Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.9.1a is out! (05/10/19); Updated the Forum Rules and Guidelines (02/29/20); Blog post: GIF Roundup (04/11/20)

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: ---  (Read 11856 times)

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3738
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: latest versions made game worse
« Reply #30 on: October 02, 2015, 02:20:11 PM »

Well, you can always just mod the game to make it the game you want...so yea.  It's flexible.
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

orost

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 430
    • View Profile
Re: latest versions made game worse
« Reply #31 on: October 02, 2015, 02:38:56 PM »

@Creepin: I think you're confusing "the game is being developed in a direction I don't like" with "the game is being made worse". It was never intended to be an arcade blow-em-up, it just happened to play like one in a particular stage of its development. If you want that, that's fine, and there's nothing stopping you from playing the game like that (give yourself max rep, adjust some values in a config file to make earning money easier, go ham ramping up and blowing everything up - I do that sometimes), but that's not what the game is intended to be and you're not going to convince the author that he should abandon his vision and turn development around because you like it some other way.
Logged

Creepin

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
Re: latest versions made game worse
« Reply #32 on: October 02, 2015, 02:52:12 PM »

@Creepin: I think you're confusing "the game is being developed in a direction I don't like" with "the game is being made worse".
Hey, I never claimed I judge things from POW of omniscient and omnipresent being, so any of my judgements comes with an invisible tag of "IMHO", much like any of other peoples judgements. With that being said, for me, as a person, "the game is being developed in a direction I don't like" is perfectly, precisely equals "the game is being made worse". Fair enough?

Quote
but that's not what the game is intended to be and you're not going to convince the author that he should abandon his vision and turn development around because you like it some other way.
That much is obvious and never was my goal. I just wanted to a) rant and let off my frustration and b) support likeminded folks.
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: latest versions made game worse
« Reply #33 on: October 02, 2015, 05:52:19 PM »

How did this ever get to a page three?
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2650
    • View Profile
    • Bitbucket profile
    • Email
Re: latest versions made game worse
« Reply #34 on: October 02, 2015, 06:16:42 PM »

Laziness by what metric? Perhaps you should present the game(s) you've made, so we know you have a proper benchmark for such things.
Really, has it comes down to such a lame argument? Truly, pathetic.
Lame, how? I'll grant that it comes across as... ad hominem, perhaps (that's the closest term I can think of).

But ad hominem is exactly what the claim it responds to is hard to interpret as anything other than, and more to the point, one the OP has shown no basis for making. I submit that someone who has not participated in the making of a game is in a much weaker position to make claims on a game dev's laziness. And while one could still marshal evidence from elsewhere, MatthiB has not indicated that they even have any such evidence beyond "features X, Y and Z do not have a complete implementation" (next to useless for the purpose unless placed in context).
« Last Edit: October 02, 2015, 06:41:37 PM by Histidine »
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3738
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: ---
« Reply #35 on: October 02, 2015, 06:51:21 PM »

Well, he changed the title and the contents of the post to "---".  Wonder why.  Did he feel embarrassed or something?
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

Serenitis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: ---
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2015, 02:37:05 AM »

Well, he changed the title and the contents of the post to "---".  Wonder why.  Did he feel embarrassed or something?
Maybe it was the two dozen or so politely worded "NO U" replies that tripped the stropswitch.

re: Faction Identity.
I don't think we have a massive problem as it stands. Sure we could use a bit of a tweak to emphasise certain ships in fleet compositions, but the overall feel of all these groups essentially using whatever they can get hold of does okay.
For example - I don't think I've ever seen a faction Onslaught outside of a neutral or Hegemony fleet. Nor a Conquest outside of a Sindrian or Luddic fleet.
(I'm not counting pirate/bounty fleets.)
All the rest seem to be a mish-mash of whatever was available and not full of holes, which could probably use a bit of tidying up but it's not the sort of thing that really screams PRIORITY.

I wonder if each ship had an entry in the .csv to declare that this ship is high/mid/low/some other category tech, like how some are marked as civilian.
And then use this to build faction fleets by requiring a minimum of x% to be one of those categories.
Not sure if this is something that would be worth the effort (for now) - Adding an extra column to a csv is trivial, but I have no idea about the code side.
Logged

Cycerin

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1647
  • beyond the infinite void
    • View Profile
Re: ---
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2015, 02:44:16 AM »

Nice backpedaling. I guess he expected a heavily opinionated monologue to not generate discussion.
Logged

Zapier

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: ---
« Reply #38 on: October 03, 2015, 02:47:43 AM »

Too bad the OP didn't stick by his post. Honest feedback from a variety of players expecting different things should be welcomed as it is. Not likely appreciated by everyone but certainly useful for generating discussion as evidenced here, even when it's filled with some strongly suggestive opinions.
Logged

Doom101

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
  • Doom will always find you.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube channel
    • Email
Re: ---
« Reply #39 on: October 04, 2015, 06:01:26 AM »

I was avoiding this thread up until now for reasons that should be quite clear to anyone who's been here long enough, But now that the OP has completely backed down from this thread i feel i want to point something out.

If you're going to make an inflammatory post, and yes anything that bashes a game in it's own forums is considered inflammatory even if you have genuine criticisms to make, you should stand by it, take all the advice, criticism, even the hate(which luckily this forum doesn't do so much as others)
And then apply what was said to make a proper response, most of the time community members would be and are willing to help you fix your issues, or at the very least reach an agreement, and help you seek the proper response. Such as oh "Well X game does the Y feature you're looking for much better, have you tried playing that?"

making a post like this and then disappearing, and then trying to erase all evidence of it, ( which won't work, nothing on the internet can ever be deleted) will only shun you from that community for a very long time.
Logged
When you can't go on, just accept your doom. It comes to all, it is inevitable.

Also I totally had the name BEFORE the cruiser.
Pages: 1 2 [3]