Spring RTS Engine

Anyone tried the alpha version ?

http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/

hash(1/0)

The divided by zero exception-game

I'm taking a wait and see approach to this game.

I do not- they kicked diffrent terrain using unittypes for collission easyness and bought themselves a piece of boredom with that.

Pretty tough to start on new terrain with a handicap.
This whole movement thing, ideally makes for interesting fights, unexpected attack angles, robots that can dodge behind wreckage and rocks, tanks that to retreat from hovers up on hills..

They are not the first to do this:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-trek-new-worlds

I have yet to see something that suggests this is anything more than just a benchmark/tech-demo.

I have yet to see something that suggests this is anything more than another "Epic Scale Woo!" commercial RTS.

They've got a FAQ saying that they want to make units smart and automated, I don't trust that though.

They have GalCiv games as their background and this video exists: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2YPs0AkzvU so it's not a hoax. However they mention that showing units instead of icons at high zoom levels is a benefit, so I'm skeptical it'll be great.
But anyway, it's directx so I won't be playing it as I've switched to Linux fully a year ago.

Hype


A lot of their units are actually 'meta units' as they call it, where several units act as a single entity, so they're not really putting tens of thousands of units ingame, they're just rendering them. What's more a brief look at that video shows all sorts of untruths, for example, when they say other games use 2D icons when you zoom out because they're unable to render full models, that's nonsense. Spring did it because units were too tiny to tell apart at full zoom, even starcraft and dawn of war 1 acknowledged that

Also the map they're using, I've seen maps like that and better in spring, there was nothing I saw that couldn't be done or hasn't been done here. The technology already exists, we built it

gajop wrote:But anyway, it's directx so I won't be playing it as I've switched to Linux fully a year ago.

Their future plans include Vulkan for MacOS and SteamOS/Linux support.

Source: http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/game/faq

Im sure they wont risk anything.
So its gonna be another Fully Symmetric Balanced Supreme Commander without risky ressource strategys.
Very sad. The tech sure has potential.
But there ceos are in hardcore denial on the risk they allready have made when going rts.

So instead of going fully bonkers, and come out on the other side where the risk might be lower again- because you combined a commando-moba into your game, or something similar- they stay at peak max risk, fromt here perception the min. No risk of loosing the planetary annhilation crowd ..

PicassoCT wrote:Im sure they wont risk anything.
So its gonna be another Fully Symmetric Balanced Supreme Commander without risky ressource strategys.
Very sad. The tech sure has potential.
But there ceos are in hardcore denial on the risk they allready have made when going rts.

So instead of going fully bonkers, and come out on the other side where the risk might be lower again- because you combined a commando-moba into your game, or something similar- they stay at peak max risk, fromt here perception the min. No risk of loosing the planetary annhilation crowd ..

What?

I know nobody wants to here this- but these guys do a AAA-Graphics Game for a small audience which equals economic suicide by now, especially after AMD abandoned its own mantle bandwagon.

So in order to get a bigger audience- they would have to widen the scope, add moba elements or episodice storytelling.
Anything more then doing supreme commander with hover tanks.

If you are clever, you promote these elements as two diffrent games, and let the players find out on day one that they actually share a game.
Thus avoiding the battlezone effect of scaring off people who like one genre only.

PicassoCT wrote:I know nobody wants to here this- but these guys do a AAA-Graphics Game for a small audience which equals economic suicide by now, especially after AMD abandoned its own mantle bandwagon.

So in order to get a bigger audience- they would have to widen the scope, add moba elements or episodice storytelling.
Anything more then doing supreme commander with hover tanks.

If you are clever, you promote these elements as two diffrent games, and let the players find out on day one that they actually share a game.
Thus avoiding the battlezone effect of scaring off people who like one genre only.

Your not making any sense whatsoever.

I see nothing here that Supreme Commander hasn't already done, if you want planetary scale, play Planetary Annihilation. If you want tens of thousands of units, you're already in the right place

I will give them 1 unique thing though, they have a UI I've never seen the likes of, I worry for the poor soul who has to use it

AF wrote:I see nothing here that Supreme Commander hasn't already done, if you want planetary scale, play Planetary Annihilation. If you want tens of thousands of units, you're already in the right place

I will give them 1 unique thing though, they have a UI I've never seen the likes of, I worry for the poor soul who has to use it

Did you really watch the interviews? There a talk about how unit formation manged themselves, by having a repair unit automatically repair units in it's formation for example. With the majority of focus on macro than on micro.

Super Mario wrote:

PicassoCT wrote:I know nobody wants to here this- but these guys do a AAA-Graphics Game for a small audience which equals economic suicide by now, especially after AMD abandoned its own mantle bandwagon.

So in order to get a bigger audience- they would have to widen the scope, add moba elements or episodice storytelling.
Anything more then doing supreme commander with hover tanks.

If you are clever, you promote these elements as two diffrent games, and let the players find out on day one that they actually share a game.
Thus avoiding the battlezone effect of scaring off people who like one genre only.

Your not making any sense whatsoever.

Welcome to Picassoville!
Population: not you Gordon!

The game looks like it is taking "epic scale" to sell out not to actually gain any depth. That being said the game looks awesome cool but also very dull and boring in gameplay. Bascially: blob a an army push it at one front and then blob another pushing the other. Rince and repeat.

Also the studio did not work on GalCiv. In fact believe it is entirely new studio under the same publisher, Stardock.

Orfelius wrote:
The game looks like it is taking "epic scale" to sell out not to actually gain any depth. That being said the game looks awesome cool but also very dull and boring in gameplay.

And your basing this on, what exactly?

Super Mario wrote:

Orfelius wrote:
The game looks like it is taking "epic scale" to sell out not to actually gain any depth. That being said the game looks awesome cool but also very dull and boring in gameplay.

And your basing this on, what exactly?

Based on the provided video of course. It can be clearly seen that there are just 2 AI controlled armies clashing without any sort of involvement from the players.
Other than that it only seems logical since if you upscale the numbers, suddenly individual units stop making a difference and the value of micro decreases and finally into the point where the armies can be only used in big blobs since the player just doesn't have enough attention spam to command them all at once. Also this so called "meta unit" is basically a blob of automated units.

However I do think it might be somewhat interesting if they will implement some sort of interesting resource/research system.

We will see how it goes once some real footage will be released but I do not expect anything awesome out of this (though I would like to be pleasantly surprised).

You are literally jumping to conclusions based on little information we have regrading game play. Most video that I have seen are meant to be benchmark demos, judging game play based on a benchmark video is just idiotic.

Well of course judging a game based on all currently available data to me is idiotic!
There is nothing else I can do at the moment until I acquire more of it as I clearly stated in my previous post.

Besides how do you know they are just 'benchmarks' perhaps it is indeed the gameplay? Neither do I or you know that, but it seems likely considering their design philosophy of 'meta units', epic scale and automatization.

Additionally I was not the only one making similar assumptions in this thread. There is no need to get all personal just because somebody on the internet is wrong.