SE:V, I'll be honest

[arthurtuxedo]

Theonlystd said:
Now i know i dont post often so doubt many care of my opinion

But i start played Se3 empires prolly 6,7 years ago.. Been playing Se4 pretty much non stop for months here latly.


I was excited about the demo and well it was a bit of a let down.

I cringe to think how much time was wasted on horrid 3d graphics.. Ground Combat teh i thought that was lame when i was 13, 8years ago in imperium galactica 2..

Did you shudder to think of the time wasted on SE4's graphics, which were hugely improved over SE3? Or SE3's improvement over SE2? I wasn't around this board until just after SE4 was released, but I'm sure a lot of people did complain about how Aaron shouldn't have been focusing on graphics in the buildup to SE4, too.

All the complaints about the graphics just confuses me. Either they're complaining because Aaron supposedly focused on "flashy 3D graphics over gameplay", or they're pointing out that the graphics are the opposite of flashy, and are in fact quite dated. Well, which is it? And can any of you look me straight in the face and tell me you would pay $40 if the game looked exactly like SE4 with a few new effects? Did you pay full price for SE4 Gold when you already had SE4? I sure as hell didn't. When you release a sequel, everything should be improved, including the graphics. If these graphics complainers would really listen to themselves, I think they'd realize the absurdity of their complaints.

[Tim_Ward]

Theonlystd said:
("Why" - Ed) cant i double click on a planet to bring up the construction que?

Like you could in SEIV or SEIII, you mean? Let's be honest; the SE series has always been a bit of a UI disaster area. I can remember having the same thoughts back when I got the SEIV demo. You end up getting your teeth and getting used to it, though, because it's by far the best 4x series on the market.

[tmcc]

arthurtuxedo, you are correct. I was lurking here back then and lots of people complained about the effort put into the SEIV graphics over gameplay.

On that note, am I the only one who thinks that the facility, component and unit graphics are better in SEIV than SEV? The new ones are bigger but look cloudy and don't have much in the way of additional detail.

[Cube]

Whoever designed the SE4 UI needs to come back and work on SE5. As it stands now, the interface is much too cluttered and busy, i.e. too many visual elements and no distinct organizational layout.

The SE4 UI had a minimalist technical feel and out-of-your-way quality that presented the game perfectly. It also had a cohesive graphical motif that gave it a palpable professionalism.

As SE5 stands at the moment (with its Starcraft command interface and OS X menu dock), it looks like someone just installed a badly designed WindowBlinds theme from 1998.

[Ludd]

Cube said:
the interface is much too cluttered and busy, i.e. too many visual elements and no distinct organizational layout.

The SE4 UI had a minimalist technical feel and out-of-your-way quality that presented the game perfectly. It also had a cohesive graphical motif that gave it a palpable professionalism.

I agree completely. SEIV was elegant in its design, SEV, unfortunately, is not.

I will still be buying it though.

[Raapys]

Actually, I'd have to say I love MoO3's way of dealing with colony/empire related options. I find the only thing I'm really micromanaging is when I want to have some ships ready fast, at which point I put a few of my best colonies to produce my desired ships only. There's some minor issues with the computer being slow to build the latest ship factories and the way the computer *always* build troops, etc. If you've set up your development plans nicely, you'll find that the AI actually make surprisingly intelligent choices when it decides on which DEA's to develop and such, though.

And AI competence aside, I really like the way the whole thing is set up and connected in the game(research, economics, planet development). There's obviously huge room for improvement, and the game is only half-done, but they really managed to set it apart from the regular micromanagement 4x games, bringing a far more epic feel to it. With the right hacked-exe patches and mods it's actually great fun.

Bump on the SEIV interface vs SEV's. Doubtful something like a major interface change will be done in a patch, though.

[tmcc]

Regarding the designer of the SEIV UI vs that for SEV I am pretty darn sure that they are one in the same.

[AAshbery76]

I found the UI of SEIV took an hour or so to get used,I see no diffence in the SEV UI, apart from it looking 5 times nicer graphicly.

[Ludd]

SEIV look with SEV game improvements.

The perfect game game for me.

[capnq]

arthurtuxedo said: All the complaints about the graphics just confuses me. Either they're complaining because Aaron supposedly focused on "flashy 3D graphics over gameplay", or they're pointing out that the graphics are the opposite of flashy, and are in fact quite dated. Well, which is it?

I suspect that those two complaints are coming from two separate groups. Can anyone find an example of the same person saying both things? (I don't care enough to look for one, myself.)

Arguments over the quality of game graphics (like arguments over any kind of art) are a waste of time and bandwidth, IMO. Tastes vary too much to form a consensus.

Did you pay full price for SE4 Gold when you already had SE4?

Yes, I did. A lot of SE4 owners did not take advantage of the discount Shrapnel offered, because they wanted to support Aaron and Shrapnel. (Granted, some didn't take the discount because of what was wanted as "proof of purchase" [a piece of the original CD].) Strategy First hasn't yet earned that level of customer loyalty.