MOO3 problems
from 
Stardock Forums
Stardock Forums
Posted by Grifman on Usenet:
Looks like the latest version of our space conquest series may be in
trouble. As previously announced, the game has been delayed another
quarter and this was posted on the official forum boards this week:
>It's here at long last. We have all of the major pieces assembled, and we're playing through the game. Our focus has turned from designing the game to fine-tuning what we have and making sure we have a polished, smooth end-user experience. As we've always done, I'd like to share with everyone the philosophy behind what we're doing and what you're likely to see in the game as a result.
>We've been working closely with the folks at Infogrames to play the game and evaluate what's working and what's not. The good news is that we all agree on our evaluations. We've independently come to the conclusion that there's just too much going on at the start of the game and that we need to streamline the play experience. The better news is that we also have a pretty clear idea of how we're going to achieve that, and it's not too difficult to do. I'll give just a brief summary now, with the intent of bringing out more detailed information once we've had another week or so to fine-tune these plans.
>For starters, we realized that we've been designing a game that's really cool and deep at advanced levels of play. We've created AI-based helpers to build your ships, move your fleets, fight your battles, and manage your planets. That's incredibly helpful in a big game and addresses one of the biggest concerns that advanced players have mentioned about MOO2 and other similar games. But we've now come to the conclusion that we've actually done _too much_ for the players, and that the resulting lack of things to do is causing folks to feel a certain lack of control or lack of immersion during the early turns of the game. Fortunately, there are easy ways to deal with this that don't involve significant changes to the game design.
>Secondly, we've also found that a few of the cool-sounding elements of the design worked better on paper than they do in code. That happens sometimes. We've designed some really interesting systems that proved either hard to understand or hard to present effectively to the user. Those are being simplified or removed. These are not core systems, but rather elements of the game that are not absolutely critical to play. You still have ships, fleets, task forces, star lanes, lots of planets, diplomacy, and so on. For the most part, you won't even realize they're not in the game.
>Finally, we want to streamline the user interface. There's so much on the main screen that people are getting scared the first time they open up the game. That's not what we intended, and it doesn't have to be that way. We realized that the wonderful "everything at your fingertips" design was overly broad and showed too much at once, so we're moving some elements around, putting others in more logical places, and generally reducing the number of individual buttons on the main screen. You'll see mockups of a much more elegant screen design as soon as we can settle on the layout. Short version of the story is that we've been able to keep the breadth of control without overwhelming you with buttons.
>Rantz and Cory are very busy at the moment, working on the UI issues and making sure the programmers have a clear idea of where we're headed. Over the next few weeks, we'll be happy to answer questions and explain the latest refinements in more detail. Rest assured, though, that the core of the game hasn't changed. We're editing and refining what we have and making sure it's going to provide the best possible end-user experience. We all want the best game possible, and I'm very pleased that Infogrames wants that as well and is willing to extend our delivery date in order to make sure that happens. We all believe very much in the game and look forward to sharing it with you as soon as we can. Thanks again for your support and enthusiasm.
>Bill Fisher, Executive Producer
In addition, the word is that money from Infogrammes has run out due
to delays beyond contracted development dates, and the game is now
being completed on Quicksilver's dime - never a good situation since
the inclination will be to cut losses and run. At least one member of
the team has been laid off, and others are expected. So are features
being cut due to bloatedness or lack of money? Either I think means
some serious potential problems with the game.
Then again, maybe the tighter focus mentioned above will help. It was
also noted that the game had 178(!!!) UI screens, which seems totally
insane. Though I love the series, this just confirms my initial
impressions that the original game design was too bloated and promised
far too much. I loved MOO which was simpler than MOO2, so maybe the
feature cuts will help in the long run.
The real question now is can QS retool the game in the time remaining?
It seems like there is alot to do in the time remaining, including
developing an AI that works with the reduced feature set. I am
hopeful, but I'll definitely wait for the reviews for purchasing.
Grifman
Looks like the latest version of our space conquest series may be in
trouble. As previously announced, the game has been delayed another
quarter and this was posted on the official forum boards this week:
>It's here at long last. We have all of the major pieces assembled, and we're playing through the game. Our focus has turned from designing the game to fine-tuning what we have and making sure we have a polished, smooth end-user experience. As we've always done, I'd like to share with everyone the philosophy behind what we're doing and what you're likely to see in the game as a result.
>We've been working closely with the folks at Infogrames to play the game and evaluate what's working and what's not. The good news is that we all agree on our evaluations. We've independently come to the conclusion that there's just too much going on at the start of the game and that we need to streamline the play experience. The better news is that we also have a pretty clear idea of how we're going to achieve that, and it's not too difficult to do. I'll give just a brief summary now, with the intent of bringing out more detailed information once we've had another week or so to fine-tune these plans.
>For starters, we realized that we've been designing a game that's really cool and deep at advanced levels of play. We've created AI-based helpers to build your ships, move your fleets, fight your battles, and manage your planets. That's incredibly helpful in a big game and addresses one of the biggest concerns that advanced players have mentioned about MOO2 and other similar games. But we've now come to the conclusion that we've actually done _too much_ for the players, and that the resulting lack of things to do is causing folks to feel a certain lack of control or lack of immersion during the early turns of the game. Fortunately, there are easy ways to deal with this that don't involve significant changes to the game design.
>Secondly, we've also found that a few of the cool-sounding elements of the design worked better on paper than they do in code. That happens sometimes. We've designed some really interesting systems that proved either hard to understand or hard to present effectively to the user. Those are being simplified or removed. These are not core systems, but rather elements of the game that are not absolutely critical to play. You still have ships, fleets, task forces, star lanes, lots of planets, diplomacy, and so on. For the most part, you won't even realize they're not in the game.
>Finally, we want to streamline the user interface. There's so much on the main screen that people are getting scared the first time they open up the game. That's not what we intended, and it doesn't have to be that way. We realized that the wonderful "everything at your fingertips" design was overly broad and showed too much at once, so we're moving some elements around, putting others in more logical places, and generally reducing the number of individual buttons on the main screen. You'll see mockups of a much more elegant screen design as soon as we can settle on the layout. Short version of the story is that we've been able to keep the breadth of control without overwhelming you with buttons.
>Rantz and Cory are very busy at the moment, working on the UI issues and making sure the programmers have a clear idea of where we're headed. Over the next few weeks, we'll be happy to answer questions and explain the latest refinements in more detail. Rest assured, though, that the core of the game hasn't changed. We're editing and refining what we have and making sure it's going to provide the best possible end-user experience. We all want the best game possible, and I'm very pleased that Infogrames wants that as well and is willing to extend our delivery date in order to make sure that happens. We all believe very much in the game and look forward to sharing it with you as soon as we can. Thanks again for your support and enthusiasm.
>Bill Fisher, Executive Producer
In addition, the word is that money from Infogrammes has run out due
to delays beyond contracted development dates, and the game is now
being completed on Quicksilver's dime - never a good situation since
the inclination will be to cut losses and run. At least one member of
the team has been laid off, and others are expected. So are features
being cut due to bloatedness or lack of money? Either I think means
some serious potential problems with the game.
Then again, maybe the tighter focus mentioned above will help. It was
also noted that the game had 178(!!!) UI screens, which seems totally
insane. Though I love the series, this just confirms my initial
impressions that the original game design was too bloated and promised
far too much. I loved MOO which was simpler than MOO2, so maybe the
feature cuts will help in the long run.
The real question now is can QS retool the game in the time remaining?
It seems like there is alot to do in the time remaining, including
developing an AI that works with the reduced feature set. I am
hopeful, but I'll definitely wait for the reviews for purchasing.
Grifman
