X: Rebirth

[Tonci87 163]

What will the company now do? AS I see it they are done. They can´t make any meaningfull addon since it will have to run on the same crapy engine.

They should have just polished the graphics a little bit, improved the UI and delivered a solid story for once, that would have been enough for a great new X game. Instead of that we ave this half assed consolized version of an X game.

All Devs take notice, this is what happens if you try to appeal to new audiences and do it wrong. In the End you have a product that is far away from its original strenghts so your fanbase won´t buy it, and you won´t get the new audience because your product is mediocre.

[sudayev 27]

Yes, it's less and less people playing this garbage of space sim these days. They announced a major update for Reborth in may, but I think this game is a "can of worms" and nothing will fix this game, since it's badly designed at it's foundations. Only a massive overhaul, new game is the only option. Can't believe they dumped the functionality of X3 interface and most of it's ideas and decided to wrap up old and scrapped Xbox game with bad, bad everything.

Now Egosoft is spent when it comes to new ideas and I truly can't see them when new Elite will come out. The phat loot they amassed from preorders will run out quickly or it has ran out already. I remember on first day when Bernd was boasting with number one sale position on Steam with 15k customers, moments before fans peeled of the first layers of packaging to discover shit underneath it.

I can't believe they wasted such great opportunity from having thousand of players in early days to barely a few hundreds in just a few months... Most dramatic failure in game industry ever. Egosoft is a small studio and now with lack of funds and trust they wont be able to make anything big and after ripping of so many people. Speaking about crowdfunding, I don't think people will trust them to kickstart their future endeavour, to get what another rip-off? Wonder what comes next... A moblie X-game with microtransactions perhaps? (I hope not)

The only thing that keep them boat floating is their best - which is X3 and it's active community, steam charts are equal now for AP TC & XR, but keep in mind that majority of people play this game without using steam. I still carry on in Terran Conflict with XRM mod, just launched a new game and building up some fleet to hunt for Xenon ships and chasing up pilots with bounty for their heads. It's fun!

Edited April 29, 2014 by Sudayev

[Dwarden 1125]

well they got engine they can work with and sometimes failure is needed to learn lessons to do something better ...

I still hope X-online is on slow pace development and happen one day ...

{this line is meant as joke} btw. I know why X: R failed ... I'm not in the credits of this one after several previous titles where I was ;)

[Tonci87 163]

well they got engine they can work with and sometimes failure is needed to learn lessons to do something better ...

I still hope X-online is on slow pace development and happen one day ...

{this line is meant as joke} btw. I know why X: R failed ... I'm not in the credits of this one after several previous titles where I was ;)

Do you think that a proper X game is even possible in that engine?

[Dwarden 1125]

Do you think that a proper X game is even possible in that engine?

ofc it is ...

the X:R engine is way modern than obsolete previous X engine

(unable use lot of memory, single threaded AI to bone (limited to one CPU), I think the scripting was limited to one thread too etc)

lot of similarity to our games but for them it was critical chokepoint cause the game was standing and failing with the AI actions (SP game after all)

[Tonci87 163]

ofc it is ...

the X:R engine is way modern than obsolete previous X engine

(unable use lot of memory, single threaded AI to bone (limited to one CPU), I think the scripting was limited to one thread too etc)

lot of similarity to our games but for them it was critical chokepoint cause the game was standing and failing with the AI actions (SP game after all)

Yeah but the whole thing seems to lack the grandeur of previous games, you know, the scale and everything. Thus I wonder if this is because of time restrictions or because the new Engine simply couldn´t handle it. Especially big fleets must be a nightmare for that AI.

[krycek 349]

Imo it's not about the engine,it's about the gameplay decisions they decided to take with this one.The engine is really nice,the only weak part are the stations graphics-wise but those can be improved or at least by adding more diversity(badly needed).I wouldn't mind an X4 with this engine.

The game downfall was the idiotic new trade options,lack of fleet management,diversity of pilotable ships,lack of commands,overpowered Skunk,stupid hand-holding AI and so on.Even if we knew we had only one ship they didn't even bothered to make this one interesting with at least more interiors or more equipment options.

[dontknowhow 33]

http://forum.egosoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=366338&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

anybody looked at the new beta? It's getting a lot of positive comments

[kavoven 4]

http://forum.egosoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=366338&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

anybody looked at the new beta? It's getting a lot of positive comments

I don't own the game though after reading the (release) 2.0 patchnotes I thought "damn, why didn't you buy the game one steam last week when it was on sale". sounds pretty good to me.

[dontknowhow 33]

I don't own the game though after reading the (release) 2.0 patchnotes I thought "damn, why didn't you buy the game one steam last week when it was on sale". sounds pretty good to me.

did you read the comments on the forum? Looks like it's a new game. Still some unhappy people though; enough to give me concerns. I think I'll wait.

[ziiip 1]

I've just looked at the steam page of the game and there seem to be a number of positive reviews saying the game's as good as it should have been at release. Has anyone here gave it another shot these days?

[krycek 349]

I must say that the game is really improved.I was very skeptical that this train wreck could ever recover but I have to admit the devs really put effort in bug fixing and adding features.

The most welcomed addition to me are the trade agents,I don't have to fly like a madman from station to station just to pick up the latest trade offers.I use that stupid mini-game "small talk" and I can have a trade agent on every station that will always keep me updated on trades.

I don't even miss UTs anymore,yeah it sucks that I have to hold the hands of my small trading fleet but I can queue up trade orders to them and they're usually busy for a few hours while I'm free to do my own things.

The only areas that still needs major improvements are the station interiors and the player ship.I have to say I'm extremly bored with the Skunk,frankly I hate that bucket.

Imo if they would concentrate on a dlc that could allow the player to fly another 4-5 ships it would be miles better than the current situation.Maybe the equivalent of the old M6s class or a mini M7.Or at least really improve the Skunk,add more rooms or something.

I'm not sure how no one from Egosoft thought the players would enjoy spending most of their time in this ship stuck with that braindead Yisha,cockpit view and an extra room which is a friggin kitchen.

Also the station interiors,many wanted them including me but they still remain the weakest part.I don't mind their graphics or that I have to speak to people to hire them but some diversity would be a big improvement.

So some of the things that bothered me have been fixed and improved like trading,fleet management,fixed AI,old menu brought back,radar is back while others are still lackluster like player ship and station interiors.Not to mention the piss poor documentation.

I have to say I'm glad I gave it another shot and considering Elite dumped off their offline mode and Star Citizen is becoming more and more an MMO,I'm glad there are still folks like Egosoft around.I thought they were finished after the disaster launch of Rebirth.

[sudayev 27]

New interview with Bernd.

He explains why XR isn't X4 also says something about ongoing works towards proper successor to X3 - known as X4.

http://www.blastr.com/2015-3-30/exploring-x-rebirth-space-sim-enterprising-ambition-egosofts-bernd-lehahn

Keeping the hope alive :)

[froggyluv 2136]

How "realistic" is X Rebirth?

We try to be as realistic as possible. But when it comes to the gameplay experience, we have to compromise on realism. For example, in the flight physics of the game, we do not try to simulate perfect Newtonian physics. You have to think too much about maneuvers, and you can't get any interesting dogfights. For two ships to rendezvous requires a lot of energy. As a nerd, I love seeing games that are truly realistic and simulate physics. But I, myself, don't see that as an option for our games, because we want to make a game that is fun and not a scientific simulation.

I find this statement strange.

Think too much about maneuvers? This is a space fighting game!! This game has way too little concern with the intricacies of dogfighting to begin with. Flying and expert flying while in combat should be a learned skill, not just point click and there you are. Asteroids and obstacles should present some sort of danger not just bump dee dump I hit a giant rock -no worries.

The entire reason this game, which has jaw dropping space graphics btw, quickly lost my interest was the solo ship that needed no skill whatsoever to fly nor dominate space. Could understand if this game was intended and sold as an Empire Building Game that Happens to Be in Space. Going into it with those parameters would have very much changed my expectations, would be similar to expecting Mount & Blade combat in a Europa Univerallis title...

Sure it doesn't have to approach dogfighting levels of SC or ED but too imply Newtonian physics as too much work or too scientific is pretty disappointing.

[x3kj 1247]

He explains why XR isn't X4 also says something about ongoing works towards proper successor to X3 - known as X4.

Everybody told them before hand that nobody wants a different new thing that is not X4. They didnt want to listen... they pushed through, ignoring all constructive feedback and concerns that many highprofile people and also their internal testers gave them... They deserve what they got. Now they try to steer back to X4. I'm not sure if they can manage that tbh... Seeing how ore is melted from outside a station is unrealistic, unnecessary and after 5min of "yeah this is cool" something you ignore. Totally wasted efford on their part.

Think too much about maneuvers? This is a space fighting game!! This game has way too little concern with the intricacies of dogfighting to begin with.

realistic physics are not good for interesting combat either. Look at Star Citizen and what the main tactic of the players is.... flying directly at each other, in the hope not to crash into each other, while shooting. Once past each other they turn 180° and fly at each other again. There was another MMO (something with D iirc) for development a long time, that tried to do something like SC does now, except with the help of user content. They had a combat early alpha and their flightmodel was also physically realistic... same thing. Fly at each other, shoot, turn 180° start flying at each other again. Unless you just stay still, turn around your spot and shoot. The ship with the biggest shields, biggest energy reserve and most/biggest guns always wins - if the pilots have the same skill.

No epic maneuvers (unless you want to flee or evade somebody), speed and maneuverability are secondary concerns in choosing a ship for battle... That's boring.

I'm not arguing that X in general lacked in the combat department (havent touched XR with a long stick), but thats not because of the lack of physx, but because of the lack of other details. Think of XWing Alliance for example. Great game and it was fun to dogfight - and you had to juggle your energy around. It didnt have any realistic flightmechanics whatsoever.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Fennek

[froggyluv 2136]

As regards to SC, its currently only an in game videogame of deathmatch - which is always pretty boring in space games.

Physics make the game far more interesting as it creates a learning curve, something which Rebirth has none of. Simply point your mouse and go there no problem, he'll, why even give me a spaceship model , Im happy being space mouse.

In SC, context will be everything. Mining an asteroid field and then being suddenly attacked by military grade ship will be thrilling - just look at the difference of fun and skill it takes to navigate an asteroid field now- in SC it's challenging and fun with real potential danger. Rebirth? A non event.

[Dwarden 1125]

I think X:R was actually aimed as console title or runner up title to test some new ideas and new engine ...

it didn't pan-out on release (too early /rushed) but from what I heard now after multiple massive updates the game is playable

if X: R was released first as Early Access title and 1.0 e.g. this summer it would end with way positive rating from players

[Tonci87 163]

Yeah I think one of X:Rebirths main problems was that they developed it for console, and a console simply can´t deliver the same experience as in X3. I fear that after the massive failure of X:R they might not have enough budget to make a proper X4.

Space combat with real physics can be a lot of fun, but players often have problems adapting to it and that is when you see those headon duels happening. Real physics space cobat offers you a lot of possibilities to engage in a fight. For example you could run from your enemy and then turn your ship to face and shoot him while the momentum still carries you away, that is just one example of tactics that only work with newtonian physics. The problems is really that players are not used to it, they don´t know about those tactics, so they only do what is most obvious, Headon duels.

[krycek 349]

The irony is that the game is better now because they added gameplay features from previous X games.Perfect example of "if it isn't broken don't change it".

Even with the latest version there are some things that greatly annoy me.

You still can't dock fighters at your carriers and the drones are easily destroyed if you want to use them as escorts.Not to mention the good fighters and most of the drones are expensive as hell.

Also the boarding mini-game is stupid and very tiresome,disabling defenses like turrets,engines and the jumpdrive makes sense but after ordering your marines to board you start a minigame where the braindead Yisha orders you around to disable even more systems.

Creating a fleet is still fucked up and frankly useless when you order the flagship to fly somewhere because the rest of the group lags behind(kinda like Arma where the AI flanks you one by one instead as a unit or group).Had many examples when the flagship got owned because the rest of the fleet arrived late in a zone.

[x3kj 1247]

Real physics space cobat offers you a lot of possibilities to engage in a fight. For example you could run from your enemy and then turn your ship to face and shoot him while the momentum still carries you away, that is just one example of tactics that only work with newtonian physics. The problems is really that players are not used to it, they don´t know about those tactics, so they only do what is most obvious, Headon duels.

The tactic of first running away and turning around while keeping flying in the same direciton is what makes big ships with big shields and guns better then smaller maneuverable ships. You can't outturn big ships with a faster, maneuverable craft, because making a turn around your own axis does not take long at all. Therefore you are basically subjected to the big and numerous guns at all times, no matter what you do. You can do evasive maneuvers to throw off their aim, which works, but you are not able to fight them basically because you have to keep doing it otherwise you will get hit. The only thing a fast and maneuverable ship is good for, is running away. That's all. Wanna fight? biggest ship with biggest guns and biggest shields or go die.

Not sure if you are into WW2 flightgames like Warthunder, but if you imagine heavy fighters like a BF110 or Mosquito. Awesome firepower and high durability. If they are attacked from behind by a more maneuverable fighter (BF109 or Spitfire) they are basically boned however (bar a lucky reargunner shot). They can't run away, because they dont have the speed advantage. They can't outturn the enemy, unless they have clearly superior pilot skills over their opponent. If we put that into reallistic space flight none of these downsides to the awesome firepower and durability come into play, making them clearly superior over every other fighter.

I think X:R was actually aimed as console title or runner up title to test some new ideas and new engine ...

Yes it was, there are several remnant things in the game files that indicate the attempted version for consoles

if X: R was released first as Early Access title and 1.0 e.g. this summer it would end with way positive rating from players

I doubt that. A game is userrated by it's first early access performance. There will be always the guys who say "but it's still in early access" up until final release, even when its obvious that alot of the game simply is badly designed. The official review rating will be higher because it's not reviewed officially until after early access, so less bugs will be encountered, but i dont believe that this has a high impact anymore. Reviews often don't go into longterm gameplay, and thats what X was all about - you can only rely on player info for this.

If it was "just" the errors that are the problem we would see alot more mods for it, and modders wouldn't have dropped from the series like flies. It's simply the wrong design and gameplay decisions that are what makes this a bad game. I put up with all of the little flaws in X3 for several years, because many of the game's flaws where rectifiable with scripts& mods. Otherwise i wouldnt have spent 3 years of my hobby life working on the Xtended mod. On a positive note, at least XR made the departing to Arma easy for me, i don't look back or feel like i miss something.

Edited April 26, 2015 by Fennek

[Tonci87 163]

The tactic of first running away and turning around while keeping flying in the same direciton is what makes big ships with big shields and guns better then smaller maneuverable ships. You can't outturn big ships with a faster, maneuverable craft, because making a turn around your own axis does not take long at all. Therefore you are basically subjected to the big and numerous guns at all times, no matter what you do. You can do evasive maneuvers to throw off their aim, which works, but you are not able to fight them basically because you have to keep doing it otherwise you will get hit. The only thing a fast and maneuverable ship is good for, is running away. That's all. Wanna fight? biggest ship with biggest guns and biggest shields or go die.

Not sure if you are into WW2 flightgames like Warthunder, but if you imagine heavy fighters like a BF110 or Mosquito. Awesome firepower and high durability. If they are attacked from behind by a more maneuverable fighter (BF109 or Spitfire) they are basically boned however (bar a lucky reargunner shot). They can't run away, because they dont have the speed advantage. They can't outturn the enemy, unless they have clearly superior pilot skills over their opponent. If we put that into reallistic space flight none of these downsides to the awesome firepower and durability come into play, making them clearly superior over every other fighter.

Yes it was, there are several remnant things in the game files that indicate the attempted version for consoles

I doubt that. A game is userrated by it's first early access performance. There will be always the guys who say "but it's still in early access" up until final release, even when its obvious that alot of the game simply is badly designed. The official review rating will be higher because it's not reviewed officially until after early access, so less bugs will be encountered, but i dont believe that this has a high impact anymore. Reviews often don't go into longterm gameplay, and thats what X was all about - you can only rely on player info for this.

If it was "just" the errors that are the problem we would see alot more mods for it, and modders wouldn't have dropped from the series like flies. It's simply the wrong design and gameplay decisions that are what makes this a bad game. I put up with all of the little flaws in X3 for several years, because many of the game's flaws where rectifiable with scripts& mods. Otherwise i wouldnt have spent 3 years of my hobby life working on the Xtended mod. On a positive note, at least XR made the departing to Arma easy for me, i don't look back or feel like i miss something.

That´s actually not true, if you think about it heavy armed and armored fighters obviously have a lot more mass. If that mass gains momentum by engine power, wich in itself takes longer than it would be with a light ship, you need the same ammount of energy applied in the opposite direction to stop it again. The same applies to booster movements that serve to turn the ship. In other words heavy ships are nowhere close to be as maneuverable as light ships. A lighter ship should be able to stay behind a heavy ship. The advantage that heavy ships have is their firepower and durability. If heavy ships are able to turn around too fast then this is a problem with the game, not with physics based combat itself.

I´m awesome at Warthunder, but in Warthunder you have gravity and air friction to worry about, totally different from a space situation.

[x3kj 1247]

but in Warthunder you have gravity and air friction to worry about, totally different from a space situation.

obviously, that's why i was bringing it up. Non-realistic games stay close to a "planes in space" flight mechanic minus gravity. See X3, see Xwing Alliance, see basically any arcade space game.

A lighter ship should be able to stay behind a heavy ship. The advantage that heavy ships have is their firepower and durability. If heavy ships are able to turn around too fast then this is a problem with the game, not with physics based combat itself.

You can't fly in circle around a heavy fighter with a light fighter in the same time it takes a heavy fighter to turn on the spot. You would have to have extremely powerfull thrusters on the light fighter and extreme close distance (so that you are almost touching the enemy). The thrusters of the heavy fighter would have to be extremely weak if it was supposed to not outturn on the spot a lighter fighter. Just look at combat footage in SC arena. Heavy fighters dominate. Fast ships don't do shit. They can annoy and run away but that's it.

If heavy ships are able to turn around too fast then this is a problem with the game, not with physics based combat itself.

Thats my whole point. Physics are physics but they don't inherently make the game/gameplay/fightmechanics any more fun or better.

Edited April 26, 2015 by Fennek

[Tonci87 163]

obviously, that's why i was bringing it up. Non-realistic games stay close to a "planes in space" flight mechanic minus gravity. See X3, see Xwing Alliance, see basically any arcade space game.

You can't fly in circle around a heavy fighter with a light fighter in the same time it takes a heavy fighter to turn on the spot. You would have to have extremely powerfull thrusters on the light fighter and extreme close distance (so that you are almost touching the enemy). The thrusters of the heavy fighter would have to be extremely weak if it was supposed to not outturn on the spot a lighter fighter. Just look at combat footage in SC arena. Heavy fighters dominate. Fast ships don't do shit. They can annoy and run away but that's it.

Thats my whole point. Physics are physics but they don't inherently make the game/gameplay/fightmechanics any more fun or better.

I agree, if you are going to use true physics then obviously you have to build the game around this. If you say that heavy fighters can turn too fast in SC then they did something wrong. It´s not only about powerfull thrusters but about mass. A heavy fighter should have so much mass that it should be difficult for him to do sudden directional changes. A ligth fighter shouldn´t have that problem, in theory. As you describe it this hasn´t been given much thought in SC.

[x3kj 1247]

No SC is not to blame here... As far as dogfighting is concerned in a physical system, the standard fighter with forward mounted guns and big rearward thruster like we are used from scifi movies and other games with "planes in space"-mentality is simply not compatible and doesnt scale well with ideas borrowed from "planes in space" concepts, like heavy fighters and smaller and faster interceptors.

A heavy fighter should have so much mass that it should be difficult for him to do sudden directional changes.

rotating on the spot is still is way more easier then flying in a circle around another object. Inherently. The greater the distance the worse the disadvantage is for the small craft. Simple example: little fighter trying to rotate around a heavy fighter then he can rotate around himself.

Let's assume cubes with dimension "d" as spaceships and a light fighter with m1=100tons and d1= 10m (means V1=100m³). Density would be 0.1t/m³. A very heavy fighter with the same density with m2=4000t would have a dimension of d2= 34.2m (V2=40,000m²). If we assume a very short distance of 100m (basically face hugging) the little fighter would have to overcome an Inertia of I1=(100m)²*100t = 1*10^9 kgm² to change his direction on that circular path. The heavy fighter, rotating around himself only needs to overcome an Inertia of J2= (1/6)*m2*(d2)^2 = 0.167 * 4000t * (34.2m)² = 0.781*10^9 kgm² .

40 times the mass, and only 100m distance to the center of rotation (you know that's not alot from playing warthunder) and yet the bigger brick still has the advantage. And change of direciton is required for the smaller fighter because moving in a circle requires constant thrust on the fighters part, and no thrust on the big bricks part (constant rotation)

[Tonci87 163]

No SC is not to blame here... As far as dogfighting is concerned in a physical system, the standard fighter with forward mounted guns and big rearward thruster like we are used from scifi movies and other games with "planes in space"-mentality is simply not compatible and doesnt scale well with ideas borrowed from "planes in space" concepts, like heavy fighters and smaller and faster interceptors.

rotating on the spot is still is way more easier then flying in a circle around another object. Inherently. The greater the distance the worse the disadvantage is for the small craft. Simple example: little fighter trying to rotate around a heavy fighter then he can rotate around himself.

Let's assume cubes with dimension "d" as spaceships and a light fighter with m1=100tons and d1= 10m (means V1=100m³). Density would be 0.1t/m³. A very heavy fighter with the same density with m2=4000t would have a dimension of d2= 34.2m (V2=40,000m²). If we assume a very short distance of 100m (basically face hugging) the little fighter would have to overcome an Inertia of I1=(100m)²*100t = 1*10^9 kgm² to change his direction on that circular path. The heavy fighter, rotating around himself only needs to overcome an Inertia of J2= (1/6)*m2*(d2)^2 = 0.167 * 4000t * (34.2m)² = 0.781*10^9 kgm² .

40 times the mass, and only 100m distance to the center of rotation (you know that's not alot from playing warthunder) and yet the bigger brick still has the advantage. And change of direciton is required for the smaller fighter because moving in a circle requires constant thrust on the fighters part, and no thrust on the big bricks part (constant rotation)

Ah but there you make a misstake. How does a spacecraft change it´s bearing? With thrusters. Thrusters are by design MUCH weaker than engine boosters. So to turn a craft has to accelerate along it´s own axis with those thrusters. A heavy craft will do so much slower than a lighter craft if we assume that both have equal thruster capabilities. While changing the bearing of a craft the main engine is useless, it won´t help the craft to turn faster. However a small and nimble ship that is able to change it´s bearing fast can bring itself much faster into a position where it can use the main engine to alter it´s vector in Space and therefore for example orbit around a slow turning object that simply can´t react that fast. Every action has a reaction as you know, so if the hevy ship want´s to revert a thruster movement it needs to deaccelerate first and then speed up in the opposite reaction.

All in all this whole thing comes down to effective and diverse ship design, nothing more, because physics in space are just as valid as on earth, and if realism and tactics work down here, that means that there are tactics for up there too, understanding and developing them is the difficult task. Weapon system also play a huge role in this. What weapons are feasible for space combat? Weapons with recoil are basically unusable. Coil guns? That could work. Missiles with Shrapnel warheads? Not a very bright idea since the shrapnel will travel on until it hits something. Energy based weapons such as lasers? Yeah, that could work. But what about weapons that use solid matter and mass as a weapon? One of the most destructive weapons you can have in space is.... Sand.

Imagine a craft travelling at very high speed, and imagine that craft hitting a dense cloud of sand. You only have to find a way of putting the sand in front of the spacecraft.