Space combat among other things...

[Tyler_Durden]

yeah but then again, galaxies doesn't play like outcast and i don't much care for online games anyway. Besides you need DSL or broadband to play those games, let's not forget the subscription service which is totally unessessary....... it's just too expensive for me right now anyay. Whereas you just play this game at home by yourself, with one 49.99 disc, no extra fees, it's all good.

[ToppDog]

Tyler & toms got the idea...WOOHOO!!!

 

The gameplay Tyler describes is exactly what I'm talking about. FPS style movement & fighting control over your character as in JK when in 1st/3rd person mode, & when you climb into the seat of your fighter/shuttle/capitol ship, etc. you switch to a cockpit view with REAL space/flight sim characteristics (no cheezy arcade sims) such as full HOTAS controller support, etc. With the better aspects of RPG's thrown in, this would be an awsome style of game.

 

In Shadows of the Empire these things were sort of accomplished by having the missions actually be different kinds of gametypes for each mission. They were mini-games. One mission you flew a snowspeeder, & in another you walked around shooting stormies. But you were never allowed to park your speeder, get out & shoot at some droids with your blaster all in the same mission. They used different mini game engines for the different mission types.

 

But for the kind of true total 3D virtual gaming experience we're talking about, you would need a seamless game engine that does not see a difference between FPS & sim, but instead looks at everything as a HUGE virtual reality sim. Then you add in the good RPG aspects to complete the picture.

 

SWG could evolve into something like this in the years to come.

 

The problem is that it is Lucasarts' style to wait until someone else perfects a certain gametype/engine & then will adapt that particular type/style into one of their games. So more than likely if we are to see the realization of this style of game, it will be done by someone else first in a non-StarWars game. Total VR Battlestar Galactica anyone?

[Solbe M'ko]

I agree. Lucasarts is something of a vulture company. Dark Forces was Star Wars Doom. Battlegrounds was almost identical to AoE. I give them immense credit for their earlier adventure games like Sam and Max, Monkey Island, Full Throttle, and the Dig. Outlaws, though...

 

The whole flight sim thing went down in the late 90's when, to my memory, Quake came out. As soon as that happened, the huge surplus of Flight Sims on the market created demand for a fresh kind of game, the FPS. Now the FPS has been rehashed almost as much as C&C was, so we want to go back to the older gameplay types. The only consistantly popular type of game is the RPG. The newest flight sim I have played is the new redo of Sturmovik (sp). It was okay.

[Silent_Thunder]

I hate this "I wish they'd include this really cool feature, but alas this is an FPS and not RPG".

 

Who cares what genre it is as long as its fun!

 

I'm all for space combat as long as its done well... If it can't be done good enough then I say get rid of the idea and focus on the FPS combat entirely.

 

But on a similiar note, I say Raven should add as many RPG elements as possible without bogging the game down at all. I mean more bystandards would be a great addition... a Bar full of illegal, Disrupter-wielding Rodiens doesn't exactly make for interesting varied gameplay.

 

If they do actually include more civilians it would be nice if they added converstations between two NPCs like we hear in JKII all the time... Those were really great, and the more of them the better.

 

Back to the vehicles for a moment.. did Raven say that there will most certainly be more vehicles in this game than JO? Well, if they can correctly create a good ground flight simulation I would only assume that space combat would be even easier.

[toms]

the quake 3 engine cant cope with big enough spaces to even match JK, so there is no way it would work with flying vehicles, let alone space.

 

Now the JK engine, i bet that could have done space combat ok.

 

The walkers in JO were, to be fair, fun for about 3 minutes. But that was more because of the "cool" factor than because they were fun. They weren't modeled in any detail though, and controled more like FPS characters than Giant walkers. They should have had 1st person views only, with guages and readouts and a fairly small viewpoint.

 

Almost all sim games seem to have disappeared from the maket. Space sim games arent selling (Freelancer is the only one in about the last 3 years, and that was more like an fps). Mechwarrior games arent selling. Flight sims are too expensive and time consuming to make and aren't selling. Developers would much rather spend 1/4 the money and time on dumbed down, cross-platform 3rd person games than develop proper sims. It is a shame.

 

Shadows of the Empire sucked. the only remotely good bit was the snowspeeders, and even that wasn't great. A classic case of a game with too many genres not doing ANY of them well.

 

I'd really like a decent SW sim that combined Mechwarrior style Walkers with Interstate 76/Tie fighter style speeders. Where you had to worry about power ratios, targeting, speed and armour.

 

Rather than one of these Starfighter type games that have been simplified to the point of A to go foreward, B to go back, C to shoot. Steer and shoot. snore....

[toms]

and another thing....

 

WHY OH WHY don't they get the guys who did either Imperium Galactica 2 or Galactic Civilisations to re-do Supremacy(Rebellion)???? 4X games are perfect for the SW universe, I really want to command Thrawn, nogri, etc... and for a game that got terrible reviews it is still selling for about 30 quid on ebay. So there must be a market.

 

If they are going to be a vulture company they might as well do it properly!

[Gabrobot]

Raven has said that they are using models to do some of the terrain, and assuming Raven has done a decent job of updating the Quake III engine, they ought to be able to make rather large bits of terrain. Look at the Doom 3 engine for example...would you think that it's capable of large terrain? It is actually capable of terrain the size of the Radiant grid! (If the terrain is a model)

[Emon]

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

let's not forget the subscription service which is totally unessessary...

 

It is very necessary. EverQuest has at least 80,000 people playing at all times. Can you imagine the processing power and dedicated network links that need to be up and running reliably all the time to make sure all 80,000 players can have a good time? It's very expensive to maintain that kind of stuff. If the developers and publishers could make a profit off just selling the game, there would be no online fee. If that wasn't true, you'd be subscribing to first person shooters.

[Tyler_Durden]

That's why i say they should make a game based off the morrowind engine or a better one. That way those who do not have a dsl line or broadband (like me) can enjoy a sp game without having to worry about crap like lag, choppy framerates, and people screwing with you once you leave a town. Not everyone enjoys playing online you know. No, make a game so people without a good internet connection can play ( and i don't mean bots with non AI) and get almost the same experience as playing online. I mean really a lot of people, me included, can't afford $50 a month to connect online on top of $10-$20 for a game that you already paid $50 to get. Please.

 

Truthfully, they are only utilizing about %20 of the market. The internet is dead now compared to a few years ago.

[Emon]

Oh...dear god... I can't believe the words you just said... so horribly, horribly wrong.

[StormHammer]

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

That's why i say they should make a game based off the morrowind engine or a better one. That way those who do not have a dsl line or broadband (like me) can enjoy a sp game without having to worry about crap like lag, choppy framerates, and people screwing with you once you leave a town. Not everyone enjoys playing online you know. No, make a game so people without a good internet connection can play ( and i don't mean bots with non AI) and get almost the same experience as playing online. I mean really a lot of people, me included, can't afford $50 a month to connect online on top of $10-$20 for a game that you already paid $50 to get. Please.

 

I can understand what you mean. I've got a laggy 56k connection, and it's not much fun trying to play online sometimes. I wouldn't sign up to an MMORPG anyway, even if I had broadband, because I know I couldn't dedicate enough time to it to get my money's worth. I prefer a good SP game, and some fast MP action, rather than trekking around a virtual world online. I do think that MMO games are possibly over-rated as a 'growing trend' - some have seen quite low take-up figures, below their estimated target audiences. There seem to be quite a large number of MMO games currently in development, and I fully expect to see some of them fail spectacularly. I do not think the market is quite large enough to support a large number of MMO games. If you are already subscribing to one, are you likely to subscribe to another at the same time? If not, that means finding new customers, and that's always hard to achieve. Having said that, I think games like SW Galaxies will be successful, because there is already a very wide fan base. The online Matrix game may be successful for the same reason.

 

I still think it is going to be a while before we see a large-scale offline RPG/FPS hybrid for Star Wars, though.

 

Truthfully, they are only utilizing about %20 of the market. The internet is dead now compared to a few years ago.

 

Erm...I'd have to disagree with you there. The Internet is very much alive and thriving. And I'd like to see some statistics to back up your argument about 20% of the market. It's probably true that not as many people play the MP side of games as the SP side, but I'm not even sure there has been a study to examine that in any depth.

[Prime]

Originally posted by txa1265

Obviously you (also) have to work in the real world ...

Indeed I do. Wouldn't life be grand of games could be made on an unlimited budget? Too bad it couldn't be farther from the truth.

 

Originally posted by txa1265

unlike (seemingly) many here still in high school, who (as is their wont at that age) expect everything for nothing.

What, you mean like this?

 

let's not forget the subscription service which is totally unessessary.......

I guess those huge servers all just run for free.

 

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

That's why i say they should make a game based off the morrowind engine or a better one. That way those who do not have a dsl line or broadband (like me) can enjoy a sp game without having to worry about crap like lag, choppy framerates, and people screwing with you once you leave a town. Not everyone enjoys playing online you know

If you don't want to play online, then avoid the MMORPG genre altogether. There are hundreds of great SP games out there. Trying to turn something like Galaxies into an SP game as well is probably beyond the scope and resources of the game company. Besides, can you imagine having to run Galaxies entirely from your desktop? Now that is some computing power.

 

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

No, make a game so people without a good internet connection can play ( and i don't mean bots with non AI) and get almost the same experience as playing online. I mean really a lot of people, me included, can't afford $50 a month to connect online on top of $10-$20 for a game that you already paid $50 to get. Please. Truthfully, they are only utilizing about %20 of the market.

So your saying you want a top-of-the-line online game that doesn't require a good connection or decent hardware to run. There are thousands of those. They are called old games. You just can't make better games that run on the same old hardware. Unfortunately, things just don't work that way. In order to make a new game that people are willing to play, they have to take advantage of new technology. To get those fancy graphics and nice visuals, you need powerful hardware. To connect to a server and play a complex online game unfortunately requires a good internet connection. If you don't have these things, then you just aren't going to be able to play the game. Creating a game that is playable by 56Kers with 500MHz machines requires sacrifices. And those sacrifices probably mean the game just isn't going to be as good. And that isn't what sells.

 

It is sort of like hockey. If you want to play the sport, you have to buy the equipment. And that equipment costs money. Online games are the same. If you want to play, you need the equipment. If you don't have the money, that is unfortunate. But those who do want to play the best game they can, and are less likely to be willing to play a lesser game that caters to older machines.

 

If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. But there are many people who can afford it, and are willing to pay those prices to play the best games. And there are companies that are going to provide those games.

 

Besides, what do you think the limiting requirements should be for an online game? 56K? A 486? Less? How old a machine do you want to support? At some point you have to move on to newer and better.

 

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

The internet is dead now compared to a few years ago.

That could possibly the single funniest thing I have ever read.

[txa1265]

Originally posted by Prime

[re: the internet is dead] That could possibly the single funniest thing I have ever read.

 

Or the ... ermm... least informed (self-edit ). The internet is still growing, broadband adoption is growing very rapidly. It just isn't as 'sexy' as it was when you could pitch 'iUWare.com' which would deliver fresh laundered underwear to your house daily - and become an overnight millionaire. See - eventually someone figures out the emperor has no clothes. The internet is not dead ... it is just becoming commoditized.

 

And that's a good thing.

 

Mike

[Solbe M'ko]

To go off topic (sorry, Stormy!), the whole game situation has suffered as a result of wider access to computers. Companies like iD and Maxis have started making huge profits off games, so their budgets are a good deal larger than other campanies. Computer Games used to be something of a special interest, but nowadays, every kid in town owns a Playstation. I'm not saying that the games industry's transition to mainstream audiences is bad, but economics has taken center stage. A guy who wants to make a game can't do it unless the fat cats say that it would tuen a profit.

 

There are pop films, and there are art films. Why aren't there any "art" games?

 

Prime said:

You just can't make better games that run on the same old hardware.

 

I totally see where you're coming from, but I just cannot agree with you. You don't need the Unreal engine or a huge server to make a good game. Half-Life is a great game, it uses a now outdated engine (Quake 2), but it's still a great game and people still play it. Graphics and technology are a big part of it nowadays, but the gameplay still sells it for me. If Monkey Island 5 comes out with the engine from the first games, I'll buy it anyway (assuming it doesn't suck like MI4, but I'm not going into that). Some games have great graphics, but suck otherwise, remember. Look at Q3A, I hated that game (maybe you didn't, but I though it sucked), because the gameplay was far too dumbed down for me. Does anyone still play that game? I hope not, they should all be playing UT2K3, which combines better visuals with better gameplay.

 

That's just what I think...

[Emon]

I think he was referring to graphics and technology, like you can't just "make an MMORPG" that runs on 56k. You can't just "make a new revolutionary 3D engine" that runs on a 486.

 

Oh, and Half-Life uses the Quake I engine.

[Emon]

Oh, and a lot of people still play Q3. Saying the Q3 community is dead is foolish (I know you didn't but others do).

[Tyler_Durden]

To tell the truth i really don't care about the internet games, hell i don't play em and i don't wanna play em. okay you guys punked me on the internet being dead, whatever, but that wasn't my point. My point is lucasarts can in fact make a STAR WARS fps game game that doesn't require it to be an online game without having to have a high end machine. What does morrowind's requirements entail? a 700 mhz p3? And a good graphics card. The game has what, two three discs? And the game is huge as well. I think it would be awesome and anyone who doesn't agree, well...... They could incorporate awesome features such as space combat with some development time and maybe tweak the combat a little but the technology is there. Will they ever do it? Probably not, which makes this whole discussion rather moot.

[Emon]

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

My point is lucasarts can in fact make a STAR WARS fps game game that doesn't require it to be an online game without having to have a high end machine.

 

Enter the Dark Forces and Jedi Knight series.

[Tyler_Durden]

umm i think you took what i said out of context.

[Emon]

I think you're just confused.

[Spider AL]

I think I'm going to take up tennis.

 

 

 

 

 

Nobody would be happier than me if more and spiffier features were worked into SP. But realistically, the more you try to put in, the lower the overall quality of the game. Remember that. And while graphics are at best faintly relevant to me and my sensibilities, it would not do justice to the game if it had anything less than an improved graphics engine. Even Unreal and Half-Life, cutting edge in their day, are looking horribly dated these days.

 

They Hunger is still one of the best SP experiences I've ever had though, and I only played it for the first time last month.

[Prime]

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko

I totally see where you're coming from, but I just cannot agree with you. You don't need the Unreal engine or a huge server to make a good game. Half-Life is a great game, it uses a now outdated engine (Quake 2), but it's still a great game and people still play it.

As Emon has stated, in this context I was saying "better" in terms of the technical aspects, such as graphics, internect connections speed, and so on. My point was you can't run a technically advanced game without technically advanced hardware. Certainly, a game does not have to be technically complex to be fun. That is why I use the MAME emulator to play all those old arcade games. NBA Jam represent!

 

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

To tell the truth i really don't care about the internet games, hell i don't play em and i don't wanna play em.

Fair enough, but keep in mind that a huge percentage of the players out there do care a great deal about online play.

 

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

okay you guys punked me on the internet being dead, whatever, but that wasn't my point. My point is lucasarts can in fact make a STAR WARS fps game game that doesn't require it to be an online game without having to have a high end machine.

It may not have been your point, but really, it is the point. Because the internet is growing, more and more people want to play online games. Many people want a great SP experience (like me and you), but there are also many people that don't give a rats ass about SP, and only want MP. It is a big enough share of the customer base that Lucasarts "has to" provide that experience, or they will simply sell less games. And isn't selling the most games possible the whole idea?

 

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden

They could incorporate awesome features such as space combat with some development time and maybe tweak the combat a little but the technology is there. Will they ever do it? Probably not, which makes this whole discussion rather moot.

You're right, they most likely would never do that, even though they could. Why? For starters, making a game that relies on Jedi Knight level requirements will probably end up looking a lot like Jedi Knight. And that has already been done. People won't pay for that any more. Like movies, it has to be technically better. They do this simply because it will sell more games, because people want online play and better graphics. The market has spoken.

 

As for Emons comment about Dark Forces and Jedi Knight, I don't see how he took what you said out of context. You stated you want an SP only FPS that has lower requirements. Is this not correct? He merely pointed out that there are games like this already, and that they are called Dark Forces and Jedi Knight. Great games, at that.

[txa1265]

I think we were talking about space combat integrated with a FPS. This is something that Mace Griffin Bounty Hunter is claiming to do. They needed to develop their own engine to do it - and the screenshots I've seen look an awful lot like recent Q3-based stuff. In other words, very nice, but not like HL2 facials or DoomIII monsters. They also claim ~70/30 for ground/space mix. And have attempted to make the control scheme 'work' for everyone. I'm not sure what this means in practice, but I hope my cynical expectation of a standard fare FPS mixed with sub-genre space combat. By sub-genre I mean something like comparing the Tiger tank part of MoHAA to a vehicular combat sim , but something that FPS players will find satisfying.

 

Graphics is a whole different issue. Do you think that if Valve came out with a HL2 sneak peek saying 'we're still using the Q2 engine' that they would have gotten much interest? Same for Doom III - check out our new sprites! Sure In fact, JA got a bit of bad press for not 'looking advanced enough'. People want immersion. I'm playing JK1 again right now (well, not *right* now, but you get the idea) and the light stick coming up from ol' blockhead is not exactly real-worl immersive. Sure the game and gameplay rock - and clearly these weren't an issue 5 or 6 years ago when I got the game (was too busy having babies to get it brand new . But now it feels fake - like dealing with some of the cliffs in Dark Forces, even at 'hi-res' on my Mac - I can't wait for the DF Mod for JKII for see Kyle 3rd person going through some of those areas. But even if I don't need *the best* graphics at any cost, realistic graphics and effects do make a difference and I want each new game to make graphical advances, as well as learning from past games about gameplay and interaction/immersion - and I'm willing to pay for it, both in terms of the $50 game as well as the computer hardware.

 

Mike

[Solbe M'ko]

Would it be feasible to just make two games and smush them together? I mean, could you have, say, the U2 engine for the FPS part, and an engine simialar to TIE Fighter for the space part? You could just link the two engines together and have a game that passes from one to the other.

 

On that note, would it be possible to splice TIE Fighter-style action with Homeworld-style command, using two seperate game codes?

[Prime]

Originally posted by Solbe M'ko

Would it be feasible to just make two games and smush them together? I mean, could you have, say, the U2 engine for the FPS part, and an engine simialar to TIE Fighter for the space part? You could just link the two engines together and have a game that passes from one to the other.

If it were to be done, that is probably the way to do it. It will still be a massive undertaking, though. Especially if the game is to be any good.