Please . . . no more happy posts.

Chronus · March 8, 2003, 20:17

I am really looking forward to playing this game. However, I am begging everyone to please tone down the expectations!

I've just read some posts about how this game is now the salvation of the 4X, TBS genre.

Nothing can kill a good game more than high expectations. Haven't we already seen this kind of talk before . . . and the disasterous ending?

I've already made a point to not read that Random Events thread because I want to enjoy that "first time surprise" experience when I play the game. How many more threads must I avoid?

"So then, Chronus," you may say. "Why don't you just avoid the GalCiv forum altogether?"

Oh, come now! The release date is still almost a month away. Show a little mercy, will ya?

Brad - all the best to you and your team. The preorder sales sound good. I hope, indeed, that this game is the salvation this genre is looking for.

Lemmy · March 9, 2003, 06:22

Ok...but this game is going to the best game ever, you do realize that don't you?
I bet that in a few months the AI will be so good, that it will become sentient and take over the world.

Yep, this game will be sooooo good.

No game will EVER be able to top this one, yes sireee, not in a million years will there be a better game then this.

And then there is the Good/Neutral/Evil part of the game, i bet you could play this game 3 times as much as any other game, so you actually get 3 games in one

sorry, couldn't resist

notyoueither · March 9, 2003, 06:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Chronus
I am really looking forward to playing this game. However, I am begging everyone to please tone down the expectations!

I've just read some posts about how this game is now the salvation of the 4X, TBS genre.

Nothing can kill a good game more than high expectations. Haven't we already seen this kind of talk before . . . and the disasterous ending?

Hallelujah!

If I see yet another forum full of whining and kvetching, I think I'll burst. Believe me, no one wants to see that.

Chronus · March 9, 2003, 10:50

Quote:

No game will EVER be able to top this one, yes sireee, not in a million years will there be a better game then this.

DOH!

PrinceBimz · March 9, 2003, 15:02

After this MoO3 disaster? I have NEVER and I mean NEVER seen so many disappointed fans for any game in my life. So GC is a light at the end of the tunnel and most of all the developers are not afraid to show what they have created. Example, manual posted online, game replays posted just to name a few. By reading all of this it gives me a superb idea of how the game will be and play. At least all of those disappointed fans still have hope, they can return MoO3 and get GC which will be a much better game. Flat out much better game.

Lemmy · March 9, 2003, 16:47

Manual online?? Where? Where?

WarpStorm · March 9, 2003, 16:53

Oo the GalCiv website. www.galciv.com

Asmodean · March 9, 2003, 16:57

Chronus: I see where you're coming from, but believe me: We'd much rather have this, than the state the MoO3 forums are in now. I's sad to see the language that some people will resort to, only because the dislike a game.

Asmodean

Tytan · March 9, 2003, 18:36

Galciv will be quite an adjustment at the beginning.....At first I can see a lot of people will not like it because it is so different in its apporach to space strategy that it is sort of an acquired taste that you gain over time. But as time goes on you really begin to appreciate its straightforward simplicity and depth. But at first, you can bet on a few issues with the game.....

I will say this, it has the best computer AI ever. But most importantly it doesn't get strangled by its excessive clutter of features....but some people like 52,000 features and will find the simple focus underwhelming.

All that said this game is the real thing.....not a pretender to the throne.....this is the real deal......

Draginol · March 9, 2003, 18:56

Let me take this moment to lower expectations:

* GalCiv is single player only. There will not be a multiplayer "patch".

* There is no ship design. There won't be a ship design patch.

* There is no tactical combat in the sense MOO has it.

GalCiv's development focus has been on:

1) The computer AI. I feel confident in publicly saying that most players will be very satisfied with the computer AI. That as you increase the intelligence, it really does get more intelligent.

2) The random events. Having random events that you have a lot of control over whether they occur or not that add story and cut scenes and just gives the game personality.

3) A simplistic design that has a lot of complex strategies available to players. Freighters are my favorite example. A new player will say "Heck, you just build a freighter and send it somewhere, big deal." But there's so many strategies involved with where you send those freighters because of the trade ships that follow your route back and forth.

4) And of course the updates. Lots of games promise this but anyone who's downloaded Stardock Central can quickly tell that this program was a massive undertaking and it exists soley to provide easy updates.

But not everyone is going to like it. *I* don't like tactical combat in this kind of game. I liked it in MOO 1/2 but it would not work out well in GalCiv since you have free form moving in the galaxy (i.e. no starlines and whatnot). But some people will consider that a big minus.

Ohter people will find that the lack of multiplayer kills it for them.

Some people will feel that being "forced" to play as humans kills it (though I woudl argue that few games have as much customization at the start as GalCiv in which that customization delivers real gameplay differences).

And of course there's the graphics. It's not a 3D game. It's 2D (mainly so that we coudl keep the requirements low and let people make their own mods easily).

It's not a game for everyone. It's not like MOO for instance.

I can so though that the area we definitely deliver on is AI. I can't imagine even a single reasonable person complaining about that after release and each day we continue to update it, tweak it, etc.

PriestOfDiscord · March 9, 2003, 23:00

What pulls me to this game is the willingness for Stardock to upgrade and tweak the product long after it ships. I have high regard for a company dedicated to improving the product.

Not to mention this feels very 'Europa Universalis in space-ish' with the interaction between the different empires and having their own AI paths, and I really like that.

Jamski · March 10, 2003, 06:51

I'm trying not to get too excited about GalCiv, considering my "mixed" experience with MoO3... but I can't help starting to get a bit warm.

-Jam

vee4473 · March 10, 2003, 08:42

So far, from I have read, the only thing that I have mixed feelings about is the lack of MOO2 style combat.

If I understand correctly, galciv will have combat like civ does.

And i know I will like it, because I enjoy civ combat.

For some reason though, when it comes to a space based game with starships and such, having a more visual combat approach is always nice.

But, like I said, civ style combat never kept me from enjoying civ, so i'm sure it won't in this case either.

Boris Godunov · March 10, 2003, 14:51

Quote:

Originally posted by War of Art
I'm trying not to get too excited about GalCiv, considering my "mixed" experience with MoO3... but I can't help starting to get a bit warm.

-Jam

Mahler!

I'm also trying to contain my excitement. I am going to have two conquer-the-galaxy games to play with soon, as I also just ordered Space Empires IV (I downloaded the demo and found it to be an addicting, fun game). I'm having fun reminiscing about summers spent playing Ascendancy, MOO2 and Imperium Galactica II... and GalCiv looks to be the upcoming superstar of the genre. OoooooooOOOOOOoooooh I'm excited...

PriestOfDiscord · March 10, 2003, 16:38

Quote:

Originally posted by War of Art
I'm trying not to get too excited about GalCiv, considering my "mixed" experience with MoO3... but I can't help starting to get a bit warm.

-Jam

MOO3 had way too much hype built around it, which made for unrealistic expectations. Even damning evidence of problems like the lead designer getting laid off didn't slow down the PR. Mainly because it had a strong series name behind it. Look how that worked out.

I heard about GalCiv from word of mouth, before the MOO3 truth started leaking. Not having the huge hype machine built around it, I'm far more willing to trust the good things I hear about the game. Not to mention how open the developers have been in sharing info and listening to ideas...did MOO3 have that at all?

I mean, I don't want to get overexcited to be let down either, but with all the info(which is a lot) we get about the game I can't help but feel confident this is going to be a stunning success.

PapaMonkey · March 11, 2003, 13:56

And their honesty. The developers are trying to LOWER expectations?!? Have you ever heard of that before?

Lemmy · March 11, 2003, 14:54

Nah, it's all reverse psychology...i bet Brad is actually a marketing mastermind trying to sell us a simple chess game with a spacey interface.

Chronus · March 11, 2003, 21:45

Quote:

The developers are trying to LOWER expectations?!? Have you ever heard of that before?

No, I haven't but I wished it was practiced more often. Give us the bad news right away so that everyone (developers, as well as players) can get past it and go on their merry way. Giving us the reasons for the calls also helps. We may not like it, but the forwardness somehow makes it much better to take IMOHO.

gwillybj · March 12, 2003, 02:36

Quote:

Draginol wrote...
Let me take this moment to...

...prove to gwillybj that he will love this game, specifically for the reasons others might not.
Now, as to whether it will be The Best Game Ever And It Will Never Be Bested: I won't say until I've played it, but I will be weighing it very seriously with SMAC, which I play solo-only by choice and about which my wife

accuses me of becoming obsessive.
I suspect I will enjoy it not necessarily more, but surely equally as well because it is different enough to provide a pleasurable alternative.

WarpStorm · March 12, 2003, 06:03

I think that GalCiv's AI is much better than SMAC's. When I think about it, that was the one thing I'd change on SMAC if it were up to me. The AI was fairly weak.

Jamski · March 12, 2003, 06:07

What do you not like about GalCiv, Warpstorm? You've played it, haven't you? I want to get my expectataions as low as possible, then when I play it, I'll be so surprised how good it is

-Jam

WarpStorm · March 12, 2003, 17:40

Well, I'd like for there to be more major races (at once). There are only 5 major AI races in the game no matter how big the galaxy. (Yes, I know that races can split and there are the minor leaguers).

Another thing I'd like to see is more variety on planets. Unless I'm missing something they are only distinguished by a planetary quality number.

The graphics are nothing special.

Are your expectations sufficiently lowered?

I'm looking forward to the release version, because it's just plain fun.

Jamski · March 17, 2003, 06:36

Hmm, only 5 big guys, plus the human, plus the minor guys. I'm thinking SMAC, somehow. Only 7 factions, but what a game. My expectations are now so low that my mouth is watering. I must point out that my favorite game (and still most played) is Civ 1.

And these are you only "quibbles" with the design. I'm not surpised Brad is proud of his baby.

-Jam

The Templar · March 17, 2003, 12:03

Like someone said above, too may features kill a game! Civ3 is so damn good because there are so few features. Why? AI is simple and cannot handle loads of features. Civ3 probably has a better AI than SMAC because SMAC had too much crap going on (same with CTP2).

One planetary quality number? Good. Look at SE4. 3 distinct resources (minerals, organics, radioactives) as opposed to 1 "resources' in SE3. The AI in SE4 could not manage 3 types of resources, but SE3 could handle 1 resource. One planetary quality number sounds good.

PriestOfDiscord · March 17, 2003, 18:10

Quote:

Originally posted by The Templar
Like someone said above, too may features kill a game!....

I can't say I agree with that. So just because most people can't write good AI to save their lives we should never expect that to change? Even a game like Ascendancy, which might have had the worst AI ever written in a strategy game, was still fun just because of all the original ideas it had. I hate cookie-cutter games that don't change the status quo at all.

Besides, the AI seems pretty competent in this game from everything I've seen.

Jamski · March 18, 2003, 03:50

Quote:

Originally posted by PriestOfDiscord
Besides, the AI seems pretty competent in this game from everything I've seen.

Please tell me you're not referring to Acendancy.

-Jam

PriestOfDiscord · March 18, 2003, 04:48

Quote:

Originally posted by War of Art
Please tell me you're not referring to Acendancy.

-Jam

Not quite, that was more directed towards GalCiv. It looks to have some promise in deciding what to do.
Meanwhile, the bottom of the barrel doesn't go any lower than Ascendancy when it comes to AI.

Jamski · March 18, 2003, 04:52

Thank god. I was having doubts about the sanity of anyone calling the Acendancy AI competent.

If the AI in this game is good enough that it keeps beating Brad, without cheats, then its good enough for me. I hope.

-Jam

Boris Godunov · March 18, 2003, 11:16

*Sigh* what I wouldn't have given to have Ascendancy with a competent AI. It was such a beautiful game...

billybaruch1 · March 19, 2003, 00:55

Quote:

Civ3 is so damn good because there are so few features.

Did you like Civ3 from the beginning or just after it's been patched? I got it and took it back because I read that the Air Defense interceptor feature didn't work. Is Civ3 a good game now that's it's been patched?

How about GalCiv's Metaverse? This sounds pretty good to me.

Quote:

Q: Can you explain the Metaverse in more detail?

Quote:

A: Sure. Essentially when you play GalCiv, your game is recorded and can optionally be submitted to the metaverse when the game is done. This has two particular advantages: 1) It lets you compete indirectly with other players in the GalCiv universe. And 2) We can update the AI based on the top players. So as time goes on, when you play a computer player you’ll be really playing against the strategies employed by the top players.

You can read the whole interview here:
http://www.galciv.com/encyclopedia.a...m/docs/qa.html

I was so let down by moo3, I'm resolved to wait and read fan reactions and maybe play the demo first. But I think this really could be a game to rival Alpha Centauri.