[quote who="Wintersong" reply="4" id="3407857"]Moving from hex to hex? That would be a curious idea. [/quote] Maybe they'll make a separate map for star systems, like in MoO2 or Ascendancy. Well, maybe not like Ascendancy. That one was in 3D. [e digicons]:S[/e]
[quote who="Shandzin" reply="35" id="3407855"]No. These are not any good new features, just alterations that don't introduce something new to the game.[/quote] The GalCiv series never had multiplayer before. So, how does adding it not introduce something new to the game?
They're already on it. From the announcement : "We’re putting new stuff out on the map besides anomalies, because it adds depth to how you explore and colonize the galaxy."
[quote who="Shandzin" reply="32" id="3407799"]GC1 and GC2 are good games, and i am afraid that nothing new will be added in GC3.[/quote] Are multiplayer and hex tiles, instead of squares, not something new? In any case, the game has just been announced. It's a bit early to doubt, that there will be anything new, don't you think? Let's give them some time to show us what they've got.
I'm seeing it too.
[quote who="Martok" reply="21" id="3407644"]Hello Hortz. I see your obsession with animations hasn't abated at all. [/quote] Yes, he is still the same .
[quote who="Mgalekgolo" reply="13" id="3407671"]It covers what happened before the campaign started (History of the Drengins and Arceans, the Stargates, how the Terrans took their place among the stars), what happens during the campaigns and what situation is at the end of GalCiv2.[/quote] It also includes a few retcons. However, they are relatively minor when compared to what Blizzard did with their games.
[quote who="Pikosil" reply="21" id="3407465"]Your opinion is marginal and irrelevant. The single thing most people complain about in any game, but can't precisely articulate, are the animations. Animations are even more important than graphics. You can see this in Resident Evil 4, graphics age, good animations don't.[/quote] GalCiv 3 is, first and foremost, a strategy game. Gameplay is, therefore, much more important that graphics or animations.
[quote who="Clocknova" reply="8" id="3407291"] I found it kind of ridiculous that tech I had researched in one mission was suddenly forgotten in the next. It seemed very artificial and I quickly lost interest. I'm a sandbox player all the way.[/quote] That was because each mission in the campaign was essentially a separate scenario. However, it wasn't as bad in the DA and TotA campaign, because you didn't start over from scratch completely in each mission
[quote who="Starbound_Dust" reply="5" id="3407265"]They still needed 'farms' to increase the population cap, but these were called energy crystals, or something like that,[/quote] They were called Charging Stalks. The Yor are my favourites too, but they were so even before TotA came out.
[quote who="amrbean" reply="27" id="3407214"]This is from Steam Support: http://i.imgur.com/4sa1Ln6.jpg [/quote] I was asking for a link to where Gabe himself said that. The support staff can say anything. It wouldn't surprise me, if they just keep repeating what they heard from others. Also, if Valve is really intending to do this, then why isn't it mentioned in the SSA? That would be kind of important to ease people&#
[quote who="Galacticruler5000" reply="10" id="3407192"] I thought the Snathi became insects back on ToTA...or was that a mod....?[/quote] That was a change in Tolmekian's Tech Tree Fix mod.
[quote who="charon2112" reply="10" id="3407159"]I bet that everyone that says they don't see a need for a different badge is only a $39 founder... [/quote] I bought the Founder's Elite version. However, I did so to support Stardock, not to get some form of status symbol. I couldn't care less about those.
[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="39" id="3407124"] What he means about freebie is "what would prevent someone with a wide civilization from using those same techs to build a really tall, really wide civilization?" If there's a tech that lets you add 10 tiles to each of your planets so your 20 planet civilization can compete with a 100 planet civilization, what is keeping that opposing 100 planet civilization from doing the same to all of its planets?[/quote] Th
Yeah, I don't see the need either.
[quote who="NitroX infinity" reply="5" id="3407028"] Strange. How can the Snathi become a major race when in every game I played, I wiped them out? [/quote] I'm probably the only one, who managed to get wiped out by the Snathi. [e digicons]:([/e] In my defense, it only happened once, and I had modded all minor races to be able to colonise and use better AI algorithms.
[quote]Any details about multiplayer?[/quote] The FAQ has been updated. It now says, that there will be both online and hotseat multiplayer, plus some form of asynchronous play. Edit: Forgot to say: Great job making that list! [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]
[quote who="Alstein" reply="90" id="3406849"]I did check this for LH. You did to launch the game, but not to run it.[/quote] I tried this, but LH always quits after a couple seconds, once I terminate the Steam process. I'm really curios why it works for you and Frogboy, but not for me. [e digicons] Are you perhaps running the beta for 1.4? Maybe that's it. I only tested version 1.3. [quote who="Alstein" reply="90" id="3406849"]What I w
[quote who="Weidbrewer" reply="78" id="3406761"]I think what Gaunathor's concern is one of order - you're booting the game, then killing the client, showing that Steam is required to run the game. He'd like to be able to just load the game without having to have the Steam client start at all.[/quote] Exactly. [quote who="Hollow Man" reply="81" id="3406772"]Yeah, you can simply download the installers from the Stardock store. I didn't realize that un
[quote who="nomotog" reply="144" id="3406687"]No it's not promising at all. If they are keeping the rock, paper and scissors of GC2, that suggest to me that they don't intend add any extra depth to combat. I'm assuming that if there was a new aspect of choice then they would have eluded to it.[/quote] Maybe he should have continued reading, because the next paragraph of the article says this (emphasis mine): Wardell says the customization plays into the ove
[quote]Also for those people who may have lost their original copy who want to give it a playthrough again while they wait for GalCiv3 to come out.[/quote] If you registered your copy, then you can download it directly from Stardock. No need to buy it again (unless you want to).
My favourite part is this: Many games are mechanically sound but the universe feels dead—like there's no soul to it. Galactic Civilizations II had soul, and Fallen Enchantress had soul. Can you describe what the universe is like in Galactic Civilizations III this time around? That sense of depth and “soul” is really hard to capture in a game that is primarily a sandbox; you can't force a narrative on the player, or even control
[quote who="Goudeau42" reply="6" id="3406423"] Only way they need changing is more modules[/quote] If they change the upgrade-mechanic, and remove the module-limit of the AI, then I agree to more modules. Otherwise, this will only lead to more micro, and makes it even harder for the AI to upgrade it's starbases. Also, those modules need to be useful and fun to use (provide some sort of challenge or trade-off). A couple hundred modules with +1 modifiers isn't some
[quote who="Brainsucker" reply="9" id="3406505"]So rather than tech trading, why not add the feature of "Ship trade"?[/quote] That already exists in GalCiv. Granted, you can't trade the designs, but you can trade the finished product.
[quote who="Spitfire" reply="2" id="3406586"] So the map doesnt actually restart it just keeps expanding? [/quote] No, each mission is on a different map. There are a few exceptions to this, though. In those cases, you restart the map, but there will be changes, because of something that happened at the end of the last mission. Overall, I'd say it's worth it play the campaigns. They provide interesting background information (in my opinion at least), and off