Descent Inspired Shooter Live-Stream tonight

[Darktalyn1]

I haven't played Descent in a long time, but saw this posting and thought it might be of interest to you guys!

They're doing a live stream at 6pm tonight (guess that's 9pm for those of you on the east coast) showcasing the multiplayer.

I doubt I'll be able to watch, but maybe someone here will catch the stream and give a review.

Peace, and may the Fusion Be With You

[Isaac]

[youtube]mcLhOOcGmqA[/youtube]
It has potential, I think.

[Top Gun]

They have my attention, at least.

[TigerRaptor]

Same here.

[Fiend]

the archived broadcast http://www.own3d.tv/cadenzainteractive#/watch/613188

[Sergeant Thorne]

Sounds/looks pretty impressive, actually. Now all they have to do is make it cool in addition to playable. Bubbles/rings following you in mid-air so that you can track each other? I think there really needs to be a cohesive, science-fiction precedent for everything in a game like this if you want to make it enjoyable. Can't just indiscriminately throw graphics around.

It's really cool to hear someone touting 6DOF. All right!

[flip]

They got the 6DOF but the physics are nowhere near as fluid as Descent. The sound effects don't come close and the bots are nowhere near as menacing.

[Sergeant Thorne]

I agree.

On that note just think what a new Descent game could do with enemy bots on today's graphics cards and processors. That's a part of a new Descent I never really considered. Oh man... menacing, high-detail, shiny, and complex...

If you happen to be inspired to do some 3D concept art, DT...

[Sergeant Thorne]

Watching the rest of the stream video I really don't think they have an idea that has the potential to become anywhere near as big as Descent. It's just not as awesome to fly around the inside of a computer playing virus VS system as it is to explore mines figuring out puzzles, destroying virus-crazed mining bots, and blowing reactors. Some kind of ****ed up 6DOF Tron. If you're going to make a game, make it awesome, I say. (I have always felt that any game project would be better off beginning with the third iteration also, but that's another discussion)

[sdfgeoff]

Sergeant Thorne, you mention:

Oh man... menacing, high-detail, shiny, and complex...

I disagree with complex, at least for levels. I discovered, while making levels for DEEP Space (my descent clone), that if you give too much detail (ie pipes and things) to a level, then it becomes hard to navigate in, as you keep bumping into things. That's why I prefer D1 and D2 to D3.

I agree with you about the rest though.
Seems my project has another iteration to go, this is only it's second start-over.

[Sergeant Thorne]

I hear you. I've played a level or two where the complexity started to get in the way of game-play. But hey we're talking about potential in a new game (and robots in particular). Maybe you could solve that problem with the introduction of a collision map that allows complex objects to interact simply with your ship's collision model, but still allows weapons to interact in complex ways (take scratch's eye out, or blow an arm off). All I know is that a menacing mining robot with multiple moving parts would be awesome!

[cydereal]

Hello friends! My apologies for the thread necromancy, but I was directed here from another Descent-related forum (DXX-rebirth).

I'm Cydereal, the game designer for Retrovirus and that annoying guy talking on stream, for those of you who checked it out.

We're really excited about our game, obviously, but it's way more important to me that communities like yours find something in it. We're making this game because we liked playing Descent and we wanted to see what happened when some of the basic concepts of Descent received a modern touch. That said, we're not the ultimate arbiters of what made Descent a good game. The amount of time put into 6DOF games here is immense, so naturally, I'd be a fool not to value your opinions.

So, I'm all yours. What questions do you have about our game from what you've seen so far? What things are, to you, so critical to the Descent experience that we'll be screwing ourselves if we miss them?

A bit on stuff I've already seen in this thread:

Level Detail: sdfgeoff, you nailed it. Levels with too much clutter become a pain to fly through, particularly as you dogfight. Nothing is worse than strafing up into an obstacle and losing your shot or getting stuck while you get pummeled. We're looking for a finer balance. Our movement is slightly different from Descent, in that it's a bit more "direct". You'll feel a bit less like a vehicle, in terms of delay and turn acceleration. We're a bit more like a modern FPS in that way, only you're able to move in all directions. The vehicular feeling is added in with a slight sway to the visible weapons and a very slight lag time when turning. The clutter in levels can go up somewhat, as our movement is more precise, but we're definitely cognizant of this factor. It feels really good right now boosting through a smooth surface.

On the setting: Sergeant Thorne, I hope you're wrong, haha We do have some puzzle gameplay, though right now we've only shown one level that includes it. The puzzle we have shown is a stealth level, where you've got to cloak through a level full of turrets that will ruin your day if you show yourself. In the canon, you're breaking into the Operating System to defend the system's root permissions from the virus. I'm curious, what would we be able to do to make this cool for you? Is it just a setting thing and you're not likely to dig it? Would knowing more help? Please, don't hold back if you have an opinion!

Sound and Physics: flip, our sounds right now are mostly pinched from our last game, Sol Survivor. Kind of a cop out, as what you hear is all we've got available, but that's what I've got for you on that front. Can you qualify what you mean by "the physics are nowhere near as fluid as Descent?" I'm asking because the specifics might help me make changes now, if it makes Retrovirus better.

On our "trails" in Multiplayer: Sergeant Thorne, we've not got a real canonical reason for the trails in multiplayer other than without them it can be very difficult to spot enemies. It may be that we're hand holding a bit, but this is still early. It's more a mechanical decision than a graphical or canonical one.

[Foil]

What things are, to you, so critical to the Descent experience that we'll be screwing ourselves if we miss them?

You'll get lots of feedback on this, but keep in mind that the one thing above all the rest of the things that really made Descent was the movement. Specifically:

• 6DoF (it appears you have this down, as long as your auto-leveling options can be disabled)
• Rotation-rate limits (see below)
• Velocity limits (it appears you have this in place, although I'm curious about tri-chording / thrust-vector addition)

You'll feel a bit less like a vehicle, in terms of delay and turn acceleration. We're a bit more like a modern FPS in that way, only you're able to move in all directions. The vehicular feeling is added in with a slight sway to the visible weapons and a very slight lag time when turning.

"Slight lag time"? As opposed to a rotation-rate limit? Wow, that's a red-flag to me.

A number of games touting 6DoF have utterly lost the Descent-6DoF "feel" by implementing quick-turn "mouselook" FPS controls. I sincerely hope that's not the case with your game, because quick-turn controls completely breaks the flow of close-up battles (a Descent staple), especially in multiplayer where getting the rotational advantage on an opponent is crucial.

A quick search even just on this board will tell you that "mouselook / quick-turn" controls are almost always looked upon poorly by Descent folk, simply because it turns the game into a battle of "who can point and click the fastest". And that's no different than any of the other shooters out there.

--------

The one other thing that I think you'll find Descent players commenting on is the openness / distance you guys seem to be going for. Honestly, I think that's a huge mistake, for a number of reasons, including the fact that at those distances, 6DoF doesn't play much that differently than a "ground-pounder". Descent3 had that same problem in a number of areas (weapons, level designs, etc.); take a look at the relative sales figures to Descent/Descent II, and you'll see it was a very costly mistake.

I think this is something you guys really should look at, if you want to stand out from the rest of the fps crowd. Go and look at some of the fan videos for the Descent games, especially multiplayer. You'll find that the most intense action, and nearly all of the most popular levels over the years, have been close-up / frantic / tight. Shooting distance weapons at a small blip indicated by trails... it just doesn't compare with fighting a ship you can clearly see (or you know is right on your tail).

--------

Oh, and one more thing about controls: If you want it to appeal to the full spectrum of Descent players, you'll want joystick support.

--------

I'm definitely going to be keeping tabs on your game. We as a Descent community will be hoping that it's the kind of game we've been waiting on for many many years.

[Alter-Fox]

@Thorne: In terms of making the gameplay fun, I don't think it matters very much where the story says the game takes place. It doesn't directly influence the gameplay at all (only indirectly through the stage design).
I think what matters a lot more is enemy and weapon design -- which doesn't have as much to do with the setting, especially a completely (for lack of a better word) "metaphorical" setting like this one.

And there's no way the bots can look as menacing as the ones in Descent. It's called nostalgia bias. Besides, with more complexity the scare and intimidation factor tends to go down -- probably because people don't normally get attacked by triangles and dodecahedrons that happen to have guns or claws -- people are more scared of things that, on some base level, they don't expect . It's practically impossible to add so much complexity but keep the intimidation factor from going way down.

Retrovirus is a pretty cool name, I don't deny it... but retrovirii themselves have a pretty neat modus operandi. I'm a little bit curious about whether Retrovirus is just a name or whether retroviruses (or computerized versions of them) will actually have something to do with the story. That would be awesome.

[Isaac]

You'll feel a bit less like a vehicle, in terms of delay and turn acceleration. We're a bit more like a modern FPS in that way

I'd rather have it feel like I'm dog-fighting, than "point and clicking" the enemy. Thanks, but no thanks. Good luck with your game.

[Alter-Fox]

Meh, I for one am still going to try it. Then I'll decide whether or not I like it. Even if it doesn't play exactly the same as Descent that doesn't mean it can't be fun. And there is going to be an editor and probably a modding toolset as well. I'd love to use it as an excuse to remake Descent 1 in my image .
It's pretty close-minded of you to not even try Issac... I expected better, especially from you.

[Krom]

Just an observation about Descent compared to other games in general that you probably want to keep in mind. Descent has only a cult following probably less because of the "disorienting" 6dof nature, but more because of the extreme skill divide between players. Most people if given a decent control setup can quickly adapt and be comfortable flying a ship around in a 6dof environment without getting disoriented. Navigation and orientation aren't really the problem in Descent, rather the most common reason I've seen people drop out is that experienced/expert players simply destroy them and they feel they have no hope of success.

To understand why, one needs to look at some more common and top selling first person shooter games with mass market appeal and look at the real differences between them and Descent:

Most ground based first person shooters out there have a significant dependency on point-and-click with a mouse (because this is a very easy to grasp and master control scheme) and most weapons travel across the map instantly, this means that frequently whoever points-and-clicks faster wins. The mouselook nature of aiming means there is basically no advantage to getting behind another player, since players can turn instantly, even if you are behind them it is still reasonably possible for them to turn and shoot you first. The tactical limits of these games are basic concepts like who has higher ground, or who has better cover, and reload/fire rate timings. There are a few variables the player needs to track, but none of them are particularly daunting; locate/recognize enemy players first, dodge weapons that cause splash damage, don't get pinned down or cornered, try to keep moving your character randomly in order to out twitch your opponents aim. However the reach and aim of most weapon fire is a constant, and the location of enemy players is also going to often be constrained by gravity. This gives everyone a fairly even playing field which lends itself to mass market appeal, ease of use, and hopefully increased sales from "casual gamers".

Descent on the other hand is very different, the limited turn rates, the relatively quick acceleration of the ships, the limited weapon travel speeds, and the often close quarters combat adds whole new tactical dimensions (and complications) to the game. Some environmental advantages like higher ground lose relevance and cover can just as easily be used as a blind spot or corner against you. Because of the limited turn speed, it is common for you to be right next to an enemy ship but unable to shoot at them. Which means where you are, where you are going, which way you are pointed, which way you are turning, and where your opponent is, which way they are going, which way they are pointed, and which way they are turning are all vitally important to your success. Its an enormous number of variables to track before you have even fired a single shot! Then we get to actually shooting at them...which because of the non-instant nature of most weapons gets the whole scenario even more complicated, often enough even if you are pointed directly at your opponent they will still be able to dodge your shots. So you have to take all that position/movement information and further use it to predict your opponents next likely moves so you can lead your shots ahead of them in order to actually score hits, all while trying to feint them out to avoid their shots. And then, as if it wasn't bad enough already, experienced players with solid controls can exploit multiple vectors and chording in order to actually accelerate, move and turn faster!

So what this all means is that in order to succeed in Descent you have to beat your opponent not only at aiming, timing, and weapon management, but also at positioning, feinting, and outright prediction. Rather than provide an even playing field between players, Descent practically goes out of its way to make it uneven. Because there are so many variables, there are a lot more skills to master and there are multiple methods to success with plenty of blurring between the lines.

Descent's cult following is not because of the uniqueness of the game, its because the game brings out the uniqueness of its players. And to be honest, designing a game like that is commercial suicide, skilled players from Descent will slaughter and intimidate any potential new audience of "casual gamers" away from buying such a game.

[cydereal]

And this is why this community is fantastic..!

So. Yes, right now we're a bit more on the direct "point and click" movement style, but there is a limit to how quickly you can rotate. In our earlier builds this effect was more pronounced, and it made flying well a rewarding thing in its own right.

My favorite movement scheme in our own game felt more like drifting. Under normal movement conditions, WASD+Space+Shift gave you full control of strafing, and the mouse turned you with more limiting than it does now. Then, the player could hold Right Click to engage a speed boost. While boosting, adjusting direction with any input was slowed, representing the thrust of the ship. Learning to account for this additional limitation made me feel like a badass when I could really quickly loop around a pillar and catch someone who didn't quite have that skill in them.

I just spoke with one of our programmers--in specific the guy who has implemented movement--and he agrees that we should have a (very limited) test with a few of the hardcore Descent community members in the next few weeks. We'd give you a really early build, get on a voice chat with you and have you guys lay down the law. If we did it right we might even be able to make quick changes to settings to show you a before and after. We have control over all of the parameters here because it's our own home grown engine, so it's more a matter of getting the settings right in the eyes of the community. We're not trying to remake Descent, so there are some differences, but it's really important to our whole team that your community finds these differences new and unique rather than simply poor approximations of the original.

Krom, you're dead on with where "casuals" drop out with the genre. We've found in testing that it's hard to get people to adjust to objectives being on the floor or ceiling, and navigation is a skill that even experienced gamers have to re-learn. So far, FPS skill transitions pretty well into Retrovirus. At our LAN group, our best FPS players are our best Retrovirus players. Players die easily enough though that a 3v1, with the 1 being a vastly superior player, almost always ends in favor of the three. Our livelihood is on the line with Retrovirus, so we've got to find that medium between Descent's hardcore skillcap and the more approachable host of modern FPS games. Put another way, rather than having trichording or bunny hopping being a necessary thing that players have to know without it being an explicit mechanic, I'd rather we have a Tribes-esque slide mechanic that's put on the table early but is hard to master.

(Forgive me for assuming trichording was an unintended bonus rather than a planned feature. If I'm wrong, please say so!)

I can jabber on about this sort of thing forever though; really, we'd just need some of you guys to come play with us.

If any of you are based in Southern California, shoot me an email, <dbarker> <cadenzainteractive> <com> and I can make a time for you to come in house to test. Otherwise, keep your eyes peeled here and I'll post when we've got a Descent community test ready.

[Alter-Fox]

Krom's post is why I sometimes call Descent "midair chess".
Trichording was an unintended bonus in the first game, afterwards Parallax didn't fix it because everyone would have hated them if they did.

And for everyone else, even with all this talk about "point and click ruining the skill factor" we still have a huge advantage over anyone else who plays the game -- anyone who can hang out in a game of D2 (or D1 or D3) can intuitively think in 3 dimesions. Compared to the competition we'd play like dolphins (or birds for people who don't understand that analogy).

[Isaac]

It's pretty close-minded of you to not even try Issac... I expected better, especially from you.

The number of games I really want to play is HUGE. My time is limited.

[cydereal]

The number of games I really want to play is HUGE. My time is limited.

We're going to be bringing in some members of this and other Descent communities to hopefully arrive at something that hardcore communities like. If you're really opinionated and knowledgeable on the matter, we'd love to hear from you.

[Sergeant Thorne]

Hello friends! My apologies for the thread necromancy, but I was directed here from another Descent-related forum (DXX-rebirth).

I'm Cydereal, the game designer for Retrovirus and that annoying guy talking on stream, for those of you who checked it out.

We're really excited about our game, obviously, but it's way more important to me that communities like yours find something in it. We're making this game because we liked playing Descent and we wanted to see what happened when some of the basic concepts of Descent received a modern touch. That said, we're not the ultimate arbiters of what made Descent a good game. The amount of time put into 6DOF games here is immense, so naturally, I'd be a fool not to value your opinions.

So, I'm all yours. What questions do you have about our game from what you've seen so far? What things are, to you, so critical to the Descent experience that we'll be screwing ourselves if we miss them?

Hey Cydereal, thanks for dropping in and replying! Didn't realize these critiques would end up being directed at you folks.

...

On the setting: Sergeant Thorne, I hope you're wrong, haha We do have some puzzle gameplay, though right now we've only shown one level that includes it. The puzzle we have shown is a stealth level, where you've got to cloak through a level full of turrets that will ruin your day if you show yourself. In the canon, you're breaking into the Operating System to defend the system's root permissions from the virus. I'm curious, what would we be able to do to make this cool for you? Is it just a setting thing and you're not likely to dig it? Would knowing more help? Please, don't hold back if you have an opinion!

Hey, I hope I'm wrong too. Maybe that could be cool. Might just be a matter of personal taste, however I don't believe a game can thrive without a story/setting that grabs grabs people's attention and makes them want to play--even want to like the game. It has to capture the imagination. If you can make people want to like your game after reading the box/game description, don't ruin it in the introduction, and then back it up with solid gameplay, graphics, "enemy and weapon design" (Alter-Fox), and so forth, then you've got a real winner, IMO. Imagination is a powerful ally (wielded nefariously by our latest president, but I digress ). If they want to like it you've won half the battle, because they will even overlook imperfections (kind of like someone in love), and as long as you don't do anything to spoil that you're golden.

...

On our "trails" in Multiplayer: Sergeant Thorne, we've not got a real canonical reason for the trails in multiplayer other than without them it can be very difficult to spot enemies. It may be that we're hand holding a bit, but this is still early. It's more a mechanical decision than a graphical or canonical one.

Understood, and I followed your reasoning in the video as well. Almost wouldn't even nitpick it, understanding that what we're seeing is still in the development stage, I just think that your circles detract from the immersion in the game by making me wonder why there are circles following your ship, instead of being something a little more believable, like some kind of static electrical trail or something I can figure out which still serves your mechanical purpose.

Despite my critiques on the core of your game (:P), I'm pretty interested because every indication I've seen leaves me with the impression that you guys really have your heads in the right place on this, and that's awesome. Has nothing to do with the fact that you're here giving us audience to criticize your work. You're obviously trying to make a unique, substantive 6DOF offering, for the sake of 6DOF, and that's nothing but great in my book. I really look forward to it.

[cydereal]

I'm streaming on own3d.tv/cydereal if you want to watch some Retrovirus crunch development. Not for long tonight, and "off the record" as it were. Just figured I'd extend the invitation.

[Krom]

I'd say the best way to go is to design a 6dof game that you want, something that will sell on its own merits and doesn't have to copy Descent, make it easier and fun for inexperienced players. With any luck it will bring in a new audience with something they can enjoy and can generate an installed user base. After that all you should need to do to make Descent players happy is make the engine able to do a true "Hardcore Descent mode" that could with the right models and levels pass for a straight up copy of Descent, but with better graphics, bigger levels, more environments, and a more robust / flexible engine. Then put out a good level editor, a standard set of Descent style multiplayer game modes, and a decent SDK. With those tools, the Descent community will probably work miracles for you at little to no extra cost...

Although it really depends on how much time/work you want to put into cloning Descent, but I'd say at least keep it in mind for a potential mod.

Oh and one word of caution, a cult following like this community is going to be at times very picky about the game mechanics and if you work with them for a long time you will probably run into some ... how shall I say ... "extremist personalities". If you do, don't take it personally.

[cydereal]

Krom: Well said on modding. Our editor is a releasable thing. We're going to need to build up a lot of documentation, but modders will likely step into it easily. Maybe the attempts to get Retrovirus playing as much like Descent as possible will come via the community.

[Alter-Fox]

Is it a BSP based engine or something else?
It would be cool to learn something completely new, but I understand the popularity of BSP...

[Krom]

Good to hear, normal multiplayer games tend to sink or swim depending on the quality and availability of user made maps, so having a polished map editor bundled in on release day would definitely be encouraging for the community.

Also leaving the finer details of doing a Descent clone/remake to a modding community would dodge various legal issues that are hanging over Descent. Mainly it is the IP rights which are pretty much caught in legal limbo hell: IIRC Parallax Software has the main rights when it comes to creating a Descent sequel or remake and Interplay holds all the trademarks. So the current situation would likely generate problems for any commercial attempts because 1: Parallax doesn't exist anymore and 2: Interplay is almost perpetually struggling to remain in business. Fortunately free community created total conversion mods built for other games/engines can clear the bulk of that pretty easily (there are even a few projects like that currently ongoing, listed right on the DBB index page).

And I know there would be plenty of people here willing to do the day to day grind of porting models, weapons, maps, and fine tuning the ship handling. Heck, I would be all over tweaking a ship and weapons to simulate Descent, I'm always tinkering with games that can be modded with a text editor. Just give me some physics that mathematically behave like Descent and I'd probably have an anarchy game going with some friends in a couple days.

[Alter-Fox]

I do have this project planned that might make Interplay some money if they're still alive in a few years... but I shan't discuss it until the time is right.

[cydereal]

Krom: The kind of modding you're talking about--ship congfig, weapons, and the like--can already be done in Paragon. Very easily, in fact.

We're always kind of curious about why the 6DOF genre vanished. We've seen games devote little slices to the idea, but nobody has made a full 6DOF game. I figure if anyone knows, it'd be someone in the Descent communities.

We're also streaming again tonight, 6:00pm US Pacific time: http://own3d.tv/cadenzainteractive

[Krom]

Given how many copies Descent 1 sold and the state of online / multiplayer connectivity at the time, I think its fairly likely Descent sold mostly on its single player campaign which at any skill level is much easier to succeed at than multiplayer.

I don't think even in the first couple weeks to months after Descent 3 shipped that I ever saw even 100 players online in multiplayer at once, where other traditional ground based first person shooter games easily have thousands of players online at any given time. At least it would appear the state of the single player game is hugely important to the ultimate success of a title like Descent. (Descent 3's single player campaign is pretty much universally considered the weakest of the three, it is often called tedious and frustrating, which may be a significant portion of why Descent 3 ultimately lost money.)

For the first year or two I was playing Descent I was a keyboard only player and I couldn't dodge a homing missile to save my life. My play style was to carefully lean a wing around a corner and pick off robots with quad lasers from where they couldn't shoot at me, and that was on trainee skill level. By the time I got Descent 2, I had begun to move a little better with sliding, but I still rarely banked (although I never used auto-level). I still couldn't dodge a homing weapon barring a miracle (I found out years later was mostly the fault of high framerate dependencies), but pretty much everything else I could handle in without having to hide behind corners all the time (just some of the time ). It wasn't until late 1998 when I got online, found this site and learned about the upcoming Descent 3 title that I finally abandoned my keyboard only configuration and added in a sidewinder precision pro joystick, it was the best change I ever made. It took me a couple weeks with the then available Descent 3 demo 1 to adjust to a joystick, but once I did, it opened up my freedom of movement to a whole new level and I improved rapidly from there. It was around then when I started playing multiplayer online. After a few months, when I would take a break and go back to play a single player game of Descent 1, my method of play had changed from peeking around corners and sniping with lasers, to bursting into the room and destroying everything with liberal applications of both primary and secondary weapons while dodging all incoming shots using the full range of available movement. It was like I was a different person entirely, and I have never found another game with the potential for me to improve my skill to that extent, most don't even come close.

I guess the point of it is that the single player campaign in Descent might not be very original (find blue->yellow->red keys->[rescue hostages optional]->reactor->escape, rinse-repeat), but it is consistently fun and accessible on the Trainee skill level to even completely new and inexperienced players. Descent 1 simply had the perfect mix, it was accessible but challenging and could scale up the challenge with the skill of the player, ultimately leading them to multiplayer. It kept people around and playing it for so long because it was hugely rewarding for anyone who took on the challenges and worked to improve themselves.

A casual multiplayer game has to be easy and accessible to the level of casual gamers or they will quickly abandon it out of frustration. So getting casual gamers in while preserving the feel of multiplayer Descent is probably impossible because multiplayer Descent is practically the dictionary definition of extreme hardcore gaming.

[cydereal]

A casual multiplayer game has to be easy and accessible to the level of casual gamers or they will quickly abandon it out of frustration. So getting casual gamers in while preserving the feel of multiplayer Descent is probably impossible because multiplayer Descent is practically the dictionary definition of extreme hardcore gaming.

This is pretty much the lesson of the last ten years of gaming. It's why Brood War is yielding to SC2, and it's why League of Legends has the biggest lead in the MOBA eSports space. (Not saying either is superior, just observing!) Players have to feel like they can jump into a game and hit the minimum competence very easily. Our last game, Sol Survivor, took like 30 minutes to hit that point. Retrovirus is about a minute of poking at the flight controls before getting comfortable.

We're not going to be an extremely hardcore game, but with testing, I'd like to bring the multiplayer to a state where a skilled player can go 1v3, but not trivially. I get the sensation that in Descent, a skilled player will crap all over newbies and it won't even be close. Really, if you have FPS skill, the mechanics are similar but the predictive thoughts about enemy movement and shot placement are more akin to Descent. You guys are going to have such a leg up because you're already used to thinking in that space.

You guys have no idea how excited it makes the guys on the team to come in and read discussion on this board and others within the Descent community. You are all totally justifying our decision to make the game we're making!

[Krom]

Yeah, 1v3 is totally possible in Descent, I did it once vs three of my cousins and the results weren't pretty; I beat them by 130 to -7 in a 20 some odd minute match, they just couldn't touch me at all. Actually if I was put in a sufficiently large map I probably could have kept that up regardless of how many of them there were against me, it was just that big of a divide between us. I had years of experience at it on a highly competitive level of play, they had minutes at best.

Actually that LAN party was a pretty good example of casual games vs Descent, since when we played the "revenge match" in "their" game (one of the Unreal Tournament series, forget which one) I had never played the game before but was able to hold my own almost immediately and actually started to beat them with some weapons in less than 15 minutes of play.

After that, when we did our Christmas or Thanksgiving LAN parties we usually ended up playing cooperative games instead of competitive ones...

[Alter-Fox]

We think like dolphins. That is enough advantage for slaughterage.
Some of us have trouble with groundpounder games because we're too used to the freedom of 6DoF. So needless to say we're looking forward to this no matter whether it's hardcore.

And yeah, I used to beat the crap out of Xaihyv and Klixovann whenever they came over for a LAN, but they learned... quickly. At least I'm lucky enough to have a brother and a friend who both enjoy this game. But they (and some TF2) are the reason we've renamed the Omega cannon in our circle.

[Sirius]

The Descent players I know who played FPS games generally found them pretty easy to adapt to - they are fairly intuitive. Other way around is ... apparently a bit of a step!

[Foil]

The same experience here: When I've brought friends into Descent multiplayer games, even friends who are generally very good at FPS, they've generally gotten the crap kicked out of them.

The learning curve for singleplayer 6DoF can be steep for inexperienced players. The learning curve for multiplayer 6DoF (especially for Descent) typically kills, even for experienced gamers. Very very few stick around long enough to get past the "holy crap, I have 2 kills and 35 deaths" stage.

In any case, please pardon those here who want the hardcore 6DoF action (including me). I'll have to reconcile myself to the fact that RV is going to be targeted at a shallower learning curve, and hope it's still something that "feels right". I'm looking forward to something playable at some point.

[CDN_Merlin]

6dof games are hard when coming from a FPS. When I first started multiplayer in 1997, it took me 3 months of playing 4 hours a night to get above 50%. But sadly today most kids don't want to invest that much time in a game to get good. Kids today are to spoiled.

Looking forward to a demo.

[Krom]

In any case, please pardon those here who want the hardcore 6DoF action (including me). I'll have to reconcile myself to the fact that RV is going to be targeted at a shallower learning curve, and hope it's still something that "feels right". I'm looking forward to something playable at some point.

Which is why we need a mod that gives us a hardcore Descent mode, right long with its months long learning curve. Think of the shallower default mode as a way of generating an installed base that we could then pull players from into to the hardcore mode. It'd just be up to the community to make the hardcore mode look fun and play even better so it would generate some interest and bring in new players.

The thing about casual FPS games is I think they generate a lot of sales, but they don't really have a lot of staying power afterwards. To me most casual games feel like they are just trying to make as many sales as possible in that 2-6 month hype window before the title burns out, and then they are forgotten almost entirely. 6 months later everyone has played it out, gotten bored, and moved on to the next casual game. On the other hand, once a player gets hooked on a hardcore game like Descent they could easily end up playing it for years, that is serious staying power that you won't find in casual games.

Having both a casual mode and a Descent mode in one game would probably be the best of both worlds. If we could get a perfect Descent clone MOD off the ground early on and keep a pool of active players in it, we could probably convert casual gamers who are growing bored with the default mode into the Descent mode and keep them interested and playing for a lot longer.

[cydereal]

In any case, please pardon those here who want the hardcore 6DoF action (including me). I'll have to reconcile myself to the fact that RV is going to be targeted at a shallower learning curve, and hope it's still something that "feels right". I'm looking forward to something playable at some point.

Don't worry about the shallow learning curve for RV's content. Krom kind of addressed it already, but our tool for RV ("Paragon") will allow the communities we're chatting with already to recreate the hardcore 6DoF experience. The Descent communities we're in touch with have the talent to do it, and we'll add features post-release as often as we can that support that effort.

If we do this right, the game will be easy enough to pick up and play that the "average" FPS player will discover it, be interested because it isn't just another modern war ground pounder, and then stick around. If even 5% of those guys play hardcore modes, we'd probably have a great thing going!

[flip]

I think the more human like your ship moves the better. It should feel like you would expect but also respecting the atmosphere. If that makes any sense

[cydereal]

Our livestream is going to be delayed this week until tomorrow, June 7th at 6:00pm Pacific. Sorry for the delay, we're going to be busy catching up on some deadline stuff.