So you found it then, Nathan.

? I found what? I'm not sure what you're referring to...

I was referring to the disaster that was Elite blue space which even DB said was...unfortunate.

Lol, yes I did.

chaosavy, im honest with you.

I didnt back VD1 back in the day because it looked so awful and screamed "amateur" purely from its art style, that i couldnt get myself to put money in it.

And if i, with my very generous attitude towards indie games and easy hype-abiliy didnt get inclined to back it, its pretty certain that others thought the same and withheld their funds.

Regardless of the actual quality, if it looks bad at first glace it will be taken up as bad.

and that bluescreen stuff radiates the very same feeling to me, and knowing that the game behind it isnt as bad as it looks makes it actually worse.

Modability does nothing if the ones who could mod it dont take a second glance at your game because of questionable art decisions.

Not ment as harsh or insulting.
Im just with talv here, i want you to get all the cash you deserve, but the art stands between that.

That's fine guys. Its not going to be black - but it doesn't mean its going to be blue/the same - is all I'm saying.

Cornflakes - VD1's KS art looked pretty bad in comparison to the final product - my opinion. The added toon+outline shader made me hate the old and love the addition.

I'm not super concerned with art - because - I can't afford it and I don't have the skill for it, nor does it really motivate me. Many games are successful - despite of art - for example Mount and Blade (which inspired me to make Void Destroyer).

Void Destroyer 2 only needs to be as successful as the original - and I can keep making games the way I want to make them (I've been told fairly often by players that they love them - though maybe more often that they don't). Still I nearly can't lose, because the space sandbox genre is bigger than the space/dogfight/RTS linear game genre.



I appreciate your feedback - the above is just where I'm coming from.


Oh but he - let's change topic -

You guys are less into the combat - while I lean more heavily in that direction - so what would you add to a space sim/sandbox game that would improve the "non-combat" aspects.

chaosavy wrote:Oh but he - let's change topic -

You guys are less into the combat - while I lean more heavily in that direction - so what would you add to a space sim/sandbox game that would improve the "non-combat" aspects.

Just remember, you asked... These are my likes in a space oriented sandbox

Exploration
- Stuff to actually find
Extensive trading
Building (stations, ships, production chains)
- Management
A fully working background economic simulation
Colonization
- Management

A fully fleshed out and working X-4 is what I'd like...

That's great - now a bit of a harder question:


So the way I tend to play space sandbox games (so thus my rough plan is) - do small missions, buy bigger ship, do harder missions, buy fleet (including economy ships), buy stations, conquer bases - type of progression.

Missions tend to be combat oriented, "escort/defend" or "rob/bounty hunt" - type missions right now - so the question is:

How would the "less combat" way of making money (aka progressing through the game) work?

How would this fit into the "start small" - usual way of having space sandbox (versus starting with a trading ship already to do trading).


One way is I could toss a trading ship somewhere for the player to find - but how would the new less combat oriented player know where to look?

it could work by introducing parts of the economy that have a very low entry barrier, but high turnover for its entry cost.

mining, exploring (scanning asteroid fields for valuable ore locations and selling those locations)
or non-violent mission types (that possibly include mining and exploring), courier missions,
scouting missions ("i know somewhere theres a base of them, you are on neutral terms with them, find the base for me")
support in construction jobs etc etc.

theres many things that could happen in your world and could serve as entertainment for the player.

Cool - I already have a courier mission (which tends to result in enemy attacks - but the player could out run them versus engaging).

Scouting field missions are cool - I had those planned - but finding rich roids is a bit nicer touch.

I might introduce mining at a smaller scale as well - versus current largerish ships and hugeish ships.

Oh, and kindly make mining more enterntaining than "shoot this asteroid for 5 minutes straight".

wizaerd wrote:

chaosavy wrote:Oh but he - let's change topic -

You guys are less into the combat - while I lean more heavily in that direction - so what would you add to a space sim/sandbox game that would improve the "non-combat" aspects.

Just remember, you asked... These are my likes in a space oriented sandbox

Exploration
- Stuff to actually find
Extensive trading
Building (stations, ships, production chains)
- Management
A fully working background economic simulation
Colonization
- Management

A fully fleshed out and working X-4 is what I'd like...

Basically, he wants to work while he's off work.

Yeah if you are making a sandbox, follow through properly, simulate EVERYTHING.
AI need to make money to repair their craft, and need to have money to buy more ships.

If you do simulate everything then the game gets a ton of depth and complexity for the small cost of simulation.

Missions could be as simple as Alpha Sector ZZY Station Q is having severe hardware issues,, and needs oxygenators (all high tech made up stuff) in order to keep their life support going. The player can either build said units, depending on har far they've progressed... Hmmm, you said starting out... Ok, they can go pirate it from some innocent trader (ala combat), or they can find a vendor who has an excess supply of them in which case they can be bought for cheap, or perhaps even bartered for, they can sneak in stealth like and steal them...

Not everything has to avoid combat... a passenger mission could escalate to the point where combat is required, but there should be other avenues as well... escape, barter, bribe, etc...

The thing about a simulation's quests is it they need be riddled with choices (combat, diplomacy, trade, bribes). They shouldn't just always automatically devolve into combat. Finding some ancient artifact quest could include exploration, and finding said artifact is in the hands of faction A... SO I can fight faction A to get it, I can sneak in to steal it, I can pirate it myself, I can hire mercenaries/burglars to get it for me (with a possibility of a double cross), I can trade/barter for it...

Hmmm, not so sure I'm explaining myself very well... I tend to ramble a bit...

It sounds good to me, wizaerd.