Chromehounds, trying to squeeze as much nostalgia fun out of it to compensate not having been able to play more than three times online (as the game was intended).
Sonotsugipaa
If you're ok with emulation (or have the hardware & means to acquire the game), the infamous Banjo Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts is similar to Robocraft - only singleplayer-focused, with the technical limitations of the Xbox 360, and a bastardized version of the BK artistic direction.
I'm not sure the game aged well, but other than that I got nothing
... so, when are we launching?
On a serious note, I think I was wrong.
Assuming you can get into Mün's SOI with an incredibly precise trajectory, you can MAYBE, sort of, lose kinetic energy by simply burning "upwards" at certain points, until you're basically repeatedly going upwards then downwards relatively to the Mün. Its rotation is a problem, but tbh I haven't played KSP in years and ffs I'm studying IT, not... whatever KSP is.
Contrarily to popular belief, the average person isn't much better at drawing anatomically correct depictions of human insides than AI
Would most people be happy with a 2025 AAA game with the graphical fidelity of GTA:VC, though?
Personally I would love it if those massive budgets were spent where it matters, but I suspect "this game looks like it came out 20 years ago" would be a common complaint, as if only indie devs get to sacrifice photorealism for style.
Not distributing your game through a publisher does that sometimes
... not in M.A.V.'s case though, redditors say the devs just use their Discord community now
There isn't anything like it either, save for M.A.V. but I ain't blindly buying a game with an apparently unmaintained website
I imagine the latter isn't too hard, you just have to get it right just before leaving the atmosphere (quick saves help); however, isn't landing (not crashing nor rolling around) on the Mün without steering straight up impossible?
Though I can see some rocket landing on a planet with an atmosphere...
Me still not having a Chromehounds sequel:
Just tested this: the "original+" code compiles, but does not increment i.
There were two problems:
b(bool)
andb(char)
are ambiguous (quick fix: change the signatures tochar b(bool&)
andauto b(char&& v)
);- The concept def. has to come after the
b
functions, even if the constraint is only checked after both, I was unaware of this (fix: defineC
immediately beforevoid inc(int&)
).
Sadly not, it is often considered illegal to reverse-engineer software for the purpose of circumventing DRM.