1. Realize that this is NOT MOO 2.5. It's a completely different game and set of programmers.

2. If you don't like it, take it back or figure out a way to mod it. This game is extensively modifiable- just see some of the improvements made by players already:

Archangel Brian's Encyclopedia upgrade: http://www.ina-community.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=3554592


Insominax's GUI graphics pack: http://www.ina-community.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=269806&perpage=30&pagenumber=2

Modification Forum at Infogrames: http://www.ina-community.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=285

These people are trying to help. Civ3 is one of the most modded games in history, I think, Moo3 will be also.

3. If you have a problem, ask for help. Don't just gripe about Quicksilver or Infogrames, find a way to fix it. Yeah, it's their job... so? Either play or don't play.

For the record, I have not played Moo or Moo2, so this is my first shot at the Moo title. I have to say, I like this game. I'm no fanboy, so don't flame me, ok? Do something positive about it if you don't like the game.
:scan: :king:

Well said DJ54 - but you really don't think this will stop people, do you? ;)

nope, I don't think it will. If they start complaining about the game, I hope someone points out they didn't have to buy the game ASAP and stop being so immature. I have no patience for fools or flamers, much less trolls. After reading several other boards where all folks did was flame and complain, I've had enough. I hope this place is different and the players are mature enough to figure out how to make it work rather than gripe.

It is impossible to create a perfect game. Hell I doubt I could create the perfect game for myself. As desires and thoughts change day to day.

People just like to complain. Some do without reason just to make them feel better. There are however many people who complain with some justification and reason. These people should speak out.

"It sucks" is not helpful

"I dont like how I can only tell the AI viceroy manage all or nothing, in Civ3 I could turn on and off aspects of the AI management. I think that this would really help MOO3" Is helpful .. I think :)

Very nicely put. I was on the fence about this game, but think I'm going to pick it up after reading some of the mods already made.

The one thing that has given Civ 3 legs is the DYP mod (at least for me). The ability to modify that extensively WILL make for a fun game, eventually. That's assuming the game isn't already fun! :)

I can't wait to go get it.

:rolleyes:

This is exactly the attitude that prevents better games from being developed.
Why shouldn't people say it if they don't like a game? Why am I supposed to cheer for the work of a company whose product I pay for, no matter if I like it or not?
If I don't like a product I bought, no matter what it is, there is absolutely no reason not to say so.
If I buy some food that simply doesn't taste well, am I supposed to tell everybody it was great so that they can buy it as well without "being biased"? :rolleyes:
The company doesn't have to produce the product I like, and I don't have to like what they produce. But I have every right to talk about it and, if I want, never to buy something of theirs again. That's how a market economy works.
Imagine nobody likes a game but, according to your argumentation, nobody says so and everybody buys it. Why on Earth should any company produce anything better then?

Originally posted by DJ54
1. Realize that this is NOT MOO 2.5. It's a completely different game and set of programmers.
Realize that people know that but don't give a damn. Not being MoO 2.5 doesn't make it a better game. Being programmed by a different set of programmers doesn't make it a better game either.
For the record, I have not played Moo or Moo2, so this is my first shot at the Moo title. I have to say, I like this game.
For the record, I have played both MoO and MoO2, and they are actually my favourite computer games ever along with the Civ series.
I have to say, I don't like that game.

Now please tell me why it is okay to say what you said, but not what I said.
2. If you don't like it, take it back
If they would give me a refund that would be indeed alright. As I said they are not obligated to fulfil my wishes for a great new MoO game. But I'm also not obliged to pay and shut up.

But they won't give us a refund, at least not as far as I know.
3. If you have a problem, ask for help. Don't just gripe about Quicksilver or Infogrames, find a way to fix it. Yeah, it's their job... so?
What so?
That's all there is to say, they deliver a product, we pay for it. I'll assume that you pay for it as well, although an attitude like that would only be understandable if it was freeware (or something equivalent ;) ).
A software product is still a product that has to work. Otherwise they shouldn't complain if people hand it back. And that is what you do, and that is the only thing that really annoys me.
I hope someone points out they didn't have to buy the game ASAP and stop being so immature.
A product has to work at the moment you buy it. Anything else is immature.

But MoO3 doesn't even have many technical problems, at least not for me, so that's more a theoretical thing, albeit one that shows your general attitude.
Do something positive about it if you don't like the game.
Why can't I just dislike the game? I don't dislike it because I think it's cool to do that or because I feel great doing it, but for reasons that simply exist. I don't know if you always imagine everything was great until you believe it, however, I don't.
Originally posted by Angmar
There are however many people who complain with some justification and reason. These people should speak out.

Exactly. Of course it is not useful if someone just says "MoO3 sucks". But remember, he has every right to do even that, especially if he really doesn't like it.
And it is in no way less useful than those comment you can always read from fans, basically saying the game is great and everybody who has another opinion is an immature flamer. And that often even without having played the game themselves.
In the official forum there were loads of comments like "I'm still waiting for it to be delivered, but how dare you to say it's not good!".
That's a lemming attitude that doesn't help anyone but people who don't produce quality.

I'll say it again, I have no problem with anyone who likes MoO3. Fine for you, nice that you have a game to play.
But I really can't understand people who want to force me to think that as well, because I don't.

If they would give me a refund that would be indeed alright. As I said they are not obligated to fulfil my wishes for a great new MoO game. But I'm also not obliged to pay and shut up.
But they won't give us a refund, at least not as far as I know. You have 30 days to return the game for a refund. Contact Infogrames to get your refund....if they refuse to give you a refund then the EULA is invalid and you may copy the game and sell the copies at will. ;)

would they refund this?

I mean, I turned $50 into trash cuz Fred Meyer wouldn't let me exchange it for something else.... I might buy it when it's price falls to $15.00... but probably not.

Originally posted by DJ54
I have not played Moo or Moo2

If you were a fan of the first two MOO's you wouldn't like this game. I also think it is beyond stupid to say that someone that doesn't like the game shouldn't post or express their opinion.

Long ago my two favorite games were Civilization and Master of Orion. I thought Civ 2 was an improvement but was slightly disappointed with MOO2. Civ 3 was again an improvment(after patches) but MOO3 isn't even the same game.

Here is what I mean by that. Civ 3 is a new version of civilization. It inhances the game by adding new stratigic elements like culture, boarders and war wearieness and of course upgraded graphics. MOO3 is a completly different game than the previous two. Because the game carried the name MOO3 it gave fans a certian expectation. They wanted the same elements that made the MOO series fun to them in addition to new expanded stratigic elements and enhanced graphics.

That being said I still gave MOO3 a fair shot. I played it for about 30 hours since it came out and just couldn't squeeze any fun out of it. It didn't seem immersive to me and definatly didn't have that "just one more turn" aspect. In addition to that I had to put in quite a bit of real work just to learn the game. Apparently Quicksilver doesn't have the same philosophy as Sid that the learning curve should be gentle and fun. But even after I learned it all I still wasn't having a good time.

So just think about how dissappointed some people might be after waiting for four years only get something they didn't expect. Cut them some slack, it is their right to rant and rave. The game simply doesn't live up to the promise of its name even if it is fun for some people to play. Look at it this way, Call to Power is bad civ, MOO3 isn't even MOO.

Thank god for Sid Meier. I'm so glad he has stayed with the Civilization series the whole way.

Originally posted by Neomega
would they refund this?

I mean, I turned $50 into trash cuz Fred Meyer wouldn't let me exchange it for something else.... I might buy it when it's price falls to $15.00... but probably not. Well, you are right - there is no refund for idiocy. You could have at least tried to sell it on eBay for 30 or so bucks....or you could have returned it to Firaxis....but too late now.

Originally posted by Neomega
would they refund this?

I mean, I turned $50 into trash cuz Fred Meyer wouldn't let me exchange it for something else.... I might buy it when it's price falls to $15.00... but probably not.

It appears to me that you need some better anger management. I mean, it's ok if you don't like the game, and it's understandable that you're angry if you buy a game you don't like. But destroying everything, geez :rolleyes:

Originally posted by munzy
Well, you are right - there is no refund for idiocy. You could have at least tried to sell it on eBay for 30 or so bucks....or you could have returned it to Firaxis....but too late now.
And why would Firaxis be interested in it? :mischief:

Hehehe, well, to answer your question because they are forced to by their own EULA, but I get the joke. ;)

Originally posted by munzy
Hehehe, well, to answer your question because they are forced to by their own EULA, but I get the joke. ;)
Really? If you understood it like I did your answer doesn't make any sense at all? :confused: ;)

I can see a few different ways that it could be but I have been wrong many times in life. :)

I hope no one thinks my moo3 preview was a bad thing....
I just wanted people to know the game has bugs....
And what the bugs were....
I like Moo3....
But without modding and patch to remove the serious bugs..
The games not worth it sorry...

and to as why Neomega destroyed his game...
it uses a new copy protection on the cd...
some people can truly NOT bring back the game...

Originally posted by Hitro
But they won't give us a refund, at least not as far as I know. Can't you get a refund or exchange from the retailer? I know I always buy EB because.

Originally posted by Greadius
Can't you get a refund or exchange from the retailer? I know I always buy EB because.
I don't think so, unless I can prove that it doesn't work, which is not the case. I bought it at a shop that belongs to a large chain of electronic article markets and I don't think that they will take it back just because I don't like it, but it may be possible if I'd just whine enough.
However, I personally don't plan on giving it back, I will indeed wait for patches.

But the thing is that as far as I know Infogrames (or Quicksilver) won't give people a direct refund.
Anyway, my comments were mainly directed towards DJ54's attitude concerning software products. I have encountered the same on alot of sites for alot of games.
An example of that is a German football managing game called "Anstoss 3". I really liked it, but fact was that it has a number of severe bugs. So many people rightfully complained about it in the developer's official forum that was supposed to be there for exactly that, just to get loads of "What do you want? Make it better!" comments from the fans there.

That's definately not the right thing to do with bug reports, and I think it's also wrong with (constructive) critisism of the game itself.

Tell them that you do not agree with the EULA and demand your money back. They have to give your money back because of the EULA. I will test it out tonight... :-D

Originally posted by Hitro
I don't think so, unless I can prove that it doesn't work, which is not the case. I bought it at a shop that belongs to a large chain of electronic article markets and I don't think that they will take it back just because I don't like it, but it may be possible if I'd just whine enough. Ahh, then petition EB to make itself available on that side of the Atlantic. You can exchange any game within two weeks simply if you don't like it; no questions asked.

In terms of the EULA stuff, there's a few things to consider.

1.) Chances are, the EULA includes a clause that lets you get a refund of what you paid IF THE GAME DOES NOT WORK. IE: if the game is somehow defective, you can get a refund under the warranty term.

2.) A breach of contract for the EULA does NOT give you license to pirate the game. Chances are, even outside of the EULA, the game is still copyrighted. Distributing copies of a game without consent of the rights holder is a violation of section 106 of the copyright code (title 17 I believe). It violates the right to reproduce and to distribute the work. So, just because the company refuses to acknowlege the terms by which they're bound under the EULA, you are NOT allowed to copy and distribute the game.

3.) What you MIGHT be able to do, however, is bring a claim in court against the company. Either a breach of contract claim or a tort claim. If the EULA was truly violated, you might even be able to remove the claim to a local court, as opposed to whatever CA court the EULA probably requires you to file in. Failing that, you could always try for a class-action suit.

Anyway, I haven't played the game or bought the game, nor do I intend to, given the heavily mixed reviews I've seen. Galactic Civilizations seems much more interesting. While I'd love to play a true successor to the MOO legacy, it sounds like this game just ain't it. Every review I've seen has said the game is a real disappointment. Now, while some folks have said that you need to give it time, I disagree to an extent. Even complicated, in-depth games should be able to suck you in at the start. When I first got MOO2, I played it with the same "one more turn" attitude that I'd had with it's predecessor, and that I've had with the CIV games. From what I've heard, MOO3 just doesn't have that.

As far as complaining goes, I don't blame people who complain. I think the destruction of the CD and box and such was a rather pointless waste, but I don't know about this whole copy protection meaning that you can't get rid of it. What's up with that exactly? Anyway, people should complain if constructive criticism can lead to a better game.

I think the destruction of the CD and box and such was a rather pointless waste,

Naw, it saved me from wasting more time on it.

And plus, what good would it have done had I left it in-tact.... gathered dust on my shelf.

I am terribly unimpressed with MOO3.

I dont think they had a clue who their target market was, they certainly didnt get close.

Originally posted by Solo4114
In terms of the EULA stuff, there's a few things to consider.

1.) Chances are, the EULA includes a clause that lets you get a refund of what you paid IF THE GAME DOES NOT WORK. IE: if the game is somehow defective, you can get a refund under the warranty term.

Hmm - would this include if it does not work on particular systems? The 800x600 resolution makes it unplayable on some LCD and large screen systems. (Mine included).

System requirements listed 800x600 resolution. However, all other system req's listed are *minimal* requirements (as is typical). Only in this case, after actually trying the software, does one discover that this is an exclusive requirement.

I'll see if Best Buy will bite.

Ashoka

The reqs for the game are really low. And it actually works on my system ! I got a 2 CPU thingy and because of that I cannot play any game of Westwood, and more...

IMHO 600x800 is not that bad, even at 19" CRT. I've come from text-based mudding ;). I never played MOO1 and MOO2. I expected MOO3 to be a great management game, and so it is.

Just remember space is big, really big. If you don't like it, go try a faster paced RTS game.

My buddy pre-ordered this thing a year ago, and finally took possession of it. He's given it a try, and doesn't hate it. He brought it over the other day and I gave it a try and man, I gotta tell ya that I can hardly stand it.

A lot of stuff is simply too onerous to want to continue to torture yourself with. Almost every aspect of the game needs a redesign. I started making a list of things that should be changed, and ways to make it better. I quit after it reached the 5th page; 15 ideas, and no feeling of accomplishment at all. I don't think there's any salvaging of the game.

I did like the concept of simplifying stuff that they touted so much, and letting the AI handle most of the micromanagement stuff, but as I feared, in practice, it didn't work. I had no sense of accomplishing anything. There were far too many details to worry about. Do I really need to choose from SEVEN different attitudes in my diplomacy? A lot of the interface was designed quite poorly too. I found it very annoying to find the information I was looking for, even when I had the proper page displayed!

They seemed to have spent too much effort on making flash than on making playability and ease of operation. Did we really need to be able to rotate the galaxy in 3 dimensions? Sure, it looks neat, but they were smart enough to make it viewable from the top without star overlap, so what's the point of 3D? It'll never get used a second time. At least moving around the map was easy. How hard would it have been to use a little standardization in the interfaces? Was it really necessary to waste the miniscule screen area with needless graphics? Sure, those planet pics were cool, but it's not like you gave us a reasonable 1600x1200 screen area. I shouldn't have to hunt for buttons to open and close important information every time I need to see them.

I could see that SOME ONE tried hard to make it an appealing game, but SOME ONE ELSE seemed to do their level best to screw it up. It was like Hollywoodizing the book Watchers (by Dean R. Koontz). They tried what, 3? 4? times, and never came remotely close to getting it right. (I think they came vaguely close the third time, but then, it's been a while since I saw any of them.)

It was like the sequels to Highlander. Even the fourth, which was arguably the best of them, had almost nothing whatsoever to do with the original movie.

I really got the feeling that there wasn't a single person in charge of MOO3 that had even HEARD OF MOO2, nevermind played it. Too bad I didn't think to try and be a playtester for it, cuz I woulda told em it sucked, and they needed to see what the heck they were doing and play the previous game once. They woulda had a better game if they'd simply cleaned up the tediousness from MOO2, and implemented all those cool concepts they'd touted the last three years on its basic framework.

They wound up with a game that could only be loved by people unwilling to believe or admit they wasted $50 on it.