Spring 0.4b evaluation...
Moderator: Moderators
Zwzsg, the brawler can already strafe, why not others?
I suppose I was illustrating the potential of this game more than anything...with a little polish it could be a FPS @_@
Besides, UA is half dead, Spring is thriving, and any former quake/UT addict would be lying if they said they wouldn't want to take down a kroggie with a rocket launcher <_<
Edit: Yes, that would be very cool.
Leading from the front ^^
I suppose I was illustrating the potential of this game more than anything...with a little polish it could be a FPS @_@
Besides, UA is half dead, Spring is thriving, and any former quake/UT addict would be lying if they said they wouldn't want to take down a kroggie with a rocket launcher <_<
Edit: Yes, that would be very cool.
Leading from the front ^^
It just wouldn't look right. Units don't strafe, they use turrets. A bulldog strafing would an atrocity. And for kbots, you'd have to redo a new set of animation for every model.
And Spring is a RTS, the FPS mode was just added because SJ was bored waiting for other to complete their part, it can stay as a little bonus that people will try once the first they play, but you're not supposed to control 500 units each by hoping in its cockpit.
Just get over the fact that Spring isn't a doom-like.
And UA isn't dead yet.
And Spring is a RTS, the FPS mode was just added because SJ was bored waiting for other to complete their part, it can stay as a little bonus that people will try once the first they play, but you're not supposed to control 500 units each by hoping in its cockpit.
Just get over the fact that Spring isn't a doom-like.
And UA isn't dead yet.
I don't want to see an FPS either zwzsg. But there is a lot of potential with the features built into the engine. Just look around at what has been done.
What if 16 people joined a server, and there were two separate teams. 1 player on each side would control the building of the base and the overall strategy, and the other 7 per side would control units individually as they see fit. Wouldn't this be fun?
Either way, there is a LOT that can be done with the feature if it is improved. I admit that it isn't good enough yet for what I said above, but that doesn't mean a gametype like this couldn't exist. Once the project gets past 1.0, we really need to look into utilizing the FPS mode in a better way.
(Not to mention that most of the gaming public likes FPS's quite a bit simply because they are easy to jump into. It makes sense to add some FPS elements if we want to grow to our fullest potential.)
What if 16 people joined a server, and there were two separate teams. 1 player on each side would control the building of the base and the overall strategy, and the other 7 per side would control units individually as they see fit. Wouldn't this be fun?
Either way, there is a LOT that can be done with the feature if it is improved. I admit that it isn't good enough yet for what I said above, but that doesn't mean a gametype like this couldn't exist. Once the project gets past 1.0, we really need to look into utilizing the FPS mode in a better way.
(Not to mention that most of the gaming public likes FPS's quite a bit simply because they are easy to jump into. It makes sense to add some FPS elements if we want to grow to our fullest potential.)
-
GrOuNd_ZeRo
- Posts: 1370
- Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 01:10
You wouldn't need additional animations really, picture this, the turret will remain where the mouse is pointed, the pelvis/chassis area will turn sideways just like it would as the unit was aiming at a target while turning 90°, it will look fine, even on bulldogs...and if/when directional armor is added, it will expose the flanks of the tanks and they will be more vunerable.
-
HellToupee
- Posts: 59
- Joined: 01 May 2005, 01:27
-
Sean Mirrsen
- Posts: 578
- Joined: 19 Aug 2004, 17:38
Well, if I remember correctly, in one game there was a strafing tank... I think it was Recoil, but I am probably wrong.
What I can suggest: make 2 drive modes that can be toggled in the settings (for now, can be changed in the menus later). First is similar to what is now, but the turret global orientation remains the same no matter where the unit turns. This will make targeting while manuevering a LOT easier.
Second is similar to what I saw in Recoil (or whatever that game was). When you press left or right, the unit will move forward, but will also turn to face the appropriate direction relative to the camera. This will have an odd effect for ships, but fast-turning units will be almost strafing. Of course, the turret should always be oriented to where the mouse points, as in the first mode.
What I can suggest: make 2 drive modes that can be toggled in the settings (for now, can be changed in the menus later). First is similar to what is now, but the turret global orientation remains the same no matter where the unit turns. This will make targeting while manuevering a LOT easier.
Second is similar to what I saw in Recoil (or whatever that game was). When you press left or right, the unit will move forward, but will also turn to face the appropriate direction relative to the camera. This will have an odd effect for ships, but fast-turning units will be almost strafing. Of course, the turret should always be oriented to where the mouse points, as in the first mode.
Once more zwzsg, I was just illustrating the potential...it doesn't take much imagination to see a nifty FPS in spring, for me at least.
Of course tanks and such wouldn't strafe, but infantry units? hovercraft? maybe a light kbot or two?
I am very over the fact that Spring isn't a doom-like...right now. I plan to spend many hours playing it as an RTS, but it still could be great fun jumping around a kroggie.
Of course tanks and such wouldn't strafe, but infantry units? hovercraft? maybe a light kbot or two?
I am very over the fact that Spring isn't a doom-like...right now. I plan to spend many hours playing it as an RTS, but it still could be great fun jumping around a kroggie.