Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sathe]

I really don´t think that at this point lore should have any kind of priority, not to mention lore that will be written now might not fit final version of game (at least not all of it)

[Igncom1]

That however doesn't mean that lore surrounding the overall universe and factions presented can't be fluffed up.

[Toxcity]

There seems to be a good amount of lore in Starsector so far, considering all the stuff in the Codex, and the desciptions for planets, markets, and goods. It's just not in your face as much, which is pretty cool with me.

[Gothars]

My favorite piece of lore in the game is

Spoiler

the sleeper station in Arcadia. That a huge station where so many people get deep frozen to wait for better times even exists says so much about the state of the Sector, without actually stating it.

[close]

And it's so nice to discover such things for yourself, on a remote, otherwise irrelevant outpost.

[Harmful Mechanic]

My favorite piece of lore in the game is

Spoiler

the sleeper station in Arcadia. That a huge station where so many people get deep frozen to wait for better times even exists says so much about the state of the Sector, without actually stating it.

[close]

And it's so nice to discover such things for yourself, on a remote, otherwise irrelevant outpost.

And for extra bonus funny, notice that the only thing it exports is harvested organs.

[Linnis]

Lore is good an all, but is all serve the much important immersion, once you have immersion, people will make up their own stories, along with a sprinkling of lore and a mission (other than "sandbox")

Like say in games like FFT/Tactic ogre or xcom, a nameless randomly generated character can give so much feels and bring you into the games. For tactics it was the likeable unit portraits and their dying messages (also randomly generated), xcom was the fact that they have country flags on their uniform.
Even say in homeworld1 and 2, when your ships are seconds away from exploding into fireballs, your captains still matter of factly and professionally proclaim their oncoming demise. (along with most all voice acting in that game, make you really feel like *** is serious and not a game)
FTL? Simple mission, everything else generated, so you somewhat care when your characters die, as every one is important to your success.

Immersion

[Steven Shi]

Linnis,

The games you listed are all single player games with clear goals and beginning to end progression.

Starsector, Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous etc are sandbox games that requires a lot more in terms of immersion to compensate for the mundane grind that's typical of the genre. The soft power of a deep lore is far less obvious than a game mechanic but in my view, just as important - a game with excellent mechanic but bland story will at best make the game mediocre and at worst, a mere tech demo.

Without context, space sandbox is just an effort in number management - bigger bank balance, bigger ship stats, bigger weapons stats etc. That's fine in the short term but how often you replay a sandbox/4x game purely because of the mechanics? (Mount and Blade is an exception being the only decent melee sandbox in existence)

My original point was, since there's at least another year left in development, Alex can slowly fill up his universe with lores and stories (both in-game and out side of the game) so on the day of release, there's a fantastic universe already in place for people to get lost in.

[StarSchulz]

My favorite piece of lore in the game is

Spoiler

the sleeper station in Arcadia. That a huge station where so many people get deep frozen to wait for better times even exists says so much about the state of the Sector, without actually stating it.

[close]

And it's so nice to discover such things for yourself, on a remote, otherwise irrelevant outpost.

And for extra bonus funny, notice that the only thing it exports is harvested organs.

0.0 that is terrifying! how did i not notice that when i read that today 

[miljan]

Starsector, Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous etc are sandbox games that requires a lot more in terms of immersion to compensate for the mundane grind that's typical of the genre. The soft power of a deep lore is far less obvious than a game mechanic but in my view, just as important - a game with excellent mechanic but bland story will at best make the game mediocre and at worst, a mere tech demo.

Without context, space sandbox is just an effort in number management - bigger bank balance, bigger ship stats, bigger weapons stats etc. That's fine in the short term but how often you replay a sandbox/4x game purely because of the mechanics? (Mount and Blade is an exception being the only decent melee sandbox in existence)

How often do you replay a game because of lore? 90% of games are replayed because of mechanic/gameplay, and the ones that are played for years are played only because of it. The only time you will replay the game because of story (not lore) is if you can have a effect on the story so the ending or going from point A to B is different. From mount and blade, to terraria, minecraft, skyrim and every sand box game out there, replay value comes from game mechanic and gameplay. You talk here about some game numbers min/max things, but you miss the main point. You replay this game because of different play styles. In starsector case, one play style can be a heavy fleet, with a character that has a lot of logistic, another one is trader, another one is using high tech ship (that offers different play style to hegemony ships) and similar. Does some text written on a planet that will be same every time you play it improve replay value? No.

The reason is once you read the lore, finish a story, you read it. You will not get any replay value from reading the same text again. In other words removing mechanic/good gameplay from a game with a great lore you will have a *** game that will maybe be played once more because of lore/story. Remove lore form  a game that has great mechanic/gameplay you will still have a great game, and those games are played for years..

If you look game that put their focus on story you will see they are played once or two times to see all story arks and thats it.

The thing where you are correct is that more lore does make a better immersion of the game (for some people), but that doesn't have to do anything with replay value, and even how good a game is and how long it will be played.

[nomadic_leader]

If you look game that put their focus on story you will see they are played once or two times to see all story arks and thats it.

Wrong. If you read books, watch TV shows, or play a story oriented game just to see "what happens" then you aren't quite understanding literature. Nothing happened because it's all made up; that's not the point.

Everyone knew Hector was going to die, but they listened to recitations of the Iliad countless times with enjoyment (and they couldn't even unlock alternative endings),  because the entire fabric of the work is interesting and enjoyable; it isn't just a thing to get you from point A to B.

I'll grant different people come to games (and books, or films, or whatever) for different reasons; some people do just like to manage numbers for fun. I can't imagine why, but whatever.

Some people, however, really do enjoy them because they offer you entrance to another world, one which provides some kind of solace, amusement, or instruction. This sensation is accomplished through good storytelling-- techniques which make an imaginary world seem peopled and alive. "Lore" in a video game is an example of this, and there are several video games that have only one ending which people still play again and again.

[miljan]

If you look game that put their focus on story you will see they are played once or two times to see all story arks and thats it.

Wrong. If you read books, watch TV shows, or play a story oriented game just to see "what happens" then you aren't quite understanding literature. Nothing happened because it's all made up; that's not the point.

Everyone knew Hector was going to die, but they listened to recitations of the Iliad countless times with enjoyment (and they couldn't even unlock alternative endings),  because the entire fabric of the work is interesting and enjoyable; it isn't just a thing to get you from point A to B.

I'll grant different people come to games (and books, or films, or whatever) for different reasons; some people do just like to manage numbers for fun. I can't imagine why, but whatever.

Some people, however, really do enjoy them because they offer you entrance to another world, one which provides some kind of solace, amusement, or instruction. This sensation is accomplished through good storytelling-- techniques which make an imaginary world seem peopled and alive. "Lore" in a video game is an example of this, and there are several video games that have only one ending which people still play again and again.

I agree that I am wrong if you look at only that part of my post.  There are people that do it, but they are really a minority compared to games that are replayed over and over because of gameplay. Not interested here talking about books and movies, but games.

My whole reply is more on general note to  SQW when he tried to imply what is important for a game, what makes it popular, what makes high replay value for most of the people, including starsector directly. I guess some people would replay starsector over and over to read same text on a planet again or description of a faction, but if there are any, they are really in few numbers. And text will not make the game from replay value and gameplay/mechanic value any better. That was my whole point of the post. 

And if devs want to make the game good (that will be played a lot and for long), focus needs always to be on mechanic, gameplay, content, different play styles. If he has time he should flash out more  lore, story, but don't sacrifice things that are more important for the game.

[Steven Shi]

@Miljan

I believe lore is as critical a component in game genres like 4x or sandbox as any game mechanic. Majority of action you do in a sandbox are mundane and repetitive so context is absolutely critical for immersion and replay value. It's not like a RTS, FPS or plateform were you have an existing story to drive you or can rely on constant action packed combat to keep the endorphin hits coming.

Once Starsector's excellent combat sim wears off, people will start to wonder why am I transporting this to that planet? Why should I care about Faction A vs B? Oh look, another fleet of I-don't-care to destroy *yawn*.

Building a living gaming universe isn't just about in-game texts but also what you give gamers outside and can be a powerful marketing tool. Alex will eventually need to think about why people would want to spend limited free time playing Starsector instead of Elite, SC or any number of existing/upcoming open world space games. Is Starsector's game mechanic enough to drive the sales on its own like M&B's melee or X's freedom or EVE's 'anything goes'? TBH, what Starsector is proposing isn't unique in the space genre so how does it intend to stand out?

Personally I bought the game 2 years ago partly because of his lore blogs made living in his universe sound interesting. I don't believe I'm the minority in picking games this way.

[Megas]

I got Starsector to play it as an arcade shmup.  Like Star Control 2 or Transcendence, lore is nice, but takes a back seat to blasting ships and finding things that let me blast ships better.

[SafariJohn]

I'm with SQW. The lore is why I came. The combat is nice and all, but the lore and story is what immerses me and keeps me from leaving.