Frogboy

[quote who="earthandbeyond" reply="7" id="3717786"] Because there are resources we need to harvest? Because you made it fun to explore? Because in the tutorial alone there's a Lexite site and an alien artifact, and there might be more stuff out there? Seriously, you guys made it fun and profitable to explore and then say don't do it? [/quote] Oh we want you to go there. We just want to make sure you wait until you're ready. ;)

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="3" id="3717918"] Or, hey...maybe some sort of encyclopedia or almanac that gets built as you travel? So it's like, "Yup, been there...and here's what I saw while I was taking the tour!" ...but that might be rather more work than just indicating where you've been. Still, this is ideas and wishes; no harm done sayin' it, right? [e digicons]:)[/e] [/quote] Yep, that's "The Codex" is designed to do.

I am of the growing opinion that we need some sort of hint to when something is off screen. I'm just not sure how best to visualize it. It's something that might have to wait until post-release when there's more feedback.

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="2" id="3718085"] anyway, short version: seems like it’s more useful to have a top down view of your ship as a thumb nail? No, no; that's the opposite! What we have now is a top down view, and that stinks; a kind of isometric, from-both-front-and-above view as a thumbnail would be way better! [/quote] Why would it be better? It seems like it would

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="2" id="3718087"] Well, the idea is to be able to identify it...which is difficult from top-down, sometimes. Ships don't always look like what you built from above. [/quote] In the game the ships are always shown top down. Wouldn't it be easier to view them from that view?

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="2" id="3718145"] And shadows? [/quote] They're in internally but not ready for general availability. Shadows on sphere...hard.

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="578" id="3718612"] "Like SCO uses" comes with complications of its own. 3D models come in a lot of different flavors, so unless there is a converter or unless we can use a fairly easy, commonly-used generic format (like .obj for example), that shan't be much of a solution. I'm told that SCO's model were made in Maya, which I don't have...I'm a 3DS MAXer, myself. And I'm not rich; my copy of MAX is waaaayyyy out of date at this point. So...like I said, with

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="572" id="3718587"] That idea only existed on the premise that Paul and Fred were going to be apart of it. Oh. Drat. Was that ever even a possibility that they were willing to entertain? [/quote] Yes. At the very start, back in 2013, we talked about working together and they talked to the lawyers at Activision who said they could not work on an outside project. [quote] I bet it'd be taken that w

[quote who="bleybourne" reply="571" id="3718584"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 566 And there is nothing preventing them from continuing their story. I'm not defending P&F (you know me better than that) but this is the sticking point that a lot of the P&F fans are getting stuck on, and it ste

[quote]Well, maybe my history is off, but I got the impression that, when Stardock first got their hands on the Star Control series, you guys wanted to do a sequel. Like, "Let's ignore SC3 and pick up where SC2 left off," or something like that.[/quote] That idea only existed on the premise that Paul and Fred were going to be apart of it. Stardock trying to continue the SC2 story would be no more legitimate, IMO, than SC3 from Legend. [quot

[quote who="The FOO" reply="6" id="3716357"] Quoting Frungy_Party, reply 3 Quoting The FOO, reply 1 Sweet! I wanna set i

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="15" id="3715973"] Heh. Most of my ships were designed with precisely that in mind, at least for the player. I have one ship--small but super-fast--with Boarding Party and Heal; it sends wave after wave after wave of troops at the enemy and just replenishes its crew, all the while staying well out of range of any weapon. NASTY little ship, and it's very difficult to lose using it. [/quote]<

Underneath Star Control is CIDER which is our next-generation game engine. This engine uses Nitrous as its core. All the components were designed to be ported and Oxide (the devs of Nitrous) have already begun porting it to Linux and Nitrous already supports Vulkan and DirectX 12. We also have to port the Cider pieces as well and that will also lik

[quote who="Frungy" reply="17" id="3718538"] Win 10 - latest public build 32GB RAM <ul style="color: #f

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="565" id="3718568"] Well, I still say that the real losers in all this are the players, the ones who wanted a proper sequel to SC2. And I find it rather difficult to blame Stardock for not giving us one; I gather they'd love to, were it feasible. [/quote] And there is nothing preventing them from continuing their story. Not being able to market it as a Star Control game unless they

[quote who="tingkagol" reply="563" id="3718565"] I'm sorry, but given Stardock's current stance on what the SC trademark protects, a revised history of events without the announcement "GotP is the direct sequel to SC2" but still announcing a game that has the UrQuan, Spathi, Orz, etc still leads me to believe Stardock will have a problem with it. Perhaps not if 5 years have elapsed from SCO's release? [/quote] We'll never know now. PF are pretty aggressive about

[quote who="shusain1" reply="561" id="3718562"] I think Paul & Fred are creative geniuses and SC2 is may favorite game of all time. But no way I'd help with their legal fees. You can't ask for charity when the objective is to make a for-profit game. Hell, the money isn't even contributing to game development. They should swallow their pride and let Stardock use some of their IP in exchange for Stardock letting them use the SC Trademark. From the impression I get, I think S

[quote who="tingkagol" reply="558" id="3718539"] ...aaand P&F are now asking for money from fans. Seems like Stardock's marathon strategy is working. They need USD 2M. That's. A. Lot. For lawyer fees. IMO, that money should be used to develop the game, not feed the lawyers. It's so sad to see this dispute being won by whichever party has the financial clout. [/quote] What "marathon" strategy? In what world is it unreasonable for a company to

[quote who="BionicDance" reply="8" id="3718426"] Waitwait... "new chapter 1 build"...? So...what about those of us who still only have Fleet Battles? [/quote] Beta 3goes our just after the 4th of July holiday. I thought you had the chapter 1 beta.

New build should be up today(new chapter 1 build).

That is probably the result of the red tape hits from the measured. We have made changes that makes it so that you can always move since.

Grr. I responded to this and nothing showed! anyway, short version: seems like it’s more useful to have a top down view of your ship as a thumb nail?

Yes, that would be a game over scenario I suspect. In this week’s update we are going to have more feedback to warn You about dangerous planets.

[quote who="Frungy_Party" reply="3" id="3715985"] So does that mean there might be an Alpha ZoLu, Beta ZoLu, Delta ZoLu, etc.? [/quote] there could be. I’d have to check. But you’d just search the galaxy file I mentioned to be sure.

This is a good point. But it seems from a usability point of view you want to see how it would look too down wouldn’t you?