Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ladlon

  1. Nevermind, I figured out what I was doing wrong. For those viewers playing at home, it's important to be in ONLINE mode when doing so! Man, I hate how I always seem to figure things out seconds after posting! Oh well... So, how's things?
  2. Hi. I tried getting access on Steam to the experimental beta (via the Properties > Beta screen), but the pull down Opt menu isn't responding. I've entered the code, verified it successfully, but the pull down menu only has Opt Out. What could I be doing wrong?
  3. While in the movement phase of combat, it looks like it would benefit by the ability to select multiple soldiers and move them at once, as moving each soldier one at a time over a long stretch of empty map can be a touch tedious. Silent Storm 2's move method works well for this.
  4. Although there currently is not much option for the player to do things quietly, I DO wonder if firing your gun or throwing a grenade is 'noticed' by the AI (and makes them aware of your position, or can even be used to distract them as a decoy, making them move towards the noise).
  5. I'm assuming it'll be in the final, but I figured I mention that currently Xenonauts needs some sort of LOADING indication (animated message or animated mouse pointer), so you know things are in fact loading (unless final gamesave/section loads are pretty much instantaneous in the final), and that it hasn't crashed or not noticed you clicked.
  6. Does the sound you make give away your position to the enemies in any way, or is that not at all modeled in the engine?
  7. The actual animation for the window entering isn't terribly important. I just figure you jump the guy 1 tile (like a move), with maybe a frame or two of the vault graphic, if needed. Then again, I guess I'm making assumptions about how the engine works! Even if it's treated like entering a door (you just move from one tile to the one beside it) would be fine. Breaking the window or opening it in the process. Sure, you can go around or go to the door, but this just adds another option, which comes in handy when the other two aren't ideal (...large building with a door only on one end... or if you want to cut through the building... or if you are in a room, and the alien is outside the only door, etc).
  8. Yep, that's the site I was looking at. Sorry, I should have included a link! Thanks for putting that in there. Check out the vids. They get startlingly good animated effects using just the ASCII (and obvious cleverness). The explosions and fog (I THINK it is fog) are quite nice, and the text animation is really quite well done. The motion sensor is nice, too.
  9. Have you guys seen X@Com, the ASCII-based X-Com game? It's actually quite impressive, as far as visual flare (ironically enough). The interface animations alone are pretty impressive, and they do a surprising job of creating atmospheric/pyro effects with their limited graphic engine (ASCII!). I guess that the Xenonaut engine pretty much has static text display, but if not, I'd love to see some sort of animation treatment like seen in X@Com.
  10. I'd like to see random placement of things like cars. Define street areas on the maps that CAN be occupied by cars, and then randomly place cars within those areas (or, for each car-sized street 'tile', determine if a car is there or not). From there, randomly determine the type of car, and the state of damage. (and, maybe even if it's on fire or not) Overall, I'd like to see some random tile damage when you arrive, to give a sense of battle/struggle previous to you arriving.
  11. Are mines or traps currently in or planned for Xenonauts?
  12. As I play, I'm sometimes thinking 'It would be great to be able to call in an airstrike or artillery' during tough situations. Not sure exactly how you'd put that in, but it would be a nice option when things are a bit tricky. Maybe it would be an actual unit that you could fly over (as a secondary vehical) to the site, which would then be (supposedly) flying over the battle area (but not seen or dealt with in the actual ground combat), but could be called upon to attack an area of the ground battle map. Kind of like the dropship... you fly it to the site, but once you arrive, it's not something you control (and, unlike the drop ship, it wouldn't even appear on the map). Or, make it even more simple, and just have the ability to call in a strike 'from somewhere', without actually having to deal with the actual source. Either way, I figure I'm going to get the 'it'll throw off the balance' response. But, again, I just figured I'd throw the idea in, in case it sparks some ideas.
  13. Wow, look what I started! An interesting debate. Thing is, what I'm suggesting wouldn't change anything, nor require any AI adjustments. I'm basically just saying to have a command to peek around, which in reality (programwise) would just be like a macro/hotkey to do a 'move out of corner, turn around 90 degrees, move back into corner, face the original way again' combo... and treat it exactly as if you did each move manually (as you currently do). It's entirely about visual appearance, rather than changing how things work. Functionally, they are identical (as are the AI reactions to it). I'm simply suggesting it because it APPEARS less clunky than 'step out into the open, turn around, step back into cover, turn around to original orientation'. Purely cosmetic. Does the same thing (in the engine/under the hood), but in one command, and doesn't look as silly as the robotic process of 'step out, turn, step back'. Kind of like replacing a 'get on top of fence, get off of fence' with a 'vault over fence'... same action, just VISUALLY displayed differently, and combined into a single action. Not a huge deal, but then again, to me it doesn't seem like a huge deal to change it (since it won't affect anything else). Just declunkifying the action.
  14. BTW, in one session, I had an open door, with an alien on one side (standing in the doorway), and me on the other side of the door (not the doorway, but the door), on the tile beside him/it. He managed to shoot me, even though there was an intact door between us. Shouldn't the door provide cover, and if he actually shot through the door, should the door graphic not be replaced with a damaged/destroyed one? Has that been added, or is this a bug?
  15. Hrmm... I must not have right clicked hard enough last time! Okay, thanks.
  16. It should definitely be a 'clumbsy' move (high AP/vulnerability). They should be an alternate (but risky) means of escaping a room, and not treated like just another door. It might add some interesting tension... Trapped in a room, 'I could go out that window, but I'll be at risk... Should I do it?!'. I love when you can inject a bit of mini-drama into a game with little details like that (and random events as well).
  17. No real new 3D /sprites are required, I think... Just maybe do a frame or two of the vaulting pose? High AP cost (and vulnerability, if the engine calculates that sort of thing), but give the ability to climb out a window.
  18. Just wanted to be sure of how doors work... Currently, the door icon that appears when I hover over a door is just an indicator, and not something I click to actually open the door, right? I don't have to open doors, I just point to a tile on the other side, and it automatically opens it, correct? Is there, or will there ever be an 'open door' command (if you want to open the door, but not travel through it... for example, to just clear a firing path)? Can you/will there be a command to CLOSE doors?
  19. That all makes sense. Okay, cool. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't burning myself of hard-earned 'loot' by assuming they collected stuff at the end! I guess it does allow for future use (rescue incapacited soliders, etc), if it's not utilized currently.
  20. From what I understand, the solider's faces are from a small pool of portrait images. I'm curious why, instead of having a library of full faces, you didn't create the faces randomly from a library of eyes, noses, mouths, haircuts, etc (...obviously put in groups of 'caucasion, asian, etc', so you don't get an incorrect mix of elements)... kind of like how you do the ground battle maps, actually. I just figure that would give you a huge collection of unique faces, with less effort, compared to the current system. Just me being curious and stuff, as usual...
  21. Ahhh..., I didn't realize that this wasn't an engine they made, or that they weren't allowed to modify it. Ya, that kind of throws a wrench into that. That's a shame. The stuff I was describing should be fairly easy to add to the engine (...ex. random fractal pattern moving across the screen, random opacity, to create drifting smoke, cloud shadow, fog, etc). I imagine a faux bloom type post effect wouldn't be too hard. How does that 'no modification' rule apply to modders? Is it just people using the engine for profit (the Xeno devs) that have that restriction, or would that apply to modders who are creating free mods? (...assuming modders can even get into the engine... I don't know, as I haven't done mods before). I'm curious, too... what other games were made with this engine?
  22. I see in the vids that you can carry corpses (alien/human). I'm just wondering if you have to pick up alien corpses before winning the battle in order to collect them for research/autopsies, or does it assume that after the battle, you collect the bodies lying around (...game does it automatically for you). If it DOES collect them for you at the end of the battle, what is the purpose of the ability to carry corpses? Just curious.
  23. Ya, I could live with that. The AP reading is the most important, and it just seems wasteful and clunky to have to keep clicking and cancelling, when it could just display as you hover. I've even seen ClosetYeti accidentally moving his guys in his vids, probably due to that whole accidental double click thing.
  24. Ya, that makes sense, considering that we have fire and smoke currently animated. Idle animations for the troops/aliens would be really great too. Might even be able to fake them without going through the whole 3D modeling process just by hand editing the images. I wouldn't want them doing the usual overdone idle animations you see in so many games (where they do really blatant 'heavy breathing' loops!). Just some subtle random sway, and maybe head moves. You could probably do that by cutting and pasting heads from the other direction facing elements, and 'sway' them by distorting the element a touch. The optical stuff would literaly be things like 'realistic' glows on fire, for example. Maybe best done with a post-process effect that blooms highlights? It's a tough call, as I appreciate/respect the clean graphic style (and am sure some would complain/argue that 'realistic' effects are out of place). I, personally, think combining 2D/graphical looks with 'realistic' effects (depth of field, glows, fog, etc) really looks great. Beast of both worlds, and (again, in my opinion) doesn't clash. (An example.... the game Limbo blends the two nicely, and really benefits from it). Actually, that brings me to a similar suggestions (at least in execution)... Since you are inevitably going to have various splits in opinion among the players about the look of the game, I was thinking it would be great to have the ability to apply a global post-process effect to the ground battle display that allows you to adjust saturation, maybe lean the colours one way or another, adjust the brightness/contrast, etc), so that everyone can set it the way they prefer. With such a post-process engine in place, you might be able to introduce a bit of random fog (which randomly changes in intensity), colour tinting, bloom, glow, etc... just to give life and variation (and, in the case of fog or even cloud shadows, a hint of changing strategic visability). Other little touches, like occasional random flying debris, subtle smoke blowing by (just like a fractal overlay over the whole ground battle display) would really add a lot visually, with seemingly not much effort needed. [shrug...] Just throwing it in the suggestion box. But, at least a post-process glow effect (that glows the highlights or fire/light sources) would add an additional level of refinement and atmosphere, I think.
  • Create New...