Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 3:18:49 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
I have to agree with Nanaki on MOO3. I kept hearing about all these mods that made Moo3 so much better-but after playing a fully modded Moo3 I still think it is a horrible game---even modded. The amount of work you have to do to keep track of everything as you expand simply becomes work instead of fun---and the lore is as dry as Gin.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 31
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 3:37:00 PM   
buglepong

 

Posts: 46
Joined: 4/12/2014
Status: offline
What? Cant say distant worlds is any more original. Besides, I really liked that jellyfish race that could only live on gas giants. DW could do with one. It doesnt even have a custom race editor! Not to mention the races in DW are either painfully similar or very imbalanced.

i actuallu liked MoO3. It does bring out the ocd in me, but i have to say its empire management system was realistic and layered. Thr only thing that really brought it down was the UI. It was worse than DW's pretty clunky one.


< Message edited by buglepong -- 6/21/2014 4:43:46 PM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 32
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 4:10:27 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
quote:


Hard sci-fi can be far more than simply choosing to be either Ernie or Bert from Sesame Street--which is the overall trend today in 4x games. Sins of a Solar empire works just fine as the 3 races being clearly beliavably humanoid. Emperor of the Fading Suns is another Universe with TONS of differences between house/factions/races without going to saturday morning cartoons. Dune...though the space bending aliens are certainly far fetched -- everything else from the many houses/secs makes it far better and more interesting than a Star wars or star Trek....if you read the books that is.


I know what hard sci-fi is. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is one of my favorite books and I am probably one of those few people who understand what TANSTAAFL means, to this day I find it deeply ironic that a Japanese manga/anime, Planetes, manages to pull off hard sci-fi harder and better than most western 'hard' sci-fi out there.

Which brings me to my point. Theres a lot of supposedly 'hard' sci-fi you claim that is really not all that hard. Dune is not hard sci-fi. Sins of a Solar Empire is not hard sci-fi. Emperor of the Fading Suns is not hard sci-fi. Yes, a lot of sci-fi out there does contain some 'hard' elements, but even including one major soft element contaminates the whole 'hard' part.

Hard sci-fi, real hard sci-fi, is incredibly difficult to write. You have to read up, learn, and understand rocket science. Theres so many differences between hard and soft sci-fi that a lot of things that people love about sci-fi are a lot more different and mundane in hard sci-fi, space combat being a big example of this.

But you know what?

There is nothing wrong with soft sci-fi. It makes up the vast majority of sci-fi out there and is the only sci-fi with any kind of popular appeal at all. A lot of that is that it bends/breaks the rules in order to allow cool stuff to happen, and there is absolutly nothing wrong with that.

quote:


In fact if you listen to Carl Saigon and others, it would explain how these races reached Space travel without destroying themselves--using Religion (and forbidden tech), Tradition (like a government of Kings/queens over Democracy)- to explain self checks to allow them to reach the tech levels they do before they manage to wipe each other out before ever being able to reach us on Earth...which is Carl Saigon's belief.


Carl Sagan (I am pretty sure thats who you were talking about) is, imho, a model example of the human folly of assumption. As a species, humans tend to dislike the unknown, to the point where we will even make stuff up in order to explain it. His entire work on extraterrestrials is based off of hypothosis which in turn are based off even more hypothosis and none of it has any observational data to back any of it up.

I am personally not a big fan, because, imho, hypothosis without observational or experimental data is about the same as writing fiction, it makes a mockery of science. Infact, he was known for making lots of wild predictions, many of which turned out to be completely incorrect.

As for the Fermi paradox, well, we just recently discovered that radio waves have this annoying habit of decaying into white noise after a few light years... too bad for SETI I suppose.

quote:


DW is simply a generic copy of everything before, and not a very interesting one. And the mods available are mods done to death in every 4x game before it. I appreciate and enjoy extended universe (great, more talking bugs), Star trek and such for what they are but I still see that HUGE VOID or nothing else to choose from.


Hate to break it to you, but virtually everything out there has been done before. Sins of a Solar Empire? Oh look, a Protoss which is rather deeply ironic considering that in the game they hold the Zerg niche (I will get to that later), and its not like the 'robed temple faction' in the Advent and the generic 'Human' faction are any more unique.

...and I am certain that virtually everything you like was done before.

and you know what? That is OK.

When most people complain about originality, it is mainly because a trope becomes too overused and people get sick and tierd of seeing it over and over, and in that case, yeah, it is a good idea to pare back on usage of the trope, but it hardly means 'remove the trope entirely'.

Which reminds me, there is a lot of that going on now with the Terran-Protoss-Zerg dynamic, which actually started with Alien Vs Predator (vs Humans), evolved to its pinnacle in Starcraft, and still lives to this day in Sins of a Solar Empire. Thats certainly a trope we could lay off for awile.

Overall, Races in DW should not be removed or physically altered. Now, I agree in that balance and differences can be improved. I agree in that a great deal of races could use improved portraits (This could fix most your complaints, I imagine). I also am perfectly fine with DW2 adding new races.

But please, do not start advocating for removing races because you happen to not like them. I already seen this happen before in MOO3. The end result was terrible.

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to buglepong)
Post #: 33
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 4:33:39 PM   
Gregorovitch55

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/11/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyegore

Although it is impossible to imagine what a true alien would look like, it is certainly possible to know WHAT THEY MUST HAVE to communicate and build ships to enter space, and a talking roach does not cut it. It is a matter of taste...but seems to me there's only one taste prevalent...Mickey Mouse in Space. Was cool when I was 10...but at my age now it IS GETTING VERY OLD.



I would tend to disagree with that for a number of reasons. Firstly we know that on earth there has been a lot of convergent evolution (e.g. dolphins share a lot of characteristics with fish) which suggests that certain design principles are generally effective for species in particular niches, therefore it is reasonable to expect alien species may well evolve along similar lines in roughly similar environments.

Secondly we know the universe looks pretty much the same wheresoever you look and the laws of physics appear consistent, so it is reasonable to expect a lot of alien species will be evolving in habitats broadly similar to earth in which similar designs will prove equally successful.

Thirdly there is no hard evidence that RNA and DNA first appeared on earth. A number of pieces of space rock have been recovered that contain nucleic acids and appear to come from way out in the Oort cloud or beyond, which means it is entirely possible that RNA/DNA arrived here on earth from elsewhere shortly after the birth of the Solar System which in turn means the galaxy could be teaming with DNA based life very similar to our own.

As far as insects are concerned, we can thank our lucky stars that their respiratory systems are based purely on diffusion, O2 in and CO2 out, via static trachea and that they have not evolved lung type organs to pump the stuff in the quantities required to grow to the sort of size we are. This strictly limits how big they can grow. Spiders are somewhat closer as they posses "lung books" that are somewhat more efficient but still static diffusion based.
Again we can thank God they haven't evolved a pump for this organ or the Dhayut would be a lot closer to home than our computer screens. The point is just because insects have not evolved lung type organs on earth does not mean similarly designed species elsewhere haven't, and our observations of convergent evolution here tend to support the argument that they quite possibly have. A space faring roach is by no means as fanciful as it sounds and, given lungs or lung-type organs, it would have no better or worse chance of becoming space faring than we we do.

Which is perhaps something not to dwell on too much when you go to bed at night.




(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 34
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 4:42:51 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
I think Carl Sagan (yeah I'm a terrible speller) was a product of his time. The nuclear age. Like me remembering those drills in school where somehow hiding under a desk or going to the basement saved us children (rather than impact horrible phobeas) from a nuclear attack. Today the idea of any nuclear attack, however likely or widespread, would completely wipe us off the planet probably is a bit too paranoid after having them around 60 plus years and seeing us still standing. Oh, they might be used again, and they might be devasting, but they will not wipe us off the planet. Not all of us.

Yes, unless your doing 2001 (book or Movie) true good hard sci-fi is rare and hard to find.And i will note they did not kill the idea of God here either in 2001...I think it is used often in good sci-fi. But I can suspend my disbelief in a game if the races I choose don't reflect a Raid commercial or Daffy Duck. I was reading an article on how good old Stardock's Howard didn't want to mess up the LORE too much in Cal Civ3 but rather wanted to flesh it out. Inside i was laughing, and I'm still laughing. I can't take that lore seriously anymore than the lore in Wizard of Oz. If Howard really wants me to take his game serious he should take the LORE seriously. It doesn't have to be Kubrick's 2001, but it certainly should be better than talking hampsters. Wether a hampster could ever EVOLVE...or a roach...to have lungs, vocal cords or telephic means of comunication...or thumbs...a basic requirement...I'd say by that stage it stops being a roach or hampter and starts being pretty huminoid in nature.

Dophins are only another example. As intelligent as we think they are, along with Killer Whales I might add...ALL ATTEMPTS to form any communication or understanding in this matter have pretty much been total failures. It takes huge leaps of Assumptions where there are no real world facts-

Humanoid you can sell me. Even an intelligent underwater breathing type of humanoid looking race, or ones perferring swamps, desert, or whatnot...but by no stretch can I buy a talking roach zipping across the milky way. If you want those characteristics in a race make them zealous nymphmaniacs that can't stop having sex at every turn with a religion that forbids birth control. Even the race pictures would be more pleasing to the eye.




< Message edited by eyegore -- 6/21/2014 6:07:29 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 35
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 4:59:50 PM   
Hannable

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 11/4/2013
Status: offline
After reading this entire thread, I've come to only one conclusion:

I want some Luftwaffles.

_____________________________

"Only one human captain has survived battle with a Minbari fleet. He is behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your lives, be somewhere else." - Delenn of Minbar

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 36
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 5:30:29 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
[image]




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Hannable)
Post #: 37
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 6:57:48 PM   
Spidey


Posts: 399
Joined: 12/8/2013
Status: offline
A few things. First, regarding the UI and the strategy choices, you can always select a unit, click on its design name, wait for the design screen to pop up, change the strategy choices, click on save, and that's it, you've changed the strategy. You don't need to scrap anything.

Next, regarding alien races and whatnot, I think it's ridiculously arrogant to suggest that all intelligent life has to be humanoid. We don't really know what "intelligence" actually is so how can we speculate that only humanoids can have it? Oh, because we can't talk with dolphins yet? So by that reasoning, space colonization is impossible in hard sci-fi because we can't do it yet? Come on.

Ant colonies can do optimization instinctively that your average human being couldn't do with a computer. They also have a means of communication, though it isn't quite as advanced as human language. That being the case, I really don't see any logic supporting a categorical rejection of the possibility of intelligent ant colonies existing. Each individual ant might be pretty stupid but suppose they developed a capability of reading each others mental state without verbal communication. Suppose they evolved an instinctive divide and conquer approach to problem solving, resulting in these space ants having increasingly greater problem solving speed as their numbers grow. As improbable as this may be, how can you say it's entirely impossible for the ant colony to figure out a solution to the food problem? And if they can fix the food, they can grow numbers even bigger and become an even smarter group. Suddenly we have our bug hive. It would be hard for humans to build anything with ant tech but in this case the ants develop naturally into an organic continental-sized computer with trillions of individual cells. You want to tell me how you know what that might be capable of?

Regarding felines and cute talking teddy bears (or not so cute, in the case of Atuuks), why do you assume their paws are exactly like Earth counterparts, just because their faces are? Because assumptions are fun? Opposable thumbs in order to pick up stuff is nice but that han happen in many ways and an opposable claw or a tentacle would do the trick as well. How do you know Dhayut don't have an opposing claw on their big spider-legs? The truth is, you don't. Based on what we've seen on Earth, it seems unlikely that rhodents or felines or other stupid animals would develop into warp species. They just don't have the capacity for it, based on what we've seen on Earth. But how much have we actually seen and how much is that relative to the rest of the universe?

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 38
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 7:38:24 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyegore

Yes, unless your doing 2001 (book or Movie) true good hard sci-fi is rare and hard to find.And i will note they did not kill the idea of God here either in 2001...I think it is used often in good sci-fi. But I can suspend my disbelief in a game if the races I choose don't reflect a Raid commercial or Daffy Duck. I was reading an article on how good old Stardock's Howard didn't want to mess up the LORE too much in Cal Civ3 but rather wanted to flesh it out. Inside i was laughing, and I'm still laughing. I can't take that lore seriously anymore than the lore in Wizard of Oz. If Howard really wants me to take his game serious he should take the LORE seriously. It doesn't have to be Kubrick's 2001, but it certainly should be better than talking hampsters. Wether a hampster could ever EVOLVE...or a roach...to have lungs, vocal cords or telephic means of comunication...or thumbs...a basic requirement...I'd say by that stage it stops being a roach or hampter and starts being pretty huminoid in nature.


Hard/Soft sci-fi can both be serious or unserious, the seriousnessness really has nothing to do with the hardness of the sci-fi.

quote:


Dophins are only another example. As intelligent as we think they are, along with Killer Whales I might add...ALL ATTEMPTS to form any communication or understanding in this matter have pretty much been total failures. It takes huge leaps of Assumptions where there are no real world facts-


The only example we have is, well, life on earth. There is a good reason why a vast majority of 'alien' races out there are either anthropomorphized critters (or even inanimate objects), or humans with slightly altered characteristics, stick to what you know and all that.

In terms of actually forming hypothosis... well, we run into the problem of not a large enough sample size. We only know of one life-bearing planet, Earth, and on that planet only one race had become a sentient, civilization-building race, humans. You cannot make a decent hypothosis based off of a sample size of one.

The truth is there is no known answer, and we likely wont ever find out unless we happen to discover the remains of an ancient civilization on Mars.

quote:


As far as insects are concerned, we can thank our lucky stars that their respiratory systems are based purely on diffusion, O2 in and CO2 out, via static trachea and that they have not evolved lung type organs to pump the stuff in the quantities required to grow to the sort of size we are. This strictly limits how big they can grow. Spiders are somewhat closer as they posses "lung books" that are somewhat more efficient but still static diffusion based.


Note that the current limit on insect size is also based off of atmospheric temperature and composition... sometime in the distant past the world was a lot hotter and more O2 rich, which resulted in some fairly massive insects.

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 39
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 7:40:36 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
Next, regarding alien races and whatnot, I think it's ridiculously arrogant to suggest that all intelligent life has to be humanoid. We don't really know what "intelligence" actually is so how can we speculate that only humanoids can have it? Oh, because we can't talk with dolphins yet? So by that reasoning, space colonization is impossible in hard sci-fi because we can't do it yet? Come on.



Science is observation and an act of proving assumptions. It's how we got from the World is Flat to the world is Round. The basis of Science is pretty consistant across the Universe, therefore it is anything but arrogant to expect intelligent life to evolve alone simuliar lines of those found on Earth. And yes...you need a thumb.

Besides we already know your bias based on your Avatar. In a court of law you'd be proclaimed a hostile witness and would likely be easily impeached by a clever defense attorney. You favor Minnie and Micki Mouse and will stop at no ends to push the agenda to include them in any 4x game known or planned.

< Message edited by eyegore -- 6/21/2014 8:55:55 PM >

(in reply to Spidey)
Post #: 40
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 7:50:32 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
A few things. First, regarding the UI and the strategy choices, you can always select a unit, click on its design name, wait for the design screen to pop up, change the strategy choices, click on save, and that's it, you've changed the strategy. You don't need to scrap anything.


Thank you for this tibbit. It is very helpful. Still, why am I forced to the design screen. Suppose I regular automate that part of the game? Because i regular do because I find the intire design screen badly set up. it is cumbersome and not at all easy to use. Logically to change orders for either ship or base should result from clicking on ship or base. In either case I learned something new and it was something that constantly ate at me.

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 41
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 7:55:36 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyegore

Science is observation and an act of proving assumptions. It's how we got from the World is Flat to the world is Round. The basis of Science is pretty consistant across the Universe, therefore it is anything but arrogant to expect intelligent life to evolve alone simuliar lines. And yes...you need a thumb.


You actually bring up an excellent point, and is one of the reasons why I despise assumptions.

"World is Flat" was the dominant 'scientific' theory on the Earth's shape for a long time in many regions, it was an unproven assumption with absolutly zero observational data to back it up. It was not until early scientists made observations that 'Sphere earth' finally triumphed as the dominant scientific fact.

Likewise, assumptions about the realism of alien races is nothing short of rediculous considering that we have not even discovered alien life. How can we be so arrogant as to make assumptions about that which we had never seen?

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 42
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 8:14:01 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
Fair Question. Let's look at the popular Alien franchise. I remember when this first came out. Up to then all use sci-fi fans had as far as Hollywood was low budget b-movie sillyness. Now here was a movie that had a budget and it tried best it could to push "believable"....now decades later we can spot the many holes...like Florecent lights in the halls to a myraid of other illogical choices (after all hard sci-fi really would be using light imitting diodes...something that existed way back when I went to college to be an Electronic Engineer---and is today being used to replace L.C.D. televisions with L.E.D. televisions.

But that is splitting hairs really.. the overall truth of it was Alien was the first movie that put serious effort into sci-fi. It later evolved into mass media dumb with forthcoming sequels like Alien vs Predator and such--but the basic premise of at least the first 2 movies was my favorite because it leaned towards "beliavability."

And in that movie, the monster...was NOT a sentient being. In no way was it suggested that particular alien was a talking space fairing creature...but rather the unfortunate cargo of a sentient being the movie presented as a single dead enity in a chair in the spaceship that had crashed.

It went far south with the rediculous Riply monster in Alien Resurection...and the intire series went downhill. Promethius, as confusing as the plot is, or how stupid these top level scientists behave in it...show us the Engineers...and they are quite simuliar and humanoid. That was a conscious choice. They clearly wanted the audience to buy it. Had it been a talking roach it just would not fly anymore than it flies in DW dispite your best arguments.

So why start at the bottom in a 4x space game if your trying to make the best game possible? DW is not the 5th sequel in the series. It's the first....and your arguing B-movie 'attack of the Killer tomatoes' because "how do we know. A tomato could do that. We have no proof otherwise!"

The game, and any 4x space game for that matter already ARROGANTLY says all alien races are warlike and want power and space and can take over planets in mere days with troop pods and space fairing carriers. I guess it is all arrogance unless we include soft furry animals and hermit the cricket?

Truth is, it isn't arrogance at all. It's taste. And I've outgrown cartoons.

< Message edited by eyegore -- 6/21/2014 9:53:58 PM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 43
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 8:55:03 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
Except the popular alien franchise is not real life, it is just a movie. Just because aliens went one way, does not mean that we should have to go the same exact route. Unfortunately, I am not really too familiar on Aliens at all, I never really had much interest in the series.

As for talking Roaches, well, certainly people like insectoid races, so why not have them as a playable option? Same with the talking cats, rodents, squids, eldrich abominations, humans with bumpy forheads, and every other variety of alien out there. If you really dislike them, it is utterly trivial to disable them, you can even do it in DW1, make a mod, copy the race folder over, open the files for races you do not like, scroll down to 'Playable' and change that to 'no'. Done. That race will no longer appear in your games.

I like the idea of having enough racial choices that at least one will appeal to someone. Given, DW1's has a good selection of races (imho) but could definatly use improved art.

quote:


Truth is, it isn't arrogance at all. It's taste. And I've outgrown cartoons.


Theres a substantial difference between arguing for/against a race based on realism, which is where the arrogance comes in, and arguing based on taste, which is a lot more objective. I dislike when people try to push their personal taste as realistic, and that is where the term 'arrogant' is aimed at.

As I said, though, DW1's biggest issue in regards to races is that the portraits are not that great. The racial descriptions are vague enough that any potential artist has a lot of leeway in making a race look awesome... or lousy.

< Message edited by Nanaki -- 6/21/2014 10:01:46 PM >


_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 44
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 8:58:10 PM   
Gregorovitch55

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/11/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki

Note that the current limit on insect size is also based off of atmospheric temperature and composition... sometime in the distant past the world was a lot hotter and more O2 rich, which resulted in some fairly massive insects.


Indeed, I believe the oxygen content in the atmosphere was about 30% (as apposed to 20% now). Definitely upped their maximum build size.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 45
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 9:14:50 PM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
As I said, though, DW1's biggest issue in regards to races is that the portraits are not that great. The racial descriptions are vague enough that any potential artist has a lot of leeway in making a race look awesome... or lousy.

Actually mod wise DW's flaw is the races core are hard coded. You can make an insect race passive or aggressive, but it core behavior remains that of an insect with natural enemies like cat races. there really currently isn't any way to make a new unigue race, but only subraces within the confines of what is already there. DW extended mod may give you more insect races but at their core they all play like insect races, as do humans or riptiles and so on.

I'd love to do an Emperor of the Fading Suns mod for DW but it simply cannot be done. The game does not have ideological options but rather pins it's behavior differences instead on 'race' like cat and mouse or dog vs cat. That is a certain weakness in the design and one I hope a DW2 opens up...as games like Alpha Centuri or the recent Pandora:First contact show you do not need talking cats to define racial differences.

In those games i want to play each race, as each race plays distinctly different. Not so much in DW. That is a major flaw no mod can fix right now- and is an area I certainly hope they lean towards in DW2.

< Message edited by eyegore -- 6/21/2014 10:21:32 PM >

(in reply to Gregorovitch55)
Post #: 46
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 9:47:28 PM   
Fenrisfil

 

Posts: 216
Joined: 6/2/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fenrisfil

Second on my wish list would be a complete reworking of population, planet habitability and colonisation, allowing proper planetary terraforming, dome colonies, populations working and paying tax on large space stations and stuff like that. Installations and troops on worlds that aren't yet colonies would be part of that. All of that is unlikely to be workable until a sequel. So from my point of view, DW2 is definitely necessary!



Thing is, there are a few things here I do not necessarily agree with... Terraforming is one of the few things I dislike, simply because of the inevitability of a race eventually converting all planets into environments of its liking. Imagine an entire system full of nothing but continental planets, or an entire system full of nothing but volcanic planets, infact, these very situations happened during my playthrough of Hegemonia: Legions of Iron. Simply put, it takes character out of colonies and turns them into a mass-produced paradises for the race in question.


If it is done properly it shouldn't be a problem. There is a whole wide range between only colonising planets already good for you and being able to turn every bit of rock you find into the equivalent of a natural colony.

To do it correctly it has to be an option, but not the best option. It should take time and resources to alter a planet to full habitability and if the main goal is to expand quickly it should be a very poor option.

How I see it working would be that you establish self contained bases on planets, these are simple at first but are expanded via installations to provide mining, research and resort functions (as an alternative, not full replacement to orbital bases). You can also add extra habitat installations that expand the potential population (up to a limit). Once you've researched the technology you can build teraforming installations that can alter the planet in limited ways and upon reaching a certain level of habitability your bases turn into a full colony. At this point the habitability level would be about equivalent to the current 51% quality rating and further progress continues to be slow. There would also have to be an absolute cap. Now the decision to teraform these planets would likely be because of key resources, strategic locations or simply that there aren't enough naturally habitable planets around. If there is a habitable planet in a nearby system it should make no sense at all to just try and teraform a nearby planet instead.

True, eventually a race may turn every planet into a habitable one, but only after they'd have reached a point of total stagnation anyway and after several thousand, maybe millions on years, so I don't see a problem with that and even that could be dealt with by simply imposing a limit.

Of course they may not do anything like this or even touch the current habitability model, the point is that it is that simply including teraforming isn't going to break the game unless it is done badly and there are a whole load of things which can break the game if done badly.

Come to think of it though (and to bring this back on track to the OP's question), these anti-teraforming comments just kind of proove the point I made about why this stuff is sequel material and not DLC stuff. In a sequel if people don't like it they can just go back to the previous game (Like with Civilisation). It isn't so easy with updates or even DLCs.


< Message edited by Fenrisfil -- 6/21/2014 10:51:39 PM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 47
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 10:12:35 PM   
Spidey


Posts: 399
Joined: 12/8/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyegore

Science is observation and an act of proving assumptions. It's how we got from the World is Flat to the world is Round. The basis of Science is pretty consistant across the Universe, therefore it is anything but arrogant to expect intelligent life to evolve alone simuliar lines of those found on Earth. And yes...you need a thumb.

Besides we already know your bias based on your Avatar. In a court of law you'd be proclaimed a hostile witness and would likely be easily impeached by a clever defense attorney. You favor Minnie and Micki Mouse and will stop at no ends to push the agenda to include them in any 4x game known or planned.

Science is very much speculation, yes, but it's also about putting what you observe into context. There are basic laws of physics that we have reason to think are constant across the universe but we don't really "know" that for sure. And then there are more fluffy topics, like "intelligence", which is hard to define to begin with and which we've only ever observed on Earth. How do we put that into context? We can't, because we don't know enough.

One of the more important things in science is knowing when you've got enough data to build a hypothesis and when you don't. And keep in mind that a hypothesis in itself is utterly worthless if it can't be tested.

Therefore I maintain that it is arrogant to assume that intelligence requires humanoid features. We know that we haven't observed non-humanoid intelligence capable of space travel and we might speculate that it isn't possible, but ultimately we don't, AFAIK, have any data saying it can't possibly happen.

quote:

Thank you for this tibbit. It is very helpful. Still, why am I forced to the design screen. Suppose I regular automate that part of the game? Because i regular do because I find the intire design screen badly set up. it is cumbersome and not at all easy to use. Logically to change orders for either ship or base should result from clicking on ship or base. In either case I learned something new and it was something that constantly ate at me.

Most games with a polished UI have a certain number of features that UI designers can work with. Elliot, on the other hand, had an initial UI and initial features, and then he had to find room for new features along the way. And I don't think he fancies redoing the UI every time he adds stuff.

But I do agree that per ship strategies would've been better than having to get it done through the design window. More intuitive too.

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 48
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 10:15:36 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyegore

Actually mod wise DW's flaw is the races core are hard coded. You can make an insect race passive or aggressive, but it core behavior remains that of an insect with natural enemies like cat races. there really currently isn't any way to make a new unigue race, but only subraces within the confines of what is already there. DW extended mod may give you more insect races but at their core they all play like insect races, as do humans or riptiles and so on.


Huh? You can edit both Race Families, and Race Family Biases. You can also add (and remove) them as well. Infact, DW Extended even adds a new race family called 'Avian' that is not present in the original DW. It is certainly moddable.

quote:


I'd love to do an Emperor of the Fading Suns mod for DW but it simply cannot be done. The game does not have ideological options but rather pins it's behavior differences instead on 'race' like cat and mouse or dog vs cat. That is a certain weakness in the design and one I hope a DW2 opens up...as games like Alpha Centuri or the recent Pandora:First contact show you do not need talking cats to define racial differences.


Distant worlds does have ideological differences, it is coded into governments. Governments have ideological differences between eachother much like races do, and infact, are just as strong as racial biases. The strongest racial biases go from +20 to -25 (and that includes the biases of both individual races and families, added together), wheras the strongest government biases go from +20 to -30.

As for needing talking cats, that is true, you do not need talking cats, but we can take that a step further and say that we hardly need aliens either, and instead play up the differences between humanity. Infact, a huge number of intellectual properties do just that, and are perfectly fine for it.

We have talking cats because we want talking cats, and talking rocks and talking gerbils and talking eldrich abominations and talking humanoids of a billion flavors. We have such things not because we need them but because we want them.

Which brings me to a little prophecy I made in regards to the human race: Even if we humans are alone in the universe, we will end up creating aliens of our own. Even in real life we are rapidly approaching the capability to successfully do it, the only thing thats left is is the psychological will, and while there are strong laws at the present moment, they will likely sooner or later be broken or rewritten.

quote:


In those games i want to play each race, as each race plays distinctly different. Not so much in DW. That is a major flaw no mod can fix right now- and is an area I certainly hope they lean towards in DW2.


Except what you were talking about and the problem your referring to are entirely different issues. The problem your referring to now is that a lot of the races really are not all that mechanically different from eachother, and this is a valid complaint. I mean, if you mechanically compare the Securans, Shandar, and Atuuk, you will see that there is almost no difference. All three are happiness-focused races with maybe one minor, secondary attribute. That is a valid complaint, and one that is not easily fixed considering that DW gives you only a limited amount of tools to define differences between the races, and a lot of those tools do not even work properly. Most racial bonuses do not work with pirates at all, for example.

_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 49
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 10:33:35 PM   
Spidey


Posts: 399
Joined: 12/8/2013
Status: offline
quote:

And in that movie, the monster...was NOT a sentient being. In no way was it suggested that particular alien was a talking space fairing creature...but rather the unfortunate cargo of a sentient being the movie presented as a single dead enity in a chair in the spaceship that had crashed.

So the alien just happened to evacuate into the escape pod when Ripley set the self-destruct? Total coincidence? And the queen in Aliens just happened to want to visit the space ship?

Those creatures obviously weren't hugely intelligent per se, but they were smart enough to understand unfamiliar threats against their survival.

quote:

The game, and any 4x space game for that matter already ARROGANTLY says all alien races are warlike and want power and space and can take over planets in mere days with troop pods and space fairing carriers.

Actually the game doesn't say that at all. Plenty of races aren't particularly warlike and are happy to be at peace. If you want to bash something, it probably should be the foundation on a capitalist human civilization that all the races share. Be it bugs or space bunnies or rats or fishies, they all have an identical private sector and their implementations of various forms of government are identical and the culture barriers are insignificant. Want walking snacks and psycho bugs to live side by side? No problem.

quote:

Truth is, it isn't arrogance at all. It's taste. And I've outgrown cartoons.

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. Assuming a universal constant without having data to base that assumption on is arrogant and science is not taste.

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 50
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 10:47:06 PM   
thefinn

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 5/29/2014
Status: offline
Hell yes I got this game a few weeks back and it's blatantly obvious that the best thing the devs could do - no matter how good an idea this game is and how great the gameplay is - is rewrite it with all their past lessons and knowledge put into a new version.

Keep in mind, people are still plahing SKYRIM because of the modding capabilities and those devs know when they release skyrim 6 people will buy the hell out of it knowing they will get their moneys' worth.

The UI is awful.
The graphics are .. ok.
The inability to mod the AI, mod 99% of the game is awful.

Changing those 3 things could make this THE 4x easily imo. (If it's not already).

Can't be done without a rewrite and I can see why just looking at it. I applaud any talk of DW2.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 51
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 10:51:30 PM   
Spidey


Posts: 399
Joined: 12/8/2013
Status: offline
By the way, since we're also talking about the races in the game, and since I've apparently been labeled a fairy tale fan based on my avatar, I'd like to add that I've never actually played as the Zenox. I will at some point, but I've just not gotten around to it yet. But I do like cats and I like the smug look of the cat in the Zenox pic. And no, despite my username I don't actually like spiders much. And yes, I very much like having cat-people in the game, because why not?

We have all sorts of unrealistic space combat, all kinds of hugely unrealistic planetary invasions, we've got faster than light travels galore, we've got stationary space stations that are supposedly hard to destroy even though any asteroid on a collision course ought to do the trick. This kind of sci-fi is inherently unrealistic so why shouldn't there be furry cat-people around? And lizard-people? And insects? And squirrels and rats and turtles and snakes and dolphins and tree people and orks and trolls and undead and sentient robots? Space 4x is inherently unrealistic to begin with so why hold back and limit the diversity of life?

(in reply to Spidey)
Post #: 52
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 11:20:44 PM   
thefinn

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 5/29/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidey

By the way, since we're also talking about the races in the game, and since I've apparently been labeled a fairy tale fan based on my avatar, I'd like to add that I've never actually played as the Zenox. I will at some point, but I've just not gotten around to it yet. But I do like cats and I like the smug look of the cat in the Zenox pic. And no, despite my username I don't actually like spiders much. And yes, I very much like having cat-people in the game, because why not?

We have all sorts of unrealistic space combat, all kinds of hugely unrealistic planetary invasions, we've got faster than light travels galore, we've got stationary space stations that are supposedly hard to destroy even though any asteroid on a collision course ought to do the trick. This kind of sci-fi is inherently unrealistic so why shouldn't there be furry cat-people around? And lizard-people? And insects? And squirrels and rats and turtles and snakes and dolphins and tree people and orks and trolls and undead and sentient robots? Space 4x is inherently unrealistic to begin with so why hold back and limit the diversity of life?


Pfff, cat people in my 4x... preposterous... oh look battlebots.

(in reply to Spidey)
Post #: 53
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/21/2014 11:27:19 PM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
Relax Spidey, I think the topic is done, no need to beat the dead horse more than absolutly necessary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thefinn

Pfff, cat people in my 4x... preposterous... oh look battlebots.



One thing that is curious as to why Zenox troops are all robots, youd figure that robotic troops are already represented by the robotic troop foundary's battlebots. They are also the only race (aside from Mechanoids, for obvious reasons) whom uses robotic troops as their mainline infantry.

< Message edited by Nanaki -- 6/22/2014 12:35:25 AM >


_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to Spidey)
Post #: 54
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/22/2014 12:15:03 AM   
eyegore

 

Posts: 88
Joined: 11/18/2013
From: Houston
Status: offline
So the alien just happened to evacuate into the escape pod when Ripley set the self-destruct? Total coincidence? And the queen in Aliens just happened to want to visit the space ship?

Those creatures obviously weren't hugely intelligent per se, but they were smart enough to understand unfamiliar threats against their survival.


You totally lost me with this. The alien didn't waltz into the escape pod, Ripley forced it in. Rewatch the scene or better yet, read the book, which is far more in depth than the movie. Again, book or movie, the actual Alien was Cargo...discovered by Ripley's team. The actual Space fairing race that hauled that Cargo is called The Engineers. Distinctly humanoid--as the main plot of it'd prequel--which there will be a 3 film trilogy- was WE-as humans were created by the Engineers (as seen in the opening where the Engineer drinks the fluid, falls into what is clearly Niagra Falls and the special effects show it's DNA being destroyed and reworked to create Man (or us). The actual aliens in the Cargo was originally intended for Earth BTW-to destroy us as a creation gone wrong, and the film ends with the Scientist not taking the logical safe path to escape back to earth but the illogical path to seek out the Engineers to see why they changed thier minds about us.

Although the next two movies are yet done The engineer tearing off david's head should give viewers a clue as to what that "why" is, as throughout the movie Humans look down upon thier own creation (David) and repeatedly disbarage him throughout. The Engineer seeing this creation showing even a worse reaction and sees a greater abomination and immediately destroyed it.

The alien itself , and it's intelligence is shown as no more than a typical insect with a basic "Hive' instinct and it's desire to defend it--though there is a scene in aliens where Ripley threatens to burn the eggs if the queen doesn't back off this along doesn't indicate anymore intelligence than the same lesson taught to a family dog. Instinct drives it's actions, like most creatures on this planet and is not to be confused with "reasoning' of an intelligence equal or even a bit below our own.

More interesting and if your seeking more concrete proof that even the Alien World is filled with Religion I'll copy paste an insert from an interview with the director:

Through Shaw and Holloway's investigations, we learn that the Engineers not only created human life, they supervised our development. (How else are we to explain the numerous images of Engineers in primitive art, complete with star diagram showing us the way to find them?) We have to assume, then, that for a good few hundred thousand years, they were pretty happy with us. They could have destroyed us at any time, but instead, they effectively invited us over; the big pointy finger seems to be saying 'Hey, guys, when you're grown up enough to develop space travel, come see us.' Until something changed, something which not only messed up our relationship with them but caused their installation on LV-223 to be almost entirely wiped out.
From the Engineers' perspective, so long as humans retained that notion of self-sacrifice as central, we weren't entirely beyond redemption. But we went and screwed it all up, and the film hints at when, if not why: the Engineers at the base died two thousand years ago. That suggests that the event that turned them against us and led to the huge piles of dead Engineers lying about was one and the same event. We did something very, very bad, and somehow the consequences of that dreadful act accompanied the Engineers back to LV-223 and massacred them.
If you have uneasy suspicions about what 'a bad thing approximately 2,000 years ago' might be, then let me reassure you that you are right. An astonishing excerpt from the Movies.com interview with Ridley Scott:
Movies.com: We had heard it was scripted that the Engineers were targeting our planet for destruction because we had crucified one of their representatives, and that Jesus Christ might have been an alien. Was that ever considered?
Ridley Scott: We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose. But if you look at it as an “our children are misbehaving down there” scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, "Let's send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it." Guess what? They crucified him.


So again I do not agree with the assumption any race can be made with DW. Governmeent types are shallow bonus's as is what you can actually tinker with in regards to growth rate, agression level or whatnot. You cannot inject any form of ideal that is religious based, there can be no EMOFS church or whatever. And most popular sci-fi fiction from alien to 2001 reject talking kittens as an option to define a race. It uses instead idealogical and religous slants to fuel the differences.

The black slime in the movie reacts to the nature and intent of the being that wields it, and the humans in the film didn't even know that they WERE wielding it. That's why it remained completely inert in David's presence, and why he needed a human proxy in order to use the stuff to create anything. The black goo could read no emotion or intent from him, because he was an android.

Shaw's comment when the urn chamber is entered - 'we've changed the atmosphere in the room' - is deceptively informative. The psychic atmosphere has changed, because humans - tainted, Space Jesus-killing humans - are present. The slime begins to engender new life, drawing not from a self-sacrificing Engineer but from human hunger for knowledge, for more life, for more everything. Little wonder, then, that it takes serpent-like form.

< Message edited by eyegore -- 6/22/2014 1:27:18 AM >

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 55
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/22/2014 1:02:56 AM   
Nanaki

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 6/4/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eyegore

And most popular sci-fi fiction from alien to 2001 reject talking kittens as an option to define a race.


- If popularity was the sole determinator of anything, the X4 genre would not even exist

- You are talking about novels, these are games, entirely different formats

- Honor Harrington and Known Space, if you want feline aliens, infact the Kzinti are likely the inspiration for the Kilrathi, Mrrshan, and all the other warlike felines that were popular in X4s for awile.

- Ender's Game and Starship Troopers has insect aliens

- A vast majority has no aliens at all, bringing back my previous point "As for needing talking cats, that is true, you do not need talking cats, but we can take that a step further and say that we do not need aliens entirely"

- The aliens novels never took off, to my knowlege, so to call them 'popular' is completely incorrect

< Message edited by Nanaki -- 6/22/2014 2:09:10 AM >


_____________________________

I ate the batter of the bulge at Hans' Haus of Luftwaffles

(in reply to eyegore)
Post #: 56
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/22/2014 2:16:34 AM   
thefinn

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 5/29/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki

Relax Spidey, I think the topic is done, no need to beat the dead horse more than absolutly necessary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thefinn

Pfff, cat people in my 4x... preposterous... oh look battlebots.



One thing that is curious as to why Zenox troops are all robots, youd figure that robotic troops are already represented by the robotic troop foundary's battlebots. They are also the only race (aside from Mechanoids, for obvious reasons) whom uses robotic troops as their mainline infantry.


I had also noticed that, and yet the zenox troops act like any others in terms of stats etc.. I don't mind them getting them but they should adhere to the standards for battlebots in that case.

More than likely it's a bug or error by someone.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 57
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/22/2014 2:44:15 AM   
DeadlyShoe


Posts: 217
Joined: 6/2/2013
Status: offline
quote:

The modding limitations simply would not allow the concept of a Church from a Emperor of the Fading Suns. The Diplomacy is lacking as well. Too much remains hard coded or limited by the engine itself. If they don't create such a World at least allow the community to create it through mods---

The church from EOFS is mostly a matter of map setup and scripting, which is actually fairly capable in DWU. I don't know if you can set up triggers based off techs and the AI certainly wouldn't care about tech restrictions but you could set up NPCs that get angry at you for reaching for forbidden fruit.

(in reply to Nanaki)
Post #: 58
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/22/2014 3:47:01 AM   
Spidey


Posts: 399
Joined: 12/8/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thefinn


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nanaki

Relax Spidey, I think the topic is done, no need to beat the dead horse more than absolutly necessary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thefinn

Pfff, cat people in my 4x... preposterous... oh look battlebots.



One thing that is curious as to why Zenox troops are all robots, youd figure that robotic troops are already represented by the robotic troop foundary's battlebots. They are also the only race (aside from Mechanoids, for obvious reasons) whom uses robotic troops as their mainline infantry.


I had also noticed that, and yet the zenox troops act like any others in terms of stats etc.. I don't mind them getting them but they should adhere to the standards for battlebots in that case.

More than likely it's a bug or error by someone.


The names of various troops are specified in the race files and that's really the only difference between the Zenox troops and all the other troops. In other words, Zenox have normal troops that simply have a robot-like name. It becomes a bit silly when battle bots are added to the mix but it's hardly a major issue nor all that hard to fix.

(in reply to thefinn)
Post #: 59
RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? - 6/22/2014 4:19:16 AM   
ParagonExile

 

Posts: 210
Joined: 6/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidey
We have all sorts of unrealistic space combat, all kinds of hugely unrealistic planetary invasions, we've got faster than light travels galore, we've got stationary space stations that are supposedly hard to destroy even though any asteroid on a collision course ought to do the trick. This kind of sci-fi is inherently unrealistic so why shouldn't there be furry cat-people around? And lizard-people? And insects? And squirrels and rats and turtles and snakes and dolphins and tree people and orks and trolls and undead and sentient robots? Space 4x is inherently unrealistic to begin with so why hold back and limit the diversity of life?


I'd like to mention that several of these things are actually fully possible and even likely. :)

(in reply to Spidey)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> RE: The future of Distant Worlds - Is DW2 necessary? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.184