Master of Orion 3

 PC
User Score
4.2

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 79 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 79
  2. Mixed: 15 out of 79
  3. Negative: 45 out of 79
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. ChoicestGames
    Dec 12, 2012
    6
    The designers of MOO3 had good intentions and were aiming at making a grand strategy game - getting rid of the micro-management inherent in its predecessor MOO2. Unfortunately, they went too far and you'll spend most of your time moving slider bars but not really knowing if you're making any impact on the universe or not - which means you feel less of a megalomaniac and more like a seniorThe designers of MOO3 had good intentions and were aiming at making a grand strategy game - getting rid of the micro-management inherent in its predecessor MOO2. Unfortunately, they went too far and you'll spend most of your time moving slider bars but not really knowing if you're making any impact on the universe or not - which means you feel less of a megalomaniac and more like a senior public servant.… Expand
  2. Jim
    Sep 27, 2003
    6
    Wow, I member when AI was supposed to be your enemy not helping you out with every single action! with the AI who needs me to play at all, ill just watch. NEEDS MORE HUMAN CONTROL!!! moo2 the best so far. good concept though, I think the storyline is more interesting than the game-(unless the computer wants to read it to me)
  3. BennettM.
    Apr 8, 2003
    7
    A must-have for hard-core strategists. Intriuging and visually stunning, this is a great game. However, the AI seems to have slight problems. Most complaints about this game are based in reality, but WAY exagerrated. If it was really so bad it wouldn't have gotten so many great reviews. If strategy games are not your thing though you'll hate it.
  4. JeffV.
    Dec 30, 2003
    5
    Could have been great, but too many problems. The manual is thick but doesn't have all of the important information and lacks an index; some irritating bugs still haven't been patched; logical problems with gameplay (like, it might take a colony ship 30 turns to reach a planet to colonize, but people can start migrating and will arrive the very next turn).
  5. ChristopherP.
    Feb 16, 2007
    5
    What a complete waste of potential. What is good in this game--fun amount of complexity, detailed research tree, 16 races--is nearly completely ruined by problems that can't be ignored. Firstly, the 16 races are a joke, because the stats are not balanced at all. If you add up the stat points for each race, they're not balanced, sometimes to the point of extreme; for example, the What a complete waste of potential. What is good in this game--fun amount of complexity, detailed research tree, 16 races--is nearly completely ruined by problems that can't be ignored. Firstly, the 16 races are a joke, because the stats are not balanced at all. If you add up the stat points for each race, they're not balanced, sometimes to the point of extreme; for example, the Humans and Evons. The Evons are a humanoid race with stats that are vastly better than Humans, so the right way to go would be to customize the Evons, since customizing the Humans would be pointless. It gets worse: The enemy AI in this game is bad, really bad. Even after the newest patch, the AIs will completely randomly declare war on you without any provocation, even if you've boosted your diplomacy stat. The AI also very rarely makes an attack on you even if they do declare war, even on the higher difficulties. I also don't like at all that you have to redesign ships from scrap all manually with every military research you make. Ground combat is sort of cool, with more complexity and vast array of options such as allowing nuclear and chemical warfare, different tactics to make, etc (all of which is actually completely meaningless, because the manual nor the master's notes explains anything about the options you can take). The options "land troops" and "land all troops" when invading a planet make no sense. Even if you click "land troops," a few will invade, but the others just go into your reserves, so you have to make new transports. The emphasis on macromanaging could have been a good idea, and development plans are your friend, so the planetary AI isn't completely braindead. The game shows hints of genius with the vast complexity and emphasis on macromanaging that could work if not for the crippling problems it has.… Expand
  6. Taamati
    May 19, 2003
    7
    The game is good if you can spend the time building development plans for your planets and go through the Encyclopedia when neccesary. Though the game would be alot better if you could refit/upgrade your ships. Also for once I would like to see a game where the ships and planet etc are in scale other than that it's a good play.

Awards & Rankings

26
#26 Most Discussed PC Game of 2003

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
64

Mixed or average reviews - based on 24 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 24
  2. Mixed: 12 out of 24
  3. Negative: 4 out of 24
  1. G4 TV
    20
    MOO3 collapses under the weight of its own ambitious design. We doubt this can be fixed in a patch. Gamers need not apply. Masochists, you're on your own.
    Read full review
  2. Game Informer
    80
    Sure, the gameplay is incredibly deep, but I wanted more emphasis on the military aspects of the game. [Apr 2003, p.95]
  3. Eurogamer
    30
    If only your enemies displayed the same kind of intelligence, the game might be a lot more interesting - but in fact, the enemy AI in MOO3 is terrible, far worse than in the previous game in the series.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »