Possibilities since fs2 source was released.
- Thread starter Darkmage
- Start date
I don't have a concise definition handy, but...
Cyberpunk refers to a genre of near-future science fiction stories for which the central technologies are related to computers, cybernetics, drugs, and biotechnology. The settings are generally ambiguously utopian/dystopian - sprawling conurbations which juxtapose the very rich with the very poor. The tone is usually dark and 80's punk-rock nihilist. The characters are often hi-tech criminal anti-heroes - data pirates, hackers, dealers in illegal software and biotechnology - who must battle the ever present tentacles of "Zaibatsu" powerful multinational technology corporations and equally powerful criminal organizations like the Japanese "Yakuza".
The name "cyberpunk" was coined by Bruce Bethke. Related terms such as "cyberspace" were coined by William Gibson and popularized by Bruce Sterling. Major works in this genre include:
- Neuromancer William Gibson
- Count Zero William Gibson
- Mona Lisa Overdrive William Gibson
- Burning Chrome William Gibson (short stories, including "Johnny Mnemonic")
- Islands in the Net Bruce Sterling
- Headcrash Bruce Bethke
- The Shockwave Rider John Brunner
- Snowcrash Neal Stephenson
The cyberpunk genre has pretty much run its course, although the ideas it promoted have now percolated into most mainstream science fiction. The last cyberpunk novels to be published (that I am aware of) were Gibson's Virtual Light and Idoru about five or six years ago.
The Hollywood version of cyberpunk will probably live on for a while with films like the Matrix and its sequels.
FS Problems
I have been following this thread for a couple of days and there is, as always, no clear definition of why people dislike the Freespace games.
May I suggest that one reason people don't like freespace as opposed to Wing Commander is emotional investment. I use myself as an example, I am a father and husband, I work full time and coach my son's pee wee baseball team etc. My spare time is limited so when I invest my time and emotion into something I would like some stimulas, be it emotional, intellectual whatever.
The Wing Commander games gave this in abundance because you were somehow living the story.
Freespace had virtually no emotional investment due to a lack of story. The premise of the game was good and it had a plot but there was no story to propel the plot.
This has been a gripe of mine for a number of years with a number of games. There is a lot of visual stimulation which is cool but nothing really to stir the heart and soul ( The last mission in X-Wing Alliance being the exception). I for one appreciate the eye-candy but please include the soul-food.
If I may propose a compromise, create a gripping story first, then see how in game missions can fit the plot and expand the story.
I have been following this thread for a couple of days and there is, as always, no clear definition of why people dislike the Freespace games.
May I suggest that one reason people don't like freespace as opposed to Wing Commander is emotional investment. I use myself as an example, I am a father and husband, I work full time and coach my son's pee wee baseball team etc. My spare time is limited so when I invest my time and emotion into something I would like some stimulas, be it emotional, intellectual whatever.
The Wing Commander games gave this in abundance because you were somehow living the story.
Freespace had virtually no emotional investment due to a lack of story. The premise of the game was good and it had a plot but there was no story to propel the plot.
This has been a gripe of mine for a number of years with a number of games. There is a lot of visual stimulation which is cool but nothing really to stir the heart and soul ( The last mission in X-Wing Alliance being the exception). I for one appreciate the eye-candy but please include the soul-food.
If I may propose a compromise, create a gripping story first, then see how in game missions can fit the plot and expand the story.
FS2 possibilities
I also find FS 1 & 2 lacking the story part to be the downside of the games, plus the fact that you are thrown into the combat area with very little time to prepare for the mission (no autopilot to combat area). All of the Wing Commander games, except missions where you need to defend your carrier, gives you the chance to catch your breath, set your ship power allotments and psych up for the mission while flying to the combat area.
Probably the biggest thing I did not like about FS or FS2 was that cumbersome keyboard commands. Even the shortcut keys (very few of them) took too long to call up a specific flight group or wingman to give commands. In space combat, there is very little time to sit there and fumble thru keys to talk to a specific ship, and when there are many ships in your flight group, it becomes a useless feature during heavy combat!
The neat thing about FS2 was the ability to use a microphone to talk to other players in a multiplay game. And being multiplayer capable in itself.
IMO, FS and FS2 could learn alot from the Wing Commander games regarding flight physics. But of course, that is a very old debate that still remains wide open. Probably the most strange thing about the flight physics is the ships need to come to a stop gradually, yet turn at high speed like as if the ship was on a rail or something! I mean, would not the inertia of the ship moving in all axis be applied, and not just in the forward motion?!
WCP/SO and the fan made sim VS are probably (IMO) the only games to closely represent Newtonian physics, which are more accurate in depicting how a craft with mass would react in zero G in space. Even some of the older WC games, such as Armada and Privateer 1, also use Newtonian physics, or close resemblance of it. Again its an old debate, and probably a matter of preference to some players and not to others.
Maybe now that the source is available, someone will create some kind of game that could closely resemble a WC game.
But in overall points, FS 1 and 2 are not that bad. But none of those will ever compare to ANY of the Wing Commander games, EVER! (IMO)
RFB
The Anomalies Network TEM forum moderator
I also find FS 1 & 2 lacking the story part to be the downside of the games, plus the fact that you are thrown into the combat area with very little time to prepare for the mission (no autopilot to combat area). All of the Wing Commander games, except missions where you need to defend your carrier, gives you the chance to catch your breath, set your ship power allotments and psych up for the mission while flying to the combat area.
Probably the biggest thing I did not like about FS or FS2 was that cumbersome keyboard commands. Even the shortcut keys (very few of them) took too long to call up a specific flight group or wingman to give commands. In space combat, there is very little time to sit there and fumble thru keys to talk to a specific ship, and when there are many ships in your flight group, it becomes a useless feature during heavy combat!
The neat thing about FS2 was the ability to use a microphone to talk to other players in a multiplay game. And being multiplayer capable in itself.
IMO, FS and FS2 could learn alot from the Wing Commander games regarding flight physics. But of course, that is a very old debate that still remains wide open. Probably the most strange thing about the flight physics is the ships need to come to a stop gradually, yet turn at high speed like as if the ship was on a rail or something! I mean, would not the inertia of the ship moving in all axis be applied, and not just in the forward motion?!
WCP/SO and the fan made sim VS are probably (IMO) the only games to closely represent Newtonian physics, which are more accurate in depicting how a craft with mass would react in zero G in space. Even some of the older WC games, such as Armada and Privateer 1, also use Newtonian physics, or close resemblance of it. Again its an old debate, and probably a matter of preference to some players and not to others.
Maybe now that the source is available, someone will create some kind of game that could closely resemble a WC game.
But in overall points, FS 1 and 2 are not that bad. But none of those will ever compare to ANY of the Wing Commander games, EVER! (IMO)
RFB
The Anomalies Network TEM forum moderator
FRED2
I played around with fred in FS2 but soon got discouraged with it because I couldn't land on any Capital Ship. I even tried to fly into the Shivan Juggernaught and died.
If someone could reprogram Freespace to allow carrier landings and ejection instead of the shitty ALT-J endings then it could be ok.
I am a CGI illiterate, but how could you change the cutscenes in Freespace or would you have to create all new one's. How would you go about creating all new CGI cutscenes?
So many questions so small a mind.
I played around with fred in FS2 but soon got discouraged with it because I couldn't land on any Capital Ship. I even tried to fly into the Shivan Juggernaught and died.
If someone could reprogram Freespace to allow carrier landings and ejection instead of the shitty ALT-J endings then it could be ok.
I am a CGI illiterate, but how could you change the cutscenes in Freespace or would you have to create all new one's. How would you go about creating all new CGI cutscenes?
So many questions so small a mind.
Re: Re: FS2 possibilities
But yes, I-War and I-War 2 are about as good as you can find in a combat space sim. If you are a real physics junkie, try the freeware game Orbiter.
Terminus had a pretty good Newtonian flight model as well. Jumpgate had a Newtonian engine in the early beta releases, but it was considered too difficult by most of the players, so they simplified it a bit for the public release. And there are a few games in development that plan to support realistic space flight physics: e.g. Homeplanet, and my game Starshatter.
But yes, I-War and I-War 2 are about as good as you can find in a combat space sim. If you are a real physics junkie, try the freeware game Orbiter.
Re: Re: FS2 possibilities
Independence War and its sequel are games that I have not had the pleasure of trying out, probably because I was so wound up into going thru some FPS games during the time I-War came out. But yes, I did fail to mention that there were probably other sim games out that closely resemble Newtonian physics.
I know what you mean by embarrasing afterburner slides. Probably could have been adjusted better in the ships characteristics within the game. One can seriously foul up the settings for the ships in WCP/SO using the ship editor program and slide forever with one hit of the afterburner! (ok, im guilty, I messed with settings and slid for what seemed like thousands of light years in WCP/SO!)
It is not that hard to get used to the ships that do not follow the Newtonian physics tho. I like to play X-Wing Alliance alot, and those ships act like the FS ships. I think that is what helped me get used to the flight characteristics of FS and FS2, playing all of the X-Wing games as well as the TIE games.
Vega Strike, for example, you can also play with the settings of ships, and I am also guilty there too, seriously messing with ship settings! But found that it was not worth it trying to fly to target and run past them so fast or slide right thru the furball and end up on the far side of the system!!!
Someone mentioned the afterburner in FS and FS2. I also found that to be somewhat annoying. Mostly the shaking when the afterburner kicks in. Its a neat effect though!
But now that the source is out for FS2, perhaps something neat is on the horizon for everyone.
RFB
The Anomalies Network TEM forum moderator
Independence War and its sequel are games that I have not had the pleasure of trying out, probably because I was so wound up into going thru some FPS games during the time I-War came out. But yes, I did fail to mention that there were probably other sim games out that closely resemble Newtonian physics.
I know what you mean by embarrasing afterburner slides. Probably could have been adjusted better in the ships characteristics within the game. One can seriously foul up the settings for the ships in WCP/SO using the ship editor program and slide forever with one hit of the afterburner! (ok, im guilty, I messed with settings and slid for what seemed like thousands of light years in WCP/SO!)
It is not that hard to get used to the ships that do not follow the Newtonian physics tho. I like to play X-Wing Alliance alot, and those ships act like the FS ships. I think that is what helped me get used to the flight characteristics of FS and FS2, playing all of the X-Wing games as well as the TIE games.
Vega Strike, for example, you can also play with the settings of ships, and I am also guilty there too, seriously messing with ship settings! But found that it was not worth it trying to fly to target and run past them so fast or slide right thru the furball and end up on the far side of the system!!!
Someone mentioned the afterburner in FS and FS2. I also found that to be somewhat annoying. Mostly the shaking when the afterburner kicks in. Its a neat effect though!
But now that the source is out for FS2, perhaps something neat is on the horizon for everyone.
RFB
The Anomalies Network TEM forum moderator
Re: Re: Re: FS2 possibilities
Where can I find this freeware game Orbiter, that is if it is still available? Id like to try it!
Ok, I admit, Im a physics junkie!
RFB
The Anomalies Network TEM forum moderator
Originally posted by milo
But yes, I-War and I-War 2 are about as good as you can find in a combat space sim. If you are a real physics junkie, try the freeware game Orbiter.
Where can I find this freeware game Orbiter, that is if it is still available? Id like to try it!
Ok, I admit, Im a physics junkie!
RFB
The Anomalies Network TEM forum moderator
OK, it's been a while since I've played either WCP or FS. What was different about the afterburners?
String plug(boolean shameless=true) {
If you are looking for something with more MOD flexibility, you might want to look at the latest Starshatter demo. Not only can you take off and land on carriers, you can command them as well. No ejection support yet; I'm still figuring out how that should work exactly...
Seriously, I would appreciate feedback on the various flight models in Starshatter from some die-hard Wing Commander fans.
}
Re: Re: Re: Re: FS2 possibilities
http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/~martins/orbit/orbit.html
Warning: This sucker is the real deal and it is hard.
http://www.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/~martins/orbit/orbit.html
Warning: This sucker is the real deal and it is hard.
Mekt-Hakkikt
Mpanty's bane
In WC your afterbruners use up fuel, when you're out of fuel no more AB. In FS you have some kind of AB-pool very much like the gun pool which recharges after some rest. Cleary the advantage is, you never run out of fuel for your ABs. Disadvantage: You can't make a long continuous cruise with ABs like in WC. And in FS your ship trembles everytime you use the ABs. Some people didn't like that (I think you, RFBurns, were one of those
) but I didn't mind.WildWeasel
Spaceman
Then they operate much like afterburners do in Privateer. What's wrong with that?
WildWeasel
Spaceman
The similarity still exists.
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
Nonsense... jazz music has always maintained a relatively low profile, but it too had its highs and lows. And to claim that opera has been marginalised for a hundred years is just silly. The musical genre of film is a form of opera. And, as Baz Luhrman so kindly demonstrated, musicals are not dead. Plus, conventional operas are also regularly staged all over the world. All in all, operas are about as marginalised as action films.
As for FS being responsible for the collapse of the space-sim genre, it's hypocrisy to claim that without first analysing the role played by the disasterous WC movie in that collapse. The seemingly total collapse of the most successful space-sim brand does not exactly encourage investors. Ever wondered why EA decided to scrap an online spacesim that would have carried the WC brandname, while allowing an inexperienced (as far as spacesims go) team at Westwood make an online spacesim which would be based on a new, unknown brand? FS had nothing to do with that, you know...
Wedge009
Rogue Leader
I'm not very afterburner 'trigger-happy', so I find it hard to imagine that people can run out of fuel. Oh well, different flying styles, I guess. I did run out of AB in a Devastator a few times, though. Pesky bugs.
But even if you are a heavy AB user, there's always the near-infinite AB sliding technique, where available.
But even if you are a heavy AB user, there's always the near-infinite AB sliding technique, where available.
It's not nonsense. Swing and jazz were mainstream entertainment in the 1940's. They were played in every dance hall and on every radio station across the United States, and were also pretty popular in Europe. Swing musicians like Gene Krupa and Benny Goodman were idolized by millions of teenagers. They were the NSync of their day.
Jazz and swing have not enjoyed the same level of mass popularity since the ascendancy of rock music with Elvis and the Beatles.
So if I ask people on this board which name is more familiar:
Bruce Willis or Jose Carreras
Sandra Bullock or Denise Graves
Tom Hanks or Placido Domingo
which do you think they will answer?
Obviously, both jazz and opera are still being created and enjoyed by people around the world. All I'm saying is that they don't have the mass-market appeal they once did. Just like space sim games.
And I'm also saying that there is no guarantee that they will ever be that popular again. While everything has it's ups and downs, some things and some times are special. I think that the last twenty years of the previous century were a special time for the mass popularity of space based science fiction. For most of the rest of the past century, science fiction movies and books were the province of those with spectacles, slide-rules, and pocket-protectors.