Return to “Dev Logs”

Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#16
Victor Tombs wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 7:17 pm
@ Distant

It looks like you are going to be busy again, Distant. I'm looking forward to your next video. :thumbup: :angel:
HA! No kidding :)

I did Lindsey's PAX review first, because I just couldn't resist gameplay footage. But I've been making notes on THIS dev log for a few days now too... there's just sooo much packed into this one.

Soon (tm) :ghost:
Shoot ALL the things!
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#17
Its really good to see that things are progressing. I don't know much about coding but my understanding from reading every devlog is that you guys are working on the engine that makes the beast go. The under the hood stuff. And now that is mostly done and you guys are moving to build the actual game play that goes on top of it soon. Is that right?

If so, IMO, it might be time to try expand the team, maybe someone that can help build the AI, work on things "on top" of the engine that is being built, or just help with the leg work. Because new problems will arise, some things might take longer than expected, and if you guys can get more man power into it you can get more flexibility instead of having to fix every problem pretty much one at a time.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#18
lmaluko wrote:
Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:26 pm
Its really good to see that things are progressing. I don't know much about coding but my understanding from reading every devlog is that you guys are working on the engine that makes the beast go. The under the hood stuff. And now that is mostly done and you guys are moving to build the actual game play that goes on top of it soon. Is that right?
You are quite right about all of the above, yes. :) I can't speak to the second part of your post, though; I don't know Josh's thoughts on that.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#21
I've been lurking in these forums for more than five years and will honestly say I can't remember a more exciting time for LT's development than now.

Thank you Josh, Lindsey, and Adam, for your perseverance and hard work. All of this effort will pay off in the end.

I should say: I'm getting a sense -- and perhaps this is deserving of its own thread -- that by way of its development trajectory and its intense focus on modularity and moddability, LT is shaping up to be a prime fit for Steam's Early Access. I'm not saying this to get a needlessly early hold on the game, but I do think there have been quite a few examples of space games -- I emphasize space here -- that have built up a snowballing community by means of early access, developer responsiveness and gradual inclusion of features, supported by helpful doses of twitch streamer support. I don't even follow the space games scene, but can immediately think of games like Space Engineer, Avorion, and Astroneer that have successfully implemented this model. It might be worth considering when LT becomes a great game that people can play, and marketing that great game so that people can discover it becomes the main issue.
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#23
alpan wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:02 am
I should say: I'm getting a sense -- and perhaps this is deserving of its own thread -- that by way of its development trajectory and its intense focus on modularity and moddability, LT is shaping up to be a prime fit for Steam's Early Access. I'm not saying this to get a needlessly early hold on the game, but I do think there have been quite a few examples of space games -- I emphasize space here -- that have built up a snowballing community by means of early access, developer responsiveness and gradual inclusion of features, supported by helpful doses of twitch streamer support. I don't even follow the space games scene, but can immediately think of games like Space Engineer, Avorion, and Astroneer that have successfully implemented this model. It might be worth considering when LT becomes a great game that people can play, and marketing that great game so that people can discover it becomes the main issue.
I understand what you're saying, and yes, there have been other large games that did quite well on Early Access. Limit Theory might even do well there, too. The chances of Josh actually putting it up there, though, are quite slim. Limit Theory is a game where most systems need to be in place and functional before any of it works as a game, for one, and for another, Josh has always had a hardline stance on early access. He's not likely to break the promises he made to his backers - at least, not where he can help it. :)
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#24
Slymodi wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:40 am
damn
slyyyyyyyyyy!!! \o/
Blog | Twitter | Pinterest

"You’ve got to work on something dangerous. You have to work on something that makes you uncertain. Something that makes you doubt yourself... because it stimulates you to do things you haven’t done before. The whole thing is if you know where you’re going, you’ve gone, as the poet says. And that’s death."
- Stephen Sondheim
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#27
Been following your work since its earliest innovations on kickstarter (was too poor at the time to donate and get the demo T-T ). my buddy originally showed me this and another program called "infinity: Battlescape" by i-Novae, though i kept track of your work more due to the fact that it looked so beautiful. the only thing they currently have over your work, is seamless planetary landings (they rushed for release and quite a few things weren't implemented right as a result).

i have only had an account on the forums since 2014-ish, but i am prepared to wait till 3020 to play the gorgeous game. lol. the thing i find most appealing, and incredibly impressive, it the large scale of the game and how massive groups of ships in a tiny cluster have minimal FPS impact.

something i was curious about is in regards to research. now i understand the system lets you "endlessly improve" upon previous projects (fire rate on lasers for example) but is there any planned limit on such things? my impression is that, eventually, further work into such fields would produce results with no visible difference to the prior research (previously mentioned fire rate going so fast to appear as a solid beam, even with pulses due to firing taken into account), making any future endeavors in that direction essentially moot. am i wrong in this, or simply not fully understanding how the system works?
"Time is a prism, reflecting all at once." - Ademari Crest
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#28
Hey, and welcome to the forums! :wave: Or, rather, welcome to posting on the forums. :lol: It's good to see you here.

Josh has never quite seemed 100% sure on how research will work - he's moved between a few different ideas. The last idea he mentioned, though, is that there will be limits to all things, and researching one thing will degrade others. For instance:

Shields: 5
Engines: 7
Weapons: 3

The above could have its weapons improved to Weapons 5, but that would cause Shields and Engines to decrease to 4 and 6. Increasing weapons further, to our arbitrary value of 7, would pull shields and engines down to 3 and 5 respectively. You could keep going until you got to Weapons 13 (your solid pulse beam, essentially), but Shields and Engines would both be at 1.

That's the last I heard, anyway, He may have changed his mind in the past few years. :)
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: [Josh] Thursday, January 18, 2018

#30
Su-Bev Tome wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:46 pm
something i was curious about is in regards to research. now i understand the system lets you "endlessly improve" upon previous projects (fire rate on lasers for example) but is there any planned limit on such things? my impression is that, eventually, further work into such fields would produce results with no visible difference to the prior research (previously mentioned fire rate going so fast to appear as a solid beam, even with pulses due to firing taken into account), making any future endeavors in that direction essentially moot. am i wrong in this, or simply not fully understanding how the system works?
im personally still hoping for a system where values that would break the physics (like your infinite fire rate or endless ranges) always get dragged back towards some median by other advances and values that are purely numerical (energy needs, damage per shot, hp) scale infinitely.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron