The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Monk

Monk
Lets make a scale!

Space Shooter* 1<------5------>10 Space Simulator

IMO...
No Man's Sky: 4
Freelancer: 3
Starpoint Gemini: 3
Rebel Galaxy: 2
TIE Fighter: 3
Elite Dangerous: 6
KSP: 9
Rogue System: 10
Star Citizen: 4
Descent: 1


*I want a more inclusive terms for this...to include any games that are primarily trade focused or exploration based (NMS).

** Totally subjective and just my quick ratings...I only generally stand by this :p
 
Last edited:

claymore2408

C
Barking_Mad said:
FWIW I asked a couple of AAA devs the other day about rebuilding/changing an engine in mid-stream and their responses were:



So for me they get a pass for a while longer to see if this re-build of the engine and net code works. Will have to keep an eye out to see if they make comments about this coming into the live builds. If they do and it still sucks, then I think we can start hammering nails in the coffin.
Click to expand...

Ben Parry has already gave his opinion on the "game engine" discussion before, I'm not sure why this is being brought up again.
 
Last edited:

GordFreeman

G
Monk said:
Lets make a scale!

Space Shooter* 1<------5------>10 Space Simulator

IMO...
No Man's Sky: 4
Freelancer: 3
Starpoint Gemini: 3
Rebel Galaxy: 2
TIE Fighter: 4
Elite Dangerous: 6
KSP: 9
Rogue System: 10
Descent: 1


*I want a more inclusive terms for this...to include any games that are primarily trade focused or exploration based (NMS).

** Totally subjective and just my quick ratings...I only generally stand by this :p
Click to expand...

A linear scale for those two extremes is impossible. What aspects would you weight more heavily than others? ED simulates the galaxy more than SC. But SC attempts to simulate space flight physics more than ED. (ED limits yaw arbitrarily, and has a throttle 'zone' where the ships are more maneuverable)
 
Last edited:

Monk

Monk
GordFreeman said:
A linear scale for those two extremes is impossible. What aspects would you weight more heavily than others? ED simulates the galaxy more than SC. But SC attempts to simulate space flight physics more than ED. (ED limits yaw arbitrarily, and has a throttle 'zone' where the ships are more maneuverable)
Click to expand...

It is a totally subjective scale, not based in any sort of reality. Purely based on how I (just me, nobody else) feels playing each of those games. For me, it is a combo of flight model and environment. In my view, the current scope of SC gets a few knocks to space shooter b/c of planet and ship size. Also, I don't feel the flight model for SC is anywhere near realistic as the feel lacks inertia (or enough of it). In ED, aside from the speed limits (annoying, but I get it) if you go FAoff you get something the evokes are more realistic feeling as you can quickly get out of control with a few misplaced inputs.

Also, I want to stress, being on the low end of the scale /= bad. I'd be pretty happy with a Sq42 that is on the level of gameyness as Freelancer but with modern graphics and features. My favorite game on my list ranks at 4, for example (its not NMS).
 
Last edited:

briguy168

briguy168
Tippis said:
They're really not sims, though. They're arcade shooters that happen to take place in a space opera world.
Click to expand...

Now your just being pedantic. If we're really going to go down that route most space games fall short of actually simulating space. Off the top of my head, Kerbal Space Program would be the only "game" to meet most qualifications that a real space simulation would have. If you really want to burrow deep down into the minutia, this would be one of the better "space sims" http://universesandbox.com/

frostypaw said:
Good to see you back with a typically well reasoned point.
Click to expand...

I actually thought it was pretty funny....you know satire and all :)
 

CTCParadox

CTCParadox
Monk said:
Lets make a scale!

Space Shooter* 1<------5------>10 Space Simulator

IMO...
No Man's Sky: 4
Freelancer: 3
Starpoint Gemini: 3
Rebel Galaxy: 2
TIE Fighter: 3
Elite Dangerous: 6
KSP: 9
Rogue System: 10
Star Citizen: 4
Descent: 1


*I want a more inclusive terms for this...to include any games that are primarily trade focused or exploration based (NMS).

** Totally subjective and just my quick ratings...I only generally stand by this :p
Click to expand...

Orbiter: 11
Independence War: 7
House of the Dying Sun: 2

CMDR CTCParadox
 
Last edited:

Monk

Monk
GordFreeman said:
HAHA!!! [squeeeee]

There's no point in 'challenging' what is purely subjective!

A linear scale means nothing if it isn't even attempting to be objective.
Click to expand...

Feel free to provide your own ratings based on your experience. Lets all be subjective TOGETHER

XOXOXOXO
 

Tippis

Tippis
GordFreeman said:
ED limits yaw arbitrarily
Click to expand...
So does SC.

and has a throttle 'zone' where the ships are more maneuverable.
Click to expand...
And SC ships behave as if they have no mass.

No citation needed.
Click to expand...
Yes you do, because you're just putting up a single example of something ED does that SC does not, and yet it's not really hard to find examples of SC not simulating things that ED does.

If you're going to make a sweeping claim like that, you're going to need a very good citation to prove it — not a single case that is trivially matched by a similar one in the other game and which therefore ends up as being ±0.

GordFreeman said:
HAHA!!! [squeeeee]

There's no point in 'challenging' what is purely subjective!
Click to expand...
Sure there is. It's called having a discussion or offering a different opinion. The point of doing so can very, from demonstrating that the subjectivity is unnecessary to convincing someone to change opinion to simply offering a different method of evaluation.

The meaning of linear scales do not change just because the placement of data points on that is subjective.
 

Tippis

Tippis
briguy168 said:
Now your just being pedantic. If we're really going to go down that route most space games fall short of actually simulating space. Off the top of my head, Kerbal Space Program would be the only "game" to meet most qualifications that a real space simulation would have. If you really want to burrow deep down into the minutia, this would be one of the better "space sims" http://universesandbox.com/
Click to expand...
…and that's fine. We can simply call those games what they are and let the “space sim” label be properly applied to games that try to… well… sim in space. KSP is an excellent example of an actual space sim.
 

GordFreeman

G
Tippis said:
…and that's fine. We can simply call those games what they are and let the “space sim” label be properly applied to games that try to… well… sim in space. KSP is an excellent example of an actual space sim.
Click to expand...
...and the rest of us will keep calling them what everyone else does. Instead of getting wound up that SC has the audacity to call itself a space sim yet does not attempt to model the known galaxy one to one.
 
Last edited:

VidarSnipes

V
GordFreeman said:
SC was advertised as a sci-fi space game with artificial gravity, aliens, laser beams that travel slower than the speed of light, jump gates, shields, etc.

Big ass ships are cool. Tiny nimble ships are cool. It's a space game set in a different universe than ours.
Click to expand...

And yet it was advertised as a realistic game.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

GordFreeman said:
Wrong and wrong. Let's see those citations.
Click to expand...
Second one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs2u5UP7u3M
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom