Well I'm still trying to get it to work, but two other sites would be moo3.com and moo3mods.com I think

try www.moo3.com

whoops, error with my connection sorry for the double print

The earlier post was correct, MOO3 is very different from MOO2 (and GalCiv is more like Civilization). I bought it early, was extremely disapointed, waited, got the patch, played some more -- and remained disappointed. True, some people like it, and I wish I was one of them, but...
Too many details to manage, yet not enough control over many facets of empire building and warfare. The viceroy is susposed to take care of a lot of that, but guess what...it didn't. I found the star-lane format very confining. Some people like that style, as in Space Empires, but I don't. I played several games, got frustrated often and bored often. It's uninstalled now. I regret buying it, but GalCiv came along and has made me feel better about turn-based space games.
Final comment: It's not worth $9.00.

I agree now, after spending the last week trying to get Moo3 install and not working, while Space Empires 4 demo works better compared to it, I'm just going to pick up SE4G. And whenever Gal Civ Alt Prop I'll have to get that too

You can't pick up SE4G at any store, you can only order it from the Malfador Machinations website.

Jab I had not found the 1.25 patch, only 1.02, do you have a link for 1.25???

http://www.fileplanet.com/files/120000/127806.shtml
try this from file planet or

ftp://ftp.quicksilver.com/pub/MOO3/Win32/moo3_v125.zip

but I can't gurantee them working since so far I haven't gotten the game to work with the 1.25 patch

Don't worry, I just dumped the game into the garbage can, I am sick of tire of the stupid game.

I am amazed at what happened in MOO3. Here you have a great name brand with MOO1 and MOO2. All the developers needed to do was to make MOO3 evolutionary and not revolutionary. They just needed some more research skills, more races, maybe a twist or 2 in ship design and items and that's it. It would have had raving fans and lots of sales. IN fact, even better, they could have had downloadable updates for new races, research etc and got some money for this. So what did they do? They made a completely different game that was totally revolutionary. Whoever was the lead designer should have been in the movie, "Dumb and Dumber" because he was a total idiot!

Bottom line is that I agree with the assessment of one of the computer gaming magazines that MOO3 was one of the "worst games of the year." It was a sad end to a great concept and name brand.

~SDC~

The designer was Alan Emrich, who has made great stategic guides for games. And in theses games there were Master of Orion and Master of Magic if I recall correctly.
[Message Edited]

emerich got fired, and then I think Chantz? from quicksilver took over. I was following the game for two years. It actuallly looked promising when Emerich was running things. Then QSI took over and decided to scrap everything emerich did and redo the whole thing. The result is the spreadsheet nightmare they call moo3

~SDC~

Sounds kind of like Rick Berman and all that's been done to Star Trek in his name. You get someone taking over a project, and rather than build on what's been done before tries to implement their own 'vision' of how it should be. The point being that they want it to be -their- baby, to get credit if it succeeds. So in this case, QSI could have made an improved MoO2, but then everyone would have failed to see what a good job that QSI did. So instead we getto point and laugh. LOL Well, maybe cry at not having a good MOO3 to play. And no more Elerians!

Exactly the same thing happened with the Star Control series. SC1 and SC2 rocked! Then Accolade bought the rights to the name, brought in another designer, and proceeded to hack out a worthless piece of software called Star Control 3. Took a completely different tack on the storyline and interface...just ruined it. Notice there's never been a SC4 (well, that was mass marketed anyway.)

OMG don't get me started on Starcontrol 2, that's my favorite game of all time. I still have it for the 3do and love it. I never got a chance to play SC3 I heard a while back about 4 but did that every come out? Oh yeah do you know about the SC2 project about a company bringing it back for free online, I can't remember the link thou.

Yes, it's called The Urquan Masters http://uqm.stack.nl/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl

I've already downloaded and played it. They have done an excellent job! SC4 did "come out" but it just died as far as I know.

Where is the link to download the game Urquan Masters?

I found it, lets hope it works. :notsure:

Thanks for the link one question thou, is it any different from the orignal version? I would love to see another game like Sc2.

Just checked out the link for sc2 it seems to only lead to the forums , here is the link to the main site of ur quan masters http://sc2.sourceforge.net/ from there click on downloads to get the latest verison

Now now... MoO1 and MoO2 are VERY different games. MoO2 is basically Civ in space, with some minor HoMM influence.

MoO1 was a lot more abstract, and a conquer the dots/stars game.

The original team for MoO3 ran out of time. They needed 5 to 7 years to implement what they had envisioned... and their backers weren't going to wait that long. Out went the original team, in came a different team, out went the original design, and something got tossed together and shoved out the door. And it showed.

QuickSilver had made plenty of great games. If they had a more patient backer, then maybe we'd have gotten to buy their original design. Oh well, such is the game industry. And we do have GalCiv.

With all due respect, most of the posts in this thread about the history of MOO3 are inaccurate (why post if you don't know what you're talking about?). I'm also astonished at the difficulties some claim to have installing the game; In the year I've frequented the MOO3 forums, I haven't come across such problems in any new player (and frankly, the links do work and the patch is downloadable).

As for the game, I'm surprised someone would actually want mere evolution when so-called revolutionary ideas are possible (although I think that's overstating it). The intent of the designers was to remove the micromanaging aspects, early and late game. To this end they only partly succeeded. It reflects what I hope will become a trend in strategy gaming, like in the WW2 game Highway to the Reich, where you give orders that are first filtered down through a hierarchy handled by the game's AI (you don't push around each and every company of soldiers). The emphasis on MOO3, and unlike any other TBS game I'm aware of, is on actual planning and strategy as opposed to handling minutia.

I love the game. I wish it played better than it does. But I also wish that the culture of bashing MOO3 didn't exist on this board. Oh well.

Rainbow7....i share the same thoughs as you do. I was slowly starting to think i'm the only one who loves both games.

Rainbow7, *many* of the early GalCiv players are disappointed MoO3 players. MoO3 was very flaky for many people when first released, had a very lousy UI (too much clicking through screens for most players), and the AI didn't really do a decent job of managing things for players, that left the hardcore leaning players to micromanage and fight with the "helpful" AI. As MoO3 was more of a mix of MoO1 and MoO2, which were both very different games, most of the die-hard of either game were disappointed that MoO3 wasn't enough like their favorite version.

You can state people don't know the history of MoO3, but some of us were raving fan boys and girls in weekly contact and chats with the original developers, as well as the second team that replaced the originals. I know of at least one person here that was an actual original developer of MoO3. Personally, I'll take the word of the first team over what happened before I'll take all the white washing, blame gaming, and revisionism that has happened since then. And there was tons of all 3 after the first set were "relieved".

MoO3 was a disaster to many people for several reasons. The first was that they used the MoO name. If they hadn't done THAT, then there wouldn't have been the backlash from the diehards of 1 and 2 that wanted 3 to be their favorite version updated with prettier graphics and more stuff. After that was a product that needed to be baked for another 6 to 18 months. Other then that, it depends on your play style: for some, MoO3 is a great game. For others, it is too much to worry with. For others, it isn't enough to worry with.

You are welcome to keep posting your views. But I believe that they will be in the minority here. And they may gather some serious flamage. If you enjoy MoO3, more power to you. I hope you also enjoy GalCiv. If not, at least you have a space game you do enjoy.

Good luck and have fun!

I would have loved to play Moo3, but for some reason it doesn't seem to work on my comp, I've dled the patches and bought 2 copies of the game. I'm glad that someone is enjoying moo3 , because I'm not. It's seems that quickslilver basically destroyed any attempt to get newcomers into 4x games. I'm glad that we have galciv which is great for newcomers and vets alike. I'm finshed tring to get Moo3 to work for now, it seems like to much of a waste of time to get this game to work then try to learn it. When I can be playing Space Empires and Gal civ now.