Would you buy it?

Its probably not worth having for free. Which would you rather spend time playing? Galciv or MOO3?


~SDC~

That's an easy choice. No competition there. LOL

I just picked it up for 10 bux. I figure 10 bux is good enough to see if the first patch does anything. Then after I discover it still is inferior to Galciv, I'll just put it on my other machine for company to play freeing me up for Galciv. LMAO cha ching!!! There is no comparison. Complete Disaster is Moo3, Message boards, product, support. All a complete disaster. There is nothing more to say on the matter. And if they give MOM2 to quicksilver, I'll definitely not preorder.

#1
Straywolf,

I believe $10 is a fair price for MOO3.

Although it is a disappointing game as released, it is clear from QSI's postings on the Infogrames forum that the dev's intend to fix the game and correct as many of its shortcomings as possible in their upcoming patch (due next month).

I bought MOO3 on initial release and, after trying to play, concluded it was simply unfinished. Too many processes were unintuitive and undocumented, and there was no valid means of discerning exactly what the AI was doing, or why.

MOO3 has many innovative ideas which should not be discounted. Should QSI fix this (not only with a code patch, but a rewritten player's manual and/or strategy guide, both of which were worthless as released), MOO3 has the potential to be a surprisingly good game. For only $10, it's worth having a copy to try (post-patch) in a month or so, to see if you like it.

~SDC~

Nope. $5 is my max for that thing- returned my copy, so I think it's worth $5.

~SDC~

I wouldn't buy it. MOO3 doesn't need a patch. It needs a rewrite. Developers can't spend years (just how many was it in fact?) writing a pile of poo then spend three months writing and testing a little patch to put it all right.

MOO3 is slapped enough. If you want to buy it for whatever price is your decision, nobody can actually tell you if the game is worth whatever price. I bought it just after the release, just like many others of us. It's laying around and perhaps I pick it up when the patch is released. I agree the game didn't meet the expectations, but leave it to the devs if they can and will improve it or not. The fact Galciv is so good makes up alot to my disappointment in buying several other games, lately. Perhaps others will learn from the SDC marketing strategy, devotion, unmatched suppport etc. Maybe soon we can expect something interesting from another small company: http://www.malfador.com for those who are interested in an alternative for Galciv.

A lousy game is always a lousy game... I didn't like MOO3 so it's a waste of bucks. use it on Galciv instead!

Freya: interesting link. I suddenly realised that gold empires IV was a game I tried some years ago. it was fun, but combatsystem wasn't my favorite. Also I think the AI was sort of lame... but I enjoyed the game for a while.

I don't buy games if I suspect they'll just go onto the shelf, and judging from the comments on CSIPGS, that's exactly what I think would happen for MOO3 in my hands.

On the other hand, a certain other 4X space game seems to have gotten quite considerable, mostly positive discussion on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic.

Pontius! MOM as in Masters of Magic? As in the game that had gave us the joke that the reason for anything was "Just Cause"? (ok, I admit to being not just a Geek but also a Dork) They are making a sequal?

Nifty.

Pinky

The whole Moo3 debacle was largely a product of a major turnover at the top of the team and a bunch of chaos going on at the publisher level (which owns the rights). Apparently my understanding was that old management go thrown out and new management took over midway through the project. At that point the whole IFP thing got thrown out because the designer that came up with the idea was no longer there to see it through and couldn't be implemented.

The result was a mini-rewrite using an interface that was really geared toward one vision of the game to somehow fit with the newer. Having written applications, I cannot begin to tell you how disorienting it can be as a programmer when changes like that happen at the top.

Then to top it all off, Infogrames made a major QA faux pas by not regression testing the final AI changes before going to production (my understanding was that the changes took place 2 weeks before release). QA should've easily been able to have caught this and should not have signed off on the release. If they didn't sign off, then it was a willful move on Infogrames part to release it, which is a shame. Either way it was a mess. I would love to see the post mortem on this project.

SeanB

"MOM as in Masters of Magic? ... They are making a sequal?"

I'm not Pontius, but yeah, MOM = Master of Magic. Quicksilver were apparently promised the right to create MOM2 if MOO3 went well. Some idiot over at QS actually asked 'the fans' if they want QS to do MOM2 now that MOO3 is finished.
Uhhh, fix/finish MOO3 first, fellas.

~SDC~

Sorry was so late in replying. Yes MOM is master of magic.

Infogrames owns the title as they own Moo and Much of the rest of the Microprose title line via hasbro interactive. I think They could technically give it to anyone to do but it has been rumored they were going to give it to qs if Moo3 did well.

Well so far, Moo3 has been a disaster.

Actually, I would most certainly buy MOO3 (and will.. thankfully at a nice low price! LOL ) down the road.. again.

Even SEIV was a bit of weak AI mess when it first game out. Now, with Gold and the mods, it is excellent. With mods and patches, I think that MOO3 will be a great game. It won't be a classic hit, imo.. simply because they screwed some stuff up so badly, it annoys hte heck out of me (playing 800x600 on a 21" monitor is just.. silly).

But the engine is deep and pretty cool. If only to bring out the most geeki-ness of my 4x soul, i'll play it.

fleabitfox

bought it full price, played it for 2 weeks, then bought galciv, havent played another comp game since then

I like Moo3 a lot, although I've not played it for a while since I'm waiting for the code patch. I've talked to a few of the betas who already have the patch and it sounds like a whole new game.

I bought a dozen games in the $9.99 section of every department store.

I'd return 'em all if I could, take my $120.00, and buy 3 games that DON'T collect dust

Alz

================================================================================================================#12 by Veteran forceinfinity - 5/4/2003 10:35:40 AM

The whole Moo3 debacle was largely a product of a major turnover at the top of the team and a bunch of chaos going on at the publisher level (which owns the rights). Apparently my understanding was that old management go thrown out and new management took over midway through the project. At that point the whole IFP thing got thrown out because the designer that came up with the idea was no longer there to see it through and couldn't be implemented.
...
Either way it was a mess. I would love to see the post mortem on this project.

SeanB
================================================================================================================

post mortem on moo3 gamespy:
http://www.gamespy.com/gdc2003/moo3/

a game i wanted to see has been under development for years. the head project leader responsible for the prequel i liked left the project. they are moving over to a new engine. that game is swat: urban justice, and the release date has been pushed back another year maybe. in other words: a disaster i can see coming that will destroy a franchise that i enjoy.(actually there is only one swat3 type game so far but future games will be imperiled if ujswat goes south)

uh, sorry about the lines...

stardock, edit function plz?

I'd get MOO3 for 10 dollars, just to say I have it. If there's one obvious character flaw I have, it's that i'm a horrible packrat. Plus, maybe the game will get better after the first code patch. I myself really tried to get into the game, but I just couldn't do it

~SDC~