With all the excitement surrounding space games at the moment, with FTL, Star Command and Kerbal Space Program, it brought memories of X3 back to me and a friend of mine. I couldn't believe I'd not written about it before on this blog?! Or not in any great length, if I have and just missed it.
X3: reunion was a very big phase in my computer gaming life. I really only played the game for a month or two, but I literally played for that entire period. Seriously. After a couple of weeks I'd clocked up 60+ hours and I was completely hooked. This was back in 2006, when I was finishing my degree, and really when I was cracking on pretty well as I led up to finishing Uni.
One of the main explanations for the amount of hours I clocked up playing X3 is because I'd have it almost constantly on in the background while I was working or sleeping in my room. It's one of those games where it doesn't always require your attention.
Essentially the X games are sandbox space games. They have a story mode, but it's really just a fraction of the game. The universe in which you play is as near to 100% dynamic as is reasonably possible; each race in the galaxy has an ever changing political status to the others, the market prices and resources will change as trade routes open up or you as a player build your trade empire, if you decide to do that at all? Wars will flare up, sectors will change hands and if you start a new game it WILL be completely different after 10-20 hours of gameplay.
Ever ship or station in the game is controllable by you, as the player. Even big capital ships can be bought by the player and then equipped with fighters and repaired by player controlled freighters and installations. I never got this far, even after 100 hours of play! But I did build a large trading network and had several mining and power stations all feeding into the galactic economy. So immersive it was amazing.
I want to briefly state that the flight and ship vs ship combat was amazing too! Detailed and tactical with a huge variety of weaponry, and so slick.
X3 stands as one of the greatest games I've ever experienced. I can only think that the reason I didn't put it down when I was first listing my old favourites was because I only played it for such a short time.
Monday, 20 May 2013
Kerbal Space Program
Anyone who reads this blog will know that I love independent games developers. They are the only ones with the guts to release novel game designs or new games which focus on good gameplay and not cinematic cut-sequences *gasps with shock* I know, it's crazy stuff!
Anyway, check out Kerbal Space Program. This is an incredibly ambitious project, which is already showing mind boggling results.
The game won't work on my laptop, but a friend of mine has purchased it and I look forward to hearing how he gets on. I believe he's managed to get one thing into orbit. I wonder how soon until he builds a capital class interplanetary spaceship? A few weeks maybe... I'll await news and update you soon.
I should speak a little about the game, or at least what I've seen of it from youtube clips, which there are many and they are insanely incredible!
Kerbal Space Program gives the player access to all the various components that can be used to make shuttles, rockets, satellites, space stations, jet aircraft, anything that flies really with space travel in mind - their are jet engines for atmospheric flight, so people have used them for atmospheric aircraft. The game engine uses a remarkably realistic physics engine and actually getting a basic satellite into orbit will require a player to construct quite a complex and powerful rocket to get it there!
I don't think I can really do it justice by being descriptive, just take a look at the website and then go straight to youtube. People have built massive space stations, bases on other planets, capital ships, all launched in whole or parts from a single space base on the home planet, which I've forgotten the name of.
Take a look!
Anyway, check out Kerbal Space Program. This is an incredibly ambitious project, which is already showing mind boggling results.
The game won't work on my laptop, but a friend of mine has purchased it and I look forward to hearing how he gets on. I believe he's managed to get one thing into orbit. I wonder how soon until he builds a capital class interplanetary spaceship? A few weeks maybe... I'll await news and update you soon.
I should speak a little about the game, or at least what I've seen of it from youtube clips, which there are many and they are insanely incredible!
Kerbal Space Program gives the player access to all the various components that can be used to make shuttles, rockets, satellites, space stations, jet aircraft, anything that flies really with space travel in mind - their are jet engines for atmospheric flight, so people have used them for atmospheric aircraft. The game engine uses a remarkably realistic physics engine and actually getting a basic satellite into orbit will require a player to construct quite a complex and powerful rocket to get it there!
I don't think I can really do it justice by being descriptive, just take a look at the website and then go straight to youtube. People have built massive space stations, bases on other planets, capital ships, all launched in whole or parts from a single space base on the home planet, which I've forgotten the name of.
Take a look!
Thursday, 16 May 2013
Is an idea shared, an idea lost?
Since starting this blog I've embraced my childhood dream of becoming a game designer; whether that is just as an eternal hobby or eventually as a professional, it doesn't really matter. What matters to me is that I want to put my name on something I've created that I can feel proud of and know that there are some people that enjoy it. To that extent I've often chatted to friends and interested people about game design, my own ideas and their ideas. As time has gone by I've noticed a trend, when I've shared ideas early it doesn't end up moving forward, the idea gets crowded or lost in a sea of speculation and then dies out. However, when I've kept an idea to myself and built it in my head or in a note pad, it's normally developed into something, even if that is just something to take up again in the future I feel like there is more to that idea than if I had shared it and tried to push it forward through discussion.
The prototypes for Wastelands and Ganglands were made very quickly, in both cases I never mentioned anything to anyone until it was done. I even made a prototype of a kids game, based in the Redwall universe, over a weekend after spending time with my Girlfriend's brother and his young son. None of these prototypes were very good and in all cases they had pretty glaring holes and flaws, but having something solid to move on from, I feel, has allowed other people to then get involved in a positive capacity. I think that if I hadn't made the prototype and instead chatted to people about it or wrote concept ideas to share with people, in all cases, the prototypes would have never been made.
Tim Schafer, of Double Fine, in one of his interviews by 2 player productions, during the early stages of the development of their Kickstarter project, Double Fine Adventure (or as it's now known, Broken Age) said that he had to wait before sharing his first game design document with his friend and mentor, Ron Gilbert. He felt he had to form his idea and get enough of it onto paper before he could even mention it to anyone. Because as soon as you share an idea you lose a little bit of it, you start to worry about what that other person thinks or whether it's actually a good idea at all. If you wait until you've given it enough form that it can stand on it's own, even just a little, then exposure to other people's thoughts and opinions will possibly help it to grow.
The short version of this rant is: if you have an idea, do it, then share it; don't share it first, because chances are you'll never do it. At least, that's how I feel like. I'm interested to hear if anyone else has thoughts on this?
The prototypes for Wastelands and Ganglands were made very quickly, in both cases I never mentioned anything to anyone until it was done. I even made a prototype of a kids game, based in the Redwall universe, over a weekend after spending time with my Girlfriend's brother and his young son. None of these prototypes were very good and in all cases they had pretty glaring holes and flaws, but having something solid to move on from, I feel, has allowed other people to then get involved in a positive capacity. I think that if I hadn't made the prototype and instead chatted to people about it or wrote concept ideas to share with people, in all cases, the prototypes would have never been made.
Tim Schafer, of Double Fine, in one of his interviews by 2 player productions, during the early stages of the development of their Kickstarter project, Double Fine Adventure (or as it's now known, Broken Age) said that he had to wait before sharing his first game design document with his friend and mentor, Ron Gilbert. He felt he had to form his idea and get enough of it onto paper before he could even mention it to anyone. Because as soon as you share an idea you lose a little bit of it, you start to worry about what that other person thinks or whether it's actually a good idea at all. If you wait until you've given it enough form that it can stand on it's own, even just a little, then exposure to other people's thoughts and opinions will possibly help it to grow.
The short version of this rant is: if you have an idea, do it, then share it; don't share it first, because chances are you'll never do it. At least, that's how I feel like. I'm interested to hear if anyone else has thoughts on this?
Tuesday, 7 May 2013
Are consoles good for computer game development?
I want to bring this up because I've not mentioned it before on this blog and because with next gen consoles on the horizon I'm pondering whether it's going to be worthwhile to stay with console gaming or go back to PC gaming.
Until just a few years ago I was a pure PC gamer and I always thought console gaming was a bit of a joke for most gaming genres; the notable exceptions being fighting games and sports games. When I eventually did change to console gaming I was so pleasantly surprised how easy multiplayer gaming was and the lack of worrying about hardware capability seemed very refreshing. However, I also became more aware of how much was being cut out of mainstream titles so that they could be sold on consoles.
I find it very depressing to think that newer releases of games such as Command & Conquer, XCOM and Flash Point have been deliberately toned down so they could be sold on consoles. And it's not just like they've been toned for the console release, every version is toned down, PC included. Features which were expected and greatly loved in the original PC only versions have been stripped away so they function on all platforms in a similar way.
This leads onto the next part of my argument; has the evolution of game development been slowed due to game consoles? Game consoles are where the big money is, so all the big publishers develop for them, and because consoles maintain the same hardware for years the developers are restricted to this limitation until the next console comes out. We all know that PC versions of games are generally better, but how much better could they be is the publishers committed all their resources to pushing the limits on a single product, for a single, ever advancing platform?
The counter argument, as I see it, is that consoles have brought gaming to the masses, thus bringing more money into the industry and allowing them to invest far more into developing new games. So maybe without console gaming the publishers wouldn't be as rich and resourceful as they are and so development would be basically as it is at the moment anyway, or worse?
It's an old argument, it was just on my mind. What do you think?
Until just a few years ago I was a pure PC gamer and I always thought console gaming was a bit of a joke for most gaming genres; the notable exceptions being fighting games and sports games. When I eventually did change to console gaming I was so pleasantly surprised how easy multiplayer gaming was and the lack of worrying about hardware capability seemed very refreshing. However, I also became more aware of how much was being cut out of mainstream titles so that they could be sold on consoles.
I find it very depressing to think that newer releases of games such as Command & Conquer, XCOM and Flash Point have been deliberately toned down so they could be sold on consoles. And it's not just like they've been toned for the console release, every version is toned down, PC included. Features which were expected and greatly loved in the original PC only versions have been stripped away so they function on all platforms in a similar way.
This leads onto the next part of my argument; has the evolution of game development been slowed due to game consoles? Game consoles are where the big money is, so all the big publishers develop for them, and because consoles maintain the same hardware for years the developers are restricted to this limitation until the next console comes out. We all know that PC versions of games are generally better, but how much better could they be is the publishers committed all their resources to pushing the limits on a single product, for a single, ever advancing platform?
The counter argument, as I see it, is that consoles have brought gaming to the masses, thus bringing more money into the industry and allowing them to invest far more into developing new games. So maybe without console gaming the publishers wouldn't be as rich and resourceful as they are and so development would be basically as it is at the moment anyway, or worse?
It's an old argument, it was just on my mind. What do you think?
Thursday, 2 May 2013
Forced break from Wastelands
I'm annoyed to say I'm going to have to take about a months break from Wastelands. Version 2.2 is ready to go, and has been for a few weeks now. The problem is that I am yet to get a replacement for my printer and this month I have my end of module assessment for one of my Open Uni courses and it's also the start of another OU module; this time only a very light weight one. But with this cross over and also my desire to really swat up on Swedish for a holiday in Finland in mid-June means I can't devote any significant time to Wastelands.
By beginning of June I should be free enough to crack back into Wastelands and I hope to also have my printer situation sorted by then! Whether I buy another cheap Epson so I can use the spare cartridges I currently have, or I cut my losses and go for something a little more sturdy in the hope it'll last for a few years.
This time will also give my artists a chance to build up a collection of artwork that I can hopefully put onto more cards, thus giving the next version a more appealing look!
Sorry to all those I said I was going to give test copies to, but you'll have to wait a while longer.
By beginning of June I should be free enough to crack back into Wastelands and I hope to also have my printer situation sorted by then! Whether I buy another cheap Epson so I can use the spare cartridges I currently have, or I cut my losses and go for something a little more sturdy in the hope it'll last for a few years.
This time will also give my artists a chance to build up a collection of artwork that I can hopefully put onto more cards, thus giving the next version a more appealing look!
Sorry to all those I said I was going to give test copies to, but you'll have to wait a while longer.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)