Heart of the Tiger Novel.

[Edx]

I thought Id move this because I liked that Maniac thread.

Erm, the "stupidest thing you've ever read" is a military term meaning you have a friendly target in sight.

If you are going to quote me at least be accurate! I didnt say "ever". I was refering to the novel. In context it was cheezy. Did they say that in Wing 1 or 2? Yes or no? They sure didnt say it in 3 onwards. I havent even seen a recent war movie where they have said that. Unless you are are a posh englishman "tally ho!" is now cheezy line.

As best I can tell from skimming and searching for the word jumpshock, it comes up twice .

I was actually referring to 2 very similar sentence where we are told that blair felt sluggish. Seemed sloppy writing to me.

A full text search of the novel finds 'old friend' used by Hobbes four times:
"It is good to see you, old friend,"
"Then I shall try not to disappoint you, old friend."
"Is that you. . . old friend?"
"Kilrathi do not surrender, my old friend"

Yea maybe I exgarrerated a bit . But I dont know where this online version of the novel is that you were able to search but in 1 particular scene they used it far to often. And Rachel still says "skipper" and other words like that in the novel far too much. im sure of that even though I cannot search like you apparently can.

This wasn't Mr. Keith's choice, though -- it's in the games script. .

You are kind of right. The script only suggests they died, however. Its not abig deal, and normally Id wouldnt be nitpicking (because that is what this is) but it was a combination of things.

The two uses in the HotT novel are "ConFleet can't afford to throw away ships on meaningless gestures" and "He'd love it if he could lead the ConFleet to victory" -- they're both situations where the goal is to refer specifically to the fleet rather than the nation.

""ConFleet can't afford to throw away ships on meaningless gestures"
"He'd love it if he could lead the ConFleet to victory"

Again do they say this kind of stuff in Wing 1 or 2? In wing 3 they would have said, in context "Confed" instead of "Confleet". Its about context. And Im pretty sure they didnt even say "ConFed" in the novel.
You see if you read the beginning to Action Stations, in context it works where hey say "what resources ConFedFlt does have are..." which works in context. And since its the same writer he seems to have worked that out. "ConFedFlt" makes more sence than "Confleet".

My opinion. You are free to disagree but if its not used in context like the games use it then it isnt right in my view.

I was refering to the grammar used with actual spacecraft, though... the novel uses *both* fairly commonly, but someone with a more formal grasp of the language would naturally tend to drop the DA. (The games have used both, too -- 'Concordia' and 'the Concordia', etc.)

You are right, I guess I was far too annoyed at the book by the end (especially after Paladin was introduced). However it works better with "The" befor the ship name. Its most commen in the novel to drop the "The" when at least from wing 3 onwards they never did.

Agin, it IS a nitpick, but that it contributed to the rest of the things I didnt like.

My bet is that it's an attempt on the part of the author to fix a percieved wrong in the writing of the script --

He changed the script because he didnt like it?

No, I think what I said -- that the script probably instructed them to cast someone with a Scottish accent. The novel is probably written that way because that's how Paladin's dialogue was written in the games available to Mr. Keith (WC and WC2).

From his very first appearance in the original game: "Och, laddie, take a seat an’ tilt a glass with ol’ Paladin."

(The novel also describes Paladin as being fair haired -- because, again, when writing the HotT novel, the only source for visual and vocal queues was the original games

Whcih is a lot easier to understand than "Och, lad, dinna hurry! I'm nae sae old that ye maun rush tae see me before I keel over!"

Im alright with SOME Scottish stuff but that was ridiculous, and it was the first thing they had him say!

But lets get back to my original point. "the Novels decided to change all the good dialogue so its crap" - which is true, even if its only half right. The novel is supposed to be a book based on the game. Since this early script is supposedly so old they had such bad dialogue in there and they had to rush the writing so it would be on time. Then that just shifts the blame onto the publishers. The fact is I didnt know the book isnt actually based on the game, which if I go by what you say, it isnt really. All I can see is a book that for some reason has taken good or decent dialogue and added or changed stuff so it sounds bad or doesnt work as well(I could give examples if you dont think so), and all the other points I made.

In short, its supposed to be a novel based on the game. And as such it does a bad job because it reaslly isnt much like the game at all. Whether thats the writers fault or not, doesnt really make a difference.

Ed

 

[Bandit LOAF]

If you are going to quote me at least be accurate! I didnt say "ever". I was refering to the novel. In context it was cheezy. Did they say that in Wing 1 or 2? Yes or no? They sure didnt say it in 3 onwards. I havent even seen a recent war movie where they have said that. Unless you are are a posh englishman "tally ho!" is now cheezy line.

I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say -- it's not a cheesy line... it isn't an exclamation at all. It's a legitimate military phrase. When an F/A-18 pilot spots an enemy target, he'll say the same thing -- not for dramatic effect, but because that's how he lets his wingmen know what's going on.

I don't know of anywhere it's used in the original games -- but I also do know that combat in Wing Commander isn't a cinematic... and it'd be the element commander (ie, the player's) job to call out targets. Out of the zero opportunities in WC1-4 for the phrase to come up, it comes up zero times.

I was actually referring to 2 very similar sentence where we are told that blair felt sluggish. Seemed sloppy writing to me.

You'll probably have to cite that one... the two 'jumpshocks' aren't particularly near eachother, and I'm not sure what else to look for. Vagabond's controls are "sluggish" a few scenes after the jump has the same effect on Blair... but I don't see anything like what you're saying.

Yea maybe I exgarrerated a bit . But I dont know where this online version of the novel is that you were able to search but in 1 particular scene they used it far to often. And Rachel still says "skipper" and other words like that in the novel far too much. im sure of that even though I cannot search like you apparently can.

I count twelve "Skippers" on Rachels part -- the word shows up thirty times, but the majority of them are referring to Skipper missiles.

(... now compare that to a game that plays the same "Pretty slick flying, sir!" Rachel flick thirty five times... )

Again do they say this kind of stuff in Wing 1 or 2? In wing 3 they would have said, in context "Confed" instead of "Confleet". Its about context. And Im pretty sure they didnt even say "ConFed" in the novel.
You see if you read the beginning to Action Stations, in context it works where hey say "what resources ConFedFlt does have are..." which works in context. And since its the same writer he seems to have worked that out. "ConFedFlt" makes more sence than "Confleet".

My opinion. You are free to disagree but if its not used in context like the games use it then it isnt right in my view.

That's entirely silly, though, because it makes novels a pointless zero sum game. Fans read a book like Heart of the Tiger *because* it expands the universe... if something has to be in the games to show up in the novels, then what's the point of having novels at all? (Not that this is remotely a case of that -- as I already pointed out, it shows up in Armada... and it's not even a proper noun, it's a contradction of something that shows up in every single Wing Commander game.)

And once again, no, the Confederation and the Confederation Fleet are not the same thing. Wing Commander III refers to the 'fleet' plenty of times...

And no, different people wrote Action Stations and Heart of the Tiger. Dr. Forstchen wrote Action Stations - he just did the outline for Heart of the Tiger. Andrew Keith did the prose.

And the dashed fleet is referred to a million different ways in a million different sources - Navy, Confed Navy, Confed Fleet, ConFleet, TCN, TCSN, Terran Confederation Navy, Terran Confederation Space Navy, Fleet, Space Fleet etc. You don't like Heart of the Tiger, so you've decided to pick on it for the exact same thing every Wing Commander game, book, sourcebook, etc. does.

He changed the script because he didnt like it?

Because it was wrong -- see the St. Helens example I already pointed out.

That's why you hire a novelist to write a book -- they're more familiar with grammar, with how words work in prose. (It's also why you hire a military historian -- they know things like proper brevity code and the fact that you don't name ships after religious figures...)

Whcih is a lot easier to understand than "Och, lad, dinna hurry! I'm nae sae old that ye maun rush tae see me before I keel over!"

Im alright with SOME Scottish stuff but that was ridiculous, and it was the first thing they had him say!

So, your complaint is that the novel should have *some* Scottish dialogue, but not use it throughout...? But in your last post you were complaining that the novel didn't use it consistently.

But lets get back to my original point. "the Novels decided to change all the good dialogue so its crap" - which is true, even if its only half right. The novel is supposed to be a book based on the game. Since this early script is supposedly so old they had such bad dialogue in there and they had to rush the writing so it would be on time. Then that just shifts the blame onto the publishers. The fact is I didnt know the book isnt actually based on the game, which if I go by what you say, it isnt really. All I can see is a book that for some reason has taken good or decent dialogue and added or changed stuff so it sounds bad or doesnt work as well(I could give examples if you dont think so), and all the other points I made.

In short, its supposed to be a novel based on the game. And as such it does a bad job because it reaslly isnt much like the game at all. Whether thats the writers fault or not, doesnt really make a difference.

I disagree -- it's supposed to be a novel expanded from the game. If I want to know what happens in Wing Commander III, I can play Wing Commander III. If I want some insight into how the Victory's flight wing works or who some of the characters we never see in the game are, I'll read the novel. (Similarly, if I want to see things a computer couldn't do in 1994 -- hundred ship battles and whatnot -- I'll read the book. It's not an attempt to be the same as, but to build on to a common better point.)

I also think it also makes a huge difference whose "fault" it was -- Mr. Keith was a very kind person who was always very good to Wing Commander fans... it certainly behooves those of us who knew him to defend or at least explain things that were clearly done for a reason. (The tally ho thing, for instance -- the man wrote extensively about carrier operations... which is almost certainly one of the reasons he was chosen for adapting Wing Commander. He was familiar with his material, and he invoked it for a reason.)

 

[Edx]

I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say -- it's not a cheesy line... it isn't an exclamation at all. It's a legitimate military phrase. When an F/A-18 pilot spots an enemy target, he'll say the same thing -- not for dramatic effect, but because that's how he lets his wingmen know what's going on.

I don't know of anywhere it's used in the original games -- but I also do know that combat in Wing Commander isn't a cinematic... and it'd be the element commander (ie, the player's) job to call out targets. Out of the zero opportunities in WC1-4 for the phrase to come up, it comes up zero times.

There were plenty of opportunities. We see enemy targets all the time, and no one said it.

And well, I just think it didnt fit.

now compare that to a game that plays the same "Pretty slick flying, sir!" Rachel flick thirty five times... )

hehee, yea ok but thats because its the same scene being played over and over, so its not the same thing.

That's entirely silly, though, because it makes novels a pointless zero sum game. Fans read a book like Heart of the Tiger *because* it expands the universe... if something has to be in the games to

True, and thats why I didnt find HOTT novel satisfying because it seemed like a twisted version of the game I had played. The dialogue was different, the characters were different, people spoke in ways that werent familiar and simple stuff like failing at Locanda, which normally takes you down the loosing track, in the book means they still win. All these things means it doesnt feel like an extention of the game. If you enjoy it thats fine, but Im sure you can understand why someone wouldnt?

And once again, no, the Confederation and the Confederation Fleet are not the same thing. Wing Commander III refers to the 'fleet' plenty of times...

I know. Wing 3 does say "fleet" plenty of times but not "ConFleet". My point is that in a similar context the novels say "ConFleet", Wing 3 would have said "ConFed" or something els,e like "ConFedFlt". But in context the term isnt used in the same waym, so thats my gripe with it.

And I know all of this is nitpicking. Its just lots of little things that contributed to my lack of enjoyment. (see above)

Because it was wrong -- see the St. Helens example I already pointed out.

I know, but I cant think what you are referring to

That's why you hire a novelist to write a book -- they're more familiar with grammar, with how words work in prose. (It's also why you hire a military historian -- they know things like proper brevity code and the fact that you don't name ships after religious figures...)

But again if the game uses it differently, even all the way up to Freelancer, Origin and every script writer afterwards had decided to do do it "wrong", then I think the novel should too. The games use "The" before the ship. "The TCS Midway". "The Victory". "The Intrepid" Etc. The novel does use both, but drops the, "The" far more often. And if this isnt 'realistic' then its not like WC is especially realistic anyway.
Again, this is more nitpicking i know

So, your complaint is that the novel should have *some* Scottish dialogue, but not use it throughout...? But in your last post you were complaining that the novel didn't use it consistently.

Both. But really just dont make it so hard to understand. There is a world of difference between that first line in the novel to the line you gave in Wing 2. Look at page 314. Thats easy to understand and yet you can still understand he is scottish.
THIS is the first thing Paladin says "Och, lad, dinna hurry! I'm nae sae old that ye maun rush tae see me before I keel over!" --and its just silly. Ive got used to it now, but at the time I had to concentrate to understand it.

And like I said, this is supoosed to expand the game universe just like you acknoledge. So its the publishers fault for making him write it before he even knew who the cast were, or even before a final script was written.

And from a casual readers perspective, it IS strange that all these differences are in the novel. They cannot know the above.

Ed

 

[Bandit LOAF]

There were plenty of opportunities. We see enemy targets all the time, and no one said it.

And well, I just think it didnt fit.

So, this is the one piece of modern military jargon that Wing Commander is absolutely forbidden from adopting for... reasons unknown? And the proof is that the mute player character in the original game doesn't ever use it?

If there's one thing Wing Commander is oft to do, it's steal terminology from modern carrier operations. Is Prophecy's use of missile calls (Fox 2!, etc.) or brevity code (Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!) any different from Heart of the Tiger's reference?

hehee, yea ok but thats because its the same scene being played over and over, so its not the same thing.

I was kidding, but it actually is a valid point -- one of the big things people complained about in 1994-95 was how repetetive Rachel was.

True, and thats why I didnt find HOTT novel satisfying because it seemed like a twisted version of the game I had played. The dialogue was different, the characters were different, people spoke in ways that werent familiar and simple stuff like failing at Locanda, which normally takes you down the loosing track, in the book means they still win. All these things means it doesnt feel like an extention of the game. If you enjoy it thats fine, but Im sure you can understand why someone wouldnt?

I think you're misreferencing the game -- the novel does Locanda->Blackmane properly. If you *win* at Locanda in the game, you go to a series where you're defending Blackmane... but if you *lose* in the game (as in the novel) you go to a series where Blackmane is being evacuated. That's the same story as the novel -- the Victory is there to escort transports away from Blackmane rather than defend it.

I would further argue that in addition to being true to the games script, choosing the losing path is a dramatic necessity -- dramatically, 'characters do well and win constantly' isn't a very good story. (Wing Commander III had a problem with this very issue... it frustrated people to no end by 'forcing' them to lose the Behemoth after a whole game of succesful missions.)

I know. Wing 3 does say "fleet" plenty of times but not "ConFleet". My point is that in a similar context the novels say "ConFleet", Wing 3 would have said "ConFed" or something els,e like "ConFedFlt". But in context the term isnt used in the same waym, so thats my gripe with it.

Like other novels, games, sourcebooks, etc., the Wing Commander 3 novel uses all of these interchangably: "the navy" eight times, "Terran Confederation Navy" once, "the fleet" thirteen times, "Confed Navy" once, "Confleet" three times... and so on. I don't see how one of many terms (not even a proper term - a contraction of concept that absolutely must exist in Wing Commander!) could effect anything.

I know, but I cant think what you are referring to

In Wing Commander IV, Tolwyn's heavy carriers were the "Vesuvius" and the "St. Helens". The intent is clear, name ships after volcanoes... but the wording was wrong. A military ship would have to be the *Mt. St. Helens* -- otherwise, it's named after a religious figure.

But again if the game uses it differently, even all the way up to Freelancer, Origin and every script writer afterwards had decided to do do it "wrong", then I think the novel should too. The games use "The" before the ship. "The TCS Midway". "The Victory". "The Intrepid" Etc. The novel does use both, but drops the, "The" far more often. And if this isnt 'realistic' then its not like WC is especially realistic anyway.
Again, this is more nitpicking i know

Youu're going in circles - we've already established that tha games refer to ships both with and without the difinitive article... just like the novel.

Both. But really just dont make it so hard to understand. There is a world of difference between that first line in the novel to the line you gave in Wing 2. Look at page 314. Thats easy to understand and yet you can still understand he is scottish.
THIS is the first thing Paladin says "Och, lad, dinna hurry! I'm nae sae old that ye maun rush tae see me before I keel over!" --and its just silly. Ive got used to it now, but at the time I had to concentrate to understand it.

I still don't think it's a fair criticism, because he's very clearly just following the established way in which to write Paladin's accent -- blame Chris Roberts or Ellen Guon, not the Wing Commander III novel. (I have no problem understanding the introduction you keep quoting -- I still have no idea what "you dinna ken know" from the original game means.)

And like I said, this is supoosed to expand the game universe just like you acknoledge. So its the publishers fault for making him write it before he even knew who the cast were, or even before a final script was written.

And from a casual readers perspective, it IS strange that all these differences are in the novel. They cannot know the above.

That's just how the industry works -- any adaptation of a script is going to be written early in the process. Most of the time it works just fine (as I would argue it did in Heart of the Tiger)... other times it becomes impossibly separated from the final film (... like the Wing Commander movie novel.)

 

[Edx]

*sigh* well I guess we have to agree to disagree. Its just too different to the game for [me] to like it.

Ed

 

[NuclearPenguins]

*sigh* well I guess we have to agree to disagree. Its just too different to the game for [me] to like it.

Ed

This is why I detested the movie.

 

[ChrisReid]

This is why I detested the movie.

No, it should be quite evident from this thread that Person A didn't like Wing Commander Item B, so B isn't really like Wing Commander.

 

[Edfilho]

It's funny how he picked the strangest things to complain abou the game-version-novels.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

This is why I detested the movie.

Poor thread, he started so well.

 

[Edx]

It's funny how he picked the strangest things to complain abou the game-version-novels.

like I said it was the little things... and the fact that the dialogue is really bad compared to the actual game. The little things just made it all the more annoying, and that Paladin thing.

Ed

 

[Edx]

No, it should be quite evident from this thread that Person A didn't like Wing Commander Item B, so B isn't really like Wing Commander.

I dont know if I understand you, but it was just that I didnt really recognise the book as being part of the game. Everything was too different

Ed

 

[Edx]

Clearly LOAF there is only one way to settle this.

A duel to the death in a ring of fire. okay?

Ed

 

[LeHah]

I dont know if I understand you, but it was just that I didnt really recognise the book as being part of the game. Everything was too different.

That really doesn't make any sense since the book was based off the shooting script.

 

[TopGun]

I need to get my hands on the novel

 

[Bandit LOAF]

!LOAFSetOnFire

 

[Edx]

That really doesn't make any sense since the book was based off the shooting script.

So Loaf was wrong?

Ed

 

[Paddybhoy]

I've got to admit that after reading the The Price OfFreedom (the first WC novel I've ever read) I expected to have a poor opinion on the rest of the books but from what else i've read (Fleet action. end run and HotT) I thought the standard of writing was pretty good, a minor gripe being how maniac seems to have never being fully nailed down as a character (is he the comic relief, the rival to Blair, an a-hole?). Wing Commander can never really be a definative universe because a great majority of the universes content is based on an INTERACTIVE video game and personally I think this is a strength from the fans point of view because it allows us to use our brains and imagination!!

 

[Sarty]

I think that the only problem I had with the WC4 Novel, or any of the novels for that matter, was that it described the Lexington as being a Confederation class rather than the obvious Concordia class that it is in the game. Other than that single detail, I thought all of the novels were very well done and fun to read.

 

[LeHah]

So Loaf was wrong?

No, Im saying they're from the same source. I'm saying you're wrong.

LeHah

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I think that the only problem I had with the WC4 Novel, or any of the novels for that matter, was that it described the Lexington as being a Confederation class rather than the obvious Concordia class that it is in the game. Other than that single detail, I thought all of the novels were very well done and fun to read.

Eh, most of the modern confusing fandom lore about the Concordia-class ships comes from the stuff the novel brought up.