Sci Fi x4 game?

[mikeck]

Ian, you might really enjoy "Aurora" if organizing fleets and ship design is your thing. There is no game in existence with more "ship design" detail....for better or worse

[sandman2575]

From the Aurora Wiki:

"Some say it has the graphical charm of an income tax assistant software from the late nineties..."

Even more than the legendarily steep learning curve, this is what keeps me away from this game.

Fans of the game, mikeck and co. -- how do you get past the "GUI barrier"?  It just seems like it must be such an immersion killer.  It seems hard for me to get excited about ship design when your ships only exist as simpletext spec reports. 

[mikeck]

It's all "want to". In the end, we all suspend disbelief everytime we play any game. I think of it as me designing a ship in an office. When it deploys, I'm in the control center somewhere watching the action. It's immersive because you make it that way. You create the story and create a universe to match it . It's spreadsheets in space with some harpoon thrown in, no doubt. I wanted to learn it so I did

[Ian C]

Ian, you might really enjoy "Aurora" if organizing fleets and ship design is your thing. There is no game in existence with more "ship design" detail....for better or worse

Thanks Mike. Downloading now. Will check this out.

[mikeck]

Ian, you might really enjoy "Aurora" if organizing fleets and ship design is your thing. There is no game in existence with more "ship design" detail....for better or worse

Thanks Mike. Downloading now. Will check this out.

Just be prepared. It is very complex....very...and spreadsheet heavy you must read and play along with the tutorials

[Nefaro]

I find it immersive, fun and not the steaming pile of crap I was expecting.

You have the benefit of much post-release fixes in the mod you installed.  If you were playing a long un-modded game, you would likely get frustrated with the bugs at some point.

Reinforces the strategy of sitting on the fence for a long time, to see if someone fixes such buggy releases.

[vyshka]

Having messed around with MOO-3 for a bit, I have a hard time understanding the hate. I asked before and Jarhead thought that people were disappointed that it wasn't an upgraded Moo-2.
It took a different tack. Maybe, I never played them, but this game seems quite good. Even the "let's play" guy starts his MOO3 video talking about how much the game sucks and everyone hates it. Am I missing something? I mean, it's pretty deep. Lots of research, good ship design, detailed fleet and unit organization, decent planetary building. Heck, I even like the combat...especially watching point defense lasers blowing up incoming missiles.

If you played the original, unpatched release you would understand the hate a  lot better.  ;)

Exactly.

The original was a buggy mess.  The patches, and primarily the mods, fixed it up some. 

I actually liked where they were going with it, and I purchased MOO3 later on after I knew there were some mods & fixes for it.  But I tried playing it vanilla for a bit just to see for myself and it was indeed problematic at the time.

It ended up being pushed out the door I believe when Atari forced their hand, and it was in a poor state. Right around the time Alan's assocation with the project ended they had a major change of course and ripped out tons of stuff. I think some of the disappointment besides the state it was in, was the wondering of what had been ripped out of it. It would be interesting if someone could get Alan to do a post mortem of the project in one of this game design classes.

[GDS_Starfury]

Aurora is a great solid core of 4X gaming goodness. 

[GDS_Starfury]

I want a fully fleshed out universe with many of Auroras ideas with battles being fought out is HW style combat.
I want a crazy tech tree and ship design options.  I want custom formations in a axis.  why is this so hard to bring to market?

[Ian C]

why is this so hard to bring to market?

Because nearly all companies never ask strategy gamers what they want and they never think outside the box.

We could make written a bullet-point synopsis of game features that would make the best WW2 Grand Strategy game ever made but no one would make it. I actually have that list. I'm just waiting to win the lottery so I can hire a team.

[sandman2575]

We could make written a bullet-point synopsis of game features that would make the best WW2 Grand Strategy game ever made but no one would make it. I actually have that list. I'm just waiting to win the lottery so I can hire a team.

Well, if I win the lottery, let's partner up, because I very much want the Best WW2 Grand Strategy Game Ever Made.  And I have a few ideas of my own of how to do it.   8)

'course, lottery aside, there's always Kickstarter ... ?

[Ian C]

Well, if I win the lottery, let's partner up, because I very much want the Best WW2 Grand Strategy Game Ever Made.  And I have a few ideas of my own of how to do it.   8)

'course, lottery aside, there's always Kickstarter ... ?

That's a very serious undertaking. I wonder how feasible it would be. I have pretty good credentials - not as a professional programmer - but I do know a house full of industry people...hmm...

[MuzzyDev]

why is this so hard to bring to market?

Because nearly all companies never ask strategy gamers what they want and they never think outside the box.

We could make written a bullet-point synopsis of game features that would make the best WW2 Grand Strategy game ever made but no one would make it. I actually have that list. I'm just waiting to win the lottery so I can hire a team.

See I always thought it was because almost every serious strategy wargamer has one of those lists--they're just all completely different ;-)

[Ian C]

why is this so hard to bring to market?

Because nearly all companies never ask strategy gamers what they want and they never think outside the box.

We could make written a bullet-point synopsis of game features that would make the best WW2 Grand Strategy game ever made but no one would make it. I actually have that list. I'm just waiting to win the lottery so I can hire a team.

See I always thought it was because almost every serious strategy wargamer has one of those lists--they're just all completely different ;-)

I agree Chris, but there is some kind of common ground where we all agree that certain features and mechanics are fun, immersive and satisfying. I believe that the most fun and successful strategy games all have certain things going on that can be combined into one package, including interface, map layout, feedback, details, modability, things that immerse, level of detail and so on.

EDIT: edited to start new thread here: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=10066.0

[sandman2575]

Ian -- maybe you could start a new thread with that last great post -- just cut and repost it and give it its own thread, if that's allowed.  I think this could be a very interesting discussion but don't want to further derail this thread which should be about space 4x.

(I definitely want to respond in some detail, but at work so probably won't have a chance to do so until later this evening or tomorrow.)