History Lesson Needed

Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Well, what Wing Commander IV proved -- Quake or not -- was that the 'interactive movie' genre had hit a brick wall. :) WCIVDVD is an incredible release, though...
Click to expand...

I have to agree with Mark Day with this one. It's a good thing CR had the balls to do it. It is, perhaps, the apex of interactive storytelling.

There was no 'IX' -- it was published as 'Ultima: Ascension', as at some point in the late nineties the world decided that numbers were bad ("Wing Commander: Prophecy", "Star Trek: Generations", and so forth...).
Click to expand...

That would render your "Many Machines in IX" joke less appropriate. Did you "steal" this one, or came up in your own? :)

Its fate was pretty much sealed at that point. EA realized at that time -- a year or two into development -- that Ultima Online 2 wouldn't create a new audience... it'd just take people away from Ultima Online. Their first tactic was that stupid name-change...
Click to expand...

It's strange, indeed. But for how long can they keep improving on the same game?

They called it lots of things -- it went through two-plus development teams and several years of on-and-off work. It was 'Wing Commander Online' when I saw it.

'Vaporware' is when a game is hyped for years but never released... Privateer Online was never even *announced*.
Click to expand...

Dude, I was paraphrasing Tolwyn from WCIV. :) That was the best I could came up with.

You're probably thinking of Privateer 3, which was cancelled.
Click to expand...

Yes, you're correct! It was Priv3, it was more or less at the same time so I guess I confused them both. How good did the version of the game you played? Was it a 3D engine when you walked inside the planet?

They weren't good numbers compared to its *immediate predicessor* which sold a million copies... and they certainly weren't what EA was hoping for.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Chris Roberts is working on film projects these days... last anyone heard, he was working with a production house called "Ascendent Pictures". One of these project is the rumored Wing Commander TV show...
Click to expand...

Is Ascendent the same as PNR?
 
Originally posted by Timmy the Tooth
Is Ascendent the same as PNR?
Click to expand...

Not really... As I understand it Ascendent's for film and the like, while PNR is focused on interactive media.
 
Hopefully the tv series is live action! The cartoon series seem to limit the dialouges!(look at my post on WC4 demo)
Click to expand...

That was the plan.

That would render your "Many Machines in IX" joke less appropriate. Did you "steal" this one, or came up in your own?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure only I could come up with a joke like that.

It's strange, indeed. But for how long can they keep improving on the same game?
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I recently tried UO again, and they have been doing an excellent job of changing it over time to keep people interested...

Yes, you're correct! It was Priv3, it was more or less at the same time so I guess I confused them both. How good did the version of the game you played? Was it a 3D engine when you walked inside the planet?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was a 3D engine where you walked around... looked like UA, with a slightly sci-fiier character.
 
OK!
Another inconsistency!

I just read End Run.

In the book they say that the TCS Gettysburg is one of the fleet carriars jumping the Kilrathi fleet at Vukar Tag.

However, on her first appearance, in SO1, the Gettysburg is a Waterloo class cruiser!

Waterloo cruiser has a light fighter complement (40 or so) and is defently not a Fleet carriar.

Now may be the excuse of the TCS Austin (looks like an Exeter, deffrent intirior) worked for the Austin, but I'm not buying it here!
 
Originally posted by HammerHead
OK!
Another inconsistency!

I just read End Run.

In the book they say that the TCS Gettysburg is one of the fleet carriars jumping the Kilrathi fleet at Vukar Tag.

However, on her first appearance, in SO1, the Gettysburg is a Waterloo class cruiser!

Waterloo cruiser has a light fighter complement (40 or so) and is defently not a Fleet carriar.

Now may be the excuse of the TCS Austin (looks like an Exeter, deffrent intirior) worked for the Austin, but I'm not buying it here!
Click to expand...

They never say she's a Waterloo-class cruiser there, however, not in the dialogue. Also, you can (in theory) destroy 36 enemy fighters in the Rigel missions.

Rigel A has you fighting 3 Ferrets at NAV 1, 6 Epees at the Kamekh's wreckage, and 2 more Epees on the way back.

Rigel B makes you fight 4 Ferrets at NAV 2, and 4 Epees at NAV 4 who are trying to kill Bear and Bodybag before you get them back to Concordia.

Rigel C lets you battle 6 Ferrets and 4 Epees at NAVs 1 and 2 on patrol to find the Gettysburg, which has its own complement of pilots AND fighters... which leads to Rigel D on the winning track.

Rigel D has 2 Epees at the jump point, and 6 more Epees at the pirate base. In this last mission, you also have 2 other wingmen.

Now, you've fought 34 pilots, and yet there are enough pilots AND crew aboard the Gettysburg to fight if necessary, or so it seemed from the dialogue. We borrowed two of them, and left two of them on Concordia under guard, PLUS they had 'all their senior officers and wingleaders with the Commodore (Cain)'. That's a bit more than 40 craft, which leads me to guess that they did just reuse a ship model for this craft...
 
Originally posted by Haesslich
That's a bit more than 40 craft, which leads me to guess that they did just reuse a ship model for this craft...
Click to expand...

Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Low-creativity-reusing-lasy-sons-of-b#$%$#^


OK! I decided to take the challange!
If any one can land me fully complete models of Exeter Destroyer and Waterloo Cruiser, I'll tweak them around just a bit so they won't look completely different, but could still be considered as diffent models - The Gettysburg Cruiser Based on the Exeter design and a Fleet carriar design based on the Watrloo cruiser. I'll let you guys pick the carriars class name...
 
Originally posted by HammerHead
Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Low-creativity-reusing-lasy-sons-of-b#$%$#^


OK! I decided to take the challange!
If any one can land me fully complete models of Exeter Destroyer and Waterloo Cruiser, I'll tweak them around just a bit so they won't look completely different, but could still be considered as diffent models - The Gettysburg Cruiser Based on the Exeter design and a Fleet carriar design based on the Watrloo cruiser. I'll let you guys pick the carriars class name...
Click to expand...

And just so you know, I screwed up the math. :D But it's 37 enemy pilots, not counting those who were stranded with Commodore Cain, and the four friendly pilots we know of... and others who are likely doing CAP for the Gettysburg.
 
I'm pretty sure the Gettysburg is supposed to be a Waterloo heavy cruiser.

More likely, the Waterloos are considered as important as fleet carriers -- since they're so heavily armed and carry so many fighters (recall that in WC2 it was very important for Concordia to join up with Agincourt...).

The couple of extra pilots you count (I've got it on good authority that the number of fighters listed in the Waterloo's specs are so high compared to everything else *because* of SO1, not in spite of it) are probably the guys assigned to test fly the Crossbows...
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
I'm pretty sure the Gettysburg is supposed to be a Waterloo heavy cruiser.

More likely, the Waterloos are considered as important as fleet carriers -- since they're so heavily armed and carry so many fighters (recall that in WC2 it was very important for Concordia to join up with Agincourt...).

The couple of extra pilots you count (I've got it on good authority that the number of fighters listed in the Waterloo's specs are so high compared to everything else *because* of SO1, not in spite of it) are probably the guys assigned to test fly the Crossbows...
Click to expand...

In other words, this is just above the 'standard' capacity because of the test team, the way the Morningstars in SO2 had their own pilots despite flying off the Concordia? Gotcha.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
More likely, the Waterloos are considered as important as fleet carriers -- since they're so heavily armed and carry so many fighters (recall that in WC2 it was very important for Concordia to join up with Agincourt...).
Click to expand...

This is also consistent with the amount of fighters that the renegade can pull into battle on Rigel (WC2 SO2). Tolwyn also stated it was imperative to separate the Gettysburg and the Depot, implying that both, together, mounted up to a formidable force.
 
Originally posted by Delance
This is also consistent with the amount of fighters that the renegade can pull into battle on Rigel (WC2 SO2). Tolwyn also stated it was imperative to separate the Gettysburg and the Depot, implying that both, together, mounted up to a formidable force.
Click to expand...

Actually, a starbase by itself is a pretty formidable force. :D A starbase with a defending ship would be even worse.. which is why, in other games, we tended to destroy the defending ships before we hit the bases.

Even lowly supply bases, as in Secret Missions 1.
 
Originally posted by Haesslich
Actually, a starbase by itself is a pretty formidable force. :D A starbase with a defending ship would be even worse.. which is why, in other games, we tended to destroy the defending ships before we hit the bases.

Even lowly supply bases, as in Secret Missions 1.
Click to expand...

Yeah.. like Delance implied.. I'm not sure how formidable a depot is compared to a starbase.. We see a lot of both, and there are lots of classes of starbases. A depot alone might not be so significant without assistance.. though together they're likely greater than the sum of their parts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top