IGN 6.6 Review
 

IGN give SEV a 6.6. This sux. How is the patching going? What is Aaron's take on these reviews.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/749/749070p1.html

Here is the summary from IGN

Closing Comments by Steve Butts

If the 4X genre keeps heading in this direction, it's going to become even more marginalized. While I definitely don't agree with dumbing games down for the sake of mass appeal, games like Space Empires V just don't have a broad enough appeal to inspire other developers to imitate and refine the basic 4X model. Civilization IV struck a nice balance between depth and approachability but we've yet to see a similar success in the sci-fi setting.

Space Empires V really does deliver one of the widest and far-reaching 4x experiences we've ever had but the resulting lack of focus and direction will leave even fans scratching their heads with confusion. Poor AI and general stability problems make learning the ins and outs of the game through trial and error much more frustrating than hardcore types are likely to stand. It may be worth checking it out once the basic performance problems are fixed with a patch, but until then it's just not worth the aggravation.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/165/165204p1.html

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

I don't believe Aaron has made any public comment about any review of the game as of yet. I believe that he is focused upon addressing the bugs and improving the game and really doesn't have any interest in what these reviews say. And rightfully so.

I have played a dumbed down game for mass appeal recently, Empires At War, and I absolutely hated it. I mean the game has so much potential, all ruined by dumbing it down for the masses. What fun is it to play a game that has no depth to it? A game that lacks any need for creative thinking or skill? A game that has no call for strategy or tactics? I just don't get the appeal of dumbing down a game. Why can't they simply make a smart game, like SE V, and give the players the options to dumb it down or not?

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

I like the game that Aaron has made, but I have to agree with the reviewer. Most of us find SEV easy to get into because we're familiar with SEIV or we're gluttons for micromanagement hell. Most people who might actually enjoy Space Empires aren't like that and quickly get frustrated by all the complexity presented up front.

Part of the problem is that Aaron does way too much by himself. He needs a development team for Space Empires 6. Hopefully that will be possible now, since Strategy First bought Malfador and they'll be able to throw an actual budget in his direction.

He needs a professional UI designer, plus a bunch of experienced programmers and interactive artists under his wing to really make Space Empires accessible to the masses.

The key is not to "dumb down" Space Empires. (I hate it when games are "dumbed down." It sucks all the fun out of them.) The key is to simplify it so that all the complexity that makes the game great becomes intuitive and easy (fun) to control. Then the complexity is there for advanced players, but it doesn't get in the way of casual or beginning players.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Wow im impressed. A mainstreamer`s site like IGN gives a respectable 6.6 ? Pretty good.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

I second that motion

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

I don't think there should be more developers, really. Since more developers equals more costs, that also means the publishers would want to make the game sell more, i.e. more mainstreamed. I'm fine with just Aaron. I just hope he'll be given all the time he needs to fix the bugs and improve upon a game that was, I'd say, released 6 months too early.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

This is strategy first we are talking about.Not a chance in hell.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Aaron needs help in the way of somebody who can cover off the manuals or data files etc; not with the actually coding.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

For a game with the scope of Space Empires V Aaron needs a team. If Strategy First expects one man to design the game mechanics, program the core engine, design the UI, script the data files, write a killer AI, alpha test, and hammer out all the bugs, all on a pre-announced launch deadline, then they're going to get a pretty mediocre game.

I know Aaron is a great programmer. I've played SE1, SE2, SE3, SE4 and SE5. I've been a fan since 1995. But if he wants Space Empires to have mainstream appeal without compromising the loving detail that makes us hardcore suffer from the "just one more turn" syndrome, he also needs to be a great leader and have a dev team to back him up.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Well everything he learns in SE V will help him with SE VI.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Rather than a lack of "focus" I would suggest that SE has rather a "generic" feel to it, due to lacking a strong background story and atmosphere. The likes of Imperium Galactica, Haegemonia, Homeworld and Galactic Civilizations all had a background with a campaign to complete which provided players with a good introduction to the game.

SEV's introduction is pretty non-existent and the tutorial only seems to cover a quarter of what it should, leaving new players to learn by experimentation (which is where a second-rate AI probably becomes a bonus...). Producing an exciting scenario (let alone a campaign) would be a time-consuming task needing imagination, storytelling skills and thorough playtesting so it is understandable that basic game design/UI issues should be given priority - however does SEV offer enough in terms of event scripting to allow modders to produce their own campaigns?

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

A lack of background? Man you are talking main stream generic games here. That has never been SE, if you want background and scripted story go play StarFury. It’s very clear from your post you have never played any of the SE series before. The lack of background, the completely open script is what makes SE so darn powerful. Anyone of us ANY-ONE-OF-US can step in take this game and recreate it in any style or fashion we want! In fact we need not keep it as a space based game. With the right pics and some work you could make this an island adventure. Now how the heck does that qualify as “generic”?

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Sorry. But this was said a ton of times when SE IV was released in its buggy very similar state back in 2000.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Some of the older lads and maidens may remember what worlds of quality have once separated EU I to EU II.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

You make a good point here, but I over looked one important thing. Those games had the benefit of a large teams working on them. SE series has only had one man, Aaron, and his focus has always been on programing. SE is a franchise dedicated to in depth game play. Its up to the players to make their own back stories for their races and many have.

Pretty much the only back story you need to know is this:

"The year is 2400.00 and the galaxy awaits exploration. Who could have ever imagine the wonders and horrors to come. Where peaceful exploration and diplomacy fail, conquest begins. Immerse yourself in the role of leader of a great Galatic Empire, or vast Intersellor Alliance. Explore the technology, build ships, and colonize the galaxy as you battle against other bloodthirsty races for absolute power."

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Even games such as MoO2, which had more people working on it, didn't go for a story-line approach, though. Imperium Galactica had some story-based setup, which was alright I guess. I wouldn't mind it for SE either, but I don't want it so much as to prefer Aaron worked on that instead of improving the actual gameplay mechanics and AI, which really needs alot of fixing. I do hope there'll eventually be a release of a good map/scenario editor( think Aaron mentioned something like that in an interview?).

Some sort of 'space monsters' or other drastic, potentially gainful, events would really spice the game up a bit, though. MoO2 really had a *huge* boost in the fun-factor with Antaran attacks and the Antaran Gate thingy.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

And that’s just the Stock background story! Each mod presents something new even if it is minor there is always a new direction, flavor, theme, whatever label you care to apply! How does this grip you?

“Your people are hungry for growth and the stars are beckoning them to step forth and break your earthly bonds. But the stars can be cruel teachers; breaking those students who are unwilling to learn. Will your empire learn and rise to the top or will they be ground into oblivion under the heel of another? StarFire; let the race begin!”

Generic indeed! Grrrrrr http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/mad.gif

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

AstralWanderer said:
Rather than a lack of "focus" I would suggest that SE has rather a "generic" feel to it, due to lacking a strong background story and atmosphere.

Which, incidentally, is one of it's biggest strengths; it's not saddled down with some cheesy story that detracts from the gameplay. It allows you to come up with your own stories, unencumbered by "official" muck. Even MOO had hardly any "story" to it, which was good. Just some general background stuff is all you need.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Like my Rock, Paper, Scissors mod?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newup...1057271169.gif

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Oooo, nasty. Are they upgradeable?

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Lack of story is not the real problem. It's the lack of a well-designed way of controlling the depth and complexity of the game.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

And that is what I mean by generic - nothing to mark it apart from other games (the year doesn't count), no indication of how you got there or what previous events shaped the galaxy.

With GalCiv you have races with (some) personality and the Dread Lords in the current version, a legacy from a previous war. In IG1 and 2 you have a background story with some in-game impact (a secret weapon in 1, a race-specific goal in 2). Homeworld is one of the best examples - your race has found out their planet is not their original home but a place of exile from a disastrous war. Haegemonia gives you a civil war to resolve before a period of exploration and encountering alien races (though this is quite tightly scripted). Moo2 you had the Antarans - but also Orion and the Guardian. Star Control gave you some of the wierdest aliens ever and Ascendancy had some of the most original (shame it's mechanics were flawed in so many other ways though).

As for previous SE experience, I've played both SEIII and IV and everything above applies to them also. Your posts suggest that you've never played anything else...

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

My post suggests that I have an imagination; that the SE series allows me to mod the details and story and depth as far as I care to. Your post suggests you want scripted events and as I said before if that is what you are looking for go play StarFury. Our posts clearly indicate that we see this in two different ways and there appears to be no middle ground. Agreed to disagree before this turns into a flaming.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

In order:
GalCiv also restricts you to playing humans only. Most SE players would call that a bad tradeoff. (think they changed that for GC2?)

Homeworld is a mission-based RTS, not a 4x.

Haegemonia: see "tightly scripted" this is bad.

MOO2 does it the best out of all the examples, and even there it just turns into a win condition plus space monsters. Nothing major.

Star Control: Not a 4X. Only one scenario. Again, most SE players would consider that a bad tradeoff.

Ascendency had about as much backstory as SE.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Less hardcoded story = more flexibility = more replayability.

I'm making a unique story each time. And if those Phong don't like it, they can research their own doomsday devices http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

If SE4 had a fixed story we wouldn't still be playing it after 7 years.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

AstralWanderer said:[
As for previous SE experience, I've played both SEIII and IV and everything above applies to them also.

You're right, that was one of the big strengths of previous SE games too. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

In GalCiv2 you can play any race, or create your own custom race. The storyline is also optional.

In any case, SE5 could be given a great storyline that wouldn't detract from gameplay in any way, just by making it a set of scenarios. Hopefully this will be possible at some point if a scenario creator/editor is made/released.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Technically, it's entirely possible right now. You can script events (which presumably means you could schedule them for certain turns), you can play all players to set up the scenario situation... Sure it's a little tedious, but quite doable. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

/delurk


Ok, I see it here again, a mention that Strategy First has 'Acquired' Malfador Machinations.. wtf? (sorry for the foul language) SFI Acquired 'Intellectual Property' From Malfador. they did not 'Acquire the company'. They got the Name and lisence for the Space Empires Franchise. PERIOD!

What does this mean? It means that SE and it's future are in SFI's hands, This Includes 'Starfury' since it's official name is "Space Empires: Starfury". They do not for example have the rights to Dungeon Odyssey, and If Aaron should so choose to start a new series of games he is free to do so.

Misinformation is worse than a bad review. It bugs me to no end. And here's a opinion of SFI.. They went through hell, Most companies would have gave up and pulled the plug, threw in the towel. Did they? No, they stuck with it and suffered the consequences. They can't change the past, only try their best to make the future bright. (Poo! happens to good people, anyone care to dispute this fact? It does not make the poo smell better, and spreading it around only serves to 'soil' everyone involved. grrrr..)

Sorry for the rant, but this misinformation about the 'Acquisition' has been going around long enough. It Irks me.

Nuf Said, Cheers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Wow, that sounds good. I just might have to giv GalCiv2 another look.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

That sounds like it would make stories that are dry and uninspired. How can an "epic generator" possibly compare to actual writing? Sure, you can give each type of event some flowery text, but after a point, all stories would just be pretty much the same text in different ordering...

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Stardock have more or less canned the epic story generator.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

I prefer the lack of a background story and the lack of a campaign. Me, I want to create my empire and rule it, without my game play shoehorned into someone else's idea of a story.

For me, the "sandbox" style is infinitely preferable to the scenario or campaign approach. I prefer to be the one to decide when I've won.

IMHO, far too many games today are oriented toward people whose only goal is to "beat" the game and move on.

For me, the purpose of a strategy game like SEIV (I don't own SEV) is to create my own little sci-fi fantasy to do with as I please.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Bravo, well said!

As I said, they are main stream dumbed down generic games. SE5; in no way shape or form, can be called generic by that understanding. Now I stand by what I said!

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Sandbox games would be infinitely much more fun if games actually had an AI that sort of fitted the '..intelligence' description, though. That's much less of a problem with scripted games, as one can just set up the actual scenario to be hard, instead of relying on the AI itself to be challenging.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

That's actually such an accurate definition of generic I should go paste it into the Wiktionary. Seriously, you should look these words up first before getting all indignant and wotnot.

The GalCiv2 campaign was PAINFUL. Basically play a map rinse and repeat, duplicating most of your research effort with each map. Then they patched it so the campaign was virtually impossible. Haven't looked at it since though I've pre-ordered the expansion for the hell of it. Slick game all the same.

If the reviewers think the game could do with some hand-holding options then why doesn't someone knock up a simplified mod that could be used as a newbies' mode. Simplified research tree and fewer ship options that sort of thing. Compared to what some of you guys are working on this would be a doddle. Getting it included in the stock game might be harder though.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Getting a dumbed down mod built is as simple as posting here and getting support for it. One of us modders would build it (I’m sure) if they thought it was worth it. As for your comment about the definition of generic I think you should check again. The game market is not built around open ended games with little or no scripting and background. Thus far the examples sighted have been limited to a pinch of 4X and a few others. The market is overwhelmed with scripted games. I can go to the local Wal*Mart and the majority of the shelves are filled with games which have oodles of official mumbo-jumbo, gaggles of pre-scripted events, and what-not amounts of money sucking charge by the month on-line play. As I have already said SE is not scripted, not burdened by an official background story and by that definition is most certainly NOT your run of the mill, spit out by a mega-corp, shallow GENERIC game. Now the next time you want to jump in a conversation at least take the time to first read what has been said. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif And you see I am putting the little smiley here so you don’t think I am attacking you Frightlever.

I don’t use Wiki, I use M-W:
Generic: relating to or characteristic of a whole group or class.

Re: IGN 6.6 Review
 

Whoever says that a campaign or background means shoehorning? You can still have free-form play and the ability to create your own empire/race/ideology - but having a background with real in-game consequences makes it more compelling and believable.

To take another example, Alpha Centauri is a 4X where the background benefits the game (dealing with the lifeforms on Planet and the option to win the game via the Transcendence path) and the factions differ in diplomacy as well as gameplay.

With SEV, there is virtually no difference in diplomacy - all the races have the same responses (even though they have different files) and none of the racial history has any impact. Dealing with the Eee while allied with the Drushocka? No problem! Developing energy weapons also? "Hey the Drushocka ate our people with those, but we don't mind you using them... eeek!!". Indeed the only difference between SEV aliens seems to be with ship designs and weapon types.

Aside from the not-too-different aliens, you have the random events and ruins in SEV. The events are simple and could be improved upon by even basic scripting (for example having a renegade group of your own people forming a pirate base in a nearby nebula, resulting in a random loss of resources until it is destroyed). Ruins could similarly offer more than a tech grab-bag (artifacts allowing communication or limited, ultra-speed travel, access to new quadrants if researched properly or ability to contact/ influence outside races, like the Dread Lords or Antarans from other games).

Saying that imagination can cover this is a cop-out - you can dispense with SEV (and computers generally) if you choose to rely on imagination enough. Adding atmosphere (in terms of gameplay, not just the breathable stuff) can create a new dimension to SEV making it a more believable (and less antiseptic) experience. Some has been done in terms of the racial backgrounds, but this needs to be built upon further for best effect. Mods can certainly cover a lot of the ground - but the stock game needs some toning up too (after the bugfixes, UI improvements, AI enhancements, etc).