Strategy First to publish GalCiv

http://www.strategyfirst.com/press/DisplayArticle.asp?sLanguageCode=EN&iArticleID=1266

For those interested in the article.

I remember the original Galciv AIM published the first galciv. That was one heck of any ugly game box.

LOL.

orion451: Just a forum notice: We try not to use the A word in relation to the history GalCiv.

Too late, I'm already damaged! :VOMIT:

Sorry. When the announcement for a publisher came it brought back memories. But I will keep the A word out of the forums I promise.Galciv 2 box was awesome though. Stardock had the some of the coolest boxes for os/2 software object desktop in particular!

My only worry is about whether STrategy first will treat this game with the proper respect. This game stands head and shoulders above most of the games they publish. I hope it doesn't get thrown together with drek like disciples ii.

Hey I liked Disciples 2 I liked it much better then Age of wonders 2 that's for sure or even HOMM. I just wish it had some sort diplomacy.

Alex, do you mean the original AoW, or are you a beta tester for the sequel? I'm just curious. I've been looking for a turn-based fantasy strategy game, and Disciples II looks interesting, but I also wanted to know how AoW: The Wizard's Throne will turn out before I make any decision. (I'm not even considering Heroes 4; just about everyone I know says it's drivel.)

I played just the demo of AoW2 and to tell you the truth graphically it looks great, I just couldn't get into it like I did with Disciples 2. I really do recommend D2, it's very addictive and just plane fun!

Have you played Europa Universallis??? This is undoubedly one of the greatest strategy games I have ever played. How can you suggest that Strategy First has not published first class games? They did a very good job publishing this.

Paul.

I have EU2. It's a decent game but nothing like a AAA game. It only has scenarios and very limited campaigns. The AI is awful too. It's decent but it really plays like a game written by a couple of guys.

I've been tempted to get Disciples 2, but for one thing--there's no skirmish/non-linear campaign mode. I don't like being forced to play a campaign through a series of missions, each with set objectives. I generally like to play games that are *open-ended*, and D2 can't be played that way. Which is a real shame, because it looks really, really cool otherwise.

You know, come to think of it, the only turn-based fantasy strategy game I know of that *does* play as a non-linear campaign is Lords of Magic, and there were just too many flaws in that one to be enjoyable otherwise (and yes, I had the gold edition). So I guess my question is, does anyone know if AoW 2 will have skirmish mode and/or a non-linear/open-ended campaign? If it does, I'll probably snatch it up, no matter what!

TheHampster,
you're being extremely hard on EU2. It has a full scenario editor so you can create infinite numbers of scenarios. There's also an online swapping location for these and there are hundreds of user scenarios (of varying quality). There is no difference between a campaign and scenario!
While it's AI is not perfect it is not bad. The biggest appeal of this game is the fact that there are hundreds of computer controlled countries all playing independently, which just look and behave right. That is an amazing feat and gives the game an atmosphere which doesn't exist in any other game.
You comments about it not being an AAA game are very worrying. My understanding was that AAA has nothing to do with quality, just with the amount of money spent. An AAA game therefore can be absolutely awful but still be an AAA game. The best quality comparison of EU is to look at the reviews.
www.europa-universalis.com/reviews.asp

Anyone who thinks Strategy First did not handle top quality games is very mistaken. The sales figures for this game were also superb, so they can certainly handle large demand as well.

Galciv strikes me a similar to EU in development scope. It's a top tier quality game being developed by an independant company which, with the right support could do extremely well. I don't want a AAA game with millions of pounds of advertising which is really poor. I want a superb quality game which defines what a space strategy game is all about.

Paul.

Solitair;
I agree with you. Strategy First did an excelent job on EU. (IMO) It was advertised enough that people knew of its existance and were willing to pick up the box to see what the game was about, but not so much that people were unduniated (did I spell that right?) with so much that people were sick of hearing about it.
I think Strategy First is a great asset to have in publishing this game. I also think that with the publishing of this game that SF will do more people will try out the Drengin creating an even larger base for galciv. All around a good situation for Stardock, and thus galciv, and us players.

I think, considering my experience with GalCiv 1 on OS/2 that the game will speak for itself. As long as it's available on the store shelves and the net, word will get around. Especially if we get some big multi-player games happening.

There won't be direct multiplayer in GalCiv. Though there is the metaverse.

Obviously WE like Strategy First.

I think Strategy First really is, well, first when it comes to turn based strategy games, at least since Microprose gave up the title a couple years back. Disciples 2 really was a great game. The Fat Imp was my favorite game feature of last year hehe. Good people too, I get the impression that they really care about their products when I talk to them.

Legion is an excellent game. I'm really looking forward to playing it. That sort of mass marketing for the big names is fairly common. Remember that the same occurred for EU and it still sold huge numbers. Word of mouth, reviews and customer satisfaction will sell the game. Once it;'s on the shelf it will sell!

Paul.

How many copies do you consider "huge number"?

Warcarft 3 numbers would be nice

Not sure about the states, but within Europe I would consider numbers above 100,000 as huge. The ELSPA (www.elspa.com) has the sales numbers for any game within Europe. Above 100,000 is a Silver award (eg. Tomb Raider 4, medal of honour), above 200,000 is a gold(Fifa 2002), above 300,000 is a platinum. Full information on any game can be purchased from the site. I suspect that Strategy First is a member and can provide you with numbers for any of its games.

Obviously there will a different organisation in North America.

Paul.

Then no Strategy First game has done huge numbers. Hardly any games do huge numbers then. The PC Data numbers on EU were like 50,000 worldwide.

You said EU sold huge numbers but 50,000 isn't huge. Not Strategy First's fault really just none of their games get the hype of a Warcraft 3 or a Neverwinter nights.

Warcraft III and NWN are much better games IMHO and the fact they are coming from the top 2 gaming company's on the planet doesn't hurt. Quake 3 had tons of hype and it sold like crap compared to games like starcraft or Baldurs Gate. The reason I think is because first it really wasn't a great game, second it would only run on a super PC and third the half-life factor. I think in the end it all comes down to the market, and how many people know about your game and how many people would want to play that type of game (is it there thing). Marketing is what it's all about and EU didn't have the same marketing as most games.

IMO what you need is some great reviews, E3 hype, a game that runs on a low end PC and of course timing and you got your self blockbuster. aka The Sims


BTW Interesting topic!

The Sims... Yuck
I never could understand what people saw in it. I tried it and could hardly stay awake.

Oh well, to each their own. Back to work, guess I will have to concure the galaxy at a later time.....