OT) MoO3 and SE IV

bostonrpgmania · #1 February 28th, 2003, 08:57 PM

Hi

I am a newbie player of the SE IV. Having hard time to learn about the game and at the same time got a lot of help from this site.

I looked at MoO2 and I liked it (in fact slightly better than SE IV at the moment. Maybe I will like SE IV more as time goes by..who knows)

Since I am not a hard core 4x gamers. graphics is somewhat important and I was a bit more involved with MoO2 since I could actually see which building were build on a planet (I Hope SE V do this next time rather than just describing which building were built on a planet in a table--maybe this is just my opinion).

Now MoO3 came out and boy this game got a lot of bad reviews already..See pcgr.com it is almost 2 out of 5 (about 11 gamers reviewed it). (while SE IV is about 4.8 by 5 players)

Now I become curious...a lot of bad reviews of MoO3 talks about lack of micromangagement in MoO3 and that make sense to me (SE IV allows you to do a lot of micro if you want to or if not you can leave the work for minister--which is very good)

However, a lot also talk about spread sheet characteristics of the game; they do not like bunch of spread sheets in the game which SE IV actually share. But here in our forum, we do not have much complaints about that characteristics of SE IV.

THen the reason why MoO3 is getting so bad review is partly related to the fact that MoO3 is purchased a lot by casual gamers (like me) who likes some visual treats and......or because the game itself is quite bad?

What if MoO3 has been released as web only product so only hard core 4X players buy it. In that case do you think it may get a little bit better review? (again many would not like their macro approach and that I understand..)

Aloofi · #2 February 28th, 2003, 09:37 PM

You know, the same you feel for 4x games its what I feel for RPGs and RTSs. I can't play those games, too much eye candy and too little meat.
The only RPG I've ever played was the Fallout series, and RTS I played a few, but they always end up prematurely shelved. Can't stand the whole concept of building a "base" instead of a real Empire and then Tankrush it. In those games you make a mistake and its game over, but in SE4 I have made gigantic mistakes, and I always get a chance to get my Empire back on its feet.

Aloofi · #3 February 28th, 2003, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bostonrpgmania:

Since I am not a hard core 4x gamers. graphics is somewhat important and I was a bit more involved with MoO2 since I could actually see which building were build on a planet (I Hope SE V do this next time rather than just describing which building were built on a planet in a table--maybe this is just my opinion).

Dude, play Imperium Galctica II, its a dumbed down 4x with real time tactical battles. You get to see a lot of buildings there, if that its your bag.
Its not a bad game actualy. And with a fairly good eye candy.

bostonrpgmania · #4 February 28th, 2003, 09:50 PM

It is not that I like eye candy...
I prefer good gameplay to eye candy as well.
(for example two games that I am currently playin is Uncommon Valor and SE IV at the moment)
But I am wondering why MoO3 is so badly reviewed..

well for moo2 it had some nice (but still sub par to today's standard) graphics that helped you to be immersed... that is what I am emphasizing.

Again even for role playing I prefer Ultima 7 or 4 to Ultima 8 or 9. Also I like Torment, Fallout series to Neverwinter night.
I was curious whether the reason why MoO3 is bashed so hardly is related to the fact that the game is reviewed a lot of casual gamers rather than serious 4x guys like you since I am considering buying it

oleg · #5 February 28th, 2003, 10:06 PM

One complain about Moo3 is a very poor interface. SEIV has spreadsheets, but it is just one to get for example every single building queu. In Moo3 to get to one planet build queu you must go through 4 windows and if then you want to check another planet, you must return to major screen, find that planet and repeat your task.

Aloofi · #6 February 28th, 2003, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bostonrpgmania:

well for moo2 it had some nice (but still sub par to today's standard) graphics that helped you to be immersed... that is what I am emphasizing.

That's the diference between you and me. I don't get immersed by graphics, but by gameplay/data. Don't worry about my unpoliteness, I'm just picking on you.

Its just that most companies out there make products for you instead of me, so I kind of envy the amount of games you get, and I kind of blame you for it too.

I haven't bought MOO3, and I'm not planning too, cause some of the bad reviews were by *******s like me that love to micromanage and have ALL data in easy access, and if they didn't like it there is a very small chance of me having fun with it.