cuorebrave

[quote who="Vaelzad" reply="54" id="3634440"] Quoting IBNobody, reply 52 Will we be able to edit the campaign to strip out many of the filler worlds? I would play a "just-the-good-stuff" mod. But it's all good stuff. [e digicons]X([/e] [/quote] IBNobody,

[quote who="Volusianus" reply="20" id="3632741"] Quoting cuorebrave, reply 16 I don't mean resource placing. I mean the interesting planets were hand-made. Destroyed cities, items to pick up, aliens to meet, mysteries to find out. I don't want Stardock to keep making new worlds/systems to find a we

Well, scientists DO say that the universe never ends, but is more... ROUND. So that when you go to what would be the "end", you're actually just following it AROUND. Which would be a sweetass way for Stardock to do it - if it was a concept humans could actually wrap their minds around... :P

I don't mean resource placing. I mean the interesting planets were hand-made. Destroyed cities, items to pick up, aliens to meet, mysteries to find out. I don't want Stardock to keep making new worlds/systems to find a weapon +1, shield +3, just for the sake of having more planets to explore. If it's curated content, with a purpose, then keep it! Once that's exhausted, though, it's time to stop. It's a hard type of concept for

I think the question of "How big is too big?" is answered when it stops being a personal experience, hand-designed by the creators of the game. I don't really want a million planets to land on with procedurally generated weapon/ship-part pickups. I don't want to land on planet 340 and get a Starshot Laser which does 40dmg, which is awesome and new and unique... only to then land on planet 1070 and get a Starshot Laser +1 that does 50dmg. That's not enthralling to me. I don't w

This is the first update that, albeit short and late (lol), really blew me away. I mean... every single page had something I loved on it. Something I truly loved and truly made me a believer that Stardock is on the right track. It's quirky, it's fun, while also dealing with serious issues. That's my favorite kind of stories to tell! Serious stuff, but in a fun way.... like Kingsman if anyone's seen it! So, for starters, This Month's New Alien is PERFECT! I mean, ra

Okay, since my spam firewall blocks Starcontrol.com as Pornography still, I can't access any of this from my computer at work (where I do all my good, lazy, day-dreaming!), UNLESS I subscribe to a post on my phone, and then access the post from my Subscriptions, which goes through Stardock.com instead of Starcontrol.com..... does that make sense? I wanted to post that workaround in case there's anyone else that has the same problem! ## Planet Critters ##

Rock, Paper, Shotgun just did an amazing exposé/think-piece on the beauty of Star Control and what makes it such an incredible game experience. https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/02/15/star-control-ii-retrospective/#more-347263 There are a TON of good points in there, and it's a great read altogether, but the point that stuck out the most is what he commente

First, this post is not about relishing in another company's misery. I just read a report about possible layoffs at Toys for Bob, as a result of Skylanders underperforming in 2015. They cited increased competition from Disney, Amiibo's and others, as well as the casual crowd not making the jump to next gen systems. Layoffs and underperforming games are never to be welcomed, but in this specific situation, it brings up two interesting possibilities: 1) There maybe

[quote who="Dill_rat" reply="1" id="3616525"] As I understand it, components of SC1 and (especially) SC2 will not be returning if their use impinges on the capacity of the original creators to continue the story they began all those years ago. In that light, I think most items on your list would be A-OK as long as their use isn't going to impede the continuation of the story from SC2. Example: Procyon is a star that exists, and the use of the star name itself shouldn

There's like, a ton of confusion still, spanning many, many threads, over what's possibly going to make a return in StarControl reboot, and what's completely off limits. And really, despite this being a founder's program where we get to meet with the developers and interact with them - there's not much of that going on here on the forums. So I was hoping we could get the developers' input on this subject to clear up confusion for some people

See?? 1.8m. StarControl has $5m. $1m of that could go to making those conversation screens as immersive as possible.

Ugh, I know. As soon as a pressed Post Reply, I thought... Well that sounds like Fallout IV, the exact game I'm bashing! I think the difference lies in the fact that... When EVERYTHING weapon you come across is special/can be turned into something special, then NOTHING seems special anymore. I mean, you got friggin power armour in the first 40 minutes of the game. AND killed a Deathclaw! You're supposed to spend 70% of the game figuring out how to do both o

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="58" id="3616121"] ^ I did enjoy Farcry 3 as much as I enjoyed Heroes of Might & Magic 1 & 2, Civilization and new X-Com. I love turn based games. If you wanna know, I tried Fallout 1 when I was about 25-26 and the combat turned me off in it. Dunno. Maybe if I try it again?... [/quote] Fallout 1 & 2 have, to this day, the best death animations in history. I hate gibs. And every single game thinks gibs are so rewarding. But tha

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="13" id="3616120"] ^ So, you'd rather play the game with like 20 guns, but unique ones, 'cause to make 5000 different guns is a pretty massive feat to accomplish?.. I'm not in favor of % stat increase and long ass clunky naming, but in case of Fallout 4 weapons it works and is pretty solid. Reflects the weapon mod "game" nicely too. Remember, you can rename your weapon, so it feels more personal to you. If you're role-player

!!!! You sound like the kids these days! "I hate stats!" "turn based combat is too boring!" lol, you sounded like you play Call of Duty. But you're older than me (34), so you win! And I take back what I said!

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="11" id="3616101"] ^ Irrelevant to main story fluff doesn't need to be "meaningful". You don't want to burden devs with it. Maybe you do if it's EA?... noooo..... Bioware?..... no, no, no...... Blizzard?..... naaaaahhh..... Bethesda?.......... f*ck no. [/quote] Yes, Hunam, I'm talking about your beloved Fallout IV, with its legendary weapons that "boost limb damage by 10%" or "deals 15% more damage to super mutants"!!!!!! Are we allo

... Are you, by chance, very young?

[quote who="Hunam_" reply="52" id="3616096"] Ok. Fallout 4 fun is over. Underground Undercover main storyline quest bugged out. Can't progress. On the shelf it goes until Badthesda fixes this shizz. Only 153 hours in... [/quote] You're insane for playing the boringest Fallout for 157 hours, and the most brilliant (NV) for 0 hours. :P Have you even played the originals?!

I truly, madly, deeply, do not want to see ANYTHING in the game that affects ANYTHING by percentages. Urgk. No thank you. Life doesn't work like that anyway. I don't want to see weapons that shoot 5% faster. I don't want shields with 10% higher capacity. I don't want a bountiful harvest season that gives you 12% more crop yields. It becomes meaningless. And is one of the most boring tropes in gaming. The Civilization games have become one big number crunching pit of despair fo

[quote who="IBNobody" reply="1" id="3612950"] In a separate thread, I thought the game should take 20-30 hours. Cuorebrave replied and said... Quoting cuorebrave, reply 23 As for 20 hours of gameplay? That's crazy talk. Did you really beat SCII in 20 hours? Or were you just referring to the ACTUAL STOR

Going back to the original post... Can I just say? Correct me if it's already been brought up, I haven't read every reply in this massive thread... But holy shit. There's already a perfect solution to everyone's argument about the whole good ending vs. bad ending... It should include slides or short movies, each one showing RACE-SPECIFIC endings based on whether you helped or hindered them. A la ORIGINAL Fallout 1 & 2. Does no one remember those?!? They were some of the mo

[quote who="sendingsignal" reply="50" id="3615989"] oh huh starscape. I hadn't gotten to it yet, the graphics looked janky at a glance. But I think I picked it up in a bundle! I'll give it a shot! [/quote] Graphics are junky, definitely! I hate the art style of the people! Combat graphics are nothing to write home about. But there's something fun about it that scratched my itch!

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. Can't uncode it or translate it, or whatever. And I want it to be in the ruins of some civilization who are gone without a trace. And the artifact, in the DLC, opens up or gets unlocked and sends you on a chase to find out what the hell happened, and how to avoid the same fate. DLC with a story and a

Love the new Mukay and the animation. I understand this is super pre-alpha. But I want to acknowledge one of Stardock's shortcomings that I need to see improved now - including with the Mukay. Conversation screens are, proverbially, where most of the meat of the game lies. And these need to look GOOD. These need to be LUSH. Intricate. Detailed to the max. Completely immersive. All the bells and whistles you could possibly come up with. If the majority of the game's story