Laserbrain Studios

Games Forum Blog Contact

Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:
Please enter the missing word of the game title "Hidden _______":

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: CheeseshireCat
« on: October 07, 2009, 07:29:09 PM »

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
I don't even remember Privateer having time pass at all. I think it's been too long since I've played the original!


I just installed it specifically to check stuff :) It is TOTALLY unplayable, with HORRIBLE graphics, but at least, I can look things up :)
Posted by: Christian Knudsen
« on: October 07, 2009, 05:37:26 PM »

I don't even remember Privateer having time pass at all. I think it's been too long since I've played the original!
Posted by: CheeseshireCat
« on: October 07, 2009, 04:10:07 PM »

Quote from: "Christian Knudsen"
I don't think the original Privateer had a "speed" rating during autopilot. Autopilot would just play a cutscene of the ship flying by and then "teleport" you to your destination (with a risk of encounters during autopilot).


It did, and even had that speed listed. It wasn't obvious unless you checked the time passed in transit.
Posted by: Iltsuger
« on: October 07, 2009, 12:40:06 PM »

That's what I remember too.  Like an in-engine cinematic with your ship zipping off into the dark-blue distance, sparks flying out the back.

Hey, yeah!  This game needs sparks to show critically damaged ships :)  I'm betting someone's already suggested that, though.
Posted by: Christian Knudsen
« on: October 07, 2009, 10:37:00 AM »

I don't think the original Privateer had a "speed" rating during autopilot. Autopilot would just play a cutscene of the ship flying by and then "teleport" you to your destination (with a risk of encounters during autopilot).
Posted by: CheeseshireCat
« on: October 07, 2009, 06:14:26 AM »

Another autopilot-related thing.

I got a strong impression that distances/speeds in Ascii Sector are not the way they were in Privateer.

In Privateer, you had two speed ratings, combat and cruise. Combat was what was used in manual control, and cruise (used for autopilot) was times 100 that.

Therefore, distances were much larger, thus the amportance of nav points, and you actually had to spend a DAMN LOT of time to reach one even on afterburner.
Posted by: Flyboy
« on: October 05, 2009, 08:07:21 AM »

I'm not saying "keep current course" would be a bad thing. It would be an improvement. Is what I'm trying to say is that it wouldn't solve all of the inconveniences of the autopilot, whereas setting coordinates to fly to in a certain order would. Having said that, "keep current course" would be a major step in the right direction.
Posted by: CheeseshireCat
« on: October 04, 2009, 07:25:17 PM »

I just don't get how is that a bad thing -- is all.
Posted by: Flyboy
« on: October 04, 2009, 08:03:50 AM »

My point exactly. If a feature was added to "keep current course" then the players ship would simply fly in a straight line until attacked/almost collided/got too close to nav point/ or disengaged. It would help a little bit maybe, but it would still require the player to drop out of autopilot, reset the course, and resume.
Posted by: CheeseshireCat
« on: October 01, 2009, 05:15:16 AM »

Quote from: "Flyboy"
Yes, it no doubt would, but that wouldn't really solve the problem, as the player would have to keep dropping out of autopilot and manually navigating around asteroid fields, etc.


How so? You just fly in a direction that misses the field, then fly to your intended nav point. I used the tactic a couple times by heading to a different nav point then stopping auto halfway when the line to my intended destiantion no longer crosses the field.
Posted by: Matt_S
« on: October 01, 2009, 12:56:08 AM »

Quote from: "Quaker2k9"
Gameplay-wise, I think it makes sense that "tricking yourself around obstacles" should take some time. In my opinion, adding stuff to the autopilot that helps you doing this would make it too easy - in the end, players wouldn't navigate through annoying asteroid fields anymore at all.
But that's what in-game time is for.  And sometimes missions are in asteroid fields.  If that's not enough reason to go through asteroid fields rather than around, then they could always be made more interesting.

This goes back to my philosophy that idle time is bad.  I take my vidya game philosophizing very seriously  :|
Posted by: Quaker2k9
« on: October 01, 2009, 12:18:04 AM »

Gameplay-wise, I think it makes sense that "tricking yourself around obstacles" should take some time. In my opinion, adding stuff to the autopilot that helps you doing this would make it too easy - in the end, players wouldn't navigate through annoying asteroid fields anymore at all.
Posted by: Flyboy
« on: September 30, 2009, 07:30:46 PM »

Yes, it no doubt would, but that wouldn't really solve the problem, as the player would have to keep dropping out of autopilot and manually navigating around asteroid fields, etc.
Posted by: CheeseshireCat
« on: September 29, 2009, 09:27:03 AM »

Wouldn't it be much easier to just implement a "Keep me on the current course" function of the autopilot?
Posted by: Flyboy
« on: September 26, 2009, 02:49:57 AM »

I'd like to be able to layout a line of travel manually. Probably the only real change in the code would be to allow the player to set the coordinates to travel to. The mouse would be perfect for doing that.