Any One Still Playing This Game? - Page 15

Fyron · #**141** November 3rd, 2007, 12:43 PM

That was a rather cludgy setup, IMO. The random selection of SE3/4 was much better. SE3 had the armor/outer/inner thing going, without the need for excessive slots.

pathfinder · #**142** December 25th, 2007, 03:41 PM

I do at times,rarely these days.

Where oh where can I find the mod launcher. Been doing a search and just can't seem to locat it for d/l.

Never mind, found it.

Possum · #**143** December 25th, 2007, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Urendi Maleldil said:

Quote:

Fyron said:
We lost the battle to get rid of slot layout entirely... alas.

I still have no idea why Aaron was so set on having this cumbersome slot layout system. SE2's ship design system was the most elegant. The order in which components became damaged depended solely on the order in which they were added.

That makes two of us. I still refuse to buy or play SE5; played the demo and hated it with a passion. I'm still having fun with SE4.

Makinus · #**144** December 26th, 2007, 09:36 AM

Yep SEIV is, at least until now, a superior game strategy-wise compared with SEV... SEV have more graphical goodies, but i always prefer strategy against graphics...

I still do play occasionally Stars! versus the AI, and that game, graphicaly-wise, is as dry as a spreadsheet...

And about hardware requirements, SEIV runs in nearly everything, while SEV chugs slowly even in the most upped up systems...

StarShadow · #**145** December 26th, 2007, 10:14 AM

In the last week I've played Stars! (I love that mystery trader), Moo2 and SE4. On the other hand I'll install/fire-up SE5 once every 3-4 months just to see if it's fun yet. I really REALLY wish Stars! Supernova hadn't been shelved by the publisher, I just know it would have been awesome.

Ironmanbc · #**146** December 26th, 2007, 12:06 PM

So true I miss stars!

Why oh WHY did they NOT put it out, it had a good following but....

Fyron · #**147** December 26th, 2007, 03:41 PM

Makinus said:
"Yep SEIV is, at least until now, a superior game strategy-wise compared with SEV... SEV have more graphical goodies, but i always prefer strategy against graphics..."

Strategy-wise, SE5 is actually better than SE4. It has more depth in fleet strategy setup, it has more strategic options in weapon damage types (esp. for clever modders), the slot layout actually makes ship design more strategic due to directional damage (past the armor layer, anyways), etc., etc., etc. The downside is the cumbersome UI and such; the strategy is all there, buried underneath.

Makinus said:[/i]
"And about hardware requirements, SEIV runs in nearly everything, while SEV chugs slowly even in the most upped up systems..."

Only if you put Vista on them... SEV runs really well on my 5.5 year old P4 box, even with the ATI radeon 9600pro I used to have in it. Sure you can't run it well on 12 year old boxes, but your statement was rather hyperbolic.. You can quite easily build a ~$300 (or less, even) PC that will run SEV like a champ.

Ironmanbc · #**148** December 26th, 2007, 06:31 PM

I have a P3 (1.4) system with an ATI 9200 Sapphire card (1gig memory)(Win XP Pro)

I can run se5 with no problems, I even run World of Warcraft(with high graphics on) a slowdown when entering a city with a lot of players on (I turn off shadows)

StarShadow · #**149** December 28th, 2007, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Ironmanbc said:
So true I miss stars!

Why oh WHY did they NOT put it out, it had a good following but....

It was never released because the publisher (iirc Empire Interactive) decided it wanted to switch focus to sports games.

Xrati · #**150** December 28th, 2007, 05:11 PM

I think Fyron hit it on the head when he said

Quote:

Strategy-wise, SE5 is actually better than SE4. It has more depth in fleet strategy setup, it has more strategic options in weapon damage types (esp. for clever modders), the strategy is all there, buried underneath.

SE5 is a game for modders, not players...