🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 05 May 1998 15:38:18 -0000, "John Shiali" <jo...@heights.demon.co.uk>
wrote:


>Derek, here's a bit of something I posted into the space-sim
>newsgroup (I didn't cross post, but I was surprised it didn't get a
>response from you):

Hmm, I missed it somehow. Sorry

>Excerpt begins  -----------------------------
>
>I tried it, and although the presentation was very good, the in-game
>graphics are showing their age.  

hehe, go take a look at what's in store for the sequel due out later this year.

>It also has a learning curve that makes the Himalayas look like a small pimple. 

That's not going to change anytime soon but I've moved to a fully iconized
bridge for the Battlecruiser, complete with point and click flight planning (if
you touch the joystick when flying the BC, it's because you want to) as well as
moved more tasks into the personnel ai and decision tree, complete with the
ability to delegate duties to any of the bridge officers. In short, under total
AI control, the Flight Officer, Nav Officer and Tactical Officer can perform
any number of procedures which range from combat and navigation to weapon
systems control. All you have to do is make sure their ass is on duty <g>

> Although there is the argument that complex software means a complex/deep interface, I found
>many things very unintuative indeed, and it did put me right off the game. 

Yes, that's been the main gripe but when you're writing an indepth game that
stands the test of time, and after spending years and years honing the
technology to go with it, you _certainly_ don't want it to be 100 hour title.
The fact that people are still playing a 1996 title, enhanced in 1997 and 1998,
does not surprise me in the least. I KNEW that would happen and that's what I
wanted when I designed. Not forgetting that Take Two released it incomplete and
for all intent and purposes, it should'nt have gone anywhere from there. If I
didn't have a 'franchise' in mind, I would never have been able to pull off a
sequel (Battlecruiser 3020AD) in such a short time.

>I think Derek will have to have a hard think about how to make the
>player interact more easily without having to learn the whole of the
>giant manual by heart before even starting the game.  

You're right, I am having a hard time with this but the fact of the matter is
that the game will cater to those who want an indepth sim as well as a shooter
(The Xtreme Carnage module is just as good a shooter as any). Considering that
most companies are placing emphasis on strategic elements (XCOM-Interceptor for
instance) and using proven product lines to test it (Rebellion anyone?), I
think the time has come for indepth titles. The generation-next kids on the
block are not going to be buying/upgrading powerhouses (P233 or higher) to play
the next version of Outwars or Forsaken. Games are getting cheaper and access
is expanding, therefore there's still a budget for Forsaken, Descent-Freespace,
Independence War (I-War in the UK) and BC:3020AD.

>With the upcoming graphics engine, the game does show a lot of potential, 

That's just a byproduct of our wanting to take advantage of the leaps in
graphics technology. My focus remains on gameplay.

>but I would have been disappointed if I'd paid money for it.

In what respect?

>Excerpt ends    -----------------------------

>I think the real problem you have to address with BC3000 is how to
>make that learning curve easier. It's so offputting not to be able to
>do anything easily.  You can click on things, but there is a real
>problem in how one thing links to another. eg, its very easy to select
>a hyperspace destination, but once you've done that, there is nothing
>that is obvious about how you activate that jump.  Its easy to jump
>between the different modules, (personnel, messages, etc), but once
>you get there, things loose their coherence.

There is no way to make the learning curve easier and I'm not even going to
try. Changes are being made to address _some_ issues but BC3K will remain
complex and top notch in all aspects. If you've even played any of Jane's sims,
you won't find anyone asking for Origin to make them any simpler because you
lose the entire premise. BC3K is not X-Wing as TF is not I-War. Different
games, same genre.

About hyperjumping, it's documented and simple.

1. Select a target
2. alt+9

you're there.

I fail to see how switching to Navitron, Tactical, Logistix, Commlink etc loses
coherence. They all do a specific thing or they would all have been merged into
a single module.

>I know you're going to say "Its all in the manual - its a complete
>universe simulator - what did you expect?", but I certainly don't
>expect to have to learn the manual just to be able to have a little
>poodle around the game. 

Well, then, it's not your type of game. I don't believe that there is a game in
this genre where you don't have to read the manual. The time it takes to read
the instructions for a demo, you could be up and running and training in
Xtreme Carnage. I guess it's all about the mindset. If you're out looking for
the next best thing since X-Wing as far as ease of use,  you're not going to
find it and I can assure you that games in this genre coming out in 1998-99
will only increase in functionality and hence complexity. Don't take my word
for it....stick around and see.

>This will be your biggest problem - people will give up on the game
>before getting to the good bits because it need so much hard work
>before you *get* to the good bits.

SOME people you mean.

>As a competent and hardcore gamer who gave up on the game, I can
>only suggest that you give a lot of thought to how to give some kind of
>spoonfeeding to the player, just so that he can do enough to keep his
>interest alive until he becomes competetent enough with all the
>systems.  Maybe make things selectable on screen with context sensitive
>menus that lead you from a choice to the next set of logical choices?
>Kind of like a "wizard" system to guide you around basic tasks?

Unfortunately, that's going to be difficult to do and again, BC3K will remain
in a class all by itself.

>Or what about training missions? Right from ship handling, weapons
>deployment, right up to "graduating" to a command?

These will be in BC:3020AD

============================================================
There are dozens of threads on my website daily and when I was finished typing
this post, I went over and grabbed a few. Feel free to go over to the COMMLINK
section and read for yourself. Then you will see what I mean when I say that
there definitely is a market for an indepth space sim and not just realistic
sims such as F15, Longbow2 etc

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 04, 1998 07:09 PM 
Author: Michael Jones (cmrd...@geocities.com) 
Subject: What do I love? 
The Battlecruiser 3K series of games. What do I love about them? 
Once word - free-form (unless that counts as two, but I've had that argument
with myself before =). 
In Battlecruiser, the only barrier between yourself and the ship is your mind.
Why do I say this? I loved the first of the WC games, and it is still one of my
favourite games of all time. Read the manual, and it suggested maneuvers to use
in space combat. I tried them, and they worked - remarkably well. Because they
were MEANT to work. The game had been designed to take those maneuvers and act
on them, the the people who wrote the manual could sound impressive. After all,
we've all heard of the such-and-such maneuver for avoiding a tricky situation
in Star Trek. 
In Battlecruiser, however, there isn't that barrier there. There aren't
pre-programmed maneuvers. There isn't pre-programmed anything - it is up to
YOU. I would say it is the difference between a computer RPG fantasy game, and
an actual RP Game with a GamesMaster/DungeonMaster/StoryTeller in charge. The
former is structured - you can do what the programmers intended you to do. The
latter is totally free-form - you are guided by a basic rules structure, and
then the "intelligence" and flexibility of the DM, GM,or ST allows you to do
anything you could do in this world. Battlecruiser has pushed the boundaries
back from the world of computer games by using it's artificial intelligence to
move closer to the real-life, around-the-table, RPG style of play - give us a
basic set of rules, and let us learn the rest from there. The fact is, we CAN
discover new straregies, new maneuvers, to get us out of unusual situations -
because the situations themselves aren'r prescribed - as Pandora has pointed
out to us in the past in a different thread. 
That is what I love about the game - more than the depth of play, etc. etc. I
believe it is this concept that the rest revolve around. 
Of course, this is not to say there aren't bad points - no game is perfect. But
my biggest gripes seem to be being dealt with. I hated not knowing what the
state of he universe was - I felt as if I was being shunted from battle to
battle, and couldn't see this dynamic universe that was so talked about. With
the nitroduction of news channels in 3020 - and proper channels, ones that
relate what is really happening in the game, not some pre-programmed script -
that problem should be solved. My other problem was the concept of time in the
game - I have had it for six motnhs and not made my weekly salary yet! And in
ACM, missions are thrown thick and fast. In real life would you fly five
missions in 30 minutes?(Okay, there is no real life Battlecruiser, but compare
to a military perspective). Finally it annoyed me that warp and hyperspace were
so instantaneous - there should be some kind of time lapse, as well as a
clearer animation to make you know you've really been thorugh hyperspace. But
these are little gripes, and at least once has already been dealt with. And
they are far outweighed by that first part I described - the concept of freedom
of play. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: May 04, 1998 06:50 PM 
Author: Guy Campbell (gcam...@sunny.vcccd.cc.ca.us) 
Subject: BC3K is alive! 
I've never played a computer game that makes me feel more like I am actually
INSIDE the game than BC3K. When I sit down in the Commander's chair of my
Battlecruiser, I feel like I'm really THERE! You don't know what's going to
happen next. You don't know what's at the next waypoint. You don't know if your
crew is going to follow your orders or screw up big time. Lives are a stake!
Every action you take will effect you, your crew, and the galaxy around you,
for good or ill. Just like real life! I get a feeling of abject terror whenever
I exit from hyperspace, because there's no telling what you're going to
encounter, "Cloak! Cloak, darn it! They're all around us, man! What do you mean
we're out of Questor missiles?" I Love it! Linear plot? Forget it! BC3K is in a
class by itself. Please, Derek, keep following your dream. We'll be right there
with you. 
Somewhere out there, 
Commander Guy "Agro" Campbell GCS Sagan 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

"The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further 
than the crowd.  The man who walks alone is likely to find 
himself in places no one has ever been."

ICQ                     : 158435
Email                   : mailto:dsm...@pobox.com
Media Contact           : mailto:bc3000a...@mindspring.com
World Wide Web          : www.bc3000ad.com
BC3K Latest News        : www.bc3000ad.com/temp/gnn.html
Active Worlds           : Teleport to GALCOM at www.activeworlds.com