Nuclear Dawn, NS Rip Off WTF!
So I was browsing Steam today when I notice this game called Nuclear Dawn advertised on the front page. I watch some gameplay vids of it and low and behold It's almost a CARBON COPY OF NS MINUS ALIENS! WTF! Complete with resource points, team commander (top down view), sentries and other structures, team upgrades etc. I mean if that wasn't blatantly copied from NS I don't know what is. Now read their slogan for the game <i>"Nuclear Dawn is the first game to offer a full FPS and RTS experience, within a single gameplay model, without crippling or diluting either side of the game."</i> Obviously I call BS since NS was around YEARS before this rip off even entered the concept phase. I'm greatly angered and offended by this, I hope Flayra and the rest have some kinda copyright on their game because this is just too similar to be a coincidence. I say sue the ######s!
Edit: Oh and first post in 2 years, yay! Yes I'm a professional lerker(sp?).
Edit: Oh and first post in 2 years, yay! Yes I'm a professional lerker(sp?).
Comments
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=114385" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....howtopic=114385</a>
:p
lol wow Boojum that was an interesting watch. I guess the Chinese will copy anything and everything...
Edit: Oh and first post in 2 years, yay! Yes I'm a professional lerker(sp?).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Everyone takes issue with that quote, and I still don't see why. NS is a horrible RTS, it can't claim to have not crippled either side of the game.
Now I don't imagine nuclear dawn will do any better, but NS didn't invent the FPSRTS genre and it certainly can't argue that it's the best example of it.
All rts games have the same elements, NS is probably most similar to star/warcraft if you want specifics, and fpsrts games don't generally do anything as interesting as deviating from the standard RTS approach. What you describe is how every RTS game ever has and probably will work for the forseeable future, all they (and NS) did was take the rather uninspired approach of replacing the little AI controlled soldiers with little human controlled soldiers, and voila, FPSRTS is born.
Or alternatively it means they've gone with a more in depth RTS aspect to the game, which if it's the case is quite interesting to me, I'd like to see a game that manages to give a more full RTS element without making it suck due to the need for players to do everything.
What I'm hoping they're doing is basically separating the RTS and FPS elements, allowing the commander to play his game while the players play theirs, it'll work a lot better that way for both sides, as players get the freedom to have a nice shooter game while the commanders get the freedom to not be limited by the stupidity of their units.
If so, their claim would have some validity to it, as I don't know of any other FPSRTS games that don't regress the RTS side back five or ten years.
It's a fundamental part of any RTS that I am better than my units, they are not sentient creatures with their own thoughts and feelings and rights, they're my sword, shield, and hands in the world.
When you try to change that you end up making a pretty poor RTS game, because having units with minds of their own is like having an FPS where your gun decides where to aim.
What exactly disqualifies NS from being an rts, at least for the marine side?
What exactly disqualifies NS from being an rts, at least for the marine side?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=102260&st=240&p=1717224&#entry1717224" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...p;#entry1717224</a>
NS1's RTS side was really poor from a strictly 'real time strategy' aspect. Obviously, the FPS side was truly amazing.
It's pretty damn close. The key RTS elements, the basic building blocks of an RTS, do not exist in NS1.
I am, generally, although I do think there are interesting things you can do with the genre.
For example, in previous NS2 versions, the alien commander had a pretty separate role from the team, but the team was still an important element, the activities of the team give the commander opportunities, if they secure an area it's easier to expand there, if they are defending somewhere the commander can push elsewhere while the enemy is distracted, and so on. Having an autonomous map element which changes the terrain by making some areas favourable and others not, <i>is</i> an interesting mechanic for an RTS game.
Similarly of course, you could try making an FPSRTS by thinking about what makes it an RTS, strictly speaking, there isn't anything that says an RTS needs to have a top down commander, you could make an RTS from the first person perspective, still with strategic elements of holding areas, building them up, attacking enemy strongholds etc, but without the top down view. If you gave everyone the ability to make buildings then people could spontaneously work in small groups to build up and push/defend as they like. Still strategic, still real time, just not conventional RTS, and also meshing much more fluently with the FPS element.
What, things like territory control, resource management and tech trees? Even the last one exists in a rudimentary form. It doesn't have ALL the building blocks of an rts, but that's because it's a hybrid. You can't very well have micromanagement of units if they're being controlled by different players.
It did have territory control, although rarely was that a result of the commander planning out a specific strategy. It was more a group of marines wandering out near a hive then asking for a phase and t/siege fac. Either way, I'll give you that one. The 'resource management' must be a joke as NS1 had only one resource which was generally immune to harassment (read my post I linked to earlier). Finally, the tech tree was basic at best. I'm not knocking NS1 for any of this but to say NS1 was also an RTS is a beyond a stretch. There was a guy who had a top down view, could build structures, and drop weapons / health.
I only bring up these flaws because I'm hopeful NS2 can correct or improve upon them. It's not easy because every concession provided to the RTS side will likely hurt the FPS side. I like the idea of MACs and ARCs because it's something for the commander to plan, control, and coordinate with his team. I'm hoping to see more commander controlled content in NS2.
I agree with this as im usually always the guy sitting in the chair beacause my tea
Either doesnt want to or dont know how. And i wish there was more for
E to do to interact with the game other than occasionally droping building/packs attempting to tell people what to do so we can win or hopping out to kill a lone skulk chomping at ips. Macs and arcs are great however arcs have a tendency to get eaten as well as macs because they have to defensive ability, and as the pathing stand are almost always a waste of tres other than macs whose pathing is better than the arcs. Late game i find myself running around with multiple macs buildimg turrets beacause theres nothing else to do.
Also sorry for typing at work on my iphone
But no, neither are rip offs.
Different developer
But no, neither are rip offs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Gloom for the Amiga CD? Haha...