Well, the tables might be turned if ED had 40 million dollars in crowd funding and SC 2 million
Last edited:
SC Flightmodel Discussion
- Thread starter Mobius
- Start date
- Status
Well, the tables might be turned if ED had 40 million dollars in crowd funding and SC 2 million
+1 on that
Pretty graphics, totally lame physics, and Roberts has made the same mistake so many other devs have of confusing the way our visual systems work, with how a camera operates..! Tilt your head side-to-side - does the horizon tilt? If so then go see a doctor...
Head motion due to inertia is one thing, but tilting the view when the player is experiencing normal gravity (as when the pilot first climbs into the cockpit) is a crass and highly disorienting error IMO.. like motorcycle games that tilt the horizon when the bike leans (which i find totally unplayabe, suffice to say)..
Head motion due to inertia is one thing, but tilting the view when the player is experiencing normal gravity (as when the pilot first climbs into the cockpit) is a crass and highly disorienting error IMO.. like motorcycle games that tilt the horizon when the bike leans (which i find totally unplayabe, suffice to say)..
Similarities with the flight model compared to Elite pretty much just the reverse and being able to go directly up, down, left and right. Other than that its exactly what I expected and I am looking forward to it too, it seems history maybe repeating itself.
SC showed a blackout, what would actually happen in space if you pull back on a stick like a fighter jock?
SC showed a blackout, what would actually happen in space if you pull back on a stick like a fighter jock?
SC is waaaaay to "X-Factor" for me. "The Next Great Starship" is unwatchable for that reason.
Even when I first saw Wing Commander it had no appeal to me at all. Elite on the BBC model B looked better and more realistic and in depth, and WC was on the Amiga!
SC's gameplay lost it for me the moment I saw there was a flight mode playable in external view. FE2 had external views but not this chasecam stuff. FE2 was not playable in 3rd person mode, it was good for sightseeing only, as it should be in a space sim. With 3rd person mode in a space sim your immersion is gone, straight off. I wanted something that has some level of immersion of being a pilot, not some remake of Starfox.
But really, it is the "cheese" that is putting me off. The fanboys, those who sneer "well, Elite Dangerous is nowhere near SC in scope" when they clearly know very little about it, the cringeworthy "Killian"-style, OTT presenting of "Wingman's Hangar"...ugh.
Sorry, I know most ppl are trying to keep it positive and "live and let live" and all that. This is just my opinion: I've no real interest in ever playing SC and their OTT "gameshow" style and some of their more fanatical fans have frankly put me off for good.
Plus there is Mack's argument too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tQBAEYX0X0&feature=youtu.be&t=6m4s
Even when I first saw Wing Commander it had no appeal to me at all. Elite on the BBC model B looked better and more realistic and in depth, and WC was on the Amiga!
SC's gameplay lost it for me the moment I saw there was a flight mode playable in external view. FE2 had external views but not this chasecam stuff. FE2 was not playable in 3rd person mode, it was good for sightseeing only, as it should be in a space sim. With 3rd person mode in a space sim your immersion is gone, straight off. I wanted something that has some level of immersion of being a pilot, not some remake of Starfox.
But really, it is the "cheese" that is putting me off. The fanboys, those who sneer "well, Elite Dangerous is nowhere near SC in scope" when they clearly know very little about it, the cringeworthy "Killian"-style, OTT presenting of "Wingman's Hangar"...ugh.
Sorry, I know most ppl are trying to keep it positive and "live and let live" and all that. This is just my opinion: I've no real interest in ever playing SC and their OTT "gameshow" style and some of their more fanatical fans have frankly put me off for good.
Plus there is Mack's argument too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tQBAEYX0X0&feature=youtu.be&t=6m4s
I feel the same way, had very high hopes for SC, I had backed it before ED appeared on KS, but the video of the flight model has just killed it, Limit Theory looks like it has more potential than SC after watching this video.
I keep tabs on Josh. Impressive fellow.
Depending on your velocity and the change rate of the path vectors? The same thing. G-forces on a pilot is based on acceleration / rate of change on a velocity vector, and even the best in shape and experienced pilots (with Gsuits) will experience g-lock and black-out if the acceleration is too high.
If it's just a matter of immersion for you then it really should just be a matter of not using it as well. You won't get any kind of UI/HUD while in any of the extrenal views so they aren't really made for you to play from them, they are as you say for sightseeing.
So we should or could be seeing blackout's in Elite?
The WC series have never had a flight model to speak of and have always been rather arcadey. Just look at some youtube footage of the old games - no sense of inertia, or flight movement. SC just follows in that tradition. If it floats your boat, fine, but one thing I appreciate about flying around in a sidewinder is Frontier's perfectly judged feel for the weight of the ship as you chuck it around space.
Agreed, if at any point during that SC video I thought the flight model was superior I would still be posting asking FD to sort their act out, but I was so shocked at how bad I thought SC flight model was I felt that I would post my views.
I'm a bit surprised by the honesty of the presentation.
I'm sure criss has staff that could have done the flight presentation much better.
I like the graphics and the damage model.
only the curved target graphics things that flew trough the cockpit are crap.
far to distracting for my taste.
and what have been said about arcade style ..true.
flight dynamics will surely improve , what we saw here was terrible.
I'm sure criss has staff that could have done the flight presentation much better.
I like the graphics and the damage model.
only the curved target graphics things that flew trough the cockpit are crap.
far to distracting for my taste.
and what have been said about arcade style ..true.
flight dynamics will surely improve , what we saw here was terrible.
i was really surprised that Roberts demo'd it himself...he's clearly not able to play his own game very well. im sure there must have been better people to show it off than his effort did.
I've actually easily put more than twice the support funds on SC than ED (and am part of the DDF here), and as you I am starting to be nervous about this flight model.
When discussions on the model where happening last year on the SC forums, a great deal of attention was made on the fact that ships have mass, and that the flight model was to be fully 'Newtonian' - with the attendant stabilisation systems - albeit with top speed limitations (somewhat akin to ED) and that it would be respecting things like inertia and mass. Then come Christmas and the demo and CR himself stated that the flight model seen was not the end product, that he knew it was quite unrealistic that that they were working on it.
Yesterday unveil indicated to me that everything in the above paragraph was wrong as nothing appears top have changed in their flight model. While it may be using 'Newtonian' characteristics, the values for mass and inertia was simply not even close to what they should be.
Network issues aside as those are fully understandable - (but not being properly prepared for a public unveil is not), it seem to me that the emphasis at this point is toward the visual and gimmicks over the core; and that does not bode well for the plan ahead. On the planning side, I fully understand that projects slips; but this particular project seems to be on a long slope...
But boy oh boy... those ships are shiny.
As a SC subscriber and someone who does believe in the vision, I guess that my faith is being tested at this point.
- Status