raidsoft

When UI elements use fixed sizes then higher resolution definitely means more screen estate, unless you purposefully play at lower resolutions and upscale it of course. Though in general that's why unscalable fixed resolution UI assets are a terrible idea in the first place because there's plenty of weird situations where people might have super high resolution screens on a small size meaning the UI would be impossible to read because it's so small. Honestly the best idea would be that the UI is modular and flexible so you can move things around as well as scale either the entire UI or specific pieces as you prefer, though likely going to be a bit more time consuming to create.

I do think Chris is right about it not fitting entirely, though you could probably make it work but the question is if it would be worth it as I think it would slow down the game play even more and those that already play cautiously would end up progression a battle at a crawl (literally!) Oh and I know there's plenty of people in my circle of friends that would love to see a game actually go for very in-depth tactical simulator like JA, I can't really think of anything that was as ambitious as that in terms of complexity of mechanics. I'd imagine that it would still end up a pretty niche game though, unless it ends up revitalizing the genre which I could definitely see happening if someone did that right (similar to what has happened with isometric classic rpgs lately)

Sure that helps but not having to ask people to install third party software and instead saying press a key and see what it say is considerably more straight forward. But often trying to figure out if CPU is the limit can be problematic and people misunderstand it all the time because if a game is heavily single threaded it will look like CPU is not a problem because the way windows works. It will jump that load between cores so it looks like you're getting a little load on all the cores when in fact it's one thread that gets moved around and is actually the limiting factor. But yes generally if you aren't seeing 95%+ load on your GPU then it's likely the CPU is the limiting factor. Honestly adding something like that to the game would be nice but not important enough that it should take priority over something else.

Glad to hear that separate graphics settings are planned, that will help people for sure. Something else that would be useful is if there's some way to display if the CPU or the GPU is the performance bottleneck, planetside 2 had a good example of that where it displayed either GPU or CPU depending on what was limiting performance. That helped a lot to for example optimize the settings to work at max CPU usage without making the GPU the limiting factor. Not sure how hard something like that would be to implement but it would be nice to have.

Would be great if you could separate the graphics settings to be adjusted manually and separately in the final game instead of only presets. Being stuck with the unity presets is extremely restricting in terms of tweaking settings to increase performance for individual cases. Not everyone values settings the same either so just giving people the option to tweak it if they want would be great, or at least have the option to tweak it in an .ini file if making UI assets for it would use too much time.

I'd definitely buy it (of course assuming the result actually turns into a good game) even if it's largely a re-hashed/updated version of the game. The thing that bothers me the most is easily the part with going 3D. Believe me when I say that I understand the reason for it but there's been sooo many examples of games going from sprites to 3D and failing horribly at it. I'd be more skeptical but I'd of course give it all the chance to win me over. What I am wondering is, is there no easier way of working with sprites? It seems the engine choice hindered you guys a lot, can other engines deal with sprites in a better way perhaps? I would assume there's more ways then one with how you approach it especially between engines. It warrants investigating at the very least I would think? Sprites definitely hold up better over time compared to 3D, a sprite based game doesn't feel dated even close to as quickly as 3D games seem to. There's just some kind of quality there that seems extremely hard to translate over between the formats. All in all you have my full support as a long-time follower of Xenonauts and Goldhawk Interactive regardless of the path you take in the end!

Awesome, just awesome. Good job to everyone involved in getting the game to this point! You all should be proud of what you have created. Especially to you Chris, good freakin' job man.

Indeed it was one of the nominees in that category, definitely deserved to be included there that's for sure! Hopefully this means the game will be brought to the attention of more people so they can enjoy it as well!

Something with how the steam overlay interacts with the game on his particular system? Could try turning the steam overlay off and see if that helps.

Wow that's pretty hilarious

Awesome stuff, your effort is Greatly appreciated!

Maybe she died in surgery but they were too afraid to tell you so they just covered it up hoping you wouldn't notice? (Sorry this is not helpful, if I had anything helpful to say I would but that's what I would tell myself if this happened to me)

The difference between how grenades worked in the original makes it less useful, in the original you needed TU's to both prime AND throw the grenade, the advantage you gained from relaying a grenade was that you could use a soldier that was out of range to use his TU's to prime it then the frontline guy would only need TU's to throw the grenade and not prime & throw. But since you don't need TU's to prime grenades in Xenonauts then it makes it less useful, I haven't actually tested if you can actually do this with explosive grenades though in xenonauts as they do land on the ground, do they show up as an inventory item or are they a non-item entity after they have been thrown? I could see a mod doing this but I don't see the need as high enough to warrant official devtime from other more important things.

I definitely agree that it very easily can become a slippery slope.. "Well maybe some people don't want to do this, or that" and before you know it you have XCom: Enemy Unknown. Don't lose sight of the original goal of the game, if I can auto-resolve my way through most of the game (just doing 1 mission for each thing you need for research) then I think that most of the feeling you get from achieving something when you win is lost as well. I also think that needing to do air combat added to the game, it's a fun and important mini-game and being able to just auto-resolve that detracts from the game as a whole in my opinion (others probably disagree on this)

Well, that's what we know of.. Guess we'll see if anything else has been compromised further on..

I don't have much to add over what has already been said, I only had one thought but no idea if it's a good idea or not. How about having a "black market" or "shadow faction" that you can sell the crash site to? May be a terrible idea but maybe something interesting could be created from it. Lore wise you would tell the nations YOU cleared it but in fact you sold it to this militant rebel/shadow faction to deal with, what bonuses/penalties this could involve I'm not sure of, my idea is just to plant this thought and possibly get it discussed and considered.

I'm impressed by the amount of work put into this Looking forward to using this when I'll be playing through the game (still holding off for a bit more fully featured/stable version of the game before putting serious time into it) Can't wait to get some fellow Swedish rookies to send on kamikaze missions when that gets added

I think it's shaping up very nice I was a bit sceptical about the approach when it was first mentioned but I think that the way it turned out was much better then I imagining it looking! Sure you could nitpick small details, always something more to do but I think that there's probably other areas that need the development time more then some fine polish that makes very little real difference in the end. Getting more and more excited to get through the game! (Been holding off from playing much during development as to not burn myself out before the game is finished so I can appreciate it fully then)

Yay awesome!

About time you switched hosts eh? New one seems awesome so far!

Well that would explain why they never shoot Pretty hard to shoot what you can't see! I tried playing some but kind of lost traction when I crashed from trying to open the inventory in a battle (seemed to happen every time) and saw the AI problem so I kind of didn't bother.. Hopefully next version will be more viable for extended playing/testing

That's a good point, you would never want the AI to be predictable, sometimes they should make decisions that will seem stupid because in a different situation that might have thrown you off and caused you lots of pain ;D Unpredictability means replayability! Of course there's a fine balance between interesting/fun unpredictability and frustrating/stupid unpredictability as well, not easy to pull off that's for sure.

Seems like a good start but I'll wait and see how it develops with more time as I got plenty of other stuff to play right now anyway so I don't feel in any rush to jump on it right away

Reading that made me realize that most of the small things that were nagging at me had to do with loss of control in one way or another.. I do think that streamlining was taken to the extreme and thus made the game frustrating to play, hoping modders can fix it

Same reason for me that I can't fully enjoy it, small issues constantly that just nag at me, generally if it's just a few things I might forget about it after a while but when you keep getting reminded about it over and over again it's hard to let it go