Supreme Cmdr

No, seriously, those are two very important features that, given additional time, I would have put in. But I don't have that additional time and as such, I'm not going to attempt it. Who knows, maybe we'll do an add-on. I'd have to run that one by DC and see how they feel about it, once BCG ships and the dust settles. After all, if I'm not going to do another BC title (apart from the MMOG one), add-ons are the way to go. With maybe 2-3 months in dev time, I can whip up these two features and release an add-on for about $19.99. But again, this would depend on the sales of BCG. So, buy two copies if you ever want to see these dropped features appear in this game other than in BCO.

quote: Originally posted by StarRider: quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: quote:Originally posted by Kalshion: This is not the forum for this, meaning you posted this in the wrong forum I beleave It is. He is asking for a tip. This forum is for tips requests and sharing of tips. Jeez people, if you know, help the guy out. I can't believe this. I was just thinking the same thing

I read somewhere that the AI doesn't attack??

quote: Originally posted by Rosko: It's all-good, though I must admit I'am a little disappointed about the dynamic mission selection feature. Does it have to be dynamic? Can't it be a set scenario list with in the roam mode? It would be like instant action with you're experienced avatar, in the game world. You could gain access to the list from places like GalcomHQ. A player could benefit from experience they get from the combat. Is this a viable option? It would have to be manually scripted and tested. And I just don't have time. And again, how is it going to cater to the playable career/caste combinations?

quote: Originally posted by StarRider: So, thumbs up for Freelancer, for what it is, but, 6 years in development????? It doesn't even come close to BCM. Well, to be fair, they set out to create a mass market title and thats what they ended up with.

quote: Originally posted by StarRider: SC- you can ignore the rest here, I just elaborate on the above. I hope you don't mind. Very well quote: Right now, I can explore and mine for minerals, and fight, fight, fight, but to what end? Total domination?The BC games have always been military based. Thats what military do. Fight. BCM is the first game in the series that allowed gamers to pick different castes. In fact, there is 90% chance that I will completely remove the ability to play as any other caste other than military or insurgent, in BCG single player. That should solve the issue of someone mistaking my design generousity for wanting aggravation. quote: What if I just wanted to find artifacts and gain knowledge of the BCM universe and its deep history? Oh I dunno, go buy and play another game maybe? Let me post, verbatim, what I posted in another forum. Hopefully it will sink in. quote: quote:# FEATURES THAT ARE EITHER NO LONGER PLANNED FOR BCG OR WHICH WILL PROBABLY BE CUT # Basic two-way communications with some NPC units using built-in database script and based on unit's caste, career etc # Dynamic generations of missions (based on world events) posted at station/base pinboard # Global news system powered by NPCs and alliance matrix. This will work similar to probes and relay critical info at specific intervals. :cry: Too bad, for me this is would have taken the series to the next level. Yeah, I know. The clan is disappointed too - as am I. The fact is, I have to work on BCM Gold (mostly multiplayer now, since the single player is done and solid) and BCG simultaneously. This is my fault for talking Dreamcatcher into re-releasing BCM Gold (even though the main focus is in BCG). I did this primarily because I wanted to restore good faith with the retailers who are pissed at the EB exclusive. Which is why none of them carried the game. To this end, Dreamcatcher folks have done an excellent job in winning the retailers back, due to their support of me doing BCM Gold and with the one critical feature - multiplayer. To the extent that Gamestop, who flat out were quite vocal in not taking BCM due to the EB gig, came on board and are one of the most commited (along with EB and others) now and with a pretty high sell-in (I was shocked when Gladguy gave me the figures). One would think that I'd be focusing on BCG - which is the primary title and where all the time, effort and money is going, but the fact is, I commited to doing BCM Gold as part of the marketing campaign (among other things) as well as delivering a multiplayer component. Which is why I decided not to do a downloadable component for BCM but which Dreamcathcher, even though they didn't have to, agreed to give a BCM Gold discount to existing BCM owners. Because of all this and with less than seven months to go (for BCG shipping), I have been working on THREE projects simultaneously (which is not as bad as it seems, because all my games are based on established technologies - so no wheel re-inventing here). In the past month, after delivering the Beta 1 candidate of BCG, I have been focused 99% on BCM Gold multiplayer and 1% on BCG (asset management, the odd fix here and there). The XBox title is currently all about asset creation and pre-production, so not much work there (until BCG ships). And because of this, I decided - about three months ago - that, once again, these three high-end features which I wanted to do in BCM, are again going on the cut list. As I mentioned in my other threads, these features are very extensive and not something that I can just up and do on a whim. To wit: The dynamic mission generation alone requires a very extensive architectural revision and which I HAVE to do for BCO (the MMOG version of BCG) anyway. So, rather than attempt it now - and either do a half-assed job or cut it half way through, I decided to put it on the cut list right now and not even touch it. I can't just auto-generate missions without taking into account world events, race/caste/alliance issues etc etc. Its not a simple cut 'n dry game (like for e.g. FL). The news feed is not a big deal - IF - I wanted to just use existing technologies (which the probes already use). But I do not want to do that because its not going to be meaningful and won't add much to the game. I envision this feature being something that you [player] can act upon depending on your race/caste/career. Its going to be pointless if the system generates news feeds which have nothing to do with you. e.g. if you're playing as a Terran/Trader/Commander, you won't care about an invasion going on in Centris would you? So, the system has to generate an equal balance of events which would beneift any of the careers and over 25 castes that you can play. Otherwise, it will just be peripheral. Apart from that, the system just can't up and make stuff up. The entire game runs on an AI kernel that is event driven. As such, any news feed that comes through, is going to be about something that is actually happening somewhere in the game (in space or on a planet). And given the size of the game world, that could be a LOT of stuff. In BCM, if you have even launched a probe into a remote region and watch its feed, you'd know exactly what I mean. Sure, it can tell you about hostile incursions in its region, but how many players have ever responded to a probe's feed? If I don't do it right, once again, I'd be accused of putting in features which are not fully fleshed out for all careers - in much the same way people tell me that the marine career in BCM is pointless in single player. The two-way NPC communication is - as I described in another thread - not just some throw in that I want to do. It is very ambitious and complex, to the extent that it, again, has to tie into the game world and events. In under a few days, I can whip up a quick canned system based on a canned DB of sends and responses. How long before it gets tiring and with no variation? I mean, how many times are you going to send something like Lower your shields and prepare to be boarded and getting back Fack off, you toothless wanker!! Eventually, you'd just stop using the comms system - no matter HOW large the canned DB is - and do what you do now : arm weapons systems, achieve primary lock, fire, blow stuff up, collect cargo. Move on. These are serious design issues which, on the surface, don't seem like a big deal. It is all a matter of time and scheduling. And for the next seven months, I've got my hands full and I don't plan on putting my game releases in jeapardy. BCG was supposed to be a Summer completion and release but because of BCM Gold, its now an Aug/Sept release. Thats bad enough - especially since BCM Gold, which is responsible for the BCG delays, is not a title that anyone (I've made all my money on BCM), let alone Dreamcatcher, is going to make a lot of money on. If anything, for me, its a marketing gig. The only consolation is that with a publisher and commited retailers, the game would get more exposure and if I do a good job on multiplayer (my first foray into this aspect of gaming), it can only bode well for BCG. Also, being a world wide release - and with foreign versions - it will get more exposure than BCM ever could have hoped for. Its all good. I, quite frankly, just want to get this BCG game over and done with so that I can move on with new things and experiences (e.g. my XBox project and the MMOG project). As such, I'm not inclined to keep jamming stuff into BCG (I didnt' do it for BCM because what I couldn't do then, I defered to BCG) when I can just do what is required for the game and defer what I can't do for the next (and final) game in the series, BCO. A man has got to know his limitations - and I for one, learned that lesson back in 1995. I'm all the better for it and it has served me well in the two projects that followed the first. Why mess with what works? In fact, that list you see remains relatively unchanged since I first wrote it about a year or so ago. Thats because I knew what I wanted to do in BCG, going in. The only features I added to that list in the past month or so are the following : Mouse supported flight control (in addition to keyboard and joystick support) : because it would make the game a bit more accessible when coupled in with new interface revisions. All-Seeing-Eye server browser support - built-in as well as external (using ASE client app) : because Dreamcatcher wanted an alternative to my battlecruiser.net alternative and I had no intentions of using GameSpy Arcade nor forking out $40K for GameSpy.Net in order to use just one SDK out of a suite of stuff I don't need. They [GS] refused to let me (or DCI) license what I need a-la-carte, so I said **** it, signed with the little guy and gave him my money. Had ASE working in under two days. Case closed. Personnel now have unique names which can be modified via INI files. This means that e.g. MARINE#1 can now have an alias that reads JOHN DOE. : because the clan complained that their experienced marines were treated too much like Red shirts and they wanted to personalize them. Anyone who has played BCM can take one look at this BCG gameplay section of that list and see that a vast majority (about 50%?) are existing feature enhancements. Some of which could have been in BCM but weren't. And if you look at the version control file for BCM, you will see a significant amout of revisions, enhancements and new features which I have added to the game in patches. Those too could have been defered to BCG. These aren't easy decisions to make, but the last thing I need right now is aggravation. And before the speculation about the suits being involved starts, let me stop that one in its tracks right now : Dreamcatcher have never, ever asked me to alter my design, nor my game in any shape or form. The only discussions we've had - and which I welcomed - are related to a browser alternative (in the event that some gamers want to host their own servers) as well as interface revisions for ease of use. Nothing else. So, I hope that one sinks in.

quote: Originally posted by Elenkis: Anyway, GalCiv is a very different game to MoO3. They're both strategy games and both set in space, but GalCiv plays more like a Civilization game than a MoO game. Well thats interesting. Thanks for the input though, I'll remember not to take MOO3 too seriously then.

quote: Originally posted by Fermin: quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: If you don't see a feature listed, its not going to be implemented. e.g. the ability to build your own units is a BCO feature and not planned for BCG. From the BCG Features listed.... ┬À NEW! ability to construct space/planetary cities, bases, stations Which is correct? I know for a fact that you're not reading the version that everyone else has. In fact, there only three references to cities in that file - and neither of them is as you indicated. Clear your browser cache, reload the page or download the HTML file.

I have update the features file by including a new section at the end. Anything that gets cut, goes there.

Stardock's upcoming GalCiv is going to blow MOO3 like a nuclear weapon.

quote: Originally posted by DREADA: Gulp! What chance does the NPC-communication feature have of going through From a basic standpoint i.e. a canned set of transmissions from which the NPC picks a response and sends back, I'd say 50%. From a more advanced system (the one I have in mind), I'd say 5% quote: ie. does it have a higher priority than say station-news system?Yes. That one doesn't stand any chance of going in. quote: Will there be any exclusive equipment reserved for high ranking marines/officers (armor etc)?No quote: Will this feature be coupled with the Pertrack system (superimposed onto ship/station schematics)?No. You pick a deck location from a drop-down list in Tactical quote: Originally posted by Sebbish: Will there be more space "traffic?" Like more hostile patrols in hostile regions, traders and civilians in friendly regions, etc. ? I'm not making any changes to the AI kernel in this regard. So, the traffic will be the same as it is now. It works - why mess with it?

quote: Originally posted by Cmdr_ Laracuente: Another question: After you have taken over a ship , will your team be consumed to create the ship's crew and therefore not being able to recover your marines? No. After taking over a ship, it comes under your control just like a regular NPC ship under Fleet C&C. You don't have access to the captured ship's crew. You can choose to leave your team on board the ship or beam them back. Its no different than leaving them somewhere else e.g. on a planet. Except that if you leave them on another ship, they can get killed - the same way they can get killed on a planet or anywhere else. Since you can see what the heck is going on, via PerTrack, you can can try to pull them back if things get too hairy e.g. if you stupidly send Resnig over. And he brings a toothbrush to a firefight.

quote: Originally posted by LBM: quote: I toyed with the idea of doing auto-generated missions but quickly abandoned it because it requires extensive modifications to the AI kernel and which I didn't want to make at this time, since I have to do it for BCO (which is still almost a ways off). Yeah, I was hoping for that as well, but I guess GBS III will do. Its not a simple thing - and thats why I didn't even want to start it. I'm not particularly interested in doing macro missions all of which will get repetitive after a while. My design calls for something more sophisticated and which is built into the current events of the game world as well as the race/caste alliance relationships. I may come up with something post-ship if I have time and am not bogged down with GCE (XBox project), but thats about it. I am going to ship GBS-III on the CD (with complete docs etc) and if I expand its scripting macro support, then someone else can come up with a repetitive string of missions based on that (which is exactly what I don't want to do).

GoalieJerry, you are going to be so disappointed, that you're going to be crying in your sleep. gamespy.com and quartertothree.com have reviews. You might want to read them.

To make my life easier, I have updated and uploaded a printable version of the planned feature set. Please read it carefully. You can ask specific questions about the contents if something isn't clear. I also revised certain items in that document so that they are clear enough to answer some of the questions already posted here. If you don't see a feature listed, its not going to be implemented. e.g. the ability to build your own units is a BCO feature and not planned for BCG. There is no reputation system and I don't plan on implementing one etc etc As for the unit stats, I have not changed mosts of them because IMO they are well balanced in BCM and I don't plan on messing with them. Only stations and some capital units have revised stats. The station/base news feeds pinboard feature, though still listed,may be dropped, depending on how much time there is to completion. It is pretty complex because it has to be based on the galactic events system. Just piping in chatter (e.g. like probes chatter) is going to be pointless if the news feed is largely meaningless. I toyed with the idea of doing auto-generated missions but quickly abandoned it because it requires extensive modifications to the AI kernel and which I didn't want to make at this time, since I have to do it for BCO (which is still almost a ways off). The Stormcarrier is no longer a unit unique to the Gammulans. There never will be, race/caste specific units in BCG - only in BCO.

Yep, sounds like BCO alright

quote: Originally posted by Richard: The saved game relating to negative inventory will be e-mailed shortly. Hope it all helps. Got the saved game (you probably got my email reply). Found another place where this problem could exist and hopefully that hole is plugged now too. FYI, negative inventory is harmless (read the VCF and you'll see why) but since I've decided to no longer allow it, each time this comes up, it has to be fixed wherever the loophole exists.

ah, now I get it. That sounds cool. I never did get that far into the demo because I'd rather wait for the full game. I suppose I made a good decision then by not charting the second galaxy in BCG - but instead, leaving it up to the players to discover the areas and chart it out for themselves?

One FL thread is enough I think

quote: Originally posted by Elenkis: Maybe I'm just weird, but I played the demo for a good 6 hours and had a lot of fun with it. A lot of that time was spent exploring. Thats not weird. FL is looking like BC games - you either like it or you don't. Some people so far like FL and others are disppointed because they expected so much more. I think that its the high expectations and overhype that is causing this attitude I think. quote: Freelancer does the whole exploration thing better than any other game I've seen, period.Really? Thats interesting to know. How come?

I would like to see each item/question either in an itemized list or in separate paragraphs. Otherwise, I'm not going to reply to them. So, please go back and edit your posts accordingly. Also, note that I'm NOT going to reply to every single post or item. If I don't respond to a specific one, you can safely assume that the answer to your question (if it was a question) is no. And I'm not going to pay ANY attention to arguments about the merits of one thing over another. Nor should ANYONE else. That goes double for you Epsilon5. So please don't turn this thread into a debate about what someone types. I'll be the judge of the merits of the posts. [ 02-25-2003, 10:01 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

I'm not concerned about competition. I'm concerned about the genre.

BCG, from my magic 8 ball, is about six months from release. While it has a major graphics overhaul in lots of areas, as well as tweaks here and there, advanced multiplayer (the mp in BCM Gold pales somewhat in comparison) is the main focus because it is the single most important feature in a Battlecruiser game. The BCM Gold multiplayer is the first foray into this area and its not by any means perfect nor the full impact of what I have in mind going forward. That said, I'm sure that some people are expecting a lot from BCG (apart from multiplayer)and some don't care for multiplayer. So, this thread is going to be my official overhype-quelching thread so that come Aug/Sept. nobody tells me they didn't know wtf I was talking about or that I made promises I didn't keep. So, if there's anything in BCM that is missing, needs improvement or something you'd like to see in BCG that is in line with the series, by all means post it. As always, foolish postings will be ignored - but not deleted. And if it gets out of hand, see this? I'm not afraid to use it. And I'm talking about gameplay features - not technology (because thats pretty much covered and is a given). e.g. Will there be communications with NPCs? Will I be able to upgrade from one ship to another? Are you going to finally put in the ability to orbit a planet before you can scan it? I'd like to be able to build my own units (e.g. station) in space and on planets. Is that possible? Will there be a reputation system Stuff like that. [ 02-25-2003, 09:30 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

I'm sad, just very sad.

quote: Originally posted by Davewave: Can i install weapons etc No. Read the craft data in the appendix quote: For the developers, im also a game developer, it would be nice to release a patch that could possibly allow for upgrades on ships such as this like in the titles Privateer and Privateer 2. Ok, thats all, hope to hear a reply from anyone.Never gonna happen quote: By the way, i haven't heard much on multiplay but which patch version WILL contain the multiplay update? ive got the latest. , Cool [/QB] Read the news and announcements forum