Jump to content


Extremely concerned about space battles and ship design

concerned ship design game development developers community ideas

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

Mikko_M #1 Posted 16 June 2015 - 03:33 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 19
  • Member since:
    06-14-2015

In a recent PC Gamer interview...

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/wargaming-on-master-of-orion-this-is-a-passion-for-us/

 

...Wargaming's Chris Keeling had, among other things, this to say about the project:

 

"Master of Orion has been copied and imitated for 20 years, yet it still sets the bar for the space 4X genre. Is that the effect of rose-tinted lenses, the fact that every space 4X is being compared to an idealized memory of perfection? Or was there something qualitatively different about the original Master of Orion games that nobody ever captured?

Wargaming are gambling it's the latter."

...

 

""The goal is not to perfectly re-create Master of Orion or MOO2, Keeling said. "It's more like, what would MOO have looked like if they'd had access to modern technology, the ...resources to make a game of this scope and scale and magnitude, and also had the last 20 years of experience with 4X games?""

 

And

 

""One of the reasons Keeling is confident that he and NGD will get this right is because 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 said. "They thought that 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.""

 

Now to me and many others that last part sounds the most worrisome, since like Aquasarrious so well put it in another topic:

 

"Sadly it seems they don't want tactical combat in their game (those lazy ass devs are going to fail hard with this game imo).
Seriously...what's the point ? Buy an IP and create a remake with LESS options than a game 2 decades old ? -___O..."

 

It sounds like the great tactical combat and ship designing systems of Master Of Orion 2 are either being cut or significantly reduced in order to focus on other aspects of the game, which is the completely wrong and terrible way to go about it since like the article said:

 

"Or was there something qualitatively different about the original Master of Orion games that nobody ever captured?

Wargaming are gambling it's the latter."

 

Now how do you plan to capture that qualitatively different feel of the original Orion games, if you are cutting key features of those games?

 

The way I see it, there are two ways you can go about with developing this game. The right way and the wrong way.

 

 

And here is a bluprint for the WRONG WAY of doing things:

 

- The goal of the project is to make a few bucks on the old legendary Orion brand.

 

- Key features of the original games are cut to speed up and make the development process cheaper.

 

- The developers won`t listen to the community that has being playing the original Orion games for 20 years + countless other 4X games while waiting for a new great Master Of Orion game.

 

- The release date is set in stone early, which will result in a Sword of the Stars II kind of experience, were the game is rushed out unfinished and untested leading to bad reviews and dissatisfied customers.

 

- Most of the money is spend on game media pr and the developers ride the Orion name heavily and tell us how cool and awesome everything is going to be.

 

Now the end result of this road will be bad to average sales, bad reviews, dissatisfied customers and the general devaluation of the Orion brand.

 

 

And here is the blueprint for the RIGHT WAY of doing things:

 

- Wargaming puts its money where its mouth is and the project truly is a "passion for you"

 

- The original great features of the Orion games are improved upon (not cut) by using the possibilities of modern technology

 

- - For example the space battles could be simultaneously turn based so that both fleets can execute their orders simultaneously

 

- - And the importance of diplomacy can be increased by creating a smarter diplomatic AI (that can make intelligent deals) and by adding new options for diplomatic co-operation

 

- The developers listen to the community and use the best ideas for their advantage:

 

-For example this idea from anguille_1: "Apart from what you guys mention, one of my favorite part of the first MOO is the spying system. IMHO it is still the best in ANY 4x i've ever played. There was no micromanagement (unlike in MOO2 or MOO3) and the option to target specific planets and research fields is awesome. I always used it to weaken specific planets before invasion or to weaken the economy." which could make the spying system both more interesting and add strategic depth to it.

 

- - More great ideas can surely be found in this topic...

http://forum.masteroforion.eu/index.php?/topic/58-what-do-you-absolutely-want-in-the-new-master-of-orion/

... and perhaps in the near future in many other topics as well.

 

- The game will be released when it is done, and by this I mean when it is both balanced enough and free of major game breaking bugs

 

- - There will be a lot of balancing work that is required for a game of this sort since the races, techs, ships, battle mechanics, AI all need to be balanced and made bug free.

 

- If there is a problem the developers try to find creative ways to solve them, for example a kickstarter for money etc. , and don`t just release an unfinished and untested game.

 

The end result of this road should be a great and balanced game, good reviews, happy customers, eventual demand for a sequel and the general prestige for your Orion brand.

 

So Wargaming please, choose carefully which road you want to embark on with your new brand.

 

PS. Still not buying into your 10% research results. ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Mikko_M, 16 June 2015 - 04:18 PM.


locke_RO #2 Posted 26 June 2015 - 07:26 AM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 1
  • Member since:
    04-28-2011

outdated comment deleted...

 

 


Edited by locke_RO, 26 June 2015 - 07:30 AM.


Executor_Tauron #3 Posted 27 July 2015 - 01:27 AM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 5
  • Member since:
    07-26-2015
You pretty much nailed it. You could share this on US forum as well. Hopefully devs might listen to fans.

Azmo #4 Posted 07 August 2015 - 11:13 AM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 5
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

i agree. without ship design and tactical combat it would not be master of orion. it would be just a generic 4X game.

 

ship design can be done even better than MoO2. look at StarDrive


Remember Tukayyid!


TrueAnothername #5 Posted 28 August 2015 - 05:18 PM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 2
  • Member since:
    08-28-2015

The most complicated about tactic/strategic combat I had in MoO2 was when at game start I accidentally hit the wrong button & found out I was unable to design my first warship when I had enough tech researched.

 

What was too complex about designing the ships in MoO2; the 10y old neighbors boy was able to do it back then? oO



Aramor #6 Posted 03 October 2015 - 09:30 AM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 4
  • Member since:
    07-14-2013
Honestly, Im not going to buy this game. Ship design and tactical combat were my favourite Moo2 features.

Colwolf13 #7 Posted 10 October 2015 - 12:30 PM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 6
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014

View PostAramor, on 03 October 2015 - 09:30 AM, said:

Honestly, Im not going to buy this game. Ship design and tactical combat were my favourite Moo2 features.

How can you already decide that your not going to buy this game because of the ship design and tactical combat when you have no clue as to what its like?



Ewalden #8 Posted 11 October 2015 - 10:10 PM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 4
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

There was a video released on youtube and on their facebook page, named "First Look". It contains two brief episodes of space combat, one against a pirate and one against a space monster:

https://www.youtube....h?v=4RUz80MUK_s

Notice that in both instances the space combat seems fully automated, on such a scale you can hardly see the ships? And in both cases it is literaly over in two seconds? What is the point of beautiful ship graphics if you cannot actually zoom in see them fight? Or control them?

Now, I played the Master of Orion games for endless hours. I still have Master of Orion II installed on my pc, the GoG (Good Old Games) version. My favorite part of the game is the space combat. If you remove that Master of Orion isn't that different from being Civilization in space, and while the Civilization series is a highly successful series, it has combat units you control. Even if it is a limited form of control. People love controlling units. Ask any Civ4 or Civ5 player, any MoO or MoO2 player or any Total War player for that matter.

Why not even ask the people, like me, playing World of Warships currently, if one of the main reason we play that action naval game isn't because we like the beautiful visual orchestra that naval battles are? We enjoy seeing big ships firing their main weapons at each other and there is a certain beauty in a ship's destruction. They are Wargaming. They know we gamers appreciate military mayhem.

Where they got this from I have no idea: "So while there are a lot of players that played tactical battles, there's not that many. It's about 10% of the players." I would like the know the statistical source.

I can litteraly make a counter statement: "I do not know of a single Master of Orion or Master of Orion 2 player that didn't love the game for its space combat." My source, well, it's my own personal experience, knowing what my brother enjoyed, my friends enjoyed, I enjoyed.
- Taking a Doom Star flanked by a phalanx of Titans to Antares was ever so much fun.

 

I must agree with the original poster, if they do not implement space combat as a tactical segment similar to MoO or MoO2 I believe the game will be a flop. If I had a choice between playing a modern version without tactical space combat or the old version with tactical space combat its hardly a question. I would go for the one that offered me more gameplay, not less. I might want to auto-resolve a battle I know I will win, but in most battles I will take personal control. I want to fire my massdrivers. I want to launch those missiles. I do not want to watch two fleets I can barely see annihilate each other in two, five or even ten seconds, knowing I cannot influence the battle.
 


Edited by Ewalden, 11 October 2015 - 10:20 PM.


Elfin73 #9 Posted 13 October 2015 - 07:24 AM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 3
  • Member since:
    07-27-2013

Really disappointed... why would they take out tactical combat ? it is like ripping out the soul out of the game -  controlling units and re-play battles it is what made fun this game. If i move this there away from that and send this unit there  to use that weapon or make assault on that ship that can be capture -  this could alter the course of battle not even to say the game. NO if there is no Tactical battle AS SHOWN IN THEIR COMMERCIAL teaser Trailer I will be really really disappointed - it was too good to be true!!!! not to mention that i am not buying if i do not see the game play Moo2 had. EXCEPT if Wargaming is in DENIAL and believes that Moo3 was a success! as I see familiar design from Moo3 kindly note that the game had sales due to the fact that gamers were misconceived it as the Moo2 and though that was that good - that is a fact! IS ANYONE LISTENING ?  Moo2 game play!

Unless as I understand you are doing it for other reasons apart from REVIVING A LEGEND!!!



GloriousProfits #10 Posted 13 October 2015 - 04:17 PM

    Ensign

  • Players
  • 1
  • Member since:
    01-27-2012

Relax. What you saw in First Look video was combat "simulation" (lol, that's what they call it. Apparently "Auto" was not good enough). The devs have confirmed that the game has Tactical Combat multiple times. Also, look at the "simulation" battle screens - you can clearly see Tactical Combat button greyed out.

 

What we saw was an auto combat. I think they have not nailed how exactly they want Tactical Combat to be yet. We just have to wait for more info ;)






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users