GalCiv3 Forums
I am guessing that the game will score in the high 70s on metacritic at launch. What all do you predict?
midas
I suspect that we have not seen everything quite yet. Assuming they fix some of the minor bugs that I still see in beta 6... High 80s. if they do not fix those things... mid 70s
At launch as of 0.90 beta and predicting with the updates 79-82.
Endless Legend scored an 82 and this game is on par with that game. This is a good score for a strategy game which tend to sore in the 60-80 range. My personal review is a 85 with my biggest gripes being all very reasonable things to change. Diplomancy is getting better, the UI is still pretty buggy, some Sound FX still makes me cringe and I think more information should be available to the end user.
40 given the number of areas which are still a big mess [moral/economy/sensors/minors doing nothing/bugs not even acknowledged/ai not doing a lot of things and not using properly the game mechanics/invasion/combat etc]
If the tester don t play the game much maybe 50
This game will get terrible reviews, for one reason only:
They'll take a look at the negative vibes in the existing community.
Given I've never played MP I don't think I can give a good prediction. However, I expect that in the Pros v Cons that many reviews do that the lack of tactical combat will get a fair bit of mention in the "Cons" section, if only due to the fact a couple of recent space 4X have had it.
The game has GREAT potential. I'm afraid they are releasing it too soon. I'm playing the lastest opt in and while the game has come a long way since alpha and initial betas it still needs more polish and bug fixing. I also don't particularly like the idea that the in game faction editor doesn't create xml but binary instead. It seems like it should follow the xml pattern as well.
Multiplayer works, but there are dsyncs and crashes that make it difficult to play even with 2 players. I haven't tried the hardest level of AI but so far it is really easy to exploit its tenancies. I'm guessing the harder levels just cheat to do better instead of actually playing smarter, but need to confirm.
The mechanics of the game are all working for the most part and there are some solid game play decisions and choice that make for an interesting game.
Over all I think the game just needs to stay in beta longer. I know this won't happen since they have already given a release date. So I'm hoping even though it releases they will keep fixing the game and we won't get just a negative influx of players that will see bugs and things and abandon the game and never come back.
I think it will do exceedingly well.
The interface and graphics are awesome.
The AI is not some scripted PoS.
It's multi-core therefore you don't have to wait too long for the computer players to take their turns.
Still being worked on - I'll be happy when we see some DLC and major updates. (I know it's just being released, but I kinda HATE planetary invasion atm... it's way too abstract).
Those are some of the "usual suspects" for bad reviews in this genre from my experience.
I don't think you have to hope - Stardock has always provided excellent ongoing support for the GalCiv games (well, all their games, really). They've openly stated several times that they expect to be working on GalCiv III for at least the next seven years, possibly longer.
I'm not worried about stardock, I'm worried about the player base.
It works only for some. So far we've not been able to get any version of Beta6 to even start for a 2P game; CTD on clicking start.
With less than two weeks to go SD are going to have to pull one mother of a bug fix patch out of the hat to not have the condition of the game negatively affect day one reviews - the reviews that play the game for longer than an hour anyway.
I really think that Stardock will make it. It was really a big step from 5.3. to 6.1.
After 150+ hours of playing since Beta 5, I can see a great development.
On May 14. it will not be a 100% perfect game and will needs some polis and balancing for sure but I think
it will be a great, deep and complexe 4x game.
And they will stil work on it very hard !
Thing is - the player base doesn't change, doesn't matter whcih game it is, they always act the same.
Stardock know this going into game development and should be managing perceptions accordingly.
p.s. Still waiting for that bug that makes the screen go black when getting into combat (intermittently) to get fixed (has been like that for at least 3-4 versions now).
I'm hoping it'll get the same if not higher score than GC2 did I think it was 85-95% and named strategy game of the year! But seeing as I've never reviewed anything before I honestly don't know if they don't fix multiplayer after all the hoo-harr of having it plus all the other bugs we the players have reported that still aren't fixed then it might suffer a lot which will be a dammed shame.
I think a solid 8.It's a little too bland and lacking imagination compared to the competition.
Has to get upwards of 80 easy - look how high GCII got on release and it was broken and unfinished. II is already deeper and better, imagine what it could be at the release of the first DLC pack...
I think it'll get a 75-80, which is a shame because it's got the true potential for greatness... and I think it'll reach that greatness after release. Stardock is not going to abandon it.
But there's just a huge slew of minor issues and balancing issues. I played the game for a few hours and I repeatedly hit things where I just said... well... that's a bug. It wasn't anything major, but it's certainly enough to dock your review score. The game's gotten a LOT of polish since the last few Beta stages, but it still needs some more baking. I think player and reviewer expectations are very high.
I know that's rough for Stardock. It's been in development for far longer than they hoped it would be. Big ambition, big project means lots of bugs to slay.
Stardrive 2 has an average score on 70 on metacritic. I haven't played it, but from what I've heard and read I think this game will score slightly higher then that, so 75-85. I think the main criticism will be that it is kind of a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none. It does a lot of things well, but there is no standout aspect that it excels at. I think it gets points for ideology and ship designer.
83.
Here's my email to Derek before Fallen Enchantress shipped on what I said it would get. I've blanked out most of the email but the pertinent part is there:
Granddaddy of them all...MOO2
GalCiv II is the highest rated space strategy game of all time. It didn't have tactical combat. Having tactical combat in a game of this scale would be nuts. Node-based games like MOO can have tactical battle since the number of them can be kept to a limit. There's something like a max of 249 nodes in MOO 2 right? GalCiv III has over 500,000 tiles meaning, in theory you could potentially have hundreds of battles per turn.
After having played Beta 6.1, my own rating is 86%. I still think if you would have waited two or three months more you could have got a 90+ with all minor things fixed and thought out. I do not get why you needed to release the game NOW when people can play it as early access already, but I think it will get an okay launch.
I would actually very much like ship-to-ship combat improved, as in MoO 2. Got a mediocre armed starbase, but playing myself, could take out some key ships of their fleet, so once my own fleet arrives, they can deal with the remains. I think ship-to-ship combat is a thing Gal Civ is still lacking compared to MoO 2 (which is a 1995 or so game).
One can have it as in the Total War series: Turn-based strategy on the main map, and then either auto-battle (which would be as it is currently) or commanding your own ships turn-based. You still could auto-battle through a lot of battles, but if a brave commander is needed to save the day, you can be that one. Heroes of Might and Magic and X-Com Enemy Unknown all have great turn-based battles, and it is the next logical step after you have designed and built your ships to actually command them in battle. Would make weapon placement important, give rise to a lot of additional battle techs which could give you an edge over your opponent. I always liked to get enemy shields down and then transport boarding parties over in an MoO 2 game.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.