I just want to mention THIS

TCSTigersClaw

TCSTigersClaw

Greek Special Forces B' Company "Naoussa" 2007-200
All this time reding the Forums , ive got to say this to all of you:

It is VERY, VERY wrong to gather information about the WC univerce from sources like :WC the movie , WC Academy series ,Super Wing commander. These are in WC universe, but they are something like in another Dimension.

In the wc movie Chris Roberts just wanted to show to the crowd everything about the wcuniverse in a 90 min movie.In Academy series the same thing. These (movie/series) just have relation with wc univerce but they are not included in it.If yes there is a big confusion specially with the wc academy series (and the SWC)
cause it changes the hole history of WC.

So in my opinion , in wc univerce Pilgrims never existed , all the facts in WcAcademy and Super Wing Commadner never happened , or happened but not as the (series/games) show them.

P.S Expecting the opinion of LOAF, cause he is great wcfan , but ithink he is wrong about the above. :cool:
 
It is VERY, VERY wrong to gather information about the WC univerce from sources like :WC the movie , WC Academy series ,Super Wing commander.
Click to expand...

That’s like saying, and equally vaguely, that it’s “very, very wrong” to pay any attention to the New Testament because only the Old Testament is “correct”. Certainly you’re free to have your own “faith” about WC, but when it comes to arguing in favor of it, you might as well try spitting into the wind.:)

These are in WC universe, but they are something like in another Dimension. . . .These (movie/series) just have relation with wc univerce but they are not included in it. If yes there is a big confusion specially with the wc academy series (and the SWC) cause it changes the hole history of WC.
Click to expand...

From this I take it that the heart of your “angst” about what is or is not a valid source for WC is the seeming conflicts among the different sources. With all due respect, you misunderstand what attracts many of us to discussions about WC and its canon. While we faithfully accept Origin’s imprimatur without question, the fact is that most of us revel in the challenge of harmonizing conflicts–reasoning our way to an explanation that accounts for an apparent conflict and so eliminates it. It’s simply fun!

You’re free to join us in this as you like, but if you understand the point I’m making, the very last thing any of us will appreciate hearing is that conflict among the sources is a bad thing, or should be “resolved” by simply belittling or ignoring one or more of those sources (the movie, SWC, etc.). In short, that just wouldn’t be speaking our language here.

I might say that it’s also disappointing when someone highlights a given conflict (“Oh yeah, well what about this and what about that?”) merely as a way of throwing down the gauntlet to us, rather than being genuinely curious and interested in finding a way to harmonize facts and thus help us add to our overall knowledge of the WC universe.

So in my opinion , in wc univerce Pilgrims never existed , all the facts in WcAcademy and Super Wing Commadner never happened , or happened but not as the (series/games) show them.
Click to expand...

Again, you’re entitled to your opinion, but most if not all of us who enjoy the “game” of canon follow Origin’s lead. So, yes, the Pilgrims most certainly did/do exist, WCA and SWC most certainly did happen, and so on.

Cheers!
 
Well... to each his own -- and one can never force his owns.

However, I think there's a bit of a 'have not' mentality here -- particularly regarding Super Wing Commander. You've simply heard that it's a different game and decided it 'doesn't exist'. But it's *not* a different game. It's Wing Commander I with new graphics and speech -- it's the same exact story. Why wouldn't Wing Commander 1 have happened?

Further, I think the complaint about the movie or Academy is often simply that someone didn't like it. For that reason, we should talk about exactly *why* you think it shouldn't be accepted -- instead of simply leaving it at that. For example, is it really a 'contradiction' to have Broadswords on the Tiger's Claw? The first thing you jump at is 'yes -- we don't see them in WC1!'... but that's not really a contradiction -- since there's no evidence that they're *not* around.

Finally, there's the idea that maybe we're not in a position to judge any of this. People put just as hard work into animating Wing Commander Academy as they did rendering ships for Wing Commander 2... what right have *we* to pick and choose and make such judgements? We can simply give our opinions -- not claim that certain products don't exist. That would be rediculous...
 
hehehe, Loaf is right about SWC it is wc1 all over again, the only story line difference is that you take out the sivar base.. of which no evidence says other wise in wc.. and the stealth fighters get mentioned at the start as a RUMOUR, and Tolwyn orders that silenced at once presumably because it's bad for morale... that being said choose your own wc tieline.. whatever you choose to take as cannon is upto you.. be happy with it and don't bitch on to us about what you don't like unless you can back it up with VERY good reasons.
 
Well Im not here to judge anything. You didnt understand.

Im not saying that dont like any of these (WCM,WCA,SWC) , they are part of wc.

I just want to have my mind clear about WC and not questioning all the time!
Ive been playing wc since 1 in Amiga format, I just want to gather opinions about some things and correct the "mistakes" of WC.
Ive been asking all these things (see my previous posts) cause im working on a wc project of my own nearly 3 years and I just want it to be Perfect. It will be something like an Encyclopedia.

I apologize if someone feels that I m just trying to find mistakes for WC just to say that "its not a good game"
I love WC

P.S sorry if you dont understand something , my english are not good:(
 
I think we did understand you. I’m not sure you understood us. Best of luck with your “encyclopedia”, but the rest of us will see it only as fan fiction.
 
If you are looking for an "encyclopedia", then why didn't you say so. LOAF is making one.

Also, those "mistakes" don't really contradict anything. THey add depth to the rest of the story, where there may not have been enough time and space to explain it all.
 
Originally posted by Nemesis
I think we did understand you. I’m not sure you understood us. Best of luck with your “encyclopedia”, but the rest of us will see it only as fan fiction.
Click to expand...


Maybe its the fact that I take Wc more seriously than just a game............. :(
 
Maybe it’s the fact that I take Wc more seriously than just a game.............
Click to expand...

But all life is a game! And many things in life are not perfect.:)

I think I understand what you’re saying. Some of the conflicts among the games, WCM, and so forth strike you as bad or sloppy storytelling. You hate it when things like Pilgrims, for example, suddenly pop up and “interfere” with what until then was, from your point of view, a smooth storyline.

Well, what would you have us do? Adopt your personal take on WC? What about mine? If you feel free to argue that SWC is just plain wrong as a source of information about the WC universe because WC1 got all the facts right, there’s nothing to stop me or anyone else from saying that WC1 is just plain wrong because it was SWC that got all the facts right. We’ll never agree.

Virtually all of us take WC seriously, whether as a great game, a great story, or both, but when it comes to the game’s canon, most of us take Origin most seriously of all because Origin owns the rights and is therefore the only one with the power to say what is or is not WC. We may not like each and every direction in which Origin has taken the story (or allowed it to go), but there is no other path that makes any sense to follow, not if we want a single WC universe–albeit with holes and bumps–that exists beyond the four corners of our respective and individual fanfics.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
However, I think there's a bit of a 'have not' mentality here -- particularly regarding Super Wing Commander (...) it's *not* a different game. It's Wing Commander I with new graphics and speech...
Click to expand...

Speaking of which, LOAF, there's a question that's been bothering me for a while now. Okay, so SWC exists, as do all the ships seen in it... but all the ships seen in WC1 do exist as well! :eek:
Should they be considered the same regardless of their different looks, or should the WC1 and SWC ships be considered different "variants" of each ships' class? I'm leaning towards the first option, since they're supposed to be the same ships in the first place (except for cases like the Rapier's, in which there is actually a difference in the ships loadout, which is sufficient to designate a different "variant"), but at the same time, it feels strange to think that if I take a WC1 Exeter and place it right next to a SWC Exeter, I can point to them and say "there's a pair of Exeter-class destroyers!" <G>

--Eder
 
Originally posted by Eder


Speaking of which, LOAF, there's a question that's been bothering me for a while now. Okay, so SWC exists, as do all the ships seen in it... but all the ships seen in WC1 do exist as well! :eek:
Should they be considered the same regardless of their different looks, or should the WC1 and SWC ships be considered different "variants" of each ships' class? I'm leaning towards the first option, since they're supposed to be the same ships in the first place (except for cases like the Rapier's, in which there is actually a difference in the ships loadout, which is sufficient to designate a different "variant"), but at the same time, it feels strange to think that if I take a WC1 Exeter and place it right next to a SWC Exeter, I can point to them and say "there's a pair of Exeter-class destroyers!" <G>

--Eder
Click to expand...


Well thats some of the confusion I was talking about.When thinking of a Schimitar , what picture must I have in mind? The original or the Swc Scimitar?

Just one more thing.I dont want to be misunderstanting.I never said that I dont like the WCM WCA and the SWS , or that we have to IGNORE them.I just said that maybe they are not in the regular WC storyline, cause it doesnt make any sence at least not exactly the same.They are ORIGINS products , very good products and they are WC!!

I really like WCA and WCM (I ve never had the chance to play SWC so I Dont Have any opinion).

thats all folkes...

P.S. thanx Nemesis (whats your E-mail??)
 
We've had something like four different versions of what the Tiger's Claw should look like, WC1, Academy, Movie and SWC, yet they are all the same ship. ITs not that big a deal. Just go with whatever image and design you feel best represents the ship in question to you personnally.
 
Well , maybe you are right Kal-El.

TCSTigersClaw is different in the eyes of each person.
Maybe thats the best.

:cool:
 
Originally posted by Darkmage
hehehe, Loaf is right about SWC it is wc1 all over again, the only story line difference is that you take out the sivar base.. of which no evidence says other wise in wc.. and the stealth fighters get mentioned at the start as a RUMOUR, and Tolwyn orders that silenced at once presumably because it's bad for morale....
Click to expand...

... not to mention that your character's name is "Armstrong."

Alas, SWC was made before "Bluehair," became "Blair."

I am in agreement with Supdon3 and imagine the WC1 designs for all the ships except the Hornet which was, IMHO, the only cosmetic improvement in SWC.
 
Originally posted by Eder


Speaking of which, LOAF, there's a question that's been bothering me for a while now. Okay, so SWC exists, as do all the ships seen in it... but all the ships seen in WC1 do exist as well! :eek:
Should they be considered the same regardless of their different looks, or should the WC1 and SWC ships be considered different "variants" of each ships' class? I'm leaning towards the first option, since they're supposed to be the same ships in the first place (except for cases like the Rapier's, in which there is actually a difference in the ships loadout, which is sufficient to designate a different "variant"), but at the same time, it feels strange to think that if I take a WC1 Exeter and place it right next to a SWC Exeter, I can point to them and say "there's a pair of Exeter-class destroyers!" <G>

--Eder
Click to expand...

I personally don't think it matters -- in your mind picture the ships however you always have. Extrapolating a bright and wonderful universe from a 10 pixel by 10 pixel image of a ship requires just as much imagination as doing so from a novel description or somesuch...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top