Poll: Manual from heck

Zanac · March 16, 2003, 22:58

Just for fun, imagine that the manual came with ALL of the information needed to play and understand every aspect of the game (barring strategies, cheats, etc). How would this improve things for you?

Kloreep · March 16, 2003, 23:47

I voted "nowhere near enough". A good manual would have been wonderful the first few games when I was learning everything, but what I want now is a good patch.

Serb · March 16, 2003, 23:52

IT IS already an awesome and great game with manual or without it. But obviously good manual is needed to make few learning days (yep, days, dozens of hours) easier for begginers.

PaulNAdhe · March 17, 2003, 03:07

The game needs much more than a new manual.

asleepathewheel · March 17, 2003, 03:42

I would rather have a useful in game encyclopedia than a manual.

But a beefed up manual would help, definately.

darcy · March 17, 2003, 04:27

My patience is limited. A new manual might have improved things two weeks ago. QS had years for this game, and at least one month of idle time after it went gold, and still promises are the only thing they have to offer.

That's too little too late.

asleepathewheel · March 17, 2003, 04:30

Quote:

Originally posted by darcy
My patience is limited. A new manual might have improved things two weeks ago. QS had years for this game, and at least one month of idle time after it went gold, and still promises are the only thing they have to offer.

That's too little too late.

Ah, I misread the premise. I thought it was referring to the initial release. And yes, I agree with you, at this point, a manual does little good. Need more in-game stuff now, since those who can play do so.

Blacken · March 17, 2003, 14:32

The game isn't bad. Better than most. Perhaps I'm odd (likely), but I didn't spend more than five hours getting used to the game before actually understanding the damn thing. It's more like MOO2 than people seem to say.

Jack_www · March 17, 2003, 14:59

Well I regret getting Master of Orion 3. Stupid me to think that taking 4 years on a game would produce postive results. Allthough I still play the game because I spent $50 on it and I do have some fun with it, I expected more. Allthough I good manual would go a long way in helping people learn the game.

Harry Seldon · March 17, 2003, 15:45

I needed a middle of the road answer like "better manual good; patching bugs better."

SINISTER1974 · March 18, 2003, 00:02

The manual was kind of vague. Only brief explanations of game aspects. But MOO3 is still a good game and will get better after a patch or two.

Epistax · March 18, 2003, 11:20

1 It would completely save the game and make it awesome!
2 Almost everything that bothers me would be fixed.
3 It would cover up some shortcomings, but nowhere near enough.
4 It would still stink, even if I understood everything!

I can't vote in a poll this bias.

1 assumes that the game needs saving. 2 assumes things about the game bother me. 3 assumes there are shortcomings (ok that's true), and finally 4 assumes that the games puts off a negative odor (I neven cooked mine).

Zanac · March 20, 2003, 19:25

You have a good point, Epistax. It is biased. I'll take that into more consideration next time I run a poll.

As it stands, I think most of the people voting are of the opinion that the game was in need of fixing, and I was just trying to see if a good manual would have fixed most of the problem (as was my opinion).

Thanks for the advice,

-D