Quoting Xenove, reply 74

I hope that I won't need to buy a gamepad just to play the game "the way it was designed to".... It's keyboard or mouse or combo for me.

Before you know it they will be wanting me to buy an Xbox to play a game "the way it was designed to play".

The next step then we will all be required to buy an Oculus rift or something..... and then sell our souls.... oh wait... I already sold mine when  joined the Founders program   .

 

Quoting Hunam_,

reply 70

SPAZ had it right with the mouse controls, but I'd rather play the game using gamepad.

 

Yes SPAZ had good controls. NO! no gamepads please.....

Logitech F310 - $15 on ebay shipped. That's what I used with FIFA. If you could afford $100 game, you can afford $15 gamepad.

Sorry I reserve all my money for buying games.... I am a game (w)horder........ but true that is no excuse for not getting a game pad.... but as I said before, I do move a lot and I would rather not have to drag around a game pad from place to place to play SC.

I want to have all I need to play games with my notebook and trusty 2 hands (and maybe a mouse for some games)..... don't really want to add a game pad.

But I will wait and see to pass judgement on that. Maybe this game will finally make me buy one... who knows...

Here is an open question...

Would SC3 iso combat have been better if the engine was capable of spinning the viewpoint with the ship?

Current: Your ship would turn if you hit A/D, but your view would remain fixed. 

Proposed: Your ship would always face forward, but the view would turn if you hit A/D.

^ It would obviously be better since all you had to do to aim is line up enemy ship vertically "above" yours (assuming your ship faces up on the screen).

Precisely what I proposed on the first page of the thread.

I know. I thought it would be useful to discuss that specifically.

I would really hate that.  That would be a completely different thing.  I would definately prefer it work like Subpace, SC, Asteroids... really every game like this I know of.

EDIT:  I had to think about this for a while before responding.  The problem I have here is that I can't remember ever having played a game that works like this.  Normally I can speak authoritatively on most issues within this genre because I have literally wound up making a life-long study of it and have an tremendous amount of experience within it.  But in this case, I actually have no real experience to draw upon.  So all I can do is envision this, play it it my mind.  After doing this for a little while, these are the potential problems I think might exists, but this is more theoretical that fact, all I can do in this case is play it in my mind and and try to envision this.

1) It seems too me that this would feel like space was the thing that was moving, and that the ship was stationary.  Apparently this is a good way to think about transwarp beaming, but it doesn't seem like a good way of playing a game.

2) I see spinning.  Lots and lots of spinning.  Not only is space the thing that is moving, it never stops spinning.  This would be disorienting and might even make people dizzy.

3) I am pretty sure the first two things would combine to destroy the Pattern Recognition Addiction effect.

This is what I see envisioning playing this in my mind.  I don't think I would like this at all.

I agree.   I don't mind the engine being 3D.   I just like the TOP DOWN view aspect because it makes a great gaming experience for me.

Civilization 3 for example uses 3D but at the end of the day,  I prefer playing in their "Strategic Mode" view.  Where the map is FLAT with hex.  I can easily get a better understanding and viewing of the game.  In some perspective view 3d, you're always like trying to figure out what's behind that.  What's blocking it. etc.  

Having a full camera control is cool for 'recording' a You Tube video of you blasting the other ship away.   But as far as practical game play.  TopDown camera mode is the most ideal way to get situational awareness.

While I agree with much of what has been said in this thread about the camera view, I gotta ask: am I the only person who isn't too invested here? I see people here speaking as though it's the combat that made SC great. IMO the combat was mediocre; it was everything else that was awesome.

I don't know if it's a PERFECT example, but since we're still only dealing with 2 planes of movement (unless I missed something), the system in place with an option for (3rd person) camera might actually be akin to something like World of Tanks or World of Warships. I don't know if you've played either of these titles (or *sigh*...War Thunder), but these actually have pretty solid camera systems that I was even going to use for my own SC-like at one point. 

I am always at least looking at different games, but there are games I play for a long time too.  Recently I played WoT for about 2 years, then replaced that with Path of Exile as my "main game".  My "take a break from the main game" game (which is usually some type of FPS, like Team Fortress for many years) has been Faster Than Light for the last few years (and I will probably play this little SFB SSD meets Nethack inspired game for the rest of my life).  And, most recently, since it was resleased I have been trying to squeeze in as much World of Warships in as I can in between Path of Exile and Faster Than Light to work my way up to some Tier 8/9 ships.  

So yes, I have actually played a lot of WoT and WoWS.  And I like both of these games a lot.  But when I go to play them, it is because I am wanting to play an FPS game.  For me, I have basically replaced FPS with WoT and WoWS for the last few years.  Too me, they are the same thing, although I understand they are actually very different types of games.  When I turn on one of those games, it's because I want to "see the world through a straw" and play a first person game.  I like these kind of games, and they are what am wanting to play when I go to play them.  Similarly, when I want to see from "gods view", which is my personal favorite view, then I would turn that game on again.  If it existed.  Which it hasn't for a very long time:-(

I have to say, if you are playing WoWS I think I can help you.  99% of people don't know what they are doing in that game.  It's very rare to see someone "who understands", but there are a few others out there that I have seen.  A very few.  Try this... Instead of turning broadside to the enemy because that's what you've seen in the movies, or directly towards them, because you think that makes you a hard target... try what real world naval captain's actually do.  You heard Picard say it once in a TNG episode, "present minimal aspect to target".  This doesn't mean to point right at them, like it sounds, it means to point as much as you can at them while keeping the primary guns in arc.  Run away at the same angle.  This makes you a very hard target, an even harder one than if you point directly at them, and keeps all your guns firing all the time.  Very few people in that game do this, if you do it you should immediately notice a big difference in how well you are doing.

That's Piracy 101! (And I mean the ocean going kind). The following technique has worked from games like Legionnaire (the ocean combat parts), to Sid Meir's Pirate to other similar games.

Always the best tactic that can even defeat larger vessels.

Try to minimize the enemy's firing arc while maximizing yours.

Works best if you have an agile ship with fast turning and an enemy that follows you stupidly (most AI I have seen).

They follow you in straight line. Veer a little to one side and the enemy follows suit.

Turn more sharply to present your full broadside and shoot. Since the enemy is sailing towards you, you can get the extra edge on range.

The enemy will try and shoot back by turning more to that one side.

But by then you would have corrected your sailing direction to minimize your exposure to only the aft of the ship.

Plus sailing away means that the enemy' shot will fall out of range.

At this stage the enemy will then try to catch up again.

At that moment you sharply turn to the opposite side and rinse and repeat.

Yes, most of the primary surface ship tactics are hundreds of years old and have applied to naval combat from the days of three masted "ships of the line" to the present day.

And that part about "if the enemy is stupid enough to follow you" is you recognizing the effect of what SFB players call "The Kaufman Retrograde", which I have mentioned here before.

Link to the Vaelzad quote... https://forums.starcontrol.com/475890/page/1/#3624579

Well... What can I say to that? I'm open and supportive to new combat styles... but.... I'm losing hope now.

Vaelzad, you need to say, "We promise that you will enjoy playing SCR in top-down view."

That is what you would call it if you played SFB.... since retrograding is only possible in space but over here on earth we would call it a "Parthian Shot" tactic.

*fixed

^ LOL, sure, Hunam.

Basically, Vaelzad, you must realize that we are all here to play an improved version of SC1/2. The combat mechanics were the memorable experience. I am one of the founders willing to embrace the new angles, but even I am still going to want to play the game in top-down mode most of the time. It is okay to fix things like screen warping, zoom levels, and turning smoothness. It's okay to add things in like extra planets or more viewpoint options. It's okay to give us new ships and new aliens.

But...

If you can't give us a fantastic top-down experience, don't call the game Star Control.

Quoting IBNobody, reply 90

Quoting Hunam_,

reply 84

Quoting Vaelzad,

reply 18

The game is not being tailored to top-down view first and foremost and there has never been any promises that it would be. Even SC2 tried to fake depth perspective in multiple views. The game's combat is being tailored to what is going to make it fun to play. 

 

Link to the Vaelzad quote... https://forums.starcontrol.com/475890/page/1/#3624579

 

Well... What can I say to that? I'm open and supportive to new combat styles... but.... I'm losing hope now.

 

Vaelzad, you need to say, "We promise that you will enjoy playing SCR in top-down view."

We promise that you will enjoy playing SCR in whichever view you decide you like to play it from best. We will not show favoritism to one view playstyle or another. 

Everyone keep in mind that you are all jumping to a lot of assumptions based on a very short video. You have not had controls in your hands, you haven't played it yet. (I know, I know, you guys want to and you will in the future, can't disclose when yet.) I will say I absolutely abhorred SC3 combat compared to SC2 or SC1. I will promise you that the combat for Star Control will not play like Star Control 3 and it will be a fun experience. 

I was concerned more with your follow-up posts to the video and not the video itself. This one is getting better.

What might help is if you told us what you didn't like about Star Control 3's combat and how you plan on addressing it.

Quoting IBNobody, reply 90

Quoting Hunam_,

reply 84

Quoting Vaelzad,

reply 18

The game is not being tailored to top-down view first and foremost and there has never been any promises that it would be. Even SC2 tried to fake depth perspective in multiple views. The game's combat is being tailored to what is going to make it fun to play. 

 

Link to the Vaelzad quote... https://forums.starcontrol.com/475890/page/1/#3624579

 

Well... What can I say to that? I'm open and supportive to new combat styles... but.... I'm losing hope now.

 

Vaelzad, you need to say, "We promise that you will enjoy playing SCR in top-down view."

You know, up until this post I thought you were Brad Wardell:-)  Th name, the early account date, a lot of the things you said... Guess not, though:-)

This has to be the best thing you could have possibly said...

Oh, phew, saved my life.    

Actually there is much more to the retrograde than the Parthian Shot tactic.  It would be more accurate to say that the Parthian Shot tactic works because of the retrograde.  The concept of the retrograde actually applies to most forms of combat, even in 3D.

Lol. I am not an employee of Stardock, nor have I ever been. I have this old account because I was a fan during the GalCiv days.

Plus, Brad is nicer than I am.