Topic: So I've made a 6DoF game

[Scottris]

This feels a lot stranger than I thought it would, coming back here after all these years. I'm guessing it's been about ten years since I've read this forum.. I guess it's not even the same forum, technically.. and longer still since I posted anything. I should be surprised that this site still exists; seems nothing lasts that long anymore.. and yet, I'm not surprised, because I never expected it to go anywhere. I never expected anything to change. I suppose that's rather typical, isn't it? Ok, way off topic; I'm getting lost in my head and that's NOT why I'm here. No, I'm here because I never forgot about Descent. In fact, I've been more than a little obsessed.. not exactly with Descent, so much as the idea of Descent. I've thought about it; what I liked about it, what I could improve about it. Moreover, I've been working to make something of it, to realize my ideas, my obsession; and I have. That's why I am here. Ladies and gentlemen, fellow Descent fans, I present to you now, my labor of love, a massive ten year project, my game: a multiplayer 6DoF shooter I call, Talon. It's not quite done, but it is close. I shall be looking for beta testers soon.

TL;DR: I made a descent-inspired 6DoF shooter, check it out: talongame.com

[Scyphi]

Very nice! It's like Descent meets Team Fortress.  My only real issue with it is that I'm not entirely sold on the HUD, but that's a relatively minor thing in the long run. The game itself looks like lots of fun, and the Descent influence is quite readily apparent (especially in those weapons).

[VANGUARD]

I can't say much. Maybe I have internet issues or something. It keeps locking up at 0:29 or 0:30 seconds.

[Pumo]

Oh my, it looks terrific!
It's the most similar to Descent game I've seen (of course, taking Sol Contingency appart) in years! Not even Forsaken had that touch, and as I could see on the vid, this game has a movement very similar to Descent.

IMVHO, it looks much more promising than what Miner Wars was for me, and maybe even better than Retrovirus, except for one small thing, very specific in my case.

I'm a loner, a Single-player avid fan, and as this game is indeed made as an MP arena style game, I would like to ask:
It will be moddeable in some form, so can anyone make weapon/ship/level modifications, and eventually, a scripted Single player mod, if anybody wants to?

[Scottris]

Thanks guys.   Despite the differences, I do hope Descent fans will find it enjoyable.

It will be moddeable in some form, so can anyone make weapon/ship/level modifications, and eventually, a scripted Single player mod, if anybody wants to?

Yes. That will be entirely possible. Ultimately, I hope the game does attract a strong modding community. My desire was to build a solid base game, and I'd like to see people building on it.

@ Scyphi: I would of course encourage you to give the HUD a try before passing final judgment, but I will tell you that, should you so choose, it will be quite easy to swap out the HUD textures; or even implement a small client-side mod that disables the HUD entirely (although you would loose the valuable information it provides).

[-<WillyP>-]

WOW!!! Yep that about sums it up.


But, I am curious about your decision to eliminate bi/ tricording. I read the explanation in the pilot training section, and you've explained it in that context, but I am curious why you would make this game without it.

[Scyphi]

But, I am curious about your decision to eliminate bi/ tricording. I read the explanation in the pilot training section, and you've explained it in that context, but I am curious why you would make this game without it.

I don't see anything of the such saying that there's no bi/tricording, and in rewatching the gameplay video, it certainly FELT like there was at least bicording...

I would of course encourage you to give the HUD a try before passing final judgment

Oh, and I intend to. Probably just need to get used to it, but I just thought I'd get it out there that something about it bugs me. Not entirely sure what yet...my first instinct would be to say that it's too busy, only it's clearly not. I'm starting to think that I don't like the circular shape of the HUD...I dunno. Is there any reason it has to have that circle shape in the middle? I couldn't immediately see much reason, but that doesn't mean I'm not overlooking something...

But like I said, it's a relatively minor thing. I like just about everything else I see about the game.

[Foil]

I'll say it more bluntly: 

The lack of tri-chording will cause many Descent fans, including myself, to avoid your game, which otherwise looks amazing.  If you want the hardcore 6DoF players, you need to allow it, perhaps as an "advanced flight" option.

-------

If you don't mind me asking, why did you decide to not allow tri-chording?  Do you (like at least one other user here *cough*Kaia*cough*) have some personal grievance against it, or is it a limitation of the Torque engine you're using?

[Foil]

I don't see anything of the such saying that there's no bi/tricording...

It's in the "Flight Dynamics" portion of this page.

[Scyphi]

It must be hidden somewhere in all of that techno-babble that is just flying right over my head, then. 

But I am interested in knowing why the lack of bi/tricording myself now too. Personally, I have a hard time imagining playing any 6DoF game that doesn't feature it...it seems so essential to it...

[Foil]

Talon fighters have normalized thrust vectors, meaning that combining thrust axes does not increase thrust.

[Scottris]

Yeah, I expected that the trichording issue would need additional explanation.

Here's the deal: You CAN and SHOULD combine multiple thrust vectors, but in Talon, you do it because you want to move in *that* direction, for tactical reasons, not because moving in a diagonal direction is faster than an orthogonal one.

"But that's 6DoF sacrilege!", so why would I do such a thing, you ask? Because, I like the six-axis system for the freedom it provides. Trichording actually *reduces* that freedom, by making some directions better than others. This is something that actually began to annoy me towards the end of my time playing Descent.

I know this is a hard pill to swallow. When you first discover the trichording mechanic, it is exciting, it seems like an excellent idea, because you have discovered a way to move faster than the other guy. BUT, what happens is that, in time, everybody "discovers" this. So now you are no longer utilizing this trick to gain an advantage, now you *must* use it, just to stay competitive. If you *don't* trichord as often as you can, then you *will be slower* than the other players. Which means that at any given time, your choice of directions is reduced from 26 (every possible combination of axis), down to JUST 8! (the fastest diagonal vectors). See the problem?

That is why I normalize the vectors in Talon, and upped the speed. I didn't make the diagonal vectors slower, I made the other vectors faster. Yes, it means that you no longer gain an advantage over new players from knowing this trick, but I believe the benefits outweigh that cost.

This also explains why it is impractical to implement a trichording option. Which way would it go? Would the diagonal vectors be faster than the baseline? Thus giving certain players a nearly-double speed advantage in certain directions? That is not at all fair. Or would trichording players simply have slower cardinal vectors? That's not unfair, if it's your choice, but why would you choose that?

This is not a decision I made lightly. I gave it a great deal of thought, and testing, over many years. I would strongly encourage everyone to give it a try before condemning this system.

[Pumo]

When you first discover the trichording mechanic, it is exciting, it seems like an excellent idea, because you have discovered a way to move faster than the other guy. BUT, what happens is that, in time, everybody "discovers" this. So now you are no longer utilizing this trick to gain an advantage, now you *must* use it, just to stay competitive. If you *don't* trichord as often as you can, then you *will be slower* than the other players...

That's exactly the same argument Kaiaatzel (a well known user here for his tri-chording bashing lol  ) always use, so he will be happy to read what you just said.

And TBH, what you're saying sounds pretty reasonable and I mostly agree.
I do like tri-chording, but never been such a die-hard follower of it, maybe because I don't play MP very often, and I just use it a few times in Single-player (sometimes is not even needed).
For me, tri-chording doesn't defines Descent as it is, although I know many players think that Descent = Tri-chording, for me it's right if you decide not to include it in Talon.
As you said, you already made a speed boost in general, so I suppose it will be right like that.

[NUMBERZero]

Chording is not just about speed. It is a tactical choice. The tradeoff for having greater speed means that you are now at an angle, therefore increasing the distance from your crosshairs to the target. Whereas flying straight ahead, you will have your guns prepared to fire at anything and anyone at any time, anywhere. So the other guy may "move faster," but he can't "react faster."


For example, I switch between the two flying styles, straight and chording, depending on my opponents. Those who like chording tend to slam themselves into the wall as they are burning around a corner to try to get behind you. Against those types of people, I like to fly straight so that I can be ready and I can direct my fire against that wall that they are heading towards. A powerful missile usually does the trick, or I barge in in front of them, they literally push me as they turn around, and I get behind them instead at point-blank. They they cannot counter my straight flying. This is actually how I get half of my kills and people HATE me for it. XD

I use chording for when I want to ambush unwary foes and then skip away after having made my guerrilla attack. I also use it to speed past defenses to hurry to objectives or to try to survive something. Or just the opposite, to chase after the guy on his way to the objective or to safety.

And of course, you can mix the two styles together. I have had Smart Missiles detonate just a few feet away and I have been able to react fast enough to hurry out of the way. I remember that I was flying straight one time, therefore I was able to see where it detonated. I had plenty of time to react to it, and was able to dodge out of the way with the speed that tri-chording provides.

[Scottris]

@NUMBERZero: You are entirely correct. I disagree with nothing you said. I was a regular multiplayer player myself back in the day. I used those tactics, as you describe. However, such a tactical trade-off as that is exactly what I don't want in a 6DoF game. For the same reason that I don't like conventional flight sims or flight-sim-mechanic space fighters, as they force one to make the tactical decision to either perform defensive/evasive maneuvers OR engage and attack the target; because you can't do both at once. Now, those are perfectly good games, if that is what you like. They have certain mechanics with which you must work, and you use tactics suitable for those conditions. There is nothing objectively wrong with that. Nor is there anything objectively wrong with trichording, and the tactics and trade-offs involved, if that is what you like. I simply do not like playing with those restrictions. I liked Descent, because it did not have the constraints that conventional flight sims did. Eventually I realized that, while that is true, it did have its own set of constraints, of similar underlying principles. Now I find those constraints annoying, as I do with flight sims. I want greater freedom of movement. It is not that one way is right, and the other wrong. It is about what you want out of a game.