Return to “General”

Post

LT vs others

#1
I just have to say, with all the hype for star citizen and Elite dangerous, THIS game to me, seems to be the one that I want to play. I HATE being forced into multiplayer and will NEVER buy a game that forces me to maintain an internet connection. I have no problem with a game that allows IP to IP playing as an OPTION though, for those who want that aspect.

Star citizen does not appeal to me very much, it has some interesting ideas, but it also seems to have some things that make me a bit reluctant to get all worked up about it.

Elite dangerous so far, seems interesting, but seems to mainly be a shooter along with trading which is okay, but it all depends on what else surrounds that as far as game play goes.

All in all, LT seems to be the one that grabs my attention and holds it, mainly because it is being made how I would probably make it if I had the skills. It's all about options, a game can be as deep and complex as the player wants it to be, or as simple as a player wants it to be. If you are playing a piano, you can hit a single key at a time and still make some nice music, but if you play chords, you can add richness and depth to what would otherwise be a single note composition.

So keep up the great work Josh.
Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
Post

Re: LT vs others

#4
Yeah I don't get it. I realize that some people like multiplayer, but what bothers me is that so many seem to think it's the only way to play. I used to like the old IP to IP method.

I think the only reason most companies want that internet connection bull is because they want to control how people play. The whole trend seems to be moving towards those companies saying it's our game, you play it how, when, where, why we say to.

I miss the days when I bought a game on a floppy, stuck it in my 1541 drive and it worked, no bugs or rarely, and I could play it anytime I wanted. Since I had a physical copy, I didn't have to rely on the internet to be able to play, in fact, I STILL have those C64 floppies and my Amiga 3.5's.
Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
Post

Re: LT vs others

#5
Agreed,

I also am more excited about this game than either of the two mentioned. I don't mind multiplayer games, I have played Eve for a few years now, but I feel my self easily getting bored with that game often because of limitations that are put on you by both the developers and the other players. Of all the aspects to get excited over in this game, the data editor is the most exciting for me because data editor = options :D

Really looking forward to this game, I am saving up vacation time from work and even came back to work early from a surgery so that I can enough days left to take a couple off when it is released. That's not overboard right?? :lol: :lol:
Post

Re: LT vs others

#7
I prefer single player games. One of the many reasons I'm here. :D

But remember there is a sizable chunk of Star Citizen you can play offline called Squadron 42 and as Draglide12 says you have the option of private servers. Incidentally you will also be able to play Elite:Dangerous offline if you so desire. ;) :)
Post

Re: LT vs others

#8
All of them can be played solo. I know.

Just like you can play Battlefront 1942 solo.
But is that really the main focus of development or a tacked-on single player mode utilising multiplayer gameplay?
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: LT vs others

#9
Squadron 42 is designed as a single player game. The Elite Dangerous offline option will be fully functional but you end up losing the dynamic PU obviously. I can live with that. :thumbup:

Didn't someone I am acquainted with once say that you could never have enough space games.
Post

Re: LT vs others

#10
I think Minecraft did a good job with that singleplayer/multiplayer aspect though.

I'm still looking forward to SC.

Also, welcome to the forums OyvindLT! :wave:
Image
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.
Post

Re: LT vs others

#11
I may end up buying both anyway. Depends on how they turn out.
But during the early fundraising they sounded extremely multiplayer heavy. Like 95% talk about how cool this or that would be in multiplayer. Oh, and you can play a crippled version of the game solo.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post

Re: LT vs others

#13
I don't think you will be dissapointed Gazz. You have to dig deeper with Star Citizen because the most vocal of the fans tend to be the militaristic joystick jockeys who live for multiplayer. I still have to see if I can live with the PU of Star Citizen when I have implemented the "go away" options which will be provided for those who don't particularly want to meet other players. If it still doesn't work for me I will be out of there quicker than you can say afterburner. Then it will be private server time. :)
Post

Re: LT vs others

#14
A big problem with a lot of strategic single player titles is that the opposing AIs are too easy to beat and given that, the game gets boring. That is less of a problem with a sandbox.

Here is an idea that is being added to Pandora (a 4x game a la Alpha Centauri that has both single player and multiplayer support.) In multiplayer anyone can join a game and take over one of the AI players. When anyone leaves, the AIs kick back in. That is pretty cool, bu you can also play a game in single player and then stop the game and email it to someone else who can then start playing single player as any of the players. They can play it for awhile and then email the game back. With something like this in place it would be possible for different players to share a universe, although not at the same time. This would be a "poor mans' multiplayer that might make sense for LT.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

cron