oooo aaron! - looks like moo3 is flopping... ;) do se5 faster? - Page 8

Bralth · #71 March 4th, 2003, 04:02 AM

I'm not sure that MOO3's 3d map is the way to go, but a 3D map with better controls, visiblitiy would be very nice.

Would it add a whole ton? Most likely not (3d combat would of course but thats a different issue) but I've always had a fond spot in my heart for space games that used a 3d map over a 2d one.

Atrocities · #72 March 4th, 2003, 04:55 AM

Like I said, I am sure if Aaron uses such a map system, it would be far better than anything QS has done.

Quote:

"1. The 3D star map."

What would this add to the game? How is it an improvement?

"2. Moveable windows.
3. Wheel mouse support."

OK, good things.

"4. Construction Planner System."

Err..what? EDIT: Ah. Eh, ambivalent.

5. Retreat from Battle option.

Would depend on how it is implimented.

Phoenix-D

1. Having this map would really be a cool feature. Your right, it would not be an improvement persay, but it would be a cool feature that give SE V a more [i]real]/i] feel to it. If you could see how your star systems play into the bigger picture in a real space, then perphas it could offer you a differant point of view. That system that looked weak and un-important in one view looks a lot more inviting as a strategic point in another. I like the map system, granted its needs a lot of improvement, but it still is one of the best additions to 4 X gaming in a good long time.

2.

Glad you agree.
3.

Glad you agree.

4. "ambivalent" You got me. I have no idea what that means.

5. Agreed. That feature is very important both before you agree to enter into battle, and after you commit to battle.

Phoenix-D · #73 March 4th, 2003, 05:41 AM

"4. "ambivalent" You got me. I have no idea what that means."

It means I'd have to see it in action to have an opinion.

PHoenix-D

tesco samoa · #74 March 4th, 2003, 06:20 AM

AT how was the manual ????

I was hoping for a good old fashioned gaming manual ?

Is it up to speed Janes or Sierra style ??

Atrocities · #75 March 4th, 2003, 07:20 AM

The manual in my opinion is not very helpful. It is full of the back story of the Orion game, but does not really give you any more information then a breif description of what things are. It does not really go into detail about how they work, or why.

Rantz at the moo3 forum said they are working on a new manual for the website. That it should offer a few more answers.

Time will tell. But in the mean time, your best bet is to read the player FAQ's, and the Readme file.

dogscoff · #76 March 4th, 2003, 12:37 PM

I'd love to see some stats on how many new players Moo3 has sent to SE4.

Also, Shrapnel should run a special offer: a $10 discount off se4 Gold for anyone who sends in an original moo3 CD=-)

trooper · #77 March 4th, 2003, 12:55 PM

Is MOO3 customizable like SE IV ?
If it isn't, I think they can't be compared...

Mondu999 · #78 March 4th, 2003, 01:28 PM

geoschmo:

I'm a noob here, so I'm not entirely sure I can answer the question as to why SE4 isn't compared to other 4x games, but here goes:

It ain't commercial. The graphics don't compare. Most players 'talk' about how graphics don't matter in strategy games, but that's a lie. Its nice to have bells and whistles.

Gameplay in SE4 is great (having only played the demo), but most are unwilling to give it a try because its made by an independent (meaning thats its not carried by a huge publisher). They just don't consider SE4 in the same 'league' as those other games (even tho I as play SE4, I think !!! This could be a Moo game if it had prettier graphics!). No offense, but u see what I mean?

Mondu999 · #79 March 4th, 2003, 01:30 PM

Oops...I'm reading this thing backwards, aren't I...ignore me as I run into hiding.

klausD · #80 March 4th, 2003, 03:48 PM

I am glad that there are different opinions about the qualities of games.

With MOO3 it seem that players which like to play realtime games or at least do have basic tolerance (although no specific love) are not so harsh with MOO3 than the turnbased purist (like myself) which find this game not worth playing.

But it has some interesting points. (no I dont mean such unnecessary "cool" features like some 3D map or realtime combat or other eye candy)

I mean Spies. The basic idea of MOO3 spies is a very good one. Of course there are intelligence and counterintelligence spies missing but thats only typical for the bad and halfhearted approach of QS. No, this failure should not detract from the good basic idea of handling spionage and assassination.

The same with Moving ships and fleets. No ship can be moved or is in existence without a fleet. Thats it. No fuzzying around with single ships or multiple ships with or without taskforce. Thats I mean is a clean design. there are other good ideas like mouse support if the pointer goes over a fleet. (the icon grows and gets bigger)
The same mouse idea is with system icons. A excellent ergonomic idea.

These 2 above things are the best in MOO3 IMO. (other goodies are ground combat options etc.)

I would appreciate if the ergonomic and interface of a 4x game like SEV would be streamlined and improved. Some of the MOO3 ideas could be at least taken in a closer selection.