Why dont they...

Destroyer · September 11, 2002, 18:04

Im confused as to why QS have totally redesigned the game.

The secret of Civ's success is they have kept the same model, and just expanded on it each time.

Most people agree MOO2 was pretty solid throughout. So how hard can it be to expand on each area?

A total redesign could alienate the core fans by loosing everything that made moo2 great.

If Moo3 fail, what chance is there of ever getting a decent spaced based 4x game ever again?

moomin · September 11, 2002, 18:48

GalCiv.

Destroyer · September 11, 2002, 19:27

A rather expansive response. Ive checked their website, and, well - There does not seem to be any praise for their game on the newsgroup site - only technical problems.

Do you have more objective info on this game. And it looks as if it is unfinished. When is the final version due?

SeanV · September 11, 2002, 22:19

Destroyer:

Maybe I am confused but it does not seem, to me anyway, that QS has completely redesigned the game anymore than Info. completely redesigned CivIII.

The tech model they have now is like the original MOO one.

Diplomacy is the same... except for the addition of the tone of voice (again a small change.)

The number of ship sizes have been increased by 8 (a good thing wouldn't you say?)

Starbases and ground defense have been made completely user designed (Okay that's a relatively major change, I'll give you that.)

Starship systems can now be placed at a specific depth inside the ship and get an armour bonus (Just an improvement of Moo and Moo2 ship design.)

Only space and ground combat have change to any really significant degree. Space combat has been speeded up, due to the number of ships each side can field and ground combat has been slowed down.

So really there are only two *large* changes and neither one is a really huge change.

Now, whether or not the change in S&D combat will have a real effect on the Mooness of the game I cannot say.

Agree or Disagree?

moomin · September 12, 2002, 03:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Destroyer
Do you have more objective info on this game. And it looks as if it is unfinished. When is the final version due?

The final version is due Q3 or Q4 next year. The original version of GalCiv is the reason I still have an OS/2 partition around - it spanks every 4x space game, including Moo, so hard it ain't even funny.

Still these are hopes. RTFS proved to be stillborn. PaxImp2 thought real-time was a good idea, S:S went bust and Moo3 looks dubious at this point. GalCiv might join the ranks of sorely lacking follow-ups. But given their development process - so much more responsive and so much less flash than QS's - I have high hopes.

wervdon · September 12, 2002, 11:35

Actually, Id say MOO2 was pretty close to a re-design on MOO1 and Id rate them both as the best 4x space games ever, though I slightly prefer MOO2

Bleyn · September 12, 2002, 11:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Destroyer
Im confused as to why QS have totally redesigned the game.

The secret of Civ's success is they have kept the same model, and just expanded on it each time.

Most people agree MOO2 was pretty solid throughout. So how hard can it be to expand on each area?

A total redesign could alienate the core fans by loosing everything that made moo2 great.

If Moo3 fail, what chance is there of ever getting a decent spaced based 4x game ever again?

Well lets see...

1. Who says that just because the previous title was good, you have to stick with the same formula for the new one? Companies have managed to take properties, completely change the genre and come up with a better game than before.

Dune & Dune 2 are an example of this. Dune was a decent RPG for its time. Not outstanding, but I would say it was pretty solid. Dune 2 was a smash hit that helped propel the RTS genre into massive popularity.

2. Who says sticking with the formula is a guarentee of success? Dune 2 was great for its time. From everything I've heard Dune 2000 and Emperor turned into little more than graphical updates on Dune 2 by sticking to the formula.

3. Why shouldn't QS consider heavily changing the formula with Moo3? They have nothing invested in the old formula. They aren't Simtex or Microprose. Heck, Simtex and Microprose are both gone, not exactly good omens for sticking to the formula.

If all they were going to do is update things a little, why bother? I would think that would be more likely to help sound a death-knell for 4x gaming than an attempt to bring something new and different in. And who says 4x games aren't on their way out anyway? I hope it isn't the case, I like my 4x games, but that doesn't mean they'll always be around.

Unfortunantly, while QS may have had grandeous plans for their version of Moo, they have had to scale them back quite a bit, and while I expect Moo3 will be somewhat different, and really hope its better than 1 or 2, I no longer expect something completely new.

vmxa1 · September 12, 2002, 11:48

Bleyn, I do not disagree in the main, I would offer one restraint. If they want to update a little for MoM/Moo/Moo2 and a few others, I would not complain. If they can do much more, I would be very happy. Even just taking Moo and make it a Windows game with new sound would be enough for me to buy it.

Hagbart · September 15, 2002, 17:23

Civ3 is not "completely redesigned" in any way..

wervdon · September 16, 2002, 01:34

Quote:

Civ3 is not "completely redesigned" in any way..

That depends on what your definitions of redesigned is. They redid some pretty fundamental stuff (though I agree they didnt change the core gameplay) such as support not coming from cities and costing gold not shields, no old style zoc's that you can't pass through, and the entire bombardment system :P They did a good job though, cause I can't make myself play more than 3 minutes of civ2 now :P

EDIT: Sorry, what my point was is that if Moo3 is a "complete redesign" as this thread's initial premise was, then civ3 is too

system370 · September 23, 2002, 20:54

It's been six years since Moo2 was Released - kind of a long time between releases.

If Moo3 was Developed 2 or 3 years after Moo2 we would have had More of an Eteneded/Expanded Moo2, but now game design and game programming have moved on considerably. IMO Moo3 is looking more like 2 generations removed from Moo2. Viz: Moo3 = Moo4, they skipped one release.

Personally I would be happy with a Moo2 "Gold" edition with a few extra Bits and Bobs, a balanced tech-tree as well as all the Moo2 Bugs Finnally fixed.

vmxa1 · September 23, 2002, 21:42

system370, I like your idea. If 11/26/2002 makes it, I guess I know what I will doing turkey day.