What is this piece of CRAP.....!

[Ed Kolis]

Originally posted by General Woundwort:
I second the remarks of the distinguished MP from Britannia. I'd give my left arm to be able to play Star Control II again...

Did you ever try The Ur-Quan Masters? Great remake of SC2!

edit: There was a Commander Hayes in SC2? Hmm, that name sounds familiar...

[ October 16, 2003, 12:10: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

[Fyron]

Personally I dont have a problem with the graphics, I think I may actually be the only 19 yr old who doesnt care about graphics when its comes to games

Think again buddy.

[Fyron]

Keep in mind that SF was made primarily to test a theoretical combat model for SEV (though in SEV one would hope it would be much less complicated, so you can still get 100s of ships flying around per side)... well, that is how it started, anyways.

[Rollo]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Keep in mind that SF was made primarily to test a theoretical combat model for SEV...

I don't think this is true. The only statement that I recall is that the graphic engine would be used. I reckon combat in SE5 will be carried out differently than in SF.

[General Woundwort]

Originally posted by Ed Kolis:
Did you ever try The Ur-Quan Masters? Great remake of SC2!

edit: There was a Commander Hayes in SC2? Hmm, that name sounds familiar...

Ohhhh boy!

Well, I guess I'll have to wait, I've got so much else on my plate. But many thanks for the link...

[narf poit chez BOOM]

CARP IS A FISH.
FISH GO IN MY DISH.
THE ISH-WISH DISH!

[DeadZone]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

Personally I dont have a problem with the graphics, I think I may actually be the only 19 yr old who doesnt care about graphics when its comes to games

Think again buddy.

---

Of course, how could I forget you Fyron

Needless to say, too many ppl base a game on its graphics and as companies are now looking into only making a game look good the game play and lifeline of games are now bcoming Pathetic

I shall dare to give an example

EA Sports
Fifa football
The fist fifa games I played was fifa95 for the mega drive, rally good enjoyable game
Then I played 97, improvement on graphics but played not as well
Then I got a Playstation, first game I got for it was Fifa 99, Great graphics, fantastic game play
Then Fifa 2000, played that, wot a disappointment that was, gameplay had gone down the drain completely IMO and PS2 fifa releases had the same problem, and it put me off of any game made by EA Sports

Then earlier this month, I thought I would give them another chance and brought Fifa 2003 for the Gamecube
And all I can say is that they got their act together, needless to say I think it was the first time, since I got broadband year ago August that, I didnt go on my computer for a week

Now I know these are console games and not PC, but the same rules apply, EA had started to rush out products which caused crap games even tho thy looked cool, then they got their act together and now are producing games that look good and play good, BUT THEN, they do own Westwood studios, which is the best computer graphics stuidios in th world, so you should expect their games too look good anyway, and now they are utilizing their ppl properly their games have vastly improved, but also they hav the advantage that the publish their own games so they work to their own timescale

Now SF, dont have all these luxuries, so we shouldnt expect a brilliant game, and perhaps if the game was given a few extra months when the project came to be, then things would have been diff.

[NutButter]

[What gave you the idea that this was supposed to be a 4X game? Some elements (the 3D engine in particular) may make into the next Version of Space Empires, but this isn't Space Empires (despite what the name says, just like Descent: Freespace was most certainly not Descent; it's all in the branding ). It's an entirely different game and if you look at it with expectations based on a different kind of game then you're the only one who's at fault if you're disappointed.]

No, Starfury clearly didn't look like a 4x game. That's why I tried the demo instead of buying it. But I do like Starfury's genre of gameplay. So why is it MY fault that the game was poorly developed?

Your expectations are obviously more satisfied sooner than mine. It seems a bit idealistic to allow Starfury to stand on its own and forget why you like the other games you play. However, lock me in a box with Starfury alone, I'm sure I would learn to like it. But I don't have all day to wait for modders or patches or the next generation to make it right.

You obviously understand that the game needs "refining", and I agree. I'll take your advice and move on to games that succeeded.

[DeadZone]

You do rise valid points there

But, most of the ppl that are satisfied with this game are the type of ppl that prefer the ability to mass mod (like myself) or like the prospects of loads of other mods wheather they be fantasy or based on their favourite TV show/movie (ie. Star Trek and Babylon 5) as game makers cannot put in such things without a proper license (which costs) due to copyright laws

Alot of other games I see that I like dont have the modability of SE & SF and anything you can mod takes alot longer and alot more effort and usually requires a team of modders rather than a single modder (Which is why my first mod attempt for SE:IV failed, cos the style of modding was new to me as I was used to being apart of a team)

[NutButter]

I think you nailed it DeadZone. Starfury, like SE4, is a playground for modders. From that standpoint, it deserves alot more respect from those who design and use the mods. To you, it probably appears to be more of a new construction set, and you appreciate the ability to alter its form with new ideas. To me, I appreciate the package as a whole, and don't have the skill or patience to deal with the mechanics to make it work.

To each his own, indeed! Hope I didn't show any disrespect to anyone!