graphics wish for final version

nice idea, could be cool

Well, most of the graphics we have at the moment are placeholders -- we still don't know whats going to end up replacing them. Some things -- like the new Kol -- we've been given "early", but for the rest, who knows?

A lot of effects are final, a lot are placeholders and a lot aren't even in yet (in beta 4 anyways). I don't think we have any lightning bolt type effects but I haven't seen the latest ones.

Way to be vague

its what he's paid to do, you dont think he actually works on sins do you?

Boy oh boy, I cant wait till all the eye candy gets put in! Go gobots go!

Actually the Vasari battleship has pulse beams that are sort of like lightning.

Lightning is a very difficult effect to simulate accurately as an example look at the Ion Distruptor in X3 where Egosoft got it completely wrong.

UT3 has a nice effect with their 'lightning gun'....

Thanks a lot for all the replies. Hopefully you'll add such weapon type effect!
The Vasari battleship's pulse beam comes close, but is still very straight/ like a normal laser.

The best effect I've seen was the Solon ships' weapons in Hegemonia, so an effect like this can be done right and look really impressive then.

Stefan

i noticed that in some scenario's there is suposed to be an astroid ring.
and when u play this it turns out there are just like 3 astroidfields around the planet but they dont form a belt at all.

now i understand its impossible to make the 3 fields 1 belt, but is it possible to just draw a belt between these fields?

not even moving and unable to travel along the rocks but just for show, so u still keep the 3 fields as is but just have some rocks in the background connecting them and surrounding the planet or whatever the astroid belt is supposed to surround.

maybe in the same way the background changes when zooming in on different colored stars(systems)?

44RS, what are you talking about?

If your talking about the crytal / metal asteroids around each planet, they aren't supposed to be a ring or a field -- their a concession by the devs to the necessity of game play.

no i dont mean the resource astroids around the planet, im talkin about the "level/map" itself.

for example, when u play a game of Close Encounters.
the description of the scenario is:

"Only a thin astroid belt seperates neighboring empires.
Expand quickly but warily, an assault may come at a moment's notice."



But the astroid belt consist of just a few astroidfields, as in u got planets with resource astroids and astroids with resource astroids, the last i call astroidfields.

I mean is it possible tp connect these fields with some astroids in between so they form a belt, it will stay a field with the same gravity well, i just mean a trail of small rocks between the fields so they form a belt.

maybe u dont even need models and can just use textures or something, like the way the background changes when u zoom in on a different color star/solarsystem.

so u got fields, with gravity wells within a big picture of a belt, like its just show but there are 3 astroids big enough within the belt to have a gravity well.

I'd say its way too late at this point to try anything like that.

ok, twas just an idea

im also andering, is it possible to tilt some solar systems on their side?

I mean when u play a game with like four stars they are all layd down the same.

as in te planets are turning around the equator of the sun and for all suns up and down are the same.

i think it would look cool if some system "twist" not from "left to right" but form "up to down".

maybe im a little vague but i dont know how to put it else:)

I'm not sure what your asking 44RS -- star systems and planets do already have some Z axis randomization, its slight but its there.

no, hes talking about the entire solar system to be tilted a few degrees on the plane, making you have to spin the camera around every time you try to look at a different solar system

Um, Ick, horrid idea.

it would add to the realism and the overal feel of "alien" difference between systems, the changing of ur perspective wouldn't really matter in my opppinion, especially with the empire tree

The changing of perspective does matter, hugely. It would amplify the (huge!) need for a frame of reference (currently lacking you will note!) and leave people even more confused than they are right now. I tend to pick one direction as "north" and stick with it -- and so do most others, I believe! -- but having to flip and twist your view makes that impossible, making things even more confusing. And without a shared frame of reference (e. g. a "north" and a "south") directional communication is impossible (I'll engage him on the north, you on the south, etc etc ).

Fact is, we desperately need a frame of reference -- going and mucking up what little reference we do have, is a Bad Idea.

iunno about really needing a frame of reference, but the rest he said was true

It seems to me a simple built-in compass would solve most peoples area awareness issues.

Which is why I have, oh-so-subtly, been campaigning for it -- a directional reference, AKA compass!

I`d like to see already excellent graphics swollen up with higher poly-count versions that require Pixar-level animators to generate, so that despite no visible difference at anything but artificially close-up ranges I can write a promotional statement about the game declaring the insane number of polys present in each entity.

And then have the announcement follow of even more totally unnecessary poly count increases in the next entry in the series.

(grin different-fps-game-starting-with-'C'-and-ending-with-'s'`ishly)