Quickest way to puff up yourself is to put down people with actual accomplishments. "Plato, Socrates? Idiots."
John Hamp
I was in the beta and gamma. The game, as-is it very solid. What I've seen reported on the forums would fall into the cosmetic area or in the hard to reproduce problem. The beta and gamma team all worked very hard and at the end, we would all be playing the game for hours on end without finding any real bugs. I think some people, looks at Sontum, have unrealistic expectations of a game that has to work on so many hardware configs and played in so many styles an
That totally rocks. The game is outstanding. It's been a great few months for strategy gamers. Civ 4 is really fun and GalCiv 2 is incredible. Pity a couple of griefers on the URL you posted gave the game a rating of 1 to knock its overall rating down to less than 9. What's wrong with people like that? Congratulations to you guys. It's not just a good day for Stardock, it's a good day for PC strategy gamers IMHO.
Because right now it's more fun to watch people act shocked SHOCKED that downloads are slow at the absolute peak moment. I'm glad I preloaded. If I'd waited until today to buy the game I'd get it at a store.
I'm loving the ship design. I wonder how much the ship design will end up being something that takes on a life of its own outside the game.
Working great here too! You guys have the patience of saints. In my casual browsing of the forum I saw 14 posts that asked questions that were already answered in the sticky posts. Great job!
I don't understand why someone who is going to buy direct take the download route wouldn't just get it a few days in advanced and take advantage of the preload? I got my copy today and I only had to download something like 2 megabytes. It was over in less than 15 seconds.
Yea cuz Steam has such a great reputation. Then you could download slow AND wait 4 hours for it to validate. Nice. Did you read this? https://www.galciv2.com/Forums.aspx?ForumID=274&AID=101795
I'll throw my 2 cents ... * * * Civilization 4 works great here. Never had a problem. It never crashes for me. If you get enough people you will have horror reports for any games. I read somewhere here that GalCiv 2 doesn't work out of the box on Windows 2000 in non English. Probably only 10 people here have that problem. But if you sell a zillion copies like Civ does,that's probably a lot of people. * * * If GalCiv 2 gets popular enough you WILL have people that
There's always Star Ranger to count on to over emphasize a minor feature into being the main feature. MOO was all about tactical combat? I don't think so. I bet if you took a poll that the majority of MOO players hit "Auto" the majority of time when ships came into combat. I do agree with you on one thing, I don't think GalCiv 2 is a MOO successor. It's a lot better than MOO was. MOO had barely any diplomacy. No strategic mechanics like starbases, influence, or galactic resou
In Europe it's being release by Paradox so that question should be directed towards them I think.
This is getting so old. I am getting so tired of buying games and having features and content stripped out of what it could have been because the developers wanted to cater to the 'l33t" 1% that play these games multiplayer. "But I wanna play by email". I doubt outside the hard core that most people even know what play by email means. It's a tiny niche of vocal people. Find, your loudness and allies in the press have gotten plenty of potentially great strategy games cri
Some of the SE fans are just being obtuse I think. GalCiv I sold more copies. Fine. Sales don't prove its a better game. GalCiv I got better reviews. Look, I'm not the one running around saying galciv is the "king of the hill". It's the Space Empire fan that is claiming SE is king of the hill. But what does he base that on? You guys completely ignored the reviews part. Average Game Rankings score with 52 reviews was 79%. GalCiv I with over 100 score
I think that no one who posts either here or at the SEIV forums can be considered objective, so how is your opinion any more objective than that of Atrocities who posted his opinion that you quoted? You say GalCiv is king, he says SEIV...who's to say who is correct? Also, as was said above, it's rather difficult to compare the two, as they appeal to a different demo
I can't believe how well this game has turned out. Back during the betas the game seeed a little buggy and a little bit dry to me. I was a tidy bit worried. It had the makings of a great game but could they get the bugs out and make it really have a soul? I can't speak for the other gamma testers. BUT I think Stardock could probably have gone gold last week if they had to. They could definitely have gone gold by the beginning of this week. At this stage, they're fixing bugs that are p
I've been playing the gammas. It'll be worth the wait. The difference between Beta 5 and the Gammas is almost as great in some ways as GalCiv I to Beta 5.
Space Empires is one of the most successful 4x games of this century. It has been King Of The Hill since 2000, and looks to be holding that title for many more years to come. Wow. That is quite a claim. What do you base this on? GalCiv I sold a lot more copies I bet. GalCiv I got better reviews. I think it can be objectively said that right no
Baby sitting is the right term. Tactical combat would be very negative on the game for those who play on the metaverse. Anyone who wanted to be competitive on the metaverse would have to play out every single battle for maximum efficiency. I just want to see my designed ships have a pretty eye candy fight.
Everyone who preorders should be getting the goodies I think.
I disagree about room. If I have a class 15 planet then those 15 tiles coudl be used: 1 for advanced farming: +15 food 1 for virtual reality: +40% morale 3 Mega factories 3 Mega research centers 1 Planetary Achievement reserved 1 Stock exchange 1 Orbital control thingy 1 Super project reserved 1 Planetary Defense 1 Invasion Defense 1 for whatever Only early on do you really need 5 factories to be getting much out of the pla
General Views -------------------- The game is definitely better than GalCiv I and that is saying a lot. There is a lot more to the game this time than there was last time. A lot more to do and a lot more ways to enjoy what you're doing. There are some playability problems that needs to be addressed which I'll discuss below. (1) The pacing is off. It takes too long to get into the game. (2) Stuff, in general, is too diluted. You give us too much stuff
Lol. I just love the memories of MOO 2. I liked MOO 2 at the time too. It was a great game for its time. But it doesn't hold up very well today. The AI was a joke. It had a lot of micro management that totally kills it on larger maps, and it has really bad game balancing. It was good compared to other games then. But like many games 10 years ago, it doesn't hold up so well today.
Whatever solution has to take into account the production amounts of your planets. You can't just have it be free or paid for with money otherwise there's no ponit in building factories in the first place.
I've come to conclusion that if there was multiplayer for this game I wouldnt play it anyway. This game would not be good enough to use multiplayer for. I'll check civ4 multiplayer, because it got some good reviews instead. What a troll. Like you'd know whether GalCiv 2 was going to be good or not at this stage. I was in the beta of GalCiv I a
I like Saber Cherry's suggestion!