Kavik_Kang

And yet, in the end, all you wind up with are some "side quests" for evil conversation options. It's a wonderful "glorious vision", but in the end, it's really just half-a-dozen side quests. That's how it actually works out in the end. I would rather see a single story carrying you through an amazing arcade game. I would rather see them focus on that than spend a lot of time writing two different versions of the story and the "evil" version's associat

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="36" id="3617983"] Quoting Kavik_Kang, reply 35 I don't know of any RPGs with these types of multiplayer zones... I don't see how it is like an RPG at all. I was agreeing with you, saying that I bought into the founders program for Su

I don't know of any RPGs with these types of multiplayer zones... I don't see how it is like an RPG at all.

I really have to point out here that with "full featured" multiplayer for this genre, 1v1 & 2v2 dueling, base defense, capture the flag, and space hockey... people would be playing this game for many, many years. A lot more people than most would imagine. I have long believed that this is a "lost genre" that has the potential to still be popular today. Only first person shooters rival this genre in their suitability for online play. Top down space combat games are

The reason I don't like the idea of multiple story paths is partly because it makes you want to play through a second time just to see the other storyline you missed, while the game will be pretty much the same thing all over again. But more than that, as someone giving advice during the making of the game, I'd hate to see the devs waste so much time on so little end result. What do you get in the end for making multiple good/evil paths for the story? In the end, in

Its not really a clone, it is a re-boot. A clone is every first person shooter you've played since Doom. Or every RTS you've played since Command HQ (probably too early... so we'll go with) Age of Empires. The computer game industry mostly makes clones. Imitations of past successful games, and they generally stick with the 5 or 6 that sell the best like FPS, RPG, RTS... you know them already. So you'll don't often see more niche games (basical

That sounds similar, except with the hyperskip drive you have no control over it other than to stop moving in which case you would not be cloaked. The ship would "skip" in and out of normal space (it isn't really cloaking, it just has the same effect) 2 or 3 times in the time it took to charge the weapon. So to use the ship most efficiently the player develops a rhythm of how he moves based on the relative position of the ships and when the weapon will be ready to fire again.

As for the earlier subject... Being "retired" from game design I have no problem "giving away" things I once thought of as "my best ideas". For example, making space hockey "on a pinball machine table". 10 years ago I never would have told anyone about that, today... I'd be thrilled to see some of this stuff actually used somewhere so I might as well tell them to people who might actually use them. This subject reminds me of another formerly "secret great idea"..

Oh baby, an actual top down space shooter. I'll be playing this next week:-) In the video you posted he said it is a successor game to "Escape Velocity". Subspace/Continuum that I have mentioned here before was not a commercial game and never intended to be released as one. Escape Velocity was someone elses attempt to make a commercial game like Subspace. It wasn't very good, but this Endless Sky looks interesting.

All you are really talking about is an inertialess drive like the Airlou had in SC2. In these games the design of the ships is very simple. You have thrust, turn rate, and top speed. Most ships have inertia, but you might have one like the Airlou that does not and stops when you let off the thrust. Something similar that I have been wondering is if they will have reverse thrust or not. I think it is better with reverse thrust, with top speed limited to 50% in r

[quote who="HenriHakl" reply="4" id="3616542"] A big question for me is how the ship abilities will be done/recycled. There are a number of common themes and distinct special abilities closely associated with particular aliens. Can new aliens have parallel abilities that are essentially the same? Or will every alien have a unique new set of abilities? [/quote] Some of the ships might be reminiscent of ships from the original in some ways, but

Thinking about this more... In SC2 the satellite ships were "upgraded" by means of giving you a access to a better ship. You start with the nearly useless earth cruiser. You soon get a Spathi, which is actually one of the better ships... which is why you then lose access too it early in the game. This was to give the new player a powerful ship early on to learn, and to handle the probes and khor-ah the player would face early, then taken away so there could be a prog

In SC2 only the mothership ever received upgrades. I could definitely see this new game working the same way in that regard. There really isn't a reason to upgrade the "satellite ships" (what us SFB players call full size ships carried by another ship). Each is unique and designed to work a certain way and have a certain balance too it in relation to the other satellite ships. There is really no need to change them through upgrades, and in fact it would probably be

Yes. That is the whole idea. Each map could be it's own self-contained location somewhere in the galaxy. You might have small maps with a single quest, larger maps with a "campaign" of quests, or even a map as large as the original storyline map. The "warp speed" jumping represented by these maps creates the potential for a :galaxy" of unlimited size... as many "maps' as you want to make is how big the galaxy is.

[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="5" id="3616064"] I want to see DLC have a great story. What I really want is for you to uncover some artifact in the main game. Total mystery. No clue what it does. Never figure it out during the entire game. [/quote] Haha. I acually put something like this into a mod I did of an obscure BBS "door game" called Usurper. The two most expensive things were a "Thingamagig" and a "Whatchamacallit". Neither of them actually did any

A cool post-story thing might be something similar to maps in Path of Exile. You could find star charts that reveal quisispace portals to whole new areas. Sort of maps within the existing starmap that was used for the adventure game. Each would be it's own little self contained quest with a custom map made just for it. Wow. Thinking about this more, this could be a very cool post-story focus. The story could end by sending the victorious captain "on a

It would be a simple thing to arm the different races differently so that they were different. This is just how a true defense works within this genre. A minefield protects the base, defense satellites defend the minefield, and the base defends the area. SFB players call it "peeling the onion" and it lends itself paricularly well to SC where the player has a fleet of unique ships. This would add a lot of depth and immersion to SC, and like I keep saying can be used in

It is something of a tradition within the sci-fi game genre to make references to previous sci-fi fiction and games. Star Trek is the one most often "honored" in games, but most people making these games like to put in many references to past sci-fi that things they liked. SC2 had many of them, just like most other similar games do. I would imagine you'll find some in the new Star Control, too. For example, as a B5 fan I wouldn't mind encountering something b

I'm bored at work and thought I would clarify this a little more. To put this in its most basic and simple terms, this creates a layered defense and any number of layers can be used to create a stronger and stronger defense. The first layer are the "defense satellites", essentially mini-bases. These can be armed with any weapons and used in many ways but defsats meant to be part of a layered defense have fast shooting, fast tracking weapons meant to overwatch/defend the

Yes, "losing" and being able to just load the last save is common in this type of game. A "hardcore" loss that makes you start over from the beginning would make 90% of players quit and not try again.

[quote who="Kissamies" reply="38" id="3615852"] Heh, I know it's going to be earlier era, and recently binge watching a lot of Star Trek: Enterprise probably influences me, but I'd start at somewhere around 2114 or so... [/quote] I'd go with 2112 for the Rush reference:-)

But it is a story driven adventure game. I can't think of any that have been made that you could actually lose and be forced to start over. I like games like that, when they are made and meant to be that way. Like NetHack or Faster Than Light. But an adventure game is about... the adventure. You don't want to interrupt it and make the player start over from the beginning, you want to let them live the adventure you have created for them. </p

[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="55" id="3614987"] Quoting Volusianus, reply 53 It's not believable if there's no way to fail. The entire point of games is to teach us how to deal with consequences in the real world. In the real world, consequences have real weight. Sorry if you can't deal with that. People die,

[quote who="Volusianus" reply="53" id="3614950"] It's not believable if there's no way to fail. The entire point of games is to teach us how to deal with consequences in the real world. In the real world, consequences have real weight. Sorry if you can't deal with that. People die, mistakes are made. Just because you won in a way that satisfied you does not mean there's a happy ending. Fury Road is one of my favorite films of the past 2 decades, but I still feel like the

But they are making a game. Pretty much all high-budget games are made to appeal to the widest audience possible. Many games fail financially, few go into it willing to make something they think will only appeal to a small segment of gamers. The need to appeal to the casual gamer, mass market audience is an overriding factor in most game design decisions. I would love a space exploration game that was like a submarine simulation in spaceships, but I probably won't