Worst fears coming true: Quarter to Three Review - Page 6

Spectrex · February 23, 2003, 18:27

What Tom Chick says in this area is incredible since it goes against what's been said by all the beta testers, QS/IG and every other (balanced!) reviewer. If you want a proper review of the game you'll probably be much happier with the one at TOS. Even though TOS is a fansite it's by no means a fanboy review and criticizes many of the same issues that Tom Chick mentions (documentation, interface, battle graphics, etc.).

Anyway the reasons for the overall negative attitude of the Qt3 review have been discussed to exhaustion, just look back in this thread.

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 18:28

It's amazingly addictive. It's like Europa Universalis, especially in one way:

The more you play, the more you understand various components of the game. The more you understand what is going on, the more addictive it gets.

Then, when you finally play against other devious human players... oh, the treachery! oh, the cunning! It becomes extra-special.

This game, despite the rudimentary multiplayer interface, sings in multi. This is getting to be one of the best online strategy games I've ever played - on par with the Heroes of Might & Magic series (imho).

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 18:31

Uh huh, Spectrex. Did Orion Sector say it sucked? Let me know.

Fair and balanced? Tell me, how is MY review not "fair and balanced"? (rolling eyes)

Tom Chick is doing another "Deus Ex" review on this one. Trust me. The more you play, the more addictive it gets. When you understand HOW the game plays, it becomes even more addictive.

If you think the game plays itself, you either haven't played it, or you haven't played it for more than a session or two.

Actually, I'm willing to bet Tom set out not liking the game before it was released. I'm betting I could find something in a newsgroup proving it.

Found one thread with Tom Chick and Derek Smart and some guys blathering about "overpromising and underselling".

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 18:39

By the way, " Worst fears coming true: Quarter to Three Review"... sounds like self-fulfilling prophecy.

Some people WANT it to fail - and in their heads, they color their view with turd-colored glasses. Others have low expectations and masochistically desire it to be bad.

Reminds me of Civ III - everyone who predicted it would suck proclaimed Civ III sucked - and often based on other people's opinion or by harping on the negative stuff they heard from some people and using it as gospel.

Fact is, *I* am loving MOO3. Nothing anybody says will make me believe otherwise. I formulated my own opinion WHEN I PLAYED IT.

If someone believes that the computer plays for you... that's something they'll MAKE happen. trust me, try that tactic during multiplayer and watch yourself get pasted by not only the other players, but the computer, too.

lockstep · February 23, 2003, 18:42

Quote:

Originally posted by vee4473
i will wait to see if your theory is true lockstep. (that moo3's take on the potential endgame micro hell is successful)

To be honest, it's not so much a theory as a lot of wishful thinking. But what makes me somewhat confident is that the Orion Sector reviewers, while criticizing Moo3's combat graphics, lack of good documentation etc., clearly stated that Quicksilver really 'pulled off' a competent viceroy AI.

We shall see in a few days ...

Sarxis · February 23, 2003, 18:42

Very rare are those games that build in momentum like that Jonah. Yeah, AC and EU were like that, and I love them for it.

Comrade Tribune · February 23, 2003, 19:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Craig P.
The only simplification I see is that everything is in one list, instead of separate lists for weapons and specials.

My impression was that they dumped down the ship design part quite a bit. I wouldn´t be surprised if they removed most of the more 'extreme' specials, similar to removing the 'extreme' racepicks.

I may be wrong, but I predict that ships of the same general category will now be very similar to each other, ship design mostly being a no-brainer; at least this is what the reviewer hinted at...

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 19:15

Comrade = broken record. He obviously has the agenda (not me.)

Let me repeat - I love playing this game. Period. Nothing you can do or say will prevent ME from doing that.

Hey, I hated a lot of the original Civ (such as the superpowered spy/diplomats and the way allies could halt production by parking their troops and blockading your cities -- and the way you could get impossibly huge cities by deking it constantly). Didn't mean I didn't love it, too.

However, the problems in MOO3 are nonproblems the more you play. And frankly, they seemed like design choices to me, not problems.

Comrade Tribune · February 23, 2003, 19:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Spectrex
In other words, he didn't bother to learn how to play the game and couldn't see past the graphics (not up to Homeworld standards, I guess) and poor documentation (this is less excusable...).

If the documentation is so poor that you have to learn the interface by trial and error (which some people, me included, *hate* to do), then you can´t blame Tom for thinking there is no way to turn off the Ai, even should it come to pass that he was in error...

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 19:17

Funny, I had no problem with the documentation. Please, "Comrade", stop saying the same crap like a broken record. MarkG will end this thread soon anyway.

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 19:22

By the way, as to "outdated manual", maybe neither YOU nor Tom Chick looked at the readme.txt.

It gives a TON of information and the "numbers" that people might want. It even tells that you CAN destroy a planet with a Stellar Converter...

Comrade Tribune · February 23, 2003, 19:24

Quote:

Originally posted by JonahFalcon
Funny, I had no problem with the documentation. Please, "Comrade", stop saying the same crap like a broken record.

It´s more you who sound like a broken record, with all the 'nothing can stop me from telling you all how wonderful blah blah blah'.

Why does the '60 minutes' review sound so much more factual and convincing?

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 19:27

Uh huh...

Comrade Tribune: MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because MOO3 sucks because I read something by Tom Chick, and choose to ignore everyone else's review, and despite not playing the full version myself.

Comrade Tribune · February 23, 2003, 19:36

Markus The Mighty · February 23, 2003, 19:44

YEEHA!

Let the flame wars begin!!!

*sigh*

Infidel · February 23, 2003, 20:16

I think Jonah wins by default because, well, he's got the game, and enjoying the hell out of it, apparently.

-infidel

Comrade Tribune · February 23, 2003, 20:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Infidel
I think Jonah wins by default because, well, he's got the game, and enjoying the hell out of it, apparently.

Tom Chick has the game, too, and he also seems to think it´s a 'hell' of a game.

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 20:26

Go back to your Off Topic rantings.

If you don't like the game - amazing, since you never played it

- then please don't post here anymore.

TheMaestro · February 23, 2003, 20:29

Oh boy, a flame war. LoL

JonahFalcon · February 23, 2003, 20:30

It takes two to tango. I'm not responding nor replying any more. This thread has hit a dead end.

Comrade Tribune · February 23, 2003, 20:44

Quote:

Originally posted by JonahFalcon
I'm not responding nor replying any more.

Master Marcus · February 23, 2003, 21:22

Quote:

Originally posted by JonahFalcon
Funny, I had no problem with the documentation. Please, "Comrade", stop saying the same crap like a broken record. MarkG will end this thread soon anyway.

yeah, reminds me the bashing days before Civ III's release. A few hardcore fans have some difficulty to adapt to something new and complexified, or too different from golden classics. With so much bashing on actual TBS projects, they're free to create their own game then, if they have the coding skills, and we'll see if they can punch a better game....

I don't want MoO 1.5, or 2.5 ( GalCiv may be more like these classics, with its more vivid science-fantasy graphics, but much less gameplay options it seems...). So far on what's being said, I know I'll like MoO3 if it's well balanced.

JonahFalcon: when you say the AI never countermand your queue's orders, never, well do you play with AI planetary Econ: on and AI zoning on???( I know, I've just asked something similar in another thread but I've just reading you talking it out here).

Draginol · February 23, 2003, 22:39

I don't think anyone will be complaining that GalCiv lacks depth. It has a tremendous number of viable strategies.

Master Marcus · February 23, 2003, 22:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Draginol
I don't think anyone will be complaining that GalCiv lacks depth. It has a tremendous number of viable strategies.

No doubts about that, sorry for the misunderstanding. I never meant to diminish the depth of the GC project next to MoO3, I just wanted to make it more appealing for the eyes - and perhaps the gameplay as well - to another base fanboys not attracted to the apparent boring fonts, data and multiple arid windows displayed in MoO3. Both games should attract a large fan following, I'm sure.

Bernie Rubber · February 24, 2003, 02:28

Comrade, lets see now... what do we have. Feel free to correct me on this.

Johna's side.

He has the game, and has played it.

Your side.

Your impressions based on one review, of which I've spent 40 minutes pointing out glaring ommisions and biases on such, almost all of which have gone unchallenged.

Personally, I think Johna has the advantage.. but feel free to correct me..

rhofman · February 24, 2003, 03:18

Bernie, please let this thread die.

The Tom Chick defenders will not willingly concede. You can spend between now and the eventual MOO3 release pointing out flaws with Mr. Chick's review. Let them play IG2 for a couple more years. It's what they deserve.

darcy · February 24, 2003, 03:25

Another reviewer shared his opinion at IGmoo, this time on the quality of the AI:

Quote:

As for examples of the diplomacy oddities:

--Turn 5 of a game the Nommo declare war on me (playing as Imsaeis, who I customized to be as good at diplomacy, and as likeable as possible). My CB rating with the Nommo was A-OK. Yet war was declared on turn 5. Still, no big deal, the Nommo are a warring race so I was ok with that.

Turn 7, they end the war. So, what was the point of starting the war in the first place? This happened throughout the game. It got to the point that when I read the Sitrep and saw "The Nommo has declared war on us!" I said to myself, "Yeah yeah whatever." In a few turns and they'll be asking to form an economic treaty--while warring with us. This is just one example but in the games that I played, this was extremely common, regardless of the races or the CB rating.

I'm fine with a race (any race) deciding to go to war. Even if I'm not fully aware as to why that is (and you rarely are told why war has been declared) but races don’t always need a reason. What's annoying is this on again off again stuff. Are we at war or not? What can you possibly do by declaring war for 2 turns? And this goes on the entire game.

Anyway there are other odd things about the AI and how it reacts to the goings on of a game. In one instance, and I mentioned this in the review, I was playing as the Cynoid. I had (if I recall) the 5th best military. The Meklar was ruling over everyone. They had a sweet military and a lot of planets. They (the Meklar) had left a planet undefended--and I wanted that planet. Without a declaration of war I decided to send in the Marines. After a skirmish with militia, I took control of the colony.

The next turn the Meklar sends me a message asking to exchange items or form a research alliance The CB rating stayed the same. I wanted to ask the ambassador, "Uh..you do realize I just killed a bunch of robots on LV-426, right?" Over the course of the next 10-15 turns, two more planets were taken. Still, the Meklar loved me. "Hey let's form a Trade Alliance." It just didn't make any sense. These were the most peace-loving Meklar this side of San Francisco. I looked for reasons as to why they didn't just squish me. I didn't have an alliance with anyone that could threaten them. I wasn't a Senate member, so I had no impact on voting or legislation. I was the ruler of free wheeling Cyborgs that had free reign to unplug the Meklar at will. It was strange.

CharlesBHoff · February 24, 2003, 06:29

Game companies do want someone who has than history of given unbias reviews. As much as I like Civ 1 I hardry ever play it now as Civ 2 and Civ 3 are alot better than Civ 1.
I cannot say anything about Norrorwind as I was unable to play it on my computer, I will say that I have Daggerfall and Arena alway install on my computer.Which say alot about those games.

CharlesBHoff · February 24, 2003, 08:09

In 1940 France have more than twice the number of tank's as Germany did. Most of then where spead out to infrantry units instead of being concentrate. When the France did concentrate they Tanks in large unit their went overboad. They created than Amonur div with 1200 tanks in it, it was very hard to command on a battle field compare to the Germany 200 to 300 tanks armour div which was more mangental on the battle field.
Nap was the last field marcharl who micro-mangerment verything. After Nap most succueful armies where ran by than staff of man who advice the commander and did rotine
stuff which didnot need the Commander approval automatic
so the commander was free to do his job which was to make
the big diviceion without worrying about all the little detail.
Before Ike launch D-day he sat down with 15 or 20 staff officers in charge of the many aspect of D-day planning to see it D-day can go head.
I than happy that than game company work hard to reduce micro-mangentment in agame.
To add to the above the Freneral general was total command of 1200 tanks their where not broken down into
smaller units with their own commander like the germany armour div was broken down into smaller unit with their own commander. First the germany armour div has three armour reg of about 100 tanks so he can say reg 1 attack from the left flank and reg 3 attack from the right flank while reg 2 attack the middle.

Grumbold · February 24, 2003, 08:14

Quote:

Originally posted by kalbear
It's your and the gaming public's loss then, CT. I don't know when you did it, but it's been smooth for the few months I've been there. I'd encourage you to give it a try, as long as you have a non-hotmail e-mail account. There's plenty of folks there you haven't trolled recently.

There are some connections it doesn't seem to like. Since they rebuilt the forums I've rarely managed to get on with less than 30 seconds lag between screen changes despite having tried on four completely different internet setups and normally outside US peak traffic times. Something they are doing is screwy.

Edit: just tested again. 258 seconds from hitting "discussion board" to getting the main forum page.