Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series



Message

MartialDoctor -> Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 4:19:45 AM)

I've been meaning to write this for a few months now but haven't gotten around to it until now.

I bought Distant Worlds a little over a year ago and, being initially very impressed with it, bought the Shakturi expansion soon after. However, I started to get frustrated with some of it's problems and gave it up. When the Legends expansion came out, I figured I'd give it a shot, thinking it was going to solve these issues. Unfortunately, it did not.

Here are my main problems with Distant Worlds:

1) Difficulty. There's already a whole posting on this and I'm a bit frustrated this hasn't been addressed. I even was told by a developer that they'd increase the difficulty if it wasn't sufficient (this was when before Legends was released; I had said that I didn't think the additional difficulty levels were enough). However, I am still waiting.

Basically, more difficulty levels are needed and they need to do more than simply increasing the money the AI makes. They need to increase his research abilities, mining abilities, construction abilities, and possibly even give attack / defense bonuses at higher levels. Something that will keep them challenging into the later game.

2) AI Behavior. This is a big one for me. It's the main reason I have stopped playing. The AI does in no way shape or form act coherently. Bribery and Shakturi Alliance aside, I have never seen the AI become friendly towards me to the point of wanting to ally. They've wanted to make a trade pact, on occasion, but that's the extent. Again, unless you actually give them money or really good trade arrangements, they never become on good terms with you. However, it's very easy for them to become angry at you!

To make matters worse, the AI acts incredibly erratically! In my last game, I had a trade agreement with a race (the ape race, forgot the name) and he was just passing me money. Why? I have no idea! It made no sense why a simple trade partner would give me money. But regardless, things were going well with them. Over the course of some time (not too long, though), this stopped happening. All of a sudden, he just declares war on me! Why, you ask? Because he "covets my resources."

A race who starts becoming friendly with you should naturally start become more friendly with you. Unless you do something that would upset them, they should want to be closer with you over a longer period of time.

This sort of thing has happened multiple times now. It's very frustrating when all races are seen as enemies and none as potential allies. The main reason for this I've noticed is simple. The covet resources and same system negative factors are far stronger than any positive factors that exist in the game. And they increase very quickly. So, basically, any nearby alien race will become your enemy over time. Even if things are going well initially.

This is a huge turnoff for me as it takes away from immersion. In a 4x game, there are friends and there are enemies. GalCiv II does this best, I feel. Depending on your alignment and other factors, races will naturally start liking you or disliking you. Your actions will also determine this but, without any action on your part, those tendencies will occur.

Distant Worlds could easily implement a similar system with races and government styles. Unfortunately, all it has now is an initial value that doesn't change and, thus, makes little difference in the long run.

Also, why no music when dealing with each race? That adds so much to immersion and feel of a race. I can still remember the sound of the Ur-Quan from Star Control II and, hearing that, knew it was ready for a fight.

3) Diplomacy and Trading. It's very frustrating not being able to trade things with the AI. Everything should be listed as able to be traded. The AI might not trade for it, but it should be available on your list. Planets, ships, stations, technology...

Also, the extremely high cost of some things is ridiculous. Same system facilities (i.e. contested stations) are extremely overpriced. And wanting another race to start or stop a war is even more overpriced! It's so high, it's ridiculous.

These are my main gripes with Distant Worlds. And, for me, they are incredibly important (especially #1 and #2). Without a challenging and immersive game, no matter how well done other factors are, I'll lose interest. And I'm sure I'm not the only one.

This game is so well done on so many levels that it's a pity that these things are overlooked. It's for these reasons that I stopped playing and probably won't pick it back up unless they are addressed.



Litjan -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 7:06:22 AM)

Agree on the difficulty.

Disagree on the Diplomacy AI. I get into alliances easy with the other races - and also feel that itīs quite natural for "friends" to estrange if their goals start to diverge. Friendship works on equal terms - if you start to pull ahead or even infringe on their territory, they will get jealous and eventually less friendly. Perfectly fine and a total exploit if it worked otherwise (befriend someone early, then watch them smile as you pull away towards total domination?)

The "covet resources" is a strong factor - but can be offset with enough positive markers - common wars, general likes, good trading, clever use of ambassadors, etc. I have won several games by domination with many races in a mutual defense pact with me...

Not to say that this area couldnīt use more work - just that I donīt think itīs that bad.

Also funny how you feel stuff to be overpriced, when the general consensus is that almost everything is way underpriced (except for the initial few years).

Jan



MartialDoctor -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 8:31:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Litjan
The "covet resources" is a strong factor - but can be offset with enough positive markers - common wars, general likes, good trading, clever use of ambassadors, etc. I have won several games by domination with many races in a mutual defense pact with me...


Common wars would require wars to be going on. General likes don't increase and even a maximum of +20 can't offset a covet resources that can pop up to -50 in no time flat. Good trading is very, very slow and very small in amount. Ambassadors help as well, but nothing in a huge amount.

Again, my main point is that there is no natural inclination to move towards beneficial relations. Yet there are natural inclinations to move towards bad relations. This can make races act erratically as I have seen in multiple instances.

Relations should work as they do in the real world. Relationships that are moving in a general positive direction should continue to do that. The same goes for those moving in a negative direction. Unless outside factors come into play, that is. All other 4x games I have played work on this principle.

So, in Distant Worlds, this could work something like this: The government type and race don't give any initial changes. But, over time, they would increase, decrease, or stay about the same. The degree of change would depend on the relations set, similar to how the static numbers are set now.

In this way, races who both like your race and like your style of government would become closer and closer to you naturally. And the opposite would go for those who dislike your race and your style of government. And then there would be a lot in between these ranges.

Now, with these races you had mutual defense pacts with, were they your neighbors? If no, then you had no worries with the covet resources. Did you do any trading with them? If yes, and the trades were beneficial for them (price wise), that can boost your relations with them easily.

quote:


Also funny how you feel stuff to be overpriced, when the general consensus is that almost everything is way underpriced (except for the initial few years).


That's probably because I play at a level much more difficult than most people here. I play at the highest difficulty level with races much larger than and more advanced than myself. I also make my own empire at the lowest tech level with a restricted home system. I basically can not make much money or risk getting overrun by my neighbors.

Once I overcome that hump, grow my empire sufficiently, and make a powerful enough fleet, the game loses it's challenge and I stop playing.

But regardless, if you compare the cost of techs to the cost of contested stations, declaring war, or stopping a war, you'll find the prices to be ridiculous.

I've received multiple techs in exchange for giving up a, more or less, insignificant disputed mining station. I've also had a case where I agreed to go to war with another race's enemy in exchange for all of their technology (it was something like 10 or 12 techs). It was a while ago so I'm not positive but it was something to that degree.

How is that reasonable?



WiZz -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 12:18:07 PM)

MartialDoctor, agree with you totally. I lifted up similar topics a few times and I'm sure, that would not serious changes in AI until next expansion release. And answering on your question I can say, that AI is so weak, because there are some limits in game source code, that prevent AI to play in full force.



jlevans -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 2:48:33 PM)

I agree with you Martial Doctor, especially the bit about the uncompetitive AI against experienced players who have made the time committment to master the game's learning curve. The game has such long term replayable potential, but it can only occur if AI development and improvement is continuous. That is what would keep me coming back.

New features in expansions are great and DO pay the bills, but the AI must continue to improve incrementally between expansions to keep interest long term. If that happened, in my opinion, the game would be replayable for many, many years and the expansion gravy train could continue long after most game's lives end.



ASHBERY76 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 2:50:41 PM)

Funny I think the game economy is vastly underpriced and diplomacy is pretty easy to get treaties with leaders and bribes.



Carewolf -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 3:03:50 PM)

Contested stations and stopping/starting wars are stupidly overpriced. You can start a war and then be paid to immediately stop it, and live off that money for the rest of the game, or buy one all conquering navy. 3 million by the start of the game, means you can BUY galactic victory, but enemies will value a contested research facility that gives me no bonus at all (because I have better one elsewhere) at 11 million.... That is just stupid. Of course they can not afford it, which just makes it stupidly pointless.



Shark7 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 3:53:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

Funny I think the game economy is vastly underpriced and diplomacy is pretty easy to get treaties with leaders and bribes.


Same here.

I do think that the whole AI thing is being resolved in the ship design area. The AI does fine with attacking, but it can't win wars when its ships aren't competative. With the policy changes and the ability to give the AI empires optimized designs, this will right itself IMO, though the AI may still need some tweaking.

Remember folks, it is after all an AI. It can only do what it is programmed to do...the only way to get a human level of challenge is through a human opponent (maybe a multiplayer mode is down the road someday?).



Cauldyth -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 4:25:04 PM)

Hmm, I've never noticed issues with erratic diplomacy. In fact, I played one game of Legends where there wasn't a single war that I saw, let alone participated in. Everyone was getting along with each other. It was kinda boring. ;)

And yeah, hopefully the new ship designs and empire policies help. When the AI in a game isn't able to keep up, it can be difficult to identify the reason if you don't have access to the guts of the game. Having poorly designed ships is certainly one part, but it also seems clear that the research AI is pretty scatterbrained, at least from the recommendations it's always making to me.



Registered55 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 6:14:34 PM)

as much as i agree to most of this, i think it would be unfair to expect an underlying system that works like a recent paradox game (Victoria 2, CK II), the game will constantly be refined i'm sure, but the developer can only do so much, and i'm sure the developer has been learning so much through the creation of DW series.

paradox games had to start somewhere (HOI 1.... great concept but what a disaster, Victoria 1.... great game, game breaking even.... but could there be any more bugs, and static games... yuk!)

DW will continue to grow (hopefully), but there is a strong chance that we will never get the kind of polished AI that paradox now produces (i should add that paradox has had over ten years and many game releases to there profile) in this game, but hopefully DW 2 will be made, which would probably mean a full rewrite of coding (mostly) which would open up new possibilities, assuming the developer can do it.... rewriting a game from scratch.... most indie developers don't do it, Aaron Hall didn't with "Space Empires" series, he kept adding code,features and did rewrite a lot of code, but what "SE 5" needed the most was a full rewrite... however it didn't happen because of the huge amount of work involved..... and it's not just about time and finance (although these are big factors) having the skill and abilities needed to recognize and resolve the flaws in the original design (starting all over again, let's be honest most of us would move on to a different project rather than go back to the beginning) [>:][>:][>:]




MartialDoctor -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 6:30:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

Funny I think the game economy is vastly underpriced and diplomacy is pretty easy to get treaties with leaders and bribes.


You missed the entire point of my post, which was there was no natural progression towards treaties without the use of bribes.

Diplomacy that works around bribing is both boring and unrealistic. No one would become a good friend just by you giving them lots of money.



Shark7 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/13/2012 8:23:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MartialDoctor

quote:

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

Funny I think the game economy is vastly underpriced and diplomacy is pretty easy to get treaties with leaders and bribes.


You missed the entire point of my post, which was there was no natural progression towards treaties without the use of bribes.

Diplomacy that works around bribing is both boring and unrealistic. No one would become a good friend just by you giving them lots of money.


Actually there is. If you watch, in general relations will improve or worsen over time, even if you do nothing. It depends on the alien empire's disposition toward you at start though.



MartialDoctor -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/14/2012 2:00:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: MartialDoctor

quote:

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

Funny I think the game economy is vastly underpriced and diplomacy is pretty easy to get treaties with leaders and bribes.


You missed the entire point of my post, which was there was no natural progression towards treaties without the use of bribes.

Diplomacy that works around bribing is both boring and unrealistic. No one would become a good friend just by you giving them lots of money.


Actually there is. If you watch, in general relations will improve or worsen over time, even if you do nothing. It depends on the alien empire's disposition toward you at start though.


Really? I have never noticed any such changes except for some small changes that take a long time to make any difference. In my above example, I had positive relations and a trade agreement before the "cover resources" kicked in and turned the friend into an enemy almost immediately.

Is it just, then, that the covet resources can worsen things very quickly but other aspects do not? Which ones are talking about specifically?



onomastikon -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 7:37:59 AM)

I have yet to see a 4x game I have liked with significantly better Diplomacy AI. That being said, I agree in principle with many of the points you (OP) make, even though I believe the Diplomacy is sufficient. I have not played DW in some time, and for the following reasons:

- Deficiency of strategic choices starting in the latter part of mid-game. By this I mean: I never seem to have a galaxy in which there is a serious shortage of resources, both strategic and (to a much more severe degree) luxury. There is, in my feeling, nothing worth fighting for, because there is always more than enough for me.
- Deficiency in AI strategy. By this I mean: The AI does a sufficient job in skirmishing, but I never feel that any empire has a "plan", e.g. waiting and massing before declaring war and smashing me with a big surprise stack, or getting people to hate me, or sneaking up to win on special racial VC, or bottlenecking, etc.
- Economic suboptimality: Starting in the latter part of mid-game, I do not have a sink for money or resources, so they start to become meaningless. Additionally, the private sector fails to be seriously interested in migration, and since I cannot repopulate via state-controlled ships, I am left with one huge homeworld and dozens of little colonies so economically unimportant as to make corruption (which, if the colonies were to earn money, would further discourage colonization) moot.

I believe the first and the third issue could be addressed without too much hassle from Code Force, and would not require an expansion.



Arcatus -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 8:45:48 AM)

Yes, the diplomacy and relations would benefit from a overhaul, but in all the 4X games i've seen some parts of diplomacy is "broken".

But lets not forget that the tactical AI in this game is the best I've seen. Now that the AI have got better designs in the .14 beta I expect things to get more difficult.



solops -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 3:29:58 PM)

Try playing as a xenophobe. Not just as a race characteristic, PLAY that way...enslave or exterminate populations, etc. Whole new game.....



Cauldyth -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 3:46:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: onomastikon

- Deficiency of strategic choices starting in the latter part of mid-game. By this I mean: I never seem to have a galaxy in which there is a serious shortage of resources, both strategic and (to a much more severe degree) luxury. There is, in my feeling, nothing worth fighting for, because there is always more than enough for me.

I believe the first and the third issue could be addressed without too much hassle from Code Force, and would not require an expansion.


The resource scarcity would certainly be easy to adjust, but my guess is that the AI would need some significant changes to compensate. Currently, it's possible to just let the automated mining system take care of things, and you'll have all the resources you need (which is the problem, of course). If securing resources became a strategic challenge, then the AI would have to be up to the task.

That said, I hope they do it. :)



Haree78 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 3:57:00 PM)

Regarding difficulty.
Short of writing an AI that is somehow going to be better than a human at this game there is only 2 ways that this can work.
1) Start off a game with disadvantages, this is very easy to do with the current game. I guess you don't like this idea. I know that this only increases difficulty at the start and I agree the game can become just a job of mopping up near the end, although the Shakturi event can apply a new spike in difficulty later on that can be entertaining.
2) Use a mod that applies advantages to all the races except the one you are playing. If you want I could easily write an increased difficulty mod. I could for example increase the power of all insect races if you normally play humans and this would increase the difficulty right through to the end game.
In fact I'm tempted to do a series of difficulty mods...they are effectively cheats for the AI, but would be easily explained away as that's the differences in the races. Let me know if that sounds like something you would want.



Haree78 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 4:08:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MartialDoctor
You missed the entire point of my post, which was there was no natural progression towards treaties without the use of bribes.

Diplomacy that works around bribing is both boring and unrealistic. No one would become a good friend just by you giving them lots of money.


I never bribe. I become friends with quite a few empires because I trade a lot.

Personally I would like to see a lot of how you become friends with races be taken away from trading and more towards a combination of racial bias / government type and common enemy.
I feel that the coveting resources thing should only really affect more war like, aggressive species, with other races it having less of an effect. Non war like, passive species should be less affected by coveting resources but more influenced by reputation and if another empire is being aggressive.



Cauldyth -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 4:53:52 PM)

Yeah, I've got no problem with a little asymmetry, it can be a useful way to make a game interesting. What drives me nuts is when an AI blatantly cheats by doing absurd things - conjuring units from thin air, etc.



Haree78 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 7:32:41 PM)

Have a try of this MartialDoctor:
Extra Difficulty mod

I think it might be what you are looking, it will solve point 1.



WiZz -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/15/2012 10:18:35 PM)

[&o]



Imrryran -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/17/2012 12:48:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
I do think that the whole AI thing is being resolved in the ship design area. The AI does fine with attacking, but it can't win wars when its ships aren't competative. With the policy changes and the ability to give the AI empires optimized designs, this will right itself IMO, though the AI may still need some tweaking.

Have you tried playing with automated ship designs? I'm not quite interested in that part of the game and never bothered designing my own ships, thus using the same ones as the AI. It is still ridiculously easy to beat any AI empire. The AI simply cannot understand that it needs bigger fleets and more colonies to beat me.

The improvement in AI design is great sure, but it won't solve most of the AI issues.



MartialDoctor -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/21/2012 2:58:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Haree78
Personally I would like to see a lot of how you become friends with races be taken away from trading and more towards a combination of racial bias / government type and common enemy.
I feel that the coveting resources thing should only really affect more war like, aggressive species, with other races it having less of an effect. Non war like, passive species should be less affected by coveting resources but more influenced by reputation and if another empire is being aggressive.


You make a lot of good points here.

I decided to start up another game, since I hadn't played it a while, and give it another go [:)]

I don't know how, but, at least in this game, the AI seems to be doing a bit better than previously. I still had to hamper myself a lot and put large AI empires near me, but it's been an interesting game.

However, the same AI behavior is showing up. Basically, what I've noticed is, the instant a race gets next to you, whether the race is aggressive or passive, whether it's relations with you are positive or negative, they always start coveting your resources. In this current game, not too long after an AI race colonized near me, they'd start coveting my resources.

Now, that doesn't make a lot of sense. If someone likes you, or is a friendly and / or non-aggressive race, then there's no reason for them to start coveting what you have and disliking you simply by moving next to you. It should affect your relationship very little, if at all. Things should still work out well, barring other circumstances.

If the race is aggressive, non-friendly, and warlike, well then that would be understandable. Unless you are also an aggressive, non-friendly, warlike race, in which case they may very well like you (since everyone has friends, even aggressive and warlike people).

Anyways, just some more observations and thoughts. I hope everyone's having a good week [:)]



Shark7 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/21/2012 3:21:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MartialDoctor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Haree78
Personally I would like to see a lot of how you become friends with races be taken away from trading and more towards a combination of racial bias / government type and common enemy.
I feel that the coveting resources thing should only really affect more war like, aggressive species, with other races it having less of an effect. Non war like, passive species should be less affected by coveting resources but more influenced by reputation and if another empire is being aggressive.


You make a lot of good points here.

I decided to start up another game, since I hadn't played it a while, and give it another go [:)]

I don't know how, but, at least in this game, the AI seems to be doing a bit better than previously. I still had to hamper myself a lot and put large AI empires near me, but it's been an interesting game.

However, the same AI behavior is showing up. Basically, what I've noticed is, the instant a race gets next to you, whether the race is aggressive or passive, whether it's relations with you are positive or negative, they always start coveting your resources. In this current game, not too long after an AI race colonized near me, they'd start coveting my resources.

Now, that doesn't make a lot of sense. If someone likes you, or is a friendly and / or non-aggressive race, then there's no reason for them to start coveting what you have and disliking you simply by moving next to you. It should affect your relationship very little, if at all. Things should still work out well, barring other circumstances.

If the race is aggressive, non-friendly, and warlike, well then that would be understandable. Unless you are also an aggressive, non-friendly, warlike race, in which case they may very well like you (since everyone has friends, even aggressive and warlike people).

Anyways, just some more observations and thoughts. I hope everyone's having a good week [:)]


It is quite possible that you have a resource they are severely short of. And lets face it, historically wars have been fought over less (in fact, the basis for all wars is greed...that is one country coveting another country's resources).

In other words, those that have resources are grumbled about by those that don't. And yes it will sour relations when someone is always dependent...those that are dependent on another start to resent the fact, just as much as those that are depended upon resent the fact and will take advantage of it.



Shark7 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/21/2012 3:23:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Imrryran

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
I do think that the whole AI thing is being resolved in the ship design area. The AI does fine with attacking, but it can't win wars when its ships aren't competative. With the policy changes and the ability to give the AI empires optimized designs, this will right itself IMO, though the AI may still need some tweaking.

Have you tried playing with automated ship designs? I'm not quite interested in that part of the game and never bothered designing my own ships, thus using the same ones as the AI. It is still ridiculously easy to beat any AI empire. The AI simply cannot understand that it needs bigger fleets and more colonies to beat me.

The improvement in AI design is great sure, but it won't solve most of the AI issues.


Heh, try the Picard Era mod .It was...quite more than a challenge. Has to do with how the AI was set up in the mod files I think.



MartialDoctor -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/21/2012 6:54:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7
It is quite possible that you have a resource they are severely short of. And lets face it, historically wars have been fought over less (in fact, the basis for all wars is greed...that is one country coveting another country's resources).

In other words, those that have resources are grumbled about by those that don't. And yes it will sour relations when someone is always dependent...those that are dependent on another start to resent the fact, just as much as those that are depended upon resent the fact and will take advantage of it.


You make a good point and it's quite possible that it's true in my case here. Still, you are actually reinforcing my point.

A militaristic race is going to want to forcibly take that away from someone else and, thus, it's understandable why some of those races are trying to do such. However, a friendly race or more pacifist race isn't going to start wanting to have relations sour much over this, right? That would mean they would have less beneficial trade, either by removal of a trade agreement or, possibly, even trade sanctions. It would go against what the coveting of the resource would create - a desire for this good.

For instance, if you have a friend, and he has something you really want, are you going to want to trade him for it or are you going to want to beat him up and take it from him? The same goes here.



Litjan -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/22/2012 9:32:57 AM)

You have to look at the bottom line - the outcome of the other raceīs "internal calculation".

You get to see all the relevant factors - trade, basic likes and dislikes, common friends and enemies - and yes, also "coveting of resources".

If you have a good friend - and you both desire the same thing (like a pretty girl, that top position in your company or a juicy planet) and you are really, thruthfully totally ok with him getting it instead of you - then you are a saint :-)

Conclusion - its ok for your friend to covet your resources, as long as the total dislike/like calculation comes out in the very positive you are still friends. This actually makes diplomacy real - you have to work harder at keeping your friendship well if there are differences in play.

Jan



Empire101 -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/22/2012 1:30:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


Remember folks, it is after all an AI. It can only do what it is programmed to do...the only way to get a human level of challenge is through a human opponent (maybe a multiplayer mode is down the road someday?).


We live in perpetual hope!!


[image]local://upfiles/29250/E2F89AB957A1479880B245CBBECF5036.jpg[/image]



onomastikon -> RE: Why I stopped playing Distant Worlds (5/23/2012 10:32:01 AM)

(Funny! But funny, because modern sci-fi fools such as myself and everyone else here that grew up on Star Wars et al. have learned that a couple of dudes with laser swords can defeat entire "legions" of nuclear-powered warships and troops. Or, looking at Mass Effect, for example, that 4 guys armed with shotguns can defeat a flotilla of nuclear-powered starships.)



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.328125