It''s not...

It''s just hard for the publishers to pay for all the time they''d need to put into it!

Oluseyi -

The truth is, I care more about what shockwave.com thinks. They will (hopefully) see the game as unique immediately, just by seeing the level of detail done through Flash. If accepted, it will be played, solely due to the fact that Shockwave.com has got some serious traffic coming in (and it's better then the 2D space game they have already).

Why does it sound like you want to discredit me? I told you, to me, realism isn't an issue. I have missiles in the game, and they work well, so why would I take them out? Because their aren't enough particles in space to obtain the necessary velocity? um... okay...

I like some of your ideas though. I'll probably put space mines in because I already have the functionality for velocity to affect drift. I like the leeches too.

[edited by - devnull2k on May 3, 2002 4:59:16 PM]

[edited by - devnull2k on May 3, 2002 5:02:15 PM]

quote:

---

Original post by devnull2k
Why does it sound like you want to discredit me?

---

a.) Because you misinterpret my statements. It''s okay; it happens all the time.
b.) Because you''re not familiar with the paradigm called "deconstructive criticism", where people tear your idea apart and then reassemble the good parts, stripping away all cliche and "fat".

It''s your game, not mine, so I can''t make you do anything. Whatever I say here is a suggestion directed at you, but that someone else may find useful.

<br><br><span><font size="-2">[ <a href="http://www.gamedev.net/reference/start_here/">GDNet Start Here</a> | <a href="http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/search.asp">GDNet Search Tool</a> | <a href="http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/faq.asp">GDNet FAQ</a> ]<br>[ <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/">MS RTFM [MSDN]</a> | <a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/">SGI STL Docs</a> | <a href="http://www.boost.org">Boost</a> ]<br>[ <a href="http://www.google.com/">Google!</a> | <a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html">Asking Smart Questions</a> | <a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/index.html">Jargon File</a> ]<br>Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!</font></span>

You can say it if you''d like. I''ll take no offense.

wouldnt the idea of building an autonomous fleet of "things" take all the fun out of the later levels?

the fun bit of a space shooter being the shooting of things, right?

autos shouldnt be able to attack without direction from the player.

imho.



die or be died...i think

Good point, you definitely would not want to overdo something like that.

"Missiles make no sense in space; they waste too much energy attempting to attain velocity (since there are very few particles for their emissions to push against). "

thats wrong. but what made me laugh is a famous scientist said rockets could never leave the atmosphere once long long long ago. for the exact same reason.

its difficult to pick words cause im not sure what your vocabulary/experience is. but how bout mental pictures.

two people in space facing each other. one person pushes off the other. who moves? answer is both people. directly away from each other. one mass goes one way and the other goes the other.

ok now your rocket. your rocket pushes a mass out its tail pipe. that mass goes one way so the rocket has to go the other.

systems of particles have interesting properties.
internal forces cant change the center of mass of a system of particles.

you can view rockets that way. ok imagine a rocket at a space station and all the forces at work come from the rocket. its at rest at the space station. the center of mass for the rocket and the fuel is at the station. it blast off from the station (without pushing on it its next to it) ZOOOOOM! 30 minutes later its 10,000 miles away. wheres the center of mass of the original fuel and the rocket now? at the space station. internal forces cant change a systems center of mass. 10,000 miles doesnt change that. so in this view the push comes from the fact that mass is moving backwards away from the center of mass there for the rocket has to move forward to keep the center of mass from moving (skewed sense of cause and effect though). but notice that what the rocket is in is irrelevant to this. the pushing is not against the earth or the air.

ok another way is conservation of linear momentum. again mass moves out the back. it has a force that force has an equal and opposite force on the rocket.

missles in space combat are highly effective as an idea. key note that you detach them before they ignite =)

but as far as the original poster goes. Defender!

[edited by - declspec on May 9, 2002 3:16:03 PM]

What about a weapon that modifies enemy behaviour?

eg. turns enemies into friendlies; turns enemies into kamikazies; turns enemies magnetic, etc.

Wow, thanks guys. Thought this post died on me.

declspec, thanks for your comments.

hm... enemy behaviour changing. not exactly what i had in mind. I would have to add art, and program AI. good idea though...

i was thinking more along the lines of cool weapon effects that destroy enemy ships.

declspec - I think Oluseyi meant that a missile must use a lot of energy (and take a lot of time) just to get up to speed, while something like a laser obviously goes at light speed. That''s what he meant when he said one should focus on "low-transmissive energy" weapons.

Firebird Entertainment