BUY the Strategy Guide

[JonahFalcon]

I think the Strategy Guide is a worthwhile purchase, because reading it for all those months gave me an idea of how to do my first few turns. It made some practical applications of how to use the menus, in details, instead of just describing what they were and did.

Yes, it's nice to have the tech list and many stats, as well as the hints on diplomacy, but to me, in retrospect, the real benefit was letting me know HOW the game was played before I had it.

Now that I've played the game for 2 weeks, I've re-read it, knowing what the pictures and lingo (ie. DEA) mean, and I'm more "in tune" with what is going on now.

[krait23]

I for one won't buy any strategy guide that contains info that *should* be in the manual. Seemingly all recent games just leave a lot of important info and stats out of the manual and put it into a so called strategy guide which is sold seperately. No way I am going to support that practice. And if you say its nice to get techlists and stats, I assume that the MoO3 Strat Guide is no exception....

Lata
Krait

[Grumbold]

I wouldn't mind it having that information provided it then went on to have serious in-depth strategy advice. The only comments I've seen on the strategy guide lead me to believe its not capable of providing that. I'll expect the factual information about how to play the game to be available on websites very shortly so a strategy guide with no strategy will just be a waste of paper.

[Stuie]

I have never purchased a so-called "strategy" guide. It is for me to figure out the best strategies, that's the game.

[darcy]

BUY the Strategy Guide

Hell no. Documentation belongs in the manual, and I won't pay extra for it. Let's not support those shoddy business practices, shall we?

[Jamski]

Why buy it ? You'll get a better guide by reading the 'poly forums (in a few weeks after we've all digested it )

-Jam

[Xelvonar]

I've purchased three Prima guides in my life.

1. Civilization III. I felt it was crap. It contained next to no strategy, and almost all the the info was already in the manual, or could be deduced easily in the game.

2. Simcity 4. Extremely useful for learning how the guts of the game works. So much goes on below the surface, and its hard to see why what you choose to do has any affect on your city.

3. Moo3: Cause I couldn't stand the wait and I needed SOMETHING. I suspect it will end up being somewhat useful. It doesn't have any deep strategy, but it has useful tips for getting started.

Why buy it ? You'll get a better guide by reading the 'poly forums (in a few weeks after we've all digested it )

So in essence, I agree. The deep strategy that I was looking for was not in the guide.

-Xelvonar

[Epistax]

I'd buy it if there was a real point, but seeing what time it came out, it probably has little to nothing to do with the final project.

The moo2 strategy guide rocked.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by krait23
I for one won't buy any strategy guide that contains info that *should* be in the manual. Seemingly all recent games just leave a lot of important info and stats out of the manual and put it into a so called strategy guide which is sold seperately. No way I am going to support that practice. And if you say its nice to get techlists and stats, I assume that the MoO3 Strat Guide is no exception....

Lata
Krait

I completely disagree with you. Stats, charts, and raw information are what strategy guides and websites are for. Manuals are play guides that tell you how to play the game, and should not have any more raw numbers and formulas then is needed, just decriptions.

[delmar]

Everything I might need to play the game should be in the game. Not in the manual, not on web sites, not in strategy guides; in the game. If it's not, that means that the designers of the game are lame.

If that information is sold for extra money, that simply means that someone is trying to squeeze out a few extra dollars from you.

Nothing's wrong with either approach, but I agree with Darcy/Krait/etc that we shouldn't support the latter.

[JonahFalcon]

However, the Strategy Guide is just that - a STRATEGY guide, and helped me understand HOW to play.

[Yodasplat]

Originally posted by darcy

Hell no. Documentation belongs in the manual, and I won't pay extra for it. Let's not support those shoddy business practices, shall we?

Amen to that!

[JonahFalcon]

Nope. I for one don't need raw numbers - and frankly, they're useless. Can you imagine trying to calculate the raw numbers during the game? That's why it's a COMPUTER game, not a board game.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by delmar
Everything I might need to play the game should be in the game. Not in the manual, not on web sites, not in strategy guides; in the game. If it's not, that means that the designers of the game are lame.

Yes, that is also true. Good tool-tips and an in-game encycopedia can be all you ever need if it's designed properly. (MOO3 seems to have both of these, can't say how good they are without playing though)

[Grumbold]

So do I have to throw a double six to win this battle, or what?

[MariOne]

Originally posted by JonahFalcon
Can you imagine trying to calculate the raw numbers during the game?

Yes.
And very well indeed.
In a strategy game, the fun is in taking decisions, and test your own decisonmaking ability against some benchmark.

To make good decisions, you need a vision for the big picture AND the "proper" knowledge of details.
If the more detail you get, the better and more succesful decisions you can make, then "proper" means the more details any documentation gives you, the better.

Some find this more entertaining than others.
Probably a player who likes Stars! will not like CivIII.

If a game does not allow you to devise a precise plan on the basis of actual figures, and not just high-level decisions based on generic hints, I feel that some fun is missing. Other players enjoy games totally the other way around.
This just means that certain kind of games are better suited for certain kind of players, and that certain kind of players are better suited for certain kind of games.

Or differently put, if you say "I for one don't need raw numbers - and frankly, they're useless. That's why it's a COMPUTER game, not a board game", then if you like the game, I probably won't.

In MY OPINION, a computer game it's a COMPUTER game mainly to provid me with computer opponents to play it against, and for the upkeep of menial data and tasks in case I can play it against other humans too.
When I say to the game "do this and do that", that's where a computer is useful, for the upkeep of the results, rather than paper and pencil.
But the data that help me to decide what, where and when to produce something, how many ships I need to overcome a given opposition and of which kind, and which resources I'd better have to look for, provide and the most efficient way to exploit them in order to have more of said ships and earlier than my enemy, are a key element for my personal playing experience, they do improve my personal gaming enjoyment. I need to know that data to take my gaming decisions. The computer is there to HANDLE that data, but I need to KNOW it to have more fun when I play. At least when I play TBS.
I'd agree with you when I play Real Time god-games like Populous or Dungeon Keeper, which I also enjoyed to play, to stick to something vaguely similar and leave FPS or racing alone

___

BTW, in another thread, someone pointed out that you were making a joke as you were using the smiley.
May I humbly suggest that even a smiley has to be interpreted according to context? For instance, here after your "computer game" statement, it definitely gives the impression that you laugh at those who could "incredibly" think otherwise. Maybe a would have been more appropriate...
( - not in the least lecturing, just trying to avoid to argue about misunderstandings)

[Harry Seldon]

Originally posted by Grumbold
So do I have to throw a double six to win this battle, or what?

Actually, it's a 16 or better on the twenty side.

[Gargantua]

Originally posted by JonahFalcon
I think the Strategy Guide is a worthwhile purchase, because reading it for all those months gave me an idea of how to do my first few turns. It made some practical applications of how to use the menus, in details, instead of just describing what they were and did.

Yes, it's nice to have the tech list and many stats, as well as the hints on diplomacy, but to me, in retrospect, the real benefit was letting me know HOW the game was played before I had it.

Now that I've played the game for 2 weeks, I've re-read it, knowing what the pictures and lingo (ie. DEA) mean, and I'm more "in tune" with what is going on now.

Buy this, buy that, what else I have to buy? I am not trying to learn Quantum Physics here, its a freaking computer game, it shoud be easy to navigate, and easy to play. Why not to put 100,000 techs into game,make the whole navigation and menues as confusing and clumsy as possible and say its a very deep game, so go buy a strat guide with all tables and " some practical applications of how to use the menus". WTF is practical application of how to use the menus? Not fun and not deep, its just plain stupid.

[darcy]

MariOne, that's an interesting point with Populous and Dungeon Keeper (Startopia might even be closer to home, considering the theme). They're all games with indirect control, just like Moo3 wants to be. You don't influence every little detail directly, you rather give little AIs a push in the right direction.

IMHO the reason why that works for those game is not necessarily their real-time nature, but rather the nature of their feedback: it's visual. You see quite clearly and quite quickly how your decisions affect the game world. That makes your choices interesting, because you have an idea what they might cause. Moo2 had alot of this visual feedback too, in the form of little icons you could easily keep track of.

The conclusion I draw from all the reviews I have read (including the positive ones) is that Moo3 lacks this feedback. It's either not immediate or not obvious enough how the choices you make affect the game. I'm not sure if memorizing all the formulas and numbers will be enough to change this deeply rooted feeling of being marginalized, of having no real impact on the gameplay.

[13Matt13]

However, the Strategy Guide is just that - a STRATEGY guide, and helped me understand HOW to play.

Youre arguing against your position. Strategy guides should NOT tell you HOW to play the game, thats what the manual, tutorial, and in-game help/resources are for (and box stuffers like charts at one time, but that day is long passed).

Strat guides should tell you how to play the game BETTER (and are fairly useless for strat-games, since any well-publicized strategy will have an equally well-publicized counter. MOO1 and MOM were the 2 exceptions, but no way will you ever find strat guides on par with them anymore). Now what have you got? $20 worth of kindling. Especially in this....unique...case, since I would find 4 month-old advice on how to operate ANYTHING (car, software, TV....) shady, at the least.

[JonahFalcon]

No, by "how", I meant, it gave me strategies and ideas to toss around - hence, a STRATEGY GUIDE.

Buy this, buy that, what else I have to buy?

Just go to the store, and read it there. If you like what you see, buy it.

[Gargantua]

Originally posted by JonahFalcon

Just go to the store, and read it there. If you like what you see, buy it.

Right, thats why nobody needs your advertising here

[JonahFalcon]

Do shut up, Porsche.

[Ming]

Let's not get personal folks... Remember, talk about the issues... not the members

[Destroyer]

I think the issue is:

a - do you need the guide to play the game properly
b - does the strategy guide contain "strategy"

The most recent guide I bought was CIV3. I bought it as it contained proper instructions and information. I hate online guides and readme files. I like a manual I can refer to while playing the game and looking at exactly what Im doing.

The CIV3 guide was basically a rip-off, as the info should have been in the instruction manual in the first place. There was almost no strategy included what-so-ever in it.
I only bought the book because I was really playing the game a lot, and it was handy.

So these "guides" fall into 3 catagories:

a - walkthroughs
b - real strategy guides
c - instruction manuals

Most of the good ones will contain elements of b and c.

The best ones Ive bought were:

UFO: Enemy Unknown
TFTD
Xcom Apocalypse

The worst:
Baldurs GAte 2
Alpha Centauri
Civ3
Masters of Orion 2.

To be fair, the net provides most of the strategy and solutions for these games. This leaves little room for the publishers to make money from guides, hence the reason they are sold before the game is finnished.

[MitchDev]

Baldurs Gate (I) was the WORST strat guide, with Ascendency close behind...

[Destroyer]

Ascendancy? I never even considered buying a guide for that one. Talk about MOO2 failing to drive the competition.

[Eston3]

Having purchased the strat guide (Yes, pity me) I can say that What I got was NOT a strat guide. The tables and missing data should have been included in the game. And there is still an inordinat amount of info NOT provided. The actual strategy is soooooo less than helpful as to actually be counter productive. This ruthlessly averice policy leaves me with a reluctance to purchase any additional games from this company, no matter how good they may be!
Does anyone have the email of the CEO? They won't change if we don't make them.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Osweld


I completely disagree with you. Stats, charts, and raw information are what strategy guides and websites are for. Manuals are play guides that tell you how to play the game, and should not have any more raw numbers and formulas then is needed, just decriptions.

The strategy guide scam takes a $40-50 game and bumps it to a $55-70 game. It's just another way publishers have devised to gouge the lemmings.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by MitchDev
Baldurs Gate (I) was the WORST strat guide, with Ascendency close behind...

Man you are so correct about Ascendancy guide, nothing but generalities. Of course the manual was nearly non existant.

Moo2 is not far behind.

With games taking so long to come to stores, I do not understand why they can not make guides like Moo1.
Now that was a real guide, tables, fact, detail, ideas on strategy, the best.
I can not recall BG1, but BG2 guide was of some value, whereas Moo2 and Moo3 guides were not worth much.
I buy guides for all of my games, if they have one regardless of their content. I have to have the whole package.