WHAT IS THE NEXT BIG THING? ...and WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ,or not like IN IT

[gbjbaanb]

Gerbils with guns could be a good thing, don't be so quick to write them off.

For example...

The gerbils are coming (ie a hairy, buck-toothed, mammal-based race) and they're armed. They appear in a far corner sector and proceed to blow everything in up to bits, then they slowly freight in their wheel-shaped base station, re-equip and move on to the next sector.

The race who's just been given a kicking complains and the other races get together to talk about putting a legal framework in place for the defence of the galaxy, but in the meantime.. the gerbils take over sector by sector. Of course, you as a player can get a load of battleships together and fly in their to repulse the little buggers, which would effectively mean a lot of ships, much fleet combat, and basically a serious mission that gets harder the longer you leave it.

A bit like final fury, except they come to you and become part of the universe and have a real knock-on effect.

[nap_rz]

here's a big question for you X series fans all :

what if the next big thing is something that going to be released on consoles too?

[X2-Illuminatus]

Then egosoft will hopefully has many more sales.

[perkint]

what if the next big thing is something that going to be released on consoles too?

I don't think it's an "if". Bernd suggested a year or two back that developing for just one platform was not economically viable any more. Can't remember the exact quote, but it's on here somewhere in an interview with Bernd promoting X3TC before release...

Tim

[X2-Illuminatus]

You probably mean this one.

[notaterran]

this probably wont be done but id love it did happen, the ability to walk around stations and ships and even help board enemies ships in a fairly basic FPS way. Obviously there would be a lot of copy/paste "maps" and not asking that every single capital ship is fully mapped out because that would be basically impoosible to do what with most destroyers and carriers being near 1km and 200-500mt wide and tall. No i mean just a couple of rooms and corridors like say the bridge, hanger, armoury etc

Actually, in X2 you could fly inside the station a little bit, and then dock your ship. But I like the idea of having some form of elementary FPS element for the stations and big ships. I agree with you that some basic design would suffice (the first Deus Ex accomplished a lot with very few polygons). But if you’re thinking of FPS in terms of boarding a ship, you need a team to develop the ships and universe and another one for a Ghost Recon-type of game set in space. It would be a monumental game, but Egosoft would probably need the combined budget of Valve and Ubisoft (not to mention hiring people with experience in FPS such as John Carmack or Warren Spector).

[perkint]

Thanks X2-Illuminatus that is exactly the one I meant. I found it very revealing, actually telling us a lot about TBNT (still space game, but breaking away from a lot of the limitations of existing X games, etc).

The phrase I was previously referring to was:

At the moment it's in fact necessary to develop big projects for at least one of the main consoles as well.

States things quite explicitly I would say...

Tim

[Edit]Although quickly skimming it again, I was obviously wrong about it being during the X3TC promotion, since it was discussing porting it to Mac...

[BigBANGtheory]

For me I would like TNBT to be a break from the traditional X-Universe so that Egosoft are free to experiment with new ideas which wouldn't conflict with their work so far.

I would like TNBT to be a scalable game engine this time, able to utilise modern PC hardware.

I would like TNBT to be successful.

I would like TNBT to learn from the recent sucess of DCS A-10 Warthog and how attention to detail inspires SIM fans including support for TrackIR and HOTAS systems.

I would NOT like TNBT to be limited by a 32bit single threaded architectecture using only DirectX9.

I would like to see TNBT include a beta test where feedback from users is listened to and acted upon.

[perkint]

I would NOT like TNBT to be limited by a 32bit single threaded architectecture using only DirectX9.

Not likely to be. TNBT development timelines are such that multicore (and possibly 64b although not so sure on that one) is virtually guaranteed to be supported. And that's ignoring comments from Bernd in interviews mentioning optimising multicore processing whilst working on X3TC

I would like to see TNBT include a beta test where feedback from users is listened to and acted upon.

You mean much like X3TC did? Somehow I doubt Egosoft will drop that approach...

Tim

[christina one dash one]

beta testing ! wow would love to be in on that!


chris

[pjknibbs]

beta testing ! wow would love to be in on that!

chris

Then sign up for level 5 DevNet access and you may well get the chance! However, don't think that this is a just a crafty way of getting to play the game early--beta testing is tedious, repetitive work where you're generally just testing whatever got fixed in the last update.

[Uncle Ruckus 42]

If I had a wild guess I'd say the TNBT is gonna be like Evochron Mercenary, but better graphics and all the complex building and mission stuff from X3TC, and hopefully way more detail on the planets, but that game did some cool things.

What I want: Cockpits, the ability to blow up, take over, tax, or otherwise conquer planets. Faster ships, boardable stations, the ability to become a corporation and become universally traded (and even have npc ships join your side or give you investment capital if you meet certain requirements). Likewise the ability to actually join a specific faction or pimp out your fleet in a big battle in exchange for a hefty fee from a race that needs you.

A few more unknown sectors to build in, better way to place stations would be good too.

What I don't want: an MMO, I have never enjoyed a game like that. EVE was really dissappointing to me.

[SinisterDeath]

Well, I would have to say that if anythings, its going to be like X3, either a direct sequel/prequel (Aka during the initial tera-formers gone-bad?)
Or a new Space/Trade/Combat/sim IP.

Ideally, I'd say they' would take it to a whole new level. (And something i'd probably kill people for if the following comes into existance)

Something along the same scale of X3 (sector wise), With planetary landings, ground vehicles, and a player-character you can actually run around as.

Everything on the ship/Ground vehicles/Player can be 'upgraded', either in the manner of X3, or other game types.

Escentially meaning, Your ship would have methods be it direct tune-ups, to new 'parts' to make it faster/better weapons/accuracy/ect.

Same with the vehicles, (Aka go from a V6 to a V8 for instance)

And the player would have there own 'inventory' in the manner that they'd have there 'clothes' there 'armor', there 'weapons.

Idealy the game would start from on-planet, You would have to 'work' your way up, be it through honest-trading, police work, or thug-pirate work. (Obviously a varrying amount of combat).

From there, you could develop your own-planatary economy, a fleet of vehicles to deliever/buy/sell/trade items you either produce, or are the middleman in.

From there you'd be able to export/import from the interplanatary level.
(Including planets with actual 'atomspheres', 'gravity', and landing anywhere 'on' the planet.

It would be 1 part sim city, 1 part x3, 1 part spore, 1 part battlefield.

I think to make the leap into 'multiplayer'
The game wouldn't have a true-mmorpg feel to it, but rather, be cased on a more open-server model.

Meaning, players could 'login' to a server someone hosts on there computer (or on a dedicated server) So you could 'lan', co-op, or say, 64-128-256-512 players on a server.

You would all start at either, same planet, various planets, ect.

Obviously there could be different game starts, different races, including those that start in-space. (preferably unlocked like in X3 after you achieve, say, space flight.)

The biggest thing is, online-death couldn't be pernament. Instead it would most likely have to fall-back to either a 'clone system' or a type of 'heir' system (people breed like bunnies! ) (Could be hilarious to see a guy, get toasted, and come back as 'Sally Sadals'.

Singleplayer would still be death = reload.

[Argon tactican Justin]

I think to make the leap into 'multiplayer'
The game wouldn't have a true-mmorpg feel to it, but rather, be cased on a more open-server model.

Meaning, players could 'login' to a server someone hosts on there computer (or on a dedicated server) So you could 'lan', co-op, or say, 64-128-256-512 players on a server.

Many of your ideas would mean adding more variables to the game that have to be sorted through. With this quote, for instance, the problem is that everything that all those people did would probably have to be sent to the host's computer for their CPU to go through, even if they weren't in the same sector/on the same planet. That would put a great deal of stress on the CPU and internet connection of the host's computer, if I understand how such servers function

[StarSword]

Yeah, my Internet connection is underpowered as it is. If I tried to play an X4 like that, I'd be throttled back to 6KB/s in five seconds.

[VincentTH]

Yeah, my Internet connection is underpowered as it is. If I tried to play an X4 like that, I'd be throttled back to 6KB/s in five seconds.

There is also the issue of proximity to the server.

I have played EVE online and AirRivals, 2 MMOs. The proximity to the server, or lack thereof, (both in terms of ping time and in terms of Scheduled events) make people like me, who live across the Pond, was a Beta tester for both games, but end up giving up on the games. 2 perfect examples:
- Scheduled events at 2AM my time
- You see your enemy within range (1800m), in a split of a second, you bring up your shield, then wam!!! you are dead before being able to fire a shot, because when you saw the enemy at 1800m, he was actually on top of you already at the server!!!

On the other hand, games like Starcraft II , while not an MMO, do have frequent disconnections that berated the customers like me. And I have a 3MB/s Cable connection!!!! Imagine a 1 hour struggle, then when you almost won, BattleNet disconnects you for a split of a second, then kicks you out, and tags you with a loss!!!

back on topic TNBT:
I don't mind Steam that much, but I don't like the fact that I cannot play DiD at gramma's house because my brother in law refuse to enable the game ports!!!! For the past 3 years or so, I wish that Steam developers wrap the TCPIP data inside HTML traffic, such that game ports need not be enabled to play the game!!!

[Argon tactican Justin]

The only two conditions that TNBT MUST meet in order for me to even consider it are:
1. NOT MMO
2. Hard copies sold in the United States. I can't even get Steam updated to update the games I got hard copies for because of a Dial Up internet connection, and since it won't let you play Steam games that haven't been updated and won't let you update them until you update Steam, I can't play those games It's part of the reason my hard copy version of X3TC is only patched to version 2.5 (which is the version it came as)

[StarSword]

Good, another nail in the X-MMO's coffin. Allow me to quote myself:

the real money is with MMOs or console gaming. Radon Labs, Katauri Interactive,... Egosoft?

Well, Bernd has previously stated agreement with the console part, but I doubt (and hope) not MMO...

Tim

Seconded on the MMO part. Here's what I think of MMOs:

* fires Hammerhead missile *

MMOs are only fun if you can keep the n00b-pwners and l33t-skill-braggers (read: assholes) out. (Not to mention the time-wasting idiots who use a video game as a chatroom, like what RuneScape has become. That's what e-mail, texting, instant messaging and the goddamn telephone are for.)

Include a way to report and ban trolls, n00b-pwners, braggarts, and other such wastes of organic matter, and it's a solid plan. However, since political correctness and Terms of Use policies typically don't allow for people to be blocked from a game just for being jerks, an X-universe MMO is an inherently bad idea for the serious gamers who are in it for enjoyment and don't mind giving newbies a leg up, rather than sniping them just to watch their heads explode. An MMO would poison the great community of X-gamers that is this forum.

Co-op and/or competitive multiplayer, sure, as long as you include LAN compatibility. Blizzard caught a lot of flak for leaving that out of StarCraft II multiplayer; gamers have to log on to Battle.net to play against somebody sitting at the same table, whereas in original StarCraft you can use UDP or TCP/IP for multiplayer games.

It's also nice to know I'm not the only guy on this board with a crappy Internet connection.

[EternalSpace]

I hope we can walk around in ships/stations and go on planets. Hopefully an expanding randomizing Universe. The ability to own a sector and tax the residents. Run a police/military company (Sector Presidents can buy contracts with you!) The ability to make planets and suns for Sectors you find that are empty. And be able to destroy planets to make asteroid fields.

I'd like LAN play or Custom Massive Multiplayer servers so I can have my whole household in my universe along with people I invite. Maybe have it running the universe as long as the server is up, no need to actually be in the game.

NO NO NO FORCED MMO!!!!!!!

[imperium3]

I'd rather TNBT went in a different direction from the way the X series was headed. That went for larger and larger-scale combat and trading while disregarding the exploration that made XBTF so successful. Partially that was due to features that weren't remotely feasible when BTF was developed.

I'd like to see a game more based on exploration, seek out new worlds and all that. For example, one mission might involve being sent to a star system to identify a site for a new outpost. Once you pick a site (with the required resources) the outpost gradually is built and grows over time. That sort of thing.

I haven't really seen this in a game, though Mass Effect perhaps came closest with regards to exploration. That game also showed why planet landings are a bad idea, however - they require a substantial amount of effort to do, and even then aren't particularly interesting. The only really worthwhile thing you could put on a planet is an RPG or RTS element, neither of which would fit in at all with the kind of space sim Ego are good at developing. And while making it console-compatible won't go down well with most of the fanbase (as the specs of modern consoles are waaay behind what a PC can do), it will at least force Ego to design a simpler UI!

Above all though, I hope it's not multiplayer. Singleplayer games are so much easier to get hooked onto.