test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
What EXACTLY about the engine limits this game?
System
Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I see people chalk up frustrations, disappointments or things that they dislike about the game to the game engine being shared with Champions.
Now, there are things I think could be better with a longer development timeline or with certain choices re-evaluated.
HOWEVER...
The engine itself is not "old"; it was developed from the ground up for a game that was released five months before STO. I fail to see how it's ill-suited to a Star Trek game or how anything I've ever seen as a complaint about this game is due to the engine's limitations.
An engine handles the networking and graphics. Most of the graphical limitations are not due to the engine but what the target user's computer can handle (ie. polygon budgets). In terms of instancing vs. multiple servers vs. the cap on players per instance... None of that is necessarily tied to the engine. In terms of the combat systems employed? Again, not tied to the engine.
Now, in terms of bugs with line of sight or an enemy failing to spawn, those are issues with the engine itself being too new, not with it being a "bad engine" and certainly not with it being "old".
Now, there are things I think could be better with a longer development timeline or with certain choices re-evaluated.
HOWEVER...
The engine itself is not "old"; it was developed from the ground up for a game that was released five months before STO. I fail to see how it's ill-suited to a Star Trek game or how anything I've ever seen as a complaint about this game is due to the engine's limitations.
An engine handles the networking and graphics. Most of the graphical limitations are not due to the engine but what the target user's computer can handle (ie. polygon budgets). In terms of instancing vs. multiple servers vs. the cap on players per instance... None of that is necessarily tied to the engine. In terms of the combat systems employed? Again, not tied to the engine.
Now, in terms of bugs with line of sight or an enemy failing to spawn, those are issues with the engine itself being too new, not with it being a "bad engine" and certainly not with it being "old".
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"No Hemi"
(And snap on the "instancing", that's the only beef I have tech wise.)
EDIT (Afterthought)
This is assuming that the Z axis is "locked" and if "unlocked" could be used. Otherwise, the lack of a Z-axis is the biggest flaw with the engine.
(Free the Z)
I worked with heroengine for over 3 years, and like an MMO, it evolves as you use it. When I first began using it, it didn't have seamless environments (you needed to piece things together via assets). Though, it was in around the time Bioware purchased a license (nice guys, btw).
Same with AI. Same with a lot of things. If it's developed as a core system, each game they use will gain benefits from the engine being worked on, and in time, limitations can be overcome.
Another big part is how well the content designers can make use of the technology. Some of the geekier people might do more with it than the less geeky people. It depends...
EDIT:
An "engine" is probably more inclusive than you imagine, it certainly wouldn't be just graphics and networking (try to imagine a level editor with a scripting available -- with wrappers for virtually everything -- input, sound, entities/objects/etc). Though the line of sight errors you're mentioning are probably related to extrapolation, not the engine necessarily being unable to perform a decent ray cast (which is easy). For play experience, the leniency might be too high or low in some cases, which is something that might stand to be tweaked on more.
That's how many years old now?
But the STO engine has a lot of new shiny bits.
-np
Not true and if it were, there would be some liability there as Cryptic doesn't own the CoH engine.
It was built from the ground up. The similarities are likely cases where some of the same people were involved in both and so they used systems they were familiar with.
Unless he has proof, I'm going with a modded Champions engine, as has been stated many a time.
Of course, if Cryptic really wanted to, they could always built a brand new shiny engine.:D
They just built a new engine LAST YEAR. I'd rather they polished this engine up before creating a new one that would probably be exactly the same anyway.
Or, orrrrrr... they could fork out about 700k and license the ur3 engine.
or.. or.. the Cryengine 3!
Lots of awesome pre builts out there and we all know cryptics spankin rich.
Actually, Cryptic owns the City of Heroes engine. NCsoft licenses it from Cryptic, and presumably has been doing so since they bought out Cryptic's stake in the game. NCsoft owns the IP and assets, not the engine.
Also, Cryptic employees seem to refer to City of Heroes as using the 'Cryptic Engine' as well. When Star Trek Online was initially announced, I remember several interviews and videos where they said STO would be using the Cryptic Engine, a proven MMO platform 'eight years in development'. Or some number like that, anyway.
I tend to think you're right. Champions Online probably was made from the ground up. But it seems they consider it an evolution of the City of Heroes engine rather than a completely different beast.
They did use their knowledge. They didn't do too much to reinvent the proprietary file formats.
But CoH still has sluggish controls and handling on my computers and CO runs like a dream.
The controls not letting you go straight up or down is not the same as the Z axis being not there/locked. If there were true you would never be able to up or down (see guildwars for a Z axis less game)
the controls are what limits it, not the game engine.
I think quite a few of the limits of Star Trek Online come from that, Sector Space being probably the most prominent one.
At least that's what I gathered from following the forums.
I think it is locked, because it is locked.
Locked means I can not access it at whim.
Please, what's with the semantics? Or did you not think about going vertically in the ships?
Lastly, please explain how the controls are not tied to the engine?
The controls limit the amount of "tilt" ingame, along with a few variables. You can never be fully upright (either pointing up or down) And the engine doesn't limit, the code Devs put in does.
Thank you.
EDIT (To Add)
Remeber that remark on semantics?
Whether it is a "broken flaw" or an "intended flaw" it is still a FLAW.
The debate isn't whether you can use it or not. It is not a engine issue. It is a control issue, which is down to manouverability programming put there by Devs.
Yes, the game lets you full use the Z axis, the controls mean that you have to spiral to use that Z axis.
The fact that you don't know that the Z axis only allows up and down, not how you go up and down show why you think it's a flaw of the game engine.
See above edit. Semantics.
As it stands the engine will not allow me to use my Z-Axis. That is a flaw, I feel that the Z-axis should be "unlocked" (We do know what quotation marks are, right?). Whether or not it is "broken" or "intended" is moot.
Up and Down, in space? I am the one that doesn't understand the Z axis?
And no, moving the X plane to a 45 degree angle is not moving vertically, which is what I am discussing.
See that's what the Z axis covers, the y axis forwards and backwards, the x axis side to side.
How you are able to navigate along those axis is a control issue, not a game engine limitation.
Imagine the ship in space. Draw a plane through the center of the ship, when the ship tilts "up" what happens to that plane?
The Z plane would be sticking out of the top of the ship, VERTICALLY! Do you not understand???? To move on this, one would only move VERTICALLY.
If you are moving in an upward pitch 45 degrees you are moving in the x plane and the z plane. If there were no z plane you could only move horizontal. The current controls don't all you to pilot your ships at a true vertical pitch. Which I think I heard they are talking about or are going to change.
Image
Ships could not be above you if there is no Z axis. You could not fire up at them with beams or turrets.
I never said NO Z, I said that we did not have full access! Sneaky sneaky sneaky!