Space Engineers - Say goodbye to Starmade and Blockade runner. - Games

[QUOTE=Wickerman123;43112769]Someone has already done this: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01DxmVRi0Ao[/media][/QUOTE] that's where i got it from, but i already posted one of his videos earlier and i didn't want to look like a spammer. pretty good videos though, definitely got a bit of the old ingenuity there

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43113042]well the devs themselves have said it'll cause performance issues.[/QUOTE] when it comes to programming there is always a way always it sounds more like a "we have other priorities" response

[QUOTE=DeEz;43114239]when it comes to programming there is always a way always it sounds more like a "we have other priorities" response[/QUOTE] Obviously something that is going to be difficult to implement well, and difficult to implement that won't impact performance is going to get pushed off the planned features list.

I wanted to make a small ship but I ended up making a carrier. [t]http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/703982671811432733/2F8BBE49BACB760CB0274886CB7F605447B1C2E8/[/t] [t]http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/703982671811436324/1502C9E4A8267B763750EA38DB5FE030DE4EED72/[/t] [t]http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/703982671811434545/57E2257DF94A2B91B0C3BF1054EC3CD3E425F8C4/[/t] [t]http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/703982671811430966/D85D9541090B43ED5DADB63ED8028A2A9618AAEA/[/t] [sp]sorry for any stolen paintjobs[/sp]

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43113042]well the devs themselves have said it'll cause performance issues.[/QUOTE] Developers are not gods, they are not omniscient. They have no way of knowing that every possible system for life support will cause performance issues. "Performance Issues" is often dev speak for "We don't want to work on this yet."

[QUOTE=woolio1;43115363]Developers are not gods, they are not omniscient. They have no way of knowing that every possible system for life support will cause performance issues. "Performance Issues" is often dev speak for "We don't want to work on this yet."[/QUOTE] You're right devs are not gods. There is no way they'll implement this without any performance hit.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43115377]You're right devs are not gods. There is no way they'll implement this without any performance hit.[/QUOTE] With that kind of logic, there's no way they'll implement anything else without a performance hit either. You realize what you're arguing, right? Everything they could add, everything on the planned features list, will cause some resource drain. If we're going to say "Oh, they shouldn't add this because the game will run slower!", you're not only saying the developers are too incompetent to implement features correctly, but you're also insisting that we leave the game exactly as it is because everything else will make it run worse. Obviously, the latter is not the case, so is the former? It's toilet-tier logic. Let's not use it.

But somethings put more performance issues they're worth. Its a simple concept. Of course physics take up resources, but you can't have this game without them. Because they have worth and value that is higher than the cost. So when someone says "I want X feature", and the devs go "no they take up too much resources", its true.

Why are you people still arguing about this? The amount of power and work it would take to implement this compared to the added gameplay quality does not add up. There is practically no good reason to implement atmosphere other than "It would be kind of cool and make for realistic space battles." It doesn't fit with the theme of the game, and the devs said themselves that they will never implement it because it's not worth it. This game is not realistic. Atmosphere would make everything too unstable. The devs have already made up their minds. It's not going to happen. [editline]8th December 2013[/editline] It's like arguing about the Earth orbiting the sun. No matter how much you bicker about it, it's still going to happen.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43115756]But somethings put more performance issues they're worth. Its a simple concept. Of course physics take up resources, but you can't have this game without them. Because they have worth and value that is higher than the cost. So when someone says "I want X feature", and the devs go "no they take up too much resources", its true.[/QUOTE] Not quite. If a life support system is so resource-intensive, and puts such a strain on system resources, then how does FTL get away with a really comprehensive system in a flash game with very little system strain? How does Minecraft, of all things, have an atmosphere system? (It's true! The game actually has two invisible blocks, one for a vacuum and one for air. You suffocate in the vacuum block.) How does SPACEBUILD, a mod for Gmod, manage to have a really stellar internals system that conforms to the inside of the blocks you build your spaceship out of? And how do all these games manage atmospheric simulation without causing everyone's computer to explode, or themselves grinding to a halt? No, the Space Engineers developers are avoiding life support systems probably for either gameplay reasons, or a lack of desire to work on it right now. There is absolutely no reason why, if they put time and effort into it, that they couldn't produce a well-crafted and incredibly stable life support system. But the defeatist attitude that accompanies "Oh, the developers have said it can't be done. Let's just forget about it." is INCREDIBLY TOXIC, and doesn't help the game at all. It's fine if they don't want to do it, it's fine if they've chosen not to for gameplay reasons... But "performance issues" is a piss-poor excuse for anything, especially when other games have pulled it off just fine. And for you to be defending that is beyond ridiculous, especially when you have no ties to the development team or the game itself.

[QUOTE=One Ear Ninja;43116086]Why are you people still arguing about this? The amount of power and work it would take to implement this compared to the added gameplay quality does not add up. There is practically no good reason to implement atmosphere other than "It would be kind of cool and make for realistic space battles." It doesn't fit with the theme of the game, and the devs said themselves that they will never implement it because it's not worth it. This game is not realistic. Atmosphere would make everything too unstable. The devs have already made up their minds. It's not going to happen.[/QUOTE] I hate this "X is not realistic" excuse, because any game in existence bases itself in reality through [I]parallels[/I]. I wish more people would grasp this concept of parallel concepts. You say it's not realistic without thinking of as to what that actually means. Yes it's not trying to emulate reality, but that does not mean it isn't in some way realistic. Call of Duty is "not realistic" and yet you die in a few shots, bullets travel close to their real speed, you can't jump 20m into the air, etc. YET AGAIN I REPEAT: This is talking FAR into the development cycle, but YET AGAIN I REPEAT it is kind of important to address, even if se[I][/I]riously addressing it includes currently invalidating it as a possibility. You guys are kind of being lame saying it isn't worth implementing because it would add challenge to the game. It depends on what kind of game the devs want to make. Minecraft started off as a voxel based sculptor and ended as a resource gathering survival game. The additions made the game "harder" but they made it a game. I would like the devs to seriously consider it once the metagame has been set up and all the framework tech for basic features has been set up. That's looking 6 months to a year down the road. Saying it's impossible right now is dodging the question. I just ask that they answer the question eventually (not literally, I'm not complaining about any presence or lack of communication)

[QUOTE=woolio1;43116118]Not quite. If a life support system is so resource-intensive, and puts such a strain on system resources, then how does FTL get away with a really comprehensive system in a flash game with very little system strain? How does Minecraft, of all things, have an atmosphere system? (It's true! The game actually has two invisible blocks, one for a vacuum and one for air. You suffocate in the vacuum block.) How does SPACEBUILD, a mod for Gmod, manage to have a really stellar internals system that conforms to the inside of the blocks you build your spaceship out of? And how do all these games manage atmospheric simulation without causing everyone's computer to explode, or themselves grinding to a halt? No, the Space Engineers developers are avoiding life support systems probably for either gameplay reasons, or a lack of desire to work on it right now. There is absolutely no reason why, if they put time and effort into it, that they couldn't produce a well-crafted and incredibly stable life support system. But the defeatist attitude that accompanies "Oh, the developers have said it can't be done. Let's just forget about it." is INCREDIBLY TOXIC, and doesn't help the game at all. It's fine if they don't want to do it, it's fine if they've chosen not to for gameplay reasons... But "performance issues" is a piss-poor excuse for anything, especially when other games have pulled it off just fine. And for you to be defending that is beyond ridiculous, especially when you have no ties to the development team or the game itself.[/QUOTE] well both spacebuild and minecraft are notorious for having awful performance. and FTL is as you said, a simple flash game. You remind me of the buittmad morons that inhabit the official forums they lose their shit as soon as people say they don't think having fullsized planets is worthwhile.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43116167]well both spacebuild and minecraft are notorious for having awful performance. and FTL is as you said, a simple flash game.[/QUOTE] I'm honestly not sure why I'm arguing with you... I'd get more give out of a brick wall.

[QUOTE=woolio1;43116184]I'm honestly not sure why I'm arguing with you... I'd get more give out of a brick wall.[/QUOTE] Yep. Official forum confirmed.

[QUOTE=woolio1;43116184]I'm honestly not sure why I'm arguing with you... I'd get more give out of a brick wall.[/QUOTE] There's nothing to argue right now my friend, and we're pushing the same thing, but you're making the wrong comparisons.

I can't decide if I like the cockpit for my carrier fighter to be low or high. The rocket launchers are more for aesthetics than anything. [t]http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/703982671815549455/FDEEF7D850D8841A8488AEBCC7B6CF4144F1FA51/[/t]

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43115756] So when someone says "I want X feature", and the devs go "no they take up too much resources", its true.[/QUOTE] more like devs are bad coders

[QUOTE=DeEz;43116579]more like devs are bad coders[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say that they are bad coders so much as they don't want to currently work on the feature because they can not think of a way to immediately implement it in a smooth fasion, and if it is added, they would rather work on it later when the game has more substance to it and they are okay with long periods between updating the game.

I'm confused as to why it would be such a drastic performance problem unless they meant for a perfect block by block representation where every cell behaves according to its neighbors. An FTL/Gmod style system is cake by comparison.

Can I just point out that the reason this game seems to have had such success in early access is that it's a completely free-form creative tool So putting the player's balls in a vice with extraneous gameplay mechanics like life support sort of undermines it all, for me at least

[QUOTE=Kommodore;43117058]Can I just point out that the reason this game seems to have had such success in early access is that it's a completely free-form creative tool So putting the player's balls in a vice with extraneous gameplay mechanics like life support sort of undermines it all, for me at least[/QUOTE] tick it on or off when creating new world e-z p-z or at least have a comprehensive enough modding API that modders can implement it themselves [editline]8th December 2013[/editline] we are going to need better block placement of course if we're going to have life support - single block airlocks etc as well as varying sizes of blast doors

[QUOTE=Kommodore;43117058]Can I just point out that the reason this game seems to have had such success in early access is that it's a completely free-form creative tool So putting the player's balls in a vice with extraneous gameplay mechanics like life support sort of undermines it all, for me at least[/QUOTE] that's why it'd be great, but as a different game mode

We have the weirdest arguments in this thread.

~passionate about spaceblocks~

I find it frustrating to no end when I hear people with no development experience asking "Why can't they just implement X feature?" It's as if they think the only reason there's no game with photorealistic graphics, molecule level physics simulation and a USB dick-stimulator is that nobody has had the idea. The question "Why don't they just" almost always has a nuanced and well-justified answer.

[QUOTE=bobsmit;43118087]I find it frustrating to no end when I hear people with no development experience asking "Why can't they just implement X feature?" It's as if they think the only reason there's no game with photorealistic graphics, molecule level physics simulation and a USB dick-stimulator is that nobody has had the idea. The question "Why don't they just" almost always has a nuanced and well-justified answer.[/QUOTE] also feature creep

my favorite is the "just make it optional then!" bargaining chip

[QUOTE=NoDachi;43118176]my favorite is the "just make it optional then!" bargaining chip[/QUOTE] Minecraft creative and Minecraft survival. Space Engineers will be more than just a tech demo eventually.

what

[QUOTE=Mbbird;43118743]Minecraft creative and Minecraft survival. Space Engineers [B]will be more than just a tech demo eventually.[/B][/QUOTE] To be fair Keen don't really have the best reputation for that