Freespace 3?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Privan

Spaceman
Can't believe I'm actually posting again, god knows how long it's been since I've done that. That's assuming I ever posted, because I can't remember the last time I did.

Anyways, I wanted to set a few things straight. To start off with, I'm not a big supporter of Derek Smart. Mainly due to the issue with his continued support of his degree when it's documented that it's not accredited.. So keep that in mind when you're reading this, I don't personally like the guy, but I can at least open my eyes to reality.

Since I already mentioned it, I do want to make a comment about his education. A LOT of people get degress from offshore (hell, probably some onshore as well) mills. I recently read an article about a Smith & Weston BoD member was canned because he had a degree from a mill. I'm not saying that means the degree is worth something, or that it means Derek has any real credibility for the knowledge having that degree implies. It just means there is nothing really damning about the fact because it's very common. On the flip side, his consistent defense of is rather pathetic. If you want to complain about his games being sub-standard, whichout having built a commercial level game by yourslef, then I suggest you paint all of your shirts with the word "Hypocrite" so we know just what you are.

Also, everyone who critizes his game should just shoot themselves and get it over with. To the best of my knowledge Derek is an independent developer who has recieved some minor help off and on with his projects. Making a game is extremely difficult, time consuming, and generally impossible to do. How many open source games do you see that get completed, or even near a level of polish that the Battlecruiser games have? Essentially the only difference is when developing his games, Derek has a chance in hell of getting it sold, where as open source games are pretty much off-market material.

On that same subject, the Battlecruiser games are impressive. Whiney idiots complain about the interface, but they don't take into consideration that the Battlecruiser games are meant to be a simulation style game, not an arcade style. I don't personally know how you judge Wing Commander (as I don't regularly review the board, and I hadn't used the internet much when I was still playing the Wing Commander games) but no matter what your opinion, it's an arcade style game. While the Battlecruiser games does have some arcade elements (such as fake physics in space (non-newtonian)) the actually command elements put it more in the simulation enviroment. Which is another issue, despite the first person mode in BCM and UC, and the ability to control and individual fighter, the game is meant to be played as a capital ship commander. The engine revolves around that, and not around the standard FPS or Flight Sim fare. Trying to judge the game based on those factors is equivalent to judging the Matrix as a romance flick.

Another interesting item to note was that the Battlecruiser games we're the first of their kind! Not the first flight simulator, but the first to try and simulate a direct command enviroment. Not an easy thing to jump into, especially as an independent developer.

On the subject of BC3k, BCM, and UC at release. It is well known (in Derek's case and in other completely unrelated cases) that many developer push releases, even back in the early 90s. This means problems with games. Sometimes, especially in the case of BC3k, the problems are serious. However, the fact that Derek actively supported the product and fixed the problems proves he was serious about releasing a quality game. Again, it's your opinion whether you like it or not, but that doesn't change the fact that the BC games are a quality product line for their field. Try and seperate your personal bias from real facts.

As a person you might not like Derek Smart. However, as a game developer try and give him the credit he's due, because whether you like it or not Derek has succeeded in releasing his product as an independent developer (not a group either, just a single person). The number of people who can admit to the same level of success is painfully small, and I seriously doubt anyone here is amoung that group.

Edit:
Forgot to address one last issue, the flames. First of all, just as you are free to flame people, so is Derek. Granted the fact that he is insulting a potential customer means it's a bit more shocking for him to do it, that isn't a major issue. Anyone bringing this up should question exactly why they comment on his flaming of other people? There isn't a reason for you to be involved unless you're insulted by his remarks (which it's obvious some of you who mentioned it had no interest in his statements). So you need to really question why the issue was brought up at all, although many of you probably won't like the real answers.
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
I don't think anyone here is into the whole Derek Smart thing... we're just ragging on the Freespace kids, which is our primary function these days.
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
If you want to complain about his games being sub-standard, whichout having built a commercial level game by yourslef, then I suggest you paint all of your shirts with the word "Hypocrite" so we know just what you are.
This has to be one of the most abused comments in the history of, well, everything. Repetition, however, doesn't make bullshit smell any less bad.

"Hypocrite", however, isn't what describes talking about something one hasn't done themselves. It does, though, describe someone who's done the exact same thing about other stuff, then decries it when it's someone else doing it about that first someone's pet hobbyhorse.

Have you ever made a car? Have you ever created a commercially released operating system? Have you actually ever been directly involved in the process of making laws? If not, then by your logic, Prowan, you don't have any room to complain about your car not performing right, Windows functionality, or stupid laws. But I'd be willing to bet you've done them anyway. I'm also willing to bet that you have also complained about buggy programs, without having made them yourself.

I'm not a subscriber to that logic chain, though, so let me ask you this: if something doesn't work as advertised, isn't it expected that the something in question will be viewed as undesireable?

There isn't a reason for you to be involved unless you're insulted by his remarks
By your own logic, you have no reason to be involved, either, not being the target of the DS flames. But then there's that "hypocrite" thing again, I guess.
 

Spien

Spaceman
On that same subject, the Battlecruiser games are impressive.
What?

Whiney idiots complain about the interface, but they don't take into consideration that the Battlecruiser games are meant to be a simulation style game, not an arcade style.
I'm a whiney idiot for not wanting to read and entirely comprehend a novel sized instruction booklet to play a game that's not even fun or engaging on any level.

Which is another issue, despite the first person mode in BCM and UC, and the ability to control and individual fighter, the game is meant to be played as a capital ship commander. The engine revolves around that, and not around the standard FPS or Flight Sim fare.
The ability to be a capital ship commander is the reason I bought BCM, the flight sim and first person shooting parts are just too terrible to even need to mention. Why they even exist is beyond me.

I don't hate it because it's an "accurate simulation." I hate it because it offers nothing but hours of boredom with an occasional something happening that you don't really have much control over since you're floundering around in confusion. Most of the game is look at the (not-so) pretty graphics and float around while fighting with the ridiculous controls. The problem is as a capital ship commander in the BC games you aren't just a capital ship commander, you're basically everyone on the damn ship and that's just too much for one player to have to worry about.

I really think the BC games truly were an attempt to make something spectacular, but I think their over convoluted design, their lack of polish, and their lack of truly engaging gameplay are all signs of "too many cooks spoil the supper" and signs of poor development decisions, all coming together to produce a poor game that very few people will enjoy. To be a good game, a game has to still offer entertainment, that is the point of a game in the first place.

I do not believe that the battlecruiser games are quality titles, despite the obvious effort put into them. Work and effort are different than quality.
 

Haesslich

Spaceman
My response to the BC comments are simple - show me that it is a decent 'capship commander' game which allows me to manage a fleet without micromanaging each and every little detail that my executive officer and the commanders in charge of my Marine and Aerospace forces can execute plans without me telling them how to do each and every little step - or worse yet, have to take over for them - and I'll play. Star Trek: Bridge Commander may have been an arcade-like game in capship combat, but at the very least I could issue orders and then get information back that way like an actual captain, rather than having to jump to each and every terminal to do things. Yes, the AI didn't do a good job many times, but it was at least semi-competent.

Otherwise I might as well play Wing Commander, which at least handles the fighter-pilot part well. Or I can play Rainbow Six or Full-Spectrum Warrior which handles ground combat in a semi-realistic fashion. Heck, I can get I-War or I-War 2 if I want to do capship combat, and it'll do a better job than BC3K did, even patched.
 

Sphynx

Commodore
Let me point out that there is one game which I believe does a pretty good job of actually doing what BC tried to do:

Starshatter. (Developed by Milo- at least that's his screen name- and currently being published by Matrix Games).

It, too, was bascially programmed by just one person. The graphics, while not the best out there, are still nice, and the gameplay is compelling. It involves both capital ship command, fleet command, and piloting various fighter craft (both in space and in atmospheric missions). There are many different types of missions, and you have some freedom in how you go about conducting your slice of the war (should I send in a destroyer group to take out the minefields, or should I send fighters?) You can choose from three levels of physics (Newtonian, relaxed, and arcade). It has varying levels of complexity, (commanding just one ship, commanding a destroyer group, commanding a flighter squadron, commanding an entire carrier group, etc..), it has various stations (engineering, flight deck, bridge, etc...) and as a commander you do have quite a bit to manage, but the nice thing is that you can give general orders and they will be carried out. Also, giving orders is very simple. You don't have to micromanage every single last station (you can just give an order), but you can also choose to man these stations, if you desire. This, actually, is a more accurate representation of captial ship command than the BC series has to offer.

In my experience with the BC series, your game experiences is somewhat like being the only person with any brains or innovation on a starship, and you have to run like a madman from panel to panel to show each crewmate exactly what to do... exhausting and unrealistic work.

Dr. Smart (or Mr. Smart) is not the only show in town. Starshatter is just one example of the fact that others have indeed done basically what he has tried to do, and in my opinion Milo has done a much better job with Starshatter than Mr. Smart did with the BC series. There are no significant bugs, and Milo is very accomadating with any questions anyone has. He can take both praise and criticism, and he actually listens to people and responds respectfully.

I am not here to argue whether or not Mr. Smart is a genius or a guy with Narcicistic Personality disorder. I'm just saying, he's not the only game in town. There are plenty of people who have built enjoyable independent games from the ground up. I think where Mr. Smart makes his critical error is that he does not really believe that games are ultimately about the people that play them, and not about the people that make them.

Sphynx
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Personally, I couldn't really care less about Derek Smart and have never even seen any of his games, but it seems there's a few things that are worth saying at this point...

Privan said:
I'm not saying that means the degree is worth something, or that it means Derek has any real credibility for the knowledge having that degree implies. It just means there is nothing really damning about the fact because it's very common.
There's no logic in that. The fact that fraud is common has no bearing whatsoever on the fact that we should not trust people who commit fraud. Even if absolutely everybody else on the planet got their degrees through degree mills, Derek Smart would *still* lose credibility if he did so as well - it's just that everybody else would also have lost credibility.

On that same subject, the Battlecruiser games are impressive. Whiney idiots complain about the interface, but they don't take into consideration that the Battlecruiser games are meant to be a simulation style game, not an arcade style.
I can't comment about the Battlecruiser games, because I've never even seen them. However, if their interface is indeed bad, then it doesn't matter one bit whether they're a simulation, arcade game, or whatever else. Guess what? When you make a game, you make it for *other people*. If you're the only one who can figure out how to play the game, then it doesn't matter what wonderful features you've implemented - it's still a bad game, because it doesn't fulfil the most basic requirement of a game. A game must be playable - it's that simple. If the Battlecruiser games are not, then they're lousy, no matter what excuse Derek Smart uses to explain their unplayability.
 

Star Dragon

Spaceman
HI guys

Long before I had a regular PC or the internet I played Wing Commander III (Heart of the tiger) on the Panasonic 3DO (remember that console?). It was one of my most favorite games of all time (the 3DO may be gone with the ex GF but I bought the disks and still have them next to me :p ).

I had lived in New England all my life (RI,CT,and now PA) and though I saw little advertising on tv or internet I had frequently scoured the computer stores for new games... I missed out on WC4 and 5, but when FS1 & 2 came out I grabbed them immediately and loved them (Wow these are almost like wing commander COOL!)...

So YES FS owes a lot to Wing Commander, just as WC owes XvT and so on.... You are part of a proud legacy but not the end all (neither is FS2)... The legacy will always be there in our fan bases BUT ultimately it is the developers (Beta testers) and their marketing machines that will either capture the public's interest in the genre or fail miserably and let yet another FPS or MMorg thing saturate the already over-saturated market.

As for the DS issue... HE started it with his own posting and an arrogant comment by a 15yo Fs fan (taken WAY out of porpotion that any ADULT would have recognised) caused the initial flames.

I never knew who DS was though I bought his game after a 3 year delay and guess what? It wouldn't run on my pc though I exceeded all the specs. At the time there was no support so after a few hours of messing with it I gave up and brought it back next day . I think I bought NWN and it was the best $45.00 I ever spent in the last few years...

Here's an analogy... I'm an idiot. If I was an idiot with a million dollars I'd still be an idiot. Mr (DR. ?) S does not act like a developer at all and seems to have ZERO people skills. IF people like his games I guess you could overlook that aspect. But as a fan of anything Sci-Fi or Anime related I am VERY dissapointed in both his behavior as a CEO towards his possible FUTURE customers (in regards to the FS liscence) as killing a franchise you state love for is oxymoronic and clearly insane?

One final note I did some digging on one of his BC forums and I get the IMPRESSION (to me) that his posible plans for the FS liscene would be as an "expansion" to his existing franchise... In other words A MOD... Gee what a huge streatch of the imagination? What this guy realises he has no new or innovative storyline so he is gonna BUY a background and incorporate all it's resources into his EXISTING game???

If he does do this and makes this successful MORE POWER TO HIM... But you know what, in my book that makes for a really lousy Human Being, I'm just calling it as I see it...

BTW I blame both Chris Roberts and ORIGIN for that horrible MOVIE!!!! I was soo disgusted by the lack of Mark Hamil and those FAKE Kilrathi... If I was a Kilrathi I would not be able to live with that insult until I had tracked down those resposible for the SFX and gutted them with my claws... :D Oh and DON'T get me started on those POS excuses for fighters... Where's my T-bolt, or Dragon, or Excal???

As for blaming one game for another game's demise? I don't get it... If both games were sold at same time and sales leaned one way yes I could see some sort of reasoning but lack of develpment cause the Powers that be are scared? That just means they need to worry about making a quality product and market it correctly. The Wing Commander fanbase (which would include me!) wouldn't give a damn about on paper numbers or projections... The market will bear what it will.

I am a super fan of both genres though WC is a TRUE franchise and FS is just a short game series. There is absolutely no reason why both communities wouldn't be supportive of the other (In fact if there weren't so many crossover fans there wouldn't be a WC Project! Right?)...
 

ChrisReid

Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
Star Dragon said:
So YES FS owes a lot to Wing Commander, just as WC owes XvT and so on....
WC doesn't owe anything to XvT or X-Wing.. perhaps a tiny bit to the overall concept of space fighters via Star Wars.

Star Dragon said:
I blame both Chris Roberts and ORIGIN for that horrible MOVIE!!!! I was soo disgusted by the lack of Mark Hamil and those FAKE Kilrathi...
If the Kilrathi in the movie were fake, which Kilrathi were real? https://www.wcnews.com/news/update/5436

Star Dragon said:
Oh and DON'T get me started on those POS excuses for fighters... Where's my T-bolt, or Dragon, or Excal???
They had to make due with what they had. The Rapiers were actual vintage aircraft that were touched up. The Broadsword and all the Kilrathi fighters were very cool. I hope you're joking about bringing the TBolt, Dragon or Excalibur into 2654.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Star Dragon

Spaceman
to clarify

What I was inferring to was not actually OWING anything but, rather chicken-egg concept... One had to be first followed by others. It was WC3 that made me a RABID space fighter fan, not XvT (which even back then left me very unsatisfied). If it wasn't for WC3 I would have probably passed on FS1 for quite a long time before discovering my new hobby, as I had no more 3DO and needed some sort of fix.

I choose WC3... From what I REMEMBER the in game footage was great and they were like living Tony the Tigers (but with armor and weapons)!!! The MOVIE ones were always PURPLE and looked liek cheap plastic, it made me ill to look at them. That picture on the site does NOT look like how I rememeber them from the movie... yeah they got the Kilrathi ships ok, but the Human fighters all looked like WWII rejects with rocket engine mounted on. THAT is an insult to the Confederation.

But that is just my opinion.

As for the fighters, why would I be joking about that? At least THEY are cannon, and look a heck of a lot better then some retro-kitbash. Can you agree with that?
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Star Dragon said:
As for the fighters, why would I be joking about that? At least THEY are cannon, and look a heck of a lot better then some retro-kitbash. Can you agree with that?
The fighters you mention do not exist in 2654, the year in which the movie is set.
 

Spien

Spaceman
The MOVIE ones were always PURPLE and looked liek cheap plastic, it made me ill to look at them.
Far me it for me to defend the movie (Me defending the movie!? The world is going to end!), but even in the games the Kilrathi appearance has not been consistant. They've changed in every game they've appeared. My personal favorite is the Wing Commander II Kilrathi. I agree though, the movie Kilrathi were craptacular.

As for fighters...

The Broadsword shouldn't exist either but it's there... neither should phase sheilds or Rapiers (Though I'll give LOAF the benefit of the doubt in our movie conversation that they were Rapier I's and the game ones are Rapier II's).

I would've rather have seen them use more game inspired designs myself, but the WC1 designs, not the WC3 ones. That would've made the continuity even more screwed up.
 

Patton

Spaceman
IIRC, Broadswords did exist during the WCI period. They just weren't being used nearly as often (if at all) due to your ship's guns and missiles being able to punch through the first-generation phase shielding by this time. If you read Action Stations, which takes place way before WC1, we see phase shield penetrating torpedoes mounted on Krants (I think) decimating the Confed fleet at McAuliffe.
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
The Broadsword shouldn't exist either but it's there... neither should phase sheilds
Broadswords show up on WCA - can't fault the movie for that.

I don't think anything calls the movie-era shields 'phase', though. The Confed Handbook calls them "meson shields". (Though Action Stations does use the word phase...)
 

Spien

Spaceman
Haven't seen the cartoon in years and I wasn't all that big on Wing Commander at the time and don't remember much so I wouldn't know, and I won't wont have the broadband capability to download it until I'm back in college at the end of the week.

Thanks for informing me about that though.
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
If you're going to participate in a debate, it would be good to bring something to the table other than "I disagree!".
 

Dyret

Super Carrot!
RogueBanshee said:
One game can't ruin a genre.

Besides I actually liked the Freespace and Battlecruiser games.
1. Of course it can.

2.The best thing about Freespace 2 was FRED

Freespace isnt a game, but a modding platform!

And i cant see how anyone could enjoy seeing their computer crash ten times in one hour. :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top