Master of Orion - Preview @ theEscapist

HiddenX

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Staff Member
Original Sin Donor
Original Sin 2 Donor
Supporter
Joined
October 18, 2006
Messages
20,045
Location
Germany
John Keefer (theEscapist) about the Master of Orion remake:
Master of Orion was a 4X strategy game before the term even existed. Created by Microprose in 1993, it gained great reviews and a large following, prompting two sequels and framework for the future of the strategy genre.

So when Wargaming.net acquired the rights to the game in an auction of Atari assets in 2013, fans of the series were a bit confused, given the nature of the World of Tanks developer's current stable of games.

"There was fierce competition," said Wargaming CEO Victor Kislyi, "It was expensive, but we got it. And we wouldn't have made the bid if we didn't have clear goals for it. We wanted a nostalgic feel to it. We wanted to bring back the legend."

NGD Studios in Argentina will be developing the game, but Kislyi said that many members from the original team, including the art director and music composer, are back to bring the game's vision to the present. "We are asking them that knowing what they know now, would they have done things any differently."

(…)
Click to expand...

Trailer:


More information.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
20,045
Location
Germany
Master of Orion was addictive - I hope they can re-create that feeling.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
20,045
Location
Germany
Going to take a very skeptical wait and see approach on this one. Loved MoO2, couldn't stand the third one, and there have been a number of very good space 4X games to come along in the meantime, so a new MoO game is going to have its work cut out for it living up to the best the series has offered and being able to compete against the current crop in the genre.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
35
I just hope they're not among the freaks that consider the first MoO better than the sequel.
 
Ahahaha, that trailer smells of low-budget.... hope it means they are investing the resources on the game instead of the trailer and marketing!
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
6,292
I think they're focusing entirely too much on the visuals and "space opera" aspects, which has all but nothing to do with Master of Orion.

It tells me they're trying to modernise and casualise a genre that will never work as a mainstream experience and be a proper sequel.

It's giving me the same sort of vibe as Sword Coast Legends. Lack of depth and complexity - and focus on making things easy and straightforward.

Let's hope I'm wrong.
 
What is the difference between Civ games and other so called 4x4 games pls?

I have not played any 4x4 games as such so what is good point to start pls?

Note that if Civ games are 4x4 then I have played a 4x4 game!
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
lostforever said:
What is the difference between Civ games and other so called 4x4 games pls?

I have not played any 4x4 games as such so what is good point to start pls?

Note that if Civ games are 4x4 then I have played a 4x4 game!
Click to expand...

4x4 games? There's no such genre, AFAIK.

The genre is called 4X.

There are many differences between Civ and other 4X games, but the genre remains the same.

One obvious difference is the setting. Civ is a "historical" strategy game. Master of Orion is a space strategy game.
 
DArtagnan said:
I think they're focusing entirely too much on the visuals and "space opera" aspects, which has all but nothing to do with Master of Orion.

It tells me they're trying to modernise and casualise a genre that will never work as a mainstream experience and be a proper sequel.

It's giving me the same sort of vibe as Sword Coast Legends. Lack of depth and complexity - and focus on making things easy and straightforward.

Let's hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
What does make you think that? Is there any preview or evidence giving some actual information about mechanics?

From what I read seems like graphics are quite good, but on the other hand I agree with GothicGothicness that the trailer looks quite underwhelming and the rest of screenshots don't show anything impressive either, so information seems a bit contradictory.

What I wouldn't mind is if the mid-end game was somehow streamlined (or casualised if you wish), as I did hate the extreme micromanagement that it supposed. What it will really need is a good AI, specially on the diplomacy side as it is really important part of the game.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
205
Vitirr said:
What does make you think that? Is there any preview or evidence giving some actual information about mechanics?
Click to expand...

That's kinda my point. The only information we have is about taking the game into the modern age - focusing on graphics. There are tiny bits of gameplay information - but they're all conveniently vague, including taking the best from all three games, with no details whatsoever.

From what I read seems like graphics are quite good, but on the other hand I agree with GothicGothicness that the trailer looks quite underwhelming and the rest of screenshots don't show anything impressive either, so information seems a bit contradictory.
Click to expand...

I think the screenshots reveal a game focusing on visuals, considering the game was never about detailed animations of leaders and planets. That was a little bonus on top of a wonderfully rich feature set.

What I wouldn't mind is if the mid-end game was somehow streamlined (or casualised if you wish), as I did hate the extreme micromanagement that it supposed. What it will really need is a good AI, specially on the diplomacy side as it is really important part of the game.
Click to expand...

I don't think reduced micromanagment is necessarily bad. I don't enjoy micromanaging for the sake of micromanaging. However, I'd much rather have micromanagment of interesting complexity and depth than streamlined managment of straightforward mechanics.
 
DArtagnan said:
4x4 games? There's no such genre, AFAIK.

The genre is called 4X.

There are many differences between Civ and other 4X games, but the genre remains the same.

One obvious difference is the setting. Civ is a "historical" strategy game. Master of Orion is a space strategy game.
Click to expand...

My bad 4X game! Any recommendation for good space based 4X game for someone new to genre?
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
lostforever said:
My bad 4X game! Any recommendation for good space based 4X game for someone new to genre?
Click to expand...
If you don't mind older UIs then MoO2 is good (if it runs on modern computers) and I always mention Birth of the Federation as well (but it required community patch to run on new windows).

For more modern design with more slick UI I recommend Sword of the Stars 1 and Endless Space. Don't play Sword of the Stars 2, it was a mess at release and it was never fully fixed.

For a newer super complex space 4x play Distant Worlds: Universe

And Galactic Civilizations III but that game has no tactical combat.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
3,819
Moo 1 is a good introduction to the genre and 2 refined the formula and introduced some complexity (some good, some bad) . I prefer the tactical combat of Moo 1 because of the size of fleets that can be involved. I hope they keep that in this new version and that its turn based combat.
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
9,314
Location
New Zealand
DArtagnan said:
It tells me they're trying to modernise and casualise a genre that will never work as a mainstream experience and be a proper sequel.
Let's hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Im afraid you are not. On one screenshot you can see star lanes and that suggests they really try to streamline.

They also make "unlucky" comments about ship design and tactical battles here:
http://www.pcgamer.com/wargaming-on-master-of-orion-this-is-a-passion-for-us/

They're not treating the original games' design as holy writ. He uses ship design and tactical battles as an example.

"I think that was a mistake made by some of these [later 4X] games," he [Wargaming representative] said. "They thought [tactical battles] was a key feature that was going to bring a lot of people in. [But] you can only focus on so many things. If you focus on everything, it becomes too complex. It's unmanageable. Unwieldy. If you do a deep-dive on only a few things, they have to relate directly to what the player is doing. So while there are a lot of players that played tactical battles, there's not that many. It's about 10% of the players. So if you deep dive on that, you're wasting a lot of resources [that could have gone] to something that's really more important to the gameplay."
Click to expand...

It doesnt sound very optimistic, right? And word "streamline" is used in the article. Those 10% seems to be far-fetched. They say they did some internal "research" but I would like to see how they did it. If they did it. Such things can be very shallow or easily manipulated to support prefered idea.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,527
Location
Ferdok in Aventuria (Europe)
I certainly don't agree with them. Too complex by having too many features? Not really.

MoO2 was brilliant precisely because they implemented so many features in meaningful ways that all added to the fun. SimTex were brilliant game designers, in my opinion.

Of course it can be improved and streamlined to an extent, but let's just say I don't have much faith in a modern take by developers who want to introduce this franchise to the masses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom