How much is too much?

[aCynic2]

This is going back to my space shooter game I'm developing and also very much future plans, but I'm gauging consumer interest since it helps shape the development...

So, I'm considering how I'm going to model sublight drive. Chemical, aka solid fuel, is out, considering the amount of mass required and the acceleration and final velocity makes it unfeasible, even from a very fanciful suspension of disbelief.

So, I remembered the concept of rail guns and thought I could model rail drives...well, minor research of rail guns lead to coil and gauss guns so I started thinking coil or gauss drives would be cool...

So, one thing leads to another and I'm looking at superconducters and the Meissner effect and I'm thinking about phase variance collapsing em fields and how it might conceivably effect drive performance...at least from an entertainment perspective.

So, how much is too much?

If I could conceivably model an engineer's workstation to keep them working to maintain the coolant and EM fields of a gauss drive, would it be too much work for the player?

Let me rephrase that...would it be too much work to be fun?

 

[kainlongshot]

A couple of things come to mind. . . I'm no programmer, mind you. You listed a pretty broad question in your post. "Would it be too much work to be fun?" The question is pretty subjective, but there are some questions you can answer to help narrow down the answer.

Is this game built around as an educational tool? (You listed complicated ideas and perhaps trying to explain a theoretical concept) It sounds more like a game than an actual model.

Who is this game made for? If its for the average hyperactive tween then an engineer's workstation (akin to star trek) may not be the way to go. Perhaps a simpler model of energy distribution would be better (Ex: more power to shields means the ship sacrifices speed and weapon strength) On the other hand, making it overly complicated adds a lot of depth to a genre that has been dumbed down to meet the masses. Personally, as an engineer in real life, I love the idea of indepth customization. The more numbers I got to crunch, the more effort to make my ship run tip top, the better. I'm a tinkerer and that sounds swell. However my opinion could greatly differ other's opinions.

I think answering the last question should reveal the answer to you. Good luck on your game, be interested to see what it looks like.

 

[yuppiejr]

What you are describing sounds more like a mini-game within a larger space combat/strategy sim. It would be an interesting concept for some people but to be commercially viable you would have to appeal to the "blow up the aliens, seduce the hot alien women" starship captain/gunner crowd.

I think an MMORPG that allowed clans/guilds to crew their own starships/fleet where the various "classes" worked together would have a place for something like this. I'm not sure that a lot of players are going to want to have their heads stuck in an engineering console while the rest of their crewmates gets to blow up bad guys with furious clicking of the mouse though.

 

[kainlongshot]

I have to agree. A mini game is fine but I believe his question is how tedious does a game get before it becomes more "busy" work than fun. The pilot flys the ship, the 2 gunners fire weapons, the bombadier drops and times the explosive discharge, and we got the lowly engineer stuck behind a console playing "find the dilithium crystal" . . . i dunno it may not sound much fun if you put it that way. Then again I know people including myself who love playing the multi-tasking game. Simultaneous games and equipment changes may boost some improvement it want may seem like a boring class.

Wait . . . what's wrong with seducing a hot alien woman?

/me looks at a mirror
/cry

 

[hooflung]

I think it comes down to making the end product fun for everyone involved.

If it is a one man show, then you are going to be boring even me who loves sci-fi. If it will take multiple people akin to how you use multipassenger ships in combat in star wars galaxies then as long as you have an outcome that is satisfying then you will be money.

But I think as a game developer you need not worry about how to conceptualize the end result before you conceptualize the journey. Many games are lived out over a bunch of develpers getting drunk and discussing what would be cool to them.

For instance... do you want a space shooter that is nothing more than wing commander with skill involved and are you going to model the AI to work similar to a player ran vehicle so the investment isn't lost on a complicated combat scenario?

Are you going to decend into the depths of space and fight your way out of bad situations like you were playing Event Horizon? < which would be cool >

To really gauge how much work in too much work one would really need to know what kind of reward is at the end of the tunnel.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: yuppiejr
What you are describing sounds more like a mini-game within a larger space combat/strategy sim. It would be an interesting concept for some people but to be commercially viable you would have to appeal to the "blow up the aliens, seduce the hot alien women" starship captain/gunner crowd.

Mind you, all that is future plans. But for now, the base game/sim is intended to be a co-op (aka bridge crew), 1v1 capital ship combat. I also intend to develop two play modes: Newtonian and hollywood and two command modes: solo and bridge crew.

Ultimately, I'm planning on a MMO that is a space combat sim where you can have boarding engagements, aka FPS (space pirates anyone?) but also an RPG.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: hooflung
To really gauge how much work in too much work one would really need to know what kind of reward is at the end of the tunnel.

This I had to recall even more.

Ultimately, in the MMO, players should be able to advance in rank to Admirals, Fleet admirals, etc.

One continuum in the MMO I'm considering is having two power players who are playing out a strategy game of conquer your enemy, where outsiders (aka other players) can jump in and take the role of a fighter pilot, ship Captain or infantry grunt where an engagement is occurring and actually help modify the outcome.

I could write a novel on what I plan to do with this game: RPG, FPS, space shooter sim, etc, etc, etc.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: kainlongshot

Who is this game made for?

Ya know, I've can't think in terms like that. I'm not marketing for a demographic, I'm marketing for people with a shared interest. An interest in playing a space shooter that flies like it's really in space.

Such people can come from all walks of life, so it's as universal as it can be.

Mind you, I can't model relativity because of time dilation, and while the real universe has no set reference point, mine will. It's a limitation that can be overcome by making sure the game is playable.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: kainlongshot
Is this game built around as an educational tool? (You listed complicated ideas and perhaps trying to explain a theoretical concept) It sounds more like a game than an actual model.

One last comment...the weekend is almost here and that will be my queue to begin research and development again...

Yes, it is intended as a game, however, I want to bring the simulation back into the sim...The Star Wars and Star Trek franchises tout themselves as sims, but they are not simulations. There is no need to bank against the turn in a zero gravity vacumn. There is this idea of inertia that they have forgotten in favor of audience appeal, but I think there is an appeal to realism in a simulation.

And the term model I use quite often. I'll model what physics I can, I have one 3D model made to use as a conceptual testbed for the gauss/coil engine model, I'll need to model power distribution, targeting and sensors...the term model has many connotations and denotations.


At present, I'm developing a peripheral program to calculate some rigid body mechanical properties: moments of inertia, volume, density, center of mass, center of percussion...stuff like that.

 

[hooflung]

Sounds like an Honor Harrington game.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: hooflung
Sounds like an Honor Harrington game.

A what?!

Ok, I googled it. Funny, because one of the pictured shows someting similar to what I've conceived as a method of deploying fighter class craft. In truth though, I wouldn't think fighter class craft would hold up in space, considering we already have weapon systems that can lock on and make a pilot's life short.

 

[hooflung]

If you are making a space game that is realistic and haven't read a honor harrington book then you are missing out. Some of the fleet battles in the Honor Verse are simply astounding.

 

[DaveSimmons]

www.baen.com has at least one of Weber's Harrington novels in their free ebook library, it's a good series.

If I could conceivably model an engineer's workstation to keep them working to maintain the coolant and EM fields of a gauss drive, would it be too much work for the player?

Wouldn't any real-world design of this just have monitoring of automatic controls? The controls would be to shut down, restart, switch to backups, unlock safeties to run above spec, etc. not to manually balance drive fields.

 

[kainlongshot]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
www.baen.com has at least one of Weber's Harrington novels in their free ebook library, it's a good series.

If I could conceivably model an engineer's workstation to keep them working to maintain the coolant and EM fields of a gauss drive, would it be too much work for the player?

Wouldn't any real-world design of this just have monitoring of automatic controls? The controls would be to shut down, restart, switch to backups, unlock safeties to run above spec, etc. not to manually balance drive fields.

I dunno you can add a lot of depth in a genre that really has not rules. Who to say you can't add a flux capacitor on a starship and zip around time. Sticking to some basic physics principles only adds more realism in a game that is based on fiction. But in reality whether the technology will exist doesn't stop it from still being fiction.

As for the comment on the engineering workstation, I think you can still add a lot of depth and still make it fun. Lets say a large capital ship needs to make a sharp turn, adjusting engine characteristics and manipulating a modeled warp field can allow it. (Don't quote me I'm not physicist just watch a lot of Star Trek) You'd have to sacrifice things like targeting (difficulty in aiming with such a sharp turning profile), perhaps loss of power to certain subsystems because of energy being diverted to the engines, maybe the shields are weakened because the field size or shape is so odd that the enemy (if they can get into position) can give a good broadside.

I admit when I play EvE I really wished that ship combat was a bit more . . . well more. And that multiple people could man a larger starship for great effectiveness (not starbases). One could easily jump in a fighter craft, dock with the larger capital ship, and man a station. The captain could call out commands to the crew members (shields, weapons, navigation, etc.) at the same time provide bonuses to the crew for jobs. It could be so great to have a guild/clan lead their capital ship into a giant equivalent space opera. However it requires a lot of teamwork, something very few people are will to commit and follow orders.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
www.baen.com has at least one of Weber's Harrington novels in their free ebook library, it's a good series.

If I could conceivably model an engineer's workstation to keep them working to maintain the coolant and EM fields of a gauss drive, would it be too much work for the player?

Wouldn't any real-world design of this just have monitoring of automatic controls? The controls would be to shut down, restart, switch to backups, unlock safeties to run above spec, etc. not to manually balance drive fields.

Well, in addition to what kainlongshot said, there would be heat management, power distribution, EM field maintenance, damage control, etc. If the engineer needed to boost reactor output beyond norms, how long could he do it?

Heat and heat management will play a big role.

Working in IT operations for a living (and wanting to get out and work for myself), I know that automation fails. It's not perfect.

 

[imported_FishTaco]

When you say stuff like the engineer workstation will perform tasks such as heat management, power distribution, EM field maintenance, damage control, etc. I have no idea what that really means as far as what I'm doing at the engineering workstation. Am I looking at gauges and flipping switches? Are you planning to make it a series of minigames or puzzles? There's no way I can say whether something is too much work or if its even fun if I have no idea what you mean.

I'd suggest you start making prototypes for the tasks so people can see if it's any fun or not to manage heat or distribute power. Your prototype doesn't even have to be a computer program. It could be a photoshop mock up and a description of what information the player will get and the actions the player has to perform.

 

[lousydood]

Modeling the physics is going to be non-trivial. First of all, you have to use approximation algorithms like Runge-Kutta. The actual problem is ridiculously difficult to solve precisely, even if you stick to Newtonian physics. For example, this: http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/ is a simulator for the Solar system. It'll also give you a good idea of how large the scale really is -- how do you plan on keeping player interest considering that it can take years to travel between planets (without time compression)?

Modeling special relativity would probably be easy, but not so relevant. I wouldn't try to model general relativity unless you planned on involving high-gravity or high-velocity situations such as black holes or near-light-speed travel.

And finally, on the subject of Space Combat MMORPGs, have you seen http://www.vendetta-online.com/ before?

 

[kainlongshot]

Maybe mini games where a damaged control system may bring up a schematic overlay and he has to re-route power by figuring out how to connect the broken circuits using a sets of straight, looped, 90 degree wires. I dunno. . .

Actually the more I think about it the more I dunno how this is going to work. I want to blow up stuff as much as the next guy but I don't want to be stuck playing "wack-a-warp coil" to do it. Consider trying to hybridize multiple classes. I think that will alleviate the possible boredom but at the same time help make the action hectic enough to be fun. Example: Bombardier can control ordnance loadout and engine systems. Weapons control can be used for targeting and energy distribution. While navigation can control movement, shield systems and damage control reporting.

That way at least you have a certain synergy to each class, make it a bit hectic (multi-task), and promote teamwork.

 

[Acanthus]

Honestly, most players dont care about the accuracy of parts to reality when talking about a space sim.

You could simply make up names for things and give it cool graphical effects.

I do like the idea of complexity in configuring a ship, however its easier to just create a bunch of limited parameters and slots to fit things with. Think EVE online.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: lousydood
Modeling the physics is going to be non-trivial. First of all, you have to use approximation algorithms like Runge-Kutta. The actual problem is ridiculously difficult to solve precisely, even if you stick to Newtonian physics. For example, this: http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/ is a simulator for the Solar system. It'll also give you a good idea of how large the scale really is -- how do you plan on keeping player interest considering that it can take years to travel between planets (without time compression)?

Alcubierre warp drive. I don't plan to model it mathematically at first. It's enough that the idea has a basis. If later on I can model it mathematically, I will.

As far as solar systems, yes. I am aware of how monumentally difficult it will be. I tried it once before and w/o a persistant resampling, planets and moons tend to spin out of orbit and fly out into space. That aspect will have to be fudged until later. For now, it will be sufficient to have discreetly defined orbits for planets and moons.

I've got time to get up to speed. I'm basically re-establishing myself after taking a decade or so off from programming and I have my whole life to get this done. I also expect to take shortcuts early on, but I'll try to leave the door open for model expansion. I found myself unhappy w/ having left it undone a decade ago, but I'm happy to be working and learning.

Oh, I should also note that the first phase of this game will be a freely available 1v1 capital ship version taking place in deep space (no worries on gravity). A single cubic light second worth of space will be more than enough play space for the model. It's intended to gauge player opinion and get the basis of the mathematics down. If there is enough interest, I can use it as a basis for a business loan.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
Honestly, most players dont care about the accuracy of parts to reality when talking about a space sim.

I do. I don't want to make another star trek or star wars. They are fun franchises, but the concepts are throw away. You could easily put the modeling into another story line and it'll be just as invalid.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I do. I don't want to make another star trek or star wars. They are fun franchises, but the concepts are throw away. You could easily put the modeling into another story line and it'll be just as invalid.

If that's what interests you most, maybe you should be thinking pure scientific simulations rather than games.

There are a few people who play MS Flight Simulator and enjoy that level of realism, but they're in the minority and it sounds like you want to go way beyond it in the level of micromanagement.

In space games, most people either want to dogfight or to use their mighty space fleet to crush their enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of the women.

Creating some paint / photoshop mockups with text descriptions is a good first step though, so people can tell you whether or not the game sounds like fun.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

I do. I don't want to make another star trek or star wars. They are fun franchises, but the concepts are throw away. You could easily put the modeling into another story line and it'll be just as invalid.

There are a few people who play MS Flight Simulator and enjoy that level of realism, but they're in the minority and it sounds like you want to go way beyond it in the level of micromanagement.

I want to give the player(s) that option, but I know better than to make it a requirement. Some don't want to micromanage. Some find extreme pleasure in being not only in the driver's seat, but in the captain's seat.

In space games, most people either want to dogfight or to use their mighty space fleet to crush their enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of the women.

Again, initially, the game will have two play modes: Newtonian and Hollywood. Also, two command modes: solo and bridge crew.

I think for solo, I'll model a crew that takes care of the details. They'll have an efficiency rating that affects response, accuracy and overall performance. As I develop the game out to be an MMO, if they choose to continue as solo, then his/her crew will improve as they survive combats.

Creating some paint / photoshop mockups with text descriptions is a good first step though, so people can tell you whether or not the game sounds like fun.

[/quote]

I had started this and had a pic of the captain's POV, but I can't find it now.

 

[aCynic2]

Originally posted by: lousydood
Modeling special relativity would probably be easy, but not so relevant. I wouldn't try to model general relativity unless you planned on involving high-gravity or high-velocity situations such as black holes or near-light-speed travel.

I'll include them as a instant death type event and near light speed...I should be able to model relativisitic mass and energy, though in truth, I want to avoid allowing people to kamikazi a space station with a single hit (though I think that would be hard to do at a velocity that would impart that much energy).

And finally, on the subject of Space Combat MMORPGs, have you seen http://www.vendetta-online.com/ before?

I took a look, though I didn't sign up. Looks liek it might be fun. However, even though they say real and arcade modeling, I doubt it approaches what I intend. However, I'd like to put their vessel designs through some tests to see if any of them are lopsided in their COM. Their designs are cool, though I question the function of wings on a space vessel, I like the way they visualized space...


ADDENDUM: I haven't laid down a single line of code to model motion yet, but I'm seeing now I'll need to model relativity, at least to some degree or method. I can't base it totally on absolute coordinates because a player's craft must move relative to the system he is within.

Hmmm...

Runge-Kutta Matata.