[quote who="Frogboy" reply="3" id="3730127"] Some really good feedback and more importantly suggestions. I will say, cw, you missed a number of things because species can definitely be annihilated (completely) in the game depending on your choices. Even the lovable Tywom. I'm not sure how well you can really address replayability in an adventure/RPG style game. But we are up to the challenge provided this rule is adhered to: You are the capt
cwrightc84
For DLC and general improvements this is my feedback: Right now the game has a major issue with replayability. There are several factors contributing to this: ***** 1.) Once the main campaign is complete there is very little to do. There is no reason to explore, few side quests, a small number of easter eggs. Replayability of SC:O is very very low. After I finished the main campaign, I haven't booted the game back up. This i
[quote quoting="post"] I don't think this feature is in the game but I think it would be cool to be able to romance, say, the commander. Actually, I am mostly just asking about adding the feature to woo the commander. Can we have it? [/quote] I think this goes against the canon plot. Everyone knows the captain's true soulmate is chief viscosity officer Wymdoo.
[quote who="Inferno83" reply="2" id="3729173"] Quoting Darkstar076, reply 1 One thing I have to ask though - what was your loadout for the ship because in the last battles my flag ship was lucky to beat a juggernaut with a quater of its crew alive. Don't use your flagship. Mu'kay and Pinthi al
I was doing some thinking on this: At the end of the campaign the player flagship becomes extremely powerful. With the right modifications you can trivialize any battle. Without heavy nerfs, the endgame combat power of the flagship will make it difficult to create challenging encounters in new DLC. So here is an idea: At some point, future DLC begins a second story with a new captain -this time commanding a Lexit
Very minor but why don't any other gas giants have rings like saturn?
I think the game needs to find a happy medium between accessibility and performance. Like Rise of the Tombraider, the game can have reasonable starting specs to play decently but advanced options for those people with 3 SLIed 1080 GTXes that want to see every water molecule in the clouds orbiting a mountain.
I definitely appreciate the insight on the game engine choice. I am definitely concerned about the 14 GB draw for RAM that the Nitrous Engine is preliminarily requiring. Optimization is a huge issue for a lot of gamers. Note that even the most sophisticated and graphically intensive games have not yet really surpassed 8 GB on average. The recent Rise of the Tomb Raider generally recommends 8. Even the playstation 4 has
3-4 for me as well, I think the team has been doing a great job keeping the founders in the loop and explaining why certain decision were made. E.G., the explanation between why Nitrous Engine was chosen for SC was very insightful.
To Provide Feedback on Ship Modifications from the December Vault, I decided to make a new post due to having alot of ideas revolving around this. The Player Ship/Flagship is at the heart of the game and is at the apex of the player experience. It's with you everywhere you go, and if it blows up it's game over. There are a ton of players out there with different values on what should be important in customization. It is important to try to reac
Thank you for the Transparency on the December Vault, First and foremost, I have to agree with IBNobody in that I am very concerned about the amount of emphasis and resources being spent on the "Planetary Exploration" mini-game. In terms of SC2 vs. SCO, I am increasingly worried that game as
Some questions from my end: 1.) For the main story campaign, all Star Control games had a "Doomsday" counter. If too much in-game time passes the main story would end in failure. While I personally believe that this is an aged mechanic and players should be free to finish the game at their leisure, it is an important question to ask. 2.) Like Skyrim, will players be able to continue once the main story is complete?
The first mass effect was a very simple game and was just designed to hide it really well. Think about it: 1.) All the enemies in mass effect 1 were humanoid with the same pull of animations. There was very little variation in actual enemy types. You had rifle guys, snipers, rockets, biotics, krogan tanks with health regen, stalkers, and some probes. That's it. 2.) Most explorable area were just the same hallways re tex
Also, on the topic of ST:O not being able to compete with Mass Effect, I think this is untrue. Before bioware was acquired by EA they created some of the best works as a smaller studio (kotor, the first dragon age). The quality of their work actually dropped after the acquisiton by a AAA (swtor, mass effect 3). Being an independent studio with more creative freedom than bioware, I think star dock is in a position to do star control the most justice.
[quote who="maanvis26" reply="2" id="3660671"] The more I read of these posts, the more I think that Mass Effect is really the spiritual successor to Star Control 2, brought to the modern age. This also saddens me because I don't think Stardock has the capability to fill the shoes of Mass Effect. [/quote] I agree to an extent. Mass Effect was pretty much a rehash of the SC:2 and SC:3 plot with the Protheans being the Precursors and the Reapers bein
I was just playing through the first Mass Effect and was gently reminded about some of the things that I found common in great games -especially RPGS: 1.) CHOICE SHOULD BE DIVERSE AND CONSEQUENCE NEEDS TO MATTER In all of the great RPG games I've played, player choice and the consequences of those choices is at the forefront. Players come in all sorts of backgrounds. Choices need to have variety so that players c
Thanks for releasing the November Vault, After seeing the intro video and the concept art of the female commander, the artstyle of the game looks very similar to that of the MMORPG Wildstar. I don't see this as a bad thing, I very much enjoyed Wildstar at launch but unfortunately the game was ruined by micro-transactions and the producer/developer's alienation of the majority playerbase in favor of hardore raiders. As a note about Wi
I will say that I am highly against any type of stat based upgrade, alt loadouts should completely change the functionality of a ship and perhaps give a visual indicator that it is altered allow for counterplay.
[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="7" id="3659450"] Quoting cwrightc84, reply 3 Right now if the ships are too rigid in design and hyper melee is a 1v1 match up then you will get into situation where it simply becomes a rock paper and sci
Banned for having my omission to exist... denied
PLACEHOLDER NAME: TANK SHIP PRIMARY FIRE: Red double laser cannons that fire in 4 directions (right, left, up, down) at the same time. SECONDARY ABILITY: The tank ship is surrounded by a square shaped energy shield. The shield has 4 sides and if
Congrats, looking forward to Star Control Origins to making the 2018 list
I really hope the art direction of SC:O goes in this direction:
In SC2, players had the option of trying to save a ship by attempting to flee a melee by spinning up a hyperspace drive. During this time, the ship becomes completely stationary for several seconds -which usually results in an easy kill against a human player (unless you had a Chmmr Avatar with surviving ZapSats to protect yourself). For Origins hypermelee, I was thinking of a tag-team system that would make ship escapes more interesting and add a level of strategic play
[quote who="Darkstar076" reply="2" id="3658461"] I quite like cwrightc84 idea about being able to customise ships. For example, you could by weapon systems from allies after completing a series of missions or if you down enough enemies you might be able to salvage a weapon system. Get enough of these and the starbas