GalCiv versus MoO3

I don't think either is a clone of the other. They are both 4x strategy games but they have a totally different feel. This has been discussed before but GalCiv dates back quite a ways.

Buy both.. they'll be out around the same time.. I mean how many 4X games come out.. not many (I buy all the 4x games.. only dispointment was star empires and reach for the stars in recent years. Star empires is a low end indy game so i wasn't dispointed by much) However think of it this way you can still buy the beta for galciv (time is running out on that option), and moo3 won't be out till (at best) the end of the month. me my gaming schedual is.. Beta 4B or $C till next tuesday, simcity 4, till end of month (where the beta on galciv will be closed) Moo3 till end of feburary.. then the final product of galciv.. then jumpoing back and forth depending on the style of game i wanna play.

MOO3 has tactical combat....Galciv is purely strategic

MOO3 has ship design....Galciv is similar to the civ series in terms of unit progression

MOO3 seems more complex...Galciv focusses on less micromanagement

In essence Galciv is more like "civ in space"...while MOO3 is well...a sequel to MOO2...

I'm not saying that MOO3 will be better then Galciv...my gut is that one won't be better then the other...it will be a matter of preference as to which game is more fun...

I disagree on the micromanagement part, in MOO3, at least in theory, the AI goveners are smart enough to do most of the grunt work for you, you dont have to designate what each colony produces, whereas in GalCiv, theres really no AI govener, just a build queue AFAIK

Here we go again, trying to compare MOO to GC. One person says this is better in MOO, another thinks PC is better off without it. Another pipes up that they hope MOO doesn't make the same mistake Sid Meier made with the transition from CIV 2 to CIV 3. Another expresses pleasure with the changes.

Let's face it. They are two different games. GC/OS2 and MOO2 were two entirely different games of the same genre. They didn't look the same, they didn't feel the same, they didn't play the same. I dare sae the same will be true for GC/Win and MOO3. Anyone buying any PC game has to accept a small amount of risk that (s)he will not like the game, or some part of the game, or wish some part of a game was in another game. But where is the fun in that? Why waste money on two games from different development houses that are identical?

Let's cease all of this comparison between games and consentrate on making GC/Win the best ever.

I was just joking dude. I haven't played MOO3 yet so I can't seriously compare. From the screen shots, GalCiv got better interface designs. I'm dissappointed with MOO3 interfaces

The thing about moo 3 that bugs me is that eveyone keeps giving it so much benefit of the doubt it's ridiculous.

MOO3 ain't being done by the people who made MOO2 or MOO1. Quicksilver's just the guys who got contracted by Infogrames to do it.