3000 AD Unveils Galactic Command Online

[Andy Chalk]

3000 AD Unveils Galactic Command Online

The website for 3000 AD [http://www.galactic-command.com/], is now online and like all the company's games, it promises an open-ended galaxy in which you can do absolutely anything - with a few limitations.

You can't talk about 3000 AD without talking about Derek Smart so we might as well get that out of the way. Smart, as most of you probably know, is the president and lead developer of 3000 AD, an independent game studio he founded in 1989. He is possibly more famous for his outspoken belligerence on internet forums than he is for his games, which are notorious for their incredible detail, complexity and inaccessibility; Smart's games make Peggle [http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/falcon-40].

On the other hand, he must be doing well in that particular niche because he keeps hammering away at it and he also earns props for giving away the full versions of his games via the 3000 AD website once he feels their "shelf life" as sellable games has expired.

Anyway, Smart's games have always had a certain "massiveness" to them so the transition from single-player experiences like EVE Online [http://3000ad.com/games/universal-combat-collectors-edition/] manual, with plans for an open, non-instanced galaxy in which players do whatever they want and suffer the consequences thereof. Unlike EVE, however, Galactic Command Online will be primarily a military game; the game will have a "very basic player driven economy" for resource trading, but even that will take place primarily to support combat operations.

Much of what the game will offer will evolve directly from 3000 AD's earlier single-player games. "What we're doing now is creating a subscriber based version of our tried and proven IP and technologies but with even more advancements," the company said. "Rather than doing the usual two year song and dance risk of developing a new game, we decided to go the subscription route as it is easier to extend and advance a base product over the years with expansion add-ons than to keep starting from scratch each time."

The impact of piracy on the PC gaming market is also cited as a reason for the switch to a subscription-based system, in wonderfully typical Smart vernacular. "Pirates are bastards who have all but ruined the PC gaming landscape," it says. "Not that the average pirate has enough brain cells to even play our games, but that's another topic entirely."

Galactic Command Online is being developed for Windows and is currently targeted for release sometime between the final quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011, although if I were you I'd mark that date on my calendar in pencil.

via: Blue's [http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewstory&threadid=103216]


Permalink

 

[Baby Tea]

"Pirates are bastards who have all but ruined the PC gaming landscape," it says. "Not that the average pirate has enough brain cells to even play our games, but that's another topic entirely."

Oh no he di'nt!
Well, he's certainly an outspoken fellow, isn't he?
Still, the landscape of space ship MMOs is relatively bare, so an alternative to Eve could be a good thing. I suppose we'll have to play the tried and true 'wait and see' game, eh?

 

[The Kangaroo]

If it's anything like EVE, I'm out

 

[Raithnor]

This has several layers of disaster written all over it.

None of the games they've released ever lived up to the Hype. On a good day they can get a 6.0 on gamespot. The games are a combination of bad design, buggy execution, and horribly complex gameplay.

People aren't pirating these games, the reason they don't sell is because they're terrible games. If people are pirating them it's out of morbid curiosity than anything else.

I will give them props for trying to work in a genre that's not represented well, especially considering this is the age of the Console FPS and Fantasy MMO.

Bottom line: A company that is know for mediocre single-player games is now going to make an MMO.

Now if someone perked up and said "We're going to make a Freespace MMO or a Wing Commander/Privateer MMO" then you might have my interest.

 

[Tiamat666]

I'd like to know who plays these games. I've been intrigued by the alleged open-endedness, freedom and depth of these games myself, but everytime I tried them out I've had the feeling that all the boasted features are only half implemented.

Once I was attacking an enemy base, but all enemies just stood around and didn't even fire back.

Another time I chose to start the game as a simple marine, but I was on a space station, had no spaceship, and couldn't get off it.

I don't know. Maybe there is something to these games and I'm doing it all wrong. This guy has to make a living somehow.

 

[derek_smart]

@ Tiama666

What would have been a neat trick is if we ever had such a game.

We've never - ever - had a game in which you played as a marine, stuck on station and couldn't get off it. Let alone one in which you would attack enemies and leave unscathed. In fact, the difficulty level of our games (as in reviews of our recent game released on August 17th [http://www.3000ad.com/aaw/news/#toc-game-reviews]) is the most talked about.

So you must have been playing a different game and most certainly not one of ours.

Who plays our games? Only the people who - for twenty years and fourteen games - have been buying them. Which is why I kept making them.

@ Raithnor

Whatever man, whatever.

 

[Tiamat666]

We've never - ever - had a game in which you played as a marine, stuck on station and couldn't get off it. Let alone one in which you would attack enemies and leave unscathed.

I'm pretty sure I was playing Universal Combat. I chose the marine start and found myself running around the outside of the space station wondering what the hell I was doing.

You know, I admire you for just even trying to create such revolutionary games, and I wish it would work out, but I'm afraid it doesn't. At least not for me. I gave it multiple tries.

I think you pride yourself on the complexity of your games but fail to acknowledge that the complexity stems from inaccesible interface and bad documentation, and not from real game depth.

 

[derek_smart]

Considering that my games are designed and developed for a specific group of people - and not the masses - you're obviously not the target audience. As such, you are of no consequence regardless of whether or not the game is good or bad.

 

[sturryz]

God... this man is such an idiot...

 

[Tiamat666]

Considering that my games are designed and developed for a specific group of people - and not the masses - you're obviously not the target audience. As such, you are of no consequence regardless of whether or not the game is good or bad.

I've played Elite, X-Wing, TIE-Fighter, Wing Commander but also "complex" sims like MS Flight Sim, Janes F15, and "Starship simulators" like Star Fleet. If I'm not the target audience, then who is?

By the way, you're not really confronting my criticism. You're just dismissing my opinion as misguided or irrelevant. That's typical egomaniac behaviour. Somewhere deep down you probably know that I'm right or that I at least have a point, but it's impossible for you to admit your own shortcomings or deal with criticism so you hide behind the "everyone else is wrong" facade.

I think people like you need to understand that there's nothing wrong with constructive criticism. It helps us do better and improve ourselves. For example, instead of dismissing me, you could appreciate that here is someone who tried very hard to enjoy your games but found them inaccesible. So you might decide to improve on the interface and the documentation for the next release.

But of course, the dismissive reaction is alot easier to do.

 

[sturryz]

If it's anything like EVE, I'm out

It's FAR worse.

I love how you didn't show a link to the Gamespot review of your little game Mr. Smart

 

[derek_smart]

Oh yeah, here come the personal attacks. Gamers behaving badly online - what a concept. Considering how every public person gets wanton abuse from people hiding behind keyboards, I consider myself to be in good company. So you guys can play that game all on your own; most of us have grown up.

In all the years of reading this site, I only decided to post today for the sole purpose of responding to one person posting something that wasn't remotely related to our games (and no, what you described wasn't in Universal Combat either. Nice try) and in order to cut that one off at the pass.

@sturryz

Why would I need to link to an unprofessional hatchet job? And what makes you think that I'm the only one who doesn't do that? Go ahead, go find one single game pub/dev site with links to an unflattering or rubbish review of their game. I'll be waiting.

All other reviews of my recent game are up on our site at the link previously provided. Anyone who thinks GameSpot matters, is free to go there. So I fail to see the issue. Especially when its only one site that ceased to be relevant back when Reagan was president.

@ Tiamat66

"By the way, you're not really confronting my criticism."

Maybe because apart from it being irrelevant, I don't care?

Anyway, I'm done here. Have fun.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Guys, let's try to keep it civil. Mr. Smart may be a bit abrasive but his dedication to his games is obvious, and as he pointed out, somebody must be buying them because he's still making them.

Personally, I'd love to see a reasonable discussion on 3000 AD games, not on specific instances as experienced by us (because that's obviously not going to fly) but on the overall philosophy behind the games. What motivates Smart to keep making such a tight-niche product? Who buys them, and it what kind of numbers? Why not try to broaden the concept to a more mass-market appeal?

The few forum conversations with Smart that I've seen have almost immediately degenerated into name-calling and accusations of... well, just about everything, really. That obviously won't be tolerated here, but maybe instead of a locked thread we could aim for something a little more productive?

 

[sturryz]

Alright, Alright. I am just going to quickly apologize as i had walked in not on a positive note.
Here's the honest truth, Derek's Game Studio simply can't handle his overwhelming ambition. He has the vision but lacks the resources to convert that into reality. He's gotta learn you have to scale down when it's to much to handle. I am sure Bethesda has alot of great ideas that never get implemented into their games. I tried playing some Universal Combat and I can't get over the REALLY bad planet based mechanics (infact you could throw out that entirely and it wouldn't be nearly as bad.) Their just not very good games. the only people who truly play his games are as insane as he is. he's still a better guy then old Timmy "The Edge" Langdell though.