HenriHakl

The size of the galaxy doesn't inherently matter that much: provided it is clear and easy to steer to story-pertinent locations, then all other stars/places form a quasi "random encounter" type of adventure for exploration and boldly going where none have gone before. Perhaps the question is "how addictive/rewarding is galaxy size when set against the propensity of the average player to OCD explore every single star system that they can reach?"

The nature of how Star Control plays, and the way I suspect Stardock is approaching this reboot, is paying a lot of attention to the world building. But unlike StarCitizen a lot of that effort goes into the fleshing out the aliens and their worlds/empires/cultures - less so around the challenges that might be faced traveling from A to B. While I imagine that there will be some elements that spice up general navigation, I also imagine that most of the "gaming" aspect of the game revolv

[quote who="Volusianus" reply="12" id="3630613"] Quoting Hunam_, reply 11 ^ Those 3 satellite units aren't ships. [e digicons];)[/e] I'm not gonna call them zapsats, but... [/quote] Obviously drones for the queen bee that sits on the space throne

I just wanted to put down, for the record so to speak, so that later I can say "called it": That March Wallpaper, with the yellow space ships flying in front of a brown planet. That middle ship. It looks like a giant space throne. *Somebody* will be sitting in it. You heard it here first...

Smooth turning is the "right" choice for me.

[quote who="Volusianus" reply="56" id="3624075"] Also, Furtado brought up a good point: Why are so many of you dead-set against certain ui-elements being in game when you could have simple toggles for EVERYTHING. This is Stardock we're talking about. Options for their games could be novellas. [/quote] This is generally true - but also keep in mind that the various view modes are differently streamlined mechanically for combat. To make isometric or perspective view pla

Regarding radars vs screen-edge indicators: If we're "just" dealing with classic SC2 style encounters then screen-edge indicators would be fine. However, keep in mind that Stardock indicated that multi-ship combat may very well be in the cards. If you now picture a 5v5 (+projectiles) then using screen-edge indicators will be more confusing than helpful (since there are too many and with at most wishy-washy distance suggestion). In multi-ship combat radar is definitely the

Planets and critters get my thumbs up. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] (in case you thought I wasn't serious)

I'm marginally okay with the perspective for exploration. It isn't great (and given the option I'll use the top-down camera) but it at least it'll give the art team a chance to show-off a little. I agree with the notion that (if in isometric view) that a minimap will be helpful. In general (and especially for inhabited systems) having more exciting things to see and steer towards other than star/planet will be great.

I agree with those that are of the opinion that combat is first-and-foremost a top-down affair. I don't mind an iso-view for exploration. I don't mind a story-view for exploration. And if there are masochists that want to play combat in isometric view then having the option to do so is - I guess - fine; it's a form of freedom of speech (just because you have a rubbish opinion, doesn't mean that I'll stop you from playing isometric Reborn combat). But I feel strongl

Pumped! Psyched!

I can very heartily recommend Grim Dawn. It's just about to get its full release on Steam - but I've been on its early access for a while now. It's a post-apocalyptic ActionRPG with magic and guns. And it's really good.

Different question regarding off-limits: assuming that we're in an alternate universe. Is it possible to have an event where you encounter a single Kzer-Za dreadnought that (as the dialogue reveals) has traveled through some dimensional rift and found itself stranded in this universe. The scenario is fully safe in terms of original universe continuity. A single ship being lost to the original universe generally doesn't alter the course of its history dr

I agree: given the magnitude and pervasiveness of the weapon/special system we're used to from SC2, then if we're not seeing the original aliens, we'll see similar weapon/special systems. The point I'm leading to: if the systems are recycled then it kind of precludes a supermelee that makes all ships available (unless it is deemed okay that similar-but-not-same ships are competing in the supermelee). The original precedent is SC2's supermelee still

It's exceedingly unlikely that SD decide to go "full arcade" (never go full arcade bro!). SD love the original as much as we do. Inertia-based combat is going to be the norm.

[quote who="Xenove" reply="23" id="3616330"] Unfortunately I believe that over half of the budget will go to waste in alien designs that are scrapped because lawyers will deem those aliens to be humanoid (or too similar to SC2 aliens) and therefore in breach of contract. Then another half will be wasted in "fixing" the game because the story line is seen as affecting SC2 continuity. [e digicons]:rolleyes:[/e] [e

I've withheld my vote. I'm not sure what the distinctions are: in SC2 the combat was inertia driven to my understanding (meaning you could accelerate into one direction, then turn around and fly "backward" while shooting at pursuers).

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?

I'm in favor of random events - but not necessarily of the "engineering breakthrough" variety. Instead rather "space" random events that affect everybody equally (barring racial special abilities). For example a form of ion storm that crops up in space - affects navigation and weapon systems; but it does so for everybody in the storm. Other random events can be of the form of random encounters - where a random encounter is not the same as a combat encounter.<

I'm in favor of this kind of thing; if you think about it, the grand finale in SC2 was essentially "this".

I also think it matters a lot what content is added by DLC - for example a DLC may provide a "bounty" quest system (i.e. semi-generic but with meaningful rewards); the amount of time such a DLC adds to the game varies heavily from player to player and even playthrough to playthrough.

I... I could accept that. [e digicons]B)[/e]

I like the new Vault content. That said, I'd also like the tri-count on the Mukay to atleast quadruple - there's definitely no pushing the gfx boundaries with what we've seen (this isn't DoomCry of Duty IX after all) so there's definitely room to make straight lines disappear.

My votes are for "Dota" style supermelee

Well, I'm in favor of the current design. If all else fails Stardock can obviously provide a planetary z-scaling option in the settings that allows you to determine the degree of exaggeration (from current to none). In contrast, I think it is crazy to to demand physics-accurate planets; but also demand aliens that are portrayed grimly realistic, surrealistic, and cartoony zany with exaggerated dimensions depending on the alien. Playing the "StarControl2 did it" card to explain awa