A timely editorial...
 

...from an admittedly unlikely source.

As we, the Space Empires community, prepare to make the transition to 3D, here is some food for thought.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/

I am referring to the editorial of October 4th, by Tycho, entitled, (ahem), "The Utility of Rare Erotica".

Uhh, nevermind the erotica part, that's about some weird game. Keep reading further down. He has some interesting things to say, like...

and

and, on the (hopefully) less-relevant-to-SE5 subject of realtime versus turn-based...

Re: A timely editorial...
 

Sigh not this again... with the ability to pause the combat and issue orders while paused, and a feature to auto pause after X seconds (user defined), real time combat plays 99% the same as a well designed turn based system (note that SE4 combat is a very poorly designed turn based system)... Click festing, gone. Button mashing, gone. Twitch factor, gone. Strategy, rich play experience, preserved.

Also, keep in mind that the combat in SE5 will be in 2 dimensions. It will just have 3d models, rather than 2d bitmaps.

Re: A timely editorial...
 

This kind of 3d program adds lays of problems to games. Just look to Rebellion and BOTF for proof.

Re: A timely editorial...
 

in retrospect Rebellions (and I hope we both mean the same Star Wars game) graphics weren't that great, perhaps there were limitations, but I thought the 3d battles were the best bit. I used to love building fleets of Star Destroyers and Super stars to fight the rebel fleet (Once I found the #^%$@ things http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif). Although the fighters weren't much fun, except to hold off rebel raids. That however was real time. I don't know how different the turn based fights will be.

Re: A timely editorial...
 

SE5 will have real time combat.

Re: A timely editorial...
 

Not really - how would you do PBW then?

Re: A timely editorial...
 

100% as you do it in SE4. You do not have any control over the explicit execution of combat in PBEM mode, so it does not matter at all how the combat is executed (from the playing perspective, not balance, realism, logic, etc.). It is only an issue for single player mode, where the AI won't yell at you for pausing to much, and possibly hotseat or TCP/IP multiplayer, depending on how that is going to be handled... At worst, each player would just have to agree to a set amount of time between auto pausing. Of course, if TCP/IP in SE5 is handled like it is in SE4, the game will play 100% identical to a PBEM mode and it will only be an issue for hotseat...

Re: A timely editorial...
 

Combat will be processed on the server side. But it will be a RT combat.

OK, be honest...
 

Honestly now, how did you folks feel about the 3D work in Starfury?

Admittedly, I played only the demo, but I was rather disappointed. It just seemed a bit clunky and awkward to me.

My idea of a near-perfect 3D interface in an RTS space game (and cringe if you will, Starfury is an RTS game) was the first and original Homeworld.

Granted, granted, SE5 is not Starfury, but I am just citing it as an example.

BTW, I also played and loved Wing Commander: Privateer, which was obviously a major inspiration for Starfury.

Oh yes, and....
 

Homeworld was a truly 3D game. Units moved and fought in 3 dimensions, X, Y, and Z, bay-bee http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Homeworld is one of the greatest games of all time.

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Starfury is NOT a RTS. RTS games involve at the minimum more than one unit. Call it an RTS and you might as well call Baulder's Gate or Morrowind an RTS. (or Asteroids, for that matter..)

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Well SF does have fighter management... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Starfury is an RPG - it is a real time RPG but still an RPG. Just like Privateer was a RPG.

I do not buy that an RTS can be as good and deep in thought as a turned based system. I have yet to see a RTS that allows the control that is present in a turned based system. You cannot issue standing orders. You cannot assign ships specific jobs in specific situations as you would with an actual fleet. You can control that in turn based.

Homeworld did come close and hats of to it for that. Yet Homeworlds interface was not the best and you could easily lose the battle simply because you couldnt move around in the program fast enough.

There was at one point the idea of phased turns was used. You programed the moves that you would make and when everything was done in order with factors such as speed, surprise, initiative (random sometimes stat based), and tatical advantage (terrain normally) were calculated to determine order of execution. I only saw a couple of games use this a long time ago.

Don't mistake, RTS can be great for a quick fix. I have played Ceasar III, Age of Empires, Homeworld 1 and 2, Rebellion, Sim City 2000 and 3000, and others and had fun. None of them comes close to the complexity and challenge of Dominions II, Space Empires II (for its time), III, or IV, Stars!, Master of Orion (for its time).

As far as the 3D thing goes... there is a huge interface problem to overcome. Homeworld was close but it needs to be better. Though Homeworld as a turn-based game interface might of worked well enough.

Rasorow

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

SE5 will not under any circumstances be a RTS game! It will _never_ be comparable to Age of Empires, Starcraft, Warcraft, etc. It will be a turn based strategy game. It will just have real time combat. Just like Dominions... Many games have successfully pulled this off. Many turn based strategy games have had combat systems that were not real time, but essentially tried to emulate real time execution with constructs such as issuing orders, then watching the units act for a round without intervention. Real time with pausing is just a smoother, cleaner way of doing that...

Further, as it stands now, Aaron Hall is against the idea of 3D combat. Combat is currently slated to be 2D just as in SE4. It will have 3D graphics, but will still be on a single 2D plane. It will not be like Homeworld at all. Again, it will be just like Dominions, except with spaceships instead of soldiers/monsters.

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Says who? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Where is this defined? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

BTW, the editorial has now been moved here, as it's no longer the current one

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Many places. It is not a strategy game, it is an adventure game. RTS means Real Time Strategy. There is no way you can classify Starfury as a strategy game. It has none of the essential elements of a strategy game. It would be like calling SE4 a card game...

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Erm, since when does Dominions have real-time combat, Fyron??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

(It just LOOKS real-time because the units on a side move all at once, not one at a time like in SE4 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif... but each side still takes its turn moving and attacking, then the other side moves and attacks, ad infinitum... or maybe ad nihilo if you have too many units and it crashes the game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)

Re: Oh yes, and....
 

Oh. So it is one of those pseudo-real time combat systems? I never looked too closely at it...