Worried after Podcast

So I just listened to the podcast.  I liked the enthusiasm of Paul, but grew concerned at the focus of most of the interview being on the interviewers complaining about how difficult it was to understand the slider interface and how great it would be if there were advisors like in Civilization.  I remember reading a lot of reviews on GalCiv 2 and I can't remember a single complaint about the interface.  Could it be improved?  Sure - but there is always diminishing gains to be had here - and I worry when resources are being spent on chasing demographics that aren't likely to be interested in the game in the first place.  I'm not trying to be snarky here - but if someone is having difficulty understanding the concept of the slider system on spending then they are probably not a demographic you should be trying to entice in the first place.  Personally - I hate RTS games - but even I agree it would be foolish for a company to neglect or "Streamline" or "Make more Approachable" the core mechanics in an attempt to woo me over.  Don't bother - keep your fan base happy by doing what it was that made them love the previous games and improve what they didn't like.  When it comes to Gal Civ 2 the only thing I hear people sort of meh on was the Combat and the Tech Tree.

As for what should be improved on - why I would say it is the politics.  The only thing I agreed with in the entire interview (When I wasn't gritting my teeth about the slider and advisor suggestions) was when they defined GalCiv 2 as primarily an economic and political simulation.  Absolutely!  So expand the richness of these areas.  Build a whole host of gameplay mechanics that encourages factions to interact or plot against each other.

The two most brilliant mechanics in GalCiv 2 IMHO were

1)  The enormous power of trade to increase over time - now I can't afford to let Power X gobble up my trade partner

2)  The ability to sell ships to factions.  Such a simple thing and yet it opens up such glorious possibilities.  I have propped up entire nations by selling/giving them hardware and got the thrill of seeing said hardware stop invasions cold.  Giving a lump sum of cash is not the same thing.  I have no idea if this helps - but when I see ships that I sold driving out the invaders ... ahhh ... I feel like a real PARTICIPANT in this glorious space opera.   I have also fostered terrible wars and sold arms to both sides.  I was disappointed to see this mechanic absent in both Civ 5 and Fallen Enchantress for Gal Civ 3.  Please, PLEASE do not get rid of this mechanic.  Some may complain it is exploitable but it gives such rich interactions and allows me to always participate in various proxy wars rather than the very tired strategy of turtling up until I reach God Tech.  And if it IS an exploit (rather than just ruthless politics) then crank up the difficulty.  These things that make me feel like a PARTICIPANT in this dynamic story is what is gold - slightly better interfaces, advisors or bling on my space ships - not so much.

Please expand on these types of participatory mechanics.  Other ideas

Galactic Council interactions much like Civ's latest expansion.

Different kinds of Trade agreements - Maybe I will help you in a war if you sign agreement where you profit little to none but I profit like a bandit.

Unmarked ships - Allow me to raid and attack but if destroyed there is a chance your meddling will be found out and your reputation take a hit

Perhaps your reputation will take a hit the more friendly your status is with someone before declaring war on them.  Perhaps you need to actively work to change your status as sort of a light casus belli system

Space Terrain with real strategic factors

When I demand something let me also do it in a way "Or There will be War".  They can call my bluff and I can not go to war, but at the cost of my reputation across the universe.

62,906 views 38 replies
Reply #1 Top

In the founders vault there is a picture of the economic screen just released in the last day or so.  It shows that the three sliders for military/social/science have been converted to a single dot on a triangle configuration.  This would give us all the exact same control as before and still be easier to understand and operate.  From listening to the podcast I never got the idea that they were going to simplify by removing control but rather that they would simplify by better interface.

Lets face it, if we can do everything we could already do in GC2 only quicker and easier I don't have any issues at all.  And if it lessens the learning curve while they are at it, great.

Getting into a new game as complex as GC2 can take a while and it isn't always obvious why a particular strategy isn't working out as expected.  This is a barrier to new players, even intelligent ones.  Having no idea what you are doing isn't fun.

I just got FE and FE (whatever the expansion LOL) today.  I haven't played that series since the original elemental, and before all the patches were done.  So after two hours playing the game today, I have an idea what is going on but it still feels like a lot of new stuff to deal with at once.  Lessening that impact can only be a good thing.

Also the more players SD gets addicted, the more money they have to spend on the next edition of awesomeness they have planned for later.  It is a real symbiotic relationship.

Reply #2 Top

After looking at the picture again, the triangle is between wealth, manufacturing and science.  Not sure the exact difference but 3 sliders to a triangle it still looks like an improvement.  I just wonder what the dotted circle around wealth represents.

I bet it is the farthest you can get from wealth and still make money each turn.

Reply #3 Top

Can't see the problem the more improvements. Your ideas sound good. I would like a nicer looking combat screen though. More three dimensional.

 

Reply #4 Top

Looking at the founders' economy screen picture it looks like there is a semi-circular dashed line that (I'm guessing here) shows the boundary for where the your economy goes from positive income to negative.  If that's what it is, this is exactly the sort of UI touch that has traditionally been left out (or treated as an after thought) in previous games.  I'm curious if that's what it is.  If that is what it is, it makes me very excited to see the rest of the UI.

Reply #5 Top

Quoting Kantok, reply 4

Looking at the founders' economy screen picture it looks like there is a semi-circular dashed line that (I'm guessing here) shows the boundary for where the your economy goes from positive income to negative.  If that's what it is, this is exactly the sort of UI touch that has traditionally been left out (or treated as an after thought) in previous games.  I'm curious if that's what it is.  If that is what it is, it makes me very excited to see the rest of the UI.
End of Kantok's quote

That is my guess.  I notice the picture itself is circle even though there is a triangle on it.  The dashed line goes off the triangle.  I don't know if there is any significance.  I keep trying to guess what it might mean with the idea in the back of my head that it might be nothing but pretty.

Reply #6 Top

Trade? Meaningful? lolololololol!

Had a good laugh at that. 

But good ideas throughout regardless. I also dislike the prospect of "Streamlining" this part of the game for casuals; the very thought streamlining is like a dirty word to me.

 EDIT; Oh my god! I've become one of the casual haters without even realizing it! D:

Reply #7 Top

I too am looking at the new economy screen and a new puzzle appears. GC1 and GC2 divided the manufacturing spending between Military and Social spending, but this picture makes it look like that is going away. Without seeing an example of controls for individual colonies, it is unclear whether the build queues for colonies are also being combined into one queue. Two build queues, one for military and one for social, was the result of a very strong philosophical statement by Brad. (Didn't even the OS2 versions of GC also have two build queues?)

Reply #8 Top

Quoting Lucky, reply 7

I too am looking at the new economy screen and a new puzzle appears. GC1 and GC2 divided the manufacturing spending between Military and Social spending, but this picture makes it look like that is going away. Without seeing an example of controls for individual colonies, it is unclear whether the build queues for colonies are also being combined into one queue. Two build queues, one for military and one for social, was the result of a very strong philosophical statement by Brad. (Didn't even the OS2 versions of GC also have two build queues?)
End of Lucky's quote

The podcast hinted that they would be combined but it wasn't clear how.  I recall him saying something along the lines of having colony's with no starports still having military production was silly.  I can't remember the exact wording but it left much to the imagination.

Reply #9 Top

Quoting lecek, reply 8


Quoting Lucky Jack, reply 7
I too am looking at the new economy screen and a new puzzle appears. GC1 and GC2 divided the manufacturing spending between Military and Social spending, but this picture makes it look like that is going away. Without seeing an example of controls for individual colonies, it is unclear whether the build queues for colonies are also being combined into one queue. Two build queues, one for military and one for social, was the result of a very strong philosophical statement by Brad. (Didn't even the OS2 versions of GC also have two build queues?)

The podcast hinted that they would be combined but it wasn't clear how.  I recall him saying something along the lines of having colony's with no starports still having military production was silly.  I can't remember the exact wording but it left much to the imagination.
End of lecek's quote

Didn't the screenshot in the PC Gamer article a couple of weeks ago show it flat out as a single queue per planet?

The triangle is great. It's the same thing as a bunch of sliders only far more elegant.

Reply #10 Top

Quoting Tridus, reply 9
Didn't the screenshot in the PC Gamer article a couple of weeks ago show it flat out as a single queue per planet?
End of Tridus's quote

Can you provide a link please?

Reply #11 Top

Quoting Lucky, reply 10
Can you provide a link please?
End of Lucky's quote

It's on the Media page at screenshots. 

Reply #12 Top

Just make the game you want to play and stop trying to predict how to make the game that will sell the most copies.  I honestly don't think the latter has been figured out yet.

Reply #13 Top

Quoting Rhonin_the_wizard, reply 11


Quoting Lucky Jack, reply 10Can you provide a link please?

It's on the Media page at screenshots. 
End of Rhonin_the_wizard's quote

I see four screenshots in the Media page, one of an aged Lord Kona, two ships, and a main map screen. No colony management screen, and no build queues.

Reply #14 Top

I second the keeping of the ability to sell ships to another faction.

Even better if it is expanded upon. It is such an interesting facet that isn't hard to implement nor understand

Reply #16 Top

Quoting Illauna, reply 15

https://stardock.cachefly.net/www_galciv3_com-assets/media/screenshots/ss4.jpg

 

On the right side. There is only 1 queue for each planet. 
End of Illauna's quote

 

Not sure I like that.

Reply #17 Top

Quoting Illauna, reply 15

https://stardock.cachefly.net/www_galciv3_com-assets/media/screenshots/ss4.jpg

 

On the right side. There is only 1 queue for each planet. 
End of Illauna's quote

ops. How did I miss that.

Quoting charon2112, reply 16


Quoting Illauna, reply 15
 
Not sure I like that.
End of charon2112's quote

I know I don't like that.

Reply #18 Top

Let me say, Your 

I remember reading a lot of reviews on GalCiv 2 and I can't remember a single complaint about the interface.  Could it be improved?  Sure - but there is always diminishing gains to be had here - and I worry when resources are being spent on chasing demographics that aren't likely to be interested in the game in the first place. 
End of quote


I cant promise that we wont be changing mechanics that you love, but i can promise that we will not be changing anything, unless it makes the game better.

I will say that the Focus on the sliders in the Interview was primarily a result of the Interviewers bringing it up repeatedly, I do think there is room for improvement in the economy is handled. (More of that later) But our goal, main and Brads, is the make sure that the game is true to GC2, we know that interactions like you describe with other races, trade routes, trading techs and ship, etc. Make for some great moments,  If anything we will be adding to these aspects of the game. So i think you will be happy.

In general I want to reassure you know, that as a fan of GC2 I love the richness and depth of the game, and one of my primary goals as the Designer of GC3 is to keep that Depth. 

Reply #19 Top

Further examination of the colony list shows a menu like bar with only four options; "all", "income", "class", "population", and a down arrow. Perhaps these are sort options (if so then what is "all" for?) which are too few unless the down arrow brings up an expanded list of options. My first reaction is that the "all" option makes it look like a list of filters, but the other options contradicts that, so maybe they are sort options, but if so what could the "all" be for. And if the down arrow isn't for more sort options, then three sort options (not counting "all") is beyond any doubt way too few to be useful.

 

On second thought, perhaps what is shown in this screen shot is merely conceptual, and I should not read much into what is there.

Reply #20 Top

Quoting mormegil, reply 18
I will say that the Focus on the sliders in the Interview was primarily a result of the Interviewers bringing it up repeatedly, I do think there is room for improvement in the economy is handled. (More of that later) But our goal, main and Brads, is the make sure that the game is true to GC2, we know that interactions like you describe with other races, trade routes, trading techs and ship, etc. Make for some great moments, If anything we will be adding to these aspects of the game. So i think you will be happy.

In general I want to reassure you know, that as a fan of GC2 I love the richness and depth of the game, and one of my primary goals as the Designer of GC3 is to keep that Depth.

End of mormegil's quote

I know it's a fight I'm not going to win, but I'm still annoyed I still won't be able to run my empire at full capacity. Either the factories or the research buildings will be forced to run below capacity due to the painfully artificial split. The split mechanic means it's always more efficient to run all factories or all research, with only the base colony tile providing all the production for the other category. Anything else means wasted tiles and wasted money on upkeep for the excess capacity we have to build but aren't allowed to use.

Reply #21 Top

Unlike GalCiv II, players will be able to control individual colonies much more precisely (IF THEY WANT).  

Reply #22 Top

Oh yeah this was miner, but I noticed things like when I made something like a research facility I didn't get the research or manufacturing points it promised. I assumed that this was called becaise the civilization screen worked of divying up whatever. Maybe I'm not clearly explaining this. All I'm saying is how come I never got all the points for stuff I built when I built it. This was minorly irritating that I could never get what exactly I built. Can someone comment on this to explain this.

Reply #23 Top

Quoting michaelwhittaker, reply 22

Oh yeah this was miner, but I noticed things like when I made something like a research facility I didn't get the research or manufacturing points it promised. I assumed that this was called becaise the civilization screen worked of divying up whatever. Maybe I'm not clearly explaining this. All I'm saying is how come I never got all the points for stuff I built when I built it. This was minorly irritating that I could never get what exactly I built. Can someone comment on this to explain this.
End of michaelwhittaker's quote

That is exactly what I posted about. If your civilization was set up to run at 1% military, 39% social, 60% research (my most common starting configuration), your research buildings ran at 60% capacity. Your factories ran at 39% capacity when building structures and 40% when building ships (because unused social production was rolled into shipbuilding, but without any bonuses to ship building your empire might have).

Quoting Frogboy, reply 21

Unlike GalCiv II, players will be able to control individual colonies much more precisely (IF THEY WANT).  
End of Frogboy's quote

Oh please God tell me this means I might be able to set planetary spending completely independently, and the empire spending balance simply shows the aggregate of what all my planets are doing. Let people grab and drag the pointer thing on the empire page if they want to move their empire as a whole, which would adjust individual planets to reflect how the pointer was moved. I doubt I'd use it much, but it would be a great beginner-level way to adjust your empire.

Reply #24 Top

Well then I agree I want the bonuses I'm supposed to get when I build the improvements.

Reply #25 Top

Great - happy to hear that the core elements of what IMHO made GalCivs great will be maintained.  I guess the spamming of (IMO) inane complaints from the interviewers really grated on my nerves and made me worry that the focus was shifting to make the game more casual <shudder>.