Chris Roberts should.....

Make a Strike Commander sequel if he don't have a desire or time to do a Wing Commander one.

That way he could enter the flight sim market with a great sims based in mercenary squadrons not in air forces.

At least this could made me happy until the release of a new Wing Commander.

What do you think ?
 
That would, indeed, be very cool -- unfortunately, Electronic Arts holds the rights to the Strike Commander franchise...
 
There has to come a sequel to Secret Ops, 'cos some questions are still unanwserd (what happend to Blair, to what the jump gates lead to etc). But then let origin make the sequel(s), they've done pretty good without chris.
 
Why not a Strike Commander sequel if we haven't seen a update for this original game in more than five years since the Tactical Operations Add-Ons. :(

I know that SecOps leave some doubts in it's ending, but come on ppl, Origin isn't too much interested in making any WC or WC Online sequel right now.

Give Strike Commander a chance...the flight sim market is losing speed and altitude. :(

[Edited by Raging Daemon on 02-10-2001 at 12:41]
 
Strike Commander 2 would actually be a good MMP game since it involves mercs taking assignments ect. It would be reletivly easy to have a persistant universe based on it, but I still want a new WC game
 
Well EA have the jane´s series going at this time (too damn realistic to me, but I liked the first games) so a Strike Commander II is not likely to show up.......
I love Strike Commander, it give a Dogfight view that no other flight sims was (and is) capable of giving to us.
 
Is it just me, or was SC the first game to introduce that "virtual cockpit" mode? I always wished that they would make an option like that for a WC game...
 
I am afraid that 5 years will be the time need to make a new WC game, Origin will need a team (the other was sack), get a idea about the game, develop that idea in to something, make the engine, etc..
 
It didn't take that long to make Prophecy. It took less than a year to make SecretOps. In addition, I wouldn't care if they made a new engine. In fact, I'd probably be disappointed because I like the Prophecy engine so much. It was so much fun to fly in that game.

For that reason, I think Prophecy has the best replay value of any WC game, except maybe 4. While 3 and 4 were cool with their movies and such, I hated that flight engine. It was too bulky and I felt like I was flying a desk.
 
Well Origin still have a team to make WC games at the time of WC P, now they dont.
Besides if the new game does not have a new engine, it will get bad reviews on some mags, besides there are problems now with the WC P engine, remeber that 3dfx have gone down the drain, they would need to change the engine to have a better DX support.
 
SC was the first game with a virtual cockpit -- although it was utterly useless... the first game to have a usefull virtual cockpit was Wings of Glory. :)

As for 3dfx, the only reason Prophecy shipped with '3dfx only' features was because of a marketing deal between EA and 3dfx... Secret Ops enables most of the 'unique' features in Direct3D.

The Vision Engine has a *lot* of untapped potential -- it could easily be a viable tool for the next Wing Commander game.
 
It's one of the most efficient Space Sim engines I've seen. It looks quite nice and it is one of the first WC games that will work very well under it's minimum requirements. People have gotten it running on systems as low as 133 IIRC. (It probably gets a little jumpy when lots of ships are on screen)

TC
 
Well, they'd have to bother to at least make it possible to make large ships explode (God that was the laziest piece of programming I ever saw). Put it real collision damage (WC should be arcadish - not a freaking full arcade game). Other than those two things which shouldn't be too hard to do the engine has actually held up well (although without FSAA there are way too many jaggies).
 
Have any of you guys experienced collision with your shields down? If you collide with anything with your own shields down, or if an enemy strikes your shields with his down, the ship takes damage. If you hit an asteroid, it won't matter if your shields are up because of the mass of the rock. ;)

I would guess that shields in this engine are meant to be powerful enough to resist ballistic and energy impact, and if shields impact each other, they'd simply repel.
 
The lack of capital ship explosions is a lack of artwork, not a limitation of the engine.

The collisions, too, are part of the physics defined specifically in the game, and *not* the vision engine. The engine is what renders the ships and such.
 
Join me, confed brethren and invoke the chant for the quick snap-shot deaths of capships!

*Bring back the nukes....*
*Bring back the nukes....*
*Bring back the nukes....*
*Bring back the nukes....*
*Bring back the nukes....*
*Bring back the nukes....*
...............


With the contact detonators, please!
:D
 
I asked about the lack of exploding capships in Prophecy at lunch with a bunch of Prophecy team members some years back -- they just groaned and looked guilty.
 
Good, and just wondering why does a ship explode if the engines and the bridge is destroyed? It never made much sence to me, since any damnage that could cause an explosion would come from destroying the engine making taking out the bridge useless, If they wanted to make torps absolutely necessary then they should have done a WCII way of attacking cap ships
 
Well the bridge does not make sense, though the engines do. Think about the amount of energy a M/AM engine produces and what would happen if it was uncontrollably detonated. And why do most sci-fi ships put the bridges out in the open. Why not just paint a bullseye and say, kill our command staff in one shot.
 
Back
Top