Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Emrikol
Oct 1, 2015
The only real problem with TIE Fighter and all of the other games in the series was that sometimes you'd blow up an enemy fighter and its fuselage would defy physics in order to rocket directly backwards at full speed, colliding with you and probably killing you instantly if you had low/no shields.

I don't really know why they did that. I'm guessing wreckage was thrown in random directions, and the collidable hull was included in that, but they really should have had it take direction of travel into account, at least for that one piece.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Emrikol
Oct 1, 2015

Charles posted:

This is worst in X-Wing and I need to test my hypothesis that emulating too fast a CPU makes it worse. Too fast a CPU is known to cause bugs with tugs.

It was also funnier in X-Wing, because in that game parts tore off as dying ships careened through space instead of disintegrating immediately, so the sudden veering upon death resulted in the entire ship slamming off in some insane and impossible angle, including the ludicrous 180° straight backwards.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply