Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Interviews

View
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

16. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 28, 2013, 01:15 eRe4s3r
 
Not yet.. no.. I have been burnt so badly by SOTS2 that I wait for a really really good let's play before even considering touching it...

And from what I hear it isn't doing anything better than MOO2, also it's real time so the AI is even dumber than usual.

But that's only from watching, maybe the game has more to offer.. who knows.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 27, 2013, 17:28 dj LiTh
 
eRe4s3r have you tried Stardrive yet? I'm on the fence on buying it, think i may hold off until it gets a few more updates (and maybe more then a 10% discount). It does look really good however, like a Sins meets 4x Galciv/Moo game.  
Avatar 46370
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 27, 2013, 14:26 eRe4s3r
 
Well of course Master of Orion and Gal Civ did that, but I want new games.. I guess I was being sloppy in expressing that

Also I always thought MOO2 had a late game bog-down situation and GalCiv 2, while interesting first few 50hrs or so, got really repetitive and predictable... but yeah, those 2 games are actually some of my (few) favorite 4x space games I spent more time building ships in Galciv2 than actually playing it though...

I Just think that the genre has been really really stagnant lately, with nobody doing anything to really make a GOOD 4x SP game. To me a sandbox is a cheap cop-out when all it does is degrading to a silly skirmish each and every match, especially when it's not actually random like in SOTS2...

A good 4x imo has a unique start and growth phase every single time. And only few games (like SOTS1) ever managed to do that even half-arsedly ^^
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 27, 2013, 09:40 dj LiTh
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 20:51:
Notice I said purely, I want 4x games that do NOT ever cater to MP. Story, Immersive campaign, that kind of stuff. Of course it doesn't help if the game sucks anyway....

Ahhh my mistake, was late and did a piss poor job of reading... As for immersive campaign i always thought sandbox was more important. GalCiv2 had a campaign of sorts, but ya i dont think it would take much to add one to a sandbox style game with a few scripted events and audio/dialog.
 
Avatar 46370
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 23:49 Prez
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 20:51:
Notice I said purely, I want 4x games that do NOT ever cater to MP...

Didn't the Master of Orion and Galactic Civilization series do that?
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 20:51 eRe4s3r
 
Notice I said purely, I want 4x games that do NOT ever cater to MP. Story, Immersive campaign, that kind of stuff. Of course it doesn't help if the game sucks anyway....  
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 17:32 m00t
 
Flatline wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 16:15:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 12:55:
A couple of good articles. Interesting to hear Julian's thoughts on XCom. Sounds like he had a lot of the same design issues we did. Funny he had trouble finishing it though.

Yeah, adding multiplayer to a story-driven single player game makes no sense. I can see multiplayer in a sandbox style game like Skyrim, maybe, but even there totally unnecessary.

Yeah good interview. I don't think the changes he was talking about would have degraded the game or made it less popular. Pseudo-random maps (bricks of pregenerated buildings put together, and set missions can be hand-designed). The Satellite system was weird. You could easily game it pretty hard, especially mid to late game, deploying satellites where needed only when terror levels hit certain heights. I miss selling stuff you manufacture. Badly. In the beginning you're so cash starved that selling off a few extra gizmos you make would be alluring, not to mention once you get a set of plasma weaponry there's no point in having lasers any more. My first game was a disaster because I built ten laser rifles, figuring to keep 5 and sell 5, and realized to my horror that I didn't have the ability to sell my weapons!!!

Multiple bases (or at least outposts with a main base- you farm out troops to the outposts) would have made losing your troops less painful, since you could train/transfer around troops.

Random, agenda-driven aliens would have been kickass.

And finally, I wanted to see other environments. Snow, desert, jungle, a terror mission in a favela, where your plasma weaponry was especially destructive, would have been awesome.


Yeah, I felt pretty much the same way. They could have maybe formalized some of the strategies that developed from the original. Instead of actually building and then selling mfg'd stuff, you could just set the production to produce money at a certain rate based on your tech level instead of having to micro-manage it. That's the kind of efficiency and improvement I'd like to see on the original. Not gutting major features to replace them with pretty but very thin veneers.

Expand and polish the interesting elements of the original, basically. Less cop-outs and weak design.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 17:17 dj LiTh
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 09:45:
I wish someone would make a 4x game that is purely SP... all the 4x games suck because they don't have any dynamic enviroment, scaling challenges, and proper story/immersion....

And I am of course glad that CD Projekt does pure SP games, ME3 was a travesty in certain aspects because of the (weird) forced MP focus...

4x multiplayer games? Are we talking about the same 4x here?
 
Avatar 46370
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 16:15 Flatline
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 12:55:
A couple of good articles. Interesting to hear Julian's thoughts on XCom. Sounds like he had a lot of the same design issues we did. Funny he had trouble finishing it though.

Yeah, adding multiplayer to a story-driven single player game makes no sense. I can see multiplayer in a sandbox style game like Skyrim, maybe, but even there totally unnecessary.

Yeah good interview. I don't think the changes he was talking about would have degraded the game or made it less popular. Pseudo-random maps (bricks of pregenerated buildings put together, and set missions can be hand-designed). The Satellite system was weird. You could easily game it pretty hard, especially mid to late game, deploying satellites where needed only when terror levels hit certain heights. I miss selling stuff you manufacture. Badly. In the beginning you're so cash starved that selling off a few extra gizmos you make would be alluring, not to mention once you get a set of plasma weaponry there's no point in having lasers any more. My first game was a disaster because I built ten laser rifles, figuring to keep 5 and sell 5, and realized to my horror that I didn't have the ability to sell my weapons!!!

Multiple bases (or at least outposts with a main base- you farm out troops to the outposts) would have made losing your troops less painful, since you could train/transfer around troops.

Random, agenda-driven aliens would have been kickass.

And finally, I wanted to see other environments. Snow, desert, jungle, a terror mission in a favela, where your plasma weaponry was especially destructive, would have been awesome.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 16:01 SectorEffector
 
Proudfoot wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 10:03:
It was worse with the new Tomb Raider. Multiplayer, really? And all DLC post release is for multiplayer only... REALLY?

Not sure what this 90's fascination is with adding 'deathmatch' stuff to a game just to try and have it linger longer in the sales area. Just give us a good game and some mod tools and the game will sell for years.

this.

I remember mapping in the build engine till 2001 or so, before I moved on compltely to Unreal and other BSP based engines.

Putting blood enemies in duke 3D with powerslave's weapon sprites....... ahhh the days

 
Avatar 55456
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-Q2iICtlIc
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 12:55 jdreyer
 
A couple of good articles. Interesting to hear Julian's thoughts on XCom. Sounds like he had a lot of the same design issues we did. Funny he had trouble finishing it though.

Yeah, adding multiplayer to a story-driven single player game makes no sense. I can see multiplayer in a sandbox style game like Skyrim, maybe, but even there totally unnecessary.
 
Avatar 22024
 
"It's just a bunch of mystic bovine scatology to me." - 1badmf
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 11:03 Verno
 
Proudfoot wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 10:03:
It was worse with the new Tomb Raider. Multiplayer, really? And all DLC post release is for multiplayer only... REALLY?

Not sure what this 90's fascination is with adding 'deathmatch' stuff to a game just to try and have it linger longer in the sales area. Just give us a good game and some mod tools and the game will sell for years.

I didn't really care about the multiplayer mode for Tomb Raider, the game felt very complete without it. The DLC thing is annoying but honestly I see very little DLC worth its price of admission in general and most of that is for RPGs.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: South Park, Dark Souls 2
Watching: Enemy, Network, Wer
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 10:03 Proudfoot
 
It was worse with the new Tomb Raider. Multiplayer, really? And all DLC post release is for multiplayer only... REALLY?

Not sure what this 90's fascination is with adding 'deathmatch' stuff to a game just to try and have it linger longer in the sales area. Just give us a good game and some mod tools and the game will sell for years.
 
Avatar 17200
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 09:45 eRe4s3r
 
I wish someone would make a 4x game that is purely SP... all the 4x games suck because they don't have any dynamic enviroment, scaling challenges, and proper story/immersion....

And I am of course glad that CD Projekt does pure SP games, ME3 was a travesty in certain aspects because of the (weird) forced MP focus...
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 09:32 Verno
 
nin wrote on Apr 26, 2013, 09:31:
CD Projekt RED: "There is no place for multiplayer in so strongly a story-driven game as The Witcher 3".

Glad that the SP story is the focus. Too many games tack on multi at the expense of SP.



Agreed, glad they aren't pulling a Mass Effect 3 here.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: South Park, Dark Souls 2
Watching: Enemy, Network, Wer
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Morning Interviews Apr 26, 2013, 09:31 nin
 
CD Projekt RED: "There is no place for multiplayer in so strongly a story-driven game as The Witcher 3".

Glad that the SP story is the focus. Too many games tack on multi at the expense of SP.


 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo