I just read it, a very good interview I thought.
Not sure I agree with this part though:
Chick: Fair enough. Going back to feedback from the beta tests -- this might be a difficult question because you might not be able to answer it diplomatically -- but what are some of the sillier complaints you get from fans? For instance, I'm just going to throw out a couple that I've heard. I hear people complain that the turrets don't move on the capital ships. Or that non-fighters don't fly around during combat.
Fraser: Yeah.
Chick: I've seen both of those and I think they're completely immaterial to what you guys are doing. Do you get a lot of complaints that you think are silly and miss the point like that?
Fraser: Totally. You named a great example and a bad example, and I'll explain why. In terms of turrets, a lot of people coming from Nexus or Homeworld expect that level of detail. But given what we were trying to simulate, and the system specs we were trying to hit, turrets doing that just didn't make any sense, especially at the scale we're doing it. It was absolutely silly. Waste of our resources, waste of the CPU's resources. So we didn't do that. Now, the other one -- ships not flying around with fighters -- we actually did that at the start. The problem is, given the number of ships you can potentially have, it was absolute chaos. It made for very poor gameplay. As realistic as it may have been, or as "Battlestar Galactica" as it may have been, it just didn't work. However, we did know it was something we could provide as a modding option. In Entrenchment, we actually unlock that capability. There are several mods right now that incorporate that as a gameplay feature. If you go to the modding forums on the Sins site, you can see a couple of examples. Who knows? They may be able to tweak the physics to make entertaining gameplay.
Now I'm not going to go off on one here, rather try to balance the arguement a little because it wasn't tackled very objectively.
We know you've added fighter physics as an option to Entrenchment, so lets just wrap that up and say good move and much appreciated.
It is also fair to say 'But given what we were trying to simulate, and the system specs we were trying to hit, turrets doing that just didn't make any sense, especially at the scale we're doing it.'
What people want ladies and gentlemen is turrets as an option, so my Quad-core 8GB 64bit system has the option to 'switch them on'. Now if its a waste of your time to develop this option because the majority of players don't have the system spec needed you have a community of modders that are quite prepared to invest the time for you and then you can judge the results for yourself if you empower them to do so.
So on behalf of the community that wants this enhancement feature, can you please give us some guidance or pointers on how it might be achieved. You've already got an outstanding particle system which reads constants and identity matricies externally, can you not go that extra step to effect the vector calculations on objects with variables and formulae?
Turrets aside there could be a great deal of benefits for other objects too, someone was asking me a few months back how they might extend/retract the pylons on their Galactica model. There is no reason why the core Sins game cannot include that style in its own way like hanger doors and well basically more advanced designs in general.
Not really immaterial when you look at it from that perspective at least I don't think so, turrets are just a by product of being able to control sub/child mesh objects at that level which is very very good thing for all players.
Its not only Capships, don't forget there are Starbases and enhanced tactical structures, any one of those would make a good candidate and wouldn't soak up massive ammounts of CPU cycles if applied only to those objects, or even just the pirate base which is hardly going to present in any large numbers.
Anyway I hope I have presented sensible feedback on this topic, its not a complaint its an oppourtunity to enhance the game.