GameSpy's MOO3 Review

[anonymous_user]

@Brett Todd

I wrote it. I rated it highly because I thought it was a masterful piece of work; I certainly didn’t need to “tilt” it up, though that did happen to offset the Graphics and Sound numbers (which always drag down management game scores, IMHO usually unfairly – it’s the only real problem I have with the GameSpot scoring system). My actual submitted score was an 8.5.

I’m sorry Brett, I wasn’t calling you out, or even GameSpot, just pointing out the futility of directly comparing review scores when every site reviews them differently.

[William_Abner]

@Dave_Long

Just curious, Bill. If you were giving it a star rating out of five, where would it fall? 76 out of 100 is nearly a four star review. It’s a 7.6 out of 10. Is that what you intended? That’s far above being an average game, especially for one you noted a ton of problems for. I think that’s what Brad’s getting at…this is a very good review of the game based on the rating alone (and yes, I’m not dumb enough to look only at numbers, just noting the impression that score gives).

–Dave

I don’t relate one site or mag’s review scale with another. I don’t look at a 76 at GSpy as a 7.6 or almost a 4 star review. I see it as a 76 at GSpy. I don’t see a 3/5 as a 60%. The two scales are very different. Had I been assigned this for CGM I would have scored it around a 2.5/5 based on the scale CGM uses.

When reading the GSpy review scale it says that a game that receives a 70-79:

“Games in the 70s are good games, don’t get us wrong. But they probably needed a little bit more time in the oven before coming to the table. If you enjoyed parts of a game but constantly found yourself saying, “if only they’d done x, y, z…” there’s a good chance it belongs in this category. Alternately, a die-hard fan of the genre might find a lot to like here.”

I did enjoy parts of the game, and a die-hard still may (or may not…) find things to like about it. I was also constantly saying “Damn if they would have fixed this or changed that…” I think there’s a fine game buried underneath all the GUI muck. Again, it’s in this range, for me, because I’m enjoying it and still playing it as a MP game. I wrote in the article that 'MP games are a blast because it masks some of the games problems ’ (or something like that.) I really do feel this way. I should have explained this a bit more clearly in the article and like I said, I realize the text is much more negative than positive. I thought it was a difficult game to score.

[Toddy]

@Dave_Long

Just curious, Bill. If you were giving it a star rating out of five, where would it fall? 76 out of 100 is nearly a four star review. It’s a 7.6 out of 10. Is that what you intended? That’s far above being an average game, especially for one you noted a ton of problems for. I think that’s what Brad’s getting at…this is a very good review of the game based on the rating alone (and yes, I’m not dumb enough to look only at numbers, just noting the impression that score gives).

I can’t speak for Bill here, but you’ve got to take into account that scoring varies wildly from site to site. I get the feeling that a GameSpy score of 76% would translate more into the 2.5-3 star range, or a 6-something at GameSpot.

[Toddy]

Uh, what he said.

[Toddy]

I know, Andrew. Didn’t mean that to read like I was offended or anything.

[Jason_McCullough]

Allow me to summarize: gaming reviewers range from good to bad. The gaming publications that run the reviews, however, are pretty much whores.

Edit: forget to mention that CGM doesn’t count. Happy, Steve? :D

[steve]

@Jason_McCullough1

Allow me to summarize: gaming reviewers range from good to bad. The gaming publications that run the reviews, however, are pretty much whores.

I prefer to think of us more as sluts, since whores get paid.

[Brad_Wardell]

[quote=“Bub_Andrew”]

@Brett Todd

I wrote it. I rated it highly because I thought it was a masterful piece of work; I certainly didn’t need to “tilt” it up, though that did happen to offset the Graphics and Sound numbers (which always drag down management game scores, IMHO usually unfairly – it’s the only real problem I have with the GameSpot scoring system). My actual submitted score was an 8.5.

I’m sorry Brett, I wasn’t calling you out, or even GameSpot, just pointing out the futility of directly comparing review scores when every site reviews them differently.[/quote]

I agree there. I didn’t mean my original comment to be a Rorschach test or anything. ;)

I was just pointing out that MOO3’s score was higher than the TCM score and since most of the reviewers who are posting here have played both.

Since I haven’t played MOO3 I can’t say whether MOO3 is “better” or “worse” than TCM.

The only reason I brought up the Gamespot review was in response to someone saying that Gamespy would have likely given it a lower review today because they are trying to be more like Gamespot now with their scoring system than they were at the time of the original review.

As a developer, particularly an indie developer, I’m happy with any review that makes it clear that the player played the game for more than half an hour. And both Gamespy and Gamespot clearly seemed to have played TCM fully before making their conclusions which is all anyone can ask for.

[Kahlil_Gibran]

@Brad_Wardell

The only reason I brought up the Gamespot review was in response to someone saying that Gamespy would have likely given it a lower review today because they are trying to be more like Gamespot now with their scoring system than they were at the time of the original review.

For the record, I didn’t say that you’re game “deserved” a lower score. I was simply saying that common sense would dictate that if the same review were posted today on GameSpy it would probably get a lower score - if you went by their new rating system. Personally I thought the score number on GameSpy for MOO3 was a bit higher than it should have been based what William’s review said… but what do i know?

I have not played MOO3 or TCM and have no opinion on either game – and i’m not sure if TCM deserved the score it got on GameSpy or the higher score that it got on GameSpot.

And on a closing note, I look forward to playing your next game!

[Brad_Wardell]

@Kahlil_Gibran

[quote=Brad Wardell]The only reason I brought up the Gamespot review was in response to someone saying that Gamespy would have likely given it a lower review today because they are trying to be more like Gamespot now with their scoring system than they were at the time of the original review.

For the record, I didn’t say that you’re game “deserved” a lower score. I was simply saying that common sense would dictate that if the same review were posted today on GameSpy it would probably get a lower score - if you went by their new rating system. Personally I thought the score number on GameSpy for MOO3 was a bit higher than it should have been based what William’s review said… but what do i know?

I have not played MOO3 or TCM and have no opinion on either game – and i’m not sure if TCM deserved the score it got on GameSpy or the higher score that it got on GameSpot.

And on a closing note, I look forward to playing your next game![/quote]

That’s good because the next game is a porn empire simulator! (just kidding). Seriously though, I didn’t take anything you said as to imply that any of the titles deserved different scores.

We got our copy of MOO3 here. Comes with a nice card for Galactic Civilizations in the box. Won’t get to really try the game until later. Gotta program that Galactic empire game or whatever the heck it’s called today. ;)

[anonymous_user]

@"Brad Wardell"

[quote=“Kahlil Gibran”][quote=Brad Wardell]That’s good because the next game is a porn empire simulator! (just kidding).

But why not? Just call it Porn Mag Tycoon and shovel it out the door. It should generate enough sales to make a profit with the “tycoon” label if you don’t put any effort into it. It sure seems to be the model used for developing Mall Tycoon.

On second thought, don’t do that. I want you working on GalCiv. I am so looking forward to that!

[Robert_Sharp]

@Bub_Andrew

Abner felt MOO3 is a 76 out of 100. Whomever rated Corporate Machine is the guy you’ve probably got your beef with.

You get be a writer with grammar like that? I know it’s just a forum post, but come on—“whomever rated”?

I’ll send you a Bedford Handbook…ack, they are $50!! Nevermind, get your own.

[Aszurom]

Meanwhile in Mordor…

Gollum! Where is the ring!

>My precious! Never will tell you, I won’t!

Hey, your pre-order of MOO3 is in…

>SHIRE! BAGGINSSSSSSS!

[Kahlil_Gibran]

Well whatever “it” is I’m looking forward to “it”.
I’m hoping that the interface for GalCiv is streamlined and easy to navigate, unlike (so i’ve heard) MOO 3.

and BTW ARUSH and Playboy are already doing that game ;)

[Tyjenks]

@Kahlil_Gibran

and BTW ARUSH and Playboy are already doing that game ;)

“Be Hugh Hefner and manage Playboy”

Now what straight, relatively healthy teenage boy, young man or middle-aged pervert would not want to be Hugh. At least for a little bit. I am sure this game will end up being grade A crap, but I am interested to see what they will do with it.

[Brad_Wardell]

Well first we hope to team up with the Sci-Fi channel to do Porn Emperor of Dune. But the security guys at the door know me on sight now…

[Tyjenks]

@Brad_Wardell

Well first we hope to team up with the Sci-Fi channel to do Porn Emperor of Dune. But the security guys at the door know me on sight now…

Have you secured Wil Hurt for that project yet? If not, second on your short list* is probably a given: Jonah Falcon.

Thanks in advance for my winning entry for GalCiv on UGO, Brad.

[size=2]*[Insert short/long joke here][/size]

[Jakub]

@Robert_Sharp

You get be a writer with grammar like that? I know it’s just a forum post, but come on—“whomever rated”?

I’ll send you a Bedford Handbook…ack, they are $50!! Nevermind, get your own.

Careful Robert, the sword is Sharp and can point both ways. :shock:

(hit me, I make a pun!)

(Never mind is two words ;))

[anonymous_user]

[quote=“Tyjenks”]

@Kahlil Gibran

and BTW ARUSH and Playboy are already doing that game ;)

“Be Hugh Hefner and manage Playboy”

Now what straight, relatively healthy teenage boy, young man or middle-aged pervert would not want to be Hugh. At least for a little bit. I am sure this game will end up being grade A crap, but I am interested to see what they will do with it.[/quote]

There is nothing wrong with seeing beautiful women naked.

[anonymous_user]

@Robert_Sharp

You get be a writer with grammar like that?

Yes Robert, I “get be” a writer with grammar like that.