[Mobius]

Doubtful. We know, for example, that the cutscenes were contracted to a company outside of the game-making publishing group, much less not developed inhouse at . It is therefore far more likely that the cutscenes inaccurately represent the reality of the world the games live in then that the games do.

It may be a batter of computer limitations, which didn't enable to show up the battles they wanted to show. MGS1's (PSX) Metal Gear Rex was far inferior to MGS2's (PS2) Metal Gear Ray even if the technological gap between the two war machines (in the MG continuity, of course) wasn't that big. Hideo Kojima claimed the PSX wasn't powerful enough to support the Metal Gear Rex he wanted for MGS1, so he had to wait for PS2 to develop a war machine which could match (to some degree) his original artwork.


I recall at least 4 games which show the very same differences we see in FreeSpace between ingame sequences and cutscenes.

the cutscene weaponry makes more sense to me though.  turrets shoot things that look like they should be coming out of the turret.

That's a super example. For ages, videogames. One of the oldest games which finally introduced decent turrets was Colony Wars: Red Sun for PSX. Red Sun's predecessors featured ineffective blob turrets because programmers didn't know how to make use of PSX's true capabilities.


This has been discussed in the past and, as usual, it's mostly a matter of opinions with both sides having sufficient proof to sound convincing. I would love to ask programmers if FreeSpace's low speeds and ineffective blob turrets were meant to be replacements of something else.

[The E]

And since this has devolved into another installment of "Mobius has differing opinions about canon", I'm closing this.