We all know these forums need some more spice, so here it is: Master of Magic is good, but not great. There, I said it.
Ground rules:
Why start the discussion? [1] Fun. [2] It has a major effect on how people perceive FE, and other games in this genre.
So, without further ado, here is my opinion on MoM, in very general terms:
The system that MoM set up was great: cities, troops, heroes, spells, items, etc. Building the next level X to get the better unit was fun. Finding the great hero was fun. Creating that sword you really need was particularly awesome IMHO. In addition, I found that the subsystems all worked together very well.
Furthermore, the variety was also great. You certainly could play differently with different spellbooks and races and whatnot.
The lore and feel of the game, such as it was, was also pretty good, but I hold that it benefited from the grainy little graphics (that were, of course, the only option at the time). Hear me out: the races were pretty standard fantasy/D&D fare, and the icons were just enough that you could tell what things were and they were suggestive of what they represented. The paladins, for example, were essentially a colored stick figure on a horse, and since every nerd worth her salt knows what a paladin is, we all had a picture in our heads of grand knights in shining armor. The graphics as a whole were very colorful and did well to enhance this. This also allowed the setting to be standard fantasy, as it invited the player to fill it in with imagination. (I would argue the same is true for Dwarf Fortress, but that's a tangent.)
The above all make MoM a good game, but the reason it is not a great game, (again, IMHO) is simple: the AI. I don't remember what difficulty I played it on, but the difficulty of the game (to me) was overcoming tough monsters, not the AI. Sometimes those monsters would be wandering/lair protecting, sometimes they would be controlled by a rival, but the AI never used the excellent system the game had to make a fun game. The AI could build stag beetles and throw them at me, but once I figured out how to defeat a stag beetle that was it.
Now I'm not saying I could have done better; I think that the wonderful complexity of the whole system (cities + heroes + spells + items + troops + summons) doomed the AI from the get-go. But for me, once I had explored the system to its fullest, there was nothing left to do. So I put the game down, disappointed that I couldn't test out the best hero + summon or troop + spell or strategic spell + tactical mischief that I could come up with on a deserving opponent.
To fix it, you could either: [1] simplify, streamline, or dumb down the system; [2] add, and then play, multiplayer; or [3] invest heavily in making the AI better. Personally, of course, I am not in a position to do any of them. (Fun question: is the source code out there? If so, is it even worth looking at?)
For a modern game to be successful in the same vein, it's going to have to be very careful with the lore/graphics issue (assuming, of course, it can get the underlying system right). Perhaps using sprites is palatable to a modern audience, perhaps not. Are people tired of the same old fantasy setting? I'd wager not, but I could be wrong. Multiplayer is, of course, possible, but not my preferred solution. The trick of making a system complex enough to be fascinating and replayable (over and over again) yet still manageable by an AI is certainly a difficult one.
So, to summarize: Master of Magic is a good game because it has an excellent underlying system and just the right setting and graphics to capture the imagination. For me, it is not a great game because once I explored it, I had no reason to go back.
OK: now everyone jump in and disagree! It's just, like, my opinion, man.
I am the same way, too few games have a sandbox mode.
The concept of sandbox games is relatively new and I have not yet experienced it. I am more the kind of gamer that likes to have objectives.
I am currently giving some thoughts about programming video games for the ouya and one of the biggest issue is AI programming. But if you people want games with no or little AI, that's fine with me.
I'm assuming you mean relatively new to you, since sandbox games have been popular since at least '89, when the original Simcity was a huge success. But there were plenty of others, even earlier, such as Hidden Agenda.
I wouldn't call MoM a sandbox game, however, if by sandbox we mean a game in which you basically design the world based on a series of preconceived rules, without any goals. MoM had a very distinct goal: tear off your opponents' arms and beat them to death with them. It might be better defined as an RPG-flavored, turn-based strategy game with relatively randomized presets every time you started a new game.
You seem intelligent. This kind of silly attack is beneath you.
I am trying to approach the design of master of magic in a different way (see my other thread) and trying to see if I could add more sandbox element to it.
One of the solution so far is to have either an objectiveless game, or make the objectives completable only by the player. The AI cannot win the game. Most of the AI will be more event based rather than strategy based which could simplify the development.
Elemental seem to have some sand box element by integrading some editors for map and buildings and adding unit and city design.
I like that. More of an MoM-flavored Simcity style game? Or something like an open-ended Majesty? Is there any other title you can use a for-instance?
Yes, and quite a few of us who mod wish there were more. We were promised the tools to do a lot beyond what currently can be done, but it's not been delivered, yet. I realize Stardock has a lot on its plate, but it's a shame. We really want more control over what we can do with things.
Elite was released in 1984 for 11 platforms total.
Yes, it's not a true sandbox game, but you can play it like that. There are many different ways to win, and one of them, is, say, to summon Torin The Chosen hero and win a game with him alone as your only offensive army (works on highest difficulty too). You can't really do something like that in ANY other 4X game.
Most new remakes are quite bland - you need to make 100500 cities, research 200 spells, make an army, kill everyone... No creativity at all, you may as well not play it because you did it a thousand times in previous games.
Also, Master of Magic is one of the unique games that was never been beaten by successors. Take any classics: Civ 1? Civ 4 is better. Elite? Ultima? Dune II? Wolfenstein 3D? You can name a lot of better successors. Even for Star Control II, Space Rangers are arguably better.
Yet, no other successor even had a full set of Master of Magic features, let alone a better implementation of at least half of them.
This is heresy!
Ahh, now you are stretching it. There has never been proper replacement for the Ultima games in RPG, and neither has there been anything even remotely approaching Elite 2, space-themed aquarium simulators does not count.
And Space Rangers doesn't begin to approach the mixed adventure/RPG/strategy/arcade concept that is Star Control II.
I can't comment on Elite 2 but exceptions seem few and far between of earlier games not being matched or exceeded by later games.
I'd agree about Ultima series being unmatched even by stuff Lord British himself has put out attempting to match/cash in on his old stuff.
So we have Elite 2, Ultima Series and MoM. These are exceptions to the rule and not the norm
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
