Space Combat Game Soars to Life with Starlight Inception

[WhiskeyWolf]

Now, I'll tell you what kind of spacesim I would really like seeing:

Detailed physical engine, say, Orbiter's. It wouldn't have to be as pedantically realistic, after all it would be a game where you shoot stuff in space, but the engine like that would work well for the purpose of the game I'd want to see.

Full Newtonian mechanics, no ifs, no buts. It could be alleviated by all kinds of toggleable helpers, autopilots and such, but it should be rigorously Newtonian.

Full scale planetary systems, adjustable time compression to make it workable.

Working gravity and orbital motion.

Seamless atmospheric entry and planetary landings.

Sandbox gameplay.

Modular ships with a lot of customizability, ideally with ability to create new designs from scratch and with actual physical layout affecting how the ship would handle based on physical engine. Same modular system could be used to help handle damage model.

Well simulated living universe, with many different career opportunities.

 

[Spectacle]

I don't really see the appeal of newtonian physics in a space combat game. There's no role for a human pilot in such a game, since your targets will either be too far away to see, or moving past you too fast to aim at. It could perhaps work as a kind of strategy game where you give commands to the ship computer, but not a game where you directly control the ship.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

I don't really see the appeal of newtonian physics in a space combat game. There's no role for a human pilot in such a game, since your targets will either be too far away to see, or moving past you too fast to aim at. It could perhaps work as a kind of strategy game where you give commands to the ship computer, but not a game where you directly control the ship.

What kind of a fucked up reasoning is this? Too far to see? Moving too fast to aim? You think navigating a capital class warship will be like driving a goddamn Ferrari?

 

[Spectacle]

In space there's no friction, so even large ships will reach very high speeds. Slowing down again will take time however. It is easy to see that opposing fleets will rarely have similar velocities, so most weapon fire will be at extreme ranges. It's basic physics really.

 

[Destroid]

Attack Vector has realistic modelling of 3d space combat in a tabletop setting if you want that degree of detail.

 

[DraQ]

Hey Draqs, the game Terminus has full Newtonian physics. It's interesting... but it also kind of sucks when it comes to the combat. The game itself is great though.

Looks pretty cool, judging from the video.

I like the theory that space sims died trying to compete against more visceral FPS. I would prefer for that reason any future space sims to be more like Freelancer, they should be less linear and have heavy RPG elements.

Well, but if those would be the only changes, they would have to compete with the likes of STALKER and Skyrim.

Sandbox is great, of course, especially in space, but I think that in order to not simply be shittier FPS games spacesim should capitalize on stuff that sets them apart from typical FPS games - namely conveying the fact that they are set in space.

 

[commie]

Maybe one day one will get another I-WAR game. I'd love to see an updated version of the first one at the very least.

Special Edition of Starlight Inception, including digital game soundtrack, all launch DLC, and all previous reward tiers.

Really now? Also, instead of doing this:

Dramatic and realistic storyline:

With that said, if the pledges exceed what we're asking for, the extra funding will go straight back into the game. Better voice actors, better cinematics, more art and more artists to create better levels and set pieces. A bigger, better game.

How about a story that the player is able to create himself? How about a character that isn't set in stone for a change? How about an X3 that doesn't suck?

I'm seriously disappointed that yet another team will go through all the trouble of creating an engine, models, flight physics, combat system, and so on, only to have it wasted on something that looks like a set of linear "cinematic" missions.

I like cinematic missions. Most of the open world sandbox types of space sim are boring as fuck. There's only so many cadmium hyperspace dampers you can trade from place to place and only so many respawning groups of 3 pirates you can blow away before shit gets old. The X series is a perfect example.

I'd prefer something like Starshatter did though, a battle campaign, generated missions, fixed resources. Much better than traipsing around the universe seeing the same three types of space station to trade with with a slightly differently colored planet in the background, yet also dynamic enough to provide variety.

Don't understand the appeal of the 'trading' and 'exploring' part of space sims. Playing 'stock market' mini games and 'discover what's through the jump gate' is a huge waste of time for the fun it gives. I guess it's just that the entire flying in space part is made pretty redundant.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

In space there's no friction, so even large ships will reach very high speeds. Slowing down again will take time however. It is easy to see that opposing fleets will rarely have similar velocities, so most weapon fire will be at extreme ranges. It's basic physics really.

This is what I'm taking about. Such game would be the shit.

 

[JarlFrank]

Yeah. I had lots of fun with Freelancer while the campaign lasted, but didn't see much point in playing on afterwards. Yeaah another random mission where I have to hunt down pirates just as I did before.

Then again, sandbox could be fun if there'd be some mechanics similar to Mount and Blade, as in, different space empires that have alliances/feuds so you might work for the alliance of Empires X and Y and fight Empire Z for them and actually conquer space bases and planets and they'd actually change hands and as a consequence Empire Z will become a little less powerful. And how about them not just getting infinite respawns but having a set army size that replenishes slowly (building ships costs time) so whenever you fuck up one of their patrols you actually deal real damage to them.

That would be

 

[kentable]

But then missiles would be king since they are pretty much the only weapons which can adjust for evasive maneuvers. And maybe really advanced targeting computers for the rest of your guns. A miss of millimeters at typical sublight speeds and distances means you miss by a mile by the time even lazors reach the projected target path.

 

[DraQ]

I don't really see the appeal of newtonian physics in a space combat game.

So you don't see the point of space combat in a space combat game?

 

[commie]

Yeah, the unlimited economy is what shits me most in Sandbox games: they end up being just like MMO's. How many pirates can there be in such a world or even in a sector? As soon as you leave and come back, there they are, another 5-6! How many merchant transports are making the same hoary trade route even as you're picking the off one by one? Wouldn't they dry up or go somewhere else?

The Freelancer world was mostly underused. Can't remember but you actually only needed to go to what, 13 out of 40 odd sectors? That was a waste of setting. Would have been good with much more epic quest, being better paced with more side stuff and exploration in between the main plot etc. Actually Freelancer is a bit of a bad example as that game suffered in development and was rushed and stripped bare. The X series on the other hand has no such excuse. Egosoft have had more than a decade to refine the whole sandbox formula and it's still boring as fuck. The main plot missions have gotten better, but the game is still 90% boring arse generic random respawn crap.

 

[BLOBERT]

BROS THE GUY DOES HAVE A POINT ABOUT A PHYSICS GAME BEING KINDA CRAPPY IF IT WERE REALISTIC

IN ADDITION TO HIS POINTS A CREW OR PILOT WOULD TURN INTO A THIN PASTE ON THE WALLS WITH RAPID MANUEVERING

FOREVER WAR BY JOE HALDEMAN DESCRIBES THIS TYPE OF COMBAT IN DETAIL IN ONE PART THEY ARE LIKE WELL THEY FIRED A MISSLE AT US WELL SEE IF IT HITS US IN A MONTH OR SO

 

[sgc_meltdown]

"So this is why nobody develops for a niche audience," the developer thought to himself, cornered.

 

[JarlFrank]

Yeah, the unlimited economy is what shits me most in Sandbox games: they end up being just like MMO's. How many pirates can there be in such a world or even in a sector? As soon as you leave and come back, there they are, another 5-6! How many merchant transports are making the same hoary trade route even as you're picking the off one by one? Wouldn't they dry up or go somewhere else?

The Freelancer world was mostly underused. Can't remember but you actually only needed to go to what, 13 out of 40 odd sectors? That was a waste of setting. Would have been good with much more epic quest, being better paced with more side stuff and exploration in between the main plot etc. Actually Freelancer is a bit of a bad example as that game suffered in development and was rushed and stripped bare. The X series on the other hand has no such excuse. Egosoft have had more than a decade to refine the whole sandbox formula and it's still boring as fuck. The main plot missions have gotten better, but the game is still 90% boring arse generic random respawn crap.

Yeah, this is what irks me most about the majority of sandbox games. With silly sandbox games like GTA or Saints Row, it's not a problem because the whole point is doing silly shit and laughing at driving over pedestrians. With any other sandbox that tries to offer depth - be it a space sim or something like Mount and Blade - it gets boring incredibly quickly if ships/armies spawn out of nowhere, all you can do is trade and hunt pirates, and the world around you stays completely static.

Why don't sandboxes learn from strategy games, like the Total Wars or the Pradox games? Have different countries/factions that act in the world, just as other nations act in strategy games. Ally with each other, establish trade, go to war with each other, or even build new starbases. Make the world truly dynamic. And it wouldn't even be that hard from a programming perspective, but it would add THIS much to the game because when "dynamic world and emergent gameplay" is your goal, then you better make your game world fucking dynamic.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

better make your game world fucking dynamic.

I think you know quite well how many people will settle for quantity of distraction fodder than dynamic change to the gamescape

awww yeah you're upgrading your pad in SR3 that means you're changing the city

 

[Cowboy Moment]

He does have a point though. CK2 has more "emergent gameplay" than the entire GTA series combined. What it doesn't have, is an emotionally engaging narrative, which is probably the main reason developers aren't doing this kind of thing.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

CK2 has more "emergent gameplay" than the entire GTA series combined..

haha I've been saying strategy games have more C&C than any rpg for a while now
it's just not on the personal level that people emotioneer into

the closest facsimile you can come to are the Guild games I think

 

[DraQ]

BROS THE GUY DOES HAVE A POINT ABOUT A PHYSICS GAME BEING KINDA CRAPPY IF IT WERE REALISTIC

IN ADDITION TO HIS POINTS A CREW OR PILOT WOULD TURN INTO A THIN PASTE ON THE WALLS WITH RAPID MANUEVERING

So? Put crew in hydrostatic tanks, give them neural interfaces and manoeuvre less rapidly (<20G should be fine).

FOREVER WAR BY JOE HALDEMAN DESCRIBES THIS TYPE OF COMBAT IN DETAIL IN ONE PART THEY ARE LIKE WELL THEY FIRED A MISSLE AT US WELL SEE IF IT HITS US IN A MONTH OR SO

You seem to conflate physics and tactics, BLO.

First thing first, you can have realistic physics without realistic tactics - for example Frontier has pretty good physics apart from rotation and only resolving gravity for single dominant body. It also had combat resolved primarily by matching velocities followed by dogfights at <10km range with the use of axially mounted, manually aimed lasers, plus some short range missiles with 1 minute fuel supply.

It's like implying that since STALKER allows for pretty miraculous healing, all the weapons should be replaced with nerf-guns firing colourful bubbles, which is just plain wrong.
Apart from licensed SW/ST/etc. shit there is little allure in pewpewing at retardedly shaped "starships" moving like WW1 biplanes crossed with submarines. Audience attracted by stuff like manoeuvring thrusters, railguns, countermeasures, orbital manoeuvring and velocity matching may be pretty niche, but at least it exists and won't be taken away by the newest call of derp.

Second thing, while we can reasonably predict physics of space combat, our guesses at tactics will probably differ wildly from the real thing apart from those parts that are strictly determined by physics (so there won't be stealth in space, there will be heat management, there will be unhindered six degrees of freedom movement and so on). There are countless factors influencing how you attack something, evasive manoeuvres may render long range dumb projectiles unfeasible, active defenses may neutralize seekers and fragmenting munitions at decent enough range for those weapons to be highly situational at best, various sorts of protections may limit the effective range of beam weaponry to distances allowing precise focusing on individual portions of the target. Then you have various kinds of sci-fi phlebotinum like shields and hyperdrives that may drastically alter the feasible tactics. Then you have means and motivations - in a lawless frontier style of setting you won't be spamming RKVs at tens of AUs away, you will be getting close and personal with targets that won't be even able to identify you as a threat right away, trying to inflict least possible damage to valuable stuff with retrofitted tools used as most common weapons, and combat often occuring in vicinity of other objects like planetary atmospheres, derelicts and moons.

 

[Renegen]

Sandbox is great, of course, especially in space, but I think that in order to not simply be shittier FPS games spacesim should capitalize on stuff that sets them apart from typical FPS games - namely conveying the fact that they are set in space.

Of course, we see eye to eye. The best "space" game that had great atmosphere that I played is actually called Alien Legacy. It's not really a space sim, and that says something about the space sim genre. If you're never played Alien Legacy, it's not one to be missed. Done by the creator of Starflight.

And when I think of sandbox type of games, I'm thinking of something like Starflight. A gritter, deeper Exile with graphics that don't come from the early 80s would be one of the best games ever. If people only judge sandbox space sims by Freelancer or X3, they miss the potential of the genre.

 

[BLOBERT]

BRO DRAQ I GET WHERE YOU ARE GOING ABOUT REALISTIC PHYSICS VS TACTICS AND WHAT TECHNOLOGY MAY COME

PHYSICS WILL DICTATE TACTICS TO A LARGE DEGREE FOR EXAMPLE WITH SPEED AND DISTANCE YOU CAN LAUNCH A PROJECTILE MAYBE ONE KG LARGE THAT CAN HIT LIKE A FUCKING ATOMIC BOMB IF YOU ARE APPROACHING AT 100000 KM PER SECOND AND LAUNCH IT AHEAD OF YOU AT THE SAME SPEED AND YOU WOULD NEED A POWER SOURCE LIKE A MOTHERFUCKER TO ACCELERATE A BIG SHIP OUT OF THE WAY OR SOME FAST FAST COMPUTERS AND LONG RANGE SHIT TO PICK IT OFF

MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT WE ARE MAKING SHIT UP EITHER WAY IF YOU ARE MAKING UP IMAGINARY SHIELDS AND GRAVITY TO PROTECT CREWMEMBERS AND SHIT THAN YOU CAN COME UP WOITH A MILLION IMAGINGARY THINGS THAT WILL MAKE SPACESHIPS MANUEVER BETTER

BRO OKAY I GUESS I GET YOUR POINT AND SORTA UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU ARE COMING FROM I JUST THINK THAT WE FUDGE ENOUGH IMAGINARY SHIT IN SPACESIMS THAT STRICT PHYSICS IS SORTA PERFUME ON DOGSHIT BUT THEN AGAIN I NEVER GOT INTO GAMES LIKE THAT SO I DONT KNOW WHAT I AM MISSING AND I CAN SEE WHERE PEOPLE MIGHT BE INTO IT CAUSE WE ALL HAVE OUR PREFERENCES AND I RESPECT THAT

YOU ARE A TRU BRO DRAQ

 

[BLOBERT]

AND SERIOUSLY THOUGH BRO FOREVER WAR HAS A COOL LONG RANGE SHIP FIGHT AND THE CREW HAS TO GET INTO CONTAINMENT TANKS SO THE COMPUTER CAN PILOT THE SHIP AT HIGH ACCELERATIONS I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS VERY INTERESTING

 

[Tzaero]

The Independence war games have newtonian physics and are pretty fun.



If Starlight is anything like this i'd be interested, but I doubt that it will be.

 

[DraQ]

BRO DRAQ I GET WHERE YOU ARE GOING ABOUT REALISTIC PHYSICS VS TACTICS AND WHAT TECHNOLOGY MAY COME

PHYSICS WILL DICTATE TACTICS TO A LARGE DEGREE FOR EXAMPLE WITH SPEED AND DISTANCE YOU CAN LAUNCH A PROJECTILE MAYBE ONE KG LARGE THAT CAN HIT LIKE A FUCKING ATOMIC BOMB IF YOU ARE APPROACHING AT 100000 KM PER SECOND AND LAUNCH IT AHEAD OF YOU AT THE SAME SPEED AND YOU WOULD NEED A POWER SOURCE LIKE A MOTHERFUCKER TO ACCELERATE A BIG SHIP OUT OF THE WAY OR SOME FAST FAST COMPUTERS AND LONG RANGE SHIT TO PICK IT OFF

The thing is I will need much less power to dodge it than to launch it. If it's a dumb, inert projectile, I will only have to move up to half of my length perpendicular to the direction it comes from in the same time it will take to trave massive distance from it's launch point to my craft. If it's non inert, it's going to be fragile enough to have it's guidance damaged or payload destroyed/triggered prematurely and my counterweapons will have advantage, because if they are going to be just as advanced technologically, they won't have to travel same distance.

And yeah, I will probably notice it, space is vast, empty and at 4K.
If it's not inert I will certainly notice it, notice its exhaust plume and calculate it's prime movers parameters, mass and probable payload before you even get to say "fuck, I'm gonna miss".

MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT WE ARE MAKING SHIT UP EITHER WAY IF YOU ARE MAKING UP IMAGINARY SHIELDS AND GRAVITY TO PROTECT CREWMEMBERS AND SHIT THAN YOU CAN COME UP WOITH A MILLION IMAGINGARY THINGS THAT WILL MAKE SPACESHIPS MANUEVER BETTER

The thing is that whole Sci-Fi *consists* of making shit up - it's just that the difficult part is to make up the least amount of the least shitty shit possible in order to achieve your goals.

So you can drop artificial gravity and inertial dampers, impose limitations on hyperdrives if you really need them (also try to make them possibly consistent with what we already know and account for having to relax causality if there is going to be any form of FTL), protect crew with hydrostatic tanks, account for heat management (this will limit sustained manoeuvrability and reduce usefulness of mass drivers and beam weaponry), drop shields in favour of active and passive defences (unless you can invent something plausible enough) and generally monocle up.

What you cannot justify with technology, you can try to compensate for with setting - disorganized community of frontier miners, traders and scum trying to profit from each other won't have stuff like RKV spam, for example, won't have state of the art military weaponry and targetting systems, but will have stuff like trying to get a jump on some poor fucker by trying to fly low over moon's surface, then attempting to pop him while he doesn't have much velocity nor thrust to spare when he lifts off with hold full of valuable ores and alien artefacts, while also trying to do it in a way that will live at least some of his stuff salvageable.

The thing is that you will no longer have BSB pewpew shooter on your hands, but something diamond fucking hard and absolutely .
Yes, casual gamer will probably backflip off his chair and break his neck when faced with something like this, but casual gamer is already playing fucking Call of Duty MXVII and doesn't even care your game exists, meanwhile all the actual Sci-Fi geeks will be passing out en-masse due to their brain being deprived of blood by their raging hardons, and want you to shut up and take their money once they recover.

YOU ARE A TRU BRO DRAQ

You too, BLO.

The best "space" game that had great atmosphere that I played is actually called Alien Legacy. It's not really a space sim, and that says something about the space sim genre.

Well, yeah, but the number of spacesims that don't suck is probably single digit.

And I didn't even have a PC when Alien Legacy came out.

And when I think of sandbox type of games, I'm thinking of something like Starflight. A gritter, deeper Exile with graphics that don't come from the early 80s would be one of the best games ever. If people only judge sandbox space sims by Freelancer or X3, they miss the potential of the genre.

I judge the potential of the genre by FE2 and FFE and they make me hard as fuck.

This also means that most spasims are deeply underwhelming to me.
Even I-War 2 was a massive step back - no gravity, no time compression, no accounting for Newtonian mechanics in actual game design and AI, no orbital motion, derpy backgrounds, even though piracy, subtargetting, shields and combat in general were cool.

 

[BLOBERT]

BROS I DOWNLOADED ALIEN LEGACY OFF ABANDONIA BECAUSE A FEW BROS HERE MENTIONED IT IN ANOTHER THREAD