Guess I should add I'm also not operating on the belief or intention that anything I say should (or can) push Josh or add any pressure. As far as I'm concerned, we're just fans having a friendly conversation -- if Josh takes anything useful from that conversation, great, but it's not why I'm participating.
Cornflakes_91 wrote: Flatfingers wrote:
- Complex "warp rails" (not critical to the KS vision or a Freelancer feel)
i still find that the tradelanes are an integral part of the freelancer feeling, and warp rails are the LT version of them, so an
implementation of them is necessary imo
Please note that I carefully phrased my opinion as saying that "Complex
warp rails" are not required for the Freelancer feel.
I also have strong doubts that trade lanes actually deliver anything integral to what it felt like to play Freelancer (which I did). When someone asks, "Hey, what was the main thing that made Freelancer so awesome that I should want to play it?" I'm guessing "dude, there are trade lanes to help you go faster between planets!" is not going to be the most popular response.
But I understand that people here like them, and I'm not arguing against them here. My "what would you cut if you had to?" was narrowly targeted at COMPLEX warp rails. The version in the Prototype was fine; it got the job done no worse than in Freelancer, and it wasn't as (unnecessarily IMO) detailed as the warp rails example that former-Josh said he spent days, if not weeks, developing.
Of all the many, many game features that Josh could spend extra time on to give LT its own unique and satisfying feel, a complicated way to travel quickly between planets does not seem to me to have the highest return on the investment of his time.
Actually, I remembered one more thing I meant to include in my list but forgot:
- Planetary surfaces for colony interaction (just do it from space)
This is another thing I'd hate to see go. But I have two reasons for it:
1) The time required to model even patches of planetary surfaces, plus buildings, plus whatever other UI stuff is needed, has to be considerably more than just using some existing UI gadgetry to "talk" from one's ship to a planetary colony.
2) Having planetary patches will do nothing but cause new players of LT to complain about "missing" seamless space-to-ground-and-back transitions and free flight over procedurally generated planets. Heck, I asked about that myself until Josh explained that the ground he was flying over (in Development Video #10, I think it was) was just a patch, not an entire planetary surface. By far the vast majority of people who buy and play Limit Theory after it launches will not read these forums (or anything else), and they won't give a tinker's dam for reasons why they can't fly from space to ground and back, and fly over the entire surface of planets that they can SEE (in that version of the colony management interface). They'll just complain, loudly, everywhere, that LT is "unfinished."
In summary, is a complex planet-based colony management interface a core feature for LT? I would say no. Is the simple way of talking to colonies sexy? No. Is it functional, allowing Josh to spend more time on the really LT-unique stuff? Yep.
To be clear: I am not saying I'm FOR cutting this! With maybe one exception (see above
), I'd love to see pretty much everything Josh has showed off in the first two years of LT's development make it to the game that launches. A planet-based colony management interface would certainly be cool. I can even argue that it would add to the science-fictiony feeling of the game to show radically different biomes. And I'm certain it would be a lot of fun for Josh to work on. (Love that water!)
But mcsven's question was, "What would you cut from v1 to accelerate its release?" If I take that question seriously, a colony management interface that renders planetary surfaces doesn't make the cut, compared to a space-based UI interface that accomplishes most of the same functionality with far less special coding.
I know; I'm a buzzkill.