SS Review

[sage]

Can anyone point me to an impartial review of star shatter? I'm interested in knowing:
1) How dynamic and random the campaign really is.
2) How funtional and easy the interface is.
3) How functional the graphics and sound are. (I.e. they get the job done? 4 speaker 3d sound support?)
4) How accessible the game is.
5) Gameplay balance and quality.
6) How stable and robust the game is.

It's hard to get a sense of these things reading the forums, and I won't want to spend the time to learn the game if it's ultimately lacking depth.

Thank you,

Sage

[altmunster]

I haven't seen a review yet, but I fear that when I do it will say the game is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none. Overall: great breadth little depth, in my opinion. too many times have i ordered fighters and capital ships around, only to be ignored, for it to be a tight RTS. And it doesnt seem that there are many tactical possiblities as a cap ship simulator. the fighter sim part seems a little more fleshed out, but unfortunately for me that is my least favorite part of the game. with a few more patches some of the things could be improved upon and i will rekindle my love for the game. the first 10-20 hours were way addictive, until i dug in deeper.

[DamoclesX]

its the best


end of review:)

tactics are not apparent until you spend many hours learning each ship inside out.

multiplayer across several systems with big fleets is 10x better then homeworld ever could be, we had some insane battles with feints, decoys, traps, it was awsome

the only thing I would like, is a mode to allow you to jump into any ship in multiplayer, call it god mod or something, it would be cool to setup a flight then jump in, fly it, then jump back to your carrier and so on

but I gues that would break with the way the game is ment to be played

[altmunster]

ah yes, that is something you can indeed do, as long as you are not the host (i.e. launch fighter, jump in fighter, fly mission, fly back, jump back in carrier) i admit that was cool when i did it way back when.

as far as capital ship tactics, please share. take devastator cruisers as an example?...without adjustable shield facings, adjustable weapons strengths, meaningful energy output adjustments, powerful weapons on multiple arcs, electronic warfare, decoys, all it seems you are left with is targetable subsystems, different weapons ranges, and varied weapons arc coverage on ships. these elements do allow for a limited tactical approach, of course, but they fall short of a capital ship simulator.

i do indeed hope i am missing something, but i have spent many hours with this game and haven't seen anything beyond what i mentioned. but like i said, please share...i would be most thankful to have my eyes opened to new aspects of starshatter

[David Heath]

Hi Guys

The Reviews are coming trust me but here is a preview on the Wargamer

http://www.wargamer.com/reviews/starshatter_preview/

David

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: sage

Can anyone point me to an impartial review of star shatter?

I'd strongly suggest trying the demo (http://www.starshatter.com/downloads.htm )

Some things have changed, of course (as they have since the initial retail release), but that will be a far better guide as to whether you will like the game than somebody else's opinion.

[Deathifier]

I'm no reviewer, and I do like the game, so take these answers whichever way you feel like:

1) How dynamic and random the campaign really is.

The campaigns as a whole follow a mostly linear path, it's the missions that are randomly generated on a frequent basis for you to undertake.
What you fly determines what missions you get to go on - be it fighter strikes, capital ship engagements or routine patrols. The missions are the same in name only - each time you take off all sorts of things can happen, you may wind up seeing little action or you may turn up in the middle of major engagements.

Your performance can speed up, slow down or completely fail the entire campaign.

2) How funtional and easy the interface is.

A good amount of information placed neatly around the screen - all the important info is there along with some less important stuff. You'll need to read the manual (which covers the interface very well) and play around a bit with everything to get full benefit out of what you see.
The interface doesn't obscure your vision either, and you can use a simplified version and turn off all three MFD's if you don't want them.
Many of the features have hotkeys as well, otherwise you can interact with everything using the mouse.

3) How functional the graphics and sound are. (I.e. they get the job done? 4 speaker 3d sound support?)

Music is nice, sets the mood well.
Sound is functional and distinctive (one thing doesn't sound like everything else).
I don't pay much attention to sound beyond that.

4) How accessible the game is.

Set it to arcade mode, run the tutorials and memorise a few hotkeys and away you go!
It's not hard to get started, esp. if you have previous space/flight sim experience.

5) Gameplay balance and quality.

Pretty good, none of the ships are overpowering vs. ships of the same type and fighters, if flown properly, will happily unload a pile of missiles into the side of your nice new capital ship and run off before you can scratch them (which is why you need fighters or frigates of your own as escort!).
Quality is great! Planets look wonderful both from space and on the surface. Ships look great, maybe a little on the dull side, however that sits well with the realistic space fleet feel.

6) How stable and robust the game is.

Very stable, you may get a couple of crashes now and then but on the whole they are rare.


For replayability you can go back through the campaigns a few times before they start to get repetitive and multiplayer is a very promising option if you can find a server and people on it.

So there you go, a review in a can

- Deathifier

[David Heath]

We are working with John to see if we can bring you a multiplayer server

[sage]

Let me ask two specific questions about the random campaign:

First, if there was no player involvement (i.e. you don't take any missions), would the campaign resolve about the same way each time?

Second, how much resource management do you get to do? For example, is it just ship level or do you also get to manage ammunition stocks? Crew? etc...

The reason I would strongly prefer a review (or three) is that my time is very limited. I don't want to spend the time to download and learn the demo, read the manual etc... if it's not what I'm looking for. I have some very fond memories from the dynamic campaign included with Longbow 2. That was seriously awesome and had a ton of replay value.

Sage

[Deathifier]

ORIGINAL: sage

Let me ask two specific questions about the random campaign:

First, if there was no player involvement (i.e. you don't take any missions), would the campaign resolve about the same way each time?

Yes, and that would be failure, since whilst the AI does go on missions they are simple number-crunching exercises and the results are usually pretty tame (a couple of fighters blow up, a starship gets destroyed) whereas you the player can usually destroy or damage several ships (and your own ships involved will be destroyed/take damage).

Second, how much resource management do you get to do? For example, is it just ship level or do you also get to manage ammunition stocks? Crew? etc...

Just ships, and for the most part just the ships assigned to the unit your in command of (or part of). You can change units when you attain a sufficient rank (doesn't take much for basic starships).
You also do damage control for your ship during missions, however only hull damage is retained between missions and its effect is limited to you making sure heavily damaged ships don't wander into a fight (very easy).

The reason I would strongly prefer a review (or three) is that my time is very limited.

So is everybody elses, it's a busy busy world

I have some very fond memories from the dynamic campaign included with Longbow 2. That was seriously awesome and had a ton of replay value.

If you are thinking of a map with stuff on it and what happens is entirely dependant on what you decide to do then no, it's not that kind of dynamic - the scope is a bit smaller (basically the area you operate in is fixed and moves as the campaigns progress).
'course I haven't played Longbow 2, but Apache:Havok/Comanche:Hokum sounds like it might be similar (it gave you a nice big map, a bunch of bases, and left you to blow stuff up).

If you can spare a couple of hours to play with the demo and it'll answer your questions much more matter-of-factly than any review or fan summary could, and it'd probably be quicker than reading my replies

- Deathifier