BionicDance

[quote]And there is nothing preventing them from continuing their story. Not being able to market it as a Star Control game unless they have a license to do so is not a legitimate obstacle.[/quote] Well, maybe my history is off, but I got the impression that, when Stardock first got their hands on the Star Control series, you guys wanted to do a sequel. Like, "Let's ignore SC3 and pick up where SC2 left off," or something like that. I got that idea from quo

Well, I still say that the real losers in all this are the players, the ones who wanted a proper sequel to SC2. And I find it rather difficult to blame Stardock for not giving us one; I gather they'd love to, were it feasible.

[quote]It's so sad to see this dispute being won by whichever party has the financial clout.[/quote] Especially since they could so easily be giving that money to me. I would gladly accept it. You know...in the name of ending the conflict.

Fulfilled. [e digicons]:rofl:[/e]

Don't go gettin' my hopes up! [e digicons]#:([/e]

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="9" id="3718433"] Beta 3goes our just after the 4th of July holiday. I thought you had the chapter 1 beta. [/quote] I don't. I have Fleet Battles and nothing more. Been kinna waiting--nay, hoping--to have my shoulder tapped ever since the potential was out there, but...

Waitwait... "new chapter 1 build"...? So...what about those of us who still only have Fleet Battles?

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="6" id="3718420"] New build should be up today(new chapter 1 build). [/quote] *poingpoingpoing* [e digicons]:rofl:[/e]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZs39wggIW4[/video]

Yeah, well...that's not quite what I did. In one case, I was more testing hardware than software: they gave me an XBox360, a game, and told me to play all day; if something broke, tell a supervisor. But we weren't trying to break it; we were just playing to see whether the hardware could take it. Sometimes it was the same game all day, sometimes everybody rotated games once and hour. Sure, you might get a really un-fun, craptacular game for the all-day test, but even

[quote]Frogboy is well known for his bee handling[/quote] I...was not aware of that.

Okay, ran a small experiment and, yes, Red Tape caused that twice; not a definitive scientific sample, but, hey... Didn't see it happen with any other weapons, but didn't really try; the more I looked, the more I just saw raging death that would require a lot of testing. ;) The only other weapon I might want to try this on is the whatchacallit...Demotivating Bolt? That it? I can never remember the names of certain weapons. But anyway, its entire function is to make your ship s

[quote]That is probably the result of the red tape hits from the measured.[/quote] I hadn't actually made that connection, but I'll look for it in the future and see. [quote]We have made changes that makes it so that you can always move since.[/quote] Is that-- *coughcough* --in a new build that's coming soon? *puppy eyes*

From time to time--not super often, but often enough to warrant comment--I'll have a ship stop dead in its track...and refuse to move. Nothing I do will make it budge. I can turn, I can fire, but moving forward has ceased to be an option. This ability will be restored as soon as my current, unmoving ship is destroyed, but until that happens, even if I destroy an enemy ship in between stopping and dying (which has happened, but it's not easy), I cannot propel my s

[quote]1.) Need to be able to control the zoom during battle. Best way to do it would be to use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out.[/quote] I must ask...why? If it's because there are objects off-screen that could be a danger, I asked them if they could have danger indicators that point off-screen and they seemed interested. Still, as long as auto/manual zoom is an option, that's cool. [quote]2.) need to hide mouse curser when in battle, its super annoyin

Macs aren't really gaming machines, anyway.

Bees...? Does that mean I should stop getting the mud ring ready?

I think we're all missing the real issue here: who would win in a fist fight, Frogboy or P&F?

Well, the idea is to be able to identify it...which is difficult from top-down, sometimes. Ships don't always look like what you built from above.

[quote]anyway, short version: seems like it’s more useful to have a top down view of your ship as a thumb nail?[/quote] No, no; that's the opposite! What we have now is a top down view, and that stinks; a kind of isometric, from-both-front-and-above view as a thumbnail would be way better!

Cools. :)

Pretty sure he meant the latter.

I realize this would break a bit from tradition, given how it's worked before, but I was wondering whether, in combat, we could have some sort of danger indicators when something is off-screen. I mean, you know how it is: the enemy is really close, you're very zoomed in, not realizing that you're about to run headlong into a drone or reinforcements of something; there's just no way to know about the danger coming your way. I've lost many a ship to a confined, zoomed in view...

When it comes to SC2/UQM, I usually only ask for or look up help when it's like, "What does that ship component do again? I keep forgetting what Dynamo Units do," or "Darn it, I know I went to that one planet where I needed to go after I finished that side-mission...but which one was it again?" So, like, not so much needing help actually solving it; I just had navigation/memory issues.

Well, I've asked a couple of times about that ship of mine that likes to kamikaze itself against the asteroids and that green fog of war, allowing itself to die a miserable death without any assistance with my weapons... ...whassup wi' dat?