How does this stack up to Gal Civ II

[Fishman]

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

I'm not sure how or why some guys feel that they cannot finish their games. Maybe because their machines cannot handle a large complex galaxy?

The game runs into hard physical limits inherent in the 32bit architecture, perhaps because of a combination of poor memory management and leaks, when played in large, populated galaxies.

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

The AI in GalCiv was a joke: wash, rinse, repeat approach to 4X. I'm still not certain that the AI in DW is that much better, but I see certain hints that it is.

The AI in DW isn't really all that great. At least the GalCiv AI recognized when it had bitten off more than it could chew with both hands, and generally started wars with the intent of actually fighting them, even if it did so poorly. The DW AI appears to start wars for no apparent reason with people, even when it has no idea where they actually are.

[Igard]

ORIGINAL: lordxorn

Spygames- I don't remember GalCiv intelligence options, did it have any? lol DW has a decent intelligence part of the game although it needs some rebalancing.

GalCiv had a slider for espionage below each race so that you could alter the funds toward spying. For me it was way too easy. DW has a much more involved espionage system, but as you say lordxorn, a bit too powerful at the moment.

Fallschirmjager, my advice is, if you liked the customization and game set-up options of GalCiv, DW takes it that bit further.

If you liked GalCivs presentation and humour, DW does not have as polished a UI and it takes itself a bit more serious. What it does prsent better to the gamer, is a more realistic galaxy with planets orbiting their stars and moons orbiting their planet. It presents us with a living, breathing galaxy.

If you liked GalCivs exploration phase of the game, DW does this much much better IMO. GalCiv doesn't have real anomolies to explore (they just vanish after you discover them). Most important thing though, is searching for resources to help your empire grow. Galciv does not come close to anything as engaging as this. You need to find the dilithium crystals to power your ships, you need to find the Korribian Spice or Refidium Ale your people crave.

If you liked the ship design in GalCiv then you're gonna enjoy it in DW. You can't design a 3D model of the ship. I found this to be very limited anyway in GalCiv. DW allows you to choose from a 2D image which you can mod into the game if you like. Designing your ship feels like your designing a space ship. It's awesome fun, enough said.

It's also important to note, as others have. That the developers still have alot of balancing and improvements to make. Just remember, If everyone said, "Nah, I'm not buying a game until they get everything right!" then the developers would abandon the game. If you buy this game, your helping towards its continued development. I've completed the game 3 times now and despite some issues with bugs and such, I've enjoyed every moment.[:)]

[atlana]

ORIGINAL: Davor

Now that I am back....[snip]

+1 [8D][:D]

DW does feel more alive than GC2, which makes you get more involved. The options are many and deep going; one feature i liked was, to be able to put EVERYTHING on automatic, and just have MY OWN little cruiser (as a single ship captain) roaming around on my own - how many 4X games can do that ?

I've been around the scifi/space based 4X and RTS gaming scene since the early 80's (Commodore 64 anyone?) and so far DW is IT on the 4X side (still waiting for a DW in HOMEWORLD/CATACLYSM style engine [:D])

on the negative side, it needs a decent rig to run being realtime, especially with huge galaxies (1,500 starsystems) at mid- to end-game.
Negatively is also that it's depending on certain windows components, like having WindowsMediaPlayer installed is a MUST (which i despise), instead of using just the codecs via DirectX API.

It's developed on the .NET Framework (not sure if it's utilizing XNA though), which has it's good sides (easier patching & faster deployment) and bad sides (performance hog, feature limitations)

Bottomline - I saw it on a friends' rig running who got it from a not so legit site, i test-drove it for a few hours on his PC and decided to get DW for myself (digital purchase). I think Elliot (the main guy coding DW) does a good job so far with DW, listens to his clientel (i know what a suckassjob that can be, been there done that [8D]) and deserves credits for trying a niche-market. [8D]

cheers
@

[HsojVvad]

I read a few people saying the AI is not that great. I got a question, can anyone name a game that had 1) and excellent AI 2) had a good AI. Also can anyone name wich one had a good AI on release with no patching done what's so ever. [:D]

[madpainter]

IMO the AI needs tweaking but is actually not bad. Put it this way, I can't think of a game that is really that much better.
The only thing that really bugs me so far is the fact that I can make an empire pay through the nose for a peace deal, 5 minutes later they declare war again as if they think they can win this time.

[scotten_usa]

I tried GalCivII and personally I found it a little dry.  But everyone likes different things in a game.

[Grotius]

I like both DW and Gal Civ 2, personally. But enjoying Gal Civ 2 doesn't guarantee you'll enjoy DW, because the real-time aspect of DW does alter the feel of the game, even if it is pausable real-time. Part of me is always itching to micromanage more in DW, but another part of me appreciates the game's innovative division between private and public sectors. In the end, games like Gal Civ 2 and Civ 4 are more my kettle of fish, but I certainly am enjoying DW too.

[jscott991]

If you like Gal Civ 2 a lot, you are unlikely to like DW.

DW simply is not as polished or simple to control and it requires a great deal more frenetic thinking.

I like GalCiv a little but always found it to be too abstract and the combat and ships are boring.

DW has more potential, but right now it is a fairly sloppy and hard to control game. Still, I'm more likely to be playing it in 6 months than I played GalCiv much after the first weeks.

Also, the game's slow running speed, even on super-high end machines is tedious.

When it takes 3-5 seconds or more to load the construction or ship screen, and you have to drop out of those screens to issue some (or most, in the case of ships) commands only to go back in, you really want to throw the game in the garbage.

[Sigh]

Sigh, I know that you are very negative about DW, but why don't you like galciv2? What other games do you prefer then?

GalCiv is too dry in my opinion. I tried multiple times to get into and just failed every time. Lame technology.. Lame combat... Lame "Galaxy"... Ai extremely over hyped.. And on and on.. Its just boring to me despite having a couple of strengths.

It also plays like a civilization game and not like a MOO game.. Thats not necessarily bad but i think we have enough (good even) civ clones

Still at least it works

I like alot of games.

[shanicus]

I certainly like the combat more in DW than Gal Civ 2!

Plus, I like the graphics better in this game and the main screen, too. But, to enjoy DW, you certainly need to get rid of the damn stock warning sound (check the mods)!

I would also have to disagree that Gal Civ 2 is the best 4x game (even with all its great expansion packs). I prefer Master of Orion 2, Sins of a Solar Empire (with expansions) and Sword of the Stars (if they would ditch the stupid 3d map).

Gal Civ 2 is fairly similar and more polished in many ways but that does NOT make it a better game. BOTH games have great communities and support.

I would recommend a purchase here.

[mbar]

ORIGINAL: shanicus
Sword of the Stars (if they would ditch the stupid 3d map).

I think the recent patch of Agros Naval Shipyard added a 2d disk galaxy. It's in there though.

[Zakhal]

ORIGINAL: mbar

ORIGINAL: shanicus
Sword of the Stars (if they would ditch the stupid 3d map).

I think the recent patch of Agros Naval Shipyard added a 2d disk galaxy. It's in there though.

I think the 2d option was before that even. Possibly in a patch. Sword of the Stars has easily the best combat, ship design and most interesting research-options of all 4x games. What you research & design and how you fight in the battles makes a clear difference how you succeed in the game. And the game is very challenging even on medium difficulty.

[jam3]

Galciv had a broken economic model which after about 20 games you either learned to tolerate or u just shelved it, i shelved it.

[scotten_usa]

ORIGINAL: mbar

ORIGINAL: shanicus
Sword of the Stars (if they would ditch the stupid 3d map).

I think the recent patch of Agros Naval Shipyard added a 2d disk galaxy. It's in there though.

The original game had a 2D galaxy, but I find that map penalizes some races - like the hivers. On a true 3D map they can expand like wildfire, but a 2D map restricts their growth.

[kschur]

I find Galactic Civ and Distant World both very enjoyable games in their own right. As you know Galactic Civ is turn based wheras Distant Worlds is real-time. The degree of automation in Distant Worlds is excellent and the universe feels alive with private ships pursuing their own objectives (passenger transport, mining, etc). I also enjoy the graphics of Distant Worlds. The only thing that Galactiv Civ has that Distant Worlds does not is the AI opponent in Galactic Civ will adapt it's ships to counter your ship designs. On the other hand, Distant Worlds has less of a rock, paper, scissors fell to it than Galactic Civ. I strongly recommend Distant Worlds.

p.s. Don't mind the trolls on this forum. Some people just enjoy trashing things because it makes them feel good and powerful in their very, very, very, small little universe of meaninglessness.

[HsojVvad]

Don't forget GC II had lots of patches to fix the AI so the AI will build agaisnt your own ships. So as of now, I guess you can say that, but then you have to take in context, when GC II came out at 3 weeks, it wasn't as polished as it is now. Just a reminder, GC II had lots of complaints about the AI as well in it's ealry incarnation as well.

[jam3]

The way building maintenance, empire sliders, and the general economy worked in Galciv was one of the most convoluted messes in any turn based empire game I think I have ever seen. The fact they didnt fix it from 1 to 2 says alot about the game in general. Mastering the economy destroyed the immersion of the game itself because it became incredibly gamey. Galciv 2 in alot of ways became a ship building tool much in the same way spore was just a toolset. There are alot of people who mastered the econ system and somehow still love that game but even the developers themselves admit its a horrible model.

DW has a rather opaque econ model at the moment but it almost seems to simple: grow, minimize maintenance costs, earn credits. I think DW has the upper hand because econ in galciv 2 was fundamentally flawed and couldn't be fixed via tuning. DW should be able to balance out the problems via patching.

And I love the 3d space in sots maps as well as homeworld tactical movement. Is it really that confusing? Are that many people spatially challenged?

[Zakhal]

ORIGINAL: jam3

And I love the 3d space in sots maps as well as homeworld tactical movement. Is it really that confusing? Are that many people spatially challenged?

For me the combat was a bit confusing at first but after learning handful of very useful shortcut keys it became the best ever 4x combat.

[Gertjan]

How much of a clickfest is tactical combat in SOTS? How much micro is there involved?

[Lamb Chop]

ORIGINAL: Gertjan

How much of a clickfest is tactical combat in SOTS? How much micro is there involved?

No clickfest.
pretty enjoyable combat. micromanagement is very limited also if you choose so.
If you are into more bigger picture, GalCiv II has no modern competition.
MOO II is also out for 5.99 and runs on vista win 7 etc.
Take your pick