A Poor Decision ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Coming Soon] >> Distant Worlds 2



Message

davidjruss -> A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 8:48:09 AM)

looking at a DW2 stream it was mentioned that the planets in a system were now static and no longer orbit the star as in DW1. To my mind this is a very retrograde step and as such is a "dumbing down" of a feature that is an intergral part of space exploration. In DW1 it made the systems alive and vibrant now they are just static objects in the void of space.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 8:58:36 AM)

This has already been explained why... .as the game went to 3D is was decided that planets initially would not rotate in the orbits for performance reasons and also as it complicated the docking animations with stations and the like. If you wanted to perhaps add another year or two of development time you could get this.

They have not ruled out orbiting planets entirely, but they probably want to see how the performance and scalability of the game goes before adding this complexity.

I also have a REALLY hard time seeing how this is dumbing down the game... moving planets had very little impact on actual game-play. Some but not as much as you make it out to have. Would I like to have moving planets... sure yes I would. Do I think it is the most important thing in Distant Worlds, no I don't. There are many other things I would rather see than this thing returning anytime soon.



zgrssd -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 10:48:56 AM)

Straight from the FAQ:
quote:

Am I crazy or do the planets no longer orbit their stars?
--> I explained this a bit in the stream Q&A, but bottom line is that the the planets still rotate, but they no longer have animated orbits.
Partly this is due to the change in scale, the rest comes down to the difference between having things look ok in 2D where ships and stations moved through each other all the time vs. nice 3D where they need to avoid colliding, enter hangars and docking bays properly, exit construction yards, etc.
Having the orbits match up with the more realistic scale would have meant they would be slow enough that you likely wouldn't notice the movement easily, while at the same time any movement would create a lot more challenges for us in terms of the new 3D mechanism for docking of ships in spaceports and near planets and collision avoidance. We decided ultimately that it wasn't worth adding extremely slow orbits to create a huge amount of extra bugs and work to account for that when we could spend that limited time better elsewhere on other more noticeable features. It's not impossible that orbits may return at some future date, but it's not in the plans right now.


Coding that in would propably be on the scale of adding all the remaining species. Or adding Multiplayer. Both of which I consider much higher priorities.



Mightymaster -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 12:39:02 PM)

While planets orbiting stars sounds like a cool feature I think for the gameplay it is better to have static ones.



StarLab -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 1:34:54 PM)

There is No lack of a living universe here. I also thought I would be super harsh on the lack of orbiting bodies. It bothered me for an entire 5 minutes at first but found the spinning planets actually bring things to life a LOT more than the orbits would. It would still be nice but the lack of this feature is not diminishing game play at all (trust me!). [8D]

This feature may make a comeback but I would suspect if it were to happen it would be as the DW2 series is finishing up. The devs will then know exactly how many system resources are left to implement such a monster feature and whether it's feasible or not.



Darkmater -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 2:17:14 PM)

In DWU rotating planets were in the neat category for me. Strategically, it played a very minor role in gameplay outside of maybe some bases aligning ever so often as planets crossed each other to drive a bit more effective defense. It's truly IMO not a key gameplay enhancement vs. the bugs, performance impact, pathing challenges, etc. it would create.

Gameplay enhancement like diplomacy/internal politics, etc. should be prioritized above it. The base game has a great living economy, but I would love to see more cultural, internal / external dynamics simulated as well. There is a good deal put into the races from a metrics standpoint, would be great if race culture, beliefs, instincts was further simulated to the same level as the economy. (e.g. if playing a warrior race, they should experience non-war weariness that shows itself internally where they turn that warrior energy against themselves). Imagine Klingon houses turning their war energy towards each other for satisfying their war desires vs. united when fighting an external enemy.



Erik Rutins -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 2:28:08 PM)

I've spoken on this before, but given the scale change it would not have added much in exchange for a lot of additional work and likely bug-fixing. With that said, do I want to have orbiting planets in the future? Sure, but frankly while I had the same reaction when Elliot first discussed it with me in terms of the cost/benefit, the rotating planets (they do rotate, just not orbit) and all the other game elements absolutely preserve the "living galaxy" feel of Distant Worlds. I think this is something that you will miss much more in theory than in practice.



ASHBERY76 -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 4:11:02 PM)

I think it is a good choice.Rotating just added extra fiddle.



Cauldyth -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 5:52:29 PM)

And I'd hardly call removing a largely cosmetic feature (it had very little effect on gameplay) "dumbing down".



zgrssd -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 8:09:56 PM)

Personally I was never even a fan of orbiting planets.

On the downside, they just make it harder to navigate in a system by memory.

The second you get to early warp bubble, intersystem travel times are capped around "FTL charge time" anyway. Which is the gamestate you spend most of the gametime in anyway.

On the upside it might mater if:
* two Neighbouring orbits both have habitable planets*
* that are actually inhabitet*
* happen to both have spaceports or platforms of relevant combat power*
* happen to be in the same part of their orbital path.

*maybe also mineable resources, in the STL age.

I wish there was a option to turn orbiting planets off in DW1. So it is not even a issue for me - but a feature!



Nabobalis -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 8:12:04 PM)

Yeah, I didn't like the fact they moved when I was planet watching/sitting.



zgrssd -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/1/2022 8:28:02 PM)

I just realized:
Orbiting planets literally only maters when when the stars allign.

Urban Dictionary
"when the stars align
When an unexpected and nearly impossible event takes place. Usually due to pure luck or the divine intervention of God."



Gorofin -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/2/2022 10:02:46 AM)

I like the orbiting planets very much, but they have some drawbacks (Elliots effort to get it running, computer power, effort to find the object in the system) mentioned here. So I am fine with the decision to leave it out first, but I would be happy to get it back (optional) in the future.



stryc -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/2/2022 1:49:21 PM)

I was disappointed at first because it was a characteristic that set DW apart from the rest (mostly), but orbiting bodies is pretty much just an expensive aesthetic.



Ranbir -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/2/2022 2:08:05 PM)

Aside from feeling/looking cool the one game play aspect I enjoyed from it was that before FTL the orbital paths affected efficienct of freight within your own system.

So when the planets aligned and were closer together...great! But when one orbital speed was faster and now was on the other side of the system? Freight takes a while.


Maybe ten years down the line with Distant Worlds 3 it can make a comeback.



Jorgen_CAB -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/2/2022 2:32:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ranbir

Aside from feeling/looking cool the one game play aspect I enjoyed from it was that before FTL the orbital paths affected efficienct of freight within your own system.

So when the planets aligned and were closer together...great! But when one orbital speed was faster and now was on the other side of the system? Freight takes a while.


Maybe ten years down the line with Distant Worlds 3 it can make a comeback.


If only the STL phase was long enough to make this feature an important one. You seem to research the skip drive very early now so the STL part of the game is not that important.

Once you have the skip drive ships speed are fast enough that rotating planets really will not mean that much anymore.



zgrssd -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/2/2022 2:49:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorgen_CAB


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ranbir

Aside from feeling/looking cool the one game play aspect I enjoyed from it was that before FTL the orbital paths affected efficienct of freight within your own system.

So when the planets aligned and were closer together...great! But when one orbital speed was faster and now was on the other side of the system? Freight takes a while.


Maybe ten years down the line with Distant Worlds 3 it can make a comeback.


If only the STL phase was long enough to make this feature and important one. You seem to research the skip drive very early now so the STL part of the game is not that important.

Once you have the skip drive ships speed are fast enough that rotating planets really will not mean that much anymore.

I can not understand what the appeal of a Pre FTL start is to begin with.
It is a time where you have to pay the pirates (becaues you could not possibly defend any installation with STL)
And a time where you need to build stations withint 500k units of the spaceport, because otherwise traveltimes are just too long to mater anyway.
And you are not even exploring single start within a < 10 Lightyears.

What is there to do, aside spending a ton of resource on maintenance with questinable benetif while you are unable to venrture even halfway across your own system?



Ranbir -> RE: A Poor Decision ? (2/2/2022 4:20:07 PM)

Well for me it made the galaxy feel bigger than it does. And there was a sense of grandness when my first ship still had to take a while to explore it's own solar system.

I've always been a bit iffy that FTL can happen within the system. I was hoping that inside them ships still had to rely on fast sublight.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125