SE IV The End Of An Era.

[PvK]

Originally posted by DarkAngel:
Just as games change and adapt with the times so must us fans

Not really.

PvK

[Fyron]

[ March 01, 2004, 04:22: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[bearclaw]

A thought occured to me while reading this topic...

Something that I really think should be concidered for SEV is a converter option, or at least a compatability for SEIV mods so that all of these wonderful works of art we call mods could be added to SEV! Obviously, there would be some vast differences, but...

Well, don't really have a but... Just thought it might be worth mentioning

[Captain Kwok]

I don't often weigh in on such matters, but:

SE:V needs to move to real-time resolution for combat. It is simply the best way to even out battles. Right now in SE:IV, so much is dependent on who has firing initiative etc, that battles are almost always lopsided - even between equally matched opponents.

As Phoenix-D mentioned, this is no problem for PBW type games, as all the battle is handled automatically already. "Tactical Combat" if desired for single player could be more interactive, with the user able to define targets and strategies for their ships during combat (ofc, with a handy pause option to reduce possible clickiness) if they wanted.

What is more important is that the engine for combat is done well, so that ships will obey their strategies and such, while avoiding the ills of unintended collisions and run at such a "processing" level not to make the game requirements too high.

[PvK]

Originally posted by alarikf:
Hand grenade thrown in 'cuz I've been drinking:

name a real time game that hasn't sucked?

...

You'd need to be more specific, or I'd just say "Dungeon Master" or "Myth: The Fallen Lords".

PvK

[PvK]

There are pros and cons to turn-based and real-time designs. I can think of good designs for either that I'd prefer to SE4, but SE4 1.91 is quite good. I'll wait and see what Malfador comes up with for SE5 rather than speculating.

PvK

[klausD]

to Imp Fyron:

I dont think that a lot of SE3 players has abandoned the series after SE4 release. The most players had complaints about some good SE3 game mechanics which changed in SE4, but nonetheless played it like hell.

"

You obviously did not know the people I knew then.

This seems to be true

Actually... SE4 requires creating 3D shipsets now, otherwie they look like crap in-game. SE5 will simply require either using a different 3D graphics tool, or a converter.

But if you compare a SE4 ship with a Starfury ship there are some differences. Of course the ship-design prob is not that what matters.

Also I am VERY sceptical about the real time tactical combat engine. This is a big change to the classical SE approach to this matter.

Yes, but a good change.

I think this is our traditional dispute about the "advantages" of realtime games, isnt it?

If they leave simply because it is announced to be real time, then they are not true strategy fans.

Hey come on, I am THE strategy fan. But I see a realtime game not as a strategy game. I see it as mouse clicking party. Each realtime game I have played (and I played alot) benefitted the guy which had the better mouse skills. Maybe you are one of those with good clicking skills, Iam not. A real strategy game is turnbased. (and 2D) Thats it for me. (and I am sure I am not the only one who likes it this way)

Real time can very easily play just like SE4 combat does now,

How can it play like SE4, if there is no "end turn" button - the most important button in the tactical combat game.

Only if it is made to be Starcraft-like real time.

God help us.

Of course. Do not presume that MM will pull off another MOO3. MOO3 combat was not bad because it was real time, it was bas because it was done very, very poorly.

Oh, for me one of the most negative aspects of MOO3 was its realtime combat.

We have a totally different approach to strategy games. (mine is the more traditional because of my age, I guess) buts its always good to know what others think about the matter.


to PvK

There are pros and cons to turn-based and real-time designs. I can think of good designs for either that I'd prefer to SE4, but SE4 1.91 is quite good. I'll wait and see what Malfador comes up with for SE5 rather than speculating.

Thats a possibility, but maybe if there would be more opposition against realtime elements in SE5 BEFORE the design status of SE5 has ended, the train has a small chance to go to another direction, I guess.

bye
KlausD

[PvK]

The "Combat Mission-like" design suggestion would be that you have turn-based orders, between periods of real-time action resolution where there is no control. That way there is no advantage to clicking skills, and you get advantages of synchronization of movements, and can do away with artefacts like we see in SE4, where there are big stupid side-effects like ships being able to move in, fire, and move out of range, preventing return fire; or ram a faster ship because it "wasn't their turn" etc.

However there are also clever turn-based mechanics to avoid such problems (which Malfador hasn't found yet by Version SE4 Gold 1.91), and it's of course possible to still have dumb problems with a real-time system (see collisions and point defense in Star Fury, for examples).

Combat Mission is an excellent example of that stye of play. I like it, but there are weaknesses even in such a well-done rendition. One is it relies on an extremely good tactical AI, which Combat Mission has but SE and SF don't. Another is the time and thought it can take to pre-plan maneuvers, and the lack of control during action. An issue with 3D views is the usual lack of good perspectives on the whole field of action at once.

I dunno. The design issues are very numerous. Whatever Malfador does for SE5 1.0, it won't please every SE4 fan, since some of us want 3D or real-time, and others would prefer 2D or turn-based, or some combination.

PvK

[Atrocities]

I actually read a review by some dumbarse who thought Masters Of Orion 3 was a far superior game to Space Empires IV.

No kidding. I posted a response to his review that pointed out the fact that nearly everyone who bought MOO3 hated the game and bought either, and in some cases both, SE IV and GalCiv.

I went back to read his response and the thread had been deleted. Go figure, guess some people just need to PLAY THE GAME before they review it.

I fail to understand why the 4 x community sticks to the notion that SE IV is a bad game when in fact it is the reigning king of 4 X and has been since 2000.

I guess these MOO fanatics just can not grasp the concept that SEIV is not only an older game, but it was better than MOO3.

Sure GalCiv is a great game, but it is not as fun over the long term as SEIV. How many of you still play GalCiv?

I like a lot of what they did for the interface and graphis of GalCiv, and I do hope that Aaron has taken note of this as well and plans to incorp simular things into SE V.

I especially like the scenes when you colonize a planet and find things from primitive life to advanced life and have the option of enslaving them, or giving them rights and feedoms and how doing so effects your races ability to influance other races.

No, SEIV is king of the 4 X moutain, and GalCiv is the Queen.

Nuff said I hope.

[David E. Gervais]

I downloaded, installed and played the demo of GalCiv and I was not at all impressed. It played like someone made a turn based arcade game. (think pac man one turn at a time) I would not call GalCiv the Queen to SE:IV's kingdom, it's an In-Law at best.

But hey, I've seen oogles of Ads promoting GalCiv, and even though it's not as good as SE:IV I bet about 1000 times the number of people have heard of it.

But I digress, I already *****ed a bit about this in another thread.

Nuf Said, Cheers!