Volusianus

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="19" id="3616234"] ^ Trine 2 with $1.8M budget. [/quote] My mistake, I was looking at Trine 3's budget.

Remember that Conversation screens will take up maybe 35% of your time in this. After all, this is in the spirit of Star Control 2, not SCNot3 :P. Trine 2, with a $5.4 million budget really only had to deal with 1 series of game systems, and could therefore splurge on environment assets because...that was almost the entire game. Star Control, on the other hand, is a series of complex systems that each need as much love and care allotted to each of them.

[quote who="Kissamies" reply="79" id="3616016"] Not being canon doesn't mean that it isn't a game that existed and from which another, unrelated game series lifted story elements. Of course, I might also be wrong and there might be some other sci-fi story that is the source for both of them. It sort of sounds like one of those classic 'answer to the Fermi paradox' stories so I wouldn't be surprised. [/quote] Well, I mean, they lifted the st

Wait, SCNot3 is not canon. Like, that's 100% established that it's not canon.

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="48" id="3615926"] Not to rain on anyone's parade, but I stopped playing F:NV after about 40 hours, 'cause one of the "important" side quests got broken due to some other quest being completed earlier than intended. I didn't have an older save and replaying 40hr of the same grindfest was just too annoying. Enjoying F4 right now. Probably will retry F:NV after it. [/quote] Yeah, the first month of NV's release was just

[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="25" id="3612263"] First off, I want to make a post about Fallout IV and Rebel Galaxy. They had the same main, core problem for me. They both did away with ANY sort of interesting quests, and instead devolved into a shoot-fest for every single quest. And people won't understand if they never played the original Fallouts and maybe even New Vegas. But Fallout four didn't have one quest that involved for than "Go here and murder everything there" and th

I'd be okay with the environments around the creatures not being 100% 3D as long as it looks believable, like the leader scenes in Civ 5 (which, iirc, were very rarely completely 3D).

Yup. Don't worry, we'll have this conversation again. And again. And probably again, but maybe not a xth time. (Totally on the zth time, though.)

I have to admit, seeing the Mukay move made me squee. I'm fairly certain the sounds I made were not human.

Most Casual* games. I design games myself, I understand the man behind the curtain. The fact that death in a game is nothing more than a mild inconvenience is a problem. [quote who="IBNobody" reply="54" id="3614981"] They are games. They may not have hours of mindless killing in between the cut scene segments, but they offer a narrative just like many other games do. I'm including them, and you're going to have to live with it. [e digicons]:P[/e

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 ending was ruined by time constraints that more or les

It just seems whiny to me to complain just because you lost. 40+ is so light. Completion isn't as important as substance within completion. Substance > all else. And losing is part of that formula, or you're better off not gaming at all.

I feel like the majority of PC gamers do, yes. And I mean people who actively spend significant amounts of money to play games on PCs, not people who happen to play games on a PC, that distinction is important.

Majority Fallacy: "That the largest m arket segment is the most lucrative is a mistaken belief leading to this type of strategic error. Due to intense rivalry among a large number of competitors it may be the least profitable one in reality." Take majority out of the discussion.

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="38" id="3614708"] I'm curious, though, if you ever played an RPG other than SC2, got a losing ending the first playthrough, and replayed it. [/quote] Yup, several times, actually. I've replayed Fallout several times despite "losing". Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Day of the tentacle. Even the original X-Com could be loosely included, and e

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="29" id="3612867"] Quoting Hunam_, reply 26 It doesn't, but it does from a Grand Tale standpoint. I guess I forgot to mention that. Aren't all games designed in a way that dev expects player to play?.. Besides that, how are you going to know that you're gonna get a "deaded

I actually really enjoy the Steam controller. However, I can't stand most controllers in general (hence why my go to for ports that require controllers is a ps4 controller. I don't even own a PS4 XD). However, in regards to Star Control, I'd hope there's at least SOME form of controller support, since SC1 and 2 both had joystick support.

I ended up getting the Dev Kit 2 this past summer. I honestly don't think SCR would be a good fit unless they somehow incorporate it into dialogue (which I would not be against by any means :P).

Well, my general rule of thumb is that for every USD I spend on a game, I should get a minimum of 1 hour of content. Obviously this doesn't apply to every game and genre, but it's safe to assume that this could apply to Star Control. Sandbox games have tendency to meet or exceed this ratio, which is perfectly fine. That means I never feel like I've wasted my money on the purchase. Especially considering that this Star Control is supposed to have full blown expansions AND dlc, that

That's because movies and tv shows aren't necessarily made to be immersive, they're made to be exciting. I don't know about you, but when I play Star Control, I want to feel immersed. I feel like a lot of you are looking at fetch/fedex quests at face value, rather than what could be done to make them subtle. Quests don't need to be so 1-dimensional, and I think Stardock knows this. I think that quests are best when you mix several of these types together. HOWEVER you will

Eh, Mad Maxe's war camps may have had unique layouts, but you cleared them all in exactly the same way. Absolutely nothing new in them. And in Bethesda's defense YOU try making unique dungeons when you're using essentially the same engine for 13 years :P But I get your point. However, I feel like having optional fetch quests isn't necessarily a bad thing. Obviously have some sort of indicator that it isn't a main plot quest in the interface (such as

[quote who="SavageMind1" reply="9" id="3611856"] Well I think the differences between the Genre of Fallout Series and Star Control Series is what will make the difference. I liked in SC2 you could avoid combat for the most part unless its scripted in. The FO series is very difficult to avoid combat especially if you can't fast travel to a destination. This makes fedex missions almost not worth it at times. SC series has regenerating power and ammunition vs FO which does no

I must have misinterpreted the prompt, because I thought this was just speculation of how it would start based on the information provided.

[quote who="Xenove" reply="17" id="3611498"] snipped for brevity [/quote] ^ I don't think you understand, they've already established that it's starting before SC1's timeline, RIGHT as Earth reaches the stars. I think that's one of their sticking points, iirc from the document.

I feel like fetch and fedex quests in the early stages of relationships with new species have a very distinctive narrative purpose. Obviously you don't want too many in the game. However, this could be a way of convincing the players to go in a direction they might not otherwise go. "There's nothing there, why would I go there?"