>Still no game that lets you pilot an Imperial Star Destroyer

I can't imagine any way for that to be exciting, or even fun.

>>378991725

>pilot

I think the word you are looking for is command.

>>378991725

Because there's a good reason for that. Look at it this way, piloting a Star Destroyer would be cool, just, really cool. This isn't Star Wars, not now and not again, ever.

For Star Wars, we'd rather have you pilot your gender into a new orientation. Now THAT's cool, and Star Wars!!!

>>378992110
>Piloting a star destroyer would be cool
No, it really wouldn't. I can't imagine how anyone could think that piloting a big, slow piece of shit that can't even make quick turns would be "cool" in the slightest.

>>378991725

What is Star Wars Empire at War?

>>378992254
This.
"Piloting" a Star Destroyer is altering the vessel's course .5 degrees every other hour.
Piloting interplanetary, or intergalactic, starships in general is pretty uninvolved.

>>378992254
It would work better as an action-strategy game.

>flying this massive ship in one dimension in a three dimensional field is FUN

fuckin' retarded.

>>378992761
If the vessel if moving in any direction, it's not moving in one dimension, idiot.

File: open-uri20150608-27674-htbm4b_5efb25b0[1].jpg (192KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1200x675px

>>378991954
Battle of Coruscant.

Take control of a fighter, star destroyer or any other fleet ship and wreck shit. 10/10

File: 1487631514985.gif (2MB, 374x389px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 374x389px

>>378992932
the thing is though, pretty much anything that engages you turns you into a field, easily so because you are massive and they are small, what are you going to do, try and outmaneuver those bomber squadrons?

no kiddo, have you ever played a flight simulator before? It's the same concept as engaging a bomber flying at a single altitude, your superior vehicle and engine will easily make up for any type of maneuver he can do, essentially rendering them a waste, one of the reasons things that big FLY IN ONE DIRECTION

HURRRR

>>378993136
So, you're standing still in the upper atmosphere, firing your broadsides all day long?
And that's your idea of fun.

>>378991954
>>378992254
>>378993231
naval sims are fun you spergs
it would be unique and cool if done well

>>378993243
Fucking yes. Doesn't mean you have to find it fun m8

>>378991954
>>378992254
>>378992446
>>378992761
>>378993231

Why do retards believe in this "it wouldn't be a fun concept" argument.

You do realize that there are video games out there where you drive a fucking truck around Europe delivering goods, and by drive I mean following the road rules and getting stuck in traffic.

There are games out there where all you do is literally drive trains.

You drive trains. You can't even turn manually. You hold forward. It has 6 grand worth of DLC because retards buy it.

Autists and Germans will buy literally anything that seems like it might be fucking boring.

File: header.jpg (343KB, 460x215px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 460x215px

Only closet game is playing as the Imperial Navy in Battlefleet

>>378993816
>>378993468
not really the argument, tard.

i am simply dragging you fools back into the real world, you are not maneuvering a ship that large in any -real- way, get over it.

>>378993243
What is your idea of fun?

>>378993816
The problem with those sim games is they are purely catered to the turbonerds and hardcore fans.
Meanwhile, anything Star Wars related media are going to be targeted at mainstream audience. Especially considering EA is the one that's holding the license right now, no one's gonna risk their neck just to please autismos

>>378994131
Anything that isn't an exercise in tedium.

>>378994360
Give examples of games that don't have "exercise in tedium". Stop giving half assed answers.

>>378994659
You didn't ask for examples of games, you idiot.
Literally any game that you actively interact with, meaning no fucking movie games either, or "cinematic experiences".

>>378994260
>The problem with those sim games is they are purely catered to the turbonerds and hardcore fans.
I don't know, I can imagine the truck simulators being good for casual, comfy fun. I can see myself getting some enjoyment out of driving across Europe and admiring the scenery.

I can't say the same for the train simulators, though. I don't think it would be fun to hold down one button (or in all likelihood, press it once to start the train and once to stop it at the destination), and I don't think the scenery would be as good.

>>378994826
makes no sense