Identity Overlay? Sure…

[Bandit LOAF]

Christ people, I'm bored, not dead.

On another point, if there are Kilrathi Planets in Confed then does that mean there are Kilrathi in the TCN.

I don't think so -- the Prophecy map says that Ghorah Khar and company went back to being Kilrathi after the war... their allying with the Confederation during the war was simply a marriage of convenience rather than a genuine support for Terran ideals (which is to say, disagreeing with the Empire doesn't equal agreeing with the Confederation).

It is always interesting to compare how the ship design changed radically due to the game engine technology advancement. I do not try to explain it inside the universe, I do not think it is even necessary.

It is, however *easy*. We've seen WC1 ships in the WC3 timeline and vice-versa in a number of settings... and there's no inherent problem in this.

I do not like Forstchen's style, ideology (which he fills the books with) nor his choices for the series' plot. I do not agree with the way he portrays Tolwyn or Blair. I don't think he's even close to being a good writer. I'd rather someone else wrote those books. And I am entitled to those opinions and no one can debase me for that.

Yes, they can. For instance, someone can point out that Forstchen didn't write any of the books about Blair (save for, arguably, an offhand reference to WC2's player character in End Run). For Heart of the Tiger and The Price of Freedom he wrote the outline (based on the games scripts!), which were turned into novels by two other authors (Andrew Keith and Ben Ohlander for HotT and TPoF, respectively). (False Colors, though not based on a game, was also written by Keith based on an outline by Forstchen).

They could also point out that your dislike (hatred?) of the mans "ideology" is blinding you to any objective thinking as to how or why the stories are part of the Wing Commander novel -- and this could certainly be supported by the fact that you've complained about his writing style in two (three?) books he didn't write.

For instance, personally, as someone who's interested in literature and cinema as arts, I see the movie as really weak, regardless of agreeing (or not) with its place in the WCU. I also think those rapiers are REALLY ugly...

Your mistake is assuming that we don't see it the same way. I think it has a place in the WCU, but I won't argue that it was a great movie... or that the Rapiers aren't fugly.

It's far more foolish to think element can be made to fit. They either fit, or don't. Just like the TCS Iason and the CD Iason. You can be smart and treat both as different events.

I think the current explanation of the Iason situation is quite well-done and not insulting to anyones intelligence.

Like the Kilrathi, who began liking asymmetric ships and structures on WC3. If someone were to remake WC1/2 it would be cool to have some asymmetrical graltha. It would be impossible to do this on WC1 due to the whole sprite engine. Except, perhaps, for the Jalthi, which has asymmetrical guns...

... but the Jalthi looks just like the Salthi, only green!

In all seriousness, they *did* remake WC1 in an engine capable of asymmetry... and it didn't contain any. I really don't see the complaint, though -- preferring asymmetry doesn't make all ships asymetrical.

Chris Roberts and team didn't have the kilrathi as well developed on WC1 as they did in subsequent games... Forstchen viewed both the Kilrathi and the heroes of the confederation in a way that was different form the way the people who wrote tha games did. He even changed the tech...

For the things being argued right now, I completely disagree -- any interview with either Roberts of Forstchen where they discuss the basis of the Wing Commander story involves them pointing out that it's the Pacific War theater of World War II in space. From Wing Commander 1 on, the Kilrathi were the Japanese in space... Forstchen took Roberts' concept (albeit a farily obvious one) and ran with it. Hell, think about this: in 1998 Forstchen and Roberts both wrote separate prequels to the Kilrathi War... and they *both* started with Pearl Harbor in Space. Great minds think alike!

It's a fictional universe, worked on by many different people. Obviously, there are just as many diverse views. And it's not even particularly very well written fiction. Forstchen is a VERY limited writter. His "Prophet of Ice" series of books are a shameless rip-off of Dune. Only with ice instead of sand. He's very heavy handed, his weird far right-wing ideology permeates his writting far too much and he's quite repetitive.

Well, obviously, he can't contribute anything to the Wing Commander universe if you didn't like a twenty (plus?) year old book! (Ice Prophet, IIRC, not Prophet of Ice). Given the apparent requirement that every book someones ever written must be excellent for them to be a good writer, how many good writers are there in your mind?

Wing Commander 1 wasn't very good -- after all, Chris Roberts did Bad Blood (no, don't try and tell me it's an overlooked classic. It's not.)!

Forstchen has some bad books (1945, his Star Trek novel)... he has some passable books (the Ice Prophet stuff -- I didn't really like it, but a bunch of people do)... and he has some great stuff. Wing Commander certainly isn't even his best. His 'Lost Regiment' series is one of the more famous military sci-fi sagas, and his Magic: The Gathering book would be a contender for fantasy classic if it weren't tied to a license. IMO, his greatest series (for which he seems to have gotten little to no credit) was the Star Voyager Academy stuff... two very basic juvenile novels followed by a very serious twist.

But, of course, he wrote 'Ice Prophet', so it all has to be awful.

From an artistic point of view, the games are definitely the best works in the WC universe, particularly 3 and 4. it's th pinnacle of WC fiction. you have good underlying themes, decent character development, inteligent plot solutions. The movie is bad and the books are so-so.

If you believe this, you're fooling yourself. The Wing Commander games (and the books! and the movie!) have cheap obvious science fiction plots with almost no theme or character development to speak of. Putting Mark Hamill in a jump suit does not intelligent cinema make. Wing Commander, in all its iterations, is pulp science fiction of the highest order.

On WC3, yes. Not so much on WC1 and WC2. Take Ghora Khar, for example. The Kilrathi on WC3 are very different than the ones from the previous games. That could be explained because it was a different phase of the war.

On WC2, it was Terran Confederation vs Empire of Kilrath. There were Kilrathi citizens on Confed, and humans fighting for the Kirlathi - the mandarins. On WC3, it was a racial thing: Humans vs Kilrathi. Hence, Hobbes didn't fit the equation...

No, you're just seeing what you want to see. If WC3's message is "racial" then why did Melek surrender? And if it's horribly ignoring human faults, why does the Victory crew spend the game (or book) assuming that the traitor is one of the human characters? Hobbes is the traitor because it's the biggest shock they could get away with -- it's like killing Spock... there's nothing wrong with it plot-wise, but it's going to surprise and upset people. And that's what they were going for.

 

[Delance]

Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
I don't think so -- the Prophecy map says that Ghorah Khar and company went back to being Kilrathi after the war...

Speaking of that, do you know if during WC3 or after the end of the war there were still were Kilrathi citzens of the confederation?

It is, however *easy*. We've seen WC1 ships in the WC3 timeline and vice-versa in a number of settings... and there's no inherent problem in this.

Yeah, but the game player always get the impression all ships are of a specific style. I think that was what he was talking about. As I said, if a Graltha was to show up on WC3, I wouldn't be surprised if it was to be be all asymmetrical and different like the Dralthi.

Yes, they can. For instance, someone can point out that Forstchen didn't write any of the books about Blair (save for, arguably, an offhand reference to WC2's player character in End Run). For Heart of the Tiger and The Price of Freedom he wrote the outline (based on the games scripts!), which were turned into novels by two other authors (Andrew Keith and Ben Ohlander for HotT and TPoF, respectively). (False Colors, though not based on a game, was also written by Keith based on an outline by Forstchen).

Forstchen's name is the cover, isn't it? He is partially responsible for the content of the freaking book. But it’s irrelevant. Let accept, then, that aforementioned ideology permeating the books is 100% from other writers. It is still there, and people are entitled not to like it. It’s a subjective thing. I don’t think it has to do with any author specifically, but to stuff that is on the books, regardless of who wrote them. Personally, I’m not it has much to do with left or right at all.

Your mistake is assuming that we don't see it the same way. I think it has a place in the WCU, but I won't argue that it was a great movie... or that the Rapiers aren't fugly.

Of course it has a part on the WCU, as much as the Thor Guy from WCA. Some consider that it seriously defaces the entire WC Universe but hey, it’s not like anyone get to choose here. Its OK to debate, say, WC3 or WC4 era while never mentioning the words “pilgrim” except for “pilgrim’s passage” from End Run. It’s not denying it’s there, however, like the crazy freak cousin that live in the basement, nobody wants to talk about. It's not the movie itself, but the consequences of what its merger with the rest of the universe might cause in retorspect. But what we can ask is why did they change the whole “half border worlder” plot to “half pilgrim”?

In all seriousness, they *did* remake WC1 in an engine capable of asymmetry... and it didn't contain any. I really don't see the complaint, though -- preferring asymmetry doesn't make all ships asymetrical.

Sure, but if you are going to redesign everything, just go all the way. Of course, I think everyone here would be happy to *any* remake of WC1, and I also would offer no complain to symmetrical Kilarthi ship, similar to their original counterparts or completely different. Unless they sucked (which has little to do with continuity).

For the things being argued right now, I completely disagree -- any interview with either Roberts of Forstchen where they discuss the basis of the Wing Commander story involves them pointing out that it's the Pacific War theater of World War II in space. From Wing Commander 1 on, the Kilrathi were the Japanese in space... Forstchen took Roberts' concept (albeit a farily obvious one) and ran with it. Hell, think about this: in 1998 Forstchen and Roberts both wrote separate prequels to the Kilrathi War... and they *both* started with Pearl Harbor in Space. Great minds think alike!

On the grand scheme of things, perhaps. But I do think it lies more on the deeper, subjective, underlying structure of the universe. I can definitely feel a big difference on the WC4 game and the WC4 novel, and I’m not talking about where the hell Wilford was on Axius. I don’t like real world comparisons, but I don’t think Tolwyn was neither a criminal mastermind nor a misguided idealist. Oh well, it’s all too subjective, people will feel different towards those items depending on their personal points of view.

Wing Commander 1 wasn't very good -- after all, Chris Roberts did Bad Blood (no, don't try and tell me it's an overlooked classic. It's not.)!

Yeah WC story was nothing brilliant, but it was catapulted by the spectacular graphics and gameplay.

If you believe this, you're fooling yourself. The Wing Commander games (and the books! and the movie!) have cheap obvious science fiction plots with almost no theme or character development to speak of. Putting Mark Hamill in a jump suit does not intelligent cinema make. Wing Commander, in all its iterations, is pulp science fiction of the highest order.

Wow, I remember that whenever I offered even the small hint of criticisms to a WC product I would be mass-flamed on agwc. Now, LOAF classifies WC stuff as “cheap obvious science fiction plots with almost no theme or character development to speak of”. Oh well.

Yeah, Hammil on a space suit is no Hamlet on a space suit. But then again, how great intelligent space combat cinema actually gets? In this context, I think some WC stuff was pretty good, well above average. And some aspects of it are very, very intelligent cinema. Let me just focus on one specific scene, as if it could be anything else, the final debate of WCIV. Normally, the ending is about big guns, blowing up stuff, and action climax. Hollywood blockbusters are like this. WCIV has all that, and it’s very good, with 3 carriers fighting each other. But after that Blair lands on the Senate and starts a debate with Tolwyn. When did you ever see something like that on a space combat movie? An actual political debate in which the objective was not to say cool things to turn your enemy from/to the darkside of the force, but to convince an assembly to vote, or not, to war. It was very original, and very well done. I remember that even reviewers that criticized the game like it. When I compare it with other sci-fi from the 90’s, it shines. It’s better, I think, than your average star trek movie, or starship troopers, even with its limitations.

Yeah, the plastic things on flight suit are B-movie like. Blinking lights on the backpacks from WC2 aren’t much good either. So what? Flash later on worked on a movie that won the oscar. Paladin became an orc-killing dwarf.

No, you're just seeing what you want to see. If WC3's message is "racial" then why did Melek surrender?

“The Kilrathi must not die out as a race”.

And if it's horribly ignoring human faults, why does the Victory crew spend the game (or book) assuming that the traitor is one of the human characters?

Good point. But in a way, it just reinforces the previous notion. When that happens, all doubt cease. All Kilrathi are fighting for the Emperor, and all Humans are fighting for Earth. Hobbes says “Kilrathi do not betray”. Maniac says: “You can’t trust someone that shoots down his own kind”. The TCS Gettysburg is forgotten. So is Ghora Khar, and the Mandarin. Downtown, who? All is gone, there’s only a galactic clash of the two races. No gray zone, no escape for defection. Well, I’m not sure the factual reality of WC3, universe wise, was exactly like this, but that’s how things look like on WC3.

Hobbes is the traitor because it's the biggest shock they could get away with -- it's like killing Spock... there's nothing wrong with it plot-wise, but it's going to surprise and upset people. And that's what they were going for.

And it worked very well. It even made it possible for a guy like Blair to actually Nuke Kilrath. At first, he is not all that conformable with the notion, I think, but after he sees Thrakkath murder Angels and is betrayed by Hobbes, he is all for the total annihilation of Kilrah.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Speaking of that, do you know if during WC3 or after the end of the war there were still were Kilrathi citzens of the confederation?

During WC3 the Kilrathi planets from SO1 were still part of the Confederation... there's references to happenings Ghorah Khar in the Victory Streak manual.

Forstchen's name is the cover, isn't it? He is partially responsible for the content of the freaking book. But it’s irrelevant. Let accept, then, that aforementioned ideology permeating the books is 100% from other writers. It is still there, and people are entitled not to like it. It’s a subjective thing. I don’t think it has to do with any author specifically, but to stuff that is on the books, regardless of who wrote them. Personally, I’m not it has much to do with left or right at all.

That's exactly my point, though -- Ed Filho, who's acknowledged that he hates Forstchen for entirely non-Wing Commander reasons, sees the name on the cover and can't get beyond it. The writing styles in the HotT and TPoF novels are significantly different, to the point of being obviously so. He doesn't see that because he's busy blasting a man whose politics he doesn't like under the guise of talking about the Wing Commander universe.

Of course it has a part on the WCU, as much as the Thor Guy from WCA. Some consider that it seriously defaces the entire WC Universe but hey, it’s not like anyone get to choose here. Its OK to debate, say, WC3 or WC4 era while never mentioning the words “pilgrim” except for “pilgrim’s passage” from End Run. It’s not denying it’s there, however, like the crazy freak cousin that live in the basement, nobody wants to talk about. It's not the movie itself, but the consequences of what its merger with the rest of the universe might cause in retorspect. But what we can ask is why did they change the whole “half border worlder” plot to “half pilgrim”?

They changed the 'border worlder' thing because after the script leak years and years ago people like us (well, specifically, us) complained that it contradicted with WCIV... and so the Pilgrim idea was born.

Given the events of "Pilgrim Truth", however, it's entirely believable that they're not mentioned (since they wouldn't exist anymore...). Give them credit for cleaning up their own mess.

Wow, I remember that whenever I offered even the small hint of criticisms to a WC product I would be mass-flamed on agwc. Now, LOAF classifies WC stuff as “cheap obvious science fiction plots with almost no theme or character development to speak of”. Oh well.

Because pretending something that isn't there is not a complement. Wing Commander is fun, Wing Commander is engrossing, Wing Commander is absolutely great... but it's *not* high art in the way that's been implied in this thread. It isn't commentary on anything, it has very two-dimensonal characters... this isn't speaking badly of it, it's actually part of its allure.

Yeah, Hammil on a space suit is no Hamlet on a space suit. But then again, how great intelligent space combat cinema actually gets? In this context, I think some WC stuff was pretty good, well above average. And some aspects of it are very, very intelligent cinema. Let me just focus on one specific scene, as if it could be anything else, the final debate of WCIV. Normally, the ending is about big guns, blowing up stuff, and action climax. Hollywood blockbusters are like this. WCIV has all that, and it’s very good, with 3 carriers fighting each other. But after that Blair lands on the Senate and starts a debate with Tolwyn. When did you ever see something like that on a space combat movie? An actual political debate in which the objective was not to say cool things to turn your enemy from/to the darkside of the force, but to convince an assembly to vote, or not, to war. It was very original, and very well done. I remember that even reviewers that criticized the game like it. When I compare it with other sci-fi from the 90’s, it shines. It’s better, I think, than your average star trek movie, or starship troopers, even with its limitations.

The climax of the movie is when the intrepid hero argues his impossible case with the villain to convince an audience? That's not brilliant, it's *EVERY COURT SCENE EVER WRITTEN*.

Yeah, the plastic things on flight suit are B-movie like. Blinking lights on the backpacks from WC2 aren’t much good either. So what? Flash later on worked on a movie that won the oscar. Paladin became an orc-killing dwarf.

Now that's the opposite of what was claimed about Forstchen... since the WC actors went on to do famous things, they must be great in all things. It's a logical fallacy.

Good point. But in a way, it just reinforces the previous notion. When that happens, all doubt cease. All Kilrathi are fighting for the Emperor, and all Humans are fighting for Earth. Hobbes says “Kilrathi do not betray”. Maniac says: “You can’t trust someone that shoots down his own kind”. The TCS Gettysburg is forgotten. So is Ghora Khar, and the Mandarin. Downtown, who? All is gone, there’s only a galactic clash of the two races. No gray zone, no escape for defection. Well, I’m not sure the factual reality of WC3, universe wise, was exactly like this, but that’s how things look like on WC3.

Actually, Ghorah Khar is mentioned in Victory Streak (outside the context of the timeline).

Downtown isn't there because he died in WC2. Dozens of other dead characters human and Kilrathi aren't mentioned, either.

 

[Quarto]

Originally posted by Delance
Its OK to debate, say, WC3 or WC4 era while never mentioning the words “pilgrim” except for “pilgrim’s passage” from End Run.

Actually, one of the Confed pilots calls Blair a pilgrim after his defection. It was, of course, just some taunt they came up with long before they came up with the Pilgrims for the movie, but it's there nonetheless .

 

[Concordia_FP]

Why does any of this matter?? In any fiction (game, movie, book...) there will be contradicting facts. Accept them and move on, don't waste space on the CZ trying to rationalize your claims

 

[Delance]

Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
They changed the 'border worlder' thing because after the script leak years and years ago people like us (well, specifically, us) complained that it contradicted with WCIV... and so the Pilgrim idea was born.

So they changed the script because fans were complaining? That was the reason? Fans bitching? How very unlikely.

Given the events of "Pilgrim Truth", however, it's entirely believable that they're not mentioned (since they wouldn't exist anymore...). Give them credit for cleaning up their own mess.

They wouldn't exsit? Blair is a pilgrim. Paladin, a senator, leader of the Senate, is a pilgrim. Whatever...

I don't think the half-border worlder thing would contradict much with WCIV. It is said on WCIV that the Border Worlds did fight in the Kilrathi War. Blair has no problem joining them. The Border Worlders, mostly, accept him as an acting captain. Considering that lots of events on WCM "contradicted" stuff from WC1, I don't think why would anyone pay attention to something as minor as that.

Sure, you could find a rought edge here and there, but it would be nothing unusual.

Because pretending something that isn't there is not a complement. Wing Commander is fun, Wing Commander is engrossing, Wing Commander is absolutely great... but it's *not* high art in the way that's been implied in this thread. It isn't commentary on anything, it has very two-dimensonal characters... this isn't speaking badly of it, it's actually part of its allure.

Oh please. I don't think Ed implied that, at all. He just said that, in his opinion, the pinnacle of WC fiction was WC3 and WC4. I actually agree with this. Even stuff that is not high art might have a highest point.

The climax of the movie is when the intrepid hero argues his impossible case with the villain to convince an audience? That's not brilliant, it's *EVERY COURT SCENE EVER WRITTEN*.

It is not a court, and it's not a jury. It is a debate, and it's a senate. The whole concept is completely different. I'm not sure if this was intended or not, but the result was very good.

Even if it were not, it's better than you have on your average space/action/sci-fi movie. It didn't end on a stupid trick or a big explosion.

I'll now repeated it:

1. IN THE CONTEXT OF SPACE/ACTION/SCI FI, the senate debate was something original and smart.

2. IN THE CONTEXT OF DEBATE/COURT SCENES, this one was particularly well done.

You are, of course, free to disagree.

Now that's the opposite of what was claimed about Forstchen... since the WC actors went on to do famous things, they must be great in all things. It's a logical fallacy.

Well, that was actually intended as a joke, just that. You read too much into it.

Downtown isn't there because he died in WC2. Dozens of other dead characters human and Kilrathi aren't mentioned, either.

There is a total difference in tone and context. The example provided of a Kilrathi fighting for confed implied that this thing is impossible. You know what I'm talking about. I didn't meant that Downtown not appearing on WC3 was the reason it was more "racial" than "political". Using that smart remark was just logical fallacy.

 

[Quarto]

Originally posted by Delance
It is not a court, and it's not a jury. It is a debate, and it's a senate. The whole concept is completely different. I'm not sure if this was intended or not, but the result was very good.

It wasn't too bad, but it certainly wasn't Mr. Smith Goes To Washington.

I don't think WC4's storyline is what makes it great - the choices are. The player gets to choose between a classic restorative ending and a darker, more pessimistic one. If you're looking for reasons why WC4 is better than the average sci-fi movie, the choices are what you're looking for. Although, arguably, they don't make WC4 better than the average sci-fi movie - merely different.

 

[Delance]

Originally posted by Quarto
It wasn't too bad, but it certainly wasn't Mr. Smith Goes To Washington.

Yeah? Tell me, please, one sci-fi movie on recent years with a better court/senate debate scene. Please do. What, Judge Dredd? Demolition Man? The Phantom Menance? Attack of the Clones?

I don't think WC4's storyline is what makes it great - the choices are. The player gets to choose between a classic restorative ending and a darker, more pessimistic one. If you're looking for reasons why WC4 is better than the average sci-fi movie, the choices are what you're looking for.

I agree, but not only because the player is able to choose. When do we get a terrible moral issue like the Ella/Flashpak thing on modern sci-fi? Where's the ethical/moral debate? It might not be state of the art, but at least WC addresses a lot of important and interesting issues. The Ella thing, alone, could be subject to a very interesting moral debate. How far is it right to go to archive your objective. How much does the ends justify the means? What’s off limits?

Superficial or not, Blair's conversation with Eisein on the Lex probably touches than most Star Trek movies. "Who the hell are we to determine their course of evolution?" Oh yeah, and who the hell are you to determine mankind's course of evolution? Or prevent mankind from benefiting from that planet? How freaking stupid. "Hey, billions of people. We could cure all diseases and extend the lives of everyone, but because I have a crush on a woman hundreds of years old I will sacrifice something that could save countless lives and benefit billions in favor of 300-odd people. But since I defeated some generic cliché villains, I’m entitled to do this."

Note: I posted this comment just because I wanted to explain why I think WC is above average: not because WC is so good, but because the average is very low. It is not my intention to talk about ST here. Trekkies or any other person that wants to flame me don't do it here, but on the Off Topic Forum instead.

Although, arguably, they don't make WC4 better than the average sci-fi movie - merely different.

What average sci-fi movie we are talking about here? Starship troopers? Wing Commander, the movie? Star Wars certainly is not average, and LORT is not sci-fi. I will not argue against Matrix, but give me a movie with space combat with that kind the kind of depth.

 

[Quarto]

Originally posted by Delance
Yeah? Tell me, please, one sci-fi movie on recent years with a better court/senate debate scene. Please do. What, Judge Dredd? Demolition Man? The Phantom Menance? Attack of the Clones?

One could probably be found, if I bothered to look long enough. Unfortunately, I'm lazy . Besides, I don't see why it should be a scene from a sci-fi movie. Court-room drama is hardly an integral part of the sci-fi genre, so it's natural that we won't find brilliant renditions of such scenes in sci-fi movies.

When do we get a terrible moral issue like the Ella/Flashpak thing on modern sci-fi? Where's the ethical/moral debate? It might not be state of the art, but at least WC addresses a lot of important and interesting issues. The Ella thing, alone, could be subject to a very interesting moral debate. How far is it right to go to archive your objective. How much does the ends justify the means? What’s off limits?

Ethical debates? Try Blade Runner. WC4's ethical debates, while unique in that you actually had to make the choices, were hardly great debates at all. Do we strike a civilian target, or do we not strike it, considering that in both cases we have a reasonable chance of getting past? Gee, uh, I don't know, it's a really difficult choice, morally .

 

[Delance]

Originally posted by Quarto
One could probably be found, if I bothered to look long enough. Unfortunately, I'm lazy . Besides, I don't see why it should be a scene from a sci-fi movie. Court-room drama is hardly an integral part of the sci-fi genre, so it's natural that we won't find brilliant renditions of such scenes in sci-fi movies.

That's my point exactly. As I said before, it was original for an action/sci-fi/space combat movie to end with a debate in the senate and not some big explosions (only).

And honestly, I think it's better than most "courtroom" stuff you see out there. Mainly because most of it sucks. Besides, there is a difference between a debate before an assembly and 2 lawyers shouting "objection" every now and then. Comparing the senate debate with a judgment is imprecise.

Ethical debates? Try Blade Runner. WC4's ethical debates, while unique in that you actually had to make the choices, were hardly great debates at all. Do we strike a civilian target, or do we not strike it, considering that in both cases we have a reasonable chance of getting past? Gee, uh, I don't know, it's a really difficult choice, morally .

Try Blade Runner and Minority Report, both inspired in the work of Philip K. Dick.

Story-wise, it should be near impossible to get past the superbase without using the flashpak. In the game, of course anything is "easy". The conflict is if the end, saving millions, billions even; would justify the means, destroying that civilian target with thousands of civilians.

 

[Quarto]

Originally posted by Delance
That's my point exactly. As I said before, it was original for an action/sci-fi/space combat movie to end with a debate in the senate and not some big explosions (only).

Naturally. But that's mainly because these are genres which really don't need such an ending. Big explosions can be a lot of fun, especially in sci-fi movies.

And honestly, I think it's better than most "courtroom" stuff you see out there. Mainly because most of it sucks. Besides, there is a difference between a debate before an assembly and 2 lawyers shouting "objection" every now and then. Comparing the senate debate with a judgment is imprecise.

I don't feel like saying "courtroom or senate scene" every time, and I'm pretty sure you know what I meant anyway .

Story-wise, it should be near impossible to get past the superbase without using the flashpak. In the game, of course anything is "easy". The conflict is if the end, saving millions, billions even; would justify the means, destroying that civilian target with thousands of civilians.

Story-wise, it should make no difference. Even with the element of surprise, Ella is clearly capable of getting most of its fighters up in the air. And indeed, no difference is exactly what it makes - the two missions are different, but the number of enemies you face is roughly equal.