MOO3 - for and agin'!

[ChristopherC]

I agree with most of the criticisms and indeed the praise for the game I have seen on the boards.

The difficulty and lack of flexibility in creating or disbanding fleets is most annoying. I lost a couple of planets not because I, the Emperor, or my space generals, lacked for ships - we just didnt know how to send them where they were needed! Also, I vehemently say 'hear, hear' to the criticism that we cant upgrade ships - something so beauuuuutifully handled, for instance, in that sadly neglected space epic - Pax Imperia: Eminent Domain! I would love there to be a new version of that! But that is straying from the point.

Not being particularly aggressive (or perhaps competent!) I am playing on the easiest level of the game and so far I have encountered three races and guess what? They all want to exterminate humanity! Even when I send them gifts! I grant you that a Hobbesian universe may obtain at greater levels of difficulty but at the easiest level? Arent there any other 'nice guy' galactic races out there besides mine? One of these races has the annoying habit of declaring war every few turns and then desisting. Very poor diplo AI here it seems to me.

Also, there seems no obviously counter-intelligence ability I can build up to keep my leaders for more than a few turns or preserve my technology. I cant think why these leaders, indeed, bother with the Terran Empire. Our sorry reputation for keeping our leaders safe and sound is such that they definitely diminish their life expectancy by suing for employment with us!

I think also that the font and various screens could have been more attractively and thoughtfully presented. Particularly, the extra level you have to get to on the planetary screens to see what is being produced! Whether you use AI or not, when you get to a certain number of planets the most important information you want immediately to access is what is in the production queue, n'est-ce pas?

Such irritations are obvious to all of us who are playing the game, from the outset, so in the long gestation of this game why werent they addressed? I could ask the more general question as to why games are so much buggier and less developed than they used to be, putting us the hapless customer in the unwanted and unwelcome role of post-release beta tester, but that again might be straying too far from this thread.

After all, this isnt just another space strategy game. It is the third in the series of the most important and innovative space strategy games ever devised. What computers were invented for! MOO1 and MOO2 set the standards by which any others are measured. I just dont think that enough resources were put into the quality assurance which is a special responsibility for anyone creating and marketing this game, this name. And I would like to know why!

HOWEVER, there is the hope of more patches and there are some mods on the forums I am eyeing with interest so maybe I can get from applying the patches and/or those mods devised by enthuisiasts, who seem to have more ingenuity and just sheer commonsense than the game's official programmers have hitherto displayed, finally a really worthy game. Even now I must admit that the game as it stands has at least one desired quality, that of 'just one more turn and I will go to bed.' I was up til two in the morning last night playing and I had to go work the next day! I will be playing it when I logoff from here!

And, lastly, there is always hope that in Master of Orion IV the mistakes of MOO3 wont be repeated.

Live long and prosper!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by ChristopherC
And, lastly, there is always hope that in Master of Orion IV the mistakes of MOO3 wont be repeated.

That begs the question that there would be a MoO4. After the delays, budget overruns (allegedly), and other problems that went into MoO3, plus the tapering of sales and general difficulty in getting development funding of TBS games for PCs, I think it's rather doubtful you'll see a MoO4.

[Boris Godunov]

MtG, you actually bought this game?! Ohhhhhhhh dear...

[MichaeltheGreat]

At least I restrained myself and didn't by Civ III.

I was desperate and had money to burn, and GalCiv wasn't out yet....

Despite everything, it's not that bad, and could be fixed. It can be fun, and what shipped out the door can be polished with patches to be a pretty decent game despite the UI issues. The learning curve is a one-off issue, so with adequate patching, only some elements of the UI would remain as long term problems.

Given the lack of alternatives on the market, (especially the apparent miscarriage of Stars! Supernova Genesis), there's not much to choose from in the TBS genre.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


That begs the question that there would be a MoO4. After the delays, budget overruns (allegedly), and other problems that went into MoO3, plus the tapering of sales and general difficulty in getting development funding of TBS games for PCs, I think it's rather doubtful you'll see a MoO4.

There will be than MOO4. The reason there was an long relay in MOO3 comeing out was the big copyright legal fight between Micropose and Activision over the Civilation trademark both company total wrech each other over than dumb issues. Sid Mier got the trademake for his company. No other company want to pick the MOO trademark until all the legal question where clear up.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Sales of MoO 3 don't bode well for a MoO 4, with the development and promotion costs.

Also, I wasn't talking about the delay as far as the time from when MoO 2 was out until the start of MoO 3, but the length of the development cycle from the beginning. Considering the bugs, gaps and the abysmal documentation of the game, and the post-Christmas release, Quicksilver was clearly under the gone to get a product out the door, regardless of what state it is in.

It's too bad, because it wouldn't take many design changes and AI tweaks to make MoO 3 a great game.

[Hydro]

After playing the game for a while I have a few suggestions for ChristopherC.

Leaders: Leader live a LOT longer when you have a high oppressometer rating. “High” means an 8 or 9 on the scale, btw. This means that the humans are at a disadvantage since their governmental types have a low oppressometer tolerance. After switching to Despotism my leaders happily die of natural causes and are rarely assassinated. Defensive spies seem to have no effect that I have discerned. Previously I played Constitutional Monarchy and leaders died like flies – no more! Now leaders can be a major benefit to my fledgling, beneficent empire.

Race relations: I suspect you are experiencing the joys of default racial animosity, which as a player you can’t do much about. A few things I have found that do help: actively attacking someone the other races hate or at war with, which will get you lots of ‘Relations Improving’ messages. The Ithkul are great for this since everyone hates them! Even better, attack two Ithkul races – and exterminate them slowly to get the maximum political benefit. Normally I’m a can’t-we-all-be-friends emperor with Big Hugs for all, but I make an exception with the Ithkul (nasty soul-stealing parasites!). Another possible target are the Meklar, since they have the lowest overall default racial sympathy other than Ithkul. If you want to be buds with almost everyone try the gas bags which have the best overall default race relations (but don’t expect to be friends with the Saurians!).

[MichaeltheGreat]

You can get humans to an oppressometer level of 10 with a corporate government. I keep taxes to 17% planet, 10% empire, and 0% system, and the humans goose step just like I want without any whining and no spy problems.

Doing this gives me no trouble with finances, even with very large empires.

[ChristopherC]

I appreciate all the advice I have been given. Thank you.

The point I would re-iterate is that a decent diplomatic AI at the easier levels ought to provide some decent allies! I did experience some stout allies in MOO2 although they always had their price! This is one way in which it is demonstrated to me how MOO4 was rushed out before the AI was properly refined.

I agree that another fault of the AI is that the attacking alien civilisations seem loathe to occupy one's worlds. Though with the state I am in with my latest game, I am duly grateful!

I have now purchased 'Galactic Civilisations' which I will get to at some point after having explored MOO3 some more. The reviews for Galactic Civilisations say I may find some friends out there - though, of course, always at a price. We shall see.

I am not pessimistic about computer space strategy games, particularly as home computers continue to increase exponentially in computing power. A new game in the series with the solid reputation the MOO series had ought to do well. It has, after all, a guaranteed fan base! I think that was rather taken advantage of this time round but by the time MOO4 is released, hopefully, we wont be taken such advantage of again.

I remain convinced that a decent patch or two could do wonders for MOO3. I hope my faith will be rewarded.

I notice that the box for MOO3 categorises the game as 'blood and gore'? 'Blood and gore'? MOO3 has got to be one of the most cerebral games going; one of the reasons why I bought it as soon as it was released for that is the kind of game I like. I leave 'blood and gore' to those motor mayhem games!

Incidentally, I have just asked Dan Q. to post the latest (the second?) patch on the Apolyton site. I can never manage to access the Infogrames one!

Live long and prosper.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by ChristopherC
The point I would re-iterate is that a decent diplomatic AI at the easier levels ought to provide some decent allies! I did experience some stout allies in MOO2 although they always had their price! This is one way in which it is demonstrated to me how MOO4 was rushed out before the AI was properly refined.

If you enjoy the game enough to play more I think you will discover plenty of races willing to be friendly if you are a diplomatic race or try hard. Some races are always going to hate certain others but most races have far more potential allies than implacable enemies. Just don't play as Ithkul if you want friends

I have now purchased 'Galactic Civilisations' which I will get to at some point after having explored MOO3 some more. The reviews for Galactic Civilisations say I may find some friends out there - though, of course, always at a price. We shall see.

Just to completely buck the trend, I have to say I found GalCiv boring. Maybe that's more down to space TBS overload in recent weeks than its particular merits and faults. I've shelved it for now.

I remain convinced that a decent patch or two could do wonders for MOO3. I hope my faith will be rewarded.

Me too. Here's hoping.

[Rogan Josh]

I am going to be controvertial, and admit that I prefer MoO3 to Galciv (yes I bought both ).

Galciv is just too 'simplistic' for my tastes. I like lots of complexity and lots of different tabs and windows.

With a few patches this could be a really nice game!

[Kahn]

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff


There will be than MOO4. The reason there was an long relay in MOO3 comeing out was the big copyright legal fight between Micropose and Activision over the Civilation trademark both company total wrech each other over than dumb issues. ...

Close, but not quite. Microprose always had clear rights to the title, just that Microprose had already begun to descend into decay through first bad decisions by upper management to gut the company of talent (hence creating Firaxis and Big Huge Games), which then resulted in near bankruptcy, followed by a series of owners who put out products of lesser quality under the Microprose name (by this time, only existent as a brand name), hoping that consumers would be fooled into thinking that they were buying a game of higher quality than what actually had been released.

The delay in the release of MoO3 was due to poor management and the parent company/entity switching hands so many times (I still have an ad for MoO3 that says "coming in 4th qtr. 1999"). MoO3 was even canceled twice, and went through a number of programmer staffs before finally coming to rest in Quicksilver's lap. As much as this games been kicked around, it's pretty easy to see why the quality ended up so poor. Only "The Secret of Vulcan Fury" exceeds MoO3 in hyperbole for expectations verses results.

[Dr Strangelove]

MOO3 was simply ill conceived from the very beginning. I've never played a game I had so little control over. You don't play it, it plays you. All a player can do is design ships, create fleets and armies, and launch at a destination. He has no real control over production, research, finance or combat. Yeah, I know that you can always go from planet to planet evey turn and try to control production, but unfortunately doing so eventually screws up the AI's economic management. The control you have over combat is utterly pitiful. This has to be the worst computer game produced in the past ten years. It certainly appears that Infogames has begun a concerted campaign to eradicate the turn based game from the face of the earth.

[moomin]

Oh my. They changed the gentle and caring Dr. into a foam-mouthed detractor troll.

But for the record, I agree Moo3 is worse than awfull. Vote for it in the worst game ever thread. So, I'm happy to report, did quite a few others.

[vmxa1]

I am not opposed to saying the game is far from great or even not very good. To call it the worst game ever is way over the top. In the same genre try Outpost and then tell this is the worst.
I have a whole section in the list of games that I never bothered to finish and few I installed and never got past the tutorial (Rebellion). This goes in my finished and did not care for level.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by moomin
Oh my. They changed the gentle and caring Dr. into a foam-mouthed detractor troll.

Hey! What kind of remark is that you sorry cross between Barney and Kermit! Next time you start labeling people read their sigs!

[DaveC]

having been unfortunate enough to have purchased Outpost which wouldn't even run until it was patched (as per moo1 for those with long memories) I heartily agree that while not great it is definately not the worst game of all time.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
MOO3 was simply ill conceived from the very beginning. I've never played a game I had so little control over. You don't play it, it plays you. All a player can do is design ships, create fleets and armies, and launch at a destination. He has no real control over production, research, finance or combat. Yeah, I know that you can always go from planet to planet evey turn and try to control production, but unfortunately doing so eventually screws up the AI's economic management. The control you have over combat is utterly pitiful. This has to be the worst computer game produced in the past ten years. It certainly appears that Infogames has begun a concerted campaign to eradicate the turn based game from the face of the earth.

You are dead wrong on this. First the worst ever computer game was Star Reach from Interplay than real time game which the player never won as the computer have all the advanges.

[moomin]

Originally posted by vmxa1
I am not opposed to saying the game is far from great or even not very good. To call it the worst game ever is way over the top. In the same genre try Outpost and then tell this is the worst.

Well... Outpost did stink, but then nobody expected it not to. You have to factor in the complete and utter ruin of a once great franchaise when judging Moo3.

[Grumbold]

So maybe it should be being nominated as the most disappointing full budget strategy sequel of all time. Its certainly not even close to being the worst game.

Maybe I'm an optimist but I believe if QS can get Infogrames to commit to a second code patch we will really start to see a classic emerge. Of course it will never win back the people who hate its management system, but no game appeals to everyone.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by moomin

Well... Outpost did stink, but then nobody expected it not to. You have to factor in the complete and utter ruin of a once great franchaise when judging Moo3.

right. I still have my outpost cd, saw it the other day when cleaning. I wouldn't have bought it if I expected it to stink. What an awful game. blech.

[Sujanix]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
I am going to be controvertial, and admit that I prefer MoO3 to Galciv (yes I bought both ).

Galciv is just too 'simplistic' for my tastes. I like lots of complexity and lots of different tabs and windows.

With a few patches this could be a really nice game!

I agree with you completely Josh.

[ChristopherC]

Many thanks for all the replies to this thread which I started. I have found all of them informative. The information about Micropose was particularly interesting. I had waited for MOO3 for what seemed like simply ages and bought it as soon as it came out. I will look to the reviews before I buy other such games. I have also bought 'Galciv' but havent played it yet so the brief comparisons here are interesting.

Having said that, I am now at turn 525 in my present game and it does have, for me at least, , even in its defective state, that quality of 'one more turn and I will go to bed'. I am still hopeful that a decent full patch or two will make it classic. Though I am afraid that when they patch the disinclination of the aliens to invade my planets rather than just bombard and destroy them I will be in real trouble! As it is, three separate alien races are causing me severe problems and are no way 'Ghandi-like' as one person on the board put it.

There are few such TBS space strategy games out there that I feel MOO3 is still worth persevering with.

I remember some one telling me about computer games such as Populous, brought out several years ago. The game was, I was told, bug-free and run on the widest variety of computers. Those were the days! Some one has said that the 'the suits' are ruining computer gaming. They may have a point.

Live long and prosper.