Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Unrealistic Gameplay?

2»

Comments

  • DocBrodyDocBrody Member UncommonPosts: 1,926
    Originally posted by mayito7777

    I understand what the OP it is saying but you need to remember this is a game, I see so many people in the SC forum yelling, screaming and shouting while arguing about physics on how their ships should behave, I dont even bother getting involved.

     

    The reason of the joystick is easy to understand, makes the game fun to play, gets your adrenaline pumping, otherwise what is the fun of press button 1 for targeting, press button 2 to blow up?

    they even simulate the body movement of the pilot accuartely to g-forces, I suspect some people want it more game like and less simulation like.

     

    I think it's awesome the way it is and don't forget  the ship tweaking can chamge the flight behaviour very much

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by CallsignVega

    To start, I am a SC backer and really looking forward to the game.

    However.. watching some recent game-play footage I have been scratching my head. So obviously it is an advanced time in the future with these fighting spacecraft and fleets etc. Yet you are using a joystick to "lead" projectiles/blaster whatever you want to call them with manual aim like it's World War I bi-planes? 

    Surely such advanced technology would be so far beyond that it just seems silly. I think future space combat would be more of a tactician role, IE: EvE online where one guy runs large automated ships and selects targets etc. Doesn't actually point a ship in a direction with a joystick to aim and lead dumb projectiles. 

    So that takes us to "game-play". Would people want to see a more realistic advanced combat system or the less realistic "spin my joystick around and manually target" approach?

     

    • Maybe in the process of waging these wars they found the cost of guidance systems far outweighed the advantage of near limitless cheap ammo/weapons.
    • Maybe guidance systems don't function properly due to [some science-y thing] which is why you're still using a joystick instead of just telling the ship where and how to fly. 
    • Maybe politics are in the way. 

    Who knows. :)  If you find everything else about the game fun, i wouldn't let something like that get in the way of enjoying it.

     

    I'm sure if you were someone from the past in today's world, you'd find a lot of things about day to day life seem illogical.

    • We have the technology to make quiet packaging, but half the candy sold at the cinema is in the loudest packaging you can find short of blister packs. 
    • We all know smoking cigarettes causes cancer, yet not only is it legal in many countries, but most governments tax it and profit off of it. 
    • America went thirty years without building a new nuclear reactor (two more were finally approved in 2012) and the world is still burning fossil fuels. Corporate interests and politics seem to be the biggest hurdles to technological advances there, no? 
    • Why are we rending flesh from bones at the dinner table to get our nutrients instead of popping a vitamin/mineral pill and spending the time chatting without a mouthful of dead animal and mashed plants? 
    • Or how about war. Just... war. In the far future, you'd think we'd come up with a better way to resolve these conflicts other than throwing bodies at it. 

     

    There is so much in our lives that is insanely anachronistic or even downright primitive, but the reasons for their existence all boil down to culture, big business and politics. Sprinkle in some religion there for good measure. 

     

     

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,182


    Originally posted by DocBrody

    then you should get some kind of NASA simulator where space ships look like this and you need 3 weeks realtime for a boring trip to the moon

    Nope.

  • Agnostic42Agnostic42 Member UncommonPosts: 405

    Well, if you really want to talk about reality.....

     

    In futuristic vehicles that never need to land inside of an atmosphere they would no longer need wings, only thrusters. Picture a big reinforced ball with thousands of small thrusters mounted around it to quickly move in any direction. Dog fighting would not exist and lasers would be computer guided with only a millisecond of reaction time needed to aim and fire.

     

    Why don't we just suspend our literal minds and enjoy the entertainment value.

  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,140
    I think its called adding things that are fun for the player in the cockpit.  Why I play games anyway, not for "realism".
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,865

    It needs a few things to get me to play it or even look at the game.

    It needs several planets and only one solar system.NO radar to easily track,you have to find them in that one solar system or simply stumble onto others which should easily happen with enough players in that one solar system.

    You have to give up some of the realistic expectations just to make the game fun because we all know these ships would have breakneck speeds making it impossible to stay in contact with another player.

    The game needs to be simply WELL thought out so that nothing is too easy nor too cheesy.It needs ships that utilize several players to bring it all together.I would also like to see NPC factions so that solo players could join those factions and fight alongside npc's in their ships.

    I think a good number would be around 10-15 players to be able to navigate and handle a ship ready for combat.Fire power cannot be limitless,you need to run out of fire power so that you need to use smarts when and why to use it.Example if two combatants need to stop and recharge an onlooker could step in and destroy either in a weakened state.

    What i fear SC is going to be is lots of instance cut scenes and combat will be  what i call cheesy but i know lots of people like that Xwing sort of play style.I like lots of world content,planets,players,ships stations but i don't like endless space because realistically it would be like searching for a needle in a haystack or worse.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • They're aiming at a warplanes in space style flight model for a more Star Warsy dogfighting experience because it's a game about having FUN, not because they want to be realistic.

  • scarykids2scarykids2 Member UncommonPosts: 74

    nah i like what SC is doing with its combat, regardless if you want you that same approach as of EvE targetting system, all it takes is someone to knock out the systems on your ship, and then you can't defend yourself period, no auto targeting. i mean afterall we still gotta point guns at people, id assume we still need to do that later, other from missles being able to basically do that, i think its right where it needs to be.

     

    and EVE combat was horrid, i hated it, it's exactly what drove me away from that game

  • IXJacIXJac Member UncommonPosts: 13
    Originally posted by CallsignVega

    So that takes us to "game-play". Would people want to see a more realistic advanced combat system or the less realistic "spin my joystick around and manually target" approach?

     

     

     

     

    For myself, no.  Dogfighting manually with space fighters is more fun.  Realism has to take a back seat.

     

    Also if you want more of the automated combat approach, you could try the larger ships.  According to the "Capital Ship Systems" feature of the May Jump Point issue where Foundry 42 was discussing their plans for capital ships, many of them will have arrays of AI controlled guns.  Of course they'll probably still make it so a human gunner would do a better job.

  • scarykids2scarykids2 Member UncommonPosts: 74
    yep, the multi crew ships will have what hes looking for in a sense, the multi-management for the seperate systems, and ai controlled guns, and yes you are correct, player gunners will be better, that is if they are good at aiming.
  • Baroque9Baroque9 Member UncommonPosts: 1

    I saw many movies from fight etc and I will say it's not deeep ;p. That what I want to say is: While im watching how this ships moves, how they fight I resigned ;/. I dont feel it. Ok maybe it's becouse of movies...

    I don't know how much is finished,  graphic is briliant but is there sometinhg more than ships, and fight? Like in EVE?

  • AzothAzoth Member UncommonPosts: 840
    Originally posted by Baroque9

    I saw many movies from fight etc and I will say it's not deeep ;p. That what I want to say is: While im watching how this ships moves, how they fight I resigned ;/. I dont feel it. Ok maybe it's becouse of movies...

    I don't know how much is finished,  graphic is briliant but is there sometinhg more than ships, and fight? Like in EVE?

    So you watched many movies but never took the time to read about the game ?

    Only the employee knows what is done at this point, what is available right now is a test module for flying and fighting.

    The end product is probably more than 2 years away for everything they want to put in the game.

  • SinakuSinaku Member UncommonPosts: 551

    Not all of the ships have fixed guns just fyi. Some like the hornet have movable turrets that you control by aiming the mouse at the enemy (or somewhat ahead of it to compensate for speed and distance).

    Either way I'm not sure why this is much of a topic of discussion as I think EVE and combat similar is boring as far as MMO standards go. Not to say EVE is boring or simple, just not my cup of tea. I for one love the combat in Star Citizen since I get to pilot a Hornet until my Freelancer is available to pilot!

  • IncomparableIncomparable Member UncommonPosts: 1,117
    Originally posted by CallsignVega

    To start, I am a SC backer and really looking forward to the game.

     

    However.. watching some recent game-play footage I have been scratching my head. So obviously it is an advanced time in the future with these fighting spacecraft and fleets etc. Yet you are using a joystick to "lead" projectiles/blaster whatever you want to call them with manual aim like it's World War I bi-planes? 

     

    Surely such advanced technology would be so far beyond that it just seems silly. I think future space combat would be more of a tactician role, IE: EvE online where one guy runs large automated ships and selects targets etc. Doesn't actually point a ship in a direction with a joystick to aim and lead dumb projectiles. 

     

    So that takes us to "game-play". Would people want to see a more realistic advanced combat system or the less realistic "spin my joystick around and manually target" approach?

     

     

     

     

    Well, if the opposing faction has advanced systems as well, then the fight would have to be more manual. So I guess you can say its realistic you are not fighting an unexpecting foe caight in their sleep.

    “Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble”

  • GruugGruug Member RarePosts: 1,733
    Originally posted by CallsignVega
    Originally posted by immodium

    Also, if technology is as amazing as you predict we won't be putting humans in the attack ships. Why waste human life when you could probably fight battles from earth using a joystick?

    Amazing as I predict? They are already planning on the F35 to be the last manned fighter, and everything else passed that super high tech drones with auto targeting.

     

    How is pointing a ship at an opponent manually with a joystick and leading your target with fixed guns ala WWI Bi-Planes even a consideration?

     

    Ok, Don't get me wrong, it will be mega fun. But so completely unrealistic it's almost laughable..

     

     

     

    I saw this and had to laugh a bit. I think the idea of a "drone only air force" would be a huge mistake. Firstly, drones under autonomous control are fine and good BUT that assumes there is NEVER  going  to be any sort of spoofing or jamming that could occur. Sort of reminds me of a Tom Clancey book in which China took control of the U.S. drone fleet at will. While this writing is fiction, it is also based upon real possible fact that anything can be hacked, unlocked and hence controlled under the right circumstances.

     

    Let's party like it is 1863!

  • CallsignVegaCallsignVega Member UncommonPosts: 288

    As the OP I will chalk this thread up to yes the game-play is unrealistic, but it's also fun and it's a game. That's all that matters...

     

    /thread

  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,967
    Originally posted by Agnostic42

    Well, if you really want to talk about reality.....

     

    In futuristic vehicles that never need to land inside of an atmosphere they would no longer need wings, only thrusters. Picture a big reinforced ball with thousands of small thrusters mounted around it to quickly move in any direction. Dog fighting would not exist and lasers would be computer guided with only a millisecond of reaction time needed to aim and fire.

     

    Why don't we just suspend our literal minds and enjoy the entertainment value.

    Now that's what they need to add.  Borg ship designs.  Maybe through mods...

    image

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyenRCJ_4Ww

     

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • randomtrandomt Member UncommonPosts: 1,219

    I for one left EvE because the point and click auto-combat was just so dull. If this game has a more twitch combat method it certainly needs to use it.

    As for the notion of automatic combat in the distant future.. think battlestar Galactica's little fighters, all piloted by a person, not automated.

    In that way, perhaps there's a reason for not having combat automated.. for example electronic warfare and hacking techniques..

    New to Star Citizen or looking to try it out? Use this link to create an account 
    and get 5,000 free credits that you can use to purchase in game items.
    
    https://robertsspaceindustries.com/enlist?referral=STAR-JXHC-H4QQ 
  • aesperusaesperus Member UncommonPosts: 5,135
    Originally posted by CallsignVega

    To start, I am a SC backer and really looking forward to the game.

     **snip**

    So that takes us to "game-play". Would people want to see a more realistic advanced combat system or the less realistic "spin my joystick around and manually target" approach?

    Ultimately there's going to be a limit to how much realism u can have in a game such as this. Because, ultimately, the game needs to be fun more than it needs to be accurate.

    Leading projectiles has been done in various sci-fi ips in the past. Perhaps the most well known being star wars (though it's more sci-fantasy).

    That said, it really comes down to what type of game you want to play. Do you want to play an RTS (managing many units at once), or do you want to feel like youre there in the action? (manually aiming your projectiles).

    Personally, I think there can be room for both (games like Natural Selection have done this), but it's rare to see. And I would probably hate seeing them remove aiming entirely, as it would make the game rather dull overall.

  • sgelsgel Member EpicPosts: 2,197
    Originally posted by DocBrody

     


    Originally posted by DocBrody

     

    so you mean systems that fighter jets have today are unrealistic 900 years in the future?


     

    Fighter jets and space ships aren't the same thing, you know...

    There is no reason why a space ship should fly like a plane. Such type of movement makes no sense in space.

    There is no "realism" when you make a space ship not fly like a space ship.

    then you should get some kind of NASA simulator where space ships look like this and you need 3 weeks realtime for a boring trip to the moon

     

     

    So you went from "it couldn't possibly get any more realistic" to this comment?

    Make up your mind.

    ..Cake..

Sign In or Register to comment.