Planetary Annihilation - Developer Interview

Someone linked it already? Or watched it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqDSh34V ... re=related

Ofc. Both. Been done.

And, as far as my opinion, loved every word, and here is a NEW question to add to this OLD OP's question.

If there can be 40 players, how can you use color alone to seperate the players? I mean, if you ever seen a box of 32 crayons, you can see that a lot of them look alike. There are basically 10 completely seperate colors, so the other 30 will have to be shades of the first 10 in some way. And 3 of those first 10 ARE shades of each other. So, that would make some colors similar, hard to tell if your enemy happens to have a shade away from your team color.

Just incase someone hasent seen this one:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/08/15/plane ... interview/

You guys really dont think we've seen interviews from 2 months ago?

The majority most likely have.

But i figured since he posted a old interview, if someone hade missed that one they could have missed the pc gamer one too.

Use patterns, like stripes and the such...?

Remember that 40 players doesn't necessarily mean 40 different armies.

I hope it means starting off with at least 40 units, or the early game will have some issues.

Aw damn, I got the power generator...

In reply to Neutrino, how could you have two players controlling one army? Most literally you would have everything shared, but this could create a multitude of problems (e.g. “why did you just move those tanks I put there for this specific purpose?”). You could argue that Teamspeak would remove this issue, but TS is not the norm and likely never will be.

At the other end of the spectrum you could have two players on blue team who have entirely independent economies and armies - from their POV their respective armies are light blue and dark blue, but from the enemy's POV all their units just look blue.

There are all sorts of shades in between (shared eco, minimal control over allied units, etc) but this spectrum has a standard team game at one end and a frustrating mess that can be ruined by one griefer at the other.

Are there options I haven't considered? What rabbits have the professional game developers got hidden up their sleeves?

i'd think he means teams, though with 40 seperate player the ammount of concentration needed to supervise all 40 would be all but impossible for a single person, multiple players on a single army can be an interesting mechanic

Btw, did everyone catch the awsome metal planet picture posted on facebook 13 hours ago?



(Bigger picture: http://sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-a ... 2909_o.jpg)

since it isn't clear how far the "sharing" in terms of separation of assets is going to be, it might be a premature debate.
But assuming the total share as in one army and 2 equal players, there will be always additional requirements for the players (and not the system). Any player joining in such a team would have to be technically (type fast enough or some voice chat) and socially (plays well with others ) able to coordinate his actions or to divide responsibilities locally. It's probably easiest with people you know.

as a side note, just because something might be used for grief play doesn't mean it has to be cut down immediately. Too many useful/enriching mechanics haven been benched in game history just because they can be misused.

He does not mean teams. Try looking for the SupCom coop mod. That's what he means.

If this were 1936 I would agree. The only reason TS isn't the norm is because most PCs don't come with an integrated microphone. If a game wants TS, it merely needs to include a mic.

I remember playing the same team on age of empires 2, even with the two of us sitting next to each other it never worked out well.

There would have to be some nifty sharing mechanics for this to work. Either that or each player is really his own team but they use the same pop cap and resource pool.

There are armies and there are players. Multiple players can control the same army. Armies can also ally with each other. It's pretty simple and there is no need to complicate it.

Exactly, if you can't work together well enough, don't control a single army.