I just wanted to ask you guys some questions on what you would like to see in a 3D space shooter.

(1) What are your favorite elements of space shooters?
Space. 3D movement...watching the elite graphics.

(2) Least favorite?
UNREALISTIC PHYSICS AND AI !
I really hate XWing and Freespaces physics.
The shield systems are really lacking, the damage systems, bleh I could go on for pages about the defects of the classics.
Never played Wing Commander tho...I will someday.

(3) Would you prefer huge dogfights with hundreds of fighters on both sides or more one-on-one scenarios?

Neither.
Big cap ships, plus swarms of fighters.
1 on 1 I dunno. Did 1v1 happen much in WW2 sea battles ?
I`d find that out, then use that as a guide.

(4) How much control do you like? (ie. do you want to be able to do a quick barrel roll while yawing to the left and aiming your gun turret with the mouse, or, just point and click to aim and fire?
Depends of the ships capabilities.
NO point and click. Lets make this realistic.
We arnt making an arcade shoot-em-up, I want a real intellectual space SIM.


(5) Do you like lots of small ships, or a few huge destroyer/mothership types?
See above.

(6) Do you like realism in flying, or arcade-style maneuvering?
Realism

(7) Do you like a complex damage model(if you get shot in your yaw thruster system, you can''t properly turn anymore, your navigation system can get fried, etc...), or do you just want a number from 0-100 telling you your health?
Realism

(8) How long should a battle last, 10 intense minutes of adrenaline, or a two hours of a complex tactical situation?
Battle dependant.
What`s happening ?
Is it a sustained assault or a quick hit and fade ?

(9) Do you want automatic weapons systems(ie. radar + missile locking + energy trail tracking), or do you prefer having to fly to them and fight it out?
Depends on the craft.
Also, ever play Falcon 3.0 ? It hada varible realism setting.

(10) Saving in the middle of a battle?
hmm....not sure....
Probably do a save -and-exit like Diablo2.

(11) Lots of people on your side helping you, or pretty much a one-against-all situation?
More the merrier in my opinion.

Bugle4d

quote: Original post by TheThief
(1) What are your favorite elements of space shooters?

Space. Shooting. In that order.

And the favourite elements of games in general: being surprised, pretty pictures, feelings of accomplishment, that kind of thing.

quote:
(2) Least favorite?

Steering with a mouse. Nobody steers REAL space craft with a mouse, why should I?

In general, cut scenes I can''t get skip. This is problem with many games, but in my experience space shooters have more frequent cut scenes than other games.

quote:
(3) Would you prefer huge dogfights with hundreds of fighters on both sides or more one-on-one scenarios?

Yes.

It depends, of course. What ship am I in? Do I have help? What am I fighting against?

quote:
(4) How much control do you like? (ie. do you want to be able to do a quick barrel roll while yawing to the left and aiming your gun turret with the mouse, or, just point and click to aim and fire?

I would really expect my gun turret to auto-aim if it wasn''t fixed. However, I would expect that a well-designed ship would let the pilot choose between available targetting options.

quote:
(5) Do you like lots of small ships, or a few huge destroyer/mothership types?

Yes.

quote:
(6) Do you like realism in flying, or arcade-style maneuvering?

Realism. Realism. Realism.

Thou shalt impose no upper limit upon speed except that which thy lord Einstein hath given unto you! (No pointless 200Km/s speed-limits, or whatever.)

Thou''s objects shalt continue in their motions until a force doth act upon them! (No bizarre coming-to-a-halt-when-the-throttle-is-released, even though there''s no friction.)

quote:
(7) Do you like a complex damage model(if you get shot in your yaw thruster system, you can''t properly turn anymore, your navigation system can get fried, etc...), or do you just want a number from 0-100 telling you your health?

Yes.

That should be a function of your difficulty level. Most space games that I''ve played have at least that level of damage modelling. Perhaps you should allow more graduation for the hardcode player, and a percentile for the newbie.

quote:
(8) How long should a battle last, 10 intense minutes of adrenaline, or a two hours of a complex tactical situation?

Again, yes.

Perhaps the game should adjust to your mode of play. Certainly you should have the choice between those extremes.

quote:
(9) Do you want automatic weapons systems(ie. radar + missile locking + energy trail tracking), or do you prefer having to fly to them and fight it out?

Once again, yes.

I want long, medium and short-range weapon systems. I want smart bombs, guided missiles, dumbfires, lasers (i.e. beams of coherent light that move at the speed of light, not slow-moving sticks of energy), cannon, mines, ECM and more exotic forms of offense and defense.

quote:
(10) Saving in the middle of a battle?

Definately.

quote:
(11) Lots of people on your side helping you, or pretty much a one-against-all situation?

Yup. Again, this should be the player''s choice.

On the whole, Frontier: Elite II sums up the perfect space shooter: it''s pretty (even now, it has visual effects that you don''t get anywhere else (planets cast shadows on their rings, the atmospheres of planets change colour as they turn)), it''s clever, and, above all, it''s open. The only problem is the AI is pretty poor, and you don''t get wingmen (or ''capital class'' ships).


Just Plain Wrong

quote: Original post by deClavier
The experience of blasting your way to the belly of a steel beast and then emerging from the imploding hulk ... the impossible armies of stupidity.

I think that to knowingly be within a large ship when it is imploding ranks you amongst the armies of stupidity.

quote:
I *must* be at least twice as fast as the fastest opponent or I get annoyed.

Isn''t the point of the fastest opponent that it be faster than you?

quote:
Tactically, I think space shooters are lacking because they are so freeform that technical maneuvers are meaningless.

Tactically, no general is going to fight in open space. He is going to fight in an asteroid/mine field, just at the edge of a planet''s/star''s/black hole''s gravity well, or some other place where he can put his enemy at a strategic disadvantage. In such places, maneuvers have meaning.


Just Plain Wrong

Mayrel:
How do you answer "yes" to an either-or question? "Do you want A or B?" "Yes." Look over your post and see what I mean; you haven''t given TheTheif any useful information unless you flesh out your opinion so he can infer what you meant by context (as you did in some instances). Man, I''d hate to give you a questioneer if you habitually respond like that!

I think his point was he liked both, ala "do you want cake or pie" - saying "yes" indicates you like both - a sad abuse of the language used by comedy bits all throughout the age of television/radio.

Not that I''m speaking for him or anything.

Though considering his responses to deClavier, maybe he needs someone to speak for him. (uh, just because there''s a "fastest opponent" in no way means it''s faster than you.)

"Tactically, no general is going to fight in open space. He is going to fight in an asteroid/mine field, just at the edge of a planet''s/star''s/black hole''s gravity well, or some other place where he can put his enemy at a strategic disadvantage. In such places, maneuvers have meaning."

Ok first it is Admiral
Second and most important space battles are like sea battles (at least thats where those fancy rangs come from ) and if i remember correctly those were fought on open sea

No attack

Regards

N.O.P

quote: Original post by Vlion

(6) Do you like realism in flying, or arcade-style maneuvering?
Realism

If it is a sim, realism. If it is a shooter, arcade. Simple as that.
Frontier was cool in that aspect in that you could use a planet''s gravity to accelerate you. Not that it was easy, though.

quote:
(7) Do you like a complex damage model(if you get shot in your yaw thruster system, you can''t properly turn anymore, your navigation system can get fried, etc...), or do you just want a number from 0-100 telling you your health?
Realism

Realism. More specifically, having a system damaged based on where the shot hit.

quote:
I think his point was he liked both, ala "do you want cake or pie" - saying "yes" indicates you like both - a sad abuse of the language used by comedy bits all throughout the age of television/radio.

Actually "yes" would be the logical answer if you want either one, or even both:
return want_cake | want_pie;

(1) What are your favorite elements of space shooters?

- Performing cool tricks and tactics (There is an incomming missile, I dodge it at the last moment, and destroys an enemy ship)
- Killing lot''s of bad guys! That gives some needed satisfaction.

(2) Least favorite?

- Enemies that seem to turn faster then you do (Conflict Freespace), I am never able to follow those guys in a dogfight.
- Resulting in allies who kill much more then you do, making you feel stupid
- Having to worry about too many things, when I''m in a dogfight I don''t want to be distracted by the bleep ofan incomming missile, indicating that I must press the right key for countermeasures (and having to search for that key, because I never use it)

(3) Would you prefer huge dogfights with hundreds of fighters on both sides or more one-on-one scenarios?

This should vary between battles, to add some much needed variation.

(4) How much control do you like? (ie. do you want to be able to do a quick barrel roll while yawing to the left and aiming your gun turret with the mouse, or, just point and click to aim and fire?

So much that it doesn''t become confusing, I want to do cool manouvres, but I also want to be able to follow other shipsusing less then 10 keys.

(5) Do you like lots of small ships, or a few huge destroyer/mothership types?

Both, the more veriety the better.

(6) Do you like realism in flying, or arcade-style maneuvering?

Realism, I hate the slowwing-down-when-realesing-the-throttle effect

(7) Do you like a complex damage model(if you get shot in your yaw thruster system, you can''t properly turn anymore, your navigation system can get fried, etc...), or do you just want a number from 0-100 telling you your health?

On large ships: definetly, it''s very posible to target the right systems.
On smaller ships (fighters) it should be a little harder to hit specific systems, but when hit in the rear I do expect engines to fail.
Also, systems should not just work and then suddenly stop working, but should gradually work worse and worse (steering becomes more difficult, ship doesn''t accelerate as fast, etc.)

(8) How long should a battle last, 10 intense minutes of adrenaline, or a two hours of a complex tactical situation?

I should have some time to breath in between, it could last very long, but there should be calm moments in the middle.

(9) Do you want automatic weapons systems(ie. radar + missile locking + energy trail tracking), or do you prefer having to fly to them and fight it out?

Yes, anything that makes live easier. Space shooters are already quite complex to control, the less things you have to worry about the better.

(10) Saving in the middle of a battle?

No, you shouldn''t have to much time to think about saving. Maybe at some checkpoint in a level (defeating a large ship)

(11) Lots of people on your side helping you, or pretty much a one-against-all situation?

That should be different each battle.

(1) What are your favorite elements of space shooters?
I like the tactics employed, and the Immersive feel..I actually want more of an immersiveness then any space sim ive seen.. Like I want to be able to get up from the cockpit, and wander around my ship ect..

(2) Least favorite?

I would say lack of good multi-player support.. emphasis on good.. in all fairness I havent had much of chance to check out some of the muliplayer space sims that I have seen, so if anyone can recommend a good one ?

(3) Would you prefer huge dogfights with hundreds of fighters on both sides or more one-on-one scenarios?

A little of both I suppose..well, I cant imagine 1 one 1 being very intersting for the most part .. but sometimes a big fight ends up coming down to about a 1 to 1.

(4) How much control do you like? (ie. do you want to be able to do a quick barrel roll while yawing to the left and aiming your gun turret with the mouse, or, just point and click to aim and fire?

I personally believe that ANYTHING can be done w/ mouse and keyboard, and does it much better than joysticks. I''ve seen mouse and key work for Motocross Madness, flight models in Tribes and Tribes2, and they all work wonderfully. Support Joysticks of course, but always make sure to support mouse and keyboard completely.

(5) Do you like lots of small ships, or a few huge destroyer/mothership types?

Since you asked what we want to see in 3d space-sims, and along the lines of this question: Think along the lines Star-Trek/ Star-Wars.. Big ships HOUSE little ships.. and medium sized ships like the Millenium Falcon make good fighters.. which could also dock in very large ships. Also, I would like for a space-sim to let you actually be able to dock your ship.. get up out of the seat of the cockpit and walk your 3d character out of your ship and into the larger ship.. where you could wander around anywhere.. this is what I mean by immersiveness. I want to feel as though Im actually in this world completely.

Also, I want TRANSPORTERS ala Star-Trek.. I want to be able to beam an away party to an enemy ship w/ thier shields down, and have the away-team wreak havoc and then try to beam them back. Actually, put lots of bots in that you can control from a first person perspective, from like a virtual bot control alcove. THAT would be cool. It would be cool to be a dude running to a transporter pad through a ship that say, my brother, is flying and in a big dogfight with 3 decks up on the bridge. Immserive! very cool.. imangine.. running down the halls the lights blink and the ship rocking w/ loud sounds and exploding conduits as the ship gets jolted by enemy torpedo fire.. but in just less than a minute you will be transported onto that very same ship w/ an away-team to plant an explosive in thier engine room and kill as many of their crew as possible and get out alive.. very cool.

(6) Do you like realism in flying, or arcade-style maneuvering?

I think that in space, in reality as well, having to deal w/ the physics of gravity is much less a problem, so achieving "realism" in flying could be done w/ a mouse and keyboard. Now for way larger ships, and for a sence of "realism" you might use some form of computer-aided piloting as seen in Star-Trek.. but even on the Enterprise there is a manual "joystick" that pops out of the helm which can be used to perform more delicate human reaction movements ..

7) Do you like a complex damage model(if you get shot in your yaw thruster system, you can''t properly turn anymore, your navigation system can get fried, etc...), or do you just want a number from 0-100 telling you your health?

I have to agree w/ what someone said on this question already: basically, make it easy for me to figure out whats wrong and fix it quickly if possible. And to add my version of things, if the engine core is going to blow I want to be able to transport out and onto a mother ship. On a technical scale, you could mix the 2: have multiple spots on the ship w/ a 1-100 scale attached to them.

(9) Do you want automatic weapons systems(ie. radar + missile locking + energy trail tracking), or do you prefer having to fly to them and fight it out?

I want both.. in fact.. for most of your questions, you should try to create options for a group of players, or for a player in the pre-game setup screens.. most games have something like this. But in the case of this questions, both at the same time in one game is best. To make it balanced, you could buy upgrades to your ship that allow you to have more wicked fireing and control systems.

10) Saving in the middle of a battle?

Yes. Especially if you are going to have multiplayer support. This way you could create objective that are a bit more complex than a simple 5 minute game of CS.

(11) Lots of people on your side helping you, or pretty much a one-against-all situation?

Again, for muliplayer, the more people you have working for you, the better. And create tons of tools that allow for mulitplayer communication.. such as quickly creating direct vocal communication links to anyone in the game (VOIP), and setting way-points that show up on other players radars, for commanders to use. In fact, I believe that a game should be released w/ a book that teaches standard vocal communication protocols used in the Marines today. This way people dont have to try and reacreate the wheel so to speak, when it comes to trying to communicate with thier teammates. In fact, there is also a chain of command when it comes to who talks to who and how. This should be sold w/ any battle oriented multiplayer game.. and if you have a Refereed pay service for a grand-scale space sim, you should have such protocols upheld, lest you get muted/booted by the Ref of the game.

What are your favorite elements of space shooters?
-freedom of direction: I can go up, down, left, right, forward, backward... You get the point.
-visuals: there's nothing like zooming past a planet with a bright sun in the background.

Least favorite?
-freedom of direction: Where am I? Where'd he go? Gotta check radar... What am I doing?
-visuals: there's nothing like zooming past a blurry dot with a bright dot in the background.

Would you prefer huge dogfights with hundreds of fighters on both sides or more one-on-one scenarios?
I think I'd prefer 80-90% of the game to be one-on-one scenarios, or some-on-some. Perhaps in the glorious final battle, the all-out dogfight type of combat might make a good ending to the campaign.

How much control do you like? (ie. do you want to be able to do a quick barrel roll while yawing to the left and aiming your gun turret with the mouse, or, just point and click to aim and fire?
I want as little control as possible to start the game as a rookie, or when I'm lazy, and I want as much control as possible when I'm a veteran, and when I want to challenge myself. The most important thing is that the controls feel natural. I don't want to feel like I have to become more like a monkey in order to play the game right (meaning, I need more than two hands, in which case monkey feet would come in handy)

Do you like lots of small ships, or a few huge destroyer/mothership types?
Both of course. Different missions = different targets. Today I want to hunt some small ships, but tomorrow I'll want to slowly destroy a large destroyer.

Do you like realism in flying, or arcade-style maneuvering?
I like realism, but I prefer funism. In some way, the 'easy' control setting should make the game feel more like an arcade game (where you only have to press certain buttons), and the 'hard' control setting should make the game feel a little more like an actual simulator (where you have to press more buttons). Don't try to be MS Flight Simulator, but don't give me the feeling that all I do is press fire.

Do you like a complex damage model(if you get shot in your yaw thruster system, you can't properly turn anymore, your navigation system can get fried, etc...), or do you just want a number from 0-100 telling you your health?
This would greatly depend on the rest of the gameplay, but I think I'd prefer the complex damage model. Just make sure I can easily bail out if one of my more important flight controls gets destroyed; I so hate drifting around aimlessly in space.

How long should a battle last, 10 intense minutes of adrenaline, or a two hours of a complex tactical situation?
As I never really play longer than an hour per gaming session, I'd say give me 6 intense 10 minute fights instead of half of a two-hour battle. But as I know that there are other players who play longer, I'd say make sure your game allows for both types of gameplay and let the players choose.

Do you want automatic weapons systems(ie. radar + missile locking + energy trail tracking), or do you prefer having to fly to them and fight it out?
Greatly depends on the flight model. If it's easy to get behind an opponent and stay on his tail, automatic weapon systems are not necessary. The harder it gets to stay on an enemy's tail, the more automatic tracking is needed. Personally, I'd prefer a 'Red Baron' type of space combat (no auto tracking).

Saving in the middle of a battle?
Depends on what exactly 'saving' constitutes. Do I return to that exact situation upon reloading? Do I only have one save per mission? Is it a save-and-exit-only type of save? In the two-hour battles, I'd say saving is a must. In the 10-minute quick fights, saving might be avoided.

Lots of people on your side helping you, or pretty much a one-against-all situation?
I'd say the answer to this one is the same as the answer to the 'Do you like lots of small ships, or a few huge destroyer/mothership types?' question. Use missions and have each mission be different. Let me fight alone today, and give me some help from others tomorrow.

[edited by - Silvermyst on July 6, 2002 11:52:10 AM]