Ascendancy: Consider this before you trash Logic Factory
Mike R. Turner
pushed back?
How many times have you been told on the phone or in the store,
"We're sorry, but the publisher's have moved the release date to next
summer." ? And there you are with money in hand in the middle of August.
Prime examples? Stonekeep. Daggerfall.
They have been delayed or were delayed for hellacious amounts of time.
I do not know the original release date of Ascendancy, but it seemed
to have been released at a reasonable time.
This leads me to think that they sacrificed a little of the playability
in favor of staying true to there release date.
Bash the game all you want, but remember....at least they did not delay
the game 2-3 years to the point where it became just another player
with the same characteristics of the other games of its genre.
They have shown us what they can do. They can patch the game.
Enough people have flamed them, I think they know what needs to be fixed.
Why not give them new ideas to play with, instead of treading on the
well worn paths of old complaints. :)
Have a nice day.
*wave*
Mike Turner "Life is a joke not many can laugh about."
Heinlein: What a wonderful world it is that has girls in it!
GuTtErBoY
: How many of the games lately have been pushed back and pushed back and
: How many times have you been told on the phone or in the store,
: "We're sorry, but the publisher's have moved the release date to next
: summer." ? And there you are with money in hand in the middle of August.
: Prime examples? Stonekeep. Daggerfall.
: They have been delayed or were delayed for hellacious amounts of time.
: I do not know the original release date of Ascendancy, but it seemed
: to have been released at a reasonable time.
: This leads me to think that they sacrificed a little of the playability
^^^^^^^^
That is a HUGE understatement. This my opinion of course, but from what
I've been reading, a lot of people agree on this. It's just so incredibly
boring to try to manage planets when you have 15 or more. It has awesome
potential, but my copy is going back to the store. If they get a decent
system for managing planets I'll consider purchasing it again.
A lot of people have complained about the AI (which is pretty bad). But for
me, the fatal blow to this game was it's tedious planet management.
: in favor of staying true to there release date.
I like playability myself...
: Bash the game all you want, but remember....at least they did not delay
: the game 2-3 years to the point where it became just another player
: with the same characteristics of the other games of its genre.
Now it will just go into the $10 bin, unless they come up with something
fairly soon to fix it. It's gotten a lot of bad press here.
: They have shown us what they can do. They can patch the game.
They can patch it... but will they? I have 10 days to return it, and I
don't feel like risking my money from what they've shown so far. I'll buy
it again if it works decently.
: Enough people have flamed them, I think they know what needs to be fixed.
: Why not give them new ideas to play with, instead of treading on the
: well worn paths of old complaints. :)
Well, this isn't a flame. I'm just pointing out that I'd rather have a
working game with a good interface, even if it is late. Late within reason
of course. When a game approaches being a year late, it suffers the
consequences of becoming less than state of the art I'd think.
: Have a nice day.
You too.
--
Shane Fatzinger | now it's time for suffering
| to shed the skin to which you cling
| a relic of my everything is all
gt1...@prism.gatech.edu | you've left to hold -- Argyle Park "Skin Shed"
Tony Wong
I myself do not have this game but I am interested after playing the demo.
From what I have seen, after a while, your planets will get filled and there
should be no room to build anything so why is there a problem. What do you
have to manage?? Please explain.
Tony Wong
Alexander Peck
It takes a lot of time to fill planets, especially the "enormous" ones.
When you get a lot of colonies going, this will start to become
especially tedious. After a while it takes minutes to complete a turn,
and your ships require many turns to get to their destinations.
This is the standard complaint about this game. Or one of them, anyway.
an22...@anon.penet.fi
then upgrade all those spots. You won't get completely developed on a
world without endless hours of micromanaging them.
Try that with 30 or more worlds and it's a joke!
tw...@hal.com (Tony Wong) wrote:
>I have read a lot of complains about managing planets when you got many of them.
>I myself do not have this game but I am interested after playing the demo.
>From what I have seen, after a while, your planets will get filled and there
>should be no room to build anything so why is there a problem. What do you
>have to manage?? Please explain.
>Tony Wong
Mul...@FBI.gov
The Truth Is Out There.
Trust No One!
Zach Williams
>When you get a lot of colonies going, this will start to become
>especially tedious. After a while it takes minutes to complete a turn,
>and your ships require many turns to get to their destinations.
>
>This is the standard complaint about this game. Or one of them, anyway.
>
It seems to me that everyone is forgetting to mention the fact
that you can set your colonies to auto-manage themselves!
Jason
You mean auto-mangal themselves!
-- Jason
----------------+--------------------------------------------------
Prismatic Dragon| "This is Ryo-Ohki! Cute little thing huh!"
-=[UDIC]=- | "Ryo-Ohki? Could you please not eat my gun?"
----------------+--------------------------------------------------
Unofficial Working Designs Page->http://www.primenet.com/~jhill/wd/
David W Maddocks
>How many of the games lately have been pushed back and pushed back and
>pushed back?
>How many times have you been told on the phone or in the store,
>"We're sorry, but the publisher's have moved the release date to next
>summer." ? And there you are with money in hand in the middle of August.
>Prime examples? Stonekeep. Daggerfall.
>They have been delayed or were delayed for hellacious amounts of time.
>I do not know the original release date of Ascendancy, but it seemed
>to have been released at a reasonable time.
>This leads me to think that they sacrificed a little of the playability
>in favor of staying true to there release date.
>Bash the game all you want, but remember....at least they did not delay
>the game 2-3 years to the point where it became just another player
>with the same characteristics of the other games of its genre.
>They have shown us what they can do. They can patch the game.
>Enough people have flamed them, I think they know what needs to be fixed.
>Why not give them new ideas to play with, instead of treading on the
>well worn paths of old complaints. :)
>Have a nice day.
>*wave*
>Mike Turner "Life is a joke not many can laugh about."
>Heinlein: What a wonderful world it is that has girls in it!
In short because they have shown no indication that they
are willing to make any of the numerous changes suggested.
I mean come on a 50K patch after almost 2 Months?
And all it does is increase the production of the CO's.
I would prefer a game be not released and delayed as
long as by delaying it a good product is put out. That
is not the case with ascendancy as it now stands.
Joe Sun
> In short because they have shown no indication that they
> are willing to make any of the numerous changes suggested.
What do you expect them to do? Create a whole new game just to satisfy
your personal needs?
Please stop this trash, enough is enough!
mjs
>your personal needs?
>Please stop this trash, enough is enough!
Huh? How long have you been reading this newsgroup?????? Almost EVERYONE here is
complaining about the very same things in Ascendency!!! One lousy patch could
make this game the best since MOO. Logic Factories' recent postings suggests
that they aren't going to do this. The antagonizer patch did not address all the
problems that EVERYONE is complaining about.
Joe G. Thompson
[deleted]
Joe> "One lousy patch could make this game the best since MOO",
Joe> this is a good one, I like it. Consider this,
Joe> - This is the first game the Logic Factory ever published,
Joe> you can't expect too much from them. (I'm pretty impressed of
Joe> what they've put out.)
Joe> - The Logic Factory is just a small company compare to those
Joe> giants like Sierra, LucasArts, MicroProse and etc. You just
Joe> can't expect them to take care of problem as smooth as those
Joe> big names, like you want a patch, you get a patch,
Joe> satisfaction garranteed! It's impossible.
I just wanted to make a few points of my own:
- This may be their first game, but it sells for the same price
as games from the "giants." Since they have chosen to compete
at this level of the market, they should produce competitive
products. This is what I expect from them.
- I agree that the game shows tremendous promise, but it has
some very serious gameplay flaws as released. The reasons
why the game was released this way (deadlines, money, etc.)
are not my concern. My only concern is that, as it exists
now, the game is rather unplayable. I don't understand
why this should be excused.
Obviously other companies release bad games. Outpost also had
pretty graphics and an good concept. Sierra probably had many
"good" reasons for releasing the game the way it was, but does
that mean I should buy it and be happy?
- I know that some people enjoy this game, but it appears that
a large majority do not. I think that it is reasonable for
these people to expect an improved game or a refund.
The Logic Factory created a game with great potential, but released
it long before it was ready. Whatever the reasons for doing this
may have been, they have short-changed their customers and, by doing
so, have probably badly damaged their reputation.
Joe
Joe Sun
> Huh? How long have you been reading this newsgroup?????? Almost EVERYONE here is
> complaining about the very same things in Ascendency!!! One lousy patch could
> make this game the best since MOO. Logic Factories' recent postings suggests
> that they aren't going to do this. The antagonizer patch did not address all the
> problems that EVERYONE is complaining about.
First of all, I've been following this groups for months and I did see a
lot of spam against Ascendancy.
Don't simply put the word EVERYONE here, the ratio could be small but I
did see some posting here express that they like the game, and the
antogonizer patch has made the game a better one.
"One lousy patch could make this game the best since MOO", this is a good
one, I like it. Consider this,
- This is the first game the Logic Factory ever published, you can't
expect too much from them. (I'm pretty impressed of what they've put out.)
- The Logic Factory is just a small company compare to those giants like
Sierra, LucasArts, MicroProse and etc. You just can't expect them to
take care of problem as smooth as those big names, like you want a
patch, you get a patch, satisfaction garranteed! It's impossible.
- It only happen at Macdonald, "What you want is what you get!"
I've nothing against anybody, just some of my thoughts.
Sometime you'll feel better if you don't take it too seriously.
Regards,
mjs
>> Huh? How long have you been reading this newsgroup?????? Almost EVERYONE here is
>> complaining about the very same things in Ascendency!!! One lousy patch could
>> make this game the best since MOO. Logic Factories' recent postings suggests
>> that they aren't going to do this. The antagonizer patch did not address all the
>> problems that EVERYONE is complaining about.
>First of all, I've been following this groups for months and I did see a
>lot of spam against Ascendancy.
>Don't simply put the word EVERYONE here, the ratio could be small but I
>did see some posting here express that they like the game, and the
>antogonizer patch has made the game a better one.
I have been also following this group for months. The # of people who like
Ascendancy in its current condition seems to be very small.
>"One lousy patch could make this game the best since MOO", this is a good
>one, I like it. Consider this,
Well, I meant the best conquer-the-galaxy game since MOO, and why not? I was
really enjoying this game for awhile. It is the same time of game.
>- This is the first game the Logic Factory ever published, you can't
> expect too much from them. (I'm pretty impressed of what they've put out.)
They were good enough to make this game, surely they could provide the
appropriate patch, right?
>- The Logic Factory is just a small company compare to those giants like
> Sierra, LucasArts, MicroProse and etc. You just can't expect them to
> take care of problem as smooth as those big names, like you want a
> patch, you get a patch, satisfaction garranteed! It's impossible.
The small companies are the ones who really must listen to their consumers. I do
not think Logic Factory has IMO.
>- It only happen at Macdonald, "What you want is what you get!"
>I've nothing against anybody, just some of my thoughts.
>Sometime you'll feel better if you don't take it too seriously.
If I spend $50 on a game, I will take it seriously if the game is unplayable.
Fortunately, EB allows returns. I know that some people were stuck with the game
though.
DBLUMGART
Logic Factory? That they exist. No one gave two shits about stinkers
like Pizza Tycoon, or Zepplin. But folks are really pissed about
Ascendancy because it altho it really sucks in its current state (I just
played a game last night - Antag, 7 player, sparse, hostile - and not only
was the outcome never in doubt, but I never lost a ship!) Ascendancy could
be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it could be
right up there with CIV and MOO as a never-to-be-deleted-from-my-HD
classic. Sigh....
David Blumgart
David W Maddocks
>> Huh? How long have you been reading this newsgroup?????? Almost EVERYONE here is
>> complaining about the very same things in Ascendency!!! One lousy patch could
>> make this game the best since MOO. Logic Factories' recent postings suggests
>> that they aren't going to do this. The antagonizer patch did not address all the
>> problems that EVERYONE is complaining about.
>First of all, I've been following this groups for months and I did see a
>lot of spam against Ascendancy.
>Don't simply put the word EVERYONE here, the ratio could be small but I
>did see some posting here express that they like the game, and the
>antogonizer patch has made the game a better one.
>"One lousy patch could make this game the best since MOO", this is a good
>one, I like it. Consider this,
>- This is the first game the Logic Factory ever published, you can't
> expect too much from them. (I'm pretty impressed of what they've put out.)
>- The Logic Factory is just a small company compare to those giants like
> Sierra, LucasArts, MicroProse and etc. You just can't expect them to
> take care of problem as smooth as those big names, like you want a
> patch, you get a patch, satisfaction garranteed! It's impossible.
>- It only happen at Macdonald, "What you want is what you get!"
>I've nothing against anybody, just some of my thoughts.
>Sometime you'll feel better if you don't take it too seriously.
>Regards,
Ok, I've considered it...
Whats with this "You can't expect too much from them" crud. If they
want to be a game producer then they had damn well better
produce good games, I don't care whether they are small, big, or
whatever. The problems stated over and over in previous posts
are fixable but no mention has been made that they are even trying
to fix them. The Antagonizer patch just doesn't cut it. In the two
months it took them to come up with "increased production" in place of
a better AI they could have implemented other needed changes. I
understand that AI is hard to program, they could have left that for
last as far as I am concerned. I would have been happy to get a
fleet option for moving ships, OR an improved combat system, OR
or a priority automanage function with radio buttons for stuff I did
or didn't want built on thiat world. Any of these things would have
made the game much more enjoyable.
In my opinion a game can be either tedious and hard or easy to
play and easy to win and still be a good game but being tedious AND
easy to win is just too much. I think the Logic Factory could avoid
and deflect alot of the heat they have been taking on Ascendancy
simply by putting a firm statement on the net that they are working on
any one or more of these problems. That would satisfy me that I
didn't waste Fifty bucks and mollify me somewhat. It is this attitude
of "Take the money and run" without any patches that really pisses me
off. If there isn't some improvement in the form of patches, and not
a Version 2 that I have to buy, then I for one will never buy another
game by the Logic Factory or any of the people who produced
Ascendancy.
Charles Meo
: >It takes a lot of time to fill planets, especially the "enormous" ones.
: >When you get a lot of colonies going, this will start to become
: >especially tedious. After a while it takes minutes to complete a turn,
: >and your ships require many turns to get to their destinations.
: >
: >This is the standard complaint about this game. Or one of them, anyway.
: >
: It seems to me that everyone is forgetting to mention the fact
: that you can set your colonies to auto-manage themselves!
Except that the computer does a crap job if it. I would expect to at least
renovate outdated planetary technologies and try to maximise planetary
growth but all it seems to want to do is build heaps of orbital defences--
it never looks back once the planet is full to find opportunities to weed
out e.g. facilities on the wrong colour square, factories built where
metroplexes should be etc.
Also, and the most severe criticism I have of this game, is the inability to
set a final destination (e.g 10 star lanes away) and not bother the player
again until either stopped by hostiles or it arrives). Ship movement,
considering the laughably small number, is very tedious and there
are too many ways to either not move ships accidentally or move them in
the wrong direction.
Jeez, you wouldn't even need an algorithm to plot the path--you could get
the player to do it by plotting waypoints. Even this would be a vast
improvement.
Also: exiting from the corners is really annoying, why not use the RMB which
is undefined in most of the situations where you have to do this (I've found
my escape key is easier to hit anyway);
there should be better ways to move from screen to screen, e.g. I can't
for the life of me see why you can't get from 'Ships' to 'System' in one
go instead of having to go back to the galaxy display;
The computer players don't seem to do anything much;
Diplomacy and trade seem like an afterthought;
the ship limit is pretty hard to take for MOO players;
It should be harder to leave planets with no project and free population,
this has happened to me lots and there's no way back except to scroll up
and down through the planets display. Boring!
I would like to be able to suppress the graphics in the 'Planets' display,
excellent though they are, to get a better overview of the planets and see
more than three at once, e.g if I hold three or more in a system I might want
a port-planet (yard, docks), a fortress (whoppers, shields) , research special,
whatever.
other.
You should be able to go from 'planets' to the system they're in to
view local threats and manage the planets appropriately;
It is stupidly hard and slow to move around in the tech display, attractive
though it is, especially if you've dug up something really advanced
so there's a nice big empty space. Page up and down are OK to go from the
top to the bottom of the display, but it's really slow to get to the
middle.
The military technologies hardly seem differentiated at all, except in
the quantity you can stuff on your hull size. Because there is no
miniaturisation as in MOO, your late game killer dreadnought is still going
take about a day to pulverise planetary defences and about three shots
to vapourise a medium. Again, the lovely graphic ship design interface
can't remember what you last built! This is just plain silly once the tech
list gets long.
On the plus side, the galatic map engine is simply superb and the ship,
system and combat graphics and interface are in themselves delightful.
However it looks to me that a little more playtesting would have been
justified.
I'm afraid I still think MOO has more in it despite _looking_ really
primitive and crappy in comparison. Everyone knows that there are tradeoffs
involved in bringing product to market, but I think Ascendancy has sacrificed
too much game play for top-class graphics.
If only MPS and TLC could work together in harmony...
Chuk
--
'The devil makes work for idle hands, and vice versa'
C. Meo
Senior Systems Engineer
Charles Meo
: You know what's interesting about all these flames over Ascendancy and
: Logic Factory? That they exist. No one gave two shits about stinkers
: like Pizza Tycoon, or Zepplin.
graphics I tell ya! I guess nearly everyone who has played MOO has had a
look at ASND and I thought (as with Maelstrom actually) here is the galactic
map MOO should have had--and then, as you play, you realise why MOO is a
great game and ASND is just a barely-OK start.
But, I keep going back and I think it will be a long while before I get
sick of that 3d Galactic map.
Now, if TLF were to release a decent version 2, and Master of Antares
hasn't stolen all their pretty graphics, they may have a winner.
Kit Barron
One thing that I would like to see addressed that hasn't been mentioned is
this:
If you build planetary defenses, they should be able to defend the planet
without your having to go back and push the fire button yourself. I hate
having to go back to planets to try to defend them when I am out
conquering the galaxy!
-KB
Robert Baumann
bug free-probably the only program in recent history to make that claim.
However the demo(pre-release) did not have auto planet management and
had no AI to speak of. These are also the things not completed in the
final version. It is therefore safe to say that the program was shoved
out the door to meet a deadline. However after several months and a
patch that looks like it's going to be the only one the glaring problems
of the original are still there(lousy/no auto-planet management and week
ai planet management equating to lousy AI challenge even with computer
cheats). 5-10K of coding should have fixed this and after 50K of code
additions they are not fixed or even addressed. It is certainly easy to
see that Logic Factory is deaf and blind to their playtesters and the
resto of the World. VGA Planets is programed by only 1 guy and you
don't hear him complaining about patching things. Logic Factory could
have expended a lot less effort and had a lot better product if they
weren't so dedicated to producing a mediochre game.
_ _ ---------------------------------------------------------------
|_|_| PC-OHIO PCBoard OIS pcohio.com HST 16.8: 216-381-3320
|_|_| The Best BBS in America Cleveland, OH V34+ 33.6: 216-691-3030
---------------------------------------------------------------
JosephPG3
c...@tulpi.interconnect.com.au (Charles Meo) writes:
>: You know what's interesting about all these flames over Ascendancy and
>: Logic Factory? That they exist. No one gave two shits about stinkers
>: like Pizza Tycoon, or Zepplin.
>I've already posted a critique but this point is worth taking up--it's
the
>graphics I tell ya!
MOO with the 3 D map and improved graphics of Ascenancy would have been
the game of the decade. The research tree was also an outstanding concept
to introduce in a 3 D rendered format. As it is, Ascendancy is all show
and no play.
JPG
Amos Yung
>
>js...@chat.carleton.ca (Joe Sun) wrote:
>
>>- This is the first game the Logic Factory ever published, you can't
>> expect too much from them. (I'm pretty impressed of what they've put out.)
>
>They were good enough to make this game, surely they could provide the
>appropriate patch, right?
Joe probably doesn't realize it, but what he essentially is saying is that
unless you are into charity, don't buy from small companies.
Mark Baker
Good point Kit. I had forgot to mention that and don't recall anyone
else doing so either. SEVERAL times after a battle I spent so much
time micromanaging my systems that when the the next turn started I
forgot to go back to the battle. So of course I lost my planet
because I didn't go back and tell it to fire at the ship. The
planetary defenses should fire automatically IMO. You'd think with
the level of technology available your race could manage to make an
automated defense. Duh!
I know some may think that "forgetting" to go back and defend your
planet is a stupid thing to do. But in a large game, when in the
latter stages of a game, it is easier to do than you might expect.
Good example of how the micromanagement becomes too tedious and time
consuming...
--
Mark Baker
mba...@ix.netcom.com
Robert Baumann
the next Simtex. However Ascendency was shoved out the door "as is"
which was not finished. The pathetic planet management was a feature.
The weak AI was a feature. It was only under extreme public durress
that the Antagonizer patch was released and Logic Factory Whined and
Sniveled every step of the way-stating that they were doing us all a
huge favor, or that this was a big drain on their resources and we
should all feel sorry for them. 3 months and 55K of code later we are
all still trying to figure out what the patch does except give AI cheats
to the computer. While their have been a few positive posts many(most
all of the early ones) have been prefaced by "I'm a close personal
friend of the programmer". While friends of the programmer are
certainly entitled to their opinion I was surprised how many devalued
their own words by making this statement. The patch could have been
done a lot easier and faster and if they just would have listened to the
hundreds of posts explaining about the bad planet management(both auto
and AI)rather than programming.... well whatever it was they spent 3
months programming. While Logic Factory has some good programmers,
their attitude needs a LOT of work. The one good thing(depending on
your outlook) is that the blasting that Logic Factory has taken over
this game has convinced other designers to hold back what would have
been the best releases of 95 for 3-6 months or even longer rather than
release something unfinished. While I certainly would have shelled out
$60 for Master of Antares even if I thought it was as buggy MOM version
1.00(crashed every 10 minutes) other people might not be so forgiving.
Jean-Michel Forhan
>MOO with the 3 D map and improved graphics of Ascenancy would have been
>the game of the decade. The research tree was also an outstanding concept
>to introduce in a 3 D rendered format. As it is, Ascendancy is all show
>and no play.
>
>JPG
I have try the demo but not play the game. The graphics are very impressive.
But have you read the interview at the Logic Factory Homepage?
(http://www.logicfactory.com/intb.html)
I found it very instructive: they said they don't intend to make a strategic
game but an exploration game. The player will explore the differents playing
configurations, the different winning ways...
Too bad, it could have been a GREAT strategic game.
David W Maddocks
One. This game was marketed and hyped as a Strategy Game, ala
MOO, CIV, etc. Check out the ads or the reviews it was given
(grossly overrated in my opinion). They all imply that you must
skillfully manage resources to build an empire while dealing with
multiple threats, diplomacy from hostile aliens, crucial decisions
as to which tech to invest in, etc. Now that SOUNDS like an ad for
a Strategy game. Ascendancy is a BIG dissapointment as a strategy
game.
Two. Adventure games are usually about discovering things and solving
puzzles and problems. What puzzles are there to solve in Ass-end-ancy?
None, all the winning conditions pretty much lead to the same screen, so
any "fun" in "discovering" new ways of winning is lost. What do you
discover in A, all the aliens basically have 3 or 4 things to say to
you, and they are the same 3-4 things all the time, from when you have
saved their home world from invasion to when you have a twenty to one
advantage. There is no diplomacy or real interacting with the aliens.
In Nomad for instance you travelled around, met a variety of aliens with
distinct personalities and had to solve actual conversational puzzles to
win the game.
I personally deeply regret buying and being unable to return this game.
I hope for an upgrade but don't expect one and I will never buy another
Logic Factory product unless there is a patch for ascendancy.
David W Maddocks
David W Maddocks
Matt McLeod
: Joe probably doesn't realize it, but what he essentially is saying is that
: unless you are into charity, don't buy from small companies.
Which is a silly thing for him to say - you only have to look at
Stardock (for example) to see that small companies can and do
put out some excellent products.
Even Microsoft was a small company once upon a time. Maybe if
they'd stayed that way, they'd be putting out better products.
Matt
David W Maddocks
>You know what's interesting about all these flames over Ascendancy and
>Logic Factory? That they exist. No one gave two shits about stinkers
>like Pizza Tycoon, or Zepplin. But folks are really pissed about
>Ascendancy because it altho it really sucks in its current state (I just
>played a game last night - Antag, 7 player, sparse, hostile - and not only
>was the outcome never in doubt, but I never lost a ship!) Ascendancy could
>be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it could be
>right up there with CIV and MOO as a never-to-be-deleted-from-my-HD
>classic. Sigh....
>David Blumgart
Or even if a decent AI takes time and they need to hire someone who
does that as opposed to graphics the least they could do was fix other
stuff like combat, ship movement etc. I think it's the combination of
the potential the game has and the fact that LF is just kicking back
and obviously doesn't give a crap.
Oh well, lets hope Pax Imperia ii and MOO 2 are out soon.
David W. Maddocks
dav...@earthlink.net
Carole
>>>be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it
There is a patch to fix the AI for Ascendancy, available at
http://www.logicfactory.com.
It's a module which I believe is called "The Antigonizer" or
something...
--
Carole
____________________ ____ ___ __ __ _ _
t...@rust.net * Caro...@aol.com
http://users.aol.com/caroletio/tiohome.htm
http://www.rust.net/~tio/coroner.htm
DrMo...@gnn.com
In article <4dkgem$l...@bolivia.it.earthlink.net> David W Maddocks
wrote:
>Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 04:51:13 GMT
>From: dav...@earthlink.net (David W Maddocks)
>Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
>Subject: Re: Ascendancy: Consider this before you trash Logic
Factory
>
>dblu...@aol.com (DBLUMGART) wrote:
>
>>You know what's interesting about all these flames over
Ascendancy and
>>Logic Factory? That they exist. No one gave two shits about
stinkers
>>like Pizza Tycoon, or Zepplin. But folks are really pissed about
>>Ascendancy because it altho it really sucks in its current state
(I just
>>played a game last night - Antag, 7 player, sparse, hostile - and
not only
>>was the outcome never in doubt, but I never lost a ship!)
>>be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it
>>right up there with CIV and MOO as a
never-to-be-deleted-from-my-HD
>>classic. Sigh....
>>David Blumgart
>
>Or even if a decent AI takes time and they need to hire someone
who
>does that as opposed to graphics the least they could do was fix
other
>stuff like combat, ship movement etc. I think it's the
combination of
>the potential the game has and the fact that LF is just kicking
back
>and obviously doesn't give a crap.
>Oh well, lets hope Pax Imperia ii and MOO 2 are out soon.
>
>David W. Maddocks
>dav...@earthlink.net
Let's remeber the big fucking "IF" here. A game isn't based on the
"IF" idea. If it sucks it sucks. This is to [sigh]David Blumgart
(dumbass must work for LF).
If a game sucks, it sucks. It deserves to get flamed. An "IF"
doesn't make a game good.
Sigh......
>
Silvana Grandillo
>
>>Ascendancy could
>>>>be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it
>
>http://www.logicfactory.com.
>It's a module which I believe is called "The Antigonizer" or
>something...
The BIG question is :
DOES IT REALLY MAKE THE COMPUTER A BETTER ANTAGONIZER ???
I'd like to get some feedback by players who have tried the patch.
Thanks,
Silvana
Jeff
snip
>>dblu...@aol.com (DBLUMGART) wrote:
>>
>>>You know what's interesting about all these flames over
>Ascendancy and
>>>Logic Factory? That they exist. No one gave two shits about
>stinkers
>>>like Pizza Tycoon, or Zepplin. But folks are really pissed about
>>>Ascendancy because it altho it really sucks in its current state
>(I just
>>>played a game last night - Antag, 7 player, sparse, hostile - and
>not only
>>>was the outcome never in doubt, but I never lost a ship!)
>>>be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it
>>>right up there with CIV and MOO as a
>never-to-be-deleted-from-my-HD
>>>classic. Sigh....
>>>David Blumgart
>>
>>Or even if a decent AI takes time and they need to hire someone
>who
>>does that as opposed to graphics the least they could do was fix
>other
>>stuff like combat, ship movement etc. I think it's the
>combination of
>>the potential the game has and the fact that LF is just kicking
>back
>>and obviously doesn't give a crap.
>>Oh well, lets hope Pax Imperia ii and MOO 2 are out soon.
>>
>>David W. Maddocks
>>dav...@earthlink.net
>
>Let's remeber the big fucking "IF" here. A game isn't based on the
>"IF" idea. If it sucks it sucks. This is to [sigh]David Blumgart
>(dumbass must work for LF).
>
>If a game sucks, it sucks. It deserves to get flamed. An "IF"
>doesn't make a game good.
>Sigh......
I think you missed David's point........
Robert Baumann
Facoctory's web page and the Antagonizer availabilty are correct.) but
the antagonizer patch has been out for more than two months and has been
flamed by more than 100 posts since that time. The patch was two months
late added 50K to the executible and all it did was add an AI cheat!!
Even on the hardest setting a novice player should beat it with his eyes
closed during his first game. The AI was rated the worst in the last
several years(for a strategy game) in the latest issue of computer
gaming World!! The AI is pathetic at managing it's planets and a human
should be able to get 5-20 times as much per planet as the computer can.
Also the AI is designed to build all kinds of usless doo-dads on a
planet, wasting space and population. Because of this more than half of
the planets in the game are too small for the computer to even colonize
effectively!! THe disgraceful part of this is that decent planet
management could have made the AI 5 times stronger with only a 5K
addition of code instead of the gargantuan joke they did put out. I
guess they must be alergic to success. There is one positive posting
here I have to agree with.. One guy said he liked the game because it
was so easy he never, ever had to worry about losing, no mater what the
difficulty setting.
David W Maddocks
>>In article <4dkgem$l...@bolivia.it.earthlink.net> David W Maddocks
>>wrote:
>>>Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 04:51:13 GMT
>>>From: dav...@earthlink.net (David W Maddocks)
>>>Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
>>>Subject: Re: Ascendancy: Consider this before you trash Logic
>>Factory
>>>
>>>dblu...@aol.com (DBLUMGART) wrote:
>>>
>>Ascendancy could
>>>>be a great game, in fact if LF could get a decent "AI" going, it
>>could be
>>>>right up there with CIV and MOO as a
>>never-to-be-deleted-from-my-HD
>>>>classic. Sigh....
>>>>David Blumgart
>>>
>>>Or even if a decent AI takes time and they need to hire someone
>>who
>>>does that as opposed to graphics the least they could do was fix
>>other
>>>stuff like combat, ship movement etc. I think it's the
>>combination of
>>>the potential the game has and the fact that LF is just kicking
>>back
>>>and obviously doesn't give a crap.
>There is a patch to fix the AI for Ascendancy, available at
>http://www.logicfactory.com.
>It's a module which I believe is called "The Antigonizer" or
>something...
>--
>Carole
>____________________ ____ ___ __ __ _ _
>http://www.rust.net/~tio/coroner.htm
>t...@rust.net
I was talking about the game after using the Antagonizer
Patch, before it it's not even funny its so pathetic.
David W. Maddocks
dav...@earthlink.net