Master of Orion Reboot

Still looks like a streamlined game focusing on visuals and mass appeal to me.
 
Hrm, found the robots ok-ish for this presentation and I liked their pronounciations. Of course you don't want to have a game where you spend 70% of the time robots talking. But I highly doubt that this is their vision. :p

Also I don't see anything about the "streamlining" yet. I mean it looks good and simple. But that can also be a good interface. The "gameplay" shown is far too less to judge any gameplay yet. Of course there should be a mass appeal. But everything else would probably be stupid and also not really Master of Orion. MOO never was hugely complicated terms like any of the wargames. And I'd say that it's "appeal to the masses" is what it actually makes it so popular today. Because in terms of game mechanics it wasn't extremely good. MOO3 didn't have this streamlining. They lost themselves in complexity and a clunky interface as far as I have heared. So it would be rather unwise to imitate that one.

Personally I am also happy with the automatic fights. Seems like they will add tactical fights as well, but as I am going to play this in multiplayer I hope they aren't any focus (as you will have to disable them probably) and the combat calculations still give you something to build tactics around.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,699
Hrm, found the robots ok-ish for this presentation and I liked their pronounciations. Of course you don't want to have a game where you spend 70% of the time robots talking. But I highly doubt that this is their vision. :p

Also I don't see anything about the "streamlining" yet. I mean it looks good and simple. But that can also be a good interface. The "gameplay" shown is far too less to judge any gameplay yet. Of course there should be a mass appeal. But everything else would probably be stupid and also not really Master of Orion. MOO never was hugely complicated terms like any of the wargames. And I'd say that it's "appeal to the masses" is what it actually makes it so popular today. Because in terms of game mechanics it wasn't extremely good. MOO3 didn't have this streamlining. They lost themselves in complexity and a clunky interface as far as I have heared. So it would be rather unwise to imitate that one.

Personally I am also happy with the automatic fights. Seems like they will add tactical fights as well, but as I am going to play this in multiplayer I hope they aren't any focus (as you will have to disable them probably) and the combat calculations still give you something to build tactics around.

Simtex was never about mass appeal - and they certainly never streamlined their designs.

Probably not the best business approach, but I loved their quirky nature and rich feature sets.

That doesn't mean this game will be bad or anything, but I'll be genuinely shocked if it has anything like MoO2 richness in gameplay.

Obviously, if you're willing to settle for a "mass appeal" version of that - that's cool. That video screams of simplifying gameplay and boiling it all down to basics.

Can we know for sure? Do I have proof? Of course not.

You think they'll have stuff like marine boarding actions, miniaturization, telepathic warfare - and so on? I'll have to see it before I believe it.

MoO3 didn't fail because of a lack of mass appeal, it failed because it was extremely broken, unfinished and buggy.

Let's not rewrite history because we're in denial, shall we? ;)

Then again, didn't you think GalCiv 3 was great? I bet you stopped playing that already - or am I wrong about that?
 
I think your perception is just different. For you mass appeal equals a mobile game. ^^

But I would say that the Civilization Series for example is a game which has mass appeal and which is designed around being easy to access. And I would also say that MOO isn't far away from that. And if it's "streamlined" as Civ 5 is "streamlined" compared to Civ 4 (which it is) I am also fine with that. I criticize Civ 5 mostly for different reasons. ^^

MOO3 from wikipedia: Many reviewers cited the cumbersome interface, poor AI, and launch bugs as serious faults in the game. However, it did receive some praise for its massive depth.

And regarding Galciv3: There were lots of great concepts in the game. However the game was badly executed in my opinion (which isn't the opinion of the press, the game has a metascore of 81). But it's badly executed because the developer prioritized freedom and diversity over balance and gameplay.

I only did one playthrough of the campaign and a sandbox game at highest difficulty and then never touched it again. Gave it a thumbs down in my (not very structured) Review which is also in German.
But I explained in english what problems the game has over here by giving "help" to exploit the hell out of the game in the first steps.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,699
I think your perception is just different. For you mass appeal equals a mobile game. ^^

No, I don't think this will be a mobile game :)

I think it will be the equivalent of a MoO2 beer and pretzels game. I mean, did you take a look at the combat system? Do you seriously think you can have MoO2 level complexity there?

Probably around the depth of MoO rather than MoO2, possibly even less deep. Using some of the MoO2 features to pretend it's being faithful.

But I would say that the Civilization Series for example is a game which has mass appeal and which is designed around being easy to access. And I would also say that MOO isn't far away from that. And if it's "streamlined" as Civ 5 is "streamlined" compared to Civ 4 (which it is) I am also fine with that. I criticize Civ 5 mostly for different reasons. ^^

No, I don't think Civ 5 is a "mass appeal" title. It does have elements of it, and that's to its detriment. But, very much unlike this Master of Orion video - they actually tried to expand the combat system and make it more tactical, for instance.

However, I think SimTex was on a whole other level of gameplay richness. Truly, I loved their games.

To my mind, they haven't genuinely evolved Civilization since Civ 2 - and Sid Meier stopped being relevant as a game designer many, many years ago. They've added features and removed features, but the "complexity" has mostly been about boring busywork. I'm not seeing anything inspired or evolutionary in a real sense about Civ 3 - Civ 5.

MOO3 from wikipedia: Many reviewers cited the cumbersome interface, poor AI, and launch bugs as serious faults in the game. However, it did receive some praise for its massive depth.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Seems to support exactly what I said, even though critics don't buy games.

And regarding Galciv3: There were lots of great concepts in the game. However the game was badly executed in my opinion (which isn't the opinion of the press, the game has a metascore of 81). But it's badly executed because the developer prioritized freedom and diversity over balance and gameplay.

I don't think it's badly executed, I just think it's a terribly dull design.

Then again, I'm not a Stardock fan in general.

I only did one playthrough of the campaign and a sandbox game at highest difficulty and then never touched it again. Gave it a thumbs down in my (not very structured) Review which is also in German.
But I explained in english what problems the game has over here by giving "help" to exploit the hell out of the game in the first steps.

Then we agree ;)
 
Regarding the Combat and interface in the new MOO I will quote gamestar here:
(http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/master-of-orion/news/master_of_orion,52363,3237284.html)
Andere Fans monieren mehr oder weniger direkt das Fehlen der taktischen Kämpfe im Video. Die insgesamt zwei Raumschlachten, einmal gegen Piraten und einmal gegen ein Weltraum-Monster, werden binnen weniger Sekunden im Hintergrund berechnet und noch dazu auch nicht allzu effektreich präsentiert. Und auch die von einigen Spielern als billig und an Mobile-Games angelehnt empfundene Nutzeroberfläche wird kritisiert.

Dass es im fertigen Spiel taktische Raumschlachten geben wird, hat Wargaming allerdings bereits mehrfach bestätigt. Eine entsprechende Einstellung scheint es in der gezeigten Spielversion auch schon zu geben - sie ist lediglich ausgegraut. Auch in unserer Anspielfassung auf der Gamescom 2015 war das Feature noch nicht integriert. Insgesamt hinterließ das Spiel auf der Gaming-Messe aber einen äußerst guten Eindruck bei uns. Und auch das Interface schien bereits ausgereift zu sein.

And this is my quick translation:
Other Fans criticize more or less that the tactical combat is missing in the videos. Both of the space battles (one against pirates and one against a space monster) are done within few seconds via a background calculation and also not presented with many effects. Also the user interface, which some players call cheap and mobile-gamish is critized.
But it was already confirmed via Wargaming multiple times that there will be tactical battles in the final game. A setting for that is already in the game version they showed - it's just greyed out. Also in the version we played at gamescom 2015 this feature was not implemented yet. Overall the game left a very good impression on us on the convention. Also the interface was already well polished.


The combat is a very…controversal topic because everyone expects and wishes for something completely different which also depends on their playstiles.

Personally I enjoy playing 4X games most when I play against one or more friends and a couple of computer enemies. Now in this system neither a combat as in Civ5 works (except if you play pure turn based, which will take ages) nor the combat in MOO2 which is turn based and naturally takes ages.
Now the approach Civ 5 did opened up additional problems:
1. They were unable to program an AI which can actually handle this system. It's horribly bad in using the hex system to it's advantage.
2. The simultaneous turns have the problem that the turn based game almost becomes and RTS. The player who clicks faster with his scout gets the hut. If one player drives his scout into the range of a city or artillery and the other player is fast enough he can shoot it before the other player can use his second movement point. Combats become a big mess. My group played with houserules to avoid that.

So to me the best approach is actually how GalCiv 3 did it. Movement is turn based, all other actions are simultaneous. And combat works via an automatic simulation which ideally also shows you what actually happened (well, that last part didnt work in galciv 3).

There are 4x games like Armada 2526 which already offer you to exclude the tactical combat system, but in this case for example, this means that you basically receive no feedback at all. After a fight you have no idea why you lost or won.

So what I hope is that if they make a tactical fight, they also make a simulation which leaves you with enough info to draw conclusions.
Because if the combat is an elementary part of the game like in Age of Wonder 3 for example and you cut that part out, there is no use to play the rest of the game.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,699
I don't mind simultaneous combat at all when it's done well (Combat Mission and Dominions 4 come to mind) - I just don't buy that we'll see things like boarding and take-over, telepathic warfare, time displacement weapons and so on - when they're clearly going for a faster pace with streamlined gameplay.

All this PR bullshit of them actually having an OPTIONAL tactical version smells really bad to me.

Then again, time will tell.

But don't say I didn't warn you :)
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,315
Location
Spudlandia
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,315
Location
Spudlandia
No concrete Release Date for Stellaris yet, just that it should be this year.

Haven't looked into Andromeda yet. But I am also very multiplayer focused and after the last 4x games I have the biggest hopes for Wargaming and Paradox to finally pull off a game which actually works in MP.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,699
Watched the recent livesteam.

It was a bit better than expected, but it's clearly a streamlined MoO1 much more than a proper MoO3.

I guess if you want to play MoO1 with a pretty face and a few MoO2 features - it's not bad.

Personally, I want so much more.
 
I'm watching a livestream (Quill18) as I type. I haven't played any MOO game before, this one looks very polished (no bugs so far), looks like any other 4x space game I've seen so far, but then again, I'm not a fan of the genre.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
5,645
Location
Tardis
There was something I didn't like. Streamer entered a battle that was like AI's 2400 power fleet vs. his 1500 power fleet, but in the tactical map he just moved his fleet around and killed the enemies one ship at a time, and won easily. I understand game is in Early Access and the AI hopefully will be improved, but I prefer if the actual battles were all simulated from the fleet stats. I know if I play single player I can restrain myself from abusing the AI, but knowing I can do it easily removes part of the fun.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
5,645
Location
Tardis
Oh, that sounds pretty bad. Intending to play this in multiplayer I hope that there is a way to enforce meaningful simulated battles for all players.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,699
Back
Top Bottom