1. Franchise Continuity: Because this is a franchise sequel product, some aspects of Master of Orion 2 are "sacred." MOO3 must remain a game of interstellar exploration featuring planetary management, ship design and combat, research and technology, interesting alien races, diplomacy and espionage, and multiple ways to win. But we will be improving many areas, such as its labyrinthine interface, awkward combat, repetitive research tree, and mandated micro-management, to name a few.
2. Up Scale Focus: As already discussed elsewhere in this interview, MOO3 takes strategy gaming up a level. It's both more detailed and easier to manage. It's a giant galactic empire simulator, filled with actual characters who make it run. The bottom line is that we are trying to "up scale" the focus and properly define the player's role in it (something unique in this genre).
3. Task Force-Based Combat: While ships are designed and built individually (akin to the first two Master of Orion games), ships will be grouped together and maneuver in Task Forces. The only difference between a single ship in other games and a Task Force in MOO3 is scale. There is nothing you can do with a ship that you can't do with a Task Force.
4. The "Domestic Front": Where we really have a story to tell is on an Empire's "Domestic Front." This is a subject that typically has been abstracted to triviality in standard "4-X" games. The high concept here is that economic, military, and political decisions, plus the employment of new technologies, all have social consequences. The race of an empire expects certain behaviors. If a player deviates from these expectations, it will tend to cause unrest.
5. Speed, Fairness and Play Balance: Turn-based with a dash of real time. Money matters – lots of realistic aspects of the empire to manage, if the player chooses to do so. The Heavy Foot of Government – the bigger you get, the slower you go. Cosmic Karma – random events aren't really random. And, of course, Imperial Focus to keep the player's eye on what really matters.
6. Major facelift to the user interface: There must always be a clear visual connection between the sub-screen/mode the player is in and that screen's place in the overall game. The player should normally need only two clicks to get from one place to another in the interface. There should be sophisticated rollover help that allows the player to "peel back the layers of the onion" and see how a particular value got to be what it is.
7. Excellent AI: We know what it takes to make a first-rate computer player. It's very difficult, and requires careful coordination between the design and programming teams. That's why we planned to have so many folks dedicated to the job, and didn't simply toss the task to a single AI programmer late in the development phase.
8.Excellent graphics and audio: This has been discussed elsewhere. The basic goal, though, was to set a new high-water mark for audiovisual quality in strategy games. When you see the models of the aliens we're creating, and hear their voices, you'll see just how far we've come.
Sharky Games: That sounds awesome! We hear that the space battles will be of fleet scale, in real-time (but not like real-time as we've known it!), and will take an approach similar to Imperial Focus. Players can set guidelines, then let the captains and lieutenants handle the rest. Is this an accurate assessment of your goals? If so, MOO3 will finally add something critics of RTS's have clamored for to alleviate frantic clicking.
Alan Emrich: Yes, real-time combat in MOO3 should be a stately, cerebral exercise in adjusting things at a high level. In other words, an "anti-clickfest." The unit of maneuver is not the individual ship, but rather individual Task Forces comprised of a grouping of ships organized to perform a specific role/mission in combat. So, in addition to designing ships, in MOO3 you also get to "design" (i.e., organize and assign mission priorities to) Task Forces.