Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Stardock Tried To Make Star Control, Master of Orion Sequels

Posted by Soulskill on Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:16 AM
from the brought-to-you-by-frungy-the-sport-of-kings dept.
Gamasutra reports on comments from Stardock CEO Brad Wardell in which he described his efforts to revive two old but popular franchises: Star Control and Master of Orion. Quoting: "'I actually pitched Atari on a whole idea for a true successor to Star Control,' [he said], noting that the game would follow original series developer Toys for Bob's Star Control II rather than the Legend Entertainment-developed Star Control 3 ('We just pretend that never happened,' the CEO says of that release). ... Novato, California-based Toys for Bob has actually floated the idea of making its own Star Control II sequel, with co-creator Paul Reiche III indicating he has tossed potential design ideas around, but with the company now owned by publisher Activision the proposal seems to be stuck in limbo."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Star Control II (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LightPhoenix7 (1070028) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @12:20AM (#25797381)
    I understand that they want to make a sequel to Star Control II, and that's awesome. However, I think that ship has long since passed. If they were really serious about carrying on the spirit of the game, they could simply make a new game in the Star Control style with a new background. That's why they're called "spiritual successors." I know that's not a true sequel, but that's about as good to one as we're going to get.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      As I understand it, they own the rights to create any game they like in the Star Control franchise, other than the name "Star Control" itself. The issue at hand simply relates to them wanting to get paid to develop it, and the company that pays them doesn't necessarily want to pay for a Star Control sequel.

  • obligatory game link (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 18 2008, @12:29AM (#25797473)

    For fans of the original SC 2 game, or someone with an open mind for an awesome old game, you can find it here:

    http://sc2.sourceforge.net/

    Totally free and legal too.

  • by geminidomino (614729) * on Tuesday November 18 2008, @12:36AM (#25797539) Homepage Journal

    Like Star Control II was such a great game. Who the hell on slashdot even remembers it?

    • by narcberry (1328009) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @12:39AM (#25797567) Journal

      I thought Star Craft 2 wasn't out yet.

    • by StarKruzr (74642) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @12:43AM (#25797587) Journal

      This game was published in 1992 and it EASILY is still one of the best PC games of all time.

      • I used to play it all the time on my Compaq Portable III. I highly doubt that any sequel will recapture that early 90s spirit.
        • by caitsith01 (606117) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @01:00AM (#25797719) Homepage Journal

          I used to play it all the time on my Compaq Portable III. I highly doubt that any sequel will recapture that early 90s spirit.

          This MUST be possible. I have never understood why companies don't release what amount to identical games under the hood with heavily updated graphics which remain true to the original art style of the previous game. Keep all of the game logic, but replace the graphics and make it run stably on an XP/Vista system.

          Case in point: Sid Meier's Pirates!, which was in many respects totally identical to the old 2D version, and which looks great and is awesomely fun to play.

          My dream is for someone to finally, FINALLY do this to XCom/UFO - keep the EXACT game mechanics of the original game, but make it run in 1280x1024 with photorealistic (but still manga-esque) graphics. They could keep the original music but re-record it. It would be stunning.

          Other candidates for this treatment would be Syndicate/Syndicate Wars, and Theme Park.

          • by Kjella (173770) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @01:54AM (#25798095) Homepage

            My dream is for someone to finally, FINALLY do this to XCom/UFO - keep the EXACT game mechanics of the original game, but make it run in 1280x1024 with photorealistic (but still manga-esque) graphics.

            1280x1024??? If you're doing a remake at least update it so it can run on modern resolutions including widescreen. LCDs in general suck at any non-native resolution, so it's even more important than before.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            You probably ought to give UFO: Alien Invasion [sourceforge.net] a try. It's definitely not the same game, but it's created by a group of people clearly in love with the source material.

          • by meringuoid (568297) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @06:23AM (#25799487)
            Case in point: Sid Meier's Pirates!, which was in many respects totally identical to the old 2D version, and which looks great and is awesomely fun to play.

            Sid Meier likes doing that. Take a look at Colonization, which preserves the basic mechanisms of the original, but adds more sophisticated Civ4-style diplomacy and trade. And alliances with the Indians.

            Only problem is, the Royal Expeditionary Force is normally absolutely huge by the time you declare independence, your troops don't upgrade to Continental Army status, and there's no foreign intervention force coming.

            I had to drastically revise my war plans. In the original I used to build big heavily armed fortresses and pack them with troops and cannon, and wait for the king's men to come to the slaughter. In the new game, that doesn't work: artillery get a huge bonus to city attack, so no fortress is strong enough. Instead I play a Stalinist strategy. All troops and most of the population are evacuated from any cities the king's men approach, leaving only a token guard. The civilians are sent to the arms manufactories deep inland, and there drafted into the militia. The army lurks in the woods.

            Meanwhile the king's men destroy my token garrison and occupy the city. That's when I counterattack: the artillery bonus now works in my favour. Sure, it means my cities get wrecked. The objective is to exterminate the king's men, not to have a viable colony left when the dust settles.

            It actually made me feel very bad. The burning ruin of the greatest city in the New World, now home to nothing but a couple of small fishing communities. My score history at the end showed a colossal drop during the war, as all trade and useful industry was abandoned, and all of the civilian population not involved in arms manufacture evacuated from the cities and drafted into an army in the wild. And then slaughtered. I had a mental image of Field Marshal Sir Dougie Haig with his battle plans, sweeping soldiers off the board with a dustpan and brush...

        • I doubt it (Score:3, Interesting)

          I remember Fallout 1 (or maybe 2) had a certain edible item called a "cookie". It restored a very small amount of hitpoints if you ate it. However, if you ate the cookie, your hard drive light blinked twice. This was back in the day where hard drive writes were quite loud and noticable. Since no other edible items wrote to the hard drive, most people realized that this was an easter egg left by the developers. With hard drives so quiet today (and SSD starting to take over) would anyone even notice if t
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Heh - weird. Your parent is termed "Funny" - correctly. Your post is termed "Insightful". Although I do agree with you, you simply didn't get the sarcasm of your parent.
        Let's see if I also get an incorrect value attatched - "flame" perhaps? ;)

    • I certainly don't.
    • by canajin56 (660655) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @12:59AM (#25797709)
      Whoever modded this flamebait instead of funny either didn't read your sig, or didn't remember Star Control II! How very *frumple*! *Happy Campers* enjoy the *sauce*! Come *dance* in the *heavy space*!
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Please don't be so *frumple*. *Happy Campers* are best!
    • Re:Big whoop... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by vux984 (928602) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @04:41PM (#25807709)

      Like Star Control II was such a great game. Who the hell on slashdot even remembers it?

      Jerk! Loser! Nerd! Idiot! Jerk! Nerd! Nerd! Idiot! Loser!

  • by Cordath (581672) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @01:54AM (#25798091)
    Master of Orion 2 differed from MOO1 in several fundamental ways. Most of those ways involved added minutiae to the game that didn't really add to the strategic depth of the game.

    Take buildings for example. In MOO2 (and every bloody civ-in-space game since) you can erect specialized buildings on your planets that focus the planets production. There is a tiny amount of strategy in the order of building things, but once you figure out an optimal build order for different types of planets it's just an annoying game mechanic that gets in the way of expanding your empire, saying "Nice doggy!" to your would-be enemies while you research a bigger stick, etc..

    Really, this sort of thing ammounts to shoe-horning an inferior version of sim-city into a game that doesn't need it. However, it's in every bloody 4X game people make these days, with Stardock's own Galactic Civilizations being one of the worst offenders. In MOO1, you could just set a slider telling each of your planets how much to devote to industry, research, ship production, etc..

    This is the philosophy I would like to see the MOO franchise return to:

    Create simple, intuitive, direct ways to manipulate a deep and complex system with cleverly balanced AI.

    e.g. To allow players to focus production, give them a simple control, such as a set of sliders, instead of a sim-city clone mini-game.

    Now, I know a lot of people love MOO2 and building buildings. It's a good game, and the mechanic is now utterly ubiquitous. However, if you liked MOO2 you can go play GalCiv or any of dozens of games that have all the same mechanics. If, however, the MOO franchise were to go back to it's MOO1 roots and try to find other ways for players to interact with the universe, we might finally see the ossified 4X genre evolve a little!
    • I had no real problems with the MOO3 system of planet management. The biggest problem I had in 3 was that combat sucked. It was so uninvolved as to make me resolve all battles with the one button click.

      The problem in MOO3 is that the idea was excellent but the execution wasn't. Too much of the tech made little sense, you could not weigh its impact on your empire easily. Travel down "warp lanes" made overly long games as most of your time was spent trying to get ships to where you needed them and the rou

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_Order_Monsters [wikipedia.org]

    Another great Paul Reiche III title -
  • Links inside (Score:5, Informative)

    by RichiH (749257) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @07:08AM (#25799687)

    http://www.freeorion.org/ [freeorion.org]
    http://www.thousandparsec.net/ [thousandparsec.net]
    http://www.startreksupremacy.com/ [startreksupremacy.com]
    http://abandonia.com/ [abandonia.com]
    http://gog.com/ [gog.com]

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      My thoughts on this subject:
      We don't really need a MOO2 sequel; the game plays just fine on modern systems, the graphics are adequate, the only things I could really see as improvements would be making the graphics a little higher res, maybe some more variation in ship design, and it would be GREAT if the number of stars could be increased, maybe by a factor of 4? But thats really it; the game still works, and works well.
      MOM is just more of a extreme case. While Age of Wonders: shadow magic is probably as c