Logo Platform
logo amplifiers simplified

[Discussion] What am I searching in a 4X game?

Reply
Copied to clipboard!
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 10:22:21 AM
The thing with multi is that it needs to fasterpaced or easier to pickup. play by email is awesome ^^ However a simply onlineservice much like an improvised dropbox to keep the save and with a email not when its your turn might make it harder to cheat. smiley: smile



And you are right on the single player experience. Thats where the epic needs too be. smiley: smile
0Send private message
0Send private message0Send private message0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 1:09:22 PM
I found the camera controls of Homeworld really fluid, and their slight reworking for Homeworld 2 (with a non-anchored strafe at times) was decent as well. Sword of the Stars 2...despite the state of the game, traversing the galactic map is sometimes a nightmare. The best 3D map with multiple elevations I've seen in regards to a 4X space game is probably the indie effort Star Ruler. It was snappy and uncomplicated. Not really counting Sins here, though I suppose I should.



That said...for galactic maps? 2D is the way to go, it seems.




0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 12:40:50 PM
I left the 3 as first digit of my age last year.... Still a DINK tho. :-) (but my SO isn't playing...)
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 12:36:59 PM
Pft, you cant be that old. Me and znorky are both 30+... Its kinda odd saying that... we are both DINKs though. smiley: smile





0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 12:31:33 PM
Don't like it and often enough don't have the time, particularly if in a relationship or working full-time or having kids .... (yeah, I am old! )
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 12:24:26 PM
That too... most ppl tend to not like marathon civ-games on multiplayer with 5 human players...




0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 11:49:21 AM
yea and guys what is important it's that a (mulitplayer) game dont last for houres .... (1 hour and dont count on me)





0Send private message
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 10:08:13 AM
Can't comment on Ubisoft (didn't play their games actually) but agree on the stability and patching issues.

I think a good single player experience gives high replay value.

Multiplayer is a bit trickier as you need to be sure you have a good play-time window so that you don't drop your pals out of the blue in the middle of the game....
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 10:02:49 AM
And multiplayer requires good patching and a stable gameservice. Need I say look at ubisoft and do it all the other way around and it will be a success.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 9:11:57 AM
the most important thing is that you can play them many many hours without getting bored )its the case for 90% of the games i have) and to do that you need good multiplayer because thats where i go directly when i finished the game smiley: smile
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 9:07:17 AM
Sharidann wrote:


I remember a really warm feeling inside me the first time I managed to beat Moo2 at the highest difficulty level. It had required a bit of luck, of course, but still.





Very good poiint that was specialsmiley: biggrin
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 8:33:57 AM
Don't forget a good AI too. All too often, designers solve the problem of difficulty scaling by giving the AI advantages instead of having the AI play it smart. Can lead to frustration sometimes.

I remember a really warm feeling inside me the first time I managed to beat Moo2 at the highest difficulty level. It had required a bit of luck, of course, but still.



I totalyl agree about having sound core game mechanics. As for the 3d Map, it is nice to look at, ok, but frankly, more a gimmick than anything else for me.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 8:25:15 AM
I would disagree withe a 3d map i dont relay see the point. Other then add a lot of paning and scrolling to make things slower and harder.



For me i like to get the feealig the reserche changes the options i have in ship design. so i would say good ship design is important. Other then that i do belive one of the tings that i loved withe mmo2 was that it was farly simpel gamplay but it was also very hard to do it right.



Newer games have a tendency to do to muche. THe core game macanics have to be fun, and then you can add things on to that. i see to many games that has added lots of stuff to the game that cloauds and not enhaces game play.

0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 7:46:36 AM
About tech: It needs to cover all bases (terraforming, economics, politics, warfare, diplomacy and I am probably missing a few).

It needs not necessarily to be too exhaustive, otherwise you end up doing micro-management alot, which takes away quite a bit of the strategy part of the game.



The thingie I personnally like is the possibility to customize ships to reflect either my play-style or my research tree.



Besides that, I need to feel an epic breath blow over my battles.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 7:43:16 AM
Bwah, just typed a big reply and when I wanted to post it, it disappeared into nothingness :/.



Anyway, in short because I'll have to get to work in a moment:



- I like the way how SotS handles the 3d-maps. And well, it's in space: I expect no less than 3d.



- Civ5 was a huge disappointment for me: I was more thinking in the line of the independant planets of SotS or the minor races of GalCiv.



- It was an example of two extremes: my point is more that I'd like to see empires intertwine because there are planets in a system preferable by different races.



- I was referring to HoI3's tech tree for the complexity: I wasn't suggesting to release single units. I agree that upgrading your ships is a neat part of the 4X games.



What ae your preferences? Let's make this a topic of ideas.




0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 7, 2012, 5:12:14 AM
3D maps can be confusing in the beginning... Homeworld controls for the first time... *sigh* So navigation has to be simple enough.



As for the travel this was kinda covered in the "Design overview"

Fleet travel through space by two possible means: warp travel, based on existing warp lines, or hyperspace which allows fleet to hyperjump to anywhere on the map provided it has the required range.
but sure for the second method it doesnt exclude your alternative version suggestion of doing it.



Im not too fond of citystates meself seeing how civ5 handled it (not saying that civ5 was good in any way though in my book).



As for multiple planets in one system with different planets should just be a preference really. They mention in the docs supplied that one cant inhabit a gas-giant at start without the right technology. I mean if they can invent and use spacetravel they can ofcourse utilise and settle on hostile environments.



There has to be balance to the tech-tree... sure there is a way to balance it much like Total Annihalation by just releasing new units and new units until inifinity. Id rather build and design my own ships by piecing together the components. Alpha centauri, Space empires etc. all had this element. Its also easier to balance in the end since one has components to balance rather than entire units. Also if its possible from the start of a game to ban certain tech then its most easily house-ruled out before a dev manages patch away an abuse (no offence dev-guys)
0Send private message
?

Click here to login

Reply
Comment