Return to “Kickstarter Campaign”

What stretch goal would you most like to see?

You may select 1 option

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#181
JoshParnell wrote:Wormhole Generator
An incredible device that requires enormous amounts of power to sustain, but, when activated, creates a wormhole at the chosen location in space. The destination of the wormhole is unknown: it may take you to a system that you've already found, it may loop back to the same system, or it may link to a system in a distant and completely new region of the universe. This will enable exciting possibilities for wealthy players, as you'll actually be able to modify the connectivity of space. You can, effectively, create permanent links to other systems (although you will not be able to choose the destination, so it's a bit of a grab-bag). Wormholes may well open up great new opportunities for trade and exploration!
I'm thinking that the Wormhole Generator could gain a lot more interest if it wasn't such a ... toy.

Sure you can create a trade route - but only if you use "enormous amounts of power to sustain" which would make it enormously unprofitable!
Huge efforts are usually undertaken for exploitation, not for exploration which requires covering many systems and is better done with a fleet of small ships.

You also cannot create a useful trade route if it's random!
I'm assuming that you can't quickly reset the wormhole over and over because then you might as well make it targeted...
If there is activation time or resource gathering involved then all you achieve is that players use an entire fleet of wormhole generators or cargo ships until they get a "hit" to the right destination. It shouldn't require large scale micromanagement to make a feature useful.


Instead, wormholes could be a new twist.
Require a station / generator on both ends. High production cost, minimal if any upkeep. Could even charge a fee to AI ships that use it and increase your "business relation" with these factions.
Ships traveling through a wormhole have travel time - a min time plus something depending on distance. During that time they are incommunicado.
Due to the travel time, wormhole travel would be very inefficient over short distances.
The generator stations are vulnerable.
The more they are damaged, the greater the chance of ships in transit being... gone. Even slight damage should be dangerous so that these installations require serious protection.
Obviously, losing AI ships in "your" wormhole would get them mighty miffed at you.
This would be a great way for the player to "play" other factions through stealth missions or sabotage without requiring completely scripted missions or events. Just natural interaction with the objects in the game world...

A network of wormholes would be a strategic bonus but it would not be as exploity as the instant galaxy-wide transportation in MOO2.
Sure you could have a home system with wormholes to every single system you "own" and keep only one Stack Of Doom fleet in that system.
Except that you can't. With vulnerable generator stations you couldn't risk dropping your Stack Of Doom directly on an invading enemy.
Trading and strategic fleet movements would a lot easier but without a defense in depth, your wormhole network would be more liability than benefit.
Wormhole generators could be useful without becoming a 100x multiplier for force concentration.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#182
JoshParnell wrote: It's probably one of the easiest to implement, so we may see it in the future regardless ;) Well, actually, pretty much the same could be said of any of these features, because I personally want to see them all implemented at some point. Gah. When to stop.
So we are guessing this is just stuff you will prioritize to get into the game first? Like we could potentially see Planetary Ownership + Wormholes in the first major update after release?

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#183
Asmodai wrote: Surface:
Can you actually fly around the surface when you go through the seam to a planet?
No I don't think so.

I'm guessing it will be things more like a cutscene where your ship glides gracefully down through scattered clouds over a lake with sunset reflecting in the water.

"If you vote for this goal, I'll make sure to beautify planets: clouds, varied (procedural) vegetation, beautiful atmospheres, water, etc. This doesn't include seamless planetery landings, but it does include a lot of eye candy when you do land!"
Last edited by Ixos on Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#184
I don't get why cockpits are so far behind. Come on guys it's a critical part in any space sim game, it's basically 90% of the immersion ! Everything on this list is beyond awesome, but i really can't imagine a space sim game without cockpits, it just doesn't make sense !

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#185
Well I for one don't like cockpits: they get in the way of visibility. I do not understand people who want cockpits in games like this. I mean, I get that it might be nice for immersion and for games like star citizen, but other than that I'm pretty sure I'd turn it off (hope that remains possible!).

Anyway, I voted for internal space stations: pretty much a must imo for having a nice feeling of being safe/being able to trade and to flesh out that part, like freelancer did. It may not look like much, but imo it adds a lot of feel.

I also chose that because I saw the docking bays were going to win anyhow :p

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#186
Sheoth wrote:I don't get why cockpits are so far behind. Come on guys it's a critical part in any space sim game, it's basically 90% of the immersion ! Everything on this list is beyond awesome, but i really can't imagine a space sim game without cockpits, it just doesn't make sense !
Sure it does. The mother-of-all-space-sim-games (ELITE) doesn't have or need a cockpit. All you need is a HUD that tells you everything you need to know about your ship's current state.

I want to see beautiful views of the surrounding space on my screen. I don't want to see cockpit architecture and gauges taking away half the screen size. And I especially don't want to have to point and click on animated switches or buttons in order to control my ship. Yes, it may be "realistic", but it's over-complicated and unnecessary in a game. If you want realism, apply for a job as an astronaut and spend years training how to press all the buttons and, errmmm… handle all the handles, before you ever are allowed to take off. That's not what I want from a space game. In a game I want to take off and control my ship immediately, and as intuitively as possible. Each look I have to take on a cockpit (and—even worse—use it for something) only distracts from enjoying space.

Just my two cents worth of thought about cockpits.

I'm still voting for the wormhole generator.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#187
Yeah you said it better, but that's my line of thinking too: it just ruins the feeling of being in space, because you can see so little of it.

Also: the wormholes are very interesting too... but I feel station insides are more basic. Wormholes feel like a cool addon, if there is time/money for such things. Space station insides just seem more essential imo.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#188
I am in the camp of wanting HUD and no cockpit, but some have suggested that for it to be optional would be good and of course that would keep me happy too.

But for this round of vote I went for procedural music generation, because now thinking about it this game I am thinking is sure gonna be superb graphically and really playable. But of course the background music is a different sense and although perhaps (or perhaps not?) procedural music may not always be up at the quality of composed pieces, the fact that it can be constantly changing would be so cool. Or maybe I am wrong with that assumption? Could it be made to be ever changing within the game and still sound mostly good?

Certainly the procedural music that I have heard so far I have liked :)

Just noticed you added ranks "Lieutenant Commander". Like it !

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#189
I'm surprised procedural music isn't getting more votes
Jason Schupfer wrote:I am in the camp of wanting HUD and no cockpit, but some have suggested that for it to be optional would be good and of course that would keep me happy too.

But for this round of vote I went for procedural music generation, because now thinking about it this game I am thinking is sure gonna be superb graphically and really playable. But of course the background music is a different sense and although perhaps (or perhaps not?) procedural music may not always be up at the quality of composed pieces, the fact that it can be constantly changing would be so cool. Or maybe I am wrong with that assumption? Could it be made to be ever changing within the game and still sound mostly good?

Certainly the procedural music that I have heard so far I have liked :)

Just noticed you added ranks "Lieutenant Commander". Like it !
I agree on all points. As for if it would sound good, that's really subjective but I do believe Josh could do it. Having ever changing music would more than make up for the times it doesn't quite turn out perfect, even the most perfect track gets old the millionth time you hear it.
Image FAQ | Kickstarter | IRC | Common Suggestions

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#190
* Beautiful planets. At the end of the day, while Worm Hole Generators, Cockpits and Carrier hangar bays are nice gaming elements, nothing adds more to the immersion than a believable universe. Guys, imagine looking at your ship descending down to the planet, flying over forests and seas, watching the sun scattering on mountain tops... Yes, I know that this is not the same as Seamless Landings, but if Ixos is right, we wil get to see planets from close up and feel like being there, instead of just seeing some barren rock formation.

Have a look at ProLand's forests and tell me you are not excited about this stretch goal!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ghulpp6CPw

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#191
Netzbummler wrote:* Beautiful planets. At the end of the day, while Worm Hole Generators, Cockpits and Carrier hangar bays are nice gaming elements, nothing adds more to the immersion than a believable universe. Guys, imagine looking at your ship descending down to the planet, flying over forests and seas, watching the sun scattering on mountain tops... Yes, I know that this is not the same as Seamless Landings, but if Ixos is right, we wil get to see planets from close up and feel like being there, instead of just seeing some barren rock formation.

Have a look at ProLand's forests and tell me you are not excited about this stretch goal!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ghulpp6CPw
I'm not, and here's why.

At the end of the day, this is still a game about a guy and his ship, doing many manly things in Spaaaaace!(TM). We already know that there won't be any extensive planetary interaction (i.E., no seamless transitions, no atmospheric flight), which makes this more or less on-par with the prettification of the station interiors: it's eye candy, which actually adds little to the game besides providing a soothing backdrop and a nice overview over you planetary/orbital assets.
In a way, planets are just a variety of space station here. And to make them more than that would probably eat more time, money and assets than Josh has at his hands in the foreseeable future.
Hardenberg was my name
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#192
Sheoth wrote:I don't get why cockpits are so far behind. Come on guys it's a critical part in any space sim game, it's basically 90% of the immersion !
Negative.
I want no cockpit. No modeled instruments. Just a HUD.
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#193
I believe a cockpit is better if you can go for the immersion. If you had the occulus rift for example, where you can literally look around by turning your head, then sure, that makes much more sense. With an added cockpit, you're basically reducing your viewport, which I guess is fine if you have a monster resolution.

However, I also believe that adding cockpits should be relatively simple, I mean isn't it just a skin with the different HUD elements mapped to different parts inside the cockpit? Heck, if you go that route, you might as well make the cockpit a toggle-able UI element.
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.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#194
... I find it amusing that people are pointing to the Oculus Rift as a reason to have visible cockpits, when it is the exact technology that would be used in spacecraft (in reality) to get rid of limited physical consoles.
I Pledged: $45 - BLACK FRIDAY BETA
Linux user. Crafter/Trader.

Re: Stretch Goals Poll

#195
Docking bays and carriers is high and I can see why flying into a ship or station is really cool and is fundamental to ED and SC.
If I could choose a 2nd option after the procedural music generation it would indeed be the docking, although in the original Elite I was so pants at docking without the docking computer, crashed so often.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron