Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Your perfect space sim
croxis
I am the walrus
in Zocalo v2.0
What was your favorite space sim? What about it did/do you love? Hate? Describe a game that would be the spaceship game of your dreams!
There is purpose behind this question :vorlon:
There is purpose behind this question :vorlon:
Comments
My perfect one would have the economy and politics of X3,
With a real physics model as an option (I like X3's pseudo Newtonian model, but would love a full manual one).
With 3D solar systems similar to Freelancer, but with planets that feel like planets, not little spheres.
With good graphics, shadows, etc. (X3+shadows basically).
Basically the freedom of it, included real physics. Also Babylon 5 mod for it was pure victory.
Basically good space sim consists of freedom, 'realism' and ship equipment management.
The Independence War games because of the realism and physics; an engaging story (even if EoC was rather more curtailed than it was meant to be); great graphics; cool ships and weapons.
My perfect space sim would probably be an I-War 3 or of course ITF finally ;)
oh what the hell:
-subsystem management. Balancing lasers, engines, and shields in X-Wing was freakin' awesome.
-Semi-Newtonian physics. I've Found Her was fun, but that level of detail in the physics can be inaccessible to many people. I want a limited physics model that allows for some cool end-for-end and side-slip moves, but not so much that you're rocketing past the furball over and over.
-Location specific damage. Taking out laser cannons, engines, and shield projector was awesome in the XWing series, but I want to take it a step further. I want a greater level of detail in damage modeling, as well as, the capability to strategically hit capital ships and take out subsystems. Port laser batteries on a ISD causing you problems? A couple well-placed proton torpedoes near a primary power junction/conduit, and they go dark. I want to be able to blow a piece off of an ISD, a frigate, or a fighter and actually see that piece come off of the model. If it is not a kill shot, I want it to keep fighting, albeit affected by whatever damage was inflicted.
-Progressive Intel. I want to start at the ground level of a fight against the enemy. We know some things about their ships, but we need to learn more. Intel gathered by sensors during combat missions reveals more about enemy capabilities and weaknesses, information that will be included in targeting profiles for future missions. You didn't know where aforementioned power conduit was at first, but after a close encounter with an ISD, you now have the information you need to be able to target that point in the future.
-Multiple kill animations. One thing I loved about the X-Wing novels was its descriptions of combat. There were kills where a TIE would lose a wing and go careening off but not explode. There were kills where a laser blast would pierce the cockpit and kill the pilot, but the TIE didn't explode. This goes hand-in hand with the region specific damage; it would be cool if a region specific 'killshot' had a different animation aside from 'explode.' If we manage to knock out a capital ship reactor some such, I want to see it go dark and become a lifeless hulk in space as we watch lifepods begin shooting away like rats from a ship.
-A good story. I want a story about the pilots who are flying with you, their interactions with each other and their superiors. I want to be emotionally invested in the characters and their struggles.
-Transitional missions. After seeing what the Infinity engine can do, it would be cool to have some missions that begins in space and transitions seamlessly to the surface (or vice versa). I'd also like to see a change in flight dynamics when in atmosphere.
-Branching campaign. I'd like to see a campaign with multiple outcomes, where--like sensor intel--successes, failures, and tertiary objective results hold a bearing on future missions and even change future mission objectives in some cases.
-Co-op campaign. Deathmatch and TDM is all well and good, but I want to have human wingmen to fly alongside, working together against advanced enemy AI.
Um, that's all for now I guess. If I think of more I can post it.
Problem is, the boys with the checkbooks don't think there's any money in that kind of game anymore...that's why we're not seeing them.
If I can sell my screenplay and make a couple mil (;D) maybe I can front some of my own cash for a startup!
I'm curious what croxis is asking for...
In the end, the best combat play isn't going to mean a lot if the story-line isn’t interesting. The WC series have movie physics, but they are very playable because the story-line is fun and engaging.
Here would be my criteria for a good space combat game:
[LIST]
[*]Robust and engaging storyline that does branch based on the players performance and actions.
[*]Realistic physics, but with available flight control ads – mission strategies should be allowed to take advantage of the physics, for example: a mission where fuel supply is critical, so the player may choose to “coast” in certain sections.
[*]Limit the simulation to smaller combat vehicles, fighters, bomber, small transports instead of allowing control of cap-ships, but make the piloting those ships as realistic as possible, including takeoff/landing/docking/refueling, etc
[*]Force the player to truly qualify for each vehicle type before they are allowed to fly combat in that machine, but at the same time allow the player to stick with a particular craft through-out the game if he/she chooses and the storyline still advances.
[*]Based on the players performance, give the player opportunity to enroll in other squads/missions/etc for example a particularly skilled player may be given the opportunity to join a black-ops group. Conversely, underperformance might force a pilot into a transport ship. The important part would be to make the story line engaging either way.
[*]Span a long period of time (4 to 5 years) to make it feel more epic and to allow some equipment and tech upgrades without feeling clichéd.
[*]Evolve the tactics in combat more than the weapons and technology.
[/LIST]
Things I would not want to see:
[LIST]
[*]Continuously adding more powerful ship/weapons/etc to selection to make the game more “big”
[*]Allowing pilot to select weapons loadout
[*]Adding shields at some point (either start with them or don’t add).
[*]Addition of some found alien tech (it is ok to join with an alien race in combat as part of the story line).
[*]The outcome of every battle determined by the player. The performance of the player in battle should determine the storyline, but rarely should it determine the outcome of the battle (unless the missions are special combat situations).
[*]Player at the top of the kill board, the NPCs in that particular squadron should be nearly as good as the player.
[/LIST]
There you have it....wow, this turned out long.
Jake
Just remember, its not the size that counts...:p
I've never gotten so much into the game while playing it.. I can still remember how I felt in some missions, or some of the dog fights I had.
Jake
Orbiter for its realistic interplanetary travel. Just wish the planets were better (hills and trees when you are closer to the planets, maybe also weather).
Freespace 2 for its story and how it all played out.
X3 for its trade and sandbox style game play.
So my perfect space sim would be a mix of them all. :)
Worf
I haven't found a good space combat sim in years
-Rick
Ding ding ding!
[QUOTE=Freejack;188355]I'd have to vote for I-War, given the story line, physics model and ship management. That said the problem with I-War is that it's trying be somewhere between cap-ship sim and a space fighter, and sometimes the player-fills-all-the-roles type of play (pilot, gunner, navi and systems management) can get kinda tedious.
In the end, the best combat play isn't going to mean a lot if the story-line isn’t interesting. The WC series have movie physics, but they are very playable because the story-line is fun and engaging.
Here would be my criteria for a good space combat game:
[LIST]
[*]Robust and engaging storyline that does branch based on the players performance and actions.
[*]Realistic physics, but with available flight control ads – mission strategies should be allowed to take advantage of the physics, for example: a mission where fuel supply is critical, so the player may choose to “coast” in certain sections.
[*]Limit the simulation to smaller combat vehicles, fighters, bomber, small transports instead of allowing control of cap-ships, but make the piloting those ships as realistic as possible, including takeoff/landing/docking/refueling, etc
[*]Force the player to truly qualify for each vehicle type before they are allowed to fly combat in that machine, but at the same time allow the player to stick with a particular craft through-out the game if he/she chooses and the storyline still advances.
[*]Based on the players performance, give the player opportunity to enroll in other squads/missions/etc for example a particularly skilled player may be given the opportunity to join a black-ops group. Conversely, underperformance might force a pilot into a transport ship. The important part would be to make the story line engaging either way.
[*]Span a long period of time (4 to 5 years) to make it feel more epic and to allow some equipment and tech upgrades without feeling clichéd.
[*]Evolve the tactics in combat more than the weapons and technology.
[/LIST]
Things I would not want to see:
[LIST]
[*]Continuously adding more powerful ship/weapons/etc to selection to make the game more “big”
[*]Allowing pilot to select weapons loadout
[*]Adding shields at some point (either start with them or don’t add).
[*]Addition of some found alien tech (it is ok to join with an alien race in combat as part of the story line).
[*]The outcome of every battle determined by the player. The performance of the player in battle should determine the storyline, but rarely should it determine the outcome of the battle (unless the missions are special combat situations).
[*]Player at the top of the kill board, the NPCs in that particular squadron should be nearly as good as the player.
[/LIST]
There you have it....wow, this turned out long.
Jake[/QUOTE]
I agree with most of these things, but feel that the "omni-role player" is best resolved by suitable application of multiplayer connectivity. While I'm a god awful pilot in most cases due to poor reflexes, I typically find myself enjoying micro-managing various subsystems, targeting and all that. As with many modern flight simulators covering dual- and triple-seat flight configurations, each player assumes the role that particular occupant's flight duties would entail (Specific examples don't come to mind, but I know there are several). I'll reinforce that I am not a good pilot, and that I take enjoyment from winning as a team.
I also like the qualification requirements. Newbies shouldn't be thrown behind the seat of a craft they do not know how to fly. That's just a recipe for in-game disaster and a bad time for the player. A trick I saw used successfully was a simple qualification course that allowed a good player to breeze through it in minutes, but clearly tested the limits/broke the inexperienced. Passing the course with x number of points meant you earned the unlock for it. At the same time, practicing on the course allowed pilots to learn how exactly to use the craft while holding them to a challenging goal. Boring training sucks.
We've kinda delved into a space combat sim, not a space simulator (like Orbiter), is that what you had in mind, or were you thinking of something like FS10 in space.
Jake
Right now I am working on rendering a solar system to scale :)
I agree with most of these things, but feel that the "omni-role player" is best resolved by suitable application of multiplayer connectivity. While I'm a god awful pilot in most cases due to poor reflexes, I typically find myself enjoying micro-managing various subsystems, targeting and all that. As with many modern flight simulators covering dual- and triple-seat flight configurations, each player assumes the role that particular occupant's flight duties would entail (Specific examples don't come to mind, but I know there are several). I'll reinforce that I am not a good pilot, and that I take enjoyment from winning as a team. [/QUOTE]
The issue with combat skills vs system management could be resolved by through through having very distinct vessel classes through which to play the game. Fighter and Bomber classes will require more combat and gunnery skills where recon, supply or command vessels would require much more system and tactical management skills
The cool thing is that by having 4 to 6 distinct vessel classes, one could increase the replayability dramatically. Each class would tell the story from a different storyline line with intersections of the main story at critical points like major battles. The challenge would then be creating a balance in how engaging the between different classes would be (ie only the combat vessels are exciting. This could be achieved by making the storying more revealing and important in the less combat intensive type classes.
Jake
Right now I am working on rendering a solar system to scale :)[/QUOTE]
I think the point there is that a good story, whether linear or branched, is one of the most critical elements to whether a game is fun.
Jake
On a user-generated story, the problem is, unless it's a MMO-type game with a dedicated group of players (ala Eve) there is no such thing a user-generated story. In single player games, it really just becomes a set of objectives, not a story. In MMOs, most require the devs to keep adding new plots and story lines to move the story forward.
In the end we want to be told a good story and a good storyteller provides a unique avenue to allow the story to unfold.
Jake
I like the space sim games like X and Privateer, but I really preferred the more linear story driven space combat games like X-Wing/Tie Fighter, Wing Commander, and Freespace.
Okay, let's the three of us make a game.
Jake