We know about the game, and most of us are probably going to buy it. So fight the urge to post in the MoO3 forums telling us. Want to say something good/just about it? Thats why Apolyton has GalCiv forums.

PDifolco · March 8, 2003, 18:12

I really expect GalCiv to be a blast, it has all indicators to Green (listening devs, wondrous support, it'll even be FULLY DOWNLOADABLE so I won't have to wait for the CD to swim the ocean !)...
After I'll play iyt for some time I'd get Moo3 for 10 bucks

...

Crostoneman · March 8, 2003, 19:56

Sure, Galatic Civilization looks good, but expect this guy to be laughing like a lunatic if reviewers bombs it because it plays too much like a MoO game.

vmxa1 · March 8, 2003, 20:27

Withthe dirge of 4x dpace games in the last few years, I buy all of them and hope for the best. The only one in the last 2 years that really got me was Reach for the Stars remake (I never did get into it).
As someone said most here are going to be getting GalCiv and it is well understood, that is why they stuck the flyer in the box of Moo3 (along with the fact teh IG push both).

asleepathewheel · March 8, 2003, 20:31

re: gal civ

You can only play as humans right?

That will certainly limit the replayability factor for me, I would imagine.

I haven't read enough about it to care much one way or another.

No mp?

Hmm, I heard it said numerous times on the civ3 forum, "what game has been released without MP" MP is standard these days" haha

Ray K · March 8, 2003, 21:10

Quote:

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
re: gal civ

You can only play as humans right?

That will certainly limit the replayability factor for me, I would imagine.

I would agree, except that GalCiv will apparently allow you to customize your startup abilities. This should give you the same variability for replay that you would get by playing different races in MOO1 & MOO2.

Also, there is the RPG factor where the game plays differently depending on whether you play as good, neutral or evil.

Quote:

I haven't read enough about it to care much one way or another.

Go to www.galciv.com or wait for the player reviews after 3/25.

Quote:

No mp?

Hmm, I heard it said numerous times on the civ3 forum, "what game has been released without MP" MP is standard these days" haha

Actually, all of the old-time strategy gamers know exactly *why* MP is a requirement for games nowadays. It's because the AI never gives any challenge and so you need to play against humans.

If the AI is good enough, then there's much less reason for MP. Supposedly... the AI in GalCiv is very good.

As usual, we've all heard that before so I wouldn't blame you for waiting on player reviews.

asleepathewheel · March 8, 2003, 21:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Ray K
I would agree, except that GalCiv will apparently allow you to customize your startup abilities. This should give you the same variability for replay that you would get by playing different races in MOO1 & MOO2.

Also, there is the RPG factor where the game plays differently depending on whether you play as good, neutral or evil.

In between my last post and yours, I raid the devs post on the other forum about the issue. sounding extremely cool, the customization of the civ, the way to play. I had never thought about it in his terms, that in such a customizable game, really you are just asking to change the sprites, though (shallowly) enough I would still like to. I guess I am thinking still thinking in terms of MoO2-3 where the picks are limited and you change certain characteristics, but its nearly the same civ, or Civ3 or Smax where the races are quite different.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ray K
Actually, all of the old-time strategy gamers know exactly *why* MP is a requirement for games nowadays. It's because the AI never gives any challenge and so you need to play against humans.

If the AI is good enough, then there's much less reason for MP. Supposedly... the AI in GalCiv is very good.

As usual, we've all heard that before so I wouldn't blame you for waiting on player reviews.

Yeah, the aI sounds promising, but...unfortunately I will probably buy the day its out, so won't wait around, i have little self control in such matters.

CharlesBHoff · March 10, 2003, 07:26

I read review with than gain of salt unless they say when I went to uninstall the game it took half of my windows system files also and I have to do than full install of windows that make find out it they correct that problen with a patch.

Daz · March 10, 2003, 08:07

Ack!

Why are you discussing something not to be discussed. Especially the way you do it (some of you)!

I dont like it so all you people dont buy it, get GalCiv. If you dont like something, say why and we can discuss. There must be some poll out there if you just want to cast a vote. Especially those folks you didnt ever play the game!

PS. I dont like it either but keep playing. I guess I belive I'll get to see the light.....

moomin · March 10, 2003, 12:27

Because we can discuss whatever we feel like discussing within the site rules. And last I checked, dissing Moo3 for what it is - a shameless attempt to cash in on the reputation of what was once a classic game series - is entirely allowed.

Furthermore, for every poster here there's a dozen lurkers who mostly just want to know if the game is worth buying, and I think it might be doing them a service telling them that all buyers aren't - to understate the issue a wee bit - incredibly amazed by the quality of this... offering.

Anybody who enjoys Moo3 the way it is - more power to you. But it seems more than a bit disingenuous to try to cover up the fact that many of us are incredibly disappointed with the game. I'm disgusted with what they have the nerve to call Moo3, myself.

As for those who claim we should spend more time with it; geez, guys, I gave it a weekend already, and hated it more after I figured out the basic game mechanics - before that, I could find some solace in the thought that it'd be better once I got it. But for me, and for so many others, Moo3 just isn't fun, and I refuse to pour even more time and effort into what promises to be another never-finished bugfest. If that sort of thing is your cuppa, fine, but show the humility not to try to foist it on everyone.

Oh well. Moo2 is waiting for another session.

ChaotikVisions · March 10, 2003, 12:38

*lurker sense tingling*... Anyway, you're beating a dead horse, and then doing some unmentionable things to the corpse. How many times is enough for you if you don't like? Do you have a calender up somewhere marking days off towards some pre-determined goal? Are you carefully timing the time spent reading/writing posts to see when you've spent as much time as it took you to work up the cash to buy the game, what? I'm all for you having your own opinon, but theres a big difference between tellling a few people and spraypainting it on every wall you walk past.

The Templar · March 10, 2003, 13:37

If you are a student or poor, I would not buy MoO3 right now. The AI is crippled, diplomacy does not work, the interface fails to give sufficient feedback (my theory is that the lack of feedback creates the learning curve).

I would wait for the first patch (if QS is still in business tomorrow that is ...), and if they fix diplomacy and the AI then I would give the game a decent 7 out of 10 rating and recommend it. But if funds are a problem, I would wait.

If $50 doesn't affect you one way or the other, go ahead and get it. The game is moderately fun, and does have potential. At the very least, it will give you something to occupy your time until GalCiv. At the most, QS will fix some of the problems and MoO3 will live up to its potential (and there is alot of potential here). Problem is, given that QS has had overruns worse than my Commonwealth (no empires here

), I have no faith in them. I mean really, three years in development and they say they could have used two more? Oh wait, I see it now, two more years and the patch will get here and we'll have the perfect game.

MitchDev · March 10, 2003, 17:34

Quote:

Originally posted by SINISTER1974
But gal civs does look real good. But i hear its only single player and not mp

And that is a VERY GOOD THING.

No excuse to skimp on the AI that way...