Guest Myownself Posted June 30, 1999 Report Share Posted June 30, 1999 Reality.The dream of game developers everywhere. Let's face it. Reality is the holy grail of computer simulation. But what is reality for a space sim? Or anything that is partly (or mostly) fictional? For these titles we must define reality as being the ultimate state of believability.Now. Where will BC 3x go? We see games like Tribes and TF2 advancing the FPS market. We see games such as these all the time, with the developers constantly pushing the envelope, perfecting their ideas, enhancing the experience, and the "Reality", as it applies to FPS games.We also see Strategy games advancing, perhaps a little more slowly, and perhaps not in the direction we would like them to...but nevertheless, they are getting better. It's not just the graphics either. The ideas behind them are becoming more complex, the strategies and AI more involved.We see also the simulation market making great strides. Just see how far we've come from MS Flight Sim 4.0 to Flight Sim 98. How about Falcon 4.0? They are both defining titles in this genre, advancing further towards a state of ultimate believability, or "reality". Back to BC 3x. Where will it go? Surely it will advance its strongest aspects, the AI and the complexity of the universe, and its vastness. I guess what this comes down to is a set of recommendations for Dr. Smart for his series. Until there comes an engine that simulates reality on a sub-atomic level, and until there are computers capable of running such an engine, we must do our best to simulate reality as best we can. Here are, what I think, are a few ideas to achieve that.1) With the new Strike Pak for 3020 AD coming out, would it not be possible to apply this to a first person perspective in the ground based engine? No longer would you be stuck inside of a vehicle; You could walk around inside the shuttle, open the door and go for a stroll outside, supervise the mining drones, and perhaps set up a defensive network of turrets, or perhaps a base where you could send ATV's to refuel and repair without a shuttle having to be there. This goes towards the FPS and Strategy genres. Taking Starsiege: Tribes as a baseplate for a ground FPS, you could do very well. I envision an online universe where space figher/capital ship/FPS, ground FPS, and inside-the-ship FPS could meld into one truly remarkable gaming experience. I imagine the teamplay element would be excellent. It does *not* have to be a deathmatch type shooter. I despise shooter games, especially those without any teamplay at all. But surface FPS combat against a computer/human hybrid foe would be truly unique. Imagine setting up a defensive base on a moon to protect valulable GALCOM mining assets. What would happen if an insurgent force should stumble on it, and decide to send land troops itself? I'll leave that up to you.2) As I said before, I'd like to be able to walk around in my Shuttle. Program the mining drone from it's panel, setting variables such as what minerals/metals to mine, at which percent of capacity it should return to the shuttle, et cetera.I'd also like to be able to get out of my shuttle through the airlock in first person, as well. You might think this is frivilous, and pointless, but surely life is full of frivilous and pointless things too. It's these things that make it worth living, and it's also these things that make games more worthy of playing. Things must not always have a practical purpose, for we as humans are not entirely practical...3) The relegation of graphics to mere eye-candy is truly a sad thing. People think that game developers should concentrate more on the gameplay than the graphics. I personally think the time should be divided equally. Cartoon graphics, no matter how good the gameplay is, detract from the experience of playing the game. It's simply a fact. As sims move closer towards "reality", the importance of graphics, and the feeling of "being there", become exponentially more important. Personally I don't care if the game has gameplay worthy of the nobel prize, if the graphics make me feel like I'm playing on a 386, well, I'm sorry, but the game is not a success.I'll keep this short so as not to have it take up a large amount of your time...although I've already done that I suppose. Sorry. These are only suggestions, albeit good ones in my opinion. As the developer of the sim/game, it is fully in your hands where the sim/game will go, and what it will do/look like. As long as it turns out great, no matter what it is, I'll be perfectly happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted June 30, 1999 Report Share Posted June 30, 1999 What a wonderful post. I'll leave this one up until later tonite before I wipe the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacePhish Posted July 1, 1999 Report Share Posted July 1, 1999 Oh well since this post is getting delete anyway I will just post my 2 cent. I think your ideas are noble, but no way in hell with today's technogly we can make a game with all those features you mentioned. Maybe in 10 years? But it's worth the wait I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Jansen Posted July 3, 1999 Report Share Posted July 3, 1999 quote:Where BC 3x should go, in my opinion I don't know but... what kind of reality is this guy living in.Rico Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RiEvEr Posted July 5, 1999 Report Share Posted July 5, 1999 Well... I can see his point - I'd enjoy a game like that too.Can you imagine it if you could get a couple of hundred BC3Kers online at once in the same universe with AI just "filling in the gaps" ??*sigh* - ok, I'll go back to reality then...------------------ RiEvEr ================== BC3020AD Strike Pak Team [YahooPager] RiEvEr_1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azverkan Posted July 8, 1999 Report Share Posted July 8, 1999 I disagree, what Myownself talks about is feasible, but would take an extemely long amount of work. The only thing that stops games from becoming this big is that you have to reinvent the wheel with each new game. If games used some sort of API / engine that didn't need to change every six months, you could essentially just keep building upon the same 3d engine. If this were the case, you could take an older game, say Dungeon Keeper, and merge it with your newer game, say Populous, and with little effort have Populous Keeper. A little tweaking on that and you might have a playable game with more depth than both put together.Basically game programmers need to define a set of standards so that code from one game could be "plugged in" to another much like operating systems do with device drivers. The closest thing that I have seen to that so far is the Unreal engine. Althought its not quite as modifiable as you would need for a project of Myownself's dreams, you can take weapons, monsters, armor, etc from one game and stick it directly into another (both games based on the Unreal engine).It really comes down to the difference between C / C++. As long as game programmers keeping using C, we won't see anything that Myownself has described ever come along, not in 10 years, not in 40 years. With Unreal's C++ based engine, we will probably see alot of odd things in its future that may lead up to what Myownself is talking about. ------------------ http://skynet.telefragged.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Astrogoth Posted July 11, 1999 Report Share Posted July 11, 1999 A point on my wish list,(After a day of dealing with Intrudes) is an addition to the PerScan. A wire-frame model of the BC that is rotatable showing positions of all personel this way to better plan routes of interception for intuders. Most probable with BC3020 or Strike Pak wiht 1st person interface.Thanks for the message space ------------------ [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Jansen Posted July 13, 1999 Report Share Posted July 13, 1999 It has been said that the wish list is allready closed (V2.0 and 3020), but I guess you are new here. Still..., listening about what the big man has got to offer is the only wishing you can do here.About your wish. I wouldn't be surprised if it would be in it. Go search the forum, I believe the SC mention something about it 1 or 2 moths ago.Rico Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacePhish Posted July 13, 1999 Report Share Posted July 13, 1999 So anyone here thinking about tweeking around with the BC source code after S.C release it? I just bought C/C++ programmer Bible, I'm trying to learn more about programming. After S.C release the Source Code it would be nice if someone add multiplayer to B.C ver 2.0. Also will there be MODs for B.C? That's why I'm learning aobut C++, cause I want to make some MODs. Imagine playing B.C where you can be a diffrent cast other than the Galcom and Insurgent. One kickass mod I imagine would feature free form missions sort like privatter. And also you could talk to people at space stationn and find information on all kinds of things. I think that would make the game a lot more intresting. But I still wouldn't compare it to BC3032 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Lindsey Posted July 13, 1999 Report Share Posted July 13, 1999 Methinks you are opening a hornets nest Phish. Have you tried the GBS yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts