Discussion in 'Wing Commander Saga' started by Starman©, Oct 7, 2006.
Hmm, I quite like that idea.
From what I know Theora support is still slated for 3.6.9 though (Theora support and the new FS2NetD code are actually holding up 3.6.9 at the moment).
There's plenty of specific things you can complain about in regards to EA, but if you're not talking about one of them, you're just gushing worthless internet garbage.
That's not a good example. For the very reason I talked about above, shooters actually are ditching the damage percentage thing, and they are using green/yellow/red health indicators. That's how immersive/realistic shooters like Ghost Recon show health now.
Also, even Doom used a more immersive health indicator than just a percentage - the picture of the player's head got more and more bloody as his health got lower. The game certainly wouldn't have lost anything had they ditched the percentage... and you can just imagine how much scarier it would have been (Doom? ...Scarier?), when you're fighting a pack of imps and wondering if that next fireball will be enough to kill you or not.
Actually, so called 'realistic' shooters have been doing that for quite a while now. Most FPS games use damage percentage and you're delusional if you think that is going to change any time soon. To be fair though, there have been awesome games which have used either method, take HL or Deus ex. Really it's pretty simple, percentage will always be favoured for the unrealistic/arcade FPS games, while graphical health indicators will be favoured for tactical/realistic shooters. The arcade shooters will always outnumber the realistic ones too.
I think Doom and Wolfenstein 3d had the best health meters...yes there was percentages but as you got beat up it really started showing in your guy's face. You couldn't help breathing a sigh of relief when you found a healthpack and suddenly all the blackeyes, bloody lips etc were replaced with a manic smile.
Yeah, I remember that feeling all too well!
I'd probably still want the health meter myself (especially for multiplayer) but it's an interesting idea. Easy enough to test out too; just place a sticky-note over top that area of your display.
Oh, Doom is a walk in the park compared with System Shock 2, now that's some freaky scary gameplaying. Anyway, I remember that Deus Ex used to reflect damage in gameplay just like Wing Commander: if your legs got hit, you have trouble walking around. Too bad this isn't done a lot, it makes the game more immersive.
Now I'm playing Oblivion, and the health bar is somewhat silly: sometimes the player can even wait for a little extra damage before taking the restore health potion, now why would anyone really want to do that?
Did anyone else find this amusing?
Must just be me then.
If you're confused LOAF, let me fill you in. The primary enemies in FreeSpace were the Vasudans and then the Shivans. The primary enemies in Descent were robots that took over mines.
Yeah. But the thread seems to be OK now.
But Freespace is part of the Descent universe. The first Freespace even had Descent in the title therefore the Freespace universe is the Descent universe, and so LOAF's point is true since you have more games playing Descent than Freespace
You did this wrong.
I would say that the primary enemies in Privateer were the Kilrathi, despite the fact that it's a free-form spinoff with a different story. Descent is *about* evil robots in mines, even when it's some crazy lame-o space spinoff.
As far as I know the mining operations, the PTMC and all other aspects of the "Descent" universe are entirely separate from the FreeSpace universe, despite the misleading title of the game; "Descent: FreeSpace".
Essentially both universes have nothing to do with eachother, despite their muddled roots
I'm not sure how much clearer they can be than literally putting the word 'Descent' in the title.
Because they're stupid. They only shoved the "Descent" title in just to avoid a copyright infringement with another software released before the game.
I've heard the fanboys repeat this, but it can't possibly be true. It's the sort of thing you rationalize after the fact. I can guarantee you that there is no law in the world that requires that you add 'Descent' to a title.
At the very weakest, it's to promote lousy Freespace by attaching it to the popularity of another license they own... at the most, it was always intended (as it was promoted) as Descent-coming-out-of-tunnels.
Probably that being their only reason. But Freespace is certainly not connected with Descent.
It's *named* Descent.
That it may be, but it has nothing to do with it on a "universe" level. That's just a fact you'll have to accept.
So, wait, wait. Let me ask you this: You're judging this game only by it's cover? So If I were to hand you a book titled "James McFarens wild Space Adventures" and the actual content of the book was just nice and tasty recipes for cake, you'd still insist that book was actually about McFarens wild space adventures? Is that right? Because if we're judging games purely from what the title is, then Privateer 2 has nothing to do with the Wing commander universe, because it's not in the title. You and I both know that's not true, so how exactly to you apply the same logic to Freespace? I'm really curious - I'm certainly not a freespace fanboy - I thought they were mildy interesting in the same way I thought Space Crusader was midly interesting.
Or did I miss something in my understanding of what you're trying to do here? Are you just goosing the fanboys with a stick?
Separate names with a comma.