In regards to #4, and also to people who say that there is no sense of speed, I think a lot of this is due to having such a small field of view on a computer monitor. These games always have a sense of just turning to try to track the enemy moving across your field of view. It doesn''t feel like you are actually moving, just rotating around a fixed point.

If you have played the arcade game Ferrari F355 challenge, it has 3 montiors, one in front of you and 2 off to the sides representing your peripheral vision. It is *awesome*, it really gives you a sense of speed and more a feel for what''s going on around you on the track. The same thing would help for space dogfighting games. Imagine if you were seated in a room with screens around you in a sphere, so that you could look in any direction. Of course, that is not really possible, but it is damn cool to think about.

In computer games, usually you can change your view to look in different directions. But this doesn''t really get the job done... our brains aren''t fooled unless we can see something different by turning our heads.

quote: Original post by RolandofGilead
4)gameplay, I have one tactic and one tactic only, follow the direction of the handy, built-in arrow that points in the direction of a locked onto enemy, I turn in that direction until I see him and then I blow him up and then I do it again, and again and again and again, this ties in with #6

This one''s always bugged me, too. Little add ons like forcing the player to lead shots (with lasers?!?!) don''t really help, either. All fights essentially become turning battles.

A couple of possible fixes: Fighters are too simple, and maybe need to be as systemically complex as many capital ships are in these games. That way, combat approaches to the target have to be carefully considered. If the enemy has nasty lateral guns, for instance, but is mostly vulnerable head on, then that informs me on an entire strategy I need to follow. Even better, if there are different weapons that affect different systems (for both the enemy and I) then I can make interesting strategic trade-offs.

Part of the problem, actually, may also be that fighters are TOO manueverable. What if manuevering where more slow and stately? Turning would then cease to be just a mindless task, and become one of great strategic importance.

Another (totally left field idea): What if players could carry TERRAIN with them? The main reason you have turning battles is that there''s no terrain in space, unless you''re fighting among asteroids / stations. In FPS shooters, you can duck, hide behind obstacles, jump, etc. Combined with terrain, this makes even simple shooting gameplay richer than constant turning battles.

As countermeasures, ships could launch defensive particle clouds. These clouds would defend against varying attacks (ice sphericals vs. lasers, heavy ECM cuboids vs. missiles) and move with the player''s momentum. The effect would be to complicate the playing field, create strategy and strategic manuevering, and make turning battles a bit more intricate.



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...