Master of Orion 3

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
I am a HUGE fan of the older Master of Orion, I have never played MOO3. I recall when it was released that there was some harsh criticism about it. Recently, I have recalled how much I loved MOO and I cant seem to find my MOO2 CD, so I figure, hey, the third installment is out.

My questions are as follows:
[*]Is it as fun as the first two?
[*]Did patches fix most of the things people complained about at launch?
[*]Any good games lately from other companies that have team members from the original MOO game?

thanks!
 

neegotiator

Golden Member
Jan 19, 2006
1,117
1
0
dunno if it had members from MOO work on it, but played a little Galactic Civiliations II and it's relatively in same vein as MOO.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
MOO3 was trash. Completely unplayable. It was so bad the developers abandoned it shortly after release and it was never fixed. Apparently there were some fan-made script file patches but they never fixed the core problem with the game. The graphics and performance were terrible, even for its time (used voxels for the 3d-combat). Most features of planetary management were not documented and their purposes and effects unknown. The combat it self was buggy, point-defense weapons, sensors, and cloaking never worked. The AI was atrocious. Basically all you could do was hit "next turn" every turn and in combat just throw your ships at one another and hope you won. I despise the developers and Atari for ruining the franchise.
 

Malfeas

Senior member
Apr 27, 2005
829
0
76
I hated the game. If you want to torture yourself, I'll mail you the CD's for free.

And I won the first three games I played, just by hitting the next button.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,711
8
81
Forget Moo3

Why not try Space Empires V ? I'm loving space empires V alot more than galactic civilization II, which I think is kinda boring actually.
 

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,365
16
0
1. It wasn't fun at all. The only good things about it were the shiny box and the intro, after that it was total crap.
2. It would take more than a patch to fix what was wrong with it.
3. Try Galactic Civilizations 2. The gold edition with expansion pack just came out.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Wow.... glad that I did not buy it, I take it Galactic Civilizations is what MOO3 should have been?

Why not try Space Empires V ? I'm loving space empires V alot more than galactic civilization II, which I think is kinda boring actually.
Might have to try it, that game is on STEAM and would be a lot easier than going 20 minutes out of the way to BB.
 

LintMan

Senior member
Apr 19, 2001
474
0
71
Stay far away from MOO3!

Fortunately for me, MOO3 came out before EB stopped accepting returns, so I was able to get my money back. (Probably only one of two times I'd ever needed to do that among the hundreds of games I've bought).

As I understand it, MOO3 started as a huge, very ambitious, and groundbreaking project led by the guy who literally "wrote the book" on MOO2, Johnny Wilson. Part of its idea was as galactic emperor you couldn't command every minute detail of your empire and would rely on advisors to run the day to day details (ie: what buildings to build on a planet), with you concentrating on setting the higher level strategies. You would have a limited number of command points or something that would allow you to directly adjust those details, but not enough to do that everywhere.

The project ran very behind, Wilson was booted, and the whole ambitious command point thing was scrapped to make it more like a traditional 4X. But the game's UI to deal with all those details the player was now responsible for was horrendous, and the vestigial advisors didn't work well. Worse, it was buggy as hell, the AI was nonexistent, and the game was unable to record a save in the middle of your turn. It would act like it did, but upon loading, all your moves since the start of the turn would be lost. People also discovered that you could win a game by just clicking the next turn button without ever making a single move. Those last two were what made me return it in disgust.

I'll second the recommendation of Gal Civ II. It has its flaws, but it's a milltion times better than MOO3, and it's even better than MOO2 in many ways (and I was a big MOO2 fan).

 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
Looks like everyone beat me to the punch. Moo3 was horrid overall, but especially when compared to all the other quality space conquest games out there.
I loved Moo2 and am really enjoying Galactic Civ 2 right now. I need to get my hands on that expansion.

The other guys summed it up quite nicely.
The developers spent a lot of time building up this wonderful startegy game, and then 6 months before release they changed almost everything at the last minute and the result was crap. Its difficult to control everything and darn near impossible to get precise control over most things. This is largely due to the point system being removed. The original only allowed you to do so many things each turn. That used up points. They got rid of the point system eventually, but so much of the game was originally based on that one principle that everything else was a mess without it. Also (cuz I like repeating other people over and over again) the UI was a big mess. Difficult to find important info, details were meaningless or impossible to find, you always had to click a bunch of times to see the essential screens. Not intuitive either, especially compared to other games.

Finally, one of the most important parts of any space conquest game: The Fleet.
PAIN IN THE BUTT!
Couldnt design ships nearly as easy as Moo2 or any other space game. Couldnt organize fleets worth a damn. The game would try and let you think you could, but it was really just a mess. Even if you thought you had made a fleet capable of completing a certain task, they would get there and fall apart.
Crappy to nonexistant combat control as well.

Overall, 2/10. It gets 1 point for the effort and another for some halfway decent graphics once in a while.
 

Malladine

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
4,618
0
71
Originally posted by: QuantumPion
MOO3 was trash. Completely unplayable. It was so bad the developers abandoned it shortly after release and it was never fixed. Apparently there were some fan-made script file patches but they never fixed the core problem with the game. The graphics and performance were terrible, even for its time (used voxels for the 3d-combat). Most features of planetary management were not documented and their purposes and effects unknown. The combat it self was buggy, point-defense weapons, sensors, and cloaking never worked. The AI was atrocious. Basically all you could do was hit "next turn" every turn and in combat just throw your ships at one another and hope you won. I despise the developers and Atari for ruining the franchise.
well...it was ****** but not "unplayable."
It was much like playing a spreadsheet most of the time...
 

Malladine

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
4,618
0
71
Originally posted by: lozina
Forget Moo3

Why not try Space Empires V ? I'm loving space empires V alot more than galactic civilization II, which I think is kinda boring actually.
why? what about space empire V makes it that much fun? bullet points please...i'm tired lol :)
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Is galactic civilisations II like imperium galactica II? I liked imperium galactica II.

Is it really complicated and time consuming?
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
Imperium Galactica 2 was a great game, yes, but its only slightly similar to Galactic Civilizations 2.
I'll be going to work in a minute, on my first break I'll do an in-depth comparison of the two.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
1
0
alienbabeltech.com
Atari, huh?
:disgust:

they ruined NWN2 ... hopefully not permanently ... but i am beginning to sense a *trend* :|



OP, i thought you were gonna play PS:T after Fable :p
:confused:
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
MOO2 was never a game that I played consistently, I would play it for a few hours in one day and leave it be for a month, then get another hit when I felt the "moo urge" think of it as a supplement.

Part of the reason I play lost and found with it so much.....
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
Heh, I just play MOO on dosbox every once in a while. I tried MOO3 but never got far with it. I couldn't even figure out how to build a ship.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
Alright, for simplicity I'll refer to Imperium Galactica 2 as IG2, and Galactic Civilizations 2 as GC2.
GC2 has 3D combat but it doesnt look quite as good as IG2. It also wont let you issue any commands. You just have to wait it out. You do have complete control over battle speed and viewing angle though.
GC2 lets you completely cutomize ships even down to trim pieces that have no practical use. However, like IG2 you dont really need to make tough decisions because you will always want to put on the "best" weapons and armor: items that give you the most points while taking up the least space. Also, there are no real "special" modules to put on ships. However, you do have to decide how many (if any) points you want to put into mass driver weapons, energy beams or missles. Conversely, you need to decide how much armor, shields or point defense you want, if any. So you do have to make some decisions when building ships, but its not quite as details or brain-intensive as Moo2, where you had a buttload of weapons and any of them could be upgraded in 4 or 5 ways.

Also, in GC2 you can choose to spend as much space as you want on engines. You can vary your speed between 1 and almost 100 (I think) depending on how much space you have available and your tech level of engines. All this put togther has the distinc advantage of letting you add speed, weapons and armor to your colony, construction and transport ships.

In GC2 you can have some planetary defenses but its not as involved as IG2 or Moo2. Also, unlike IG2 you dont build battlestations right around your planets. You put them out in space. You can have as many as you want but it makes sense to build fewer of them and then upgrade. Every time you fly another constructor out to a base you can give it a new module. When you advance technology far enough I think you can have around 75 modules on one base.

You can have three different types of bases. Influence, Military and Trade. All of them let you add weapon and defense modules, but the military ones also improve the stats of nearby ships. If you can get the radius high enough and add enough Assist modules you can improve a light fighter with 2 points of energy damage and no armor and turn it into a powerhouse with 20 points of all weapons and 10 points in all defenses, just for being nearby.

One last note, instead of building one of every type of planet improvement (like in Moo) you have multiple build zones across each planet that can have whatever you like (similar to Ascendancy). They can also be upgraded when your technology improves (similar to IG2). Some zones are useless until terraformed. Some do better if you put a certain type of building in them like research or manufacturing. Also, farms are helpful, but not absolutely required in this game. Food only increases your max population and I dont think people can actually starve.

As for planet invasion, you have limited control like in Moo2, you just send a bunch of transports to a planet and maybe issue a general strategy then sit back and watch. No tank games like IG2. You are not able to sit off-world and bombard with ships either. They can only attack other ships in orbit.
 

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,365
16
0
A couple of corrections since patches have changed a few things here and there. I'm not hundred percent sure of anything in the game right now, but there are special modules for ships Sensor, Survey, Transport, Cargo, and Colony. I think the number of bases is limited to 4 per sector. For a base to boost a ships armor it does have to have at least one point of armor to begin with. People can starve in the game.