Kavik_Kang

I'll add this topic to the Feb release discussion threads. The other thing that was disappointing to me was the mention again that multiplayer would be limited to up to 3v3 dueling. Just dueling means there really isn't a multiplayer side of the game, after the first few months the lobby will always be empty because it will just be a thing people try while playing the full game then forget about when they are done playing the single player game. Dueling alone won&#39

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="14" id="3623340"] Quoting Kavik_Kang, reply 11 As long as a pure top down view is an option, then there is no problem. You will find that the vast majority of players choose the top down option, and those that honestly like 3D isometric view all share one thing in common... they suck at t

As long as a pure top down view is an option, then there is no problem. You will find that the vast majority of players choose the top down option, and those that honestly like 3D isometric view all share one thing in common... they suck at the ship combat part of the game. This very much like a 3rd Person over the shoulder view in an FPS game, it sounds great on paper but nobody actually wants to play that way.

Before I go off on a several page long explanation of why what we used to call a "3D Isometric" view really doesn't work, I'll wait for confirmation that no matter what they decide a pure top down view will still be available. One of the first things I planned to say in that post was that the easiest way to resolve the issue is to make both views available and let the player decide. In multiplayer, players would be forced to play top down or suffer a MASSIVE disadvantage a

I am going to think about exactly how to word what I want to say about the "3D isometric" view for combat shown in this. For now I will just say that one sight of that was why I never even bothered to play SC3. In the next couple days or so I will make a full post about why I think going away from a straight top down view is such a bad idea, but I want to take some time to think of how to word it correctly and try to think of some good examples/comparisons to use to accompany the

[quote who="Mihos233" reply="73" id="3620793"] Quoting Hunam_, reply 70 Considering an "unhealthy" interest of Arilou/Greys in human race, I'd bring significance of human genome forward one way or the other (probably the most valuable trait/the most believable advantage human race has IMO). <br

Aww... No you ruined it for me. I really liked Boltar when I thought there was absolutely no reason or motivation for his evilness. Now you had to go and make it all make sense.

I always liked Boltar from the original Battlestar Galactica. He is just this evil nemesis rubbing his hands together and wanting to destroy all humans other than himself... for no apparent reason at all. Why does Boltar want to exterminate humans? What is his plan? What would he do if he succeeded in wiping out the humans and was the last human left alive? None of it makes any sense at all, which is what makes Boltar so comically great as a villain. He is

I've always liked what Babylon 5 did... put the humans on the side of the bad guys. This also makes "traitors" to the current government the "good guys". I always liked that idea.

I am pretty confident that the new story will in some way revolve around saving the earth, or the human race, or both. Although they are not using the original story, they will be trying to create their own that is just as epic. Your second point is really part of the point I am making. Yes, you can contrive a way to put a 20 year old in command of a starship, but why? What is the point? In only detracts from the story for no purpose. The only reason to d

I started this with a short comment about how I was nsick of seeing 20 year old generals and senators on TV and in movies and it would be nice if characters in this game were an appropriate age for their position. I still think this. Yes, people in their 20's have held such positions in the past... when life expectancy was in the 40's, not the 60's. In the civil war and all prior wars, young high ranking officers were actually common. But then a 40-year-o

There is no situation in which 40-year-old men would follow a 20-year-old kid as their leader. A 20-year-old leader is not believable to the point of being silly. When you start talking about commanding a starship in an effort to save all of humanity... there are simply no words to fully describe how impossible that is. It can't happen, and any story that revolves around a20-year-old starship commander on a mission to save all of humanity is not a story worth reading.</p

20-year-old heroes have become the norm in movies, and it is often laughably silly... like making an academy cadet a captain and giving him command of a starship before he has even graduated the academy. It's so ridiculous that it ruins any story you try and tell from that point forward. Even you would not choose the child... An alien force has invaded the galaxy and you must choose who will lead the fleet to save the Earth and all of humanity from extinction. He

20-year-old heros only exist in movies. In the real world, there is no such thing as a 20-year-old leader. The adults will not only not follow a child, they would actually laugh at the child if the kid thought he should be in charge. 40-year-old men are not going to follow the lead of a 20-year-old kid. On top of that, we are talking about a military navy handing over command of a starship to a child, which is even more ridiculous. This one thing completely rui

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="53" id="3619307"] Its not possible to make a 20-year-old hero believable. Especially not a 20-year-old starship captain, that's just silly. [/quote]

Its not possible to make a 20-year-old hero believable.

[quote who="Xenove" reply="44" id="3619157"] Quoting Kavik_Kang, reply 43 command of a starship over to a 20-year-old who hasn't even graduated the academy yet. No that would not do! But certainly it should be fine if it is a 20 year old something stumbl

[quote who="Awkbird" reply="42" id="3618927"] To use the Star Trek reboot from 2009 (far from a perfect film) as an example, Kirk is thrust into a situation in a very similar fashion to how you become the main character of SC2; you're inexperienced and in over your head, but you take control of the situation and eventually save the day. Part of what makes this kind of an adventure story so compelling is that you're ostensibly a fairly ordinary person in extraordinary

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="165" id="3618906"] Quoting Vaelzad, reply 158 I personally felt that the planetary exploration became tedious after a point. I wish I had a way to skip it once I got closer to end-game. The idea of scanners from a previous thread would come into play here. I&

Space does not have to be a void of nothingness. It can be a patchwork of terrain features and players will be willing to suspend disbelief and accept that as long as the terrain features themselves make sense too them. Terrain features such as asteroid fields/belts, comets, ion storms, plasma storms, various "dust clouds", planets, planet rings, and moons (and possibly "man made" terrain such as a minefield) can all be used to create a structure to space that has never been done

[quote who="Volusianus" reply="8" id="3618597"] This probably falls under "Space Anomalies" but obviously things like IDF holes (possibly using these as shortcuts into Quasi-space). [/quote] The wonderful thing about wormholes in this type of game is that they can take you ANYWHERE. Anywhere you can imagine, a womrhole can take you there. A different galaxy, a different universe, a bunch of X-Wings attacking the Death Star, a wormhole can

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="2" id="3618351"] Pluto must still be counted as a planet. [/quote] I don't understand the debate about Pluto being a planet or an asteroid. Long ago, sci-fi solved this issue... it's a planetoid. A little tiny planet. A planetoid. Sci-fi made up the word, we've got to use it for something. May as well be for this:-)

You forgot Ion Storms, Plasma Storms, and various dust clouds each of which might have varying effects. I haven't brought up "terrain" because fully using terrain in space requires more complex ship designs than SC will have, but they can definitely still use terrain to good effect in this game. I actually have a way of using terrain to create a structure to space that has never existed in any previous game, it was one of my big innovations in space games that never got done

I definitely think you should have some idea of what each planet is generally like just from looking at them on the solar system map. At least it's general type, giving you an idea of how hostile the environment might be. System defenses would hint at some type of life on the planet. I think conveying the most basic and general information about each planet visually is a must have type of thing. You wouldn't want the player to enter every solar system and have

But they are just side quests, that's all it actually amounts too in the end. Playing different factions in an RTS isn't really relevant, its an entirely different thing. This is essentially a text adventure game. There are no separate factions with entirely different unit lineups to work with here, only response choices in an interactive story. In the end, we really are just talking about half-a-dozen or so side quests to support evil responses in the conversa