MMORPG.com StarQuest Online Correspondent Allen Richardson recently spoke with the developers of StarQuest Online, asking them about the game's graphics, gameplay elements and more.

Amid a flurry of almost non-existent hype, StarQuest Online launched on September 21, 2007. People had never heard of it, and comments of "This looks like something I could play on my Armstrad 464" were rampant. No one had ever heard of CastleThorn Software. Now, almost a year and four months later, the game is pretty much in the same boat. The graphics have improved drastically, but are still not DX10 material or even close. So what does the game have fully in its favor.

Read Player Crews and an Interview

Very cool. It’s good to see that smaller companies are still able to take risks, and make a profit.

They love their game.

And not only them

Awesome interview

OK so i decided to have a look, with very low expectations. But even so, i didnt last 5 minutes. I'm sorry. The graphics are like 20 years old, even though i expected the worse, I wasn't prepared for what I got lol.

Its a shame, the online manual made the game sound cool. Perhaps just not for me. Others may enjoy the retro experience.

Originally posted by Radox

OK so i decided to have a look, with very low expectations. But even so, i didnt last 5 minutes. I'm sorry. The graphics are like 20 years old, even though i expected the worse, I wasn't prepared for what I got lol.

Its a shame, the online manual made the game sound cool. Perhaps just not for me. Others may enjoy the retro experience.

The manual didn't mae the game "sound cool" the manual tells you the fact that it is "cool".

That's a shame about your experience because I did the same but after a few more days of looking around the net for a game similar (playing inside a ship) I found nothing and thought that I should give it a "real" go. I got on a ship with a really nice crew and found everytime I logged in I would discover something new, that was about 9 months ago and I am still finding things now!

There is nothing like this game and there will not be for a long time (I know what game you "might" try and suggest but it isn't going to be close to this one for a while)

Yes this is a game for a certain type of player but when those players find this game they stay, I have wanted this game ever since playing elite. The game is on it's way to full on "nothing is impossible" greatness. If you don't like it first time round try again in say 3 months, it is constantly getting better!

As for graphics, companies have gotten away with graphics over DEEP gameplay for a loooong time, I can make an anology to modern day "popcorn munching eye candy" films that we get given by hollywood, They are fun for an hour and a half but you wont remember them in a few years time!

So, If you read this, give it another go (although if the graphics really do mean that much to you then I'm not sure how you will get on in a game like this), This game is very deep and has a steep learning curve, those who are willing to put the effort in and are also sick of the usual "semi-multiplayer" gameplay that we see "stuck-on" to some modern eye candy graphics should try the game and give it MORE than a few days and try to find your "niche" within it. Once you do you will feel spoilt and wonder why more developers don't have the balls to make games like these!

Warning: If you play for graphics, don't even try this game

If you play for immersion, you've found a new home in SQO.

"From where I stand, the game looks as good as it needs to."
-Bardon Thorn

You really need to try standing somewhere else.

Originally posted by HalfEmpty

 

"From where I stand, the game looks as good as it needs to."
-Allen Richardson

You really need to try standing somewhere else.

That wasn't part of the interview, that was my summary.

The graphics are horrible compared to todays uninnovative standard, personally I don't need nice graphics. I'm perfectly happy to play a game with 5 year old graphics. Now, if there was any other game that could do near this, with better graphics, I would switch.

But seriously, from a programmers standpoint, you can't set the graphics much higher at all before it starts consuming enormous amounts of memory.

Technology doesn't exist currently that could handle the map-in-map architecture required at a DX10 Standard setting.

Now it could be upped to DX9 Standard, but then you would have to have dual graphics cards and at least 4 gig of RAM to play it. -Which is not smart from a marketing point of view-

Thanks for correcting me on that! I'm relieved to hear it actually. Got  the flow of converation screwed up. Pardon me for my misinterpretation.

I'm perfectly happy to play a game with 5 year old graphics too...as long as I have the hope that they will improve over time. Part of the joy is watching things improve.

The graphics in SQO must be balanced with it's vast size, that is understood. DX10 or DX9, it doesn't matter. Nobody's expecting those kind of settings neccessarily.

Part of the intrigue of this game is looking out into space and "wondering what's out there". Even though I haven't travelled extensively  I can tell you: Not Much. Exploration of the unknown was a major draw for me. It 's been a disappointment too.

Fantastic things could be done with textures and imagery at the same grade as uploadable images. ... Anything is better than nothing. What good is a vast universe when there's nothing interesting to see?

Anyway, I'm glad those were your words instead of the developers!

"Part of the intrigue of this game is looking out into space and "wondering what's out there". Even though I haven't travelled extensively I can tell you: Not Much. Exploration of the unknown was a major draw for me. It 's been a disappointment too."

-----In StarQuest?

I'll have to check, but I think at last count there was around 17,000 objects, of which 16% has been found. Of course thats not even one object per sector........

Originally posted by AlloughN

Originally posted by HalfEmpty

 

"From where I stand, the game looks as good as it needs to."
-Allen Richardson

You really need to try standing somewhere else.

 

That wasn't part of the interview, that was my summary.

 

The graphics are horrible compared to todays uninnovative standard, personally I don't need nice graphics. I'm perfectly happy to play a game with 5 year old graphics. Now, if there was any other game that could do near this, with better graphics, I would switch.

But seriously, from a programmers standpoint, you can't set the graphics much higher at all before it starts consuming enormous amounts of memory.

Technology doesn't exist currently that could handle the map-in-map architecture required at a DX10 Standard setting.

Now it could be upped to DX9 Standard, but then you would have to have dual graphics cards and at least 4 gig of RAM to play it. -Which is not smart from a marketing point of view-

First off, I like the game, despite the graphics it has trememdous possibilities for immersion as mentioned by others above.
 

As to upgrading the graphics, sorry nothing worse than a huge exaggeration.  If you don't understand game programming then don't comment on it and make yourself look foolish.  If the staff had the skills they could easily put this in DX9 or 10 with far less memory usage.  

It all comes down to how much time they want to put into it.  Upgraded graphics would take a lot more coding time then they have put into the game up to this point, so it would exclude them from adding content for quite some time.  I don't think they want to do that.

Personally the game is fine as it is.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

Originally posted by AlloughN

Originally posted by HalfEmpty

 

"From where I stand, the game looks as good as it needs to."
-Allen Richardson

You really need to try standing somewhere else.

 

That wasn't part of the interview, that was my summary.

 

The graphics are horrible compared to todays uninnovative standard, personally I don't need nice graphics. I'm perfectly happy to play a game with 5 year old graphics. Now, if there was any other game that could do near this, with better graphics, I would switch.

But seriously, from a programmers standpoint, you can't set the graphics much higher at all before it starts consuming enormous amounts of memory.

Technology doesn't exist currently that could handle the map-in-map architecture required at a DX10 Standard setting.

Now it could be upped to DX9 Standard, but then you would have to have dual graphics cards and at least 4 gig of RAM to play it. -Which is not smart from a marketing point of view-

  .........If you don't understand game programming then don't comment on it and make yourself look foolish.  .........

Personally the game is fine as it is.

Lol......... I'm sorry, I was just trying to dumb it down so people who aren't coders could understand it.

Basically, the map in map architecture means you are loading up to 5 maps at once. If those were increased to use bump maps and all the shaders that DX9 and DX10 use, you would have to have a mega pc to run it.

Even at DX9, it would require about the same amount of memory as AOC on high setting.

___________________________________________________________________

But your right, anything is possible given time. SQO will be getting DX9 or 11 in a few years if the population keeps going up.

DX10 is a waste of programming actually.......

The emphasis of the developers on that second "M" in MMORPG is going to be the death knell for any game like this. Even for people who especially enjoy the communal aspects of an MMO, not having also large amounts of soloable content is a major tactical error, in my opinion. Once I read that, I lost all interest in SQO.

Not including substantial amounts of solo content, to cover those times a player doesn't feel like grouping, is just really really dumb.

Originally posted by tmr819

The emphasis of the developers on that second "M" in MMORPG is going to be the death knell for any game like this. Even for people who especially enjoy the communal aspects of an MMO, not having also large amounts of soloable content is a major tactical error, in my opinion. Once I read that, I lost all interest in SQO.

Not including substantial amounts of solo content, to cover those times a player doesn't feel like grouping, is just really really dumb.

You can do anything solo'ing that a group can do. It just takes a little longer.

PvP is the only thing that you can't do alone.

The richest person in game (by a very large margin) is a solo'er by the name of Riddick.