Wing 3 Destroyer Appears in WC Saga (July 17, 2009)

KrisV

KrisV

Administrator
The Wing Commander Saga team has started a push to wrap up its capital ships as it makes progress towards an alpha build. They've released shots of their take on the Kilrathi destroyer from Wing III. More pictures can be found on the project website.





​

For today's update we would like to showcase our final version of the Kilrathi Ralarrad-class light destroyer.

One of the most prevalent Kilrathi warships found on the front lines, the Ralarrad-class light destroyer is a maneuverable multi-purpose vessel that is equally competent in picket duties, fleet escort, and strike missions. Carrying a token fighter complement, the light destroyer is a mainstay workhorse of the Kilrathi war machine, wielding the energy weapons to effectively engage in anti-aircraft duties as well as the missile strike capability to pose a serious threat to larger Terran capital ships.
Click to expand...

--
Original update published on July 17, 2009
 
Last edited:
I always felt the design of Kilrathi ships in WCIII was a let down for me. I really liked the design in WC and WCIII. I do understand they were going for a more menacing look and a psychological effect. I feel that the WC: Saga versions show what the designers at Origin intended. Coming up against these ships would definitely have an impact on the pilots and naval task forces sent up against them. I think the reverse effect was achieved from the Confederation. Ships like the 'Claw' and 'Concordia', hell even the "Centurion' were beautiful works of deadly art. Causing their crews to become more proud of and caring for their ships.

I think though that the Ajax genuinely looks evil.

~~~ just a tired rant.
 
I feel that the WC: Saga versions show what the designers at Origin intended.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the actual games best show what their designers intended. No fan project has some secret corner on the *real* look of Wing Commander.
 
I'm pretty sure the WCIII engine limited what the designers could do. Otherwise why doesn't everything look like the concept art?

Its not that serious..

That is why I don't post here much due to people nitpicking of someone's opinion as if they don't know what they are talking about.
 
I'm pretty sure the WCIII engine limited what the designers could do. Otherwise why doesn't everything look like the concept art?
Click to expand...

I'm "pretty sure" that the people who built the engine knew exactly what it could and could not do; they wrote the specifications, after all. Saga is not some grand realization of Chris Douglas' hitherto impossible secret dreams -- it's just a FreeSpace mod.

And I would say the same for Standoff; they do an even more beautiful job of replicating Wing Commander II's art style... but it's a tribute, not some amazing superior product that's surely how WC2 would have appeared if it could. Rather, these fan games are *nothing* without the source material that you're so casually putting down here.

(Okay, maybe Standoff is a little closer, borrowing a Wing Commander engine instead of a Descent game...)

That is why I don't post here much due to people nitpicking of someone's opinion as if they don't know what they are talking about.
Click to expand...

I'll go right out and say it, then: you don't know what you're talking about.
 
Ok loaf.. where did I put down the source material? It was great for its time but it was a real alteration from WCII. I didn't say the designers sucked or the material sucked. I was just personally let down because I loved the style of WCII. I have a real disdain for people who casually misquote someone. I'm a news professional. Its real damaging to your credibility.

I'm pointing out that while WCIII was amazing for its time, I highly doubt you could put a model with as many polygons as say, a Waterloo cruiser into the engine. There were obviously limitations. WCII allowed for much more artistic freedom since the engine used sprites instead of actual 3d models. I feel that this is a logical deduction for the 180 in art styles between WCII and WCIII.

Also, I would like to thank you for acting like an adult and disrespecting someone who was not slightly disrespectful to you. Hail Lord LOAF, king of wcnews.com who can sit on his high horse and talk down to anyone who doesn't agree with him and and attempts to share their viewpoint and promote discussion. Let us all pause and give thanks to him for allowing us to continue living.
 
I'm pointing out that while WCIII was amazing for its time, I highly doubt you could put a model with as many polygons as say, a Waterloo cruiser into the engine. There were obviously limitations. WCII allowed for much more artistic freedom since the engine used sprites instead of actual 3d models. I feel that this is a logical deduction for the 180 in art styles between WCII and WCIII.
Click to expand...

Whether you know it or not, though, you're repeating some very tired rhetoric. BradMick actually went back and proved that you could render the various "round" Wing Commander II ships with the "limited" Wing Commander III engine some years ago. The change in design comes from the massive change in the art team, not some inability to make 3D cones. (Of course, how any of this would speak to your initial point is a mystery to me... since Saga is all ships from *Wing Commander III* and not designs lost in your imagined schism.)

Also, reread your first high-minded paragraph about credibility (in a job that... isn't mine?)... and then your third. Then smack yourself in the face.
 
Honestly I can't see why the WC3 team would secretely want their ships to look like some mod from the future. As far as I know, WC3 was more cutting edge in it's time than WCS is now. I'm sure the were very happy about the advanced graphics they had at their disposal to bring their designs to life.

That being said, I like how much SAGA's 'realistic' style reminds me of the movie Kilrathi ships.
 
You looking at it too finely. Do you think for instance that when they made movies back in the 80s they would like to have had the special effects of today? Of course they would, the technology at the time just wasn't there. A perfect example is the Star Wars Special editions.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
Whether you know it or not, though, you're repeating some very tired rhetoric. BradMick actually went back and proved that you could render the various "round" Wing Commander II ships with the "limited" Wing Commander III engine some years ago. The change in design comes from the massive change in the art team, not some inability to make 3D cones. (Of course, how any of this would speak to your initial point is a mystery to me... since Saga is all ships from *Wing Commander III* and not designs lost in your imagined schism.)

Also, reread your first high-minded paragraph about credibility (in a job that... isn't mine?)... and then your third. Then smack yourself in the face.
Click to expand...

Question is, could the hardware at the time manage such hi-definition models? 386 processors? :confused:
 
Question is, could the hardware at the time manage such hi-definition models? 386 processors?
Click to expand...

Computers may be twice as fast as they were in 1973, but that's absolutely not the question. If you believe Wing Commander III was designed for futuristic computers and then downgraded based on reality then you're... I don't know, insert something illogical here.

The fact is that the Saga machine has been pushing, for many years, the idea that their /fan/ project is 'what Origin wanted to do' in a variety of ways, to the point that we've had people go in and literally rebuilt 3D models to prove that this isn't the case. It's an old, old red flag. I don't know if you're a willing conscript to that cause or simply someone affected by it... but, in my mind, it's just a gross way of thinking.

For one thing, it's a false presumption of authority; akin to someone insisting they're doing so-and-so because God told them to. Maybe they're eating hobos and maybe they're modding Secret Ops... but either way it's a calculated monstrosity stated because there's no easy way to prove otherwise. What's more, though... it's so damn unnecessary, immodest and representative of an attitude that's wrong with some fan projects. Surely the idea is to act as a *tribute* to the original games, not to claim you're besting them and doing what they couldn't and so forth and so on. If you're in this business for plaudits and laurels and credits then make your own damn game with your own ships and ideas and so forth.

(And before anyone points this out, I have *been there*. How many times a year do we get someone going on about how my map or my ship guide or some similar project is better than the source material... and they get the same lecture and I'm stuck with a profound sense of embarassment. I *know* my goofy awkward fanservicy map, for instance, isn't what Captain Johnny intended... and I'd feel awful to claim otherwise. Imagine telling a tribute band that their covers must have been what the original artist always intended and just couldn't manage somehow. The idea that that sort of reaction is *actively sought out* by this particular group is... gick.)


You looking at it too finely. Do you think for instance that when they made movies back in the 80s they would like to have had the special effects of today? Of course they would, the technology at the time just wasn't there. A perfect example is the Star Wars Special editions.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, the updated versions of Star Wars, a grand example of something no one has *ever* questioned the merits of or the intentions behind. Also, something done for better or for (and many, many people argue this, if you didn't read my sarcasm) worse by the *creator of the series*. If Electronic Arts wakes up tomorrow and remakes Wing Commander and tells everyone it's what they originally intended to do in 1990 then it's a heck of a lot more convincing than a group of people modding FreeSpace. (And hey, you know what, they *did* do that and it was called Super Wing Commander and no one talks about it.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top