Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

The Galaxy Lives On! Distant Worlds, the critically acclaimed 4X space strategy game is back with a brand new 64-bit engine, 3D graphics and a polished interface to begin an epic new Distant Worlds series with Distant Worlds 2. Distant Worlds 2 is a vast, pausable real-time 4X space strategy game. Experience the full depth and detail of turn-based strategy, but with the simplicity and ease of real-time, and on the scale of a massively-multiplayer online game.

Moderator: MOD_DW2

Hanekem
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 6:45 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Hanekem »

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB
ORIGINAL: Hanekem

I understand and while it is disappointing, as problematic the ship design screen in DW1, it was far more free and by researching max size it did felt like our space empire's shipbuilding got better in a more progressive manner rather than you now unlocked "battleships"
I liked the idea of being able to build battleships from the get go, even if those battleships would latter on be rather destroyer in their size, admittedly I choose not to most of the time, but it made a sorta sense, given that pre-dread battleships were in the same ballpark as current day destroyers (or that current day destroyers outmass WWI and WWII era cruisers)


But my question wasn't about having a Frigate size 500 but if the frigate improvement tech was a one off tech item (with several down the line as new tech items) or some repeating tech (even if for a repeat you'd need some preconditions or something).

There was also the question about why have a base frigate hull and being able to create the frigate subclasses as oposed of having the as "stock" variants
I mean why have three variants when you can have only one and being able to fine tune it as much as you like (with in some maximum and minimum limitation for each class)
I can see the attractive of having the stock options as a go to, or for the AI, but in time I am sure I'd like to optimize the base hulls in some way (like for instance removing the hangars from the frigates in the image and using that space for something else, maybe a bigger sensor array for a "Heavy scout"/intruder or for more armor for some picket type ship)

To be honest it actually feels more realistic this way, if not just for game balance reasons. In real life you generally can't just add whatever you want to a ship based on weight alone, volume also is a thing. It also is very important where on the hull that weight/volume are going to be put and that also limit what types of systems can be utilised and where. Sensors and weapons in real ships are a pretty good example for this.

In real life there is always a measure of something added will take away particular space from adding something else but not necessarily a third system that don't compete for that physical location in the hull.

The general freedom we had in DW1 was far more unrealistic and did not present us with the general engineering challenges that we face in reality and the physical limitations of different shapes that things would in reality have to deal with.

I sorta understand what you mean, given how upgrade functioned, and I do agree up to a point
I personally would have preferred being able to design the hulls myself and use those as my upgrade constrains, basically I design a hull size 300, with say 5 engines, 5 weapon hardpoints, 4 defense, and so on and so forth and use that as my limitation for upgrade, so I actually have the option of upgrading old hulls, scrapping them, mothballing them or even selling them off to lesser powers/independents (or hell, maybe civilianizing them, turning them into scouts or armed freighters or something)
My big issue is having predesigned hulls with predesigned layouts (with the max size per hull class as a condiment) and maybe them being a research project. Honestly a part of me would like that after designing that pattern hull a yard would have to build the prototype (so rather than being a pure research project it is an actual construction order taking space and time in a slip somewhere AND built at a slower rate) and only then I could be able to start building ships to that pattern.

That for me would have been a step forward.

That said, I'd like if we had the option of having prefixes to the names of our military ships (as in HMS, USS, HMAS, MN, or none at all)
Jorgen_CAB
Posts: 776
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:53 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Jorgen_CAB »

ORIGINAL: Hanekem
I sorta understand what you mean, given how upgrade functioned, and I do agree up to a point
I personally would have preferred being able to design the hulls myself and use those as my upgrade constrains, basically I design a hull size 300, with say 5 engines, 5 weapon hardpoints, 4 defense, and so on and so forth and use that as my limitation for upgrade, so I actually have the option of upgrading old hulls, scrapping them, mothballing them or even selling them off to lesser powers/independents (or hell, maybe civilianizing them, turning them into scouts or armed freighters or something)
My big issue is having predesigned hulls with predesigned layouts (with the max size per hull class as a condiment) and maybe them being a research project. Honestly a part of me would like that after designing that pattern hull a yard would have to build the prototype (so rather than being a pure research project it is an actual construction order taking space and time in a slip somewhere AND built at a slower rate) and only then I could be able to start building ships to that pattern.

That for me would have been a step forward.

That said, I'd like if we had the option of having prefixes to the names of our military ships (as in HMS, USS, HMAS, MN, or none at all)

It does make a bit more sense though when you also contemplate that each hull have specific bonuses for which the actual hull was designed for which put some of the limitation of the different components you can put on them. These characteristics need to be balanced with the components so ships in general fill specific roles. The hull frame is not just a generic frame but designed in specific way from a lore perspective.



You then also have the space ship models themselves that need to be changed based on the different system you can put on them which I suppose have to be made for each individual hull type.
Hanekem
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 6:45 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Hanekem »

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB

ORIGINAL: Hanekem
ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB



To be honest it actually feels more realistic this way, if not just for game balance reasons. In real life you generally can't just add whatever you want to a ship based on weight alone, volume also is a thing. It also is very important where on the hull that weight/volume are going to be put and that also limit what types of systems can be utilised and where. Sensors and weapons in real ships are a pretty good example for this.

In real life there is always a measure of something added will take away particular space from adding something else but not necessarily a third system that don't compete for that physical location in the hull.

The general freedom we had in DW1 was far more unrealistic and did not present us with the general engineering challenges that we face in reality and the physical limitations of different shapes that things would in reality have to deal with.

I sorta understand what you mean, given how upgrade functioned, and I do agree up to a point
I personally would have preferred being able to design the hulls myself and use those as my upgrade constrains, basically I design a hull size 300, with say 5 engines, 5 weapon hardpoints, 4 defense, and so on and so forth and use that as my limitation for upgrade, so I actually have the option of upgrading old hulls, scrapping them, mothballing them or even selling them off to lesser powers/independents (or hell, maybe civilianizing them, turning them into scouts or armed freighters or something)
My big issue is having predesigned hulls with predesigned layouts (with the max size per hull class as a condiment) and maybe them being a research project. Honestly a part of me would like that after designing that pattern hull a yard would have to build the prototype (so rather than being a pure research project it is an actual construction order taking space and time in a slip somewhere AND built at a slower rate) and only then I could be able to start building ships to that pattern.

That for me would have been a step forward.

That said, I'd like if we had the option of having prefixes to the names of our military ships (as in HMS, USS, HMAS, MN, or none at all)

It does make a bit more sense though when you also contemplate that each hull have specific bonuses for which the actual hull was designed for which put some of the limitation of the different components you can put on them. These characteristics need to be balanced with the components so ships in general fill specific roles. The hull frame is not just a generic frame but designed in specific way from a lore perspective.



You then also have the space ship models themselves that need to be changed based on the different system you can put on them which I suppose have to be made for each individual hull type.

Not a fan of hull bonuses, it does feel too much of trying to find a question to an answer (the answer being use this ship) just let a bigger amount of space for engines or directional thrusters or what not and there, done, you have a faster ship, or have more space for EW units, or what not.

As for the spaceships designs that is only a concern for the external modules, and you could always have no externally visibly modules, with engines nozzles being independent of the number of engines, and turrets being discrete affairs receded into the hull.

But even going further, how many times will you see a battle close enough to note how many maxos blasters are in a particular ship? three? five?
I know I won't be caring for that, like at all, the same way I never cared how many turbolaser batteries are in an imperial star destroyer or where the blasts were coming from
And if you do care, maybe the hardpoint is actually a double turret, or triple or quadruple... instead of being only one gunmount
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39325
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Erik Rutins »

One of our design principles is to let folks enjoy what they enjoy, allow them to ignore what they don't enjoy as much and remove barriers if they'd like to make changes or tweaks. There doesn't have to be one right way to enjoy or play Distant Worlds.
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
User avatar
SirHoraceHarkness
Posts: 522
Joined: Sun May 17, 2015 5:29 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by SirHoraceHarkness »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

One of our design principles is to let folks enjoy what they enjoy, allow them to ignore what they don't enjoy as much and remove barriers if they'd like to make changes or tweaks. There doesn't have to be one right way to enjoy or play Distant Worlds.

This is why I have over a thousand hours into DWU over the years. So many ways to set up a game that the replayability was off the charts and with the editor it added in even more layers so you could make up pretty much any scenario you wanted to play out. Hopefully there is more of the same this time around.
Intel i9 11900k all core oc@5.3 - 32gb Crucial Ballistix 3600 DDR4 CL16 - EVGA RTX 3090 24gb FTW3 Ultra - MSI Z490 A-PRO Mobo
Hanekem
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 6:45 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Hanekem »

I know, and I like that philosophy myself, even if I'd go out of my way to say why I feel this feels bad or not.
And by and large it is that, feels, at least at this point. I am seeing stuff that reminds me of stellaris and, as much as fun that game can be, it is as shallow as a puddle (and has a lot of questionable design choices, like that pointless planetary micro, or the original sector logic because of the even worse planetary micro 1.0 used to have)

Thus far I am wowed by DW2 and the list of features, there are things I like more than others and there are things that I feel strongly about.
But I am sure the moment I play it I'll table most of those things, and just play the game.
Anyway thanks for having patience with me. I know I can be incredibly headstrong about stuff and it is not my intention to pontificate, even if it might sound at times.
I just feel very, very strongly about the game and that has its pros and cons [:D]
Siddham
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:03 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Siddham »

So far what I am seeing and reading about DW2 sounds great.
I literally never buy new games.....never....but for me Distant worlds is different.
So far really impressed and eager to buy & play.
Jorgen_CAB
Posts: 776
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:53 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Jorgen_CAB »

ORIGINAL: Hanekem
Not a fan of hull bonuses, it does feel too much of trying to find a question to an answer (the answer being use this ship) just let a bigger amount of space for engines or directional thrusters or what not and there, done, you have a faster ship, or have more space for EW units, or what not.

As for the spaceships designs that is only a concern for the external modules, and you could always have no externally visibly modules, with engines nozzles being independent of the number of engines, and turrets being discrete affairs receded into the hull.

But even going further, how many times will you see a battle close enough to note how many maxos blasters are in a particular ship? three? five?
I know I won't be caring for that, like at all, the same way I never cared how many turbolaser batteries are in an imperial star destroyer or where the blasts were coming from
And if you do care, maybe the hardpoint is actually a double turret, or triple or quadruple... instead of being only one gunmount

Then again this is what modding is all about, you can remove these bonuses and make the hull more bland and give them allot more modules and play the game roughly the same as before if you like to. I bet someone will make such a mod.

Personally I think it gives the game less character and actually less actual viable options for ship configurations if they are all more or less the same except their looks.
Jon Micheelsen
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:51 am

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Jon Micheelsen »

Hi Erik,
Awesome presentation, haven't been this excited about a game for many many years[:D] I see the proceduralism is strong, looking forward to see what that can do! And also, damn that was some nice volumetrics in that intro(those where prerendered right!?)

Moved actual questions to QA thread
User avatar
Pipewrench
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:38 am

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Pipewrench »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

One of our design principles is to let folks enjoy what they enjoy, allow them to ignore what they don't enjoy as much and remove barriers if they'd like to make changes or tweaks. There doesn't have to be one right way to enjoy or play Distant Worlds.

That is what makes the game an actual experience - its not cold and stale

Smiling as I step into another 1000 hours of moddelled Sci-fi fantasy based on a eerie trigged expanse - this truly tells a tale
“We are limited only by our imagination and our will to act.”
– Ron Garan
OnePercent
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 11:38 am
Location: Australia

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by OnePercent »

Everytime I was imagining how distant worlds 2 would improve on OG Distant worlds, aside from everything we already know, was the chance to make research immersive, by only showing the next research project etc, I am so happy that the devs were thinking along the same lines.

This was the one mechanic (of many) that I loved about Sword of the Stars, was the tech tree that was randomized/or more inclined by Alien civilization and hidden, where we only saw the next project or branching project.

After viewing stream, must say I absolutely love the attention to detail, the tiny little turrets on the ships are so cute and immersive.

Looking forward to more videos!
sinbuster
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:26 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by sinbuster »

Just watched the full video, Erik. Just a great job so far; I really love the way you've handled the UI. No more clutter and actionable buttons at the top level, yes please. The scale of ships and bases to planets is a lot better as well. However, you did say loading would be a million times faster so I'll hold you to that :P

One question: I noticed in galaxy creation that there was no option to choose your own research speed as in DW1. Will this be an option at release? (I like playing at the slowest tech speed possible).
timothyfarley
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2021 3:50 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by timothyfarley »

(Deleted - moved question to megathread, sorry!)
User avatar
Webbco
Posts: 694
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:15 am

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Webbco »

Does anyone know when the next preview will take place?
User avatar
frankycl
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:16 pm

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by frankycl »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
ORIGINAL: Ric119
1) As the humans, will they have our Solar system or the option to start in our sol system?

(...) it would make sense to include that then and might make sense in general to add the option to have "defined" rather than procedurally generated home systems as an option. (...)

Yes, this would be very nice, imho, because after having played all the official story-line(s) some of us certainly would like to play a bit more and create our own story-line(s) or settings - even without using any mods. [8D]
ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

(...) regarding the hulls (...) That's actually very easy to change through modding the ship hull data files (...), but I can only say that it does work well the new way and once you play it I think you'll enjoy it (and if you don't, it's moddable!).

That's also very nice, imho, but I think I would like the now existing system enough to not having to bother with modding in this case. - But I could imagine that it could be very nice, too, to have some race-specific hull-sizes or hull-types, like e.g. mainly very large (and slow) hulls for one race and very small (and fast) hulles for another one - or even a race with mainly some super-big mothership-hulls and only many (and cheap) other tiny fighters or drones ... that would even be worth some modding, imho. [8D]


Filon1979
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 5:23 am

RE: Distant Worlds 2 - Showcase

Post by Filon1979 »

Great!! Can't Wait. I'm just shaking...
Post Reply

Return to “Distant Worlds 2”