eizo131 Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 Then make why don't they make an engine? if you use CC generals you are gonna have to cut back on civs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echuu Shen-Jon Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 Originally posted by eizo131 Then make why don't they make an engine? if you use CC generals you are gonna have to cut back on civs. No, I don't think, that they have to! It's only the engine, not the game, they are using! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesdomain Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 Make a unique engine for Star Wars would be cool. I am just afraid it might turn out bad like Force Commander. I can't even figure out how to get past the first training level on that. Galactic Battlegrounds 1 was cool and easy to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eizo131 Posted April 22, 2003 Share Posted April 22, 2003 Echuu good point but if you noticed in CC generals all the civs were very unique that would be hard to do for 8 civs. (even if you make the GR and GE a little alike and get rid of those walking carpets....) I Said it before use the confedracy war room map as the basis of the engine, it has scale done well, it is in 3d.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesdomain Posted April 23, 2003 Share Posted April 23, 2003 I don't have Age of mythology nor do I know much about it. I heard there is an expansion pack coming out for it. Maybe that would be a nice engine to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echuu Shen-Jon Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 Originally posted by eizo131 Echuu good point but if you noticed in CC generals all the civs were very unique that would be hard to do for 8 civs. (even if you make the GR and GE a little alike and get rid of those walking carpets....) I Said it before use the confedracy war room map as the basis of the engine, it has scale done well, it is in 3d.... I GOT A NEW USERNAME!!! On topic: I haven't tried CC Generals (Because there isn't a demo), but it should be no problem for Lucas, at least, I think so...Hmm...maybe Hmm...Maybe, if you used that war room as the base thing, you could click on a part of the map, and then you zoomed in, and came to that spot, and it used the engine! Can you follow me so far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 No! ----------- I like the "war room" idea becuase it was the thing used in the movies. Maybe it could be used as the ground combat part (if the next SW RTS used a conquer the galaxy thing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eizo131 Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 Yes I am following echuu. Sounds like a good idea. My friend has CC generals, the civs are very unique and making 8 (probably more) very unique civs would be a complete nightmare. Yes I am sure LA could make something but still... it would take very long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echuu Shen-Jon Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 Oh, someone who understands me ! Yes, but we would prefer a very good game over a not-so good game, right?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 Well I understood that part! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesdomain Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Too bad I have a 8 MB video card. i really wanted to get C&C Generals but slow video card. I think i was told I can upgrade to a 64MB Radeon PCI video card. I hope I can get enough money saved to buy one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eizo131 Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 It diffrent than all the other CC games I have ever played. (not renegade) So any other ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesdomain Posted April 27, 2003 Share Posted April 27, 2003 Is Command and Conqurer Red Strike a good game? I was thinking about buying that one and giving it a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eizo131 Posted April 27, 2003 Share Posted April 27, 2003 off subject: I think so, but that is my opinion. I hated the second one to much sci-fi the first was really good. If you get it play as the Soviets, they have the best of everything (except troopers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted April 27, 2003 Share Posted April 27, 2003 I always play as Soviets becuase I'm Russian. joesdomain- Red Strike? I don't think I've heard of it. Do u mean Renegade or Red Alert/RA2???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 I think he means 'Command and Coquer Red Alert: Counterstrike' Darthmauluk- are you nuts? RoN hasnt even come out yet so how could it be a 'very old engine'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesdomain Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 If they make a space-combat Star Wars strategy game then maybe one of the current games that is space-combat might make a good choice for an engine since it is in space and not on the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swphreak Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Well, I remember some people mentioning RoN would make a good engine..... it's out now. Anybody play the demo yet? If not, get it HERE. I got about 150kbs. Now that I've played RoN, I don't think it'd be the best of engines. I like the way you can have major battles (and nukes ), but the way it tech levels progess, it doesn't feel... "Star Warsey" to me. What are your opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echuu Shen-Jon Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Dunno...But the Demo is on 194 MB! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corran Horn DFD Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I think the engine should retain the editor style of SWGB, with the triggers and all, but with more conditions and effects, in 3D and with more features, like Age of Mythology. As long as I've got a game that has a good editor that I can use to create good RPG-style scenarios, I'm happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU_Skythe Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 I personally think L.A should make their own engine. I haven't played force commander but from wehat i've read about it and looked at it , it seems a very star wars focused game... and it isn't very sucessful it seems, GB would be much more. I dont know if L.A could even get the rights to the AOM or RON engine now. Ensemble is tied in with microsoft now, remember that big large corporate company that buys a lot of other ones out? So what i say, is make an engine, similar to that of AoK's/SWGBs etc, but with much better graphical quality. Although i only read a few of the first posts, LA sure arent gonna stop time for someone with a real crap computer, but for someone like me with a 933mhz~ 128MB(upgrade soon!!) and 16MB TNT2 (i know its crap) i think its fair enough the game should run ok. What im saying is the system requirements/graphics shouldnt be like that of generals; but not of AoK's either. Maybe the level you might be looking at is RoN. It is true that in 2 years time the system requirements will probably be 512MB RAM and around 1GHZ with a good video card, but i dont think that many people will upgrade their computers as they did, when say windows 3.11 is was around. Why? Because people with computers like me can now surf the internet, play music and chat at the same time, even play videos, without relativly hardcore computers.. The bulk of the internet would be like this. Half of the people playing SWGB are 15 and below i bet; they wouldnt have jobs and wouldnt be able to buy real good computers...(in fact i'm 14 or you could consider me 15 as my birthday is the end of the year heh). Not everyone is going to upgrade their computers for a game, i definly havent, i could of spent say my birthday money or the money i get for doing the dishes but i chose to spend it on other things.. Consider SWGB's online community is made up of a lot of that[people with ~ok computers, who for some reason dont or cant get another/upgrade]. With a large or even decent online community a game can be very successful, even if it isn't the flashest game. Look at RoN now.. basically anyone who played it at some stage or plays it will say it could of been one of the greatest RTS's in a while if its multiplayer only wasnt so buggy. In addition i think gamespy has made deals with BHG so they cant encourage people to go on gamespy arcade (it comes with RoN).. The inbuilt multiplayer system is obviously far better without the hassles of adds and such. When i looked Gamespy arcade had about 100 people on for RoN, and in the multiplayer servers there were 80-or so(it dosent show people who are playing). The more people=more to play=more variety=more fun/more of a competition feeling/more of a challenge. It also means more popularity for the game. I know a lot of people on zone who have gotten their friends playing, heck i even tried to get my friends playing but to no avail. The point im trying to make: not everyone has an athlon 2.8GHZ(or whatever) 512MB ram and a radeon 9600 or whatever lol. and i bet not even half of the players on the zone or who used to play on the zone had system specs like that. Without multiplayer i would of quit SWGB within 2 weeks, but instead i player it for over a year consistently probably. Honestly i dont know how you survived if you've been playing this game for over a year and never played multiplayer, or at least went on the zone a few times a week. I've tried scenarios, made a few of my own had a bit of fun, modding which involved too much effort, Random Map Script Editing which was too hard for me lol, online scenarios which get boring after a while downloaded campaigns which are pretty boring death match which is ok i suppose and playing random map. Want to know the order of fun i had? 1. Random map 2. Scenarios 3. Death match 4. Scenario making ... etc You guys might not agree but i bet at least half the zone would .. i would never of bothered playing online if my computer ran GB too poorly. Minimal system specs should be rising but no computer game can go to overboard, like i made in my point not everyone has super systems.. mp3's and surfing the net dont take super computers.. a lot of people wont upgrade their computers to play some new game. Sure die hard RTS fanatics who play WC3 AOM RON etc would, but one of the reasons SWGB wasn't super popular was that it probably looked childish to them, they thought less of it because it was star wars (which we all know is a load of crap, this game blows aok and many other games..). In otheer words high system specs=less people=less fun=less success=crap game which is abandoned by its company early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU_Skythe Posted July 12, 2003 Share Posted July 12, 2003 oops i forgot to post what the engine shuld be like. Since this is course star wars, i dont think the star wars universe really experienced "ages/techs", and i dont think at any point during the history of the star wars universe or even mankind did troops move as fast as trooper recruits, so teching up i think should be changed around. The engine could be based on this. It would have decent graphics (think RoN style, im not sure how AoM is, WC3 is ok, RoN runs slow on my comp but it'll almost definly be upgraded in 2 years time because of my liking for games..) even in 2 years time i dont think everyone will have 3 GHZ 512MB ram Radeon pro's etc... maybe the RAM but nufin else. So moderate graphics, maybe improvment on RON's quality. Now for how the game works itself as in units and their special abilities i think the game should be shifted toward WC3 as in unit abilities. Jedi in the movies certainly could take on more than 10 troops without dieing; they should get more powers. Converting was about the only special ability in GB i think, these special abilities should be expanded on, so the engine should be designed to accomodate this. A few more powers etc., maybe some other units should get abilities ie unique units. I also think the way in which air units worked should be changed. All they were, were ground units that couldnt be hit by ground units(unless they had AA). They died very quickly in battles with other planes and certainly didnt and couldnt behave in the manner they did in the movies. Maybe they could crash rather than self destruct in mid air, little things like that to make them more air-like. The space idea also needs to be picked up on in the engine, currently the space system works like the earth is flat supporting the theory that the earth was flat in early times, lol. It worked well on senate type games with metallic platforms and so forth, even for cloud city type scenarios, but in spacemass or space asteroids it felt totally fake. Dont know how L.A would change this but they probably should. Maybe sheilds should be changed to reflect dome sheilds where you can actually see the whole top of the shield like you see in ep1 and many sci fi shows/movies. A lot of hotkey/micromanagment type stuff should be incorporated, things we have already seen such as queuing units, but now with queuing research and upgrades, infinite queue such as that seen in rise of nations, workers that might mine a resource when idle etc. That kind of thing, but with the ability to be turned off. Basically i think LA should develop a new engine and work on what they implemented when they used the AoK engine to give it a more star warsy feel. Maybe some units could have second stances/modes. As in Battlegrounds where you have agressive, defensive, stand ground and no attack stance, in the new SW RTS you could have normal, which is the normal ai type stance where they might follow units for a while, which is default. You could have a bounty hunter, lets imagine it as jango fett. On normal stance he has his blaster, typical trooper type blaster, then if you click the stance button again like in rise of nations it changes to his next stance, which could be, say a flamethrower. His range could decrease and maybe his speed for balance reasons. Next stance could be raid, buildings are only targeted if no units are present, raze where buildings are targeted by default etc. In this way many units could work in 2 ways, you could have ranged and melee units. You could have stealth mode for example which gives a unit a minor cloaking ability which makes him visible for only a few seconds, every now and then(like you might seen in FPS such as perfect dark maybe..) but decreases his speed for added stealth... when he attacks he is visible, his shot could be quieter etc there are many possibilities to this idea and it presents a way where second functions to units could be added, in(secondary weapons), like ive seen around in a few of these SWGB2 posts. Or rather you could just have another button in the sidebar which is default set to stance 1 which would be basic attack for all units, then for special units such as bounty hunters and jedi who would be rather expensive by the way could have the stance button clickable to change to their alternate units. Things such as convert would still be in the little sidebar however.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compa_Mighty Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 I'll be honest and tell you I haven't read the thread except for the first few lines of Skythe's last post. I agree with him, if you remember I've said this previously: Tech levels should be taken out. Progress should be only through technologies. As for my personal opinion, the engine should be new, no borrowing this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaruGlory89 Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 I think the Generals engine is great and far superior in terms of Star Wars than AoM, since AoM is primarily ancient stuff and would be more suitable for Fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
w@ck0 Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 wow, I am pretty new here... finally got around to reading this thread... Pretty long one and has a lot of good ideas and bad ideas... So i just wanted to add my thoughts into the fray.... I see a lot of talk about this RoN or the AOM engine stuff and my question to everyone is why must we have age progression??? I mean both of these engines are based on that... Is it needed to get the starwars feel ? NOO... SWGB i think was poorly done because of this...The progression in tech areas was not needed. It does not play a vital role in the star wars storyline... nor does it really have any major affect in gameplay... I think if we went back to some of the best RTS games known to man... Such as Starcraft.. We see that a good RTS can be made with unquie races, great detail and a good storyline... you can have a winner. This is why i agree with those who see the Generals engine as an option... For those who have ever worked with the engine know how large scale it can be... How easy it would be to get a game of this massive scale going using that engine... I also think there is no need for 8 or 9 races... we can get by with just 3 or 4... We do not need to have some massive selection to make a great SW RTS game... Some of the best games have little selection when it comes to detail but some of the best gameplay out there.. especially the star wars series of games. So i think that we need to use the generals engine and keep the game relativly simple in its race selection but detialed in its options and units and especially story line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.