Print

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

[motorbitch]

Sadly, SotS 2 still has serious playability problems which I assume are never going to be fixed.

the ai in sots2 never reached sufficient strengh. it just cant handle the complex techs or do the planig needed to handle admirals or decide what space station to build wher.

multiplayer is good though, and the ai is strong enough to provide at least fun while one learns the game. and, after all, the ai in most space 4x games are as bad or even worse.

i would argue sots 2 is the best space 4x up to date, though it could certainly have become an  even better game with more polishing, and if the publisher pushed ito a bus a few month before it was ready.

[Robsoie]

I have noticed on civfanatics someone was making a java version of MoO1 :
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=547552

http://www.java-moo.com/

Lots of interesting entries in his development blog, he hired a profesional illustrator to remake the old pixelated MoO1 screens into frankly amazing ones.

[Mephansteras]

Oh, now that's neat!

[Bohandas]

Every single attempt at remaking Master of Magic misses the point by a broad mile.
The magic systems are always weak, barely useful crap instead of the world-splitting power you could have in MoM, and if you don't have that I don't even see the point.
I don't care about graphics, I just want Master of Magic with online multiplayer and some basic quality-of-life upgrades like territory border lines, better diplomacy, ect.

Well Warlock 2 definitely has online multiplayer and territory border lines

[gimli]

Every single attempt at remaking Master of Magic misses the point by a broad mile.
The magic systems are always weak, barely useful crap instead of the world-splitting power you could have in MoM, and if you don't have that I don't even see the point.
I don't care about graphics, I just want Master of Magic with online multiplayer and some basic quality-of-life upgrades like territory border lines, better diplomacy, ect.

Well Warlock 2 definitely has online multiplayer and territory border lines

Warlock 2 is nowhere near the quality of MoM, but again, which game is? Worlds of Magic is horribad [which is based on MoM itself], AoW 3. and FE:LH are good games, but I wouldn't call them "MoM quality" either.
Now that I think about it...if Steve Barcia [Simtex] would create a new studio which would focus their work on a MoM sequel....well I guess they wouldn't have too much problems with a KS campaign.
That being said, I am not even sure that why did they close the studio in 1997, and I don't know, that who owns the rights of MoM or MoO. [It was Atari, but they had sold the rights later on IIRC.]

[TheDarkStar]

Every single attempt at remaking Master of Magic misses the point by a broad mile.
The magic systems are always weak, barely useful crap instead of the world-splitting power you could have in MoM, and if you don't have that I don't even see the point.
I don't care about graphics, I just want Master of Magic with online multiplayer and some basic quality-of-life upgrades like territory border lines, better diplomacy, ect.

Well Warlock 2 definitely has online multiplayer and territory border lines

Warlock 2 is nowhere near the quality of MoM, but again, which game is? Worlds of Magic is horribad [which is based on MoM itself], AoW 3. and FE:LH are good games, but I wouldn't call them "MoM quality" either.
Now that I think about it...if Steve Barcia [Simtex] would create a new studio which would focus their work on a MoM sequel....well I guess they wouldn't have too much problems with a KS campaign.
That being said, I am not even sure that why did they close the studio in 1997, and I don't know, that who owns the rights of MoM or MoO. [It was Atari, but they had sold the rights later on IIRC.]

Wargaming currently owns Atari (they bought it in an auction a few years ago). Hence why they are behind the new MoO.

[Shadowlord]

And here I thought Atari had fallen far when Infogrames acquired them and started wearing their skin and using their name like some kind of zombie.

[gimli]

Every single attempt at remaking Master of Magic misses the point by a broad mile.
The magic systems are always weak, barely useful crap instead of the world-splitting power you could have in MoM, and if you don't have that I don't even see the point.
I don't care about graphics, I just want Master of Magic with online multiplayer and some basic quality-of-life upgrades like territory border lines, better diplomacy, ect.

Well Warlock 2 definitely has online multiplayer and territory border lines

Warlock 2 is nowhere near the quality of MoM, but again, which game is? Worlds of Magic is horribad [which is based on MoM itself], AoW 3. and FE:LH are good games, but I wouldn't call them "MoM quality" either.
Now that I think about it...if Steve Barcia [Simtex] would create a new studio which would focus their work on a MoM sequel....well I guess they wouldn't have too much problems with a KS campaign.
That being said, I am not even sure that why did they close the studio in 1997, and I don't know, that who owns the rights of MoM or MoO. [It was Atari, but they had sold the rights later on IIRC.]

Wargaming currently owns Atari (they bought it in an auction a few years ago). Hence why they are behind the new MoO.

Ah lol...right. 
Anyway, this is what I found with regard to the MoM franchise.

ATARI auction winners - [2013]:


&
http://www.littletinyfrogs.com/article/444764/The_tangled_web_of_Master_of_Magic

"Now, fast forward to 2013. Who has the rights to Master of Magic? I don’t know. Atari doesn’t seem to think they do beyond their original publishing agreement for the DOS game from 1994. The trademark for Master of Magic expired some years ago and Nival (makers of King Bounty) registered the trademark with an intent to use (so we might end of with a game with that name at some point in the future)."
But it’s not clear who, if anyone, has the legal right to make a Master of Magic game that can lay claim to the original game except for perhaps, Steve Barcia and that’s just my speculation."

Eh...

[Atomic Emu]

Some new info from E3.

IMO the most important thing there:

During the demo, they opened up the technology research menu and showed off dozens of options, totaling 75 different research topics that each lead to 3-5 different standalone technologies.

[Aklyon]

Wonder what that Star Control franchise bit means, considering I know very little of the first one, the second one was released into open source and promptly rebuilt into the Ur-Quan Masters, and the third one was not made by the right dev and is more or less as relevant as the CD-I was.

[a1s]

Wonder what that Star Control franchise bit means

Based on the fact that the UQM is not called OpenStarControl (or TuxControl 2) but has all the plot/assets in it, I'd say we're talking about the trade mark (naming rights.)

[Shadowlord]

That is exactly it.

[Boltgun]

Wonder what that Star Control franchise bit means, considering I know very little of the first one, the second one was released into open source and promptly rebuilt into the Ur-Quan Masters, and the third one was not made by the right dev and is more or less as relevant as the CD-I was.

Star control 3 was an horrible train wreck, fit for game designer students to study what not to do.

[a1s]

Star control 3 was an horrible train wreck, fit for game designer students to study what not to do.

I though it was ok (not good, but there's still a couple of levels to go before it becomes Colonial Marines.) What was wrong with it? (linking to a blog article will be fine, if you don't want this dicussion here.)

[n9103]

Wargaming is probably one of the better ones that could have ended up with the MoO IP, assuming they do actually have the rights, as the article above casts concern in that direction.

I was also interested to see that they got the StarControl IP as well, and I'm hoping for a good interpretation with this even more than with MoO, but I'm more of a single-player guy, and the MoO games almost depended on multiplayer for memorable gaming. Never tried modding it, but maybe there's an AI patch somewhere that would change this?
Additionally, SC3 had a pretty high bar to pass, so IMO, it's not that it was a bad game, it's that it didn't live up to it's predecessor's standards. I think most of this was due to the drastic interface change, though some of the actual mechanics were a bit off as well. (Some of those race traits(?)... jeez.)

Suppose that'll do for my entry in the opinion stew.
And PTW, of course.