http://www.spacesector.com/blog/2013/10/galactic-civilizations-3-announced/

Though I have no interest in this new round of Stardock's neverending carousel of greed (64-bit, AI algorithms need online and other sh*t... meh), could it be the possible sign that GOG could take the DRM-free Galactic Civilizations 2 from Stardock's hairy paw?

First of all, we already have a thread about the announcement here. Making another one feels counterproductive. Especially as the game-related forums are less frequented.

Secondly,... ...what!? How is Stardock greedy by making the game 64-bit only? It's more the opposite, as not everybody has the 64-bit version of Win 7 or 8, nor does everyone want to upgrade to them. As for the AI algorithms requiring to be online, this is only for additional learning-capabilities for the AI, and completely optional. The game will still receive AI-updates via patches.

Stardock made several decisions, that I don't agree with either (like the move to Steam-only), but I at least try to understand their reasons for them. Maybe you could try this too?

As for the possibility of GalCiv 2 finally coming here, I can only hope so.

Oh, sorry, I had not noticed that thread. My fault.

Recently I finally played GalCiv 1 a while. After it I looked at stuff about upcoming GalCiv 3. And you now what?

I just want to say BRAVO! Stardock guys are really unique. They managed to sell us THE SAME game THRICE. My hat's off.

Are you seriously trying to tell me, that you are unable to see any changes between GalCiv 1, 2, and 3? If so, then Firaxis beat Stardock long ago by managing to sell us their game (Civ) five times. Well, six times, if you count SMAC.

Firaxis games at least differ visually.

Now I know you're just trolling, if you think all three GalCivs are mechanically the same. Also, you can't honestly look at this and tell me all they all look identical.

Edit: Clarified a sentence.

I find it purposeless debating with Stardock fan. Jedem das Seine.

But it would be better that Brad continue to do what he can do best: trifles for Windows desktop.

While I may be a fan, I'm not a fanboy. There are a lot of things Stardock did I don't like (like their move to Steam-only for their games, for example). Same for their games. Heck, I've spent six years writing a mod to fix the bugs and balancing-issues in GalCiv 2, and I've been pretty vocal about my dislike of the current state of that game.

However, so far, you haven't answered my original question. Instead, you just made general statements that could be said about any game-series, but without any arguments to actually back those statements up.

Saying about 4X space games... At leisure time, compare (visually at first) let's say Space Empires 3 to 4 to 5, and Master of Orion 1 to 2 to 3 (even made by another devs).

See the difference? And now look at your own link about GCs. Squares here and hexes there? Come on, they even are so lazy that they keep use the same icons for ships, races and such... "Oh, holy Jesus, mister Wardell, how delicate you hint on GC1 legacy in your new GC3 masterpiece".... MEH. It's called self-plagiarism and absence of ideas. In Elemental/Fallen Enchantress' case we all have seen it in full light too.

Seriously? That is all you notice?

Same icons for ships? What are you talking about?

Here, this is yesterdays dev stream. Now, can you honestly tell me that you can't see any differences in game mechanics, graphics, and UI between this and GalCiv 1 and 2?

Seriously, I won't spend my time to watch streams or something. You like it - blaze away. I don't like it. So we both are biased. For me there are many 4X space games that are more inspiring (and inspired), elaborate, content-filled, satisfying and whatever you name else.

If you don't like it, that's fine by me. However, in that case, don't claim that it is the exactly same game again as the previous ones, but simply say, that you don't like it.

I don't like it JUST BECAUSE it's in fact the same game :)

In other 4x series I see evolutions, revolutions and such. Here everytime I see only promoting loud phrases about unmatched "human-like" AI (which doesn't work as you know), the same primitive battle system that turns "brilliant" ship constructor into practically useless cosmetic tool, and almost identical graphics (as you see but don't want to confess).

On this, let me take a bow. Convey greetings to skillful businessman Brad Wardell.

And this is where I disagree. The way the economy and planetary development works, the tech tree(s), ship design (or lack thereof), race customisation, espionage, galactic resources, rally points, fleet battle, and so on. They've all either changed from game to game or got newly added.

GalCiv 3 isn't his game (he just finances it and writes the AI). Paul Boyer is the Lead Designer. So, if you have a problem with the "lack" of changes in the game, put it up with him.