Purpose of this blog

Dmitry Yudo aka Overlord, jack of all trades
David Lister aka Listy, Freelancer and Volunteer

Thursday, August 8, 2013

[MoO] Space Awaits

Following this post, I assume there are at least some MoO fans around.

This is going to be feedback/brainstorming topic. What new MoO title would you like to play?

  • Genre (strategy, MMO, etc)
  • Platform (s)
  • Distribution (f2p, paid, etc)
  • Particular MoO 1, MoO 2, MoO 3 (o_O) features you liked
  • Visual style and art
  • Anything else 

Give your ideas and remember that every vote counts.

59 comments:

  1. I particulary like MoO 2, and I'd really like to have that one modernized - and the basic prinicples continued. I tried MoO3, but that was a completely different game for me.

    It needs to be a paid game IMO.

    I'd like it to have the option of playing single player or as a multiplayer but keep it as close to turn based as possible. The charm for me was that I could take for ever for one turn if I'd like... In multiplayer there would need to be an option to enforce a max turn length though.

    A play thru should take more than an evening, so saving is important. I liked that the original had the option to play hot seat, network or PBM - and switch between those mode at will. The reason for that is that I like to start a game with friends, play the first couple of hours via network, and when the turns start to take a long time, I'd switch to PBM and send the save around.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "In multiplayer there would need to be an option to enforce a max turn length though."

      I believe there already are that choice.

      Delete
  2. Genre: Turn-Based-Strategy (Maybe make the space fights real-tim, but I'd prefer turn-based)

    Platform: PC

    Distribution: paid

    Particular MoO 1, MoO 2, MoO 3 (o_O) features you liked:
    MoO 2, everything :P

    - Joking aside, the skilltree you had in the beginning and could only change with the technology one researched very late.

    - The vast depth of the game that was still easy to understand and learn.
    Costumisable ships (It doesn't work without this)

    - Ground Combat, maybe add a real ground combat instead of the video.

    - Singleplayer and multiplayer, however the game doesn't need a singleplayer campaign.

    - Much more, MoO2 was great, and is one of my most favourite games of all time. It had some issues, and a lot of things that could be done better nowadays, so if there ever is a MoO4 I expect it to be mind-blowing awesome.
    Also... let's just forget about MoO3, okay? -.-

    Visual style and art:
    Tough cookie, I'd prefer it not to be "retro", however the classic races, plus some new ones would be nice.

    Anything else:
    - hotseat mode
    - more of everything :P

    To be honest, you could take MoO2, fresh it up with new graphics and new/updated stuff (ground combat, more diplomacy options, upgraded spy system, more customisable ships, more races, bigger maps, etc)
    and people would buy that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Any issues you didn't like about MoO 2?

      Delete
    2. A couple, most of it was due to the game being old though.
      Limitations of time.

      - No ground combat (Imperium Galactica 2 had nice ground combat)
      - Not enough ship slots
      - Not enough ship classes
      - Small galaxy (See Sins of a Solar Empire for Epic Galaxy Sizes)
      - Nowadays I would expect an enhanced diplomacy/spy system
      - Building in later turns was annoying and the automatic system unreliable
      - The late game was pretty boring with the stellar converter being the only effective weapon
      - I liked the idea of having biological weapons, but the repercussions of using them were too smal, again something that was most likely a limitation of the time

      Most of the issues I have when I play MoO2 nowadays (I bought it on GoG, since I don't want to risk damaging the years old CD-Rom) are
      from the limitations the devs back then had.
      The best way to make a new game of this franchise would be to give the dev team free copies of MoO2 and let them play it through and through, in both single and multiplayer.
      Then adapt the game to today's standarts, while keeping what made the game so awesome in mind.

      We all know that adding features to an existing model can have a positive and/or negative effect, so the dev team making MoO4 would have to be very careful about this.

      I'm not going to lie to you, making a new MoO game will be a tough job, but if it is pulled of nicely it pays off greatly.
      The X-Com re-make is a good reference to this, although it was a bit too light in my opinion and had some very annoying bugs.

      Delete
    3. One thing 2 lacked (sort of) was 1's enforcement of some small randomization of the tech tree. It was impossible to get all the techs without theft or conquest. In 2, unless you crippled yourself at the beginning, you tended to always research the same tech. A bit dull after a while. 1 could be really interesting if you rolled a game where only one player got Planetary Shields, for instance.

      Delete
    4. Ah, yeah I forgot that.
      I always played with my self-made race, a combination of Psilons and Silicoids ;P

      However I like the idea of tweaking the tech tree like this, it just needs to be flashed out better.
      Who in their right mind wouldn't research the stellar converter or doom star?

      But choosing between the doomstar and gaia transformation?
      If you're trying to get the diplomatic victory the later might be better.

      That brings me to another point, victory conditions.
      The game needs more.
      Maybe different ways to achieve victory over the antareans.

      Research victory puts a seals off the antarean homeworld isolating
      it, however parts of the research blacks out other parts,
      hence two or more races have to work together to achieve the research victory.

      This would also prevent a race that goes for the research victory from easily being overrun by a race that aims for the military victory, since they automatically need an ally to achieve the victory.

      And so on and so fourth.

      Now if you would excuse me, I have the sudden urge to play some MoO2, and maybe some Sins of a Solar Empire afterwards~

      Delete
  3. genre: 4X turn based strategy
    platform: windows
    distribution: paid

    basically: a MoO2 with updated graphics and stardrive like ship customization.
    if multiplayer is a must: ships designed in single could fight in a 15vs15 WoT like battle. (so just the combat with be multi)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with re-making a MoO2 with upgraded graphics. Then I would strongly vouch for a really extensive and fun tactical combat addition.

    Tactical combat in MoO2 was pretty dry IMHO. Replacing the tact. combat with something like space combat in starwars empire at war or maybe if you wanted to get really creative, something similar to X3 where you control the main ship and the fleet follows.

    The main overhead map and the bulk of MoO2 was designed beautifully fun and should probably be left as alone as possible. I think that if you let fans know that you were reviving the MoO2 and paying homage to what made it fun, you would get a lot of happy fans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where is innovation I wonder :) Not fun to copy the old stuff making only a new wrapping.

      Delete
    2. I doesn’t really need innovation, I would rebuy MOO2 if it worked in win 7 – 8 and the multiplayer(internet, LAN) worked well. If it isn’t to expensive that is.

      Delete
    3. Lets yakea look at Xcom it was good for the new that never played the old, but the core of that game doesn't compare to the original Xcom the game of the Old one was much better than the new one so the face lift of the new was just that. The content or the depth of the new one is not close to the Old one so yes new wrappings can be better if the content of said game is left intact. But once your start revising it to something else then no it does not work only for those players that doesn't know the first one. Play the Xcom and then play the new one and you will see a real difference in quality of game play.
      I own all 3 MOO games it really needs a good face lift.

      Delete
  5. Im thinking about an online turn based strategy Space game, with a casual approach like WoT did, with techological eras (tech trees)instead of tank trees, for the long run. Games would be played over a 24h cycle (avoiding most of the "nolife" syndrome), separated in nations/races, that would expand over a big space map (Clan Wars style, but for every single player online).
    Players would be able to customize their fleet/trade system with whatever they discover/build, validate an action, and wait for another player (chosen randomly within the same era) to "answer" that action over that 24h cycle (adjust duration of cycle with whatever you desire. For an hint at what i'm talking about, play an Endless Space fight sequence). That would be pretty quick, because lots of players would be playing the game. Players being within the same Race/Nation would expand (or not) depending on their results.

    A better player winning more often, even within a "bad/small" nation, would gain much more power within that same nation, being able to accomplish much more actions the better he gets. When his nation "expands", he would retain the amount of actions he had and be rewarded with special things (an ingame money like credits or even gold, consumables, etc...), while other members of his late "small" nation would get a little more "action points" thanks to the expanding territory.

    The idea is to reward good solo players over "platooning" medium players, while retaining a sense of teamplay (nation play), on an almost real time Universal map (1 world server).
    That would be playable on any device, it wouldnt cost much server money, and be playable by anyone who likes Sci-Fi at any level.

    The "era" scale (like a zoomout view) would reward "future era" players depending on their results, unlocking certain technologies/resources/territories. Therefore, invested players would have to play on EVERY era to maximise their capability on the later ones, allowing them to "help noobs" one way or another, and avoiding the "T10 concentration" syndrome of WoT, where bad players are often regrouped at lower tiers (eras).
    The sooner the era, the easier the gameplay (like in WoT ?), the shorter the action phase (like in WoT ?²).

    A rich casual turn based space game, where Time is Power.

    Some ideas out of my hat...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Just wanted to note that MOO 1 had some advantages over MOO 2 that people forget. Better espionage and also (IMO) better AI. For anything else MOO 2 was the best. Nothing is stopping you from taking the licence and making the new MOO a dual game : a paid turn based single-player strategy game and a multi-player more real-time version that could be ftp. That being said, please note that MOO has never been a RTS and Moo fans would take some convincing. Lastly please dont fall in the more is better route unless you manage to keep the simplicity, that way lies MOO 3.

    ReplyDelete
  7. turn based, complexity kinda like MoO2.
    it has to have the ship editor.
    if it is f2p there should be TONS(!!!!!) of visual customizations for the ships.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wee! one of the best games ever.

    I would really like to play an smartphone/tablet version of MOO2(clearly the best of the masters of Orion games).
    Don't change the game to much!

    Keep the random race possibility’s!

    Nerf or remove mind control(because it seems to be overpowered in multiplayer.
    Add an choice to save an building list (Auto build).
    Make an interface that’s easier to use on small touchscreen’s.
    Make galaxy’s that’s BIG (million’s of star systems)
    Make a clan system.
    Make it possible to give a star system away to a new player. So that it's possible to get your clan mates/friends it to your area.
    Make the turn's go automatically (Maybe one each 60 min).
    Make it possible to join forces on offence or defense. Give control of some of your ships for a period of time in battles.
    Make it possible to gift away ships.
    Remove the choice of giving away technology.
    Remove the chance of getting technology when you scrap a ship.
    Only make it possible to steel technology from players you are in war whit. Make it harder to steal technology for each time you do it from the same player.
    Give outpost's a limited capability of defending it self. For instance one unit of the best known beam-weapon.
    Give noncombat ships a limited capability of defending it self. One unit of best
    Make it possible to give orders about what the AI should try to do when you are not online.
    Make it possible to give orders to ships/fleets about where it/they should go and defend if they can. Also if it’s your allies/neutral planets.
    Make it possible, for the winner of a battle, to salvage a 5-10% of an destroyed ship/fleet.
    Don’t make it a pay to play/win game. No premium accounts, gold “tanks”. Make money on commercials, when buying the app(if you have to) or for starting each playing round(if you really have to). Don’t make it to expensive if it cost anything at all.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sadly, i never played an MoO game. I have them, but without Widescreen support, it's (mäh) not beautiful.

    But i'm still a fan of this genre. Played Imperium Galactica 2 like a maniac, own Star Trek Birth of the Federation (one of the best Star Trek games out there). I also have Sword of the Stars 1 & 2 and Endless Space.

    That's the a reason for me, to be completely against an F2P/MMO Version of this game.

    Genre: 4X turn based strategy
    Platform: PC
    Distribution: paid

    Features:
    Here i'm not against new ideas. Watch what's in other games, of the same genre, works and what not and combine this with your own ideas.

    What i like:
    - Ship Design (Like in Imerium Galactica 2 and SotS series)
    - a good diplomacy
    - big maps (Armada 2526 anyone? :-))
    - alot of tech to research
    - Trading (It's not well solved in most games)
    - a way to conquer a world/planet/system without the need to kill every breathing "thing" on/in it.
    - different ways to move between systems for each race (like in SotS)
    - Planet development (complicated. In Endless Space, it works, because you can build everything. In other games, lets take Galactic Civilizations 2, space on a planet is limited which means, you can't build what you want... I hated that.)
    - No Planet Development (Works in games like SotS)
    - Direct control over space battles and/or a good auto resolve AI
    - maybe the same for ground combat
    - a good story, maybe only a sidestory when there is no campaign (not really needed). (something like that was in Imperium Galactica 2)

    If i have more, i make another comment :-)

    Visual style and art: realistic as possible. I mean Ship Designs, Solar Systems (distance to each other, layout (it's retarded to put a gigantic gas giant besides an colonizable planet)), and what else you can think of.

    Anything else: Plz, WG, don't screw this game up. If you bring a great space 4X game, thats not f2p or an MMO, than i think you will win a lot of new customers and maybe even fans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. And I do agree that it should be a strategy game.

      Delete
  10. It's been ages since I played MOO, but honestly, what I really like the most about these games are as many customization options and personifications as possible. Designing your own ships, naming your planets, naming everything, introducing your own design: the more the better. I remember there was a really old game, called Stars! - I loved it. You could do pretty much anything with your ships in it. When designing new MOO, I recommend WG developers to have a look at Stars! for its customization options and the way it was played. It was an amazing game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Customization might be good when you have 1, 2, 5, 10 ships, what if you have got 100, 200?

      Delete
    2. In this case, give us only the ship classes. Say Destroyer, Cruiser, Battlecruiser, Battleships. Something like that, and we make our own Designs. Sure, you must decide, how they look but we can decide, what weapon layout they should have, what armorupdates, etc.

      Delete
    3. Yes, what Typhus said. There also should be an option to name the capital ships. For example, in the aforementioned game (Stars!), ships of certain class were always a part of the formation (group), these groups could be merged, or they could be as small a group of single ship. So in effect in the beginning, when I - for example - started with 3 small scout ships, those scout ship patterns I named (for example) Raptor class and the group of one ship each I named with the ship name, so in effect it could be something like "USS Orion" (group of 1 Raptor class ship). When the ships got more numerous and more advanced classes got researched, I simply merged them into one group, so instead of 10 one-ship-groups with individual ship names, I now had "Battlefleet Earth" group of 10 Raptor classed ships - and the one-ship-groups were passed to higher class (say, cruisers). By the game's end, only the ultimate capital ships, worth entire fleets, remained as individual ships in my army, the rest was merged into various battlegroups. And that's how I really liked it.

      Delete
    4. I had an idea last night, would be interesting to know what you guys think.

      Point is, only to have the ship classes is ok but not enough.
      There should be differences even inside a class. My thinking? Adding Core-System-Modules. With an such an Core-System the whole porpuse of a ship would change. If u give a class an CnC-System you would have a Command Ship. If you give an class a EWar-system you would have a special EWar Ship and so on. Each Core-System can also change the look of the Ship (like the strategic cruisers in EVE Online) and with it's look also it's possible weapon layout.

      Delete
    5. Check the Stars! game system, Typhus. I think you'll be satisfied.

      Delete
    6. "Customization might be good when you have 1, 2, 5, 10 ships, what if you have got 100, 200?" It never ware a problem in MOO2. You would make make many of the same ship, if you had more then one kind of the same class you would use an other ship design. For endgame I would give the different kind of ships a name that made them easy to recognize and a number so I could see how old a version it ware. If there ware a small deference I would call it something like Doomstar 2, Doomstar 2b, Doomstar 2c.

      Delete
  11. OWN SHIP DESIGN AND CUSTOMISATION. PERIOD

    ReplyDelete
  12. What about wg decision to introduce stalinist inscriptions in the game? you know.. the mass murderer lunatic.
    people are still eraged by this and I can asure you this wont go away by throwing some specials to the public.

    I also asked you if Stalin is a hero for you and demanded a simple answer: yes or no. So you wont acuse me of twisting your words anymore.
    You still haven't answered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Huh, seems there is no relation to MoO.

      Delete
    2. Well, it has, at some point. Some people declared that they are not interested with any WG game any more.

      As I already said this is a big PR mistake. Many websites about games (and sometimes even generally not interested with games) wrote info about it and you were showed a little like a Stalinist company.

      Before that inscriptions affair I would probably write what I would like to see in such space game, what would cause that I would play it and even pay. But now... I don't care. Also somehow I became less interested with WoT Blitz and WoWS. My eagerness (quite big a few days ago) to spend time for testing them and giving feedback is now much lower.

      Sorry, but such propagandish declaration, like you published, was really offending for many people. It is sad for me cause I liked WG.

      Sorry for this offtopic, will try not to whine about this any more.

      Delete
    3. Any links to those articles?

      Delete
    4. http://gamezilla.komputerswiat.pl/newsy/2013/32/napisy-ze-stalinem-wracaja-do-world-of-tanks-wargaming-glupio-sie-tlumaczy

      http://www.vg247.com/2013/08/07/world-of-tanks-patch-to-return-stalin-related-assets/

      http://www.golem.de/news/world-of-tanks-streit-um-stalin-1308-100833.html

      http://www.polygon.com/2013/8/6/4594394/world-of-tanks-stalin-emblems-inscriptions

      http://www.fz.se/artiklar/nyheter/20130807/wargaming-tillater-stalin-emblem-i-world-of-tanks

      http://gry.onet.pl/wiadomosci/propaganda-komunizmu-czy-wiernosc-historyczna,1,5568936,artykul.html

      Surely this are not all.

      Delete
    5. In this case, it's good that a new MoO is probably not made by SerB or the Minsk office in general. My guess, Chris Taylor would get the job, and in this case, i wouldn't have a problem with buying it.

      Delete
    6. Didnt think officially glorifying a mass murderer would cause a lot of pr-damage?

      Delete
  13. MOO2 was my definitely my favorite out of the three...
    Some ideas..

    Genre (strategy, MMO, etc)
    Keep the turn based strategy that was in the old titles. Why fix something that you don't need to. And it's the Master of Orion that all of the old(er) fans all remember.

    Platform (s)
    PC would probably be the best.

    Distribution (f2p, paid, etc)
    Standalone game like the previous ones. Not sure if this type of game is suited for a MMO like the World of... games are unless you make it so you fly a ship and upgrade the modules, etc.

    Particular MoO 1, MoO 2, MoO 3 (o_O) features you liked
    The research, espionage, and ship construction/customization.
    Being able to orbitally bombard planets in addition to sending dropships down with ground troops.

    Visual style and art
    Might be interesting to consider making ship combat 3D now that game engines can allow for it like Homeworld, but a turn based game rather than RTS. Ship construction can be more in depth where you'd need to determine if you want to concentrate weapons in one direction, or mount like sailships where you'd need to turn a broadside for the most firepower.

    Anything else
    Hope this is a good sign for us MOO fans.

    Anyone remember the Stellar Converter 'feature' in MOO2 where if you blew up a tiny hostile (Toxic, irradiated, etc) planet and made it into an asteroid field, you could later use the planet maker to create a barren large planet that can later be terraformed into a gaia that can support 10-20x the population that the original planet could?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Genre: 4X turn based strategy
    Platform: PC
    Distribution: paid
    This is good way :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Considering the fact F2P made WoT successful, I really wouldn't keep my hopes up regarding the system.

      Delete
    2. If its not an mmo it doesnt necessarily have to be f2p

      Delete
    3. I'd definitely prefer a MMO, but that would probably have to be very hard to implement. Strategy MMO's aren't exactly popular.

      Delete
    4. Right. Though it can be a strategy with multiplayer, like Starcraft (not in terms of mechanics ofc).
      MMOTBS/MMORTS seems to be a dead genre.

      Delete
  15. Genre:Scifi,4x turn based strategy
    Platform:Windows,Linux
    Distribution:F2p

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ok, will give some general feedback :)

    I see that some people want it to be paid (ie not f2P) game.

    I would like to play Eve cause I heard many good things about this game. But I do not play, cause I am not going to play a game, which demands from me subscription fee. Even 14 day free trial is not interesting for me cause it is investment of time.

    And I do not play Eve not because I do not want to pay for games. I do not play, because if I invest in a game account time and money I want to have free acces to this account for many years, even if I stopped paying. This is why I prefer F2P. And so far I paid in all F2P games, which I found fine to play (WoT among them) and I usually play these "accepted" games for many years.

    IMO F2P formula would allow to attract all those players, who would like to play such space game, but they do not want to pay fee. If some are eager to pay fee, they have already good, well developed games on the market.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Right, generally speaking I also prefer f2p to paid and especially subscription. However in terms of MOO, the question would be what to monetize in it.

      Delete
  17. Hello!

    Who would be developing this game? I love this game so I would like to follow the progress as much as possible. As for your questions...

    Almost everyone agrees that MoO2 is the best game so far. Ive seen many trying to copy MoO success, for a few Endless Space, Galactic Civ, StarDrive etc... I am pretty certain that MoO was such an attractive game because of its tactical combat, despite what some ppl might say. It really had a lot of diversity and even today I still find new tactics and ways to make the combat new and exciting. There is a problem when you have too many ships, but if you aggregate these ships when in large numbers it can be solved, just like MoO1 did. Also, look at what Heroes series have done with combat and you will find that there is a lot of space for your innovations. Like leader skills, maneuvers blah blah.

    Really love what you are doing, please keep up the good work ! Wish I could help more. I will try as hard as possible.

    Also, if you go for paid game, DLC is awesome. Like new scenarios for various races or contents, like cosmetic things, themes, etc... I've read the lore of MoO universe, much of it is pretty secret but what the MoO3 developers put in for the lore is pretty interesting. You can make a scenario on par with Babylon 5 story telling there. That is amazing when you think about it!

    Best of luck guys !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Things were MoO2 was very good at:

      Distinctive and useful technologies. Yeah, there is a couple that most players consider utter trash, but make a note about weapon systems and diversity. Endless Space made a huge error, they just put Weapon 1, Weapon 2...super boring stuff. In MoO every weapon has a different purpose and tactics, which is awesome, because when you design a ship, you really feel that you have an impact on the game!

      Leaders in the game was pretty well done. They were not generic like Endless Space for example. It could be improved though. Mostly leaders had PASSIVE advantages. Putting in some active stuff there will certainly improve immersion. Like ship leaders having some active skills in combat (sensor jamming, evasive maneuvers that would give an additional edge if used properly) and colony leaders could *theoretically* have active skills too, like a temporary boost to trade etc.

      Combat. Combat system need to be kept in similar format (as in Turn Based). Heroes of Might and Magic do pretty fine with turn based combat and so does MoO2, so don't be afraid of it. It can be improved though, but careful! Dont go wild here...

      Things where MoO needs innovation and improvement:

      Diplomacy and Espionage. Although what the MoO2 had was pretty spectacular for the time it was released, not it is pretty bland. We need more diplomacy options, similar to what Civ did maybe? And espionage needs to be overhauled and made more immersive. Why? Well because there are entire races dependent on this system and if it is too simple, then the gameplay is too boring with these races.

      Encounters, special events, quests. These are really good but a little bland when you think about it. If there were like mini quests that would give you some kind of rewards instead of "you entered system X and found Y" then it would be super. Also, please note that the intergalactic news is a very interesting concept which added some immersion into the universe and the competition between players (like the announcements who is better etc). Adding more vibe and content there would make the universe look lively.

      Delete
    2. Also, if you are considering an MMO, I can give you some feedback here too. As an avid RPG fan I have experimented with MoO universe and system and adapted it to an RPG-like system. I've been playing with friends a pen and paper style RPG in MoO universe for quite a while now and have been hearing only good things about it so far. I have adapted Google docs for such an activity and developed an extensive spreadsheet to accommodate our needs. I can share you an access to this spreadsheet and give you more feedback about our endeavors if you are interested...

      Delete
    3. Yup, I'm quite interested in a more detailed feedback.

      Thanks for the posts above as well.

      Delete
    4. Okay, I will try to make it short, for I can talk about it for years. I live in different city than my friends (Vilnius, Lithuania) so I created an online spreadsheet to make an RPG like game based on MoO universe online: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ali7Lte8MyHsdFFNX2NxMk9WYktVLWgybEJMcnh3T2c&usp=sharing (be patient it can take a while till it finally loads. Google docs isnt prepared to handle so many formulas in one place..)

      You will find there almost everything ported from MoO2 game, like techtree, combat screen, galaxy screen, ship design, character screen and etc. Just like in the TBS game ship design is very important so I've figured in RPG it would be very interesting for players to design their own ships and then fly them into combats and various other missions. Although at first it seemed difficult for players, but later they got a hang of it pretty easily. So they designed their own ships and I gave them a base of operations similar to Xcom style, where they could build repair and maintain these ships. The space combat itself was very interesting especially because their own characters influenced what they can and cannot do. Also I could make it very flexible and engaging so it was filled with action and challenging engages. We've done everything in turns, just because it is impossible to do it otherwise on a Pen and Paper style game, but it fitted perfectly and was interesting.

      Later they had choices like what to research and improve their spaceships as well as develop their characters, just like an usual RPG you would expect to be played.

      Also, I should probably mention that game mechanics were applied to it to the letter. So everything from chances to hit and combat speeds were just like in the original MoO2. There were a couple of issues that had to be changed for RPG to make sense, like some technologies were redundant. So we just dismissed them or changed a little. All in all it was a good experience for the players and we still play it after a full year.

      Hope this helps and let me know if you want to hear more about it!

      Good luck!

      Delete
    5. Sorry for the late reply.

      Well. I must say, that's really impressive. I will share it with the guys. Need some time to look it through.

      Thanks!

      Delete
  18. Just found this post today, hopefully I’m not too late to contribute.

    Genre: Ideally I’d love to see another MOO strategy game, I still have fond memories of the time I spent playing MOO3. I guess it could work in another genre, but I really don’t remember the races (I mostly used custom races), the ships were customized, and there weren’t any characters in the game. I’m not sure what you could move to another system besides the name.

    Platform: PC. I honestly don’t think consoles are worth it.

    Distribution: Preferably paid up front. I guess F2P could work, but I’m not sure what you could monetize. Portraits and unit designs maybe?

    Features: Customizable races – I loved MOO3 because I wasn’t roped into the premade races. The ability to choose perks and flaws and try different strategies kept the game fresh.

    Customizable Ships – Although it’s fairly common now, the ability to change the layout of your ships was amazing back then. More control to the player, not less.

    Expansive Tech Tree – The tech tree in MOO3 was broad enough that your choices mattered, and you had distinct choices.

    Control Not Micromanagement – This is one of those things a lot of the newer games usually mess up. I loved designing ships, or figuring out how to develop planets, but I don’t want to spend all my time working on it. Don’t give me a planetary grid and have me place building, give me a queue. I don’t want to worry about micromanaging weapon placement, give me a max mass/size for that ship type and just let me stuff modules on. It’s fun occationally, but it can really drag on during long games.

    Visual Style: This is a little harder to pin down. I think limiting race interaction to portraits, or animated stances works best for this type of game. The Civ series still uses this style when interacting between cultures/civs.

    Avoid going to high detail or realistic on any of the planet / space /ship designs. I think giving things either an animated or hand painted look might fit better,

    Anything else: I’d like to give more/better feedback, but without more information it’s hard to do. I’ll keep a sharper eye out :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's pretty much enough for now. THanks.

      Delete
  19. My favourite of the series is probably the original MOO. I played the hell out of it, and it had a simplicity that had a lot of appeal for me, while MOO2 had too much micromanagement in the late game.
    MOO3 was a lot different, and I enjoyed it, but it was probably a bit too abstract.
    You might want to have a look at Starbase Orion, an Ipad game that captures a lot of the MOO/MOO2 feeling but with modern features. I don't have it because I don't want to buy an Apple device, but it seems very interesting.

    I'd say that whatever you do should probably be b2p. Look at the Sins of a Solar Empire series to see a successful story.
    Have fun :)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Want to know what NOT to do? Make another MOO3.

    Want to know what TO do?
    - Update the graphics and gameplay for MOO2.
    - Play a bunch of GalCiv and let it inspire you.

    MOO3 was a huge disappointment. A great game can get you past graphical hurdles - Master of Magic is still fun to this day, and I play games like Dwarf Fortress, so that ain't it. Don't sweat about the prettiness factor.

    Make a solid mechanic and story, and you got us. Examples:

    MOO2 > MOO3
    Civ 4 > Civ 5
    XCOM 1 > XCOM Apocalypse & the new XCOM
    Older WoW > Newer WoW

    See a trend? Graphics might sell initial boxes, but they don't keep a playerbase happy or loyal. STORY sells. GAMEPLAY sells. Don't make it too technical, but don't dumb it down, either.

    ReplyDelete
  21. In addition to previous posts:

    Please do not make it too casual. It would kill the franchise by losing its fanbase. Other companies made that mistake and just made the fanbase run off for good. Especially in the 4X genre it should be easy enough to keep complexity while offering an easy enough casual option.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hey! Ek probeer register op die 1sab site, maar die register account button doen niks nie! :)

    ReplyDelete