a question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

a question

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> a question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

a question - 7/3/2014 6:46:44 PM

Zap

Posts: 3639
Joined: 12/6/2004
From: LAS VEGAS TAKE A CHANCE
Status: offline

If you could list what it is that best describes the enjoyment of playing this game what would be your list.
Now I don't have this game. What I'm hoping is to get a better understanding of is why you love the game. And what is the strong point of this game and maybe a weak point or two.

An example. Is it the battles that are challenging. Is it building the empire ect.

< Message edited by Zap -- 7/3/2014 7:47:32 PM >

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: a question - 7/3/2014 7:15:21 PM

Modest

Posts: 172
Joined: 11/26/2011
From: Warsaw, Poland
Status: offline

For me that is extremly easy question :) Thing which I love most in DW is to look how galaxy is becoming more and more alive when empires are developing (all empires - mine and AI's). To be more precise - I just totally love concept of private sector and how I can not directly influence it, but how much I am (and any other empire) influencing it indirectly. That is very unique to DW.

Yes, I enjoy wars, destruction and battles - but those all are cheap! To have them I don't need DW - to have them I can play Starcraft (any part and any expanison), Command and Counquer (again - any part and any expansion) or Supreme Commander (any part and any expansion)... The list could go on.

Yes, I enjoy building up mine empire - but again, it is also cheap. Not as cheap as battles, but still quite cheap. I can find it in Eurpoa Universalis (any part), Crusader Kings (any part) or Total War (again - any part) or even Civilisation (any part with any expansion). This list also could go on...

(in reply to Zap)

Post #: 2

RE: a question - 7/3/2014 7:21:16 PM

Kilravock

Posts: 65
Joined: 6/10/2014
Status: offline

Well it's basically like MOO2 with more depth and size. You can say it's a Paradox style game versus a Civilization style game.

I bought the game years ago because of the developer's videos highlighting how the game models star systems and how large the game world is. Between that, how State vs. Private economy works, how colonization and colonies work, how detail diplomacy and empire interactions can be; it all makes the universe feel alive. You also have an extreme amount of freedom in not only the design of ships and bases, but also how you use them along with other tools in the game. You also have a great deal of flexibility in how to setup a game and tailor it to how you want to play.

For weak points. Well when the game came out, it was more of a proof of concept instead of a game. It took an expansion and a lot of patches to get it to be a real game. It has come a long way in all areas, but it requires a lot time to learn how the AI and game mechanics work. The flexibility can also result in a game that is too easy or too hard if you don't know how to use it.

I have some pet issues with the game, but they are not major. Yeah it's not the best looking game, and UI is hit and mess. Invasions are a pain, but I enjoy the fleet battles. Micromanagement can be pain but it's mostly related to the UI (which has improved) and I don't really trust the AI to manage my games, but it can be adjusted to do what you want to some extent.

(in reply to Zap)

Post #: 3

RE: a question - 7/3/2014 8:14:38 PM

Airpower

Posts: 85
Joined: 7/2/2014
Status: offline

This is the first strategy game since Master of Orion 2 that I've really -loved- playing. This is, in my opinion, the best 4X space strategy game on the market right now, and possibly the best strategy game on the market period. Definitely pick it up if you like the genre.

Game's strong points:
- Events happen in the galaxy in real time, which makes the galaxy feel very alive and vibrant.
- Fully automated private sector economy, which adds a whole new dimension to the standard economic model in these types of games.
- The game is huge in scope. When you begin to conquer the galaxy you really feel like you are CONQUERING a galaxy.
- Relatively easy to play the game at a basic level, but as you get better, there are tons of ways to optimize your playstyle, which I like.
- Fun and brutal space battles, and ship designs that actually matter to the success of your empire.
- Each game feels unique and requires you to tweak your strategy to do well.
- Powerful and easy editor tool lets you tinker and experiment, to help you find an ideal playstyle.

Game's weak points:
- The learning curve for using the game's UI to its fullest potential is pretty steep.
- Automation tricks you into thinking the game plays itself well. It doesn't.
- Technology trees are the same for every race and once you have your research path down, it'll be the same every game.
- Weapons are not balanced. Some are almost always better than others.
- The AI is a bit predictable.
- Zero explanation offered for how/why in-game mechanics work the way they do.

(in reply to Kilravock)

Post #: 4

RE: a question - 7/3/2014 8:25:00 PM

Ceorl

Posts: 20
Joined: 6/11/2014
Status: offline

Why I love this game is best answered with questions? Do you like 4x games? If yes, have you played a lot of 4x games? If yes, does the idea of significantly expanding the detail and corresponding AI interaction in an effort to reduce the abstraction of many other 4x appeal to you?

If you answer no to any of these questions, your time and money may be better served with "easier" 4x games as Distant Worlds is fairly hardcore. This isn't a knock at the game or consumers, I just find this game caters to a niche audience.

An example of how Distant Worlds' complexity works through its trading system compared to Galactic Civilization 2 and the Civilization series. In both trade is heavily abstracted with a single or few units representing trade routes and major resource exchanges handled only on the diplomacy screen, you just magically get iron if the Zulus for example. In Distant Worlds, every single trade is modeled so that a large portion of the trade network, at least related to space travel, is present. We're talking thousands if not tens of thousands of ships and millions of transactions spread across hundreds of planets. You might agree in diplomacy with another faction to gain access to their luxury resource, but in Distant Worlds you'll then watch your freighters go to the specific cargo holds with said resource load it up, jump out and bring it back to the world which needs the resource.

As a result, wars and pirates can really f'up your trade network as raiders can arrive in system destroying or diverting needed supplies. As a result, your colony growth and development slow or decline, your tech level won't rise as fast, may even decline, ships and bases may not get built for lack of resources and your civilian sector will make less money resulting in less tax income.

Mind you this is HOW Distant Worlds is supposed to work. Like any ambitious game, the execution will invariably leave much to be desired which is part of the reason why I consider the game hardcore.

(in reply to Kilravock)

Post #: 5

RE: a question - 7/3/2014 9:07:05 PM

Gregorovitch55

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/11/2014
Status: offline

This:

I don't know of any other space 4X that can produce a map like this or a situation like this. I'm yellow and as you can see there are four or five other empires in the same space as me. What makes it special is that fleets fly anywhere and are only limited by how fast their FTL drives are, how much fuel they have in their tanks and where they might get more fuel. Consequently anyone on this map can make a devastating attack on anyone else - the only limitation being what the victim might be capable of doing do back in return and therefore the question of whether it's worth it. An interesting mixture of hissy-hissy and kissy-kissy will be required to sort this situation out and I would wager no two players would do it the same way.

Note that this is not a "typical" situation. Every game the map is different and the distribution of empires is different so the "situation" is also very different.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gregorovitch55 -- 7/3/2014 10:07:23 PM >

(in reply to Zap)

Post #: 6

RE: a question - 7/4/2014 4:25:39 AM

Zap

Posts: 3639
Joined: 12/6/2004
From: LAS VEGAS TAKE A CHANCE
Status: offline

I own galactic civilization II with some games under my belt. But I would not say I'm a hard core 4x player. So thanks for everyone's input. I find the massiveness of the universe and the alive aspect very attractive.

I find players impressions really give a good insight into a game. I'm tempted.

_____________________________

(in reply to Zap)

Post #: 7

RE: a question - 7/4/2014 7:11:47 AM

Keston

Posts: 300
Joined: 5/7/2010
Status: offline

The range from the tactical level to the sweep of strategic operations and grand strategy, and lots of different general and territorial objectives to fight for. Now that a string of wars (that my rather nasty-tempered Keskudons have helped to even out with some aid) have seen the ridiculously wealthy Riktoh's worlds holding Korabbian Spice and Zentabia Fluid captured by the Gizureans, it is quite fun to organize and stage multiple fleets to sweep in against the always-threatening but weakened Gizureans and snatch four worlds from their grasp in a coup de main of multiple powerful invasions that will frustrate the Riktoh and force the Gizureans to accept a quick peace. Quite different from the extended campaign against the legendary pirates and the grinding insecticidal war against the militant Sluken. The Riktoh and Gizureans must learn that the spice (and fluid) must flow (to us).

While I like warp line games as well (not to mention books like the White-Weber series) with choke points, it is true that an open space game is much more fluid and complex i its strategy, which is quite fun as well. The wars feel big.

< Message edited by Keston -- 7/4/2014 8:13:24 AM >

(in reply to Zap)

Post #: 8

RE: a question - 7/4/2014 2:28:59 PM

Tormodino

Posts: 107
Joined: 3/27/2010
Status: offline

I'll second everything that has been said here. It's massive and fascinating. There are a great many things I find very frustrating, but I'll take the bad to enjoy the good.
There is nothing quite like it.

(in reply to Keston)

Post #: 9