Jump to content


Photo

What happened to the good space games?


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 tranthe

tranthe

    Serf

  • Lurker
  • 1 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 08:39 PM

All-terrain boarding may be the new category within the extreme sports arena and clearly billing itself as summer's response to snowboarding, by permitting an ideal choice to skateboarding and biking. It's just like skateboards, http://www.cross.tv/blog/77316 while it's put on beefy tires and aluminum frame, and enables the client downhill maneuvers on either asphalt, grass or dirt.
 
 The Very Best Downhill Worldwide is sanctioning the game, believing that it'll be referred to as financially-promising sport soon. EDI is presently coping with ESPN to actually make sport area of the Extreme Games in Hillcrest, CA.
 
Vegas - Billing itself because the response to snowboarding, the downhill response to skateboarding along with a friendly option to biking, all-terrain boarding might provides you with the next hurry of adrenaline within the extreme sports arena.
 
No under be it adherents are right.
 
Resembling skateboards put on beefy fires through getting an aluminum frame, all-terrain boards propel their users downhill, letting them carve turns much like snowboarding on from asphalt to grass to dirt, although supplying the requisite adrenaline hurry. Even though the game remains touted by its founders heavily formerly year, the excitement may finally be growing in recognition. http://www.cross.tv/blog/77265
 
MountainBoard Sports, which introduced its inaugural MountainBoard last Feb and offered 10,000 units in 1996, elevated its dealer base from 140 to 200 while using the finish within the SIA show recently - a conference when most snowboard vendors saw their dealer base shrink.
a25d07c19100a31946a73ba1c37eebd6.jpg
 
A couple of booths lower the aisle, Earth Board Sports, Corporation. attracted a regular flow of curious buyers to check out its Earth Board, which made its official debut in Vegas recently that has since offered 5,000 units.
 
Another company, Outback, sells a 3-wheeled board around australia, while another company sells wheels alone like a less pricey alternative for people-terrain boarders trying to retrofit their skateboards for off-road use.
 
The champions of-terrain boarding believe they might bank their financial future within the sport, that was sanctioned by Extreme Downhill Worldwide - the sanctioning body that organizes downhill street luge - recently. EDI is presently in discussions with ESPN to actually make sport area of the X Games this summer time time time time in time time time Hillcrest, which, whether it happens, generally is a landmark event for that sport's visibility. The All-Terrain Boarding Association, meanwhile, created in 1996 by MountainBoard Sports, could be the sport's racing association determined 19 occasions this past year.
 
"Because groundbreaking as snowboarding was 15 formerly,In . states Hugh Jeffreys, president of Earth Board Sports, noting that even 5 years ago several ski resorts ongoing to get as reluctant to talk about the hillsides with snowboarders.
 
"Personally the main corporations are sitting back with loaded guns," based on him, predicting you will see a considerable interest within the OEM side for existing brands to provide their unique all-terrain boards. Earth Board already manufactures all-terrain boards by permitting an OEM reason behind Third Rail, a La-based snowboard company.
 
Despite the fact that all-terrain boards unquestionably unquestionably really are a hefty investment, completely different from $350 to $500, early retail signs are positive. https://medium.com/@...rs-b6e9e0d0f6e5
 
"It's clearly an entirely new category, but perform virtually together,Inch stated Scott Kelleher, director of advertising for Blades, Board & Skate, adding that numerous all-terrain boarders are off-season snowboarders. "Snowboarders are searching for something to complete.In .

Edited by tranthe, 17 September 2017 - 05:16 PM.


#2 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 03:06 AM

http://forums.atomic...a-real-pc-game/


no pung intended

#3 Sir_Substance

Sir_Substance

    Guru

  • Atomican
  • 15,776 posts

Posted 10 September 2017 - 08:18 AM

Be careful about pinning too much some on SC, the signs are not exactly rosy at the moment: http://dereksmart.co...inal-countdown/

 

Beyond star citizen, I don't really know why the space genre is such an under-served niche. You should know that x3: reunion now has four spinoffs/expansions/remakes/I don't really know what the deal is there. Never the less, there's been X3: Albion Prelude, X3: terran conflict and X Rebirth (and friends?) since then.

 

You might want to take a closer look at one of the more recent entrants in the X universe. I have absolutely no idea if they're any good or not, but if you haven't looked, you might be missing something.


Kablez- You can only beat a brick wall with so many sticks until... you wasted all your time collecting and breaking sticks against a wall... Tantryl- Knowledge is the new power, but will never provide a stable baseload as cost effective as burning puppies. mm80x: I allege that Sir substance must be from the internet

#4 Chaos.Lady

Chaos.Lady

    Goddess

  • Mod
  • 79,470 posts
  • Location:In your head

Posted 10 September 2017 - 09:29 AM

The problem is we had Mass Effect.  And nothing has lived up since.


In the light universe I have been darkness. Perhaps in the dark zone I can be light...
 
Take the boat, promise me 
Never to tell
The secrets you know,
Of the Angel in Hell.


#5 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 10 September 2017 - 09:32 AM

Be careful about pinning too much some on SC, the signs are not exactly rosy at the moment: http://dereksmart.co...inal-countdown/
 .

<sigh> That hory old chestnut again. I realise that he tells you what you want to hear, working for the competition and all, but you really should check your sources.

Derek Smart is a fuckwit. He's been around naysaying everyone elses efforts and bignoting his own since at least 1992, which is where I first encountered him in newsgroups. Aside from lying and distortion, he also has a restraining order out against him from one of the CIG staff.

Basically, you just quoted Andrew Wakefield - THE antivaxer.

Edit: just to clarify, there may well be issues with the game development, and certainly not all backers are happy to have been waiting so long, but using DS as a source is like using Infowars for your news.

Edited by Cybes, 10 September 2017 - 09:41 AM.

"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#6 Nich...

Nich...

    Professional Tart

  • Mod
  • 43,375 posts
  • Location:Mexico

Posted 11 September 2017 - 11:47 AM

Speaking of Derek Smart, it seems odd that no mention has been made of the Elite games.


"I think it is a sad reflection on our civilization that while we can and do measure the temperature in the atmosphere of Venus we do not know what goes on inside our soufflés" -- Nicholas Kurti

#7 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 11 September 2017 - 12:47 PM

Speaking of Derek Smart, it seems odd that no mention has been made of the Elite games.


TBH, I never did get used to the turn&burn style of flight - not in the first one (yes, I'm that old), and not in any subsequent one either. It's inefficient even for missiles compared to yaw/pitch control,and completely disorienting for humans. E:D does allow p/y steering, sorta, but a housebrick is more responsive. So, I have E:D, but I haven't made any progress beyond the training mission.

"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#8 Sir_Substance

Sir_Substance

    Guru

  • Atomican
  • 15,776 posts

Posted 12 September 2017 - 07:23 PM

 

Be careful about pinning too much some on SC, the signs are not exactly rosy at the moment: http://dereksmart.co...inal-countdown/
 .

<sigh> That hory old chestnut again. I realise that he tells you what you want to hear, working for the competition and all, but you really should check your sources.

Derek Smart is a fuckwit.

 


Correction 1: My doubts about SC well predate my starting to work for CCP, and stem from a professional understanding of the scale of the work they've promised to their backers. It's a bit cheeky of you to imply otherwise, I'm all but certain we've had discussions on this over beer in the past.
Correction 2: Derek Smart is not the source of this particular sign, and it can hardly be called an old chestnut when it's from 3 months ago. The source is a pair of documents filed with the UK government:
 
https://beta.compani...wGM-FC6tbyhYlss

https://beta.compani...RZZqoCvnEAJKzSk
 
In both cases you can see that the agreement includes a "Floating charge covers all the property or undertaking of the company.". You can read more about that here: http://www.companyla...loating-charges
 
The short version is that SC has taken out a loan, and secured it against 100% of all their assets and IP, worldwide. Think about that for a second.
 
Star citizen collected more than 100 million dollars from crowdfunding sources. That's obligation free cash in hand. They're now taking out a loan that comes with obligations, and to get that loan they've bet the entire farm, including the remaining money from the crowdfunding campaigns. Check sections 4.1.8 (Foundry42) and 4.2.8 (Cloud Imperium Games), they've staked "the Accounts (including all monies standing to the credit of each Account, all interest accrued on each Account and all debits represented by the foregoing)".

 

I don't wish SC ill, I've got a small ship of my own in a digital hangar somewhere I'd like to take for a spin some day. But you've got your head in the sand if you think the signs are good. Right out the gate, they made a tonne of promises about what the game would look like and what features it would have well before they'd even done enough technical exploration to know what they were really capable of as a company, let alone how far they could stretch the engine. There was a lot of questioning about the organizational challenge they were taking on, but they had all the money in the world, and as long as they had money they had all the time in the world. People figured there was a chance they might just about be able to pull it off.

 

But now it looks pretty damn suspiciously like the money is gone, and if true that means the time is gone too. I hope they pull through, and either way it'll be a hell of a case study to read. But SC is clearly more in peril than it has ever been. We might not know how in peril they are, maybe not that much in an absolute sense, but their company position today is quantifiably worse than their company position a year ago.


Edited by Sir_Substance, 12 September 2017 - 07:23 PM.

Kablez- You can only beat a brick wall with so many sticks until... you wasted all your time collecting and breaking sticks against a wall... Tantryl- Knowledge is the new power, but will never provide a stable baseload as cost effective as burning puppies. mm80x: I allege that Sir substance must be from the internet

#9 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 12 September 2017 - 09:31 PM

Correction 2: Derek Smart is not the source of this particular sign, and it can hardly be called an old chestnut when it's from 3 months ago.
[...]
The short version is that SC has taken out a loan, and secured it against 100% of all their assets and IP, worldwide.

...

But you've got your head in the sand if you think the signs are good. Right out the gate, they made a tonne of promises about what the game would look like and what features it would have well before they'd even done enough technical exploration to know what they were really capable of as a company, let alone how far they could stretch the engine. There was a lot of questioning about the organizational challenge they were taking on, but they had all the money in the world, and as long as they had money they had all the time in the world. People figured there was a chance they might just about be able to pull it off.


DS has been poisoning the well since Day One of this project, leaping on expenditures for office decor and staff travel with great gusto and suggesting that CIG was making it rain with backers' money.  That this particular instance is only 3 months old is a technicality.
 
As to this instance, there was considerable upset about it at the time on the CIG forums and the subreddit.  As it turns out, that's a fairly standard accounting practice in the UK for tax minimisation, apparently. (I'm no authority on UK corporate tax law - if you can find one to refute that, please do)  CIG had plenty of liquid assets left at the time that happened, and even more now: funding recently exceeded $159 million.
 
...
 
I don't believe (in a religious sense) that the game will be released with everything completed in exactly the way promised, and nor do I believe that it will be done on schedule.  Right at this moment, however, there are working and playable modules for dogfighting, racing, and fps combat.  When alpha 3.0 drops (there's a burn-down chart updated each week, and it shows definite progress), quite a lot more will come on line.

 

Did they make missteps?  FUCK YES!  And they know it.  Biggest of which is that Chris Roberts is primarily an artist, and has the typical artistic habit of letting his imagination run away from his abilities.  And whilst he still does get hung up on things sometimes, he now has people on hand (his brother, mainly) who can and will stomp on him when he gets into fantasy.  This was demonstrated fairly well when they basically threw out the entire first years' product as being unworkable and redesigned it as something that doesn't need a million kludges to hang together.  Most of the time then to now has been spent building the tools they need to build their 'verse.

 

I've backed it because I want it to happen.  Not just for me, but because I think a game like this needs to be out there.  I'm fairly confident that there will be a release.  I do not know when (but I'm willing to bet Sq42 will be before 2020, and SC the year after).  I do not know what won't make it into the game (though I have hunches).  But even if it doesn't ever progress beyond 3.0a the guys who worked on this will take the tech they've made for it out into the world, and some of the people who've gone along with the dream will help shape the games of tomorrow.


"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#10 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 13 September 2017 - 05:19 PM

Speaking of Derek Smart, it seems odd that no mention has been made of the Elite games.


TBH, I never did get used to the turn&burn style of flight - not in the first one (yes, I'm that old), and not in any subsequent one either. It's inefficient even for missiles compared to yaw/pitch control,and completely disorienting for humans. E:D does allow p/y steering, sorta, but a housebrick is more responsive. So, I have E:D, but I haven't made any progress beyond the training mission.

 
i played a tiny bit of Valkerie — dont know if the flight model is the same as in Dangerous.
 
what do you mean by "p/y steering" (pitch and yaw?) and how do you contrast it with 'turn and burn'? 
 
i like the idea of being forced to get used to unrestrained inertia, because there is a lot of skill to picking a line through space and knowing exactly when to pivot on it to take an epic shot.  manoeuvring through a slalom-like pattern with a minimum of sloppy 180s to bleed off momentum when you have overrun a turn is also an interesting challenge.  a bit like flying a quadcopter.
 
however, its also frustrating as all hell :)  personally, i would like a mixture between that and the option of some kind of inertial dampening but at a realistic energy cost.  like, imagine if you had a 'pedal' you could press that would counter whatever momentum you had that didnt match you current attitude.  with that pedal you could pull off both huge turning circle arcs while maintaining optimal speed (in terms of A to B flight time) and tricksy turn-on-a-dime shit like momentary 90 degree strafing along a curved path.

Edited by @~thehung, 13 September 2017 - 05:25 PM.

no pung intended

#11 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 13 September 2017 - 05:56 PM

what do you mean by "p/y steering" (pitch and yaw?) and how do you contrast it with 'turn and burn'? 
 
i like the idea of being forced to get used to unrestrained inertia, because there is a lot of skill to picking a line through space and knowing exactly when to pivot on it to take an epic shot.  manoeuvring through a slalom-like pattern with a minimum of sloppy 180s to bleed off momentum when you have overrun a turn is also an interesting challenge.  a bit like flying a quadcopter.
 
however, its also frustrating as all hell :)  personally, i would like a mixture between that and the option of some kind of inertial dampening but at a realistic energy cost.  like, imagine if you had a 'pedal' you could press that would counter whatever momentum you had that didnt match you current attitude.  with that pedal you could pull off both huge turning circle arcs while maintaining optimal speed (in terms of A to B flight time) and tricksy turn-on-a-dime shit like momentary 90 degree strafing along a curved path.


"Turn & Burn" was the name missile mechanics gave to their steering method; "p/y" is indeed pitch & yaw, and is the method more familiar to humans as it's basically "follow your nose". T&B would more accurately be called "roll & pitch" - you roll until your up/down is aligned with the direction you want to go, then pitch to orient.

 

I have no problem with Newtonian momentum models.  There is a lot to be said for tracking your target whilst moving in a totally different direction.

 

That damping mechanism you describe is present (though possibly not exactly the way you describe) in both E:D and SC/Sq42.  In the latter, not only are your manoeuvring thrusters visible to you as they rotate and fire, but that firing costs fuel - of which you have a limited amount.


"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#12 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 05:57 PM

well thats a potential source of confusion for me.

in a space context, my immediate conception of T&B is to assume a situation where pitch and yaw are the primary determiners of direction, and roll is a secondary visual preference (like in the game Descent, if you ignore strafing). to my mind, any emphasis on "roll & pitch" alludes problematically to atmospheric flight in aircraft that necessarily produces maximum drag and turn rate across horizontal wings.

but i guess all things are possible in a space craft, depending on its role, and the geometry of where thrusters are placed.
 


Edited by @~thehung, 14 September 2017 - 06:04 PM.

no pung intended

#13 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 14 September 2017 - 07:35 PM

in a space context, my immediate conception of T&B is to assume a situation where pitch and yaw are the primary determiners of direction, and roll is a secondary visual preference (like in the game Descent, if you ignore strafing). to my mind, any emphasis on "roll & pitch" alludes problematically to atmospheric flight in aircraft that necessarily produces maximum drag and turn rate across horizontal wings.

 
Indeed so - which is why I never 'got' it.
 
In the missiles that used that system, though, cylindrical rockets were steered with vectoring vanes in the rocket exhaust, rather than wing control surfaces - which would be just as easily done in vacuum.  But it seems little more than snotty to insist upon that when p/y steering only necessitates that those same vanes work together rather than in opposition. (ie: to roll, the top/bottom vanes in opposition: top goes, bottom goes right -> missile rolls clockwise; put those in concert not opposition: both go left -> missile yaws right left.)
 
It's more than a little snotty to insist upon that control scheme when almost none of these game spacecraft have only a single main thruster, and all of them have steering thrusters.

 

Edit: control reversal (struck through).


Edited by Cybes, 15 September 2017 - 06:41 PM.

"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#14 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:09 PM

so if i have understood correctly, the common parlance used to denote alternate flight models in space games is kind of iffy. 

 

 

about Elite:Dangerous, please elaborate on "E:D does allow p/y steering, sorta, but a housebrick is more responsive"

 

on face value, it seems to have it all:

 

447863473.png


no pung intended

#15 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:51 PM

Not sure how "common parlance used to denote alternate flight models in space games is kind of iffy".  Maybe we're just using different viewpoints on the same thing?  The most egregious common parlance error for flight/space sims has to be "barrel roll": in every instance I've seen (which admittedly does not include many military flight sims) they use that term to mean aileron roll - rolling around the RZ axis on that pic of yours.  A barrel roll is flight along a spiral path - kinda like if you could strafe sideways around a loop whilst still going forward.
 

about Elite:Dangerous, please elaborate on "E:D does allow p/y steering, sorta, but a housebrick is more responsive"

 
Ok, I may have spoken out of turn, there... My experience with E:D was <check Steam> nearly 2 years ago, and it's had quite a few patches since then.  However, when I tried it, you either got used to the (imo) obtuse T&B system with familiar input speed and lag, or had P/Y control at about 1 degree/minute turn rate.
 
Please note change on above posting.  Only a simple one-word error, but kinda large importance. :P


"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#16 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 15 September 2017 - 08:19 PM

yeah i ignored the typo coz i knew what you meant.

 

"Maybe we're just using different viewpoints on the same thing?"

 

maybe :)  thing is, i am coming at this really ignorant to the state of play and general history of discussion, whereas i am sure you are not. 

 

so when you draw a salient contrast between "P/Y vs T&B" i dont know if youre reflecting a de rigeur convention, or if this is just the gist of your personal shorthand.  because if these are anything like ways of denoting the two main competing flight system designs in space games, although i find these labels awkward and highly misleading, i should still familiarize myself with the lingo regardless.  if however, this is not the case, then i am a little perplexed by you not 'getting' the characterisation of T&B you presented and essentially agreeing with where i identify problems with that.  although, it does make perfect sense with your cylindrical rocket example.

 

 

P.S. whenever you find the barrel roll misnomer particularly upsetting, you know what to do :P


Edited by @~thehung, 15 September 2017 - 08:22 PM.

no pung intended

#17 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 16 September 2017 - 05:50 AM

so when you draw a salient contrast between "P/Y vs T&B" i dont know if youre reflecting a de rigeur convention, or if this is just the gist of your personal shorthand.

...

P.S. whenever you find the barrel roll misnomer particularly upsetting, you know what to do :P

 

Ah.  No, it's probably just my own nomenclature.  I very rarely play multiplayer stuff, so I have no idea how other people refer to these schemes.  "Turn & Burn" was, as I said before, used by rocket jockeys; "P/Y" is my own shorthand for sure, and should probably "P&Y" to stay consistent with the other.

...

Yell at the screen and thump the keyboard? ;p


"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#18 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:59 PM

http://dereksmart.co...inal-countdown/

 
Sorry for the apparent harping - it's just a handy way to make this publicly-readable rather than a PM.  Just in case you ever have a shred of respect for DS:

This man is a scumbag.


"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."


#19 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 29 September 2017 - 12:36 AM

i dunno Cybes, its starting to feel like you have a vendetta of your own against Derek Smart. 

 

/jks :P


no pung intended

#20 Cybes

Cybes

    Titan

  • Atomican
  • 18,238 posts
  • Location:Where I am

Posted 29 September 2017 - 10:54 AM

i dunno Cybes, its starting to feel like you have a vendetta of your own against Derek Smart. 

 

/jks :P

 

I have much to learn then.  When his name comes up, I might froth at the mouth, but I can go whole months without it.  That guru managed to tweet 7 different replies to one of the lead dev's posts this morning - before anyone else even got a single word in.  Not only is it unbelievable typing speed (literally), and implies that he does not sleep and lives on Twitter, but to respond faster than anyone could read what the dev had written..?  He must have written bots specifically for this.  That's impressive, man.

 

Note that impressions are not always good. ;p


"Reality does not care what you think." - Dr Richard Feynman
"There is no "I" in team." - "True.  I will not be found in any team."





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users