X4 = dead?

Talk about strategy games like MoO series, Civilization, Europa Universalis, etc.
Message
Author
User avatar
marhawkman
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 938
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:34 pm
Location: GA

Re: X4 = dead?

#31 Post by marhawkman » Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:12 pm

pd wrote:Are you getting paid to do this Zanzibar? I mean, seriously. You are advertising this game in every post you do.
He also has that werd logo....

Anyways, I don't think SotS is horrible. But what I played wasn't very good either. It has a lot of good points. But overall it lacks strategic depth. The "randomization" of research sucked horribly in the demo I played. It does like MoO3 and hides things at random. I do like it's approach towards making races have fundamental differences though. The multiple forms of FTL are a neat idea.
Computer programming is fun.

User avatar
Zanzibar
Psionic Snowflake
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:35 pm
Location: Earth

Re: X4 = dead?

#32 Post by Zanzibar » Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:11 am

marhawkman wrote:
pd wrote:Are you getting paid to do this Zanzibar? I mean, seriously. You are advertising this game in every post you do.
He also has that werd logo....

Anyways, I don't think SotS is horrible. But what I played wasn't very good either. It has a lot of good points. But overall it lacks strategic depth. The "randomization" of research sucked horribly in the demo I played. It does like MoO3 and hides things at random. I do like it's approach towards making races have fundamental differences though. The multiple forms of FTL are a neat idea.
Apparently you've totally missed all the things the 3 expansions have added to the original game... Why not take a gander at the wiki or something and see if it's gotten better? ;) Also, keep in mind the demo is a *very* stripped down version of the full game, and definitely does NOT have all the options. So if you only played the demo?? yeah... you are definitely missing out.
Image

Image

User avatar
marhawkman
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 938
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:34 pm
Location: GA

Re: X4 = dead?

#33 Post by marhawkman » Sun Jul 26, 2009 3:46 am

So you're saying the full version doesn't suck as much? I should hope not. What does it do to fix that annoying randomization feature?
Computer programming is fun.

User avatar
Zanzibar
Psionic Snowflake
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:35 pm
Location: Earth

Re: X4 = dead?

#34 Post by Zanzibar » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:17 pm

marhawkman wrote:So you're saying the full version doesn't suck as much? I should hope not. What does it do to fix that annoying randomization feature?
Well, #1... you have core technologies that are 100% for EVERY race... #2 You have tech exchange (sorta) and you can salvage technologies from your dead enemy that you missed... #3 most technologies have more then 1 way to get them... so, for example if you missed your roll for artificial intelligence linking from expert systems, you could have a link from combat algorithms instead... (this forces you to actually *gasp* have a strategy to your research priority!!) Also, since there is nothing is 100% this forces you away from the "research x weapon to beat the game"... every weapon has a way of countering it. Also exploring different branches of the tech tree gives the game a *ton* of replay value... and this is the way you are lead down that path. Technically the tech tree isn't randomized (as in, UV lasers appearing in a different spot every single game) it's just you either roll the technology or you don't... but again, you can always get it later using salvage or other tricks ;)
Image

Image

User avatar
marhawkman
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 938
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:34 pm
Location: GA

Re: X4 = dead?

#35 Post by marhawkman » Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:59 pm

I still don't like it. This sort of thing is why I favor the approach of not using preset weapon techs.
Computer programming is fun.

User avatar
utilae
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2175
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 12:37 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: X4 = dead?

#36 Post by utilae » Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:12 am

Hey guys.

You should try Astro Empires. 4X is definitely not dead.

http://www.astroempires.com
http://www.astroempires.com/screenshots.aspx

greenbalrog
Krill Swarm
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:42 pm
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Re: X4 = dead?

#37 Post by greenbalrog » Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:01 am

Surely 4x is not dead. At least I'm doing my part.
My blog is about space strategy gaming in general and today I wrote an article about the 4x genre, the 4x definition and links to good lists of games (including a link to a list posted here in the freeorion forum) :)

Henara
Space Floater
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: X4 = dead?

#38 Post by Henara » Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:51 pm

Imo it is dead, only very simple games with ubergraphics for idiots, what a shame.

Zeraan
Space Krill
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 10:06 pm

Re: X4 = dead?

#39 Post by Zeraan » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:04 pm

Henara wrote:Imo it is dead, only very simple games with ubergraphics for idiots, what a shame.
No it is not. Distant Worlds, Sword of the Stars 2 (they're still patching it though), Star Ruler, StarDrive, and some other games. As for turn-based 4X games, there's admittedly not too much, but there are some. Like FreeOrion, and a game I'm working on, Beyond Beyaan.

So don't go and say that the 4X genre is dead without actually checking. Maybe the Master of Orion series is dead, but not the genre.

User avatar
Polymorpher
Space Krill
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:53 pm

Re: X4 = dead?

#40 Post by Polymorpher » Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:34 pm

Here is almost everything you need to know about sots2 : http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/10 ... ws-to-fix/

Will it reach a point of survival and thriving is still unknown so no need waste your breath on it. Though I might get a look into the first one as I've been through a good amount of positive talk about the whole thing.

4X basically requires more careful approach than any of your standard game format. Because most of it hangs in the details. And you can either get a huge fanbase based on those or you can die outright. If you've been around as long as I have you know how many games crashed before they could blossom, and mostly on a easily avoidable (idea wise, code wise, and fund wise) fundamental design error that paralyses the game.
Image

User avatar
Zanzibar
Psionic Snowflake
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:35 pm
Location: Earth

Re: X4 = dead?

#41 Post by Zanzibar » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:07 am

Polymorpher wrote:Here is almost everything you need to know about sots2 : http://store.steampowered.com/news/7129/ (and more, if you search about every week or so)...

Will it reach a point of survival and thriving is still unknown so no need waste your breath on it. Though I might get a look into the first one as I've been through a good amount of positive talk about the whole thing.

4X basically requires more careful approach than any of your standard game format. Because most of it hangs in the details. And you can either get a huge fanbase based on those or you can die outright. If you've been around as long as I have you know how many games crashed before they could blossom, and mostly on a easily avoidable (idea wise, code wise, and fund wise) fundamental design error that paralyses the game.

Fixed that for you... game has gone from mostly unstable beta condition to near release reasonably fast... not quite "all clear" yet... but the finish line is in sight...
Image

Image

User avatar
pd
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 1924
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:17 pm
Location: 52°16'N 10°31'E

Re: X4 = dead?

#42 Post by pd » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:44 pm

All updates till now have been laughable. It's all just trying to fix the mess they've sold 3 months ago. Only blinded fanboys enjoy the game at this point. Just look outside the kerberos forums for actual player feedback.

The game is no fun at this point, has major design flaws, performance problems all over the place and awful art. I've uninstalled and might check back in 6 months.

partythenwork
Space Krill
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:54 pm

Re: X4 = dead?

#43 Post by partythenwork » Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:44 pm

muxec wrote:In the last 7 years no 4X could catch my attention for more than one evening. Nor civ4, nor GalCiv, nor sucky MOO3. Looks like nothing new can be done in the genre. Surely, modern 4X TBS games are better than 17-years old civ 1, but not that much better. Someone already bored with Civ 1-3 will not find much new in Civ 4 or Galciv or whatever. Yes, galciv features different economical model, but is it THAT different? There are not many ways to keep the game balanced, there are too few ways to let players make meaningful decisions.

All genres are suffering from aging of the industry, veteran players have seen it all, veteran player are probably not the target customer, but TBS games can not be significantly improved by improving graphics, it is minor aspect of the game. Increased complexity was the way to go in early day but now it leads to excessive micromanagement or reduced understanding.

4X games are not that good in multiplayer, for most of the game players do not interact and wars are often too fast with winner often known too soon.


A few words on future games:

Space Empires 6, Civ 5, MOO4, Galciv 3 will probably be developed later, but how much innovation can these titles provide?

I hope Master Of Magic 2 will be made sometime, but honestly I doubt the quality of the future game. Old "good" Age of Wonders utilized the worst parts of original MoM with good sides thrown away. Will MoM 2 have the same fate? Is it possible to keep it balanced without making it boring (original MoM was poorly balanced (1994, duh) and AoW was balanced even worse.

Stars! Supernova Genesis will never be released due to publishers' greed.


Is X4 really dying?

Will freeorion achieve what other developers failed? Will it provide something attractive to veterans who have seen it all already?

i don't think 4x space games are dying. there is always an urge to play these types of games; however, very few have been as immersive as the original MOO and MOO2. i think MOO3 did get one thing correct in that it tried to simplify some of the experience; however, it might not have simplified the correct experience.

if we look at the original MOO game we have distinct phases of the game.
Explore - this phase of the game we are trying to go out and discover the relative value of all of the stars/positions around us.
Expand - this phase of the game we are rushing to capture key stars before other races do.
Exploit - this phase of the game we are focusing on ramping production and ramping research.
Exterminate - this phase of the game we are just cleaning up the weaker races.

the problem i feel is that all of the races treat each position relatively the same. and when i say position i am referring to surrounding stars. there is no penalty for over expansion and thus just denying the other races planets is a good enough reason to expand.

the expansion phase needs to be more thoughtful just like the exploitation phase. there is more strategic planning involved in what techs you need to get instead of (i am just getting every tech) because time and resources is a constraint. expansion should also involve more strategic planning than dumb luck.

anyhow i am pondering all of these things because i am working on a 4x game myself. and i am looking to improve the experience for this in a MMOSG that's not real time and not turned based... more like timed turns.

davispm24
Space Krill
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:13 am

Re: X4 = dead?

#44 Post by davispm24 » Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:01 am

"Imo it is dead, only very simple games with ubergraphics for idiots, what a shame."
Although I think dead is an overstatement, I agree graphics do not make the game. They need to be sufficient but beyond that do not effect my enjoyment.

I have spent the last 15 years writing Master of Tactics (a 4X space strategy game) because I wanted to play a game with more tactical depth than MOO2 - not better graphics. Try it if you feel the same, its free to download and play. Its the same old gameplay as other space based 4X strategy games (with my own twist of course), but where I tried to be different is introduction of complexity on the battlefield. So MoT has multiple attack types (physical, psi etc), many types of weapons and I made positioning on the battlefield very important (I call it flanking).

In the near future I shall be introducing supply lines. I am currently planning for it to work like this:

1 - The longer a craft spends in battle the worse it performs (when not supplied).
2 - All crafts fighting around a friendly planet are supplied.
3 - Battles fought at an enemy planet can be supplied by adding a supply transport to the fleet, which will be visible in the battlefield (Once supply ship is destroyed then supplies start to run out!).

I am not the only one out there trying to improve this genre of game - so dead is a little harsh I think????

Post Reply