project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: hovernet temporary model 01?  (Read 16463 times)

Offline Winter

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 829
    • View Profile
    • Street of Eyes: The Writing of Ryan A. Span
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2006, 12:59:52 am »
Quoting from my post on the propulsion thread:

Quote
Our current plan is to use atomic or antimatter rockets for the UFOs, as they're very powerful and allow for spectacular effects for UFO destruction in mid-air. This allows us to send more UFOs at the player in every wave, as some or most of them will be destroyed instead of having to recover them all in the field.

Nuclear or antimatter engines are not suitable for infantry vehicles, and though high-powered ion thrusters might be, they require a LOT of power to keep something floating against gravity. The easiest and most power-effective way to keep something flying is via the Hovercraft concept, using high-powered air turbines and directed air for thrust. The hovercraft's usual rubber skirt isn't necessary with intelligent AI control, but still, air turbines have a minimum space for the thrust they can put out. They simply cannot fit in your new hovernet design.


Any kind of thruster that allows hovering would require FAR more fuel and power than a simple air turbine. The aliens aren't stupid, so they would go for the more economical option.


Quote
Another crit on the new hovernet design is the gun mount. It's got an extremely weak mounting, where one good blow might cause the gun to simply break off. That's not a mistake I could accept from aliens who are supposed to be smarter than us.


This is another problem I have with the new model, and I don't think I need to explain it further.

The storyline BTAxis and I are writing features technology, not magic. That means antigravity and similar concepts are not an option. The only thing we're using that's not entirely supported by physics is wormhole-based FTL, and nothing else. I don't know why I have to keep repeating this. It's not like it's more difficult to model things that could actually work in the real world.

I will not under any circumstances accept this model without changes.

Regards,
Winter

sirg

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2006, 09:09:25 am »
Kaeau is doing such a great work. That second model is something I have never seen in any game. It's quite original and futuristic.
I think some developers are sacrificing a lot of good stuff in order to fit a storyline that will always be secondary or of lesser importance in an action/strategy game (no offense). If you want a storyline to count, make an adventure game or an RPG.

There is no such things as "realistic" SF, because if you really know to describe the mechanics of an anti-matter engine or whatever, you could make the blueprints and contract it to make a prototype. Even with good knowledge of popular science none can really say, that's good physics or impossible to build. People with PhDs said a century ago that Theory of Relativity was crap.

Think about how different were the invading Spanish compared to the Incas... I don't think an Incan could have said to an other that a cannon looks unrealistic or that it defies the laws of physics. They knew almost nothing about physics.. and so any Earth like civilization compared to a space faring/invading sophisticated multispecies race of aliens.

Besides... one last issue - you want turbines - or so I understand - as a way of propulsion... but consider the fact the aliens are a spacefaring species, and they might invade a wide range of planets with different climates and atmosphere. In the first place, a turbine will never work in vacuum (space) and will function differently in other atmospheric conditions, on other planets. So, air turbines don't sound realistic to me :)

Elbenfreund

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #17 on: October 20, 2006, 11:07:03 am »
first: winter, i realy apreciate your role in this discussion to advocate the "realism" part of the game and i think its a good think to have this plurality of opinions.

nevertheless one has to consider what a game is about. for me its about having a good time playing enjoy the story and being courious what comes next. realism in this paradigm isnt for its own sake but a _tool_ so people feel familiar with this fictional world and think it _might be_ possible. and such a tool is design. it should make people feel like there is something new, exciting and worth to explore. it should look good as well as point out differences between humans and aliens.  if i am the only one who considers story and design for tools to create a good game, nevermind me. :)
Actualy whenever i played a game with anti-grav or whatever: i never was like "ops.... this antigrav is so unrealistic, it spoils all of my fun..." as lonk as the story is told in a good way, and the grafix look good i believe almost everything." and realy, i think allmost every player is like that. its a "skill" called phantasy. or to stick to literature: I never heard someone complaining about Isaac Asimov because it was unrealistic. he is a great example how to implement fictional content in still trustworthy world.

second: still winter is right, the new design hardly fit the old ones, but the conclueson would be to reconsider the design concept. which would be basicly depending on ka and his will to redesign the "old" ships.

here to help, eric.

btw: winter, beeing a student of theorie of science i have strong doubts ob your aproach towards science in general and your concept of "realism" in special its not clear at all *imho*

LordHavoc

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #18 on: October 20, 2006, 11:27:47 am »
The first model is aerodynamically unstable because it lacks pitch control (how much it tilts forward/back).

The second model is both extremely aerodynamically unstable (unbalanced weight, bad surface profile leading to internal vortices and worls in the air flow which cause it to flip over uncontrollably...) and bears no signs of having a propulsion system at all, hence would fall to the ground.  Don't give me excuses about antigravity thrusters on this thing.

There are reasons that aircraft look the way they do, flying requires continually cycling the air around the aircraft to avoid falling, it is the act of pushing on the air that keeps aircraft off the ground, and air being a liquid means that air must continually flow across the aircraft in this process.

The most plausible and efficient flight system in a planetary atmosphere is electric motors spinning fans, using an atomic power source (nuclear reactor or otherwise) to store the most energy possible.

Obviously such flight systems are not capable of going outside the atmosphere, but conquering a planet does not require doing so, only specialized dropships would be used for such a purpose.

Furthermore the hovernet is a hovercraft, it is designed to hover very low to the ground, so low that a 'ground-effect' skirt is optimal to reduce the amount of air that must be moved.

The skirt on a hovercraft causes air to compress against the ground, increasing its density and making it more effective at keeping the craft off the ground, the less air escapes the less effort is required to keep it slightly off the ground, this still avoids the friction problems of driving across the ground and consequently it does not matter what material the ground is made out of, as long as it can take the weight, it is a very novel self-balancing system and consequently the only efficient way to hover.

Alien technology still must obey the laws of physics, and although we are still debating the exact nature of physics (einstein's general relativity vs quantum mechanics) we do know a lot about the physics of this reality.

In a story such as this it is better to err on the side of believable reality than fantastical techno-magic that may or may not (mostly not) be possible.

LordHavoc

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #19 on: October 20, 2006, 11:57:22 am »
I should also add that the entire 'technological basis' of the game has already been laid out in the story which was finished quite some time ago, so this is really too late to argue over whether magical flight technology can be introduced to the story.

The story as it stands dictates that in-atmosphere flying craft use technologies such as electric turbine propulsion and some kind of high-energy power source, this craft does not use any kind of magical flight technology because that is not part of the story.

UFO:AI is the most realistic game of its kind, the others are all quite fantastical, let's finish this game according to the plan that was already laid out, which is for a mostly-realistic work of fiction that should be immensely enjoyable regardless of technology choices.

sirg

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2006, 08:08:03 pm »
I like a good debate :) Browsing the forum, I got the idea that because people who came with ideas don't know almost nothing about the story and realistic technology used by aliens, propose all kinds of wild concepts, like I'm doing, including flying saucers and anti-grav.

As you might know, anti-gravity isn't such a big impossibility, there are many experiments, some controversial but still fact, including diamagnetism or real gravity "screening". Those experiments require superconductors, very strong electromagnetic fields and lots of power, and because of that little progress is being made.

Quote
lthough we are still debating the exact nature of physics (einstein's general relativity vs quantum mechanics) we do know a lot about the physics of this reality.


I think debating these issues shows exactly how little we know about physics (almost nothing). We have some puzzle pieces, that's all. Scientists are debating about the multiverse and extra dimensions, branes and ptjer exotic theories. Proving these concepts real (like branes) would show us exactly how much we have until we understand at least 10% of the universe.

Returning to the subject, I would add just a last comment, that my impression is that the actual storyline and tech concepts are a bottle neck for creative, original and fun ideas and concepts. Maybe you have finished the story to  soon, because there are so many people who still want to come with ideas. Many of the game features are in testing or aren't working yet. I'm not saying it's bad that you have a story, maybe it's a very good story, but for the moment I'm a bit sad that many things won't get into the game.
And speaking of realism - psionic warfare doesn't sound like cut from reality to me, but we all know it's fun, and there is no real X-Com based game without it... :P

Offline Winter

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 829
    • View Profile
    • Street of Eyes: The Writing of Ryan A. Span
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2006, 11:01:53 pm »
Quote from: "sirg"
Returning to the subject, I would add just a last comment, that my impression is that the actual storyline and tech concepts are a bottle neck for creative, original and fun ideas and concepts. Maybe you have finished the story to  soon, because there are so many people who still want to come with ideas. Many of the game features are in testing or aren't working yet. I'm not saying it's bad that you have a story, maybe it's a very good story, but for the moment I'm a bit sad that many things won't get into the game.
And speaking of realism - psionic warfare doesn't sound like cut from reality to me, but we all know it's fun, and there is no real X-Com based game without it... :P


So if someone made a fantasy plasma gun for, say, Rainbow Spear, or any other realistic military game, you would be sad that it didn't get included in the official game?

That's the kind of analogy you're drawing. You insist that the story (and, by extension, every piece of realistic design in the game) is wrong for the model, rather than the model being wrong for the story. That is pretty insane in my opinion. Do you want to change out the current guns for ridiculously oversized cartoons as well? Maybe switch the soldiers to anime characters? There are certainly SOME people out there that would want to, and if we try to cater to everyone's wishes, nothing would get done -- ever.

The fact is that we have been working steadily towards a clearly-defined goal, the goal being a game that is both as plausible and as fun as possible, and the hovernet model represents a deviation from that goal. It is so bad that its inclusion is tantamount to abandoning the goal of plausible design. If we abandon the goal, then we abandon the entire concept of the game that interested me and many others in the first place.

You don't make bad compromises that make the game less plausible and consistent -- thereby breaking suspension of disbelief -- just because they're convenient. That is what's called bad game design. You make a concept and you stick with it.

BTAxis and I were asked to make a concept, and this is what we have. If you don't want it, we can take our storyline and leave.

Regards,
Winter

sirg

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #22 on: October 21, 2006, 10:11:16 am »
From what I know, Rainbow Six isn't SF, and does not include aliens... but in a game with SF elements, almost anything can happen. Anyway, a plasma gun can be fun in any game, including chess :) , but please anyone, don't steal this idea!
I agree that you have  to be consistent, X-Com was exactly just that, ... but I'm not going to argue anymore.

So, forget everything I've written since my registration. Probably all the cool ideas are already in the design so, why bother.

And none is saying that doesn't want your story... but we know only bits an pieces of it.. or the intro. So were just impatient and enthusiastic.

kaeau

  • Guest
opinion x and a plea
« Reply #23 on: October 21, 2006, 05:40:49 pm »
hi all

so, there is a discussion launched i didnt expect, but okay, discussing things is never a bad habit. ok, so far as i read it, it seems that things have been settled in from a toplevel, and well, i ll explain some important things to you now, especially winter. here we go.

* look and feel: are you familiar with that expression? the look and feel of an artwork, design, whatever is the emotional representation of the shape, the material, the effects and so on. if you have a shape in front of you, this form is telling you a story immediatly. it is stimulating your inner archetypes, things we all share in common. we instantly know, if a shape looks elegant, brutal, cunning, friendly, and, well, foreign, strange and so on. the form transports a feeling.

* visual categorization / design guideline:
with a settled "look and feel", you can bundle artworks into visual categories. those are instantly representating the affiliation of e.g. a model. by developing a designline, kind of a red strand, which is involved in every design of a defined category (e.g. "the aliens"), the player gets the impression, that there is actual a difference between the factions, in this case between the aliens and the humans. if alien technology looks and operates the same way, like it does in human terms, you drop an entire possibility for having an impressiv and strange visual guideline, and, more important, for transporting the feeling by look, that these things actually did come from outer space.
you can find good up to perfect examples for such design guidelines in famous settings, from lord of the rings to starwars or startrek. you instantly recognize a startrek ship for being not only from startrek, but if you have a watch some episodes, even by which race the ship is built. - (perhaps i have to add, that i dont like startrek personally, but it is important to put away the personal taste, it differs anytime anyway from person to person, neither do i personallyn like the way the ships look in startrek. but i appriciate the afford, the designers put into the look itself and how well it works) -  you will recognize an ork weapon in lord of the rings simply from the shape, also an elves design, because the are following a principle. and this is important to make the bigger ensemble not only more beautiful, but throughout such similarities, the race, the faction, the parts of the story becomes believable.
in companies it is called CI (cooperate identity), in works of imagination like stories and movies, games and so on it is a question of good or bad design. so, there must be a CI, or otherwise it is just thrown together and it becomes a bad and bland mix. lets call it alien indentity, AI.

* clichés
stereotypes are very useful, too. we all have the predefined stimuli in us. for example, and this is one of the most obvious ones, alien beeings, which look like greys and flying saucers. if we see a shape, which is very general an flying disc, it seems instantly foreign and alien. i say in very general ways, because the shape itself doesnt have to be just the used ufodisc, we are familiar with. if it follows the directive just very very approximatly, it is appealing.
sure, you dont have to use such clichés, they are a tool, nothing more.
but here, in ufo:ai, there is a break. the aliens look almost exactly like the used general alien design, but you want the rest to behave different. this is not fitting together, it doesnt feel right.
if you want to differ from the cliche, which you arnt, you have to invent something really different. consider my example of humans vs. humans in a near future of solar system colonisation. or make the aliens work different, mechanical invaders, which think they have to rescue all our pentiums and amds from slavery (a missunderstanding, for sure), or a symbiosis between giant slugs and telepatic worms, which attack, because two legged beings are considered as blasphemy in their society, anyway. these examples are just sucked out of the fingers, and for sure it needs far more time to develop such a setting.

* technology differences:
ok, as far as this discussion goes, the aliens should have the same tech level in general like the humans have. ok. thats a different approach and, well, i appriciate the affords. but: it doesnt need the aliens anymore. for me it seems like the alien invasion is just an excuse, again you are using a stereotype (alien invasion) and mixing it all up with something different. for example, if the techs should really be similar in general, a storyline with e.g. a human colony in solar sytem, attacking the earth because of political or cultural differences would be far more appealing in case, the two factions share the same evolutionary standards. for me, and please for that let me define, it is just my opinion, but one, which i consider as elaborated.

and now for my favorite:
* realism!:
realism is fine. mostly. but at points where realism acts as a break and stops, metaphorically, the motion, it is a bad thing. so, let me define what we have:
** an alien invasion from outer space
** psi warfare
** mankind in the near future, united in big power blocks
** spaceships, travelling faster then light
and so on. this all isnt very realistic, or, in other word, nothing we have encountered yet.
hell, it is a good thing, that imagination leaves room for those, and, in my opinion, for even more. IF such things are possible, why not even more? because a hand full of students of aerodynamics will tell their friends: "hey, you know, this shape isnt very flyable.." never. its a game. its NOT realistic in first instance, jsut because of the setting itself.  if realism acts as fun-killer, because everything unusual, or everything we are not used to in reallife, is kicked out, realism is out of place. and the look and feel, the design guidelines, i was talking before, are tons more important then a so called realistic approach. dont forget, im talking about the particular alien invasion here, if the setting is different, this point is partwise antiquated. but for ufo : ai, is persists. the aliens should be foreign, strange, different, but with banging them down to something very familiar, the stay one thing: humans. and thats bad.
glowing green lights in the texture, and some spikes wont help very much here.
is allright, if you want to design the human side of the story most realistic, well, we can define the realism here, we know, how our technology works and how it looks like. but for a strange species from outer space, we cant make such decision about WHAT is actual realistic here. if everything should be "real" in terms of our horizon, of our level of science, change the setting, otherwise it wont fit together.

* target audience:
ok, as you perhaps know, im running my own company for animation, design, industrial design, production design and so on since 6 years now, and there are quite many things i havent really realized, when i founded nathan : inc. for example, the importance of the target audience. if you are doning something for a greater public, you are automatically aiming for a particular group, your target audience. and, to be successful, you should aim good. here, in ufo ai, besides the xcom players, your target audience are those, who expect aliens to be alien.
yes, i know, it is no commercial project, but anyway, there are competitors, too, and success isnt something, you dont want, is it? so, my advice is at least to consider, what your players like to see.
again, this goes for the setting. if you have something different, then you can be far more unique, but an alien invasion and a xcom style game isnt unique at all. but you cant make it something special by putting the strange creatures from outer space on a level, which we can explain with nowadays physics and styles.


-> and now for something different: in the wiki, there is NO information about the storyline, almost none about defined guidelines, what the aliens are, how they work, besides the standard alien stereotypes which the antareas (sorry if misstyped), being the masters and others being the pets.

how can you expect, that someone throwns hour after hour on thinking, planning, drawing and designing something for the greater good for nothing, and then kick it back with words like "not in storyline, cant be" or "i wont accept in any terms", without revealing the concept? sorry, i have to say this, and that is not the way, a free project works.
and, in addition, you cant expect everything fitting your personal taste in visual ways, you can only do that, if you are a client and paying for the time, the designer is investing. then it is your right to act so, and its correct, for sure. but as long you are dealing with people, who are investing their precious time because of enthusiasm, such a behavior is not a team play.

i dont want to spill bad blood, and sure you can use the models, i already transfered like the chaingun + ammo, shotgun, buildings, and so on. but designing aliens which feel like something transformed from human to anywhere in space, isnt the thing im looking for. i didnt know that in first instance, because, and thats my criticism, the info is either hidden somewhere or simply not online at the ufo:ai page. creating a look in such restrictions doesnt work with me in general. thats boring. sorry.

so, my plea is to put the whole concept in the wiki, make easy-to-navigate links to particular parts of it like technology of aliens, what you never would accept designwise, etc, so another creative designer KNOWS that, before taking out the pencils and hook him / herself onto it.

pls note again, that this (i think constructive) criticism isnt a personal flamewar, a thing someone must mention on the world wide web so nobody is agonized, its my opinion, mixed with my point of view on design, my experience. if everything is strictly settled in, then its allright with me.

ka

Offline Winter

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 829
    • View Profile
    • Street of Eyes: The Writing of Ryan A. Span
Re: opinion x and a plea
« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2006, 09:35:09 pm »
*sigh* Okay. Let me take it point by point again.


Quote from: "kaeau"
* look and feel: are you familiar with that expression?


Ah, condescension.


Quote
the look and feel of an artwork, design, whatever is the emotional representation of the shape, the material, the effects and so on. if you have a shape in front of you, this form is telling you a story immediatly. it is stimulating your inner archetypes, things we all share in common. we instantly know, if a shape looks elegant, brutal, cunning, friendly, and, well, foreign, strange and so on. the form transports a feeling.


Yes, I don't see how this bolsters your argument. It is more than possible to make plausible things that still look alien.


Quote
* visual categorization / design guideline:
you can find good up to perfect examples for such design guidelines in famous settings, from lord of the rings to starwars or startrek.


Do you see what you did there? All 3 settings you name are the least plausible example in their genres (with the possible exception of LOTR). In fact, Star Wars and Star Trek are known for their laughably bad science and design. The only thing they have going for them is the look. As several people have pointed out, we're trying to do more here than just the look.


Quote
* technology differences:
ok, as far as this discussion goes, the aliens should have the same tech level in general like the humans have.


No. The aliens are significantly more advanced than humans. Their technology just doesn't violate the laws of physics when it's not absolutely necessary. In story terms, it's easier to believe in something that only makes a few concessions to problematic technology than something you know is wrong and/or impossible, like for example old Buck Rogers episodes. People might enjoy the innocence or sheer badness of a Buck Rogers episode, but they would never consider it good fiction.


Quote
* realism!:
realism is fine. mostly. but at points where realism acts as a break and stops, metaphorically, the motion, it is a bad thing. so, let me define what we have:


Now you try to attack the concept of internal consistency itself. That doesn't work.


Quote
** an alien invasion from outer space


This could happen in real life. It's highly unlikely, but it is a nonzero probability.


Quote
** psi warfare


A bit more far-fetched, but also a nonzero probability, and the story treats them in a fairly realistic way; notably, the humans themselves don't suddenly develop psi talents due to the alien invasion.


Quote
** mankind in the near future, united in big power blocks


So the European Union, the USSR, NATO, do you think they are unrealistic too? Mankind certainly can unite in big power blocks under the right circumstances


Quote
** spaceships, travelling faster then light


Also theoretically possible the way we are doing it.


Quote
IF such things are possible, why not even more? because a hand full of students of aerodynamics will tell their friends: "hey, you know, this shape isnt very flyable.." never. its a game. its NOT realistic in first instance, jsut because of the setting itself.


Once again, you resort to attacking internal consistency itself. I made the analogy earlier about putting a fantasy weapon into a realistic game; by doing this you put one genre (science-fantasy) into another (modern). In the case of UFO:AI, we are using the science-fiction genre, not the science-fantasy genre. Mixing them destroys internal consistency and would render the current storyline invalid. That seems like a pretty big sacrifice to make to accomodate a model that doesn't fit the game in the first place.

Quote
if realism acts as fun-killer, because everything unusual, or everything we are not used to in reallife, is kicked out, realism is out of place.


It is hard for me to respond to this without calling it paranoid delusion. I have said again and again that it is MORE than possible to design unusual things that are real. Hovercraft, flying wings, flechette guns, tactical high-energy lasers. There are so many wondrous and alien-looking things that actually exist in our world, and yet people completely ignore this.


Quote
and the look and feel, the design guidelines, i was talking before, are tons more important then a so called realistic approach.


Only if you think looks and flash are more important than content and consistency. And if that were true, Chronicles of Riddick and a hundred other flashy action films would not have bombed at the box office. You need a good look to catch the player's attention; you need good substance to keep it.


Quote
the aliens should be foreign, strange, different, but with banging them down to something very familiar, the stay one thing: humans. and thats bad.


Absolutely. I don't see how that's a point in your favour, however. You  can design strange things that are plausible, as you can see in my Bloodspider model.


Quote
glowing green lights in the texture, and some spikes wont help very much here.


We don't want glowing green lights or spikes anyway. Spikes waste material and serve no function.


Quote
is allright, if you want to design the human side of the story most realistic, well, we can define the realism here, we know, how our technology works and how it looks like. but for a strange species from outer space, we cant make such decision about WHAT is actual realistic here.


There are some things that are true no matter where in the galaxy you are and what you know. For example, spheres are the strongest possible geometric shape. Cylinders come in second, which is -- among other things -- why aircraft have cylindrical fuselages. Giving a machine lots of surface area with little internal space forces you to slap on lots of unnecessary armour and gives you no place to put things. Human or alien, these points NEVER CHANGE.


Quote
* target audience:
ok, as you perhaps know, im running my own company for animation, design, industrial design, production design and so on since 6 years now, and there are quite many things i havent really realized, when i founded nathan : inc. for example, the importance of the target audience. if you are doning something for a greater public, you are automatically aiming for a particular group, your target audience. and, to be successful, you should aim good. here, in ufo ai, besides the xcom players, your target audience are those, who expect aliens to be alien.
yes, i know, it is no commercial project, but anyway, there are competitors, too, and success isnt something, you dont want, is it? so, my advice is at least to consider, what your players like to see.
again, this goes for the setting. if you have something different, then you can be far more unique, but an alien invasion and a xcom style game isnt unique at all. but you cant make it something special by putting the strange creatures from outer space on a level, which we can explain with nowadays physics and styles.


Your theory is flawed, and trying to name your credentials doesn't bolster your point. I myself have worked in the game industry for 6 years as a writer and game designer. It's appeal to authority, it doesn't work.

Now, as for your point. If we slavishly follow the same principles as X-COM, our game will end up no different than X-COM, and it will have nothing new or interesting to draw in players who could be spending their time on the actual old games or on any of the new commercial X-COM clones coming out. A realistic X-COM game has never been done before, and it will be a major point in attracting attention.


Quote
-> and now for something different: in the wiki, there is NO information about the storyline, almost none about defined guidelines, what the aliens are, how they work, besides the standard alien stereotypes which the antareas (sorry if misstyped), being the masters and others being the pets.


This is true, and a lot of the UFOpaedia has not settled to a finished form. It is our policy not to put unfinished material on the wiki, to avoid giving people the wrong impression and to avoid people translating things that might change.


Quote
how can you expect, that someone throwns hour after hour on thinking, planning, drawing and designing something for the greater good for nothing, and then kick it back with words like "not in storyline, cant be" or "i wont accept in any terms", without revealing the concept?


You never asked to see the concept, which I have freely shown to anyone who expressed an interest. And do you realise how many hours I've put into the storyline that you want to discard? I have spent nearly three months trying to get the entire UFOpaedia into shape, whilst trying to keep up with my non-UFO:AI work as well. Three months. So far we've finished maybe a quarter of the work.


Quote
and, in addition, you cant expect everything fitting your personal taste in visual ways, you can only do that, if you are a client and paying for the time, the designer is investing. then it is your right to act so, and its correct, for sure. but as long you are dealing with people, who are investing their precious time because of enthusiasm, such a behavior is not a team play.


It has never been a matter of personal taste. I like by far most of the models you've made. It's a matter that in the universe you and I live in, your creation could never fly or hover or be anything more than a nice sculpture. As a machine, it would be extremely inefficient, and no intelligent alien would use it.


Quote
i dont want to spill bad blood, and sure you can use the models, i already transfered like the chaingun + ammo, shotgun, buildings, and so on. but designing aliens which feel like something transformed from human to anywhere in space, isnt the thing im looking for.


That's not what I'm looking for either. We want the aliens to be different just as much as you. We simply don't want them to make huge engineering mistakes in how they design their technology.


Quote
so, my plea is to put the whole concept in the wiki, make easy-to-navigate links to particular parts of it like technology of aliens, what you never would accept designwise, etc, so another creative designer KNOWS that, before taking out the pencils and hook him / herself onto it.


I admit that the current information handling hasn't been perfect, and for that, I do apologise. We've been trying to avoid giving people the impression that the storyline information is no longer subject to change. However, putting everyting on the wiki would also have other negative effects, as we don't want to spoil the story for non-designers.

I know this isn't much comfort, but you must remember that not every model you make will be suitable for the game, just like I've written articles that we later realised we can't use. I've already had to make several sweeping changes and rewrites to my UFO:AI material to fit the game. In my work experience there's not much we can do about this, it happens on any project, commercial or otherwise.

However, I'm open to increasing coordination and cooperation. If you'd like to be able to reach me for feedback on any of your models or to read/comment on the storyline, please come to the UFO:AI IRC channel. I'm there almost all the time, and more than open for discussion.

Regards,
Winter

sirg

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #25 on: October 22, 2006, 10:40:53 am »
The fact that some of you are experienced game designers doesn't count to much... many big game companies have designed poor games, and other previously unknown companies have made all time favourite games. So good game design it's more a question of inspiration rather than experience.

Kaeau is pointing some important issues: if you, the designers, are creating this game with the X-COM fans in mind, as the core of your target, than you should stick to the original concept as much as possible, or at least to some key features, including UFO design. Almost everybody "knows" that an UFO hovers "magicaly" in the air and has grey aliens inside. At least, it's what people expect - It's OK that you are coming up with something else, if you are in those guidelines. Personaly I like the current aliens in the game (I hope you aren't planing on changing their models/apperance).

I think that just making a remake is a waste of time, and that's why I find it great that you are coming with an original twist to a cliche background story - aliens invading and set on human extermination/agression.

When I decided to post some of my ideas on the forum/wiki and made an account, didn't know about the progress made with the storyline and about the emphasis on realism. So I proposed some wild ideas, like Dirty Harry's Magnum :) (sorry about that, but I played alot of Fallout and Jagged Alliance 2 and thought it was cool).
Then, Winter did a very good thing, and stated on the wiki that no real world weapons or weapons inspired from other entertainment are considered because of the setting, and he even made a bin for rejected proposals.

Maybe instead of revealing the story to the "non-designers" Winter should add a list of guidlines or things that aren't allowed for equipment, ships, beings, research, etc. That if there still are people wanting to contribute. I see there are fewer people on the forum. Besides it's much more easy to put some guidlines of what's accepted and what's not, rather than the whole story, which would be bad, because it will spoil the mystery.

My opinion regarding realism in video games is that realism is intented to enhance the quality of the game, but in most cases it spoils the fun, with extra complexity or boring tasks and even more bugs. So it's a delicate balance to keep. A game will never be realistic... it will always remain a game, but it has to be plausible and consistent, as Winter says. My impression is that Winter is inventing UFOs and alien technology for Area 51:
Quote
We don't want glowing green lights or spikes anyway. Spikes waste material and serve no function.


I think it's quite hard to imagine something none has ever seen. It's also hard to imagine a real human spaceship that would fly to Jupiter and back even though we know how our rockets and spaceshuttles look like and how they work.
My plea to the designers is to let their imagination free, and consider less the fact that some features on a hull are a waste of material, or it's not economical to build some system or feature. Maybe you have a better idea of what's realistic and economical for alien designs, but most of the public has no clue, with the exception of saucer and cigar designs :)

If the aliens have slave races serving them, there is no real concern about their supply of ore or other goods. So they could build a ship shaped after a bird, an insect, a worm or a cube, according to their cultural history, whitout any concern towards waste. The aliens aren't some low budget invading company from outerspace.
The big ship I saw in a mission looks very much like a human shuttle, but features green lighting for alien customers ;) Yes, the aliens also follow the laws of physics, but because their knowledge of physics is centuries ahead of us, we don't have to fill all the gaps, explaining in detail how each of their system or tech works (and by that limiting what it can do with our "understanding" of unknown physics), because we can't know. It doesn't matter that much. We won't play the game in the UFOpaedia screen.

From my experience with SF literature, the best SF writers spend very little time on describing how a future technology or how a system operates. That it's left (mostly) to the imagination of the reader, and the writer concentrates on the story and setting - the experience you are having in that writer's new universe. X-Com had brief UFOpaedia entries for each tech, but at a point I got the whole idea of how the engine rendered a field around the craft that made it gain more speed and minimised the G's for the passengers.

I would like to see ships in the game that I will imagine even after I'm done playing, and still remember them years after.
That would be a great design!

Offline Winter

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 829
    • View Profile
    • Street of Eyes: The Writing of Ryan A. Span
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #26 on: October 24, 2006, 11:56:44 pm »
Quote from: "sirg"
So good game design it's more a question of inspiration rather than experience.


Not true. Experience counts in everything, it helps creating good things, and making good things better. What it can't do, however, is make bad things good, which is the problem you're citing in your examples. :P

Bad concept or bad execution, both can kill a game with equal ease.


Quote
Kaeau is pointing some important issues: if you, the designers, are creating this game with the X-COM fans in mind, as the core of your target, than you should stick to the original concept as much as possible, or at least to some key features, including UFO design.


I don't see why. As I've said, we're trying to do something a little bit different. Straight-up X-COM clones have been done and are being done; Project Xenocide, for example. I was repulsed by its slavish copying of the X-COM source. They've got near-direct copies of several of the old aliens, they just filed off the serial numbers. Even the team don't seem very excited about what they're doing.

That's my impression, anyway.

Quote
Almost everybody "knows" that an UFO hovers "magicaly" in the air and has grey aliens inside. At least, it's what people expect - It's OK that you are coming up with something else, if you are in those guidelines. Personaly I like the current aliens in the game (I hope you aren't planing on changing their models/apperance).


No changes are planned to the already-incorporated aliens. However, just because something has been done so often as to be cliche doesn't mean we have to do it too. I personally loathe cliches. A lot of people will appreciate that we're not doing more of the same old formula.


Quote
When I decided to post some of my ideas on the forum/wiki and made an account, didn't know about the progress made with the storyline and about the emphasis on realism. So I proposed some wild ideas, like Dirty Harry's Magnum :) (sorry about that, but I played alot of Fallout and Jagged Alliance 2 and thought it was cool).


Don't worry, no harm done. Now that you know the focus of the game, you can suggest more appropriate things.


Quote
Then, Winter did a very good thing, and stated on the wiki that no real world weapons or weapons inspired from other entertainment are considered because of the setting, and he even made a bin for rejected proposals.

Maybe instead of revealing the story to the "non-designers" Winter should add a list of guidlines or things that aren't allowed for equipment, ships, beings, research, etc.


This is a good suggestion, I'll try and get something together.


Quote
That if there still are people wanting to contribute. I see there are fewer people on the forum.


There are always fewer people on the forum, but we're slowly getting more and more activity now that the general volume of posts has increased. When I first joined, the Design forum would go for weeks without a new post. :P


Quote
My opinion regarding realism in video games is that realism is intented to enhance the quality of the game, but in most cases it spoils the fun, with extra complexity or boring tasks and even more bugs.


We're dedicated to maintaining fun and ease of play. Realism is not itself an obstruction to fun, only bad implementations of realism -- i.e. things that are boring, like filling out paperwork or having to click through unnecessary screens. This is not what we're doing. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that well-implemented realism increases fun by allowing a deeper level of immersion. The only requirement for good realism in any piece of fiction is that you maintain it rigidly.


Quote
I think it's quite hard to imagine something none has ever seen. It's also hard to imagine a real human spaceship that would fly to Jupiter and back even though we know how our rockets and spaceshuttles look like and how they work.


There's a lot of things that would change with improved alien technology, but there's also a lot of things that stay the same. Gravity, radiation, thrust -- things that humans know and have observed. There are fundamental concepts that are completely unchangeable. For example, precluding gravitic anomalies and extradimensional holes, you can put more stuff in a big box than a small box. This doesn't change. So if the aliens have no logical reason to make a box smaller than they have to, they wouldn't do it.

Culture or insanity are not a factor in this reasoning due to storyline concerns. The aliens as written are not culture-driven or insane, and very big on conservation of resources.


Quote
My plea to the designers is to let their imagination free, and consider less the fact that some features on a hull are a waste of material, or it's not economical to build some system or feature. Maybe you have a better idea of what's realistic and economical for alien designs, but most of the public has no clue, with the exception of saucer and cigar designs :)


That's why we have detailed, engaging writeups with all the necessary iinformation in them. I've done my best trying to explain away some of the nonsensical alien designs we already have, and I think I've managed to bring things into a fairly coherent system -- breaking the system would mean more headaches for me and a much less plausible game overall.


Quote
Yes, the aliens also follow the laws of physics, but because their knowledge of physics is centuries ahead of us, we don't have to fill all the gaps, explaining in detail how each of their system or tech works (and by that limiting what it can do with our "understanding" of unknown physics), because we can't know.


We can make a pretty good approximation. Some things that people knew 2000 years ago still hold true today -- our knowledge is centuries ahead of theirs, but not everything has changed because of that.


Quote
It doesn't matter that much. We won't play the game in the UFOpaedia screen.


It's intended that the player -- any who are interested -- will spend a considerable amount of time reading the UFOpaedia, getting more deeply involved with the story and gameworld.


Quote
From my experience with SF literature, the best SF writers spend very little time on describing how a future technology or how a system operates. That it's left (mostly) to the imagination of the reader, and the writer concentrates on the story and setting - the experience you are having in that writer's new universe.


This works well in story fiction, but technical writing needs more detail and a more mechanical approach -- especially if realism and plausibility is one of the aims. We're trying to make the PHALANX people look competent, so we can't leave glaring errors in their logic or have them ignore obvious possibilities for plot convenience. That's lazy writing and does a disservice to whatever it's attached to.


Quote
I would like to see ships in the game that I will imagine even after I'm done playing, and still remember them years after.[/u] That would be a great design!


I'd be willing to talk about redesigning the current UFO fleet, but I wouldn't accept flying saucers, which have been horribly overdone over the years and aren't remotely plausible with alien propulsion as we've defined it.

Regards,
Winter

sirg

  • Guest
hovernet temporary model 01?
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2006, 07:20:35 pm »
I have changed some of my opinions due some of your previous posts in which we were debating (see the date of the later post). I see more clearly some things regarding the game, anyway, thanks for pointing everything in such detail.

You are right about X-COM clones...

It's great if you are planning on changing some of the UFOs. But I disagree with you on what you say about the aliens, being concerned about economics and waste of material. I mean it doesn't sound plausible to me, that's all. Maybe you imagined the aliens with a different mentality or background, so in your story they are different. My impression was that if the aliens have slave races, then there is no real concern about workforce and raw materials (=cost).

Quote
Now that you know the focus of the game, you can suggest more appropriate things.


I'll try to do my best.