EMC007
The guy who's always in way over his head
1/10. Git gud.
...Anyway, you should format and submit that as a Steam review. StarMade could use some good and comprehensive ones.
Will do
1/10. Git gud.
...Anyway, you should format and submit that as a Steam review. StarMade could use some good and comprehensive ones.
Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa right there...rock-paper-scissors-beam-missile-cannon-shield-armor-thrusters
rock-paper-scissors-piratestation-red glow-boom-respawn screenWhoa whoa whoa whoa whoa right there...
No lizard or Spock?
Sadly there are neither lizards nor spock in game yet!Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa right there...
No lizard or Spock?
First off, tried to find an Off-Topic forum, but there doesnt seem to be one.
But to preface this post: There seems to be this genre push for Sandbox style open space sim games, which for one I am happy to be seeing. It seemed the genre was practically non-existent, and then lately, everyone and their mother have been putting out space sim games left and right.
I saw on the Steam workshop ANOTHER sandbox creative space sim: Avorion (Avorion - Sci-Fi Space Sandbox: Explore, Build, Trade, Fight), which looks interesting and pretty. Havent played it yet.
But yet, looking at this list of games in the current genre...
None of them have that look, feel, and complexity that StarMade has for me. I have played all of them now (except Avorion), but each one severely lacks many things that I cant really put my finger on. But in each case, I get bored of the blandness and end up back at starmade.
- StarMade
- Space Engineers
- Empyrion
- Intersteller Rift
- Avorion
With the exception of StarMade, all the games above do a decent job of creating the hull of a ship, but they all look pretty bland, and the way they handle ship systems seems more like a bunch of props placement. And I believe thats the main issue I have with all the above games (except StarMade of course)... You are really just building a shell or frame for system props.
Dont get me wrong, every game looks much prettier and graphics wise, sorta wish StarMade could approach that level... but the limiting factor of prop placement really is major drawback. And thats where StarMade shines for me. I love the complex structures players can make for just about everything, ranging from a ship's power systems and components, to the limitless possibilities with weapons and turrets. Add in the massively complex shipyards, rail system, fleets, carriers, logic systems, NPCs... none of the other games above have that factor.
So there it is. StarMade, for me personally, is a cut above the rest for those reason alone, and the dream game for me would be StarMade + modern graphics.
Anyone else agree?
EDIT: tyNeonsturm, I presume you mean From the depths.
I played a lot of StarConflict and Dota2. Not voxel games, but you learn a lot about combat with it.For me multiplayer combat EVE like is just cannon. I like to play fair matches. Don't care if you other guys have the patience and time to simulate some faction politics.
I somehow doubt that that's the physics engine's complexity as much as generally crappy design.If SE wouldn't have this complicated physics engine, it could've been a great pvp-game. :D It has the best ideas around ammunition, a working oxygen engine and the ability to dock a ship to another ship and board it. Heck even shields were added via plugins. But it doesn't matter as long as the game crashes, lags and has low fps even on high end pc's and servers.
Is SM better right now? I can't see blocks (not rendered for me).If SE wouldn't have this complicated physics engine, it could've been a great pvp-game. :D It has the best ideas around ammunition, a working oxygen engine and the ability to dock a ship to another ship and board it. Heck even shields were added via plugins. But it doesn't matter as long as the game crashes, lags and has low fps even on high end pc's and servers.
I think complexity is the right word for this, because they could've implemented a very shallow physics collision damage and would've been better off. But they implemented it way over the top with calculations for each cube on their grids seperately. I think even each cube has also an information from where it gets the damge when it gets drawn. Instead of packing damage that comes from physical collision into a hitbox.I somehow doubt that that's the physics engine's complexity as much as generally crappy design.
It's just a bug. Ofcourse SM is better for space-combat on the long run. On the short run we have no space combat game atm. If you want some sandbox pvp without flying you can take any game, including Minecraft.Is SM better right now? I can't see blocks (not rendered for me).
As long as SM doesn't get fixed and SE does not work on Linux, even MineCraft is better.
With that much info, you should do uniform physics on the graphics card. But if they do, you cannot compare it to a game which does it on the cpu.I think complexity is the right word for this, because they could've implemented a very shallow physics collision damage and would've been better off.
A bug which sticks around for months isn't "just a bug". It's a ban from MP servers which use last stable.It's just a bug. Ofcourse SM is better for space-combat on the long run.