Why I say some of the characterization in WC3 and WC4 was not good

[Jdawg]

I don't think it's specific to Chris Roberts at all, there's this very common sense among... well, us... that the big name at the head of a given franchise is someone who cares about what we're starting to lump together as 'lore'... and the reality is that that's rarely the case. We like to make little Gods out the name at the top of the credits when the reality is that they aren't looking at their work the way we are at all. Take somebody like George Lucas who is incredibly passionate about the minutiae of filmmaking... but who never cared at all about making some cohesive Star Wars world. (Or Gene Roddenberry, a man whose actual genius was what producers really do... arranging financing!)

In the case of Chris Roberts, he's always been motivated by projects that let him move the needle. Wing Commander, Strike Commander, Wing Commander III were all projects that gave him an excuse to do something new and important, whether it was building new technology or coming up with a new way to tell a story. But he's not sitting down and saying 'I want to tell the story of the 26th century space war'... he's hiring someone he thinks will do a good job of that. Most of the 'lore' of Wing Commander is a gloss, written to go with where the technology is being pushed.

He famously didn't want to do Wing Commander IV because it wasn't going to let him do any of that... like Wing Commander 2, the idea was to have a sequel using the old tech out within a year. The bargain he struck with EA was that they'd let him do something new and important--shoot the thing like an actual Hollywood film. The goal there wasn't to tell a particular Wing Commander story so much as it was to set up the whole industry to take a seat next to the folks making motion pictures (which happened to some degree but not as he hoped at the time!).

(If you're interested, the game he wanted to make in 1995 was an RPG called Silverheart that he hoped would merge video and gameplay in totally new ways. EA never let him do it!)



I avoid most Star Citizen news these days and even I saw that! But even though these two comments weren't intended to be related, I think they really are. Because for all the complaining fans do about their IP work... it's still making much, much more money than the arguably better stuff you mentioned. The fragmentation we experience as nerds on the internet does not matter at all to the people behind it. The worst of the recent Star Warses made four times Blade Runner 2049... and that's before endless ancilliary profits! So while we cringe and go "ugh, $48,000 for a video game? that's so stupid" the people on the other end of things are perfectly happy to have that headline making the rounds... because in the end it just convinces a few more people to spend $48,000!

I don't think it's right to compare Blade Runner to Star Wars even the original blade runner was hardly a box office hit. As far as Star Wars goes, Solo lost a crap ton of money and let's be real there's a reason we have not seen a star wars movie in 5 years. Disney in general has had nothing but misfires in 2023. Ant-Man lost money, the marvels BOMBED and so did Indiana jones along with haunted mansion etc... does not help they have to Shell out billions more to finish buying fox or Hulu I cant remember which.

To your point about Star Trek I will disagree after watching countless documentaries about gene, he took the lore and where he wanted it to go very seriously. he had knock down drag out fights about the Next Generation right before he died. He might not have cared about the minute to minute dialogue in detail but the big picture story, he was very passionate about. I remember reading an interview with ronald moore, when he was writing for the next generation and not knowing what to do with a story that Gene Roddenberry wanted because there was no human conflict in it lol.

 

[Knight26-77]

After reading through this, and doing a replay, it got my mind thinking of a writing exercise of how I would remake/reboot the WC franchise. I might write up a basic draft this weekend. Honestly, my biggest change would be to the timeline and possibly character selection. In regards to timeline, it really seems like WC3 was originally meant to take place after a longer time skip than 1 year. Especially if you alt-s on the ship selection screen where the inception dates on the fighters are all over the map and, in the case of the F-103 Excalibur, take place after the game.

 

[EmuMusicFan]

After reading through this, and doing a replay, it got my mind thinking of a writing exercise of how I would remake/reboot the WC franchise. I might write up a basic draft this weekend. Honestly, my biggest change would be to the timeline and possibly character selection. In regards to timeline, it really seems like WC3 was originally meant to take place after a longer time skip than 1 year. Especially if you alt-s on the ship selection screen where the inception dates on the fighters are all over the map and, in the case of the F-103 Excalibur, take place after the game.

Looking forward to seeing your version.

Honestly, WC3 story, from my cursory reading, I think most of it should be overhauled except for the general background and some of the characters.

 

[Jdawg]

Looking forward to seeing your version.

Honestly, WC3 story, from my cursory reading, I think most of it should be overhauled except for the general background and some of the characters.

I'm glad more people are coming around to this. I remember when I first came to this board to say anything negative about any of the games was almost blasphemy. but from a story standpoint three does not do a lot of things correctly in my opinion. If you enjoy it great but on a pure Story, and character point of view to me, it misfire on 90% of the characters for me, from personality traits to characterization, especially where we left some of them off in wc2. That's one reason I actually enjoy Wing Commander Saga better than wc3. While it also has a lot of issues especially with some characterization/dialogue itself, it tells a more complete story of the timeline than three does, at least to me.

Once again for the record the wing Commander franchise is my favorite franchise of all time and three while not being the best is still a pretty great game.

 

[EmuMusicFan]

Reserved floor...

 

[EmuMusicFan]

Now let's talk about Tolwyn.

I also agree with this speculation: Tolwyn became a villain in WC4 because Malcolm McDowell was invited to play the role since WC3. I can understand doing this, but it's not necessary. I know of more than one actor who has expanded their role types through a great play.

Anyway, it could be OK, but the question is, how well?

First of all, how do we understand WC4's Tolwyn's psychological journey from a war hero to a criminal? In the game this is basically concentrated in two speeches, but the language level of these two speeches is mediocre. If a screenwriter wants to use one or two speeches or dialogues to embody a character's core ideas, the content of the language must be well-crafted and contagious enough (even if the content is morally wrong).

The script of WC4 does not have enough space to reflect Tolwyn's inner conflicts, but instead writes him as an unforgivable pretender from the beginning. This makes him a stereotypical villain.

The second is the conflict between Confederation and UBW, and the description of the villain organization Black Lance.

UBW is a political entity introduced in WC 4. The description of UBW is insufficient. We can only know some vague concepts: they were allies of the Confederation during the Kilrathi War (but they should also be composed of human colonies), and they were relatively marginal and poor to the Confederation. But the question is, what is the conflict between UBW and Confederation?

Economic interests? Political conflicts? Or cultural conflicts?

Economic interests, such as the Confederation occupying a large amount of high-quality resources and leaving the space junk caused by mining to the people of UBW?

Political interests? Because their philosophy is different from the Confederation, so they want to establish a separate country?

Cultural conflicts, like they speak different languages, at least with different accents, dress differently, so it's different from Confederation?

The question is, have all of these been written down? If these basic conflicts do not exist, and the people on both sides are very friendly and have smooth communication, then all-out war can be provoked with just some Black Lance black ops tricks. Has the Confederation's diplomatic department been abolished?

What do we see? There is no difference between UBW soldiers and Confederation soldiers, except for the badge. UBW commander is rehired from Confederation retired officers, and UBW junior pilots can serve in the Confederation's senior fleets smoothly.

This makes the possibility of a full-scale conflict between the two sides seem implausible.

BTW, I can see a vaguely similar story structure, which is from Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Re: Tolwyn. I think the only media that manages to capture Tolwyn as he was introduced in Wing Commander II, and that's Wing Commander Academy. Wing Commander II gave us a complex character who was both a heroic figure who had earned the loyalty of his crew and a pompous antagonist who genuinely believed your character was a danger. It's a much more nuanced idea than the standard Star Trek badmiral; he is bad to you in the course of the story but you aren't left wondering how he got to be commanding the ship in the first place. And as simplified as Wing Commander II's story is, it gave you some great moments like Blair failing to get anyone (even Angel!) to badmouth the Admiral. That's a real person, he is imperfect but with reason.

Wing Commander III and then IV just make him your typical bad guy. As in Wing Commander II, he's an enormous jerk to you (with a line of dialogue to cover for Special Operations, which still shocks me!) but he's nothing else. He's not some competent commander leading the war effort, he's a egotistical jerk with a comically ridiculous gun. And we should be clear, the idea that he was twisted by the events of Fleet Action is an absolute retcon; no one involved in writing or making Wing Commander III or IV knew or cared about a licensed tie-in novel. They just simplified the character to tell what's arguably a more complex story… but it really shows. (And then Wing Commander IV owes its even more ridiculous Tolwyn largely to WC3's casting…)

But while the FMV games get a bad rap for that, we also need to consider that the novels do the exact same thing in the other direction. Tolwyn in the novels isn't just perfect he's very, very close to omniscient. All the characters love him, he always has their backs, he's always there to save the day… and it's always revealed that whatever he was plotting was not only secretly correct but also entirely planned out the entire time. He has a magical intuition that lets him know what's going to happen to the Tarawa, to show up to rescue it… he knows about the Kilrathi secret fleet before the book even starts and is already part of an elaborate plot to stop it!. And so on, Forstchen's Tolwyn isn't some better take… it's just the opposite one.

But Wing Commander Academy gives us a Tolwyn who is both a competent leader who wants the best for Blair AND who has an ego and an amorality that work against him (and are implied to lead to the man we see in Wing Commander IV). It's a return to Wing Commander II Tolwyn AND one that ties us to the simpler character in Wing Commander III and IV.

The second is the conflict between Confederation and UBW, and the description of the villain organization Black Lance.

UBW is a political entity introduced in WC 4. The description of UBW is insufficient. We can only know some vague concepts: they were allies of the Confederation during the Kilrathi War (but they should also be composed of human colonies), and they were relatively marginal and poor to the Confederation. But the question is, what is the conflict between UBW and Confederation?

Economic interests? Political conflicts? Or cultural conflicts?

Economic interests, such as the Confederation occupying a large amount of high-quality resources and leaving the space junk caused by mining to the people of UBW?

Political interests? Because their philosophy is different from the Confederation, so they want to establish a separate country?

Cultural conflicts, like they speak different languages, at least with different accents, dress differently, so it's different from Confederation?

The question is, have all of these been written down? If these basic conflicts do not exist, and the people on both sides are very friendly and have smooth communication, then all-out war can be provoked with just some Black Lance black ops tricks. Has the Confederation's diplomatic department been abolished?

What do we see? There is no difference between UBW soldiers and Confederation soldiers, except for the badge. UBW commander is rehired from Confederation retired officers, and UBW junior pilots can serve in the Confederation's senior fleets smoothly.

This makes the possibility of a full-scale conflict between the two sides seem implausible.

BTW, I can see a vaguely similar story structure, which is from Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam.

There's lore for all of this but it isn't too important for this discussion... in terms of reading the narrative I think this is largely a cultural issue. To an American audience, just hearing the word "Union" in Union of Border Worlds immediately tells everything you need to know about the setup: it's an analogy for the United States' Civil War. So we go in understanding the political situation, the taking sides, the worst people trying to exacerbate it, the brother against brother aspect... it basically loads up all these tropes that we know and immediately start recognizing.

 

[Knight26-77]

@Bandit LOAF summed up the issues with Tolwyn well. While Forstchen is a great writer, he tends to deify flag-level officers, and as a result, our views of Tolwyn get twisted by that.

In regards to the BW conflict, a lot can be said of the visual narrative in WC-IV, especially the uniforms. Compare the confed uniforms of WC3 to those of WC4. They were from largely utilitarian uniforms in WC3 and then shifted to stuffy high collared almost fascist uniforms (with the jodhpurs and high boots.) Mind you, in both Tolwyn's Admiral uniform still sported booth, iirc. Now look at the BW uniforms, they largely look like WC3 confed hand-me-downs but with extra gear like the utility vests. This visually tells the viewer/player that these people are more along the lines of the real Confed and therefore the good guys. The Black Lance take it a step futher into fascist territory with their black confed uniforms and even more pronounces high boots and jodhpurs.

80s and 90s games and movies relied on these visual clues much moreso then their modern equivalents because it is an easy way to convey who the bad guys are. Dress your "bad guys" like Nazis and we know they are evil. All black or grey, probably evil. Lighter colors and blues or earth tones: good guys.

The game didn't need to go into too much more detail. Why? BEcause you, as the player, were right in the middle of it and barely had time to question things anyway. Also, IIRC WC4 had the shortest and least expansive manual compared to every other mainline WC game. Those manuals helped immensely with world-building. But, the whole industry had started to move away from the big lore filled manuals at the time. Instead, more of that lore started to be found in the games themselves, but WC4's FMV-based narrative kept them from going that route, trying to tell it all instead visually.

 

[EmuMusicFan]

But while the FMV games get a bad rap for that, we also need to consider that the novels do the exact same thing in the other direction.

Yeah, I also don't think Tolwyn from the Jukaga trilogy (I call these books) is a very successful character. He's pretty much one of those characters with one word hero written on the face. Comparatively Jukaga's character creation is at a much higher level and the character is much more interesting.

I believe Tolwyn in Wing Commander Academy animation was created by expanding on the WC4 version, but the character is just excellent. I guess the character creation is worthy of an actor of Malcolm McDowell's calibre.

While Forstchen is a great writer, he tends to deify flag-level officers, and as a result, our views of Tolwyn get twisted by that.

I've noticed this, and in the case of Action Stations, for example, almost all of the Human Squad characters are the same type of person - cold-faced, muscular, and composed, suitable for a Schwarzenegger or Stallone role.


When it comes to uniforms as symbols embodying a character's stance on good and evil, this in itself is not uncommon in classical theatre. For example, in some East Asian traditional operas, the colour and pattern pattern of the character face painting tells the audience directly whether this is a good or bad person and what the character is like. You can even tell from the trinkets if the character is affiliated with a regime that is considered an orthodox dynasty.

But I think such a classical mode of expression also still needs to be equipped with enough drama to convey the scripted ideas.

The WC4 script doesn't describe much about how Black Lance came to be as an organisation, to the point where it's a bit of a mystery as to why its status within the Confederation suddenly became so high. Even Captain Eisen was near retirement then replaced by the new comer Paulson. Paulson was just dislikable when he made his debut. That makes it less convincing.

Comparatively, Zeta Gundam's script is better. There's a scene where personnel of Titans, a military dictatorship within the Earth Federation, insultingly beat up the heroic Captain Bright, who is well known to the audience. This immediately sends a message to the audience that these guys are not good people. I think WC4 script could have arranged for Black Lance to target Catscratch, a UBW rookie pilot, for unfair treatment if they wanted to do a better job.

Off topic, I always felt Catscratch was almost wasted as a character. His background itself is relevant to this conflict. But the few plays surrounding him had little to do with it.

 

[Jdawg]

It is all a personal preference, i liked what they did with all the characters that returned and liked the new characters better than the ones that didnt return, going from wing commander 3 to wc4 for the most part.

Catscratch, hawk and panther > over what they did with hobbes, flash and flint and vaquero in wc3. I thought overall cat scratch was better integrated into the story than flash after you beat him in the simulator. Y'all know already I hate what they did with Hobbes, and I was never a flint fan at all. Meanwhile Hawk and panther were a great angel and devil on Blair's shoulder


Sosa > radio rollins. I love sosa and her character, rollins has an interesting premise but his character had zero payoff, as far as the conspiracy theories go really.

Maniac wc 4 > Maniac wc 3. They matured his character a bit and showed his loyalty to eisen. Maniac in 3 was literally biff from back to the future.

Eisen wc3 = eisen wc4. This is a bit of a wash. I liked him in both.

Pliers > Rachel. I like rachel a lot but pliers always kept me guessing. First time i played i thought he might be a double agent.

Tolwyn, seether, paulsen > kilrathi. I actually really like the muppets in wc3, but paulsen seals the deal. I think paulsen is a really underrated character, i like staying with confed, just to bask in his sleazyness lol.

Kilrathi wc3 >kilrathi wc4. Wc4 muppets are terrible to me, it's like the difference between Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 1 and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 3 without Jim Henson lol.