Why can't GC3 succeed IG2?

from GalCiv3 Forums

I have something like 80 hours in GC3 now, and I enjoy it, a bit buggy, but I find works around for the most part, not many games I had to give up.

I also played GC2 extensively.

but what gets to me as even after 15 years, the GC series, only measure up to half of what the genera defining game Imperium Galactica 2 was.

- Manual control over ships and ground units.
- fully 3D environment to build you cites in, fight the ground battles RTS style in those cites.
- RPG elements to you spies, level them up, and send on intelligent, sabotage, steal, counter-intelligent ect. missions.
- you could capture spies and make them double agents, feeding you information. really made you paranoid about your own spies.
- lie about other civilizations in diplomatic.
- WAYPOINTS. want to have your fleet move in a circle around your radar range, draw out the path you want it to follow.
- voice overs, voice overs, and more voice overs, the guided tutorial blows GC out of the water.
- galactic events, are decades ahead of anything GC has, with good (voice over) stories, follow up events, branches and decisions to take.

just to mention a few. GC has good graphics, and tremendously modding support, and I like that, that's good, but that's about it.

I really had my hopes for GC3, when they said this is going to be all we wanted to do with GC2. but if all they wanted with GC2 was better graphics, i'm disappointed.

- same boring 2D planet sticker interface, only hexagon this time.
- space and ground battles are as exiting as watching grass grow.
- getting to build a star bases is 70% of all the things you do in this game.

so there is my rant, but it's motivated by wanting something really grate. I don't get the feeling that stardock are putting there souls into this, wanting to make the huge next leap, it feels more like a, "yeah lets make a new space game now that sci-fi are popular again." this was how sci-fi died the first time... 

15,682 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

- Manual control over ships and ground units.
End of quote

I prefer hands-on combat as well, with the option to auto-resolve.

- fully 3D environment to build you cites in, fight the ground battles RTS style in those cites.
End of quote

The scale of the game could make this tedious, especially on larger maps.

- RPG elements to you spies, level them up, and send on intelligent, sabotage, steal, counter-intelligent ect. missions.
End of quote

I think something like this is being added in a dlc or expansion.

- you could capture spies and make them double agents, feeding you information. really made you paranoid about your own spies.
End of quote

Possible dlc? Not sure how this differs, functionally, from GC2-style espionage. I haven't played IG2 in ten years.

- lie about other civilizations in diplomatic.
End of quote

I don't remember this, but it sounds more like a flavor feature.

- WAYPOINTS. want to have your fleet move in a circle around your radar range, draw out the path you want it to follow.
End of quote

This would be nice to have.

- voice overs, voice overs, and more voice overs, the guided tutorial blows GC out of the water.
End of quote

I prefer text, and don't need a tutorial (but others might). The tutorial is forthcoming.


- galactic events, are decades ahead of anything GC has, with good (voice over) stories, follow up events, branches and decisions to take.
End of quote

Events could be better, but if I had to choose I would prefer a larger number of unique events over fewer branching events to keep the game fresh through many play-throughs.

 

- same boring 2D planet sticker interface, only hexagon this time.
End of quote

I wouldn't want to manage complex, 3d environments for hundreds of planets. 2D is fast and clean. Adjacency is a fun new mechanic.

 

- getting to build a star bases is 70% of all the things you do in this game.
End of quote

Except for all of the other things that you do.

 

IG2 was a great game, but it's not Galciv.

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting NGC7000, reply 1


- Manual control over ships and ground units.


I prefer hands-on combat as well, with the option to auto-resolve.

- fully 3D environment to build you cites in, fight the ground battles RTS style in those cites.


The scale of the game could make this tedious, especially on larger maps.

- RPG elements to you spies, level them up, and send on intelligent, sabotage, steal, counter-intelligent ect. missions.


I think something like this is being added in a dlc or expansion.

- you could capture spies and make them double agents, feeding you information. really made you paranoid about your own spies.


Possible dlc? Not sure how this differs, functionally, from GC2-style espionage. I haven't played IG2 in ten years.

- lie about other civilizations in diplomatic.


I don't remember this, but it sounds more like a flavor feature.

- WAYPOINTS. want to have your fleet move in a circle around your radar range, draw out the path you want it to follow.


This would be nice to have.

- voice overs, voice overs, and more voice overs, the guided tutorial blows GC out of the water.


I prefer text, and don't need a tutorial (but others might). The tutorial is forthcoming.



- galactic events, are decades ahead of anything GC has, with good (voice over) stories, follow up events, branches and decisions to take.



Events could be better, but if I had to choose I would prefer a larger number of unique events over fewer branching events to keep the game fresh through many play-throughs.

 


- same boring 2D planet sticker interface, only hexagon this time.



I wouldn't want to manage complex, 3d environments for hundreds of planets. 2D is fast and clean. Adjacency is a fun new mechanic.

 


- getting to build a star bases is 70% of all the things you do in this game.



Except for all of the other things that you do.

 

IG2 was a great game, but it's not Galciv.


End of NGC7000's quote

 

thanks for responding :)

when it come to building you own colonies on planets, it was purely optional, IG's system was even easier to use at big scale, you could sett it at auto build and focus, no micro managing involved unless you wanted to say plan your own defenses at some of your important planets. also the big fun part about it was that the battles did take place in those colonies, RTS style.

the tutorial part, it's not for me either, as I understand these kind of games now, but having a grate tutorial can make or brake a game for new comers.

voice over is not for everyone, sure. but for most and me, all this text on text on text gets boring topped on relaxing scifi tunes, and I get sleepy faster than I want.

having events that gives you quest, challenges and choices. for me made the game feel less repetitive, and each game felt more unique. for me I dont even read the text anymore on the events in GC, I just skip to the end to +1 diplomacy for all civilization, really not immersive.

Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

If I find the game maybe I might by it one day.

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

From what I'm reading, it's got quite a few shortcomings in mechanical depth.  Jack of all trades, master of none?

 

The economy is apparently very simplistic despite having things like three separate research structures for different types of research, combat boils down to simple greater firepower wins mechanics with no counter playing or tactical capabilities to defeat superior forces.  It looks like GC3 actually has more in depth combat as a result of the behavioral effects of different loadouts, you can defeat a superior force by building a superior behavior into your fleet.

Reply #5 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I like the idea of random missions,  or more indepth random events.

Reply #6 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting psychoak, reply 4

From what I'm reading, it's got quite a few shortcomings in mechanical depth.  Jack of all trades, master of none?

 

The economy is apparently very simplistic despite having things like three separate research structures for different types of research, combat boils down to simple greater firepower wins mechanics with no counter playing or tactical capabilities to defeat superior forces.  It looks like GC3 actually has more in depth combat as a result of the behavioral effects of different loadouts, you can defeat a superior force by building a superior behavior into your fleet.
End of psychoak's quote

 

Only partially true. The economy wa no more simplistic then in GC. As for the combat in IG2 you could defeat superior forces. I assure you I did it quite a few times. Manual control gave you the edge sometimes.

I still vote for the GC idea of "no tactical" battles but I'm hoping it is better this time then it was in GC 2 where it was just rolls to hit and purely measured firepower vs hitpoints. So that knowing initial hitpoints and firepower of both fleets in GC2 you could predict the outcome of battle 100% just using a calculator. Plus it looked weird in the combat viewer when all the ships in your fleet were firing at single enemy ship regardless of range and line of sight to the target. After it was destroyed all your ships would move on to the next target blowing enemy ships one by one. The opposing fleet did the same. I always hated the look of it. Plus in GC2 battles there was no randomizer to simulate the unpredictable nature of a real battle.

Reply #7 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting admiralWillyWilber, reply 3

If I find the game maybe I might by it one day.
End of admiralWillyWilber's quote

http://www.old-games.ru/game/download/1234.html