Just a question in my mind (evil smile)

from GalCiv3 Forums

Looking back at the GalCiv development, one certainly may have a question where the GalCiv 3 project would be now, if it had sane planning. 

I seriously believe we could have had THE best 4X game with the resources already spent, had the planners of this game had any brain.

I mean... Its a disaster how GalCiv changes back and forth, right and left. I do not mean to criticize, I state facts how I see 'em. 3 years now and the game is still barely playable (from bugs perspective). Interface changes, game mechanics changes, balancing for 3 years and the combat mechanics are yet to see major revamp. Combat mechanics? You mean - those very important mechanics that was supposed to be brilliant from the very start? Thats right! 

You will not get anywhere by balancing the game bit by bit and revamping it bit by bit because with new changes the old ones get new meaning. 

I mean - what those planners are thinking about?? The game has great potential and all that, but the execution of the project has been disasterous. MAYhem, as british would say now, MAYhem.

22,720 views 3 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I think there's a fair amount of regret going on - Frogboy has shared how he would have prioritised certain things differently had he been more hands on from Day 1. For instance, he'd have had the Civilization Designer in from the start and added the Ship Designer later.

My main beef is there doesn't seem to have been a "This is how the economy is going to work and no way, no how, are we going to change the basic structure. Build on it and improve it as needed, but ignore the haters and stick with the road we choose!" attitude Same attitude the team should have had with every other aspect of GalCiv3. For now, It feels a bit "Here's a new thing! Cool, isn't it? Um....Yeah...Didn't see the consequence arising. Yes, it goes against how it worked before, sorry to those of you who liked it but we prefer this new system".

To be clear, I like some of the new stuff, Citizens especially - and yes, they can do what they want as they want to create a game they want to play but from a consistancy point of view, that mechanism should either have been in from the beginning or left for GalCivIV. As should all other mechanism changes.

The mechanism changes also lead to either unintended consequences or intended consequences that haven't been thought through and implimented completely. The issue with buildings v population, for example and how they affect production. If farms and cities provide a bigger boost to all types of production - Wealth, Research, Manufacturing etc - then, great, how ever many hours of work in designing the factories, research labs, entertainment centres etc etc become useless because people will just build farms and cities and have a happy, productive civilization. They should have been removed from the game or balanced better.

I disagree that the game isn't playable but I'm not good enough at 4X to take advantage of any "Gamebreaking" bugs yet. I know there's an argument that you shouldn't take advantage of them, but also you could argue they shouldn't exist to take advantage of in the first place. If they are, in fact, bugs rather than intended things....

I still really like the game and am impressed with it and hope there's a major couple of patches left before GalCiv4 0.0.0.2 gets launched and yes, I'd happily be a Founder for that, too.

And it's Mayham as per Paulie Walnuts.

 

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Well first I would say that this is my favorite game. There is a couple of things I believe most people don't realise. The company has been restructured twice since the anouncement of Galactic Civilizations 3. I believe that the game was originally planned to be handed off after the beta, and was. 

When the third iteration was originally made meaning Galactic Civilizations 3 the base game. I don't think Brad was majorly involved, or preoccupied with Oxide. This was stardock's first 64 bit game. If Brad didn't hand off the game it still had a new lead designer. I'm talking about Carry's maternity leave. There did seam to be something originally lost in the translation from 2 at least interface wise. Probably caused from changing lead designers, and working on a different game engine. 

I do disagree about patching the game. I think monthly patches make the game better. I also liked Dlcs. The only major lost feature I know of was the wheel; besides, the large empire penalty. 

Offworld Trading Company
Reply #3 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

It has been a rough ride and there are still a lot of inconsistencies with new systems that are going to take a while to get hammered out.

But hammered out they will be,  unless Brad is struck by a bus or falling anvil.   What form that takes (continuing refinement of GalCiv3 or GalCiv4 "done right" from the beginning) is anybody's guess.

As an aside,  I recently re-installed Civ:BERT (gasp,  if you must),  and to my pleasant surprise the heavily (dozen+) modded game is actually quite a lot of fun -- and as a bonus,  it is super nice to actually be playing a game that is not going to suddenly change and invalidate my saves and strategies and knowledge of the game mechanics.   I really hadn't realized how much of a damper that was when playing recent games.   Guess its back to old/mature games for a while for me.