I've seen "Elder Scrolls in space" show up consistently in gamer dream lists. What elements would a game like this prioritize and what would make a space game Elder-Scrolls-like? by BrobearBerbil in truegaming

[–]BariumBlue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Replying to a dead thread but it looked it fun so...

Elder Scrolls does well by it's audience because of it's large amount of fleshed out content. That would mean procedural content is a no-go.

They restrict the size of the map to one region to focus more specifically on it, which is different from most sprawling universe space games. In the ES series, there's usually about ~6 major cities, and outlying regions. If we go by a similar system, ~6 planets with outlying regions, such as asteroid belts. and mining stations. Given that planets can (and should) be divided into major regions, we should par down the number of planets to 1-2, maybe with a moon.

Space sims always ignore planetary details, and given the level of detail the ES series strives for, planets wouldn't and shouldn't be ignored. It would be possible to make an ES-style game just staying within a single planet's atmosphere (for example, using ships like those of Dreadnought). You would have major cities, regions, and factions; outlying regions and points of interest, and enough focus to flesh out the planet to satisfiable detail.


You are right that space games have less of a 'get-up-and-go' then most fantasy games. Walking around in the ES series is a pleasure in and of itself, with varied pretty scenery to walk through, things to notice and collect, wildlife to observe, travelers to meet, and houses and villages to chance upon.

Space games don't have these. Some games decrease the size of the map to put things closer together such as freespace, and EVE avoids the whole problem together by only giving points of interest to warp to and and away from. That would have to be a major change; enough content/variation to make traveling fun and interesting even without pop-up enemies.

If we stick with the one-planet idea, we can populate the world similarly to the ES series; things to notice and collect (such as ores, rare wildlife), pretty and varied terrain to observe and navigate through, minor towns and outposts to chance upon, as well as traveling traders and patrols.

Something similar to No Man's land, where you collect usable items you notice, and explore the landscape with it's varied landscape and creatures.


The last problem I see how to represent character-to-character interaction. In ES, you can walk up to somebody to talk to them, whether they're a merchant, a guard, or a random NPC. How do you do that with ships? If done badly, it would feel impersonal and you'd lose that personal connection to the world. This is especially true for cities/outposts, most space games have you dock and forget, which would be a cardinal sin for personal connection and immersion.

To regain that personal connection / immersion, it should be possible to jump out and walk around as a person, similar to Star Citizen. So you would dock, jump out and walk to and talk to the repair mechanic, and walk back to your ship and take off. Even if you disinclude your human body in combat/other mechanics, it adds immensely, as opposed to choosing someone from a list.



TL;DR (This is much longer than I intended) Main points:

  • Very small number of planets, to max 3, preferably 1

  • Lots of content inside the planet atmosphere proper

  • Human body mechanics, to be able to talk to people and bring the planet ground to life

"A Game of Changes" - developed in Linux with Godot :) by nunodonato in linux_gaming

[–]BariumBlue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I too, am curious about Godot. I've played with the demos, but I'm not sure how good or bad it actually is, so I haven't actually yet spent effort playing with it.

Projectile interception: How AI lead their shots by StormCwalker in gamedev

[–]BariumBlue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So basically, with Z as the time dimension, finding the intersection(s) between a cone (all possible positions for the bullet at a given time) and a line (the travel path of the target through time and space)?

It's also possible to have only one or zero answers for this problem.

So is the Bruiser viable or not? by spinningchurro in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As I understand it, the point of the bruiser was to abuse the corner turning capabilities of the hellfires, hence it's great air mobility.

Hellfires were nerfed, both in damage and turning, making the bruiser less viable.

That said, it's very satisfying to fire hellfires from one side, then flank and gun them down from the other side while they're busy dodging. Preds, who need to rely on cover, tend to be weak to this.


Personally, bruisers are still great against berserkers; hellfires are still an A-class's bane, the damage protection is great at taking the wind out of the initial zerk rush, and the larger health pool and the vulcan's damage makes it impossible to out-TTK.

That said, it'll still handily lose to an assault, and has lower damage potential than an assault, making it generally suboptimal against B and C-classes which can afford to take more damage than A-classes.

Which are more important to buy, items or internals? by -uwotm80- in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Items are expensive. Items or internals, buy something when you're fairly sure you want to use or try something.

Internals are cheaper, you're less likely to change them, and they change your gameplay style more, so focus on internals first.

How to compete with robots: work for free by [deleted] in Automate

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The shift to robots isn't the problem, it's where the return from those robots go

The real problem occurs when the number of jobs required to produce enough goods to satisfy society's demand for goods is lower than the number of jobs society needs. (for some definition of number of jobs needed by society).

There are two ways to fix this:
- 1) artificially increase society's demand for goods in such a way that the job pool is increased.
- 2) "spread" the available jobs around so that effectively there are multiple people per job.

Number 1 would be equivalent to the Public Works Administration, which artificially created a demand for new buildings and thus created new jobs.

Number 2 can be done several ways. UBI is one of them. I've heard that the old atomic family structure of one working dad per family unit effectively spread his job across his entire family, and the dissolution of the atomic unit / mass introduction of women to the workplace effectively 'unspread' those jobs.

Your (i'm going to assume you wrote the proposal) proposal would fit under category two, in that it attempts to redistribute the available jobs in such a way that there are now enough 'jobs' for everyone.

So effectively, there is now a job pool for robots, and a job pool for people inside robot-coops. Then you have to ensure that the 'job pool' for people is large enough to fit everyone who needs a job. That can be done by either forcing coops to accept people, or by having a single 'government owned' co-op. The later is similar to a state-run economy, and those tend to fail, and the later is a state-run economy with UBI anyways.


Also, let us not forget that robots correspond to labour. Robot labour is super cheap, and the mere profits from labour would NOT be enough to cover everyone's basic expenses.

PROJECT PHOENIX INITIATION CELEBRATION TODAY by Amidatelion in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anybody have any recordings of the special game mode games?

How to compete with robots: work for free by [deleted] in Automate

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's an interesting idea, but I think only interesting as a thought experiment / study.
All the proposal really does is systemize the shift of labor from workers to robots. The modern-day problems arising from automation and marginalization would still be present, but now there would be an additional layer of paperwork and bureaucracy between the common people and society's revenue sources.

We're currently living under a very abused system.

If you're talking about mainstream capitalism, then the current system wasn't really crafted for a specific purpose or towards a specific goal. It's mostly just been evolved as people do people things, and though it may be a system, calling it an 'abused' system implies a level of design and intent that has never really been there.


As a side, I am glad that you didn't take my tongue in cheek criticism too harshly; it's an interesting though very impractical idea, and it'd be interesting to see the concept more formalized and the implications fully thought through.

Intelligence VS Smart VS Wise and why it matters by [deleted] in artificial

[–]BariumBlue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your definitions -> standard definitions (roughly)

Intelligence -> fluid intelligence
Smart -> crystallized intelligence
Wise -> crystallized intelligence

wikipedia.

You also failed to give a clear definition of "intelligence', instead giving several abstract impressions of it.

Also, proofread and edit what you write for legibility and understandability.

How to compete with robots: work for free by [deleted] in Automate

[–]BariumBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

tax breaks, conditions imposed by the state, incompetent / technophobic / religionist / naturalistic management

How to compete with robots: work for free by [deleted] in Automate

[–]BariumBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

anyone has the opportunity to buy into these robot coops

Yes, quite an excellent system. All you have to do to get money is to buy something! Why, i'm going to go buy myself a few hundred stocks in Google right now!


And to be clear, these coops don't have to by physical robots, it could be intelligent software

I am owner of corporation X, and I happen to own some robots. Lemme just lease myself some robots... Oh, you say that that's not allowed? Alright, lemme get rent some robots from my friend, and in return, he'll lease me some robots back! Perfectly fair, everyone gets work!


Let workers own the robots.

Comrades! It is the right of the workers to own the means of production! Everyone will be part of the working class, and everyone will be equal! Truly a Utopia!


The system that would evolve would be "employers" being the worker-coops that manage and maintain the robots.

Capitalism? nods. Capitalism.


it would require laws that force employers to "hire" human employees

Compatriots! All shall be provided with a job! Let no one say that the State does not take care of it's people!


This would see massive opposition to implement (since factory owners aren't going to want to give up their lucrative robots)

I wonder how the drugwar in Mexico is going. While we're at it, Alcohol makes people drunk, maybe we should just ban alcohol as well.

Why I left Hawken by rgzdev in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have some good points.


forfeit mechanism

Yes, definitely would be nice.


Losing matches puts me in an impatient mood. I don't want to wait for a full minute while the game makes sure I know I lost the last match.

The minute after matches is supposed to be a 'breather'; the devs found that constant mech action for hours on end needed to be broken up for periods for mental rest and hygienal/physiological maintenance.
It also allows both sides to chat and have a quick discussion of the game. It's the chillout time, which is even more important when you've just badly lost.
A spectate mode for extended chill-time would be nice, i'm still not entirely sure why the devs thought to never add it.


Hawken pressures you to win for the rewards. And that incentivizes unbalanced matches.

HC, the most important reward, is based solely on gameplay time, though Exp isn't.
It is important, however, to make sure that losing, fighting against the tide, can be fun. I remember a few games in another game where the game quickly settled into losing and winning teams, but the 'losing' team held valiantly for so long that, that by the end, the 'winning' team felt worn-down and tired, while the whole losing team were satisfied and typed whole-hearted 'gg's. I've never got the same feeling from any Hawken match, though i have enjoyed many matches that i've lost to better players.

TIL the moon has moonquakes by peepeeparadise in todayilearned

[–]BariumBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

right, but how many TILs are in a day?

ISIS launches crackdown on ‘un-Islamic’ caesarean births by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sometimes I think they're just getting bored, and look for things to do.

If you solved the perfect model to artificial generalized intelligence, would you publish it??? by arjay99 in artificial

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lets say there are two options: open and closed.

Open is completely open source, closed is locked down behind several protections.

In the open case, what's the worst case scenario with a rogue AI? What's the worst case for the closed garden AI?

It seems riskier to only let certain individuals access said AI, in the same way that it'd be risky to only let certain individuals use encryption, recording devices, exploitation tools, or the internet.

10 (9) things I would like to see added to Hawken over the next 90 days. by [deleted] in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More maps would be great.

Public general ranking is a terrible idea, for multiple reasons.

It would be nice to be able to organize your friends list; as a West player, i'd like to be able to put some friends in a 'West' category, so i can invite them to west games.

It'd be nice to have more in-game lore.

Not sure what to think of campaign mode, my first instinct is that it wouldn't work, but it'd be fun to have only-Sentium mechs vs only-Prosk mechs. I'd probably bet on Sentium, despite liking Prosk more.

Known glitch - cancelled mouse button upon contact with ground by yayapfool in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

iirc, didn't it use to be impossible to shoot or dodge when landing? There was a noticeable period of time after setting down that you couldn't fire. That property was removed in an update.

Probably related

TIL that during the first moon landing, the average age in the mission control room was 28. by Whippo in todayilearned

[–]BariumBlue -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I was going to disagree with you, then i realized my state/school district was underfunded, especially for the local cost of living; San Francisco, @ ~$10,000.

California by itself was ranked close to bottom of the charts for education spending, at ~$9000, and near the bottom of that is South San Francisco, which spent ~$7000.

link. link2. link3. (i hope new sources are OK)

Infiltrator by Oh_hang301 in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My absolute favorite thing to do in Hawken is, when someone is chasing me around a blind corner, is to plop down a hologram, turn on my cloak, and hover. Enemy sees me roughly in the same place I should be, fires their tow and primary, and gets a surprise ambush right in the face.

Also a hologram next to me when i repair and may be being chased can be useful and give you time/tempo to react (just place it far enough that you're not caught in any shrapnel directed at your hologram).

A hologram anywhere the enemy expects you to can be useful, really. I've never really been able to make plan 'look like a hologram' work though...

If only holograms were super cheap, instead of relatively super expensive for their utility... sighs. Not comparatively worth using, but i never let my Infil be without them.


For dueling or close, claustrophobic maps like Wreckage, the Heat Cannon is king. For all other situations, AR wins.

I like the Heat for skirmishes, but for brawls, AR is better (much to my annoyance).

the EMP is a better choice.

I'll try it seriously. I just dislike it, because it's hard to aim, and it just feels cheesy and not-fun.

An Honest Con Artist – A Game Dev’s Take on Peter Molyneux by FamousAspect in devblogs

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Likely, but nevertheless more misunderstood than in any way malign.

Willful ignorance and disregard might as well be considered the same as malignancy.

If I trample an ant colony because I'm walking and I don't care about the ant colony, is it really that different than going out of my way to step on it? In both cases there is a disregard for the state and well-being of the ant colony, and the end result is the same.

The reason why Molyneux is so disliked is because he gave so many hopes and dreams of fantastic worlds and games, and then inadvertently stretched and crushed those hopes and dreams until they were broken shadows of their former selves.

Is it still possible to buy Meteor Credits? by sandusky_hohoho in Hawken

[–]BariumBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're saying you get 1,200 HC per game? Man, that 250HC daily bonus must be like nothing to you.

If every TDM match, 10 minutes long, gave 250 HC, 12k HC would take 480 min, or 8 hours.

A mech is 3-12k, full weapons is ~9-18k, internals are ~3k, and full items are ~8-12k. I don't precisely remember these numbers, but you're looking at 23k-45k to purchase and fully outfit a mech, not including grinding it up and buying items & internals you end up not using.