Line of Defense

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Line of Defense is a spinoff to the All Aspect Warfare series, Line of Defense is the latest sci-fi MMORPG from 3000AD. It promises to feature battles across vast non-instanced planets, moons and continents with bases several kilometers in size and PVP combat on foot or with a large selection of customizable land and air based vehicles.

Main Site: http://lodgame.com/
Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/app/266620

Line of Defense Trailer
[video=youtube;kOm_0u2JBMQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOm_0u2JBMQ[/video]

Line of Defense flight model
[video=youtube;Tx1kMbC8ZxE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx1kMbC8ZxE[/video]

Line of Defense PvP
[video=youtube;jFVOkfqAlUA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFVOkfqAlUA&list=PLHoygEjNgJke19DLSzYXNI6TSCo7NZSRH&index=2[/video]
 
So, two things.

1) It isn't released yet and the developer himself says it's not ready for prime time.

2) It is indeed not ready for prime time yet


Where to begin... well first of all, most art assets and textures are quite poor. However, that is not really something that would put me off of playing a good game - in fact, OpenSpades has no textures at all and the graphics are basically programmer art, but it's still a very fun game that I played many hours and still play today.

The main issue is overall quality. It starts with the flight model which looks even more arcade than, yes, Star Citizen, and covers things like particle effects, character animations, sounds (obvious loop points can be heard everywhere), as well as the general feel of the FPS portions. I had the same issue with games like Battlecruiser Millenium and Universal Combat - there was loads of stuff to do but most activities felt unfinished. The FPS in particular felt stiff, from the walk/run and turn speeds to the way the weapon is expected to sway in a AAA game today, but doesn't in these games.

I was considering throwing money at this for a beta key but then decided against it based on videos I saw about it. What this game needs is some dedicated people working on improving specific parts of the game, like someone going over the FPS part with a fine toothbrush and improving everything from weapon sway, shooting particle effects to hit feedback.

If I may suggest something to Derek Smart, making better art assets is certainly needed- but you should perhaps focus on the gameplay feel first, improve FPS via the points mentioned above, adding a better flight model with better presentation of inertia and gravity, and spruce up some of the rather simplistic particle effects.


Finally let me say that you don't have to be a chicken to be able to tell if an egg is spoiled. Likewise, one doesn't have to be a great game developer to be able to tell which parts of a game need improvement. If your car over/understeers and feels mushy in corners, you're not required to take mechanics classes to be allowed to tell your mechanic that he should perhaps look at your suspension and tyres.
 
So, two things.

1) It isn't released yet and the developer himself says it's not ready for prime time.

2) It is indeed not ready for prime time yet


Where to begin... well first of all, most art assets and textures are quite poor. However, that is not really something that would put me off of playing a good game - in fact, OpenSpades has no textures at all and the graphics are basically programmer art, but it's still a very fun game that I played many hours and still play today.

The main issue is overall quality. It starts with the flight model which looks even more arcade than, yes, Star Citizen, and covers things like particle effects, character animations, sounds (obvious loop points can be heard everywhere), as well as the general feel of the FPS portions. I had the same issue with games like Battlecruiser Millenium and Universal Combat - there was loads of stuff to do but most activities felt unfinished. The FPS in particular felt stiff, from the walk/run and turn speeds to the way the weapon is expected to sway in a AAA game today, but doesn't in these games.

I was considering throwing money at this for a beta key but then decided against it based on videos I saw about it. What this game needs is some dedicated people working on improving specific parts of the game, like someone going over the FPS part with a fine toothbrush and improving everything from weapon sway, shooting particle effects to hit feedback.

If I may suggest something to Derek Smart, making better art assets is certainly needed- but you should perhaps focus on the gameplay feel first, improve FPS via the points mentioned above, adding a better flight model with better presentation of inertia and gravity, and spruce up some of the rather simplistic particle effects.


Finally let me say that you don't have to be a chicken to be able to tell if an egg is spoiled. Likewise, one doesn't have to be a great game developer to be able to tell which parts of a game need improvement. If your car over/understeers and feels mushy in corners, you're not required to take mechanics classes to be allowed to tell your mechanic that he should perhaps look at your suspension and tyres.

1. Indeed he said that, nothing wrong with that.

2. Agreed. The game is definitely not ready for the masses. Mind you I played the game when it was younger in it's development.


Where to begin... well first of all, most art assets and textures are quite poor. However, that is not really something that would put me off of playing a good game - in fact, OpenSpades has no textures at all and the graphics are basically programmer art, but it's still a very fun game that I played many hours and still play today.

There is thin line between poor graphics and cartoony graphics. These graphics can be a bad thing if you don't like the gameplay and frankly, there is not much gameplay.
I tried to play with other people but the game crashed all the time. So no, at that point (the point when the game was still on steam) there was no gameplay to speak off.

The main issue is overall quality. It starts with the flight model which looks even more arcade than, yes, Star Citizen, and covers things like particle effects, character animations, sounds (obvious loop points can be heard everywhere), as well as the general feel of the FPS portions. I had the same issue with games like Battlecruiser Millenium and Universal Combat - there was loads of stuff to do but most activities felt unfinished. The FPS in particular felt stiff, from the walk/run and turn speeds to the way the weapon is expected to sway in a AAA game today, but doesn't in these games.

Why are you comparing Star Citizen with this game. The two have nothing to do with each other. However, if you are going to compare, compare it with say, No Man Skies.
That being said, indeed the general feel of the FPS gameplay is, in my opinion that you are a dwarf in a giant world. Assets feel way to big. Also the feel of shooting is wrong... Almost like there is a dealy.

I was considering throwing money at this for a beta key but then decided against it based on videos I saw about it. What this game needs is some dedicated people working on improving specific parts of the game, like someone going over the FPS part with a fine toothbrush and improving everything from weapon sway, shooting particle effects to hit feedback.

As I said above, the gunplay seems and feels off. it definitely needs improvement. I had the idea that the aim and sync was off.
 
Came by because I remember seeing the trailer from a long time ago. I can't believe this is still in active development! Are people playing this right now? What makes it stand out? I assume it's been heavily worked on since these videos came out.
 
That flight model... wow.

Just. Wow.

It's so bad that all I can do is keep typing Wow.

if it was only the flight model it would be ok, but everything in this project is broken... you walk inside the floor, not on the floor, it s unplayable... i ve been offered this game on steam, and i wrote a review , so i was banned from the game as Mr Smart does not allow players to say something negative about this game :/ the concept is good, the realisation is horrible, i mean it s in development since years and years and you can t even walk properly :/
Just avoid this indie game, Evochron Legacy is much better if you re looking for something really space sim
 
Last edited:
I know nothing about this game and played the linked videos in the OP before reading anything about it.

I honestly thought I was looking at clips of a really poor 20 year old game.
 
Last edited:
it has been removed from steam by the dev, so there is no more reviews about it by the players. I think it was a good move as there was never more than 2 players playing the early access. It need to be polished, fixed and finished. If the devs manage to get rid of the bugs and actually make it playable, it could be a good game, but at the time i played it (6 months ago) it was a mess and not even a tech demo, just a broken project. Maybe it s better now, i don't know and i will never know as i have been banned from the game for writing a bad review on steam.

Note to the mods : it s not trolling to say that the game was unplayable when i tried it, and it s not trolling to say that i have been banned for writing a long and argumented steam review. Simple facts. I m a lover of space sim and i test them all. Almost :D
 
Last edited:
It's pretty baffling. Surely it won't be anything like this at release. Who would even buy it, especially with a $99 all access pass? Literally the 3rd thing when I googled this game. At least with Star Citizen, I can understand why people want to spend $100. It's pretty. Not that I'll be able to play either, since I don't have a PC. COD:IW should be a good substitute, though.
 
I think LOD has some interesting concepts in it that you dont see in many fps games. (i got my copy free)
Mainly the ability to drop everywhere in the level, without restrictions. (iron man style)
glide suit with jetpack is another fun mechanic.
damage on players is based on hit locations as well. Basically the implementation chris roberts is promising with star citizen. (you will start limping around if you drop down from too high cliff)
City level is quite huge and it looks pretty neat in design.
Water simulation is pretty complex with waves. (I think its also might be causing some performance issues)


Bad things in LOD:
Its graphics are really dated. I think closest comparison would be HAZE
Theres tons of bugs left to fix
Weapons need more variance. Theres tons of weapons but most of the weapons feels quite similar.
There is no EU servers yet.
Space ships feel simple to fly and sound awful (vacuum cleaners in space)
Default keybindings are sometimes weird

However these opinions are half a year old. Because the size of the game (or amount of contend according to star citizen fans) i haventh been keen on keeping the client installed all the time in my computer.
I do think derek smart has been quite active in fixing stuff, thats broken but i do also think that the list is quite long.(its still shorter than list of broken things in star citizen).
It might flop or it might succeed but hey same is true with star citizen right?
 
do not compare this to star citizen :/ it s not the same scope nor the same budget. it s more like Evochron or Interstellar Rift... But both are so much advanced than LOD that i don t know why you would choose LOD over the two indie games i cited. Let s see when LOD is going to be released, for now it s not even on steam anymore :/
 
do not compare this to star citizen :/ it s not the same scope nor the same budget. it s more like Evochron or Interstellar Rift... But both are so much advanced than LOD that i don t know why you would choose LOD over the two indie games i cited. Let s see when LOD is going to be released, for now it s not even on steam anymore :/
well i learned about LOD from letter from the chairman by chris roberts . And people like to compare Star citizen to LOD.

And your correct evochron is a great game, thats why im not comparing towards that, evochron also isnt a early access game.
And im not recommending buying LOD either. I just think its not the worst game out there. And it has more contend than star citizen currently has, which makes Derek smarts concerns about progress of star citizen quite valid.
After all one project has 120 million and LOD has nothing close to that, yet it has achieved more.
 
is it possible to have a thread that is not talking about star citizen :/ ? it s a LOD thread... i will not play the ''let s compare the games'' when there is nothing to compare in term of scale or achievement.
 
is it possible to have a thread that is not talking about star citizen :/ ? it s a LOD thread... i will not play the ''let s compare the games'' when there is nothing to compare in term of scale or achievement.

I think the thread title and choice of videos set the tone for the replies.
 
well i learned about LOD from letter from the chairman by chris roberts . And people like to compare Star citizen to LOD.

And your correct evochron is a great game, thats why im not comparing towards that, evochron also isnt a early access game.
And im not recommending buying LOD either. I just think its not the worst game out there. And it has more contend than star citizen currently has, which makes Derek smarts concerns about progress of star citizen quite valid.
After all one project has 120 million and LOD has nothing close to that, yet it has achieved more.

I could also push out more content if all my assets looked like PS2 in 2016 and I had been working on it since 2010. I agree these two projects shouldn't be compared. They are on totally different levels. Looking at his output, I don't think the developer has the expertise to have anyone's ear about his opinions on Star Citizen, though. It's like a fingerpainter critiquing professional artist from what little I've seen so far.
 
In the late 90's I picked up the 3000AD Battlecruiser, may have been slightly later than that. Anyway, from a nerdy type pc sim players point. It wasn't too bad at all.
Running your own ship plus doing all the other bits, X3 reminds me of it quite a lot. Lots of menu drop downs if I recall, plus all the crew stats. That's if I'm thinking of the right game here.
Anyway, if it was that, I'm sure it was, it was a good game, although buggy, but back then everything was buggy, well almost.. :O

I didn't play it fully, too busy working hard. But what time I spent in the game was enjoyable, from memory. Not sure about further games from this dev, but that early one, was o.k.
I think the idea behind them is good, but we can all think of good game ideas, its making them work, that's the hard part. So I'll not criticise, mainly because I can't make them myself. ;)
 
I have vague memories of Battlecruiser, which I picked up for $5 from a sale bin some time last millenium. It was overpriced.

My lasting impressions were of poor graphics and FX, an avalance of enigmatic menus and some really weird keybindings. I spent more time trying to figure out how to play the game than I spent actually playing it. Then it would crash.

Awful bugfest, which was most annoying because somewhere under all the awfulness was a really cool game screaming to get out. It gave me the impression that DS is better suited to being a conceptual producer than an actual developer, but after that experience I avoided anything else by him, which is why I was unaware of LOD.
 

dsmart

Banned
OK, where do I start?

First, comparisons to Star Citizen are not only unfounded, but are just laughable. In fact, earlier this morning I wrote a new Star Citizen scoop and which had a section on this very issue.

Going strictly by what the OP listed.

That intro trailer was done back in 2012 by a third-party using 100% in-game assets. The idea was to show off what could be done in the game; which btw, currently exists in the game. There's nothing in that video that's missing in the game. We didn't spend a large sum of money or time doing a glitz trailer (like those other guys) and which wouldn't be indicative of the game being developed.

The "flight model" video. Here's the hilarious part. That's actually a third person camera that only manipulates the camera and bears no relation to the aircraft flight dynamics because the game was never developed for aircraft to be flown in 3rd person. In fact, we removed it for that very reason. The LOD flight model (both planetary and space) works just fine. And while not as advanced as my previous games which use a very different and more advanced flight model that I wrote, it is in line with the type of game. Not to mention the fact that the game being in Early Access, whatever version (Build 00.09.06.08 | 16-02-26) he was running in Feb 2016, no longer even exists in the current (Build 00.09.07.14 | 16-09-20) game due to a multitude of tweaks, fixes, updates etc.

The game does not require you to spend a lot of money to play it. It is 100% skill based. Whether the final game will be F2P or not, has yet to be decided. But even so, a starter kit is only $19.99. And the Tactical Advancement Kits ($29.99-$59.99) are just a bundle of items, and which also contain a few features which are similar to standard and premium versions of games.

I disabled the game's Steam store page back in April, and moved it into CBT sooner than I planned, because most of the toxic Star Citizen fans were buying the game, review bombing it - while expressing their opinions on my "going after Star Citizen", then getting a refund. That's why you can no longer buy it on Steam, but you can buy it through some partner sites which still have keys available.

The biggest complaints we get about the game, are about the graphics. I even wrote a series of blogs explaining the art direction/style, engine etc. They're interesting, if you are into that sort of thing.

http://lodgame.com/15-10-27-state-of-play/
http://lodgame.com/15-09-04-state-of-play/
http://lodgame.com/15-07-31-state-of-play/
http://lodgame.com/in-pursuit-of-awesomeness/

Basically, back when we started in 2010 with the custom engine, being a massive game, I chose this art direction/style because I didn't want performance to be an issue down the road. So with low fidelity assets, the plan was to use shaders down the road to augment the quality without going overboard. Especially since we don't have the benefit of PBR. In other words, games like Team Fortress 2, Battleborn, Overwatch, Atlas Reactor etc have a similar art direction/style.

The issue with LOD is that there's too much detail in some of the already low quality assets, and which need to be redone anyway. Here are some excerpts from this detailed post in another thread on this forum:

When I designed LOD and started developing it in 2010, I already knew that the size of the game, and the sheer number of assets would result in a performance issue. That was even before we completed the engine. The content creation had to be started early. Then in 2011, I decided to ditch the home grown engine in the interest of time (and not reinventing the wheel), and license a slew of middleware to build a custom engine.
...
By the time the engine was at a point where performance could be gauged, analyzed etc, the game was already 100% content complete (that was back in 2013 btw).

The result is that we ended up with a powerful space and planetary engine, complete with infantry, air, ground, sea, space dynamics - but lower quality 3D assets which either didn't look all that great for a genre game, or didn't push the limits of the engine. NOTE that for all my previous games, I had built the engines (graphics, AI, animations etc) from scratch.

Earlier this year, we started evaluating which assets needed to be improved upon or completely redone. It's all right there in the game's roadmap (LOL!! yeah, we have that) btw.
...
That also goes for the game's art style. As I mentioned in the blogs above, I opted for a more colorful art style (in contrast to all the Greys in Star Citizen), and while some assets at low quality don't look good up front, with on-going revisions, they can be made to look better (we don't yet have the benefit of PBR in the engine) while still retaining the game's art style and performance. When you look at games with a colorful art style like Overwatch, Battleborn, Atlas Reactor, Team Fortress etc, the quality is in the models because the art assets don't benefit from much detail.

All the game's promised features, including the upcoming and on-going visual improvements, are outlined in the roadmap (which has been trimmed to reflect only the remaining final stages of the development) and being implemented. A LOT of those elements don't even have their tweak passes yet. e.g. the fps portion needs a lot of tweaks because atm it just doesn't feel right. It's actually also listed in the known issues page.

It's a very large game, and while I believe that the areas which require visual improvements will vastly improve on things, I have no reason to believe that the game will appeal to everyone. The game is not a pure fps game. It's not a space combat sim. It's not a planetary combat sim. It's not a vehicular sim. It doesn't have trading, exploration, mining, missions, or any of that. Because it's not that kind of game. Instead, it is an all-encompassing PvP arena style multiplayer game played in fps mode, and which has infantry as well as air, land, sea, space player controlled assets. Some people compare it to Planetside. It's a close comparison except that i) the planetside games are more complex and involved ii) it has more in common with my 2009 All Aspect Warfare game. And it's nowhere near as complex as any game I've developed.

The greatest challenge has been staying true to my original design, and not changing direction just because the industry keeps doing that. Rather than doing an AAW sequel with a legacy engine, I decided to build this type of game, from scratch, so that I could improve (the expansion plans are in the roadmap btw) on it over time without having to build another game every few years, seeing as I'm semi-retired and all.

We still have a few months to go before it hits final Beta. But if the changelog and bugs list are anything to go by, it's quite clear that game has clear goals and we're not only working on completing those goals, but also fixing, tweaking, and improving things as we go along. All of that - for such a massive game - without the benefit of 300+ developers, let alone millions of dollars in revenue each month.

In truth, I am more concerned about the game's performance, "feel", and feature set coherence, than I am about visuals. That has always been the case with my games. You can have the best visuals in the world, yes it helps, but if the game itself sucks, nobody will care, regardless of how beautiful it looks. I'm old school, and over the years it's been clear to me as a gamer and gamedev that features, enjoyment, and community are what keep games going - not just awesome graphics.


I have never been one to convince people to buy my games, because for me, this is more of a hobby than it is a business. I have just been lucky enough that my games have always sold enough for me to keep making them, while making a decent income. Buy it, don't buy, I don't care. I never did. Which is why when people use my games to attack me, just make me laugh because the joke - more often than not - is always on them. Me? I just get to keep making games that some people buy and play.

Those of you who own LOD, either because you bought it, got a free key etc, have seen the tremendous progress that we've made since it went public in Sept 2014. At the end of the day, the game will be finished, and released - just like all my games. And as these things go, people will still hate on it, regardless of merit. It's the nature of the beast.

Some feedback:

I think LOD has some interesting concepts in it that you dont see in many fps games. (i got my copy free)

I know that trying to build another fps was a non-starter. There are so many of those games out there, that it's pointless. So my design goal was to build a game that had unique and fun elements, while not trying to compete with everything else out there.

Mainly the ability to drop everywhere in the level, without restrictions. (iron man style)

Yeah, when I designed the HAIS, that was precisely what I had in mind. It was just another way to get players into the action quicker, due to the size of the scenes


glide suit with jetpack is another fun mechanic.

You're talking about the wingsuit/wingchute which are different from the jetpack. But yeah, those two assets are just another means for infantry to get around quickly

damage on players is based on hit locations as well. Basically the implementation chris roberts is promising with star citizen. (you will start limping around if you drop down from too high cliff)

Yup. And we even had to tweak this a bit because limping across a massive base is no fun. So we implemented the self-healing mechanic to augment that

city level is quite huge and it looks pretty neat in design.

Nightbridge was fun to design. The idea was a massive abandoned city. We still have some work to do on the lighting; but its one of my favorite planetary scenes

Water simulation is pretty complex with waves. (I think its also might be causing some performance issues)

That's courtesy of Triton (by Sundog) because the water in Havok Vision Engine simply wasn't good enough. We also use their Silverlining middleware for our sky, clouds, atmospheric lighting/scattering etc

Bad things in LOD:

Its graphics are really dated. I think closest comparison would be HAZE

Yup. See above. But remember, it's not the graphics engine that's the issue; it's the assets themselves

Theres tons of bugs left to fix

Not really. As of this moment, I count only 10; one (# 01) of which isn't even a bug, but more of a tweak.

Weapons need more variance. Theres tons of weapons but most of the weapons feels quite similar.

All the weapons have unique characteristics (weight, hit damage etc). What's missing is the "feeling" of being different. And this is due to things like weapon sway etc. We will get to that at some point

There is no EU servers yet.

We plan on having official servers outside North America. However, since we have to do a client-server browser version planned for the console version, I am probably going to unify that so that the PC gamers can also host their own private servers like I did with my previous games whereby you can host and play on the same machine, or spin up a dedicated console server. So even if we don't do official servers when the game is released, nothing is stopping others from hosting their own in whatever territory they choose.

Space ships feel simple to fly and sound awful (vacuum cleaners in space)

The simplistic (compared to my previous games) flight dynamics is by design. As noted in the roadmap, the audio are in fact placeholders from legacy games. Yeah, they're not that good

Default keybindings are sometimes weird

Not that I'm aware of. In fact, you can reset and change them as you see fit

However these opinions are half a year old. Because the size of the game (or amount of contend according to star citizen fans) i haventh been keen on keeping the client installed all the time in my computer.

I do think derek smart has been quite active in fixing stuff, thats broken but i do also think that the list is quite long.(its still shorter than list of broken things in star citizen).

It might flop or it might succeed but hey same is true with star citizen right?

A LOT has changed, and it's getting there slowly but surely. The roadmap is clear in what is left to do. When people who own the game see the changelog for any build (we have both GA and DEV builds, all accessible to people who own the game), they know exactly what just got released, and what it yet to come. Nothing is hidden. And that's what "Open Development" is about.

ps: I'm guessing that the moderators are going to be working over time in this thread before long :D
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom