EnglishGermanFrenchRussianPolishItalianSpanish
Log inRegister
 
New X game wishlist!! write here features you need in next X game
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 18, 19, 20
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 1626 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Mon, 30. Jan 17, 23:58    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Ezarkal wrote:
Otherwise, how difficult/possible would it be to implement dual-screen support? (Screens as in actual computer monitor, this time.) Have the main cockpit immediate flight info on the main screen, and the empire management windows on your side-screen. I heard it's been done in one of the previous X games (X2 I think), and I wonder what kind of engine limitation made it disappear. There are seriously plenty of games out there that would hugely benefit of this.

I like this, too - very nice. I'm a big fan of Supreme Commander, for example, not only because it's a great game, but also because you can use two screens (I like to put my main zoomed-in view on my main, and a zoomed out view on the auxiliary, for example.) Yes, it was X2 that supported this, until Microsoft changed the way Windows handles multi-monitors (I think the change was from XP to Vista, or maybe it was from 98 to XP), which made X2's multi-monitor feature stop working Sad
I like your notion: main (cockpit) view on main screen, with things such as, perhaps, a map window, property screen, trade menus, etc on the other (ideally with some degree of customisation.)


_________________
-
Station administration would like to remind guests to keep children away from the airlocks.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RodentofDoom





Joined: 27 Feb 2016



PostPosted: Tue, 31. Jan 17, 17:37    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

Something I've said

time, and time, and time again ..

Resources need 2 distinctly seperate lists in station over views

Products
Resources

Intermediaries belong in BOTH, and should have a seperate pricing structure for each case

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr.WHO





Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 2477 on topic
Location: Wroclaw - Poland
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Wed, 1. Feb 17, 20:00    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

I think that any new X-game is in danger of being either dump-down like X-Rebirth or "wide like an ocean, shallow like a puddle" (like infamous No Mans Scam).


I think that Egosoft need to look back at their X-Game motto:
"Think, Trade, Build, Fight", because none of these evolved since the time of X2 - they just made it more wide, but it still imitation that is shallow.

They need to add depth much more than adding new content of the same thing again and again.

Lets go throught each point:

BUILD:
- How is that player cannot be fully self suficient? Why we cannot build our own shipyard and obtain/steal/reverse-engineer blueprints?
- How is it that there is still NPC/hostiles spawned out of thin air like in ancient X-BTF? I don't ask for ultra accurate economy where every ore orb and every credit matter. However simple system that regulate Faction/Pirate/Xenon spawn based some factor would add depth to the sandbox...if player can affect these factors (e.g if I hunt Xenon miners there will be less Xenon patrols/invasions, if I hunt Pirate raids there will be less pirates over time)

FIGHT:
- How is it that there is still terrible game ballance ever since X2 - pick optimal "excel-sheet" wise M2 and ignore everything else as it's useless OOS? X-Rebirth is even worse, because even IS, anything but a destroyers is an useless piece of crap?
- there should be a well thought ballance between URV-Fighters-Capships. If something is useless then why waste the time and disc space to put it in game (like 90% of Albion fighters). I'd prefere to have 10 ships in where all of theme have purpose and use, rather than 50, but where only 5 are useful.
- generic mission especially the combat ones need to be reballanced - what is the point of "protect station from pirates" where several pirate light fighters attack station armed like an fortress? WHy would station hire someone to "protect" from the attack that has 0% of sucess and 0.00001% of doing any significant dammage?
- more variety of generic combat missions (e.g. Pirates hacked the station turrets and depots and send freighters to stoll the containers)
- more variety of hostiles in generic combat missions - I never saw any capships "pirate attack the station"
- more variety of hostile factions (Pirate and especially Xenons)

THINK:
Well this is hard nut to define, but to me "think" means "think about your purpose" in this sandbox and the purpose means player ability to make a meaningful and I mean MEANIGFUL impact on the universe, no matter if he is a lone pilot or CEO of giant trade empire.
- Point 2 of "Fight" part is one of such examples
- destroying/capturing/ buying out NPC stations.
- increasing or decreasing faction strenght by player actions.
- making that generic missions success/failure gives an long term effect - e.g. you failed to protect station from pirate raid then raid destroy the station and give cash/ticket/treasury bonus to pirates which then contribute to pirate spawn increase.


Additionally the think part is also where I'd put the "Exploration". The exploration part of the X-Games always had this HUGE problem since X-BTF - once you expore whole space there is no more exploration, even if you start the new game you still in the same static space.

This is the part where "procedurally generated space" would shine. Something like the old "unfocussed Jump drive" sector, but on much bigger scale like whole system or even whole uncharted region of several systems which would change every game or even within the same game.
That way you could have carefuly man-made static "Core" space and procedurally/randomly generated "Fringe" space.

TRADE:
I'm not really the trade guy, but I think that thereis several things to deepen the economy.
- replace spawns with shipyard build ships as much as possible
- make pirate-economy based on goods stolen by pirate raids (both freighter raids and station raids) - pirates should have their own black market stations and shipyards. That way if player will patrol space and hunt down pirate raiders this would reduce pirate presence in long er time.
- make xenon-economy which base on miners which transport resources to Xenon processing plants (we already have several Xenon stations), then processed construction materials are transported by Xenon freighters to Xenon shipyard - if shipyard if well stocked it build Xenon patrols and invasion fleets. That way player can "defeat Xenons" which is not possible with "magical spawns"

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vkerinav





Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 585 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Thu, 2. Feb 17, 02:58    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

mr.WHO wrote:
Additionally the think part is also where I'd put the "Exploration". The exploration part of the X-Games always had this HUGE problem since X-BTF - once you expore whole space there is no more exploration, even if you start the new game you still in the same static space.

This is the part where "procedurally generated space" would shine. Something like the old "unfocussed Jump drive" sector, but on much bigger scale like whole system or even whole uncharted region of several systems which would change every game or even within the same game.
That way you could have carefuly man-made static "Core" space and procedurally/randomly generated "Fringe" space.


Ironically, this would have been an excellent idea for Rebirth; utilize the gate re-alignment. Why do they all have to connect to somewhere uncivilized? There must be a few sectors that haven't yet been corrupted by you questionable biological life-forms. Make exploring it part of a mission--and then you stumbled across the gate to _____. Even better--an encounter with an explorer that came through the other gate.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kyrah





Joined: 14 Mar 2016



PostPosted: Thu, 2. Feb 17, 12:12    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

100% agree with Mr.Who.

ES should focus on their "Think, Trade, Build, Fight".

And not waste massive development time on half baked features like landing on stations with no real purpose while the core mechanics are neglected.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr.WHO





Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 2477 on topic
Location: Wroclaw - Poland
Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Thu, 2. Feb 17, 18:44    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

kyrah wrote:

And not waste massive development time on half baked features like landing on stations with no real purpose while the core mechanics are neglected.


Station walking would be great for Player HQ and Capships interiors (And bridge) - sadly we had none of these in X-Rebirth (capship docking platform doesn't count).

Ohh and NPC shouldn't looks like bunch of space hobos.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RAVEN.myst





Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 1626 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Thu, 2. Feb 17, 20:56    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

kyrah wrote:
And not waste massive development time on half baked features like landing on stations with no real purpose while the core mechanics are neglected.

While I agree in principle, let's not forget that 'walking on stations' was quite the loudly asked-for feature, so ES were responding to that demand. Of course, those who shout loudest are not always (dare I say, "almost never") worth listening to...


_________________
-
Station administration would like to remind guests to keep children away from the airlocks.
-
Born on Lave, raised on Freeport 7...
-
The Write Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
26072013





Joined: 26 Jul 2013
Posts: 11 on topic

Thank you for registering your game
PostPosted: Mon, 13. Feb 17, 20:46    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

My wish:

X4, please be good.

Additionally:

* Day 1 Linux support
* keep it a single player game, not multi player
* no walking, focus on space
* keep it moddable.

And I hope that Egosoft works on a good user interface and perhaps hires some people with fresh eyes and UI experience. Especially a good universe map, fleet management and station building UI.

The X games are really unique, there's nothing like them. I wish Egosoft and us that they get it right this time.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Toramo





Joined: 17 Jan 2012



PostPosted: Fri, 17. Feb 17, 13:40    Post subject: Reply with quote Print

My wish,

Just a true X.

Also, do not lie on what will be the game with a catastrophic marketing campaign like they did for XR.

Oh wait, why not after all, XR was an AMAZING SUCCESS (said Bernd).

Yes, I do not forget.
No, I'll not pre-order.

++

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 18, 19, 20
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
Control Panel
Login Data
The time now is Fri, 31. Mar 17, 00:41

All times are GMT + 2 Hours


Board Security

Copyright © EGOSOFT 1989-2017
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Template created by Avatar & BurnIt!
Debug: page generation = 0.42286 seconds, sql queries = 23