Holy crap. A sequel for Darklands would be awesome. A MoM sequel would be nice too, but Darklands...amazing game for its time.

What was so great on MOM is the fact, that you where able to influence every single bit in the game!
that means every square and every unit, no matter if friend or foe. I have never seen a strategy game, before and after, where the player had this huge amount of abilities and tactics available!
But in times, when no game can be simple enough and complexity seems to be a design flaw....

what I liked in MoM was that You were also someone that had magic powers that could be increased/improved over time
that you were able to use magic to modify the map to your liking,
that you were able to stack so many magic modifiers on a unit making it very likely to hold its own against anything
but albeit very expensive...

in fact you played like if you were god (nothing religious here of course)
and you were not limited as a "simple" hero like in Heroes of Might and Magic series

There is only two companies that have the expertise to make a MoM2 : Firaxis and Stardock. In my opinion, GalCIV2 is superior to Civ IV, so my preference is for Stardock

Well, in reality I only buy their games right now though one day they will make MOM2

I will definitively be a buyer for a MoM2 which is a true successor of the orignal game. I don't know why Developers don't jump on the opportunity to make a game which have already a vast fanbase

Do it, Do it, please. Many have tried to duplicate and/or replicate some of the "magic" of this title and never quite accomplished it. MoM2 would console the oldies and captivate the newbies. The only bad news would be that with its release, one would have to split their gamtime between MoM2 and GalCiv2. talk about tough choices...

Master of Magic is still one of my top 10 games. 

I would be happy with a MoM2 that was just MoM with updated graphics, bug fixes, and re-balanced.

To make MoM2 into the best game ever all you would need to do in addition to the above is add the following;

1) Hex based map / Combat map. 

2) Multiplayer (Including Hotseat).

3) Modability.

I think almost any other change or addition to MoM2 would be a step back.

 

Sammual

Man I loved that game, but it was so so unfair So much cheese existed hehehehe

And I liked that "cheese" , sometimes too powerfull AI is a bad thing.

I'd settle for a Pirates! like update. (Haven't tried getting it to run since I upgraded my Win 98 SE box.) Really, MoM was incredible -- top 10 game of all time material, easily.

I would also prefer they work on a official successor to master of magic as opposed to their own title. Why?

SD is a great game developer and one of the best in the bussiness, but IMHO, Simtex/ Microprose were unrivaled in their ability to create fun games. They had this talent of throwing around all sorts of crazy game breaking abilities creating infinite re-playability. Games such as Moo, MooII, Master of magic etc...

Sd's game design is generally more restrained. it's the difference between say the race abilities in GalcivII, where each customized ability isn't really something new, but just more of the same adding X% , and in Moo II where abilities could change the way you played the game

E.g

Creative- And gain all 3 teach, uncreative, computer randomly picks one tech and normal, you pick only one tech.

Or Lithvore- And you no longer needed food. Or cybernatic, and you needed half food/ half production per colonist

Or Telepathic , or stealthy ships (doesn't appear on enemy scanners, so they can't see you coming)even good old trans dimensional, was not just +speed to ship but also had the interesting quirk of being immune to hyperspace flux that grounded all other races.

Or take the tech tree. GalcivII has a solid weapon/defense system, but IMHO it was boring. Laser I, II, III etc, just standard improvements. No need to think that put in the best laser if beams is your choice.

In MooII, there was different weapon mounts (heavy, autofire, Armor pericing etc), Stellar convertors that could blast planets, neuron beams that affected crew, plasma weapons that hit all 4 shields, disrupter cannons that were not affected by range dissipation etc. Not to mention defenses such as Static fields that froze ships, time warps that gave you extra turns, cloaking devices, Plasma webs etc.

Master of magic I think went further even than MooII (altough the former predated the later) in creating this crazy amount of wildness, it would be interesting to see how SD would interpret a MOM style game. Would they neuter it, and turn it into a game much like Age of Wonders which was bland.

I would prefer that SD adopt for MOM II, the microprose game design philisophy, rather than the standard SD game design. Much of the favour of MOM comes exactly from the fact that there was indeed a diverse number of game breaking spells and abilities.

Playing 11 book life strategy was totally different from playing one that keyed off Warlord + Life (for crusade) + Halfling
or one based solely on Death + dark rituals + regenerating trolls. Or How about the good old Artificer + runemaster combo to build cheap artifacts and break them for 50% more mana than you put into them if you needed it?

Was any of them really balanced? Who knows? It was fun. And there was no MP anyway, so no one cared. Since GalcivII has no MP, MOMII could easily have no MP either.

I guess a problem for SD is that in galactic civilization II, each of the races weren't exactly that different, so they could work off a base AI, and tweak each one slightly for each race. God knows how they could handle this for a game like MOM, with diverse strategies.

And Brad probably understands Galciv II deeply, so he can write good AI. But for a crazy game like MOM, it would be a lot harder to figure out .....

For sure a MOM II by SD would have all the hallmarks of a SD game, brillant AI, few bugs etc. If they keep to the basic MOM design , and resist the temptation to remake it into a 'famastic civilization' game, I bet they will make a game that will be unrivaled in history.

Imagine the basic Master of Magic design, updated with 3d models of Gal civilization II, with excellent Ai of GalcivII , and lot of bug fixes.....

Game of the year? More like Game of the *decade* material!

There is only two companies that have the expertise to make a MoM2 : Firaxis and Stardock. In my opinion, GalCIV2 is superior to Civ IV, so my preference is for Stardock]

Personally I feel that of the two Firaxis more closely captures the spirit of Simtex/ Microprose game design philosophy,
and in terms of UI design SD IMHO is more technically sound though with regards to stability and AI.

-tactical combat. -tons of types of attacks(not just 1-4), like different elements and different attacks that can hit or not hit other types of units. -units have tons of different stats and abilities. -heroes have a major impact on the game. -each race is extremely unique. -wizard customization makes the game so different, each time you play it. theres are over 100 units and over 500 spells in mom and over a few dozen decent types of wizards you can customize and try out.

Actually there are 200+ spells not 500. But each spell was unique not like in many games, where you have icebolt, firebolt, stone bolt which basically did the same thing. But I agree with the rest. I think the wizard customisation thing was the most brillant thing about Master of magic. Even Master of Orion II which came later didn't match it.

The only game that might match MOM is Dominions II, but it has no tactical combat, it has tons of spells 500+, but they seem to lack something, it was also overly complicated for my tastes.

To be frank Dominions II feels like the kind of game SD would make if they tried to create a brand new fantasy title.

Age of Wonders 2: Shadow Magic was a good game in the spirit of MoM. The town sieges, large assortment of units, ability to use conquered races, multiple hero development, and cool selection of spells made for a fun game.

IMHO AOW SM came close but not close enough. There was far fewer strategies available, because there were fewer spells about 100+ versus 200+ in MOM, (and AOW spells tend to be less powerful and didn't have an impact on the game as MOM spells) and the starting Wizard's ability was fewer and more blend. If memory serves even abilities you didn't pick could be researched later, so your choice wasn't that important.

And the empire building feel in AOW SM was a lot less.

For those with problems of starting MOM you can use doxbox. It works like a charm with sound/music etc.

now I know I will be showing my Age but what about the old SSI game Sword of Aragorn. It was a pretty good game. It really allowed for custom units and stuff Its just too bad its not so expandable.

The magic system in MoM was indeed inspired by Magic: The Gathering.

This is incorrect and a common misconception about Master of Magic. MoM, was released in 1994, while Magic: The Gathering was released one year earlier. However, even back in the day it still took at least 2 years for development, thus the ideas that the magic system in MoM were based on would not have logically come from ripping off the ideas in M:TG. To further rebut this urban gaming myth, I recall reading a review and interview with one of the devs at SimTex after the game's release where someone asked this specific question (if MoM had indeed swiped a few ideas from M:TG) and they flatly denied having even known anything about M:TG when they were crafting MoM's design.

Just wanted to clarify for anyone out there who still might care about this. LOL

Stardock should get the rights for MoM II. Go Stardock

The magic system in MoM was indeed inspired by Magic: The Gathering. This is incorrect and a common misconception about Master of Magic. MoM, was released in 1994, while Magic: The Gathering was released one year earlier. However, even back in the day it still took at least 2 years for development, thus the ideas that the magic system in MoM were based on would not have logically come from ripping off the ideas in M:TG. To further rebut this urban gaming myth, I recall reading a review and interview with one of the devs at SimTex after the game's release where someone asked this specific question (if MoM had indeed swiped a few ideas from M:TG) and they flatly denied having even known anything about M:TG when they were crafting MoM's design. Just wanted to clarify for anyone out there who still might care about this. LOL

Magic was in Beta a year before it was released and it was very public at that time.

Sammual

Yup, I agree. I don't think much of Civ4, in fact I've uninstalled it. High on graphics, a great in-game map editor, and after that, nothing that Civ3 didn't do better. As for MoM, I still play it on an old P2 with Win98. Sound is not good, but so what. What I like is that it's complex, but not TOO complex; no frills, just a darn good play. The manual is good and the strategy guide is excellent (they don't make 'em like that anymore, IMO). MOO1 was very good too, and MOO2 wasn't bad, I still play both. Fallen Haven is another good turn-based classic I still play occasionally. I don't think Firaxis will go for another MOM, but Stardock might. I hope.

actually if you added conjurer to artifcer + runemaster, you can make magic items for 50% of their break cost value, effectively with a little mana, you could make magic items to break them to build you up faster to massive magic items, effectively making the best possible magic items in the game and equiping your heroes with them, mixxed with other possible things like sorcery 5 lets you make magic items that also have special properties on one of the four slots on the magic item, this one being immunity to magic.

This is what made MOM so great because there was so many different possibilities, that even those who love the game often didn't explore every single possibility, and yes, there is a definite difference between playing a life 11 human (best unit palidan), a halfling artificer + runemaster + conjurer, a 11 death mage with gnolls, to a 7 green mage with a myrran & alchemy with trolls....

There was so much variance that even with a poor AI, tbe game was a tremendous hit, also there was definite things that were tough about the game, some of the monsters in lairs were extremely dangerous, I lost a really powerful hero, and decided to live with it......

Probably most people who know about MOM know from experience why it is so good, and why it has not really in reality gotten a proper remaking...... To remake it properly you cannot destroy the complexity.

The age of wonders was okay, but its not really on par to MOM imho..... Its possible that a remake of MOM 2 would suck, simliar to MOO3, what a travesty....

just because there is a huge fanbase for MOM, its very possible to not understand the things that make MOM so engrossing and replayable....

Please for all things holy whoever makes MOM 2, don't make it a MOO3

why not just make a clone then? come up with enough of your own original ideas to avoid legal issues. There is no need to ressurect a dead franchise especially since the rights are not easy to obtain. build your own game universe and make it famous instead!

Check your facts. Conjurer does nothing (only affects summoning spells).

Far from true, IMHO.

In Hunt Valley alone (where Firaxis is located), there are three other companies that have enough programmers and designers from the glory days of Microprose that I'm pretty sure that any of them could pull it off.

In addition, Steve Barcia is still in the industry.

Having said that, I'm sure that Brad and company will do an awesome job.