The next generation of Space Strategy Games 4x style

I want GalCiv3 sooo bad...

The only games I have played on the list is GalCiv2 and its expansions and Rebellion. Though I always hear good things about the other ones listed.

Well, based on Sins of a Solar Empire, Galactic Civilizations 2, and Master of Orion 2 and 3 ... Sins is going to be real hard to improve on as it continues to develop.

Human-Computer VS Human-Human experience: Human vs computer is primary for me.

Free content with paid extensions VS Paid to use: Pay once, pay for expansions. Paying for time, or nickel and dime formulas are going to get very few customers. You are not dealing with the Maple Story venue here.

Reward system importance: Unless you have a persistent reward, but that unbalances the game at some point.

Eye candy factor: In space games, realism is preferable.

In-Game movies: and cut scenes ... you see it once, you want to know how to make it go away.

Technology tree depth: Well, you can see what works. Presentation can vary. Flat approach with tabs is most usable, Sword of the Stars rotary is innovative.

Spaceship customization depth: If anyone thinks they can do better than GC2 Twilight of the Arnor, good luck to them.

Races number and customization level: The more the merrier. The MOO series had some great design in races.

Story depth: you have a basic sub stratum, but the point of these games is that you are writing a story as you go along.

Universe Depth: Unsure what is meant. Most important thing is for player to be able to see what is going on quickly with whatever universe size you design in.

The real problem with new 4x games right now is that the shrinking economy means a shrinking market for all game sales. As buyers become more conservative, it becomes harder to get anything truly new off the ground.

Spaceship customization depth: If anyone thinks they can do better than GC2 Twilight of the Arnor, good luck to them.

Well, e.g. MOO2. Noone yet beat that when it comes to spaceship customization. GalCiv only features eye-candy in that regard, sadly.

I would like to see more strategy and I mean battle strategy. In turn based it is possible to have indebt battle strategy not just build ships and "addons" on planets.

Of course it is hard to do it in space and X4 (they are not really war games... Come on Paradox! release HOI3 already) but one could always try. If anybody could do it would be Stardock.

Most of all make the game replayable, good games never go old. I dont need "too" fancy graphics, I need a good AI, maybe a possibility for multiplayer. Open codes for modders. Story is nice but its not a must.

Large scale technology is preferable.

Well, e.g. MOO. Noone yet beat that when it comes to spaceship customization. GalCiv only features eye-candy in that regard, sadly.[/quote]

Have to agree that GalCiv 2's ship customization is mostly aesthetic, but I'm not too sure about MoO 2 being unsurpassed.

what do you mean by

Human-Computer VS Human-Human experience

if you meant singleplayer vs multiplayer, i think you should word that, otherwise can you please elaborate

I'm offering my thoughts here.  I'm a newbie to the genre, and it is also late and I'm tipsy.  Here goes...

• Human-Computer VS Human-Human experience
  Definately Human-Computer.  Finding a human opponent for a long term game is satisfying, but not worth the effort.
   
• Thin Client Browser based approach vs Normal Client based
   Not sure what you mean here.
   
• Free content with paid extensions VS Paid to use
  I don't mind paying a couple bucks here and there for substantial components, but I don't want to pay a buck for this unit and a buck for that.  I generally like full-blown expansions, as they change and evolve with the game.  I'd much rather have MOD support than cheap $ improvements.
   
• Reward system importance
  I'm assuming you mean game-to-game, I-beat-this-guy-and-so-this-gets-better.  It might help if I got addicted to the game, but as an X4 game I'd rather have everything overwhelm me from the get go.
   
• Eye candy factor importance
  Its gotta look decent, but solid gameplay overshadows pretty ships - no matter how naked they are.  This brings up a good point, in that a lot of Space games have great graphics that you never see because you are always zoomed so far out.  I would like a game where the ships are a bit larger compared to planets, so that they feel more significant and I can admire my battlecruiser more. 
   
• In-game movies?
  Waste of time.  This is a hardcore genre.
   
• Technology tree depth
  I'm still waiting for the perfect tech-tree system/depth.  I like Civ 4's tech tree, but I think in the end a simple but meaningful tech tree is best.  Every tech should be a decision, not just another thing I've gotta get before I get something else before I get the upgrade to help my gunboats etc...
   
• Spaceship customization depth
  Enjoyable, but if its a large scale game this is a rather dull aspect of micro management.  I'd love to see a unique tech-spaceship relationship, where investing in different things evolved unique spaceships from game to game.  Of course, this would only matter if the ships were individually significant enough to look at now and again...
   
• Races number and customization level
  I'd rather have only one race than different races with similar things.  If you're going to make different races, make them all-out different, and you better make sure each has important decisions to make when teching/etc.
   
• Story depth
  If you have a campaign of sorts, story is very important.  Otherwise, focus on elements that make each game "tell al tale."
   
• Universe depth
  Each planet should feel unique, not just be unique, without overwhelming the user.  So in general, I'd like a generic universe, with some cool pre-game options to change the way the game is played.  Too much depth is too much randomness.  And if its not too random, it ends up being too dull/unimportant.
   
• Overall customization
  Customization is always appreciated - especially when I can do it pre-game and use the same features and names from game to game, to have a feeling that I'm running the same group of misfit aliens.

Excellent material guys. This was the exact kind of discussion I was eager to start or at least contribute to. That is the reason why I launched my blog: www.spacesector.com/blog, to discuss this sort of things. Without being to annoying  or pushover, could you drop by the blog and put your comments there (one or so?) It would help me alot move one from there. thanks

I've been pushing for adding missions to GalCiv3.  I'd love to use the flagship like the Enterprise by dropping into the different homeworlds and picking up missions to perform like: transporting diplomats, transporting scientists to witness anamolies, delivering weapons or medical supplies, etc.  All of this with the rewards being capital, influence, technology, weapons/ships, etc. 

I'd also like to see a lot more mini-cutscenes.  For example, during successful invasions, it'd be nice to see the relative race of aliens being hunted down and destroyed OR if converting, see the diplomacy in action.  Something to give the game a little emotional punch.

Something lacking in all games is the ability to customize your soundtrack.  I'd love to be able to use my own music, directly in-game and have my playlists correlate to the action in the game.  For example, have a playlist of great battle music and another with peaceful or hopeful music.  These could alternate depending on what is going on in the game. 

Players like to be presented with meaningful choices, make decisions, and SEE the effects of those choices.

For example, I never bother to add extras to GCII ship hulls (other than to add needed hardpoints) because those choices have no meaning, no significance.

In a first person shooter, choices of which weapon, which path, etc. all provide significant feedback.  If one chooses the uber shotgun for close combat only to face an enemy in a long hall, ....

GCII, with for example its good-neutral-evil choices, contains some very nice and novel elements of the above sort.

Other standard choices include limited resources, limited planet space, trade-offs in economy models, research decisions, etc.  The inclusion of worlds not immediately able to be colonized is good, but it might have been better if some races were native to non-O2 environments. as it could add more depth to some alliance situations, etc.

Some players like to make lots and lots of decisions.  A game in which one has constant external decisions like the good-evil-neutral ones in GCII can immerse or annoy.  Which mayor should I back for this town or that, or which petitioners should I grant an audience, etc. can be worked into aspects of the game, sort of like how in GCII the leaning towards evil or whatever can, or breaking a treaty.

Other players want to make fewer but more meaningful decisions, and then enjoy the implementation.  Which weapons trees and hulls, then go out and try to kick butt.

Being able to "turn off" events or throttle them, and make similar choices in the set up at game start is probably a must to get a wide enough player base to be viable, but the game has to be deep enough to enjoy in all the possible modes.

I am a fan of Stargate, Star Wars, and Star Trek. I like how each one has a civilization in different stages of Development. Star Wars for example represent the peak of a Galactic Empire, where the majority of the Galaxy is somewhat explored or colonized. The races of the Galaxy have developed commerce with each other and interstellar war and peace is made and on a regular basis. This would be examples of expand and exploit.

Then You have Star Trek, which represents a new space farring race(Earth) Exploring the Galaxy and making discoveries, and getting in to trouble occasionally with alien races. This would be Explore and Expand.

Then in Stargate there are several ideas that I like. Learning of an Ancient race that have Mastered the Galaxy and left behind the stargates to allow instantaneos travel.  But you have the Go'uld who want to dominate the whole galaxy. Exploit. 

My perfect Space strategy game would have elements from all of those above tv shows and films.

I want to start as a Race which is neither the first nor last to discover interstellar space travel.  That means you will discover alien relics that do amazing things for you. But there could be enemies out there intent on turning your people into slaves. The alien technology you find could help you repell the invader.  Or maybe your first contact is with a benign alien race. They introduce you to a trade empire that will help catapult your technology levelsky high over night.

Or maybe you find nobody at all. You just grow and expand. Colonize some nearby stars and never encounter any aliens live. You may get comfortable and not need to spend your precious resources on war ships technology, and instead focus on science and expansion. You eventually learn how to construct artificial heavenly bodies like Ring worlds, and a Dyson's sphere around a star.

Take 2 on that idea. You don't find any aliens, but continue to invest in war ships and your people may rebel on one of your colonies which you meet with deadly force. The population of your empire is split and a civil war starts.  The war could end in many ways. One side can annihilate the other, They grudgly accept peace and become 2 seperate Empires, But the game will just continue.

No matter how you get there, you eventually will be able to master time and space to build create artifacts like stargates, warp drive that can go between entire Galaxies,  the means and method to destroy and even create new stars and planets. You are becoming the Ancient Race. New alien races are still sprouting upand beginning space travel, they may discover one of your abandoned ancient artifacts which helps jump start their ascent to follow in your foot steps. You can stand back and watch, guide them, toy with them or destroy them. However you please. 

Really, I just want to see MOOII with better AI, graphics, and LAN support.