Quote
Just out of curiosity: Why does a mech "simulation" have to be slow_ A preconceived notion perhaps_
I can understand a real (commercial) simulator such as MS Flight Sim and Falcon 4.0 having speed and maneuverability grounded in reality (to the best extent of the engine), but since we don't really have mechs, who's to say a mech "sim" would be "slow"_
Also, I've played fast strategic games, so why can a mech "sim" not be "fast and strategic"_
To me, something that's considered a "sim" is going to have more functioning aspects to it than just aim and shoot.
Let's take MWLL for example:
In MWLL you can control whether your radar is on or off
You control what you're targeting
You can power your mech on and off
You can fire different weapons at different times, or even set up firing groups
You can target enemies for your friends with targeting lasers
I'm sure I'm missing more features, it's been a while since I've played...
To me, those are the kinds of things that resonate with a "simulator"
Let's look at Falcon 4.0:
You have to control your landing gear, flaps, speed brakes
You have to control radar slew modes
You have to target friends and foes
You have to set your weapons up to fire
You have to use your navigation equipment to get from point A to point B
Here is an example of what you have to do just to start the jet (makes any mech game look like childs play imo )
These two examples (MWLL and Falcon 4.0) are simulation. One based in reality, the other not so much (I'll let you guess which is which )
Let's imagine (tragically) for a second that there is no such thing as aviation. All of our airplane simulators would have these flight characteristics (speed, maneuverability) based on nothing but imagination. Yet they would still be simulators, no_
If we were to change the flight characteristics to be faster and more maneuverable, would that make it any less a simulator_ You'd still have to put your gear and flaps up after taking off, you'd still have to tune in a navigation aid to get from point A to point B... We would simply have to accomplish these tasks at a quicker rate due to the increase in speed. This actually happens in real life aviation, you learn to fly on a slow airplane, and then you learn faster and more maneuverable airplanes, yet you still have all the same tasks to accomplish (generally more tasks actually), just at a faster rate now, or you'll crash and burn.
As you will note from this example: Speed and maneuverability do not have anything to do with simulation unless what is being simulated is realistic.
Going back to MWLL: Could it have been made a faster game, and keep the simulation elements_ Absolutely. Would it lose the amount of strategy necessary_ Not at all.
Bringing it back to this:
Quote
Now do you see the issue there_ Simulation isn't related to speed and strategies. It is related to what you must control to accomplish your tasks, regardless of how fast or how strategically you do so.
From watching the HAWKEN videos, it looks absolutely awesome. I have no qualms with the speed I'm seeing, or with the employment of tactics and weaponry. Of course, that could either change or not once I have a chance to play it.
I'm simply mentioning this because I would hate to see people thinking inside the box of "simulation is slow and strategic whereas arcade is fast". That's simply not true.
Do I think the HAWKEN team is doing a good job, yes. Please nobody take this post the wrong way
EDIT: A good comparison between simulation and arcade would be comparing Falcon 4.0 to Over G Fighters. Aircraft speed and maneuverability is generally the same, the difference between whether its simulation or not is in how much of the aircraft you actually control vs what's automatically being done for you by the game.