1443 replies to this topic

[Heffay]

ShinVector, on 16 June 2014 - 09:59 PM, said:

Ughhhh.... This is going to take a quite bit of reading and studying...
Star Citizen... Not exactly a game for kiddies...



https://robertsspace...-Input-Controls

I hope they remember to include a "fun" subsystem...

[ShinVector]

Heffay, on 17 June 2014 - 04:48 AM, said:

I hope they remember to include a "fun" subsystem...

Gotta *facepalm people when people claim that this game is not a Space "SIM"

Edited by ShinVector, 17 June 2014 - 06:07 AM.

[Heffay]

ShinVector, on 17 June 2014 - 04:55 AM, said:

Gotta *facepalm people were claim that this game is not a Space "SIM"

And MWO is a mech sim. Gameplay is important, and they need to make sure that there is decent gameplay. If I'm too busy fighting with the controls of my ship and suppressing "bladder is full, relieve immediately" messages instead of playing the game, it's not going to bode well for the game.

I still believe in it. I'm just worried about the gameplay.

[Bilbo]

Heffay, on 17 June 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

And MWO is a mech sim. Gameplay is important, and they need to make sure that there is decent gameplay. If I'm too busy fighting with the controls of my ship and suppressing "bladder is full, relieve immediately" messages instead of playing the game, it's not going to bode well for the game.

I still believe in it. I'm just worried about the gameplay.

They have a very long way to go before I even really get interested in what they are putting out, much less worry about gameplay. Dogfighting isn't the bit I'm worried about. They have a good while to get that balanced right before the SP campaign and PU come out.

[CyclonerM]

Heffay, on 17 June 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

And MWO is a mech sim. Gameplay is important, and they need to make sure that there is decent gameplay. If I'm too busy fighting with the controls of my ship and suppressing "bladder is full, relieve immediately" messages instead of playing the game, it's not going to bode well for the game.

Sadly MWO is a shooter not a mech sim

[Heffay]

CyclonerM, on 17 June 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

Sadly MWO is a shooter not a mech sim

That's arguable. The definition of "sim" is a bit fluid. Some people would say anything short of DCS isn't a sim. But just because you aren't pushing "enable port fuel pump" as one step of a 300 step checklist to fire up the engine doesn't mean it's not a sim either.

MWO is simulating you being a pilot in a giant stompy robot, and does a very good job about that. Star Citizen simulates you being a pilot in a spaceship, and will probably be "more" sim-like. But that doesn't mean MWO isn't a mech sim either.

[Lily from animove]

Heffay, on 17 June 2014 - 06:11 AM, said:

Star Citizen simulates you being a pilot in a spaceship, and will probably be "more" sim-like. But that doesn't mean MWO isn't a mech sim either.

speaking about SPACE Sims, does Star Citizen have Inertness Ship controls?

Edited by Lily from animove, 18 June 2014 - 11:54 PM.

[Sandpit]

ShinVector, on 16 June 2014 - 09:59 PM, said:

Ughhhh.... This is going to take a quite bit of reading and studying...
Star Citizen... Not exactly a game for kiddies...



https://robertsspace...-Input-Controls

could be worse. they could have let PGI develop their tutorials. lol

Lily from animove, on 18 June 2014 - 11:48 PM, said:

speaking about SPACE Sims, does Star Citizen have Inertness Ship controls?

meaning?
thrusters?
inertia?
vectoring?

If so then yes, they do. There's actually a post that CR made recently that goes very in-depth on how that works in SC. I'll see if I can find a link for you

[Lily from animove]

Sandpit, on 20 June 2014 - 07:06 PM, said:

could be worse. they could have let PGI develop their tutorials. lol


meaning?
thrusters?
inertia?
vectoring?

yes meaning those ^^
It is at least the difference between a space sim and just a flight simulator staging in Space.

Edited by Lily from animove, 23 June 2014 - 04:40 AM.

[CyclonerM]

Heffay, on 17 June 2014 - 06:11 AM, said:

That's arguable. The definition of "sim" is a bit fluid. Some people would say anything short of DCS isn't a sim. But just because you aren't pushing "enable port fuel pump" as one step of a 300 step checklist to fire up the engine doesn't mean it's not a sim either.

MWO is simulating you being a pilot in a giant stompy robot, and does a very good job about that. Star Citizen simulates you being a pilot in a spaceship, and will probably be "more" sim-like. But that doesn't mean MWO isn't a mech sim either.

Well, my definition of simulator game, a definition i trust at least someone would agree with, is this:

"A sim gamke is a game that has a focus on realism and strives to faithfully replicate the reality, meaning physics, aestethics and gameplay itself". In short, in a military sim, it means (regarding to vehicles of any kind) flipping switches and pushing buttons to activate/deactivate systems, most often following the real procedures (well when something is not covered by military secret ), dynamic and realistic damage, aestethics fidelity, decent graphic level (optional but appreciated as it enhances immersion), realistic physics, realistic enough gameplay and pace, believable mechanics different from combat: economics, resource and players management..), generally higher complexity and learning curve.

By these standards, DCS is a simulator, SC is a simulator, but MWO is not.

To believe MWO a true "simulator" i would need to see: clickabile switches and buttons, with standard procedures to activate the reactor, the weapon systems, sensors, radar, battle computer, heat sinks etc. that would be different for each 'Mech as each 'Mech has a different cockpit layout;

Meaningful cockpit screens;

More advanced tactical and gameplay options;

More meaningful 'Mech management, repair and rearm;

Collisions, fall (and fall damage), diynamic and realistic physics (the loss of a limb will umbalance your 'Mech and you have to keep it under control to avoid falling and taking damage etc.).

Pilot passing out from heat, switchable heat sinks to reduce the heat signature;

Mag scan;

Ambiental destruction;

Ammo dumping.

Ejection (activable at any time, not just a death cinematic, though that may be abused).

Random low chance of reactor fail.

Non-automatic reactor reactivation after a shutdown (like in MWLL, you have to manually reactivate it so you can decide when do it).

Possibly realistic damage and penetration like WoT (an interesting upgrade of the classic BT paperdoll!)

And countless other things that do not cross my mind at the moment, though damage and physics are the most important for MWO imho.

[Heffay]

So how does SC fit as a Sim then? They meet (nor are they planning on meeting) almost none of those things listed. Or at least the SC equivalent of those functions.

Any game with unlimited respawning is not a sim.

Edited by Heffay, 23 June 2014 - 11:31 AM.

[CyclonerM]

Heffay, on 23 June 2014 - 11:29 AM, said:

So how does SC fit as a Sim then? They meet (nor are they planning on meeting) almost none of those things listed. Or at least the SC equivalent of those functions.

Any game with unlimited respawning is not a sim.

First, SC has not a simple classic respawning. Arena Commander is just a "simulation" while in the PU you will lose your ship and your character can actually die, so i do not see your issue with it.

Actually i believe that SC meets many of those criterias. Fully recreated physics (except maybe gravity effects for space bodies or something like that that could make the game just too complex), control complexity and options in the cockpit, graphic immersion, no just respawn with a fully repaired ship two seconds after being blown up, repair and rearm, deep econonomy system, dynamic damage that influences the center of mass (something that would heavily impact a 'Mech game!), definitely a higher learning curve. If you just read the paragraph about the flight computer and the different modes you see quite a bit of complexity, even more if you download the digital manual and get a look about all the differents menu, mods and holoscreens in your cockpit.

So no, this time i just do not see your issue, please explain

[Heffay]

Well, I don't think flippable switches or random chance of reactor failure really makes something a Sim. Even the economy portion is optional. Sims can be limited to very specific functions and don't have to have a full universe simulated to be a mech sim.

MWO simulates being in a mech in combat. Very well at that. Just because it starts you off with your mech running doesn't mean the rest of the event isn't a "simulator". That's exactly what it is. You are simulating piloting a giant mech.

You can throw up arbitrary obstacles all day long about what you think makes a sim, but how about you look at things in MWO that *don't* make it a Sim. There is nothing, really. You feel like you're piloting a 20-100 ton mechanical robot in combat.

[Iqfish]

*joins thread, wants to read some exciting Star Citizen Stuff*

*sees ANOTHER endless discussion about flight model and whatnot*

*thinks: >Its not even an ALPHA!<*

/thread.

gj guys on derailing this thread, if I wanted to read more FM nonsense I would read the SC forums.

[CyclonerM]

Heffay, on 23 June 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

Well, I don't think flippable switches or random chance of reactor failure really makes something a Sim. Even the economy portion is optional. Sims can be limited to very specific functions and don't have to have a full universe simulated to be a mech sim.

MWO simulates being in a mech in combat. Very well at that. Just because it starts you off with your mech running doesn't mean the rest of the event isn't a "simulator". That's exactly what it is. You are simulating piloting a giant mech.

You can throw up arbitrary obstacles all day long about what you think makes a sim, but how about you look at things in MWO that *don't* make it a Sim. There is nothing, really. You feel like you're piloting a 20-100 ton mechanical robot in combat.

Iqfish, on 23 June 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

*joins thread, wants to read some exciting Star Citizen Stuff*

*sees ANOTHER endless discussion about flight model and whatnot*

*thinks: >Its not even an ALPHA!<*

/thread.

gj guys on derailing this thread, if I wanted to read more FM nonsense I would read the SC forums.

Actually we are not even talking about SC anymore :\

And i find this discussion to be very interesting. In your opinion, Heffay, what makes MWO a "simulator" rather then an "arcade" game?

[Heffay]

It's a Sim because you are simulating being a pilot in a mech. There is real world physics at play (round drop for ballistics), collision damage, and mechs behave according to a realistic physical model. You *feel* like you're in a giant stompy robot. The immersion is fantastic. That is what makes it a sim to me. Immersion.

[Rebas Kradd]

The visceral aspect of immersion is certainly there, yes...FEELING like you're in a mech. Though Atlases getting stopped by indestructible cars is pushing it.

The tactical side of immersion is severely lacking, though.

[Heffay]

Rebas Kradd, on 23 June 2014 - 10:15 PM, said:

The visceral aspect of immersion is certainly there, yes...FEELING like you're in a mech. Though Atlases getting stopped by indestructible cars is pushing it.

The tactical side of immersion is severely lacking, though.

The feeling is definitely there. It's why I don't like piloting assaults. Hell, I don't think any of my Battlemasters are even past 3/8 in basics. I'll take out an LRM Atlas every now and then, but that stopping distance...

Whenever I drop in a group with an assault in it, I ask them if they need a push.

Star Citizen will probably be fine as a sim, but they need to be careful not to take all the fun out of it. If the flight model isn't fun for the general population, it'll never be more than a niche game. There is a fine line they need to walk. Don't let gameplay suffer in order to accurately model physics.

Part of the problem they are going to run into though is that with this early look in the DFM, they are going to cause a lot of strife in the player base. Their forums are already a beehive of angst, with one faction discussing how poor the current gameplay is and another one discussion how flawless it's been implemented. Well, technically there are 3 factions: You can't ignore the 95% of the playerbase who doesn't even bother reading the forums. They are just out there playing the game.

*sigh* I get home tonight. Will need to service the wife, then will be able to sit down and do some serious video gaming. I think I heard there was some sort of a patch for MWO? Have I missed anything in the last week or so?

[CyclonerM]

For Kerensky.. Better for it to be a niche game than become and arcadish game to please the 12th years old children.

As long as it can live with less funding, of course..

Edited by CyclonerM, 24 June 2014 - 04:41 AM.

[Adridos]

Heffay, on 23 June 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

There is real world physics at play (round drop for ballistics), collision damage, and mechs behave according to a realistic physical model.

The way ballistics work is actually not in line with the real world physics at all. It could be compared to naval artillery of the pre-industrial era, but the similarity is based upon game balance magic, not actual physics.

Collision damage is not physically simualted and the way it works is completely within the boundaries of game logic... it's as much of a simulation as Quake 3 simulates the velocity of a rocket fired by the rocket launcher. Sorry, but it's a massive no.

The last thing you said can also be acredited to either no knowledge of physics, a case of terrible wording or straight out lying. The fact these mechs couldn't even stand upright under a newtonian model aside (there's only so much physics you can apply to mechs), there are rather obvious missing factors that are not simulated. The preserval of momentum, for instance, while emulated on the forward/backwards movement is completely missing on the sideways movement and arm movement. Actual collisions are also a required basic for any simulation adhering to real life principles as two pieces of mass can't coexist in the same place at the same moment in time. Things like aiming inaccuracy are also completely left out (the fire comes out of predefined positions at the end of a barrel/lens and is then directed at the first collision point with the center of your screen with a perfect vector). The mechs also only operate on yaw axis, where both the mech and it's feet are always perfectly upright. They also climb hills on a completely artificial basis.

Edited by Adridos, 24 June 2014 - 04:45 AM.