Mascrinthus Mascrinthus

Stardock Please Revive MoO!

▼

Stardock Please Revive MoO!

http://apolyton.net/moo3/ States Stardock Considering Purchasing MoO

from GalCiv2 Forums
A `TRAGEDY` FOR THE FRANCHISE
(8 September 2005, 23:43 | MoO3) Master of Orion III spelled an ignominious end to Master of Orion, one of the best turn-based "4X" (explore, expand, exploit, exterminate) strategy series ever made, writes GameSpy`s Allen "Delsyn" Rausch at the start of his preview of Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords [see story]. GalCivII is the sequel to GalCiv from developer Stardock Systems, released just a month after MoO3 but made Rausch almost forget that MoO3 ever existed.

At that time [of GalCiv`s release], I, like many other turn-based strategy fans, was reeling from the tragedy [that was MoO3], he further slamed the third title in the MoO franchise.

News that Stardock may be preparing to purchase the MoO franchise from publisher Atari, who marketed MoO3 under their old label Infogrames, was brokered by Apolyton Civilization Site at the end of last month [see story]. - DanQ


Source http://apolyton.net/moo3/

This post is over 1 year old. Did anything come of this? Who would not like to see Stardock create a MoO4 that does justice to the franchise!?
strategy
67,150 views 80 replies
Reply #77 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
TBH, I didn't think MOO3 was that bad. Granted, it could have been better, but I think if they allowed for a few more patches it's marco style gameplay could have been enjoyable.
Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #78 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Starflight! That takes me back... wow.

Pogonip, if you have not tried it already, Star Control II is very much in the mold of Starflight though, unlike Starflight, it does still hold up as a great game even now (and it's hilarious!) Starflight is one of those games best left to memory -- not only was it very buggy, the game mechanics were broken (why not make your crew all androids?)

And I agree that a Star Control-like game would not be unwelcome; it's an idea that, to my knowledge, has not been tried since... well... Star Control III, which was about a decade ago, I think.
Reply #79 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I have to agree with you vinraith. I also have grown attached to the Korath and Altarian mythos. The Galciv team designed a really good game with great features you don't even see from firaxis. Please keep Galciv going.
Reply #80 from Stardock Forums Top

@ Jeff Graw, While your list of MOO modifications would make for an interesting game, it wouldn't be MOO. Some of your suggestions are obvious, others are MOO, but, others would create a totally different game, than MOO. Hope you don't mind, but, I've critiqued you list below.

1. Planetary management from MoO 1 (from the galaxy screen itself) - Yes, this would actually, be MOO.

2. Galaxy layout from Galciv - NO. This is a different game, with different game concepts which change the way the game is played.

3. The cool additions from MoO 2 (artificial planets, genetic manipulation, doom stars, custom races, world destroying weapons, etc.) YES. These ideas would continue to be good ideas in MOO.

4. 3D tactical combat like in homeworld - NO!!!!!! Absolutely NOT! If you want Homeworld, play Homeworld. Some of us Real MOO2 fans, don't play Homeworld. Different game, different concepts, different tactics.

5. Planetary invasions like in Star Legions - Haven't played it, but, since MOO1, and MOO2 didnt emphasize ground combat, as a major part of the game, little should be done in this area, other than updated graphics.

6. Evil/good alignment from Galciv - NO. There is no alignment in MOO. Any player can play any race how they chose. Ants are not evil, they fight in swarms to survive, for example.

7. Ability to customize ship visuals like in Galciv, while still keeping the complexity from MoO 2 ship design. - NO. I own GalCiv2, and I felt this was a wasted area to develop. While it seem like a good idea, it makes the game larger, and ship designs end up looking too similar.

8. A great AI - vague, but, of course everyone wants to have an AI that acts and reacts smartly.

9. A huge tech tree, with race specific as well as random elements. NO. MOO2 had 7 tech levels. It was not an infinite teching game. That is what made it winable in a weekend, not years.

10. Multiplayer - Of course. Games have to have multiplayer options, such as online and LAN capabilities, or why buy it?

As a big MOO1 and MOO2 fan, and purchaser of MOO1,2,3, GalCiv2, MoM, CIV 2,3,4 (and all its expansions) including Colonization, UFO, StarCraft, Empire Earth 1,AoC exp.,3 and frequent poster (in the top 10) on Lord Brazen's MOO2 blogspot, I feel I have some knowledge of what MOO is about. As it seems Atari is disillusioned about making a MOO4 after it's disasterous attempt to change what MOO2 fans liked about MOO with its creation MOO3. I am here posting to show My continued interest in a MOO4 done right. Master of Orion was at time, alittle campy, with its purple dinosaur, but, for those of us who watched the original Godzilla, we like that version over the later remake. It was the original. It started the 4x Space game genre and every game that came after it that used ideas derived off of it owes it homage. MOO1 had great replayability, MOO2 further increased it.

If you want to know what is good about MOO2, check out it's still in use website at http://lordbrazen.blogspot.com/2005/01/download.html

click on the Community Forum at the right and read what has been done in the past few years. There are new mods, there are still online games being played, although greatly reduced. With new online playability software, a MOO4 would be a welcome addition to this series.