Damage to weapons

[McGruff]

I was wondering why in the newer games, you never lose any guns or missiles due to ship damage? I always thought it was fun to complete a difficult mission in WC1 flying a Hornet with only one functioning laser.

 

[Starkey]

Yep, that´s a thing I miss too. In fact, I´m gonna pass that suggestion on to the Standoff team.

 

[Delance]

Yeah, the fun of losing your targeting computer on the WC2 strike mission, or fighting throught waves of Kilrathi fighters on a Scimitar with a single mass driver.

 

[Mystral Hawk]

I used to enjoy the challenge when my 2 or 3 of my tachyon cannons died in privateer. Expecially when I had no missile launchers...that was fun.

 

[overmortal]

Umm . . . you could've just sold your excess tachyon cannons . . .

In wcp, I've noticed that your "guns" can take damage. Not individually, but collectively. I bet that, with some tweaking, a patch could be made to have an individual 'system' for each weapon. I can't do it, though. I'm not a programer

 

[Joker057]

I used to enjoy the challenge when my 2 or 3 of my tachyon cannons died in privateer. Expecially when I had no missile launchers...that was fun.

You got hit that bad in a Centurion?! My condolences.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I miss touches like these - it made the game genuinely hard at times. The modern concept of game design seems to require that everyone and their dog be able to win the game on their first try... back when life was good it wasn't like that at all.

 

[McGruff]

Maybe it was just because the gun barrels in those days stuck out 15 feet in front of the ship.

 

[Dundradal]

Mass consumption usually breds mass crap

 

[Chernikov]

It could be because game-makers didnt have to deal with hordes of 15-year-olds bitching about how the game was too hard and unbeatable and it sucked.

 

[Bonkus Maximus]

nah...I first squashed WC when it came out in 1991, and I was 9 at the time; the 15-year-olds just need to learn how to fly. Besides, I developed some excellent attack techniques with a Raptor with one neutron gun and one mass driver on the same side.

 

[overmortal]

Heh, who *didn't* learn a few new tricks on account of missing guns? Necessity is the mother of invention, after all.

 

[Delance]

I miss touches like these - it made the game genuinely hard at times. The modern concept of game design seems to require that everyone and their dog be able to win the game on their first try... back when life was good it wasn't like that at all.

It's the price we pay for games that requires a lot more money to be developed.

 

[Spartan689]

I remember the very first time I played Wing Commander. I was at a friend's house and her older brother was playing a game. He let me fly Enyo 1, I smacked into an asteroid lost a laser and my remaining missiles. I'm really surprised that didn't turn me off from the game. Instead I was totally addicted. The damage display and the messed up cockpit. You just don't get that anymore. Ahhh... the good ol' days. God, to think that was like ten or twelve years ago.

 

[Quarto]

It's the price we pay for games that requires a lot more money to be developed.

I dunno about that... really, these sort of touches don't cost very much (provided they are planned all along - if somebody decides to throw them in at the end of development, the schedule would get stuffed and costs would indeed go up a lot).
So why aren't they there? I would blame the very same factors that lead to games like FreeLancer - a desire to 'streamline' the gameplay mechanics to the point where any idiot can play the game (in the hope that the idiot in question will boost the game's sales).

I don't think this streamlined phase will last more than a few years, though. Every new game, if its developers want it to be well received, must introduce something new (or something old, not seen for a while) to set it apart from the rest of the genre. So, it's inevitable that sooner or later somebody will bring back those extra details we saw in WC1.

 

[Starkey]

I think Delance meant that the *ordinary game buyer* likes games that they can beat in the first try, so those games would sell more.

 

[Delance]

That's it, Starkey. I didn't mean that those detail cost a lot, Quarto. They don't. But game execs seem to think that they might alienate casual gamers, which are the most important part of the market. There's not reason to think that's not true.

There aren't enought "Core" space combat gamers around, and they will probably buy the games anyway.

It's a market thing. If most consumers wants "streamlined" games, such games will be rewarded with more sales. If this rationale proves wrong, more complex and difficult games would be produced.

 

[Mystral Hawk]

I forgot how i got hurt that badly...I think asteroid fights before you find the seltek weap.

 

[overmortal]

Asteroid fights in Privateer were genuinely dangerous. And a decent test of skill. I miss playing Privateer . . .

 

[Death's Head]

All a flight simulation game would need to have in order to appeal to the gaming dummies as well as the hard-core gamers is include an inflight options menu like Prophecy/SO, one that turns on/off things like weapon disabling. This would be simple to use just as turning on/off cockpit struts and such. A little change like that would certainly add a greater sense of realism, as well as the aforementioned difficulty level. If a shield generator can be disabled, why then, not a gun?