Good news, and congrats Stardock

About issues the game might still have - we will see what beta6 does in that regard. Beyond that, IIRC Stardock already said there are plans for DLC/expansions etc, so I take it that development does not suddenly stop after May 14.

The game is in a good state. This is the only good "early acces" game I know. As a Beta tester since many months, I think the game will be ready in 3 weeks. It might not be perfect but there is no major problem that will prevent new players to have fun with GalCiv III.

Thank you very much for your efforts and dedication, I really respect what you guys did in the last few months (and years, I guess).

I'm a little disappointed to see some of the comments but I think it does not reflect the opinion of the silent majority.

Keep up the good work,

Gothvan

Gal Civ 2 was and still is a great game. Gal Civ 3 is on a good road to that. However, I also feel two or three more betas before official release would help the game. Whoever wants to play the game in its current state already can via Early Access. And all the other folks, they expect a "complete" game. For me this still looks like a "banana game" - it will ripen at the customer.

As a loyal fan of Gal Civ 2, this is okay for me. I know that in a year the game will be better than now. But the reviews of magazines etc. will give the game a rating based on "what is", not "what could" (and hopefully will be). I think Gal Civ 3 can be a 90%+ game. 

But: It needs more work for that. Personally I would advise to officially release it only after more work has gone into it. Lets say two or three more Betas, where user feedback is analyzed and properly integrated. Could be two or three more months, depending on how you work.

I found out about GC3 half a year ago and decided to wait until the official release. I monitored the progress by reading the forum and watching the stream - and I'm amazed about how the game looks now compared to 3 months ago. Not just the graphics but it seems really fleshed out now.

For me the long wait will be over soon and I fully expect that GC3 will be a great experience.

Obviously I have to wait for judgement until I played GC3 myself, but I want to make the following point: If you played the early access versions, than it is possible that you are so focused on specific problems and "tainted" by the history of bugs you experienced that you are missing the big picture. You should try to forget the months of playing an incomplete game and put yourself into the mind of someone who starts fresh. 

Mbwah-hah-hah-hahahaha-haaaah-haaah-haaaaaa.... ah!

I've played many released games that were in much worse shape than even the early betas of GCIII.

In general and with the bug fix list in 6.2 supposed to go out this week I think they are very close to having a releasable version of the single player game, I can’t speak for multiplayer because I haven’t and never intend to play it.

However if on May 14^th multiplayer is crashing for a lot of people and isn’t playable I would advise them to delay launch. Because while I have no interest in multiplayer and agree that most players will probably ignore it, multiplayer is advertised as on of the new features that GC2 didn’t have so if you launch with it basically not working that would be mistake publicity wise.

I also agree many games have released in a worse state than the version of this game we where playing months ago, many games have also flopped or completely disappointed those who have waited for them, ahem..MOO3…ahem. So I don’t think Stardock should follow there example.

All this said I’m starting to change my mind that it won’t be ready for launch based on progress they have made over the past couple of weeks, but if you have advertised multiplayer as a feature it should work on release even if many of us won’t play it.

Nor will I.

(error plz delete)

I have to say I'm finding the game reasonably stable in single player even without the memory leak and crash fixes in 6.2 which you can read about here https://forums.galciv3.com/464667/page/2/#3545709

My concerns are more around broken features, planetary events for example I'd say over 1/3 of them don't apply well to synthetics either flavor text wise or mechanically. Stability wise I'd say it's reasonable on most systems, (although like most games I'm sure it suffers instability on some hardware/software combinations which is very annoying for those who have the issue).

As I say I don't play multiplayer and never will for this sort of complex strategy game I have to play when I can and prefer to have my own sandbox without other people to mess it up when I do play. So I can't really say how bad that is but if it's unstable for the majority or doesn't work properly that is a big issue since it's a promised feature.

MP won't be stable until we finailize the data structures. It's annoying And we apologize for the inconvenience.

It's the trade off of having so many updates in a short time.

I'm sure that's true, just saying that they aren't stardocks traditional GC audience since the previous game hasn't supported it and they will be a smaller section of the market than than the single player fans who have followed this game series so far.

But i agree with you since stardock have decided to try and attract the multiplayer strategy crowd by adding the feature they should ensure it works reasonably at least for most people from the release. 

You purchased 5 copies of the game? 

Way to go Mohobie!