Your growing empire no longer needs your constant attention with these new features! Governors will rule planets in your place, easily managed large ships and fleets across the galaxy and more.
Some of the top features include:
Planetary Governors - Choose Governors to rule planets in your place, freeing you focus on grander strategic goals. Governors decide what Planetary Improvements to build.
Improved Ship and Fleet Management - We've introduced numerous UI enhancements to help manage large numbers of ships and fleets in your empire.
Improved Ship Destination Window - A newly redesigned Ship Destination Interface will help you organize the movement of large fleets across the galaxy.
Existing Galactic Civilizations III owners can get the update through the Steam client automatically.
We also announced the release of our newest DLC, “Revenge of the Snathi” today, check it out here.
I've not said that, we have. Just that certain things have failed to be prioritized that should have been imo and that the progress has been slower than I expected.
I had a popup in the game trying to take me I presume to the Steam review page I chose the temporary decline option (this was 1.3 opt in) They have asked via their Friday streams numerous times as well. Perhaps they have never specifically asked for "Positive" reviews but I think by definition asking for people to write reviews infers this, don't you think?
I get cynicism, but I do not think on this matter that such a presumption has standing.
I'll put it more bluntly if you want, they are asking people to review their game specifically on Steam in the hope of positive reviews and potential financial gain from a higher user rating. These forums are perfectly fine for generating feedback, their not asking people to review their game on Steam for feedback. I've got to say it's something that makes me uncomfortable the user rating is there in part to protect consumers, I don't think games companies should ask their customers to write reviews on Steam for this reason. Then there would be no grey areas about what there motives are if they don't.
I think you're being extraordinarily harsh, tbh Macsen. The each patch has been a sizable improvement on the previous one. While the 'headline' features often seem a bit meh, or a little out of left field (3D printing being the obvious culprit here - it strikes me as a side-project one of the programmers had been doing on their lunch break that management decided was really cool), there's been a great deal of work on background improvements - the game runs noticeably faster under 1.3 compared to 1.2, which was in turn noticeably faster than 1.1; the AI has undergone huge improvements (the actual subroutines rather than the scripts - I think we all know my position on the scripts by now); and in general, the patching process has been very positive. The fact that 1.4 is concentrating so heavily on AI and diplo also shows SD are reacting to our feedback - bearing in mind that scheduling means we should expect to wait 2-3 months for SD to visibly react to specific feedback.
That said, there's a couple of things that should be mentioned.
Firstly, while I understand SD has to concentrate it's efforts on things that will effect the most possible players, I do wonder if those 50% who never go over a small map, or the 90% who never play over Normal, are really the ones who are going to be buying new DLC for this game in a year, two years, five years time. This isn't just SD I'm thinking of - the numbers Brad is giving out here are fairly typical metrics for the genre and if you go talk to Paradox or Firaxis then you'll be told much the same thing by them (in fact, I'v ehad this exact conversation with one of the guys at Paradox). But I suspect that, if they check back in 18 months or so, they'd find those metrics substantially changed. Not only is the total number of players going to be waaaaaaay smaller, but those who are still playing will tend to be of the hardcore fringe, playing larger maps, on higher difficulties, with more DLC, and often modded. These are the players who have a real stake in the game's ongoing development. Not the guys who buy the game and expect to 50 hours of play time out of it before they wander off onto the next thing. This makes me wonder whether the strategy of concentrating on the casual players is actually genuinely better, from a business point of view.
Secondly, I'm getting the feeling that actually, the game might benefit from less patches. The release schedule that SD have set themselves is extremely punishing. We're getting a new DLC and patch EVERY MONTH. Macsen, you mention Paradox - PI's DLC and patching schedule runs on quarters. They have 3 months between DLC and major patches. SD has like a week between minor patches and only 4 weeks to build, test and release full iterations of the game. This has a noticeable impact on the quality of the patches; there's been old bugs slipping back into the code (the end turn bug, for example, was basically eliminated in 1.1 and returned in 1.2); stuff is slipping in without proper testing (the Best Defense problem from 1.1). I suspect that, actually, the game might benefit from SD easing off on this schedule a little.
I have never, nor have I seen the company ask people to write 'positive' reviews, and I have been lurking around here and following news quite cloesly. What I do know is that Stardock want people to write reviews for the purposes of feedback, and that is what they have been getting. I'm not going to argue over your other points, even if I disagree that we haven't seen some good improvements since launch, but that statement I think is really unfair.
During the beta, just before release, the devs posted on the forums urging people to go write reviews to cross into the "Very Positive" threshold. They figured the older reviews were unfair because the game wasn't finished, and hoped people still playing the game would be happy and offset those negative reviews. They were right, the effort made the score cross the 80% threshold for a few days just in time for release. Then after release, my guess is when new players got the game, they dipped below 80% and, though I'm not certain, I think it has remained there. They did not ask for positive reviews, though of course they would prefer them.
Do not take this out of context, this quote is deep in the "Stardock needs your help" thread.
I understand your premise here, the problem is that some folks believe they game isn't quite finished, so it lights some fires to get out patches to finish it. IMHO.
There's no need, I understand the point you're making and I think the point of user reviews has no substance in this instance. The steam community offers Stardock broader access to its players so it isn't without merit for Stardock to ask those with something to say (ie. criticism/feedback) to write up reviews. As nice as this forum is, it's clearly a pretty small cross-section of the community. Aside from there being no evidence of Stardock trying to push positive reviews from its community and censor negative feedback, the data produced is being acted upon. I don't doubt that Stardock would like a higher user score, as there is a financial imperative, but it's not like they haven't been transparent of this and shied away from negative feedback. I can't think of many spaces where you get a head of a company come onto a forum and discuss many of the weaknesses of one of their own products so candidly. Whether this is all to your liking is something for you to decide, which is why I won't argue you with on your other points because 'fair enough', but I think there's a point where cynicism is completely misplaced.
Possibly Naselus, I'm not going to be as well informed as some with certain things. I wouldn't have brought up the 3D thing if it hadn't have been mentioned. There have been improvements in the patches I'm not saying there hasn't been I'm just disappointed certain things haven't received more attention and I question Stardock's order of priorities and I do think they should have made more progress in certain areas than they have since release based on the feedback they have received.
Agreed.
I realize mentioning other games is a bit apples and oranges. The key difference with EUIV and Gal Civ 3 was that EUIV was a very good game on release it had its bugs and issues just like Gal Civ 3 but it was a finished game. EUIV has been added to massively since release hopefully Gal Civ 3 will as well whichever patch/DLC schedule they decide to use. Most EUIV patches need a hotfix or two but I can live with that easily because the base game is so great. Stardock have got to get the fundamentals right the AI has had some love but diplomacy, economy, micromanagement, very little... 1.4 and 1.5 are make or break for me.
Not sure what you have already read here or if you have had any previous experience with GC2 and its' iterations, but it has been stated many times on the forums by various SD people that it is planned to support and grow this game for years to come and it will be a work in progress until the day it is no longer worked on. Just like GC2 was. They have a good record of support, everyone has their own individual priorities and I don't pretend to understand or know theirs. I don't care because I know in the end I will most likely be very pleased with it. Are there problems? Of course. Are they working on my priority list that I have? Of course not. But I have faith they will get to my "issues" but I"m still enjoying the heck out of playing this game despite the "issues" I have with it at the present. I know not everyone feels the same...
Probably should take general criticism of the Game to a separate post from the Patch Update notes. All in all I think the patch is a major step forward - it appears from the 1.3 Opt-in patches that the new Governor system needs work still and the individual planet wheel is still available. That is separate discussion in itself which has already started.
From what I seen nothing that is going on Development wise is usual for a major Strategy game after its initial release especially AI improvements - comparisons to other games or expectation is usually made in light of comparisons to other games that had many months of tweaking to the original game concept.
Continue the work Stardock - well done - don't overreact to criticism. People love to vent - sometimes you just have to listen and let it go.
I just picked up the game, though I've been loosely following the forums for a while. I decided not to pick it up until the big maps were considered workable. In fact it was naselus' mod that finally made me pull the trigger, as it promised to make the big maps functional.
I'm surprised that so many people only play small maps.
Not true. You have just as much right to object as they do to vent. It goes both ways.
Collectively, we hold Brad and team to unreasonable standards, just as we do to all other companies in our demanding entitled-customer way. In these forums, we seem to forget how often Brad and team quietly live up to those standards and then go beyond. They deserve full credit for what they do more than a constant hammering at what they have not done yet.
So, yeah, Brad gets to bitch back. It's the Internet. Bitching is the digital age universal language. Maybe more ages than that.
Not true. You have just as much right to object as they do to vent. It goes both ways. Collectively, we hold Brad and team to unreasonable standards, just as we do to all other companies in our demanding entitled-customer way. In these forums, we seem to forget how often Brad and team quietly live up to those standards and then go beyond. They deserve full credit for what they do more than a constant hammering at what they have not done yet.So, yeah, Brad gets to bitch back. It's the Internet. Bitching is the digital age universal language. Maybe more ages than that.
+1. They're Brad's forums and he can bitch if he wants to. Let him blow off a little steam like we all do and he'll be back with enough love for all of us.
The real truth behind all of this is that Brad loves the Galactic Civilizations project more than any of us possibly could. It's his baby and he created it. If he says he's going to stop programming it because of some ungrateful whiners, it's just said steam being released. He couldn't turn his back on it any more than you could turn your back on your child. Or maybe your car. I don't know what you hold to be precious.
I'm finding GC3 to be incredibly entertaining. The twists and turns at every update make it a new game every few weeks, all the while keeping some familiarity going for us as well. What's not to love?
Don't get me wrong. I understand the frustration when a bug stops you cold. It's not pleasant. But Brad and co. hate these bugs even more than we do. Give them a bit of leeway and they'll get them in the end.
The Snathi aesthetics is spot on at any rate. It is everything I dreamed about, maybe even nuttier. If that's even possible!
So I'm a very weak man.
Working on the AI and some economic balance stuff today that I hope to propose to Paul (lead designer).
I've made the Civilization capital city distinct from colony capitals on other planets so I can monkey around with the home planet being distinct. For instance, I am proposing that there be a maint of 4 on colony capitals so that if you expand really fast, there is a cost to it.
I've also toned down the amount of bonus you get from the early improvements to make the pacing feel a little less rushed (it feels too fast to me).
I'm seeing how effectively I can crush the AI today and will have more on that.
My changes will go into 1.31 (which is due out shortly).
I think you and your team are awesome, Brad. 4X games are tough to make and the fan base is definitely one of the toughest, most cynical groups I've ever seen. However, you keep making your games better and better and I'm a big fan as a result.
Personally, I'm still waiting for faction-unique scientists and the invasion stuff. Those, espionage, and politics!
Just finished the Snathi campaign, and it was a lot of fun. I do wish it hadn't ended where it did though, and we had to wipe out all other life on the map. I also think that maybe something like this should be called a scenario or story map, as campaign implies to me that it happens over multiple maps.
As for the game as a whole, there are certainly things that I would like to see improved, but most of them SD seems aware of and is working on. Yes, in some ways the constant patches and gradual improvement to make this game feel like it is still in beta, but that's a good thing, not a bad one. The amount of continuing support this and other SD titles have received post-launch is a positive evolution in game development. We can have these conversations on the forums and it is possible that the designers hear us and respond to our feedback. Maybe it isn't as fast as we like, maybe it isn't in the way we wanted, but the community definitely helps to shape the game. That doesn't mean that Stardock has a mandate to address all your personal gripes, or even the ones that seem to be held by a majority of the forum community. They still get to make the game they want to make. And you know what pays for this continuing support so that we aren't stuck with 1.0 but instead have an every growing, ever improving game? Map packs and Squirrel DLC. In fact, you reap the benefits of those things even if you don't buy them. Those things allow Stardock to work on the core game, rather than distracting them from it.
This is not to say I am a total fanboy willing to give SD a pass on anything. A quick perusal of my posts will show that most of them are suggestions for changes or issues I have with the game. This game has a ton of room to improve, but so do most games, and certainly almost all 4x, especially on release. It doesn't seem productive to get mad at SD for not improving the game fast enough, when the continued support for a released game was something we didn't outside of MMOs see even a few years ago.
Oh, and the complaint about asking for reviews is patently ridiculous. Pretty much everything that has a rating system attached to it asks you to rate it. SD never asked its community to review it dishonestly, they just pretty much said "Hey, there's this rating system, so if you like the game, please go rate it." There is nothing even remotely wrong with that. If a company is involved in a rating system and isn't encouraging their satisfied customers to review them, that's just dumb.
Even if you have only 4 or 5 colonies, it isn't hard to end up with near 20 economy starbases, plus mining and others. That is enough to get bogged down in constructor spam imo. I know that there are solutions planned, but I do think that economy starbases are the #1 drag on the pace of the game right now.
if i only had 4-5 planets i would be pushing 45-60 econ starbases
If every company asked there fanboys/girls to review on steam the % user ratings would no longer be a fair indication of the games quality, it's not a question of asking for dishonest reviews. The user rating exists at least in part to protect consumers from making bad purchases if the ratings are not relatively accurate (preferably from a broad range of consumers) then it becomes pointless.
There are certainly less reputable companies than Stardock (I fully expect Stardock will keep to promises they have made though it might take longer than I'd hoped and possibly not be quite what I want) that release truly awful games and have probably tried to alter the score to trick consumers into purchases. It's not a perfect system but I think it should be protected, I don't think that's dumb or ridiculous. I'm not specifically picking on Stardock I wouldn't be happy about any games company trying to manipulate the user rating by asking people to review there. Just because it might be common practice (I don't know if it is) it doesn't mean it should be accepted.
To be clear (and I'm making up some words here), you feel a "feeback-ee" should not be asking "feedback-ers" for... feedback? I see no difference with Stardock asking people to provide feedback on Steam reviews then say the service department at my dealership reminding me my feedback is important and asking me to take the time to provide it via an online survey tool. Obviously, there is a HUGE concern if a company tells me they want only one kind of feedback; the good kind. I would smell that turd from a mile away. I have lurked and not so lurked on these forums for five years; I have never seen Brad or SD tell me they want the one type of feedback, which is the "blow smoke up my arse feedback." "Get out there and vote" is what I heard, not "get out there and vote my way."
A public review is not the same as feedback.
There was an excellent video by Total Biscuit (YouTube) recently on preorders, Deus EX happened to be the game he was mentioning, I'd recommend anyone who ever preorders to watch it. I bet a lot of people who are "happy" with Gal Civ 3 currently are those that invested $100 in it, you'll know why if you watch the video.
There is some truth to what he said, but I'd also like to point out that in his recent mad max negative reviews video he talks about how some people see a lot of value in a game that they get a lot of entertainment out of even if that entertainment isn't consistently amazing.
He specifically mentioned $1/ hour as being good. So far my hundred dollars has gotten me 152 hours of entertainment and I'm still enjoying the game.
That's how i look at it, too.
People spend $20 for an IMAX movie which is over in 2 hours, then absolutely freak out over $5 DLC.
If you bought the game at $50 like most people and got 5+ hours of enjoyment out of it, you're doing great (at IMAX movie rates, at least).
That's how i look at it, too.People spend $20 for an IMAX movie which is over in 2 hours, then absolutely freak out over $5 DLC.If you bought the game at $50 like most people and got 5+ hours of enjoyment out of it, you're doing great (at IMAX movie rates, at least).
Same here. Since the initial release of the Alpha I've played over 1400 hours on this and have not regretted one minute of it. Was that worth the $99 I spent? Heck ya! And I keep getting all this "free stuff" for the next few years to boot. Great deal, imho. I've been hooked on the series since the beginning (OS/2) so I guess that makes me a fanboy. Who knew at my age? LOL
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
