Greetings!

We are working on version 2.3 for Crusade and the base game simultaneously. We don't have a final date but I expect you will start seeing opt-ins very soon.

I want to make you guys aware of some important changes happening on Steam that will affect you.


Review Scores

Some of you may have noticed I've been harping about the Steam user review scores.

If you're noticing an ever increasing disconnect between your opinion of a game and the user review score of a game, it's because the discovery algorithm heavily penalizes any game with <80% user reviews (And <70% means the game is basically invisible via discovery). 

This puts immense power into the user's hands for good and for ill. It also puts a tremendous level of influence on the 0.7% of the user base who reviews.

Other games (not naming names) put a considerable amount of effort into optimizing their review scores. That's why you will see (via SteamSpy) games with fewer players than GalCiv III actually have 5X as many reviews (and a >90% review score).

Recently, Steam changed the review system such that those customers who pre-purchased GalCiv III during the Founders programs don't have their reviews count towards the review score. In the future, we'll be handling our founders programs differently, but in the mean time. it's a bit of a bummer for GalCiv III and in particular Crusade.

Understanding Steam's review system

Speaking of Crusade, it's review score average from Metacritic is 88 (http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/galactic-civilizations-iii-crusade) the highest of any space 4X game in recent years (and our highest since Twilight of the Arnor). However, it's Steam user review score is only 71%.

We can have a vigorous debate on what sort of score a game "deserves". However, from a Steam discoverability standpoint, it's all based on it's *relative* score.

Thus, GalCiv III, for instance, actually has a 39% RELATIVE Steam score. That is, games are rated on the curve. 

GalCiv III's Steam user score is 76% and its Metacritic score is 81. But its relative score is 39. So unless you think GalCiv III is a 2 out of 5 game, its Steam user review score should be much higher.

I personally believe that the *natural* review score of most games would fall between a 5 and an 8. Look at IMBD ratings as an example of how most movies score.

In other words, I don't think GalCiv III's score is too low, I think most games on Steam have too high a score versus what they would get naturally. This isn't to imply that developers are cheating but rather selection bias is very strong.

However, what this means is that unless the review score for GalCiv III perks up, it's going to remain largely invisible on Steam which affects its sales and that you, dear reader, have the power to make that score go up or down. 

In either case, I would rather the score be more derived on the reviews from the community than by 0.7% of the overall userbase.

So I am outright asking, whether it's an up vote or a down vote, please take a few minutes to review GalCiv III: http://store.steampowered.com/app/226860/Galactic_Civilizations_III/

Bear in mind that on Steam 2.5 stars = 82% user review score (I kind of wish they'd implement a star system like that so that people reviewing it were grading games based on whether they think the score on the game is accurate or not).

 

Crusade vs. GalCiv III

We have finally concluded how the base game will evolve in a universe that GalCiv III: Crusade exists.

The first question we had to answer was what are the distinctly unique features unique to GalCiv III that were changed/removed from Crusade?

  1. The production wheel (easily)
  2. Planetary production wheels
  3. Planetary focus check boxes

The second question was which path was the best to take to reach that? The answer is that we need to start with the Crusade code base and port it back to the base game. 

As many have noted, GalCiv III: Crusade isn't really an "expansion pack" in the traditional sense. It's more of a sequel. I wasn't around to work on GalCiv III so you can look at Crusade as what my version of GalCiv III, having come from Twilight of the Arnor, would have been. 

We'd like to hear from you in the comments on what other sorts of things in the BASE game you'd want to keep that were changed in Crusade.

What's next for GalCiv III

From a story perspective, there are TWO more campaigns in the future:

Dark Avatar
Apocalypse

Originally, the Crusade expansion was going to include Apocalypse but I nixed it for a variety of reasons one being the most obvious: It's the conclusion of the GalCiv III storyline and we, and many of our customers, believe that GalCiv III should have another major expansion to deal with politics, elections, protectorates, etc. and that would be where Apocalypse would go.

Dark Avatar, by contrast, would be updating the Dark Avatar campaign from GalCiv II. Dark Avatar was widely considered the best of the GalCiv II campaigns.

Those two campaigns would round up the GalCiv story line to this point:

  1. Rise of the Terran Alliance
  2. Altarian Prophecy
  3. Dark Avatar (which will combine Dread Lords + Dark Avatar + Twilight together)
  4. Return [base GalCiv III]
  5. Apocalypse [Concluding GalCiv III]

So that's all for now!

Thanks for your continuing support!

 

Originally posted by Brad on the Steam forums.

http://steamcommunity.com/app/226860/discussions/1/1291817837616511889/

 


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 01, 2017

Due to my own ineptness when fighting the Dread Lords, and many years later crashes when I tried to go back and replay them, I never finished some of the campaigns.  I will be happily awaiting the reworked campaigns for Crusade.

on Jun 01, 2017

Well how would I rate the base galactic civilizations 3. I would have probably given it a 70% in the beginning. It was missing some user interface features from two, and it doesn't really do a good job at fixing the Yor. I would give it's Ai. an A since I can't beat it. It was a good game I liked it since I started playing at about 1.02. You guys even fixed the economic problem after getting rid of  the large empire penalty by giving us enough things to buy. I would have liked to see more random events. And the lost treasures need to have a leveling system, so you don't really see it's awesome effects untill later game. I thought the Jagged knife needed fixed, not removed. I know that the galactic council worked as in in appearence in two, but now another method was needed for larger maps. Finding half af the factions on excessive, and insane maps never work for me. In the beginning I would have like to of seen more base factions it is now fixed. Modding support was better in two. The game editor is now missing. We later got a map editor, but it looks like the game editor in ultimate is not coming back. I thought the customisation of races in two was more flexible than the customisation of factions in three. This is still the base game. I didn't like coercion or the administrators in the base. I still it was a good game.

As far as crusades go I would give it about 90% since it doesn't have combined research, and there are some things I can't just double click to do. other than that it is almost interface perfect. I would like to see some more variety in it;s tech. I would like to see some more promotions. I would like to see a better variety in citizens names. Other than that is is a perfect game. We could still have a full mod support like in two. The administrators are fixed now. We are still dealing with a map, not a game editor. Now galactic civilizations have moved from being a really good game to a perfect game. I also would liked to have seen more race types in the custom civilization screen. We really need a lot more than four,and these are not races they would be species.

on Jun 01, 2017

I know you all cannot say it but I will, paradox is buying reviews.  This really chaps my arse.

on Jun 01, 2017


Recently, Steam changed the review system such that those customers who pre-purchased GalCiv III during the Founders programs don't have their reviews count towards the review score. In the future, we'll be handling our founders programs differently, but in the mean time. it's a bit of a bummer for GalCiv III and in particular Crusade.

Can you speak to what is changing with the Founders program?  or is this to be announced in the near future somewhere?  Thanks.

on Jun 02, 2017

Moving forward, I have posted on Discord. While I will jump readily into lifetime founders with Stardock games. I would rather be able to give a good review of the game even if it means missing out on Beta (SCO???), but only if I can at least view and participate on those beta forums. 

Thanks for the update Stardock. As always your product is far better than most,  and I only wish there was a way for me to  distribute that enthusiasm I have for your games to many others. 

on Jun 02, 2017

I agree that due to how Steam does things, the founder's programs don't make sense to have via not-Steam.

 

One possible idea for you

1) Make Founder's editions something you buy on Stardock in addition to the base game.  All add-on content will be free (90% coupons for the expansions so they can leave reviews), but you purchase the game separately.  Allow folks to buy it on platform of choice if possible.  This way their reviews count, at least for the base game. 

It's gaming the system, but rules are meant to be bent.

 

2) Allow folks to purchase GOG founder's editions for a DRM-free option if they wish.

 

on Jun 02, 2017

zellonx

I know you all can not say it but I will paradox is buying reviews.  This really chaps my arse.

Really?  Great, how do I get some of that sweet, sweet Paradox loot?

As for reviews, well, I for one am waiting for the major changes to slow down.  Every week there are additions that changes the game, some changes for the better, some not.  I mean, the campaigns are completely busted and a lot of people like to play those.  I see fixing and adding to campaigns are on the radar, but I can't review an incomplete game.  So maybe in a month?  

on Jun 02, 2017

Not sure I understand what is going on but got it - review games more on steam.  NP.

on Jun 02, 2017

Badbonez

 I mean, the campaigns are completely busted and a lot of people like to play those.  

The campaigns are already fixed.

on Jun 02, 2017

Badbonez

As for reviews, well, I for one am waiting for the major changes to slow down.  Every week there are additions that changes the game, some changes for the better, some not.  I mean, the campaigns are completely busted and a lot of people like to play those.  I see fixing and adding to campaigns are on the radar, but I can't review an incomplete game.  So maybe in a month?

There was a patch earlier this week that addressed the campaign.

on Jun 02, 2017

Stanley Tarrant

Not sure I understand what is going on but got it - review games more on steam.  NP.
Well steam are not letting founder elites review the expansions. To be honest we are customers to. We are just loyals who have been following the game longer, or are willing to make more of an investment into the game our opinions should count to. Because not all of galactic civilizations 3 crusade customers can participate in the reviews steam is rigging  the review system to not report back correct opinions about the game. As far as rating the game.

on Jun 03, 2017

So now for the first time I reviewed a game on Steam to help you with future bug fixing and feature additions

on Jun 03, 2017

I'm a founder.  Is there any way for me to boost the review score?

on Jun 03, 2017

Strange to me that Steam allows Elite Founders to review the game but apparently the review does not count in the totals. I am not a reviewing kind of guy. I wrote that review to help SD when the game was first released. If I had known it didn't count I wouldn't have bothered. Kind of pisses me off.   

 

on Jun 04, 2017

I'd rather you guys have a heart to heart talk with your fan base and find out which version people would want to support. I have no intention of ever, ever playing Gal Civ III: Base now that Crusade exists. I'd rather you focused all of engineering, art, and others allocated to Crusade and continue with that version. I feel like this is the same conversation that Singularity had and Escalation ended up being the version people wanted overall. Crusade is a better version from my point of view.

2 Pages1 2