The State of SMAC 2

[testdummy653]

BTW....

off topic

BUT --- sigh...

The good Energy Credits are on Triumph Studios ressurecting the classic that was also from the SMAX era Age of Wonders....
according to the facebook page, it should be next week.

Why,Why, WHY can't it be SMAX for EA/Firaxis???...

I am going to cry in a corner for a minute.

Pardon me while I enter a geek depression

If enough game remakes do well, we may see another smac.

[Dale]

And what about cottages, workshops, and various sorts of mills?

You don't bother building them.  No seriously, you build mines, and if you can't you build a farm.

Anything else is inefficient use of the land.

Dale.. the cottages in Civ 4 grow when you work them. It was a huge strategy to put these on floodplains and watch the cash rake in. Perhaps also combining these with income boosting buildings.

But we digress WAY OT.

While Civ 4 DID add a bit of complexity, it still pales in comparison to SMAX's advantages. Not to say a more modern SMAX could not benefit from some Civ 4 systems. I personally like the Civ 4 "mission" system of handling aircraft. It just feels right. SMAX would be a better game for it. I also like the way Civ 4 handles copters. Copters in SMAX are just retarded with the damage on movement and insane amounts of attacks. Civ 4 has copters right. Civ 4 has a damn good resource system. But, my complaint is they did not go far enough with it. Dammit, I wanted to have to have cows or deer for leather. Or.. have to have different composits and facilities for modern aerospace units. Combine that with a modern unit builder like Fallen Enchantress has, folks would have geek orgasms. BUT - they dumbed it down.

Now.. Civ 5 was really dumbed down. BUT - Civ 5 also has things we can steal. The disembark feature upon tech really is cool. I like micro, but I feel loading/unloading masses of transports is really boring gameplay. Entering "research agreements" solves the whole "no tech brokering" arguement and is just a lot cooler than trade x tech for x.

Keep all the cool things about SMAX. But do not ignore the lessons of what came after, Nor copy the failures of what came after.

Personally, I believe Imperialism II had the best resource and production chain models ever.  I would make some very minor changes to it, but that's about it.

[Matt the Czar]

imperialism 2 was my first 4x game. my second was civ 2 mp gold

[Dale]

If there is some way to rejoin all the rights together, and the cost is not prohibitive, then it also eliminates the 2K-EA stalemate.  As I understand it, a lot of the rights standoff right now is due to the two publishers not wishing to give the other ground.

I'm still dubious as to whether there would be enough sales to cover the license purchase costs, production costs, distribution costs, etc etc, and still leave me with enough to fund the next game after any SMAC2.

Probably the best situation you could wish for, is a game that plays like SMAC, but has totally different names for everything.  Same game play, just different labels on everything.

EDIT: Anyways, just to actually "do" something, to see what is feasible, I've emailed EA legal department.

I received a reply from EA.  They want to talk!  Note: 4 years ago they even refused to discuss the SMAC/X license.

The person I will be talking to is the Director of Business Development.  These people usually discuss anything that could result in new or expanded business for EA.  Let me just tell you, this is a VERY positive step.  Basically what this means is that my request will not be going round and round a legal department.  I'll be talking with someone who actually "does" stuff for a living.

So anyways, I see a number of options:

1. "No".  End of story.
2. "Buy the license".  End of story, too expensive.
3. "Develop sequel with EA on the label".  I assume this would be the desired result.
4. "You have permission to develop something like, but not quite SMAC (restriction list)".  I would class this as a 'minor win'.

Option 3/4 can also be split into sub-options:

a. With EA funding/support/publishing
b. With no EA funding/support/publishing

I'll fight for option 3a, as that would be the best option I believe.

[testdummy653]

If there is some way to rejoin all the rights together, and the cost is not prohibitive, then it also eliminates the 2K-EA stalemate.  As I understand it, a lot of the rights standoff right now is due to the two publishers not wishing to give the other ground.

I'm still dubious as to whether there would be enough sales to cover the license purchase costs, production costs, distribution costs, etc etc, and still leave me with enough to fund the next game after any SMAC2.

Probably the best situation you could wish for, is a game that plays like SMAC, but has totally different names for everything.  Same game play, just different labels on everything.

EDIT: Anyways, just to actually "do" something, to see what is feasible, I've emailed EA legal department.

I received a reply from EA.  They want to talk!  Note: 4 years ago they even refused to discuss the SMAC/X license.

The person I will be talking to is the Director of Business Development.  These people usually discuss anything that could result in new or expanded business for EA.  Let me just tell you, this is a VERY positive step.  Basically what this means is that my request will not be going round and round a legal department.  I'll be talking with someone who actually "does" stuff for a living.

So anyways, I see a number of options:

1. "No".  End of story.
2. "Buy the license".  End of story, too expensive.
3. "Develop sequel with EA on the label".  I assume this would be the desired result.
4. "You have permission to develop something like, but not quite SMAC (restriction list)".  I would class this as a 'minor win'.

Option 3/4 can also be split into sub-options:

a. With EA funding/support/publishing
b. With no EA funding/support/publishing

I'll fight for option 3a, as that would be the best option I believe.

Or option 5 they tell you its in development.

[Dale]

Or option 5 they tell you its in development.

If that were the case, they would've let me go round and round in circles in Legal. 

[ete]

This sounds very promising. Good luck to you, and if you do get it I want in on helping make it awesome.

Also, if you get
2. "Buy the license".  End of story, too expensive.
is it certain they would want a very large pile of money for it, or is it possible they would be willing to part with the rights to an ancient game for a more modest amount? Or is it the legal fees around transfer of rights which would just automatically make it too much?

[Dale]

This sounds very promising. Good luck to you, and if you do get it I want in on helping make it awesome.

Also, if you get
2. "Buy the license".  End of story, too expensive.
is it certain they would want a very large pile of money for it, or is it possible they would be willing to part with the rights to an ancient game for a more modest amount? Or is it the legal fees around transfer of rights which would just automatically make it too much?

One thing to keep in mind is it was only 2 years ago that EA reinstated the full trademark on the game.  And with the recent success of the GOG and other classic sales campaigns, there might have actually been enough sales to interest someone high enough up.

[Maniac]

What would your plans be with the SMAC franchise? :confused: You can't make an AAA game right?

[Dale]

You can't make an AAA game right?

Why not?  AAA just means "we spent more money and must make more money".

[testdummy653]

You can't make an AAA game right?

Why not?  AAA just means "we spent more money and must make more money".

Triple AAA used to mean we spent more time to make a better product.

[Earthmichael]

In my view, most of the strategy games have regressed, some badly.

1. SMACX was the pinnacle of Civ style games.  Civ 3 was a huge step backwards.  Civ 4 was a minor step forward in some concepts, but still way below SMACX.  And after you fully analyze Civ 4, you will realize the game has no strategic depth.  Civ 5 was another huge step backward.

2. Master of Orion 2 peaked that franchise.  MOO3 was a disaster, and unfortunately was likely to have killed the whole franchise.  (Although I do hope than someone could base a new game on MOO2.)

3. Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was fantastic!  Sure, it had flaws.  Might skills were grossly underpowered, for example.  But it was amazing for its time.  Then HOMM4 was a disaster than I was afraid had killed the franchise.  But then HOMM5 came out, was the true pinnacle of this franchise, a really amazing game, with a much better balance between might and magic, and much more strategic richness.  Then HOMM6 took a huge step backwards, in my opinion.  They added some cool stuff, like weapons that gain experience and power; but they made all of the very rich and varied skill trees in HOMM5 into a single uniform and boring skill tree that all heroes of all factions share.

4. I could give me opinion on the other strategic franchises, but in my view the all follow the same pattern: weaker and dumber sequels.

With the single exception of HOMM5, I can't think of any strategy game that took a true step forward from an older version.  They all seem dumber and less strategic.

If you produce a game that advances strategic concepts for the thinking gamers, I think you will have a very loyal (but perhaps not extremely large) fan base of intelligent gamers.  If you can make the same game have a dumbed down mode for mainstream, perhaps you can pick up the fickle mainstream gamers as well as the loyal fan base of highly strategic gamers.

[testdummy653]

In my view, most of the strategy games have regressed, some badly.

1. SMACX was the pinnacle of Civ style games.  Civ 3 was a huge step backwards.  Civ 4 was a minor step forward in some concepts, but still way below SMACX.  And after you fully analyze Civ 4, you will realize the game has no strategic depth.  Civ 5 was another huge step backward.

2. Master of Orion 2 peaked that franchise.  MOO3 was a disaster, and unfortunately was likely to have killed the whole franchise.  (Although I do hope than someone could base a new game on MOO2.)

3. Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was fantastic!  Sure, it had flaws.  Might skills were grossly underpowered, for example.  But it was amazing for its time.  Then HOMM4 was a disaster than I was afraid had killed the franchise.  But then HOMM5 came out, was the true pinnacle of this franchise, a really amazing game, with a much better balance between might and magic, and much more strategic richness.  Then HOMM6 took a huge step backwards, in my opinion.  They added some cool stuff, like weapons that gain experience and power; but they made all of the very rich and varied skill trees in HOMM5 into a single uniform and boring skill tree that all heroes of all factions share.

4. I could give me opinion on the other strategic franchises, but in my view the all follow the same pattern: weaker and dumber sequels.

With the single exception of HOMM5, I can't think of any strategy game that took a true step forward from an older version.  They all seem dumber and less strategic.

If you produce a game that advances strategic concepts for the thinking gamers, I think you will have a very loyal (but perhaps not extremely large) fan base of intelligent gamers.  If you can make the same game have a dumbed down mode for mainstream, perhaps you can pick up the fickle mainstream gamers as well as the loyal fan base of highly strategic gamers.

Exactly! I played MOO3 and I had no clue what was going on. It wasn't even the same game compared to 1 and 2. HOMM3's demo (alone) I played probably 60 times before buying the game, great investment. HOMM 4,5 are not at the same level. I liked Civ 3,4 (even Civ 5), but in no way do they compared to the options in SMAC/X.

I been playing SMAC for on and off for 10+ years and I'm still learning new strategies and tactics. I can't say that about to many other games.

[Earthmichael]

HOMM5 evolved to be better than HOMM3 in my opinion, by the time it got to the Barbarian expansion.

Also, to fully enjoy HOMM5, you MUST download the astondingly good manual created by the USER COMMUNITY.

It is a mystery why HOMM4 and HOMM6 (and MOO3 and CIV5) are such disappointmnents!

[Maniac]

Why not?  AAA just means "we spent more money and must make more money".

Because you don't have the money.