Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Chiefwaffles]

I'm basing my experience off my various completed games in GalCiv 3. It's sometimes.

Point is that you're completely overblowing the "issue". It's a minor (or severe, depending on how you look at it) AI issue that doesn't ruin the game. It just [slightly/moderately] affects Singleplayer games against the AI, but even then you can still play and enjoy the game just fine. The AI works. It is definitely not perfect, but it works for its given purpose and you can easily enjoy a full game against the AI.

It's not a travesty. No one should be fired. You're having a huge overreaction to an AI issue and claiming it ruins the entire game when it really doesn't.
Though I'd rather not argue anymore. I enjoy the game as it is and I'm really tired of seemingly being the only one enjoying games in these forums.

[Cimbri]

Naming a star probably doesn't mean it will always generate the same way.

I know how it works, still found it amusing.

[SHAD0Wdump]

So turns out one of the people who paid enough to name a star, or did they just take names for those I don't remember, put in the name Boatmurdered.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It doesn't entirely fit.

Considering the proximity to that star... I feel like things will sort themselves out shortly.

[umiman]

No no no no no.

The star is Boatmurdered. They left the "fuck the world" lever on and that's what happened.

[Retropunch]

It's a minor (or severe, depending on how you look at it) AI issue that doesn't ruin the game. It just [slightly/moderately] affects Singleplayer games against the AI, but even then you can still play and enjoy the game just fine. The AI works. It is definitely not perfect, but it works for its given purpose and you can easily enjoy a full game against the AI.

It's not a travesty. No one should be fired. You're having a huge overreaction to an AI issue and claiming it ruins the entire game when it really doesn't.
Though I'd rather not argue anymore. I enjoy the game as it is and I'm really tired of seemingly being the only one enjoying games in these forums.

I completely disagree - Sergarr is bang on. This is primarily a single player game, and as such the AI is the most important part of it. Other than that it's just text and graphics - it's not even like there are own civilization problems (riots, political intrigue and whatever) - it's just you vs the AI.
As the focus of the game is (for better or worse) fighting, then the AI being woefully inadequate at it sort of ruins it. It's like having a FPS game and having all the enemies stand still.

As Sergarr says, this is the third game in the series and one that has had plenty of testing in alpha/beta. It should have been fixed, and there's no way they should be charging for a finished product when the core part of the game is so broken. The fact that they managed to go BACKWARDS is the reason that someone should be fired, and quickly.

[nenjin]

What can I say. This parallels my experience with Elemental. Big swings and attempts to fix the game, then reverting those changes and going back to the drawing board, and the game releasing where half the features barely meet a beta-level of acceptability.

[Retropunch]

What can I say. This parallels my experience with Elemental. Big swings and attempts to fix the game, then reverting those changes and going back to the drawing board, and the game releasing where half the features barely meet a beta-level of acceptability.

Agreed, I should have learnt my lesson. The thing with GalCivIII though is that they just needed to port it to 64-bit, improve the graphics and make a few improvements and it'd have been fantastic - I sincerely thought that was what they were doing, and was willing to pay half-price for it (seriously £49?!).
Instead they managed to butcher the features that worked well and somehow make a really shoddy product out of it.

I sincerely hope they fix it though - whilst it's wishful thinking, it's one of those things that could go from rubbish to pretty good with one big expansion pack or content drop. A few (majorish) fixes to the AI, espionage/characters and a few general improvements to research/governance and things would be looking up.

[Aklyon]

All the rest aside, I like what I've seen of the tech tree redo in videos. Having at least 5 'laser' research after another were just annoying, while this one is just 'new weapon tech' > 'new weapon tech specialization' > move on with things instead of iterating for dozens of turns on the same thing for tiny improvements.

[Retropunch]

All the rest aside, I like what I've seen of the tech tree redo in videos. Having at least 5 'laser' research after another were just annoying, while this one is just 'new weapon tech' > 'new weapon tech specialization' > move on with things instead of iterating for dozens of turns on the same thing for tiny improvements.

That's probably the main feature that they've put in, and I do admit that it's pretty good. The specialisations aren't quite major enough for it to be a big decision (and so they are still just lots of small improvements most of the time), but it is a nice feature to be able to feel like you're actually making decisions in tech rather than just going for 'better'.

[takfpbi]

a series known for good AI

Someone said that GalCiv1 had competent AI.

GalCiv2 had terrible AI. The game design was also a trainwreck. But Brad wrote a lot about the AI, and some reviewer wrote a great dramatic story about what he thought the AI was doing, and the AI tells you what you did sometimes. Writing. Imagination. You play space empire games because you want to forget that you are not actually a space emperor for at least five minutes (and if you paid $40 you are really hoping to get fifteen minutes) not because the game is well designed or the opponents are competent. Those things are strictly secondary, and probably trumped by IF PLAYER BUILDS DEATH STAR THEN PRINT RANDOM "I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PAY YOU THE 2% ADDL. TRIBUTE NOW PLAYER NAME" OR "I HATE YOU PLAYER NAME" OR "I LIKE THE DESIGN OF YOUR DEATH STAR PLAYER NAME IT IS VERY NICE".

If you think the computer is intelligent, you have already bought the illusion. You are immersed. You want to be the space emperor. You can see it all in your head already. And then you are mad because your immersion breaks when the "AI" doesn't play the role that it's supposed to play according to the story in your head. But a person wouldn't do what you wanted them to do either. That's why you're playing a single player game. ELECTRO PSYCHO GIRLFRIEND 4X: "YOU ARE THE BEST SPACE EMPEROR, SPACE EMPEROR PLAYER NAME, DIE DIE DIE".

[Majestic7]

Why do I suddenly want to bang ELECTRO PSYCHO GIRLFRIEND 4X?

[Retropunch]

"YOU ARE THE BEST SPACE EMPEROR, SPACE EMPEROR PLAYER NAME, DIE DIE DIE".

I agree, but all AI is an illusion. We're a few years off a proper AI, so all game AI is just an illusion. That's fine, but GalCiv2 - and a lot of other games - do a pretty good impression of AI, which is what you pay for. GalCiv3 fails miserably to even create an illusion - or rather, it slips up at the most basic illusions. It's like if you go to see a magician and they keep pulling out the wrong

[Niveras]

Candlejack?

[sambojin]

If you want good AI in a space 4X then play Stars! Sure, you'll have to get over the interface design (the game was made by one of the Excel programmers), but this is bay12 after all.

An AI that:

Doesn't cheat.
Plays reasonably to its racial advantages.
Techs up reasonably.
Uses the parts this tech gives it.
Knows about minefields, stargates and stealth.

All this in a 20 year old shareware game.
Get it here:
www.starsfaq.com/download.htm#site

Sure, sometimes it derps around a bit. Sure, you can beat it. But it can and will beat you. While you were expending resources on defeating one AI player, the others would be striving ahead, picking away at undefended planets, and your main fleets might be well out of position to respond. It thoughtfully is always set to "War", so the whole idea of diplomacy is pointless. I even hex edited the computer races a bit (into copies of my player made races) and they were friggen terrifying.

Could it mount major campaigns? Not really. But it could still surprisingly enough beat you. With enough of them against you. Once they had been "optimized", it could give you a pretty good game, even 1 vs 3. I can't think of any other 4X that can claim the same.

If ever there was a game that needed an update, this'd be it. Let's pray that one day there's Stars! the next generation or something. Instead of GalCiv4: "Last one was a whoopsie" edition.

Compare, contrast and complain. Or just talk about GC3.

[Shadowlord]

If you want good AI in a space 4X then play Stars! Sure, you'll have to get over the interface design (the game was made by one of the Excel programmers), but this is bay12 after all.

Unless I'm misremembering, Stars! was incredibly simple even compared to Master of Orion 1. It did have multiplayer, though, I think. I'm not entirely sure I'm not confusing it with something else, though.