greenbalrog wrote:Which of the following features would we like to see explored in future space gaming experience or which elements do we favor more and in which order? Or basically what do we want to see next?
1 Human-Computer VS Human-Human experience
2 Thin Client Browser based approach vs Normal Client based
3 Free content with paid extensions VS Paid to use
4 Reward system importance
5 Eye candy factor importance
6 In-game movies?
7 Technology tree depth
8 Spaceship customization depth
9 Races number and customization level
10 Story depth
11 Universe depth
12 Overall customization
Why not have that discussion here?
1. I think a game that can be open to both play styles (for example Sword of the Stars) is what people are looking for. Also the fact that you can let the computer take over for a few turns and then rotate back in is HUGE.
2. Not sure what this is... but I think a game that plays on internet explorer or firefox isn't going to give you as much features here.
3. I tried EVE. I really wanted to LIKE eve... the main problem with EVE? Space is huge. unbelievably unimaginably HUGE. Takes you forever to get somewhere even at FTL speeds. I don't need to spend 90% of my game getting from point A to point B. Put me in the action, thank you very much!!
4. Being able to salvage parts and other things from your enemies wreckage, bringing them back to your labs to be reversed engineered or just slapped onto your ships in "as-is" condition would be really cool. Now, Sword of the Stars does have salvage, and the reverse engineering... however, I was sadly dissapointed when the zuul especially didn't get the 2nd option. Sure, it's sorta been added back in, in an abstract kind of way with Argos Naval Yard... but I think there could be some good depth to this system here.
5. At the end of the day the main question is... does it get boring too fast, or is it fun? Eye candy is secondary to the "just-one-more-turn" feeling...
6. See number 5. I can take it or leave it.
7. Now the way Sword of the Stars uses it's tech tree is really unique and awesome, and I think should do well to study. Over 300 techs (with the most recent expansion) and no one way to get the "uber I win" button!! Also the fact that most techs aren't 100% gaurunteed gives the game HUGE replay value.
8. How your spaceship is customized should be an important factor in how they behave in combat. Galactic Civilizations has great customization, but in combat has epic failure in bringing any real meaning to it. Please don't give me more epic failure.
9. The number of races is not as important as much as how they play. If every race plays like humans, just with different bonuses and penalties even if you have 500... it's not going to work here. Each race needs to have it's own play style and needs to be unique and have it's own strategy. This is what makes a game like Sword of the Stars shine better then most.
10. How much story depth can you convey in a game that's 4x?? I'm on the fence about this one... Sword of the Stars for example... has a HUGE backstory... and TONS of literature on the web and other sources from one of the best science fiction writers of our time. And yet... when you play the game? Yeah... you don't get much of it simply by playing.
11. See number 10. Unless you mean customizable 3d galaxy shapes?? Now that is pretty big... If done right, each map having it's own uniqueness and strategy to play on is a good concept!!
12. A moderate level of customization is good. I don't need to be bogged down in the details, I'm the galactic emperor. I really don't care if vega 5 is building it's 50th wheat farm. I got a war to wage!! I have a galaxy to conquer... let my civilians worry about that!
13. Not sure what to write here, so I won't.