-
Ok, as expected, my post was a maxi-misunderstood one.
Inferno and BP are two different mods but the Earth-GTVA war thing is cliché. The interesting thing is that the player fights for Sol so there are probably going to be several unplausible and overkill battles that end with Earth's victory. The war may be only the beginning, only an irrilevant part of the next BP release, but there's a good chance it'll turn out to be the core. There could be less character-centering parts, or at least less intense ones, due to the fact that it's a war fought by so many and not someone's attempt to get back home.
If you think that wars between Sol and other colonies that restablish contact with it play Colony Wars.
Another important thing is not to blame Inferno for the poor storyline and characterizations. These are bad aspects that affected the old INF releases, not the WIP ones. Writing "INFR1" instead of "Inferno" would be polite, IMO.
-
Ok, as expected, my post was a maxi-misunderstood one.
Inferno and BP are two different mods but the Earth-GTVA war thing is cliché. The interesting thing is that the player fights for Sol so there are probably going to be several unplausible and overkill battles that end with Earth's victory. The war may be only the beginning, only an irrilevant part of the next BP release, but there's a good chance it'll turn out to be the core. There could be less character-centering parts, or at least less intense ones, due to the fact that it's a war fought by so many and not someone's attempt to get back home.
If you think that wars between Sol and other colonies that restablish contact with it play Colony Wars.
Another important thing is not to blame Inferno for the poor storyline and characterizations. These are bad aspects that affected the old INF releases, not the WIP ones. Writing "INFR1" instead of "Inferno" would be polite, IMO.
Man, you always find something in this campaign to complain about, don't you?
It seems to me that you're only annoyed by how BP uses a GTVA/Sol war because you're on an Inferno team, and you fail to realize that a cliché is something that has been done over and over and over. Off the top of my head I can count maybe once or twice, Inferno included.
-
Yeah.
And also, it's clear Darius is retaining the character-centric focus in War in Heaven. The preview talks about the struggles of both Beis (father and son).
It's not at all clear that there will be 'several implausible and overkill battles.' The UEF ships are markedly inferior to their GTVA opponents, and that's made very clear.
Also, Sol society in Blue Planet is very different from that of Inferno. Very different.
-
Actually it's the fact that I'm a Colony Wars fan and I don't see how an Earth-GTVA war alone can result in an interesting game immersion.
And you're wrong - if there's something I don't like about INF it's the EA-GTVA war :P
Also, Sol society in Blue Planet is very different from that of Inferno. Very different.
How does Darius know about INF Sol's society if it's only going to be described in INFA1/INFA2? :rolleyes:
-
Because it's well-established that the EA is a military dictatorship. If that's changed, though, my apologies -- I was presumptuous.
What makes Blue Planet great is the characters, music, and aesthetic. I think we can trust Darius to use this war as a way to explore his characters further while presenting beautiful and sad set-piece battles.
I'm really excited to see how Sam deals with the trauma of fighting -- and fighting well -- against his own people. I've mentioned before that I think it'd be a great touch if you had to help destroy the Aquitaine. And I'm hoping that enemy, i.e. GTVA, capital ships will send distress calls that force the player to empathize with them.
It's going to be heartwrenching. And that's why it'll be immersive and great.
-
Another thing: canonically, the Delta Serpentis node in Sol is located near Earth. What led you to change the location in both AoA and WiH?
Well you can't talk you wanted to move it to Saturn (or was that DySko? Can't remember)
Anyway it could be moved since the Sol Gate is different from the original node.
Inferno and BP are two different mods but the Earth-GTVA war thing is cliché.
It may be cliché, but if Darius does it well, which I think he will, it will be great. If you think including the concept itself is a cliché then I'd have to say you're just being a bit short-sighted. Sure it's been used in a lot of mods, but I'm sure Darius is going to introduce something new and interesting that will be brilliant. Just because it includes a random cliché idea doesn't mean the whole campaign/storyline is cliché. Anything but, in fact, 'cause as we've seen, Blue Planet has a completely different atmosphere to FS2 and is more character driven.
The interesting thing is that the player fights for Sol so there are probably going to be several unplausible and overkill battles that end with Earth's victory. The war may be only the beginning, only an irrilevant part of the next BP release, but there's a good chance it'll turn out to be the core.
You're basically criticizing here something that you have no idea about. You haven't seen a single mission from WiH that includes an implausible and overkill battle and yet, you're already criticizing it. That seems to me completely illogical. Also I'm pretty sure that even if the war is a main bit of the WiH, as I said before it'll be done in such a way that it isn't cliché and done badly. Remember we saw a lot of interesting new themes like the artillery ship, railguns, salvo turrets, etc. which will certainly make battles very interesting if not more believable.
There could be less character-centering parts, or at least less intense ones, due to the fact that it's a war fought by so many and not someone's attempt to get back home.
Not really... IMO, in fact, I actually think this war is an absolutely excellent opportunity for character development. It's humans fighting against humans for no clear reason. There can be character development on both the GTVA and UEF sides. The GTVA are the main enemy now, and they're not bad guys. They're humans just like the UEF, unlike in AoA where the main enemy were the Shivans, who are (as far as we know) faceless pawns. There's so much room for character-centered storyline development, just because there's a war doesn't mean it's not going to have character development.
If you think that wars between Sol and other colonies that restablish contact with it play Colony Wars.
I like cheese.
Another important thing is not to blame Inferno for the poor storyline and characterizations. These are bad aspects that affected the old INF releases, not the WIP ones. Writing "INFR1" instead of "Inferno" would be polite, IMO.
I'm on the team remember. :P
-
Well you can't talk you wanted to move it to Saturn (or was that DySko? Can't remember)
Anyway it could be moved since the Sol Gate is different from the original node.
I can talk because the replacement has a believable explanation. :P
Uh, the Gate is different from the original node? Really?
It may be cliché, but if Darius does it well, which I think he will, it will be great. If you think including the concept itself is a cliché then I'd have to say you're just being a bit short-sighted. Sure it's been used in a lot of mods, but I'm sure Darius is going to introduce something new and interesting that will be brilliant. Just because it includes a random cliché idea doesn't mean the whole campaign/storyline is cliché. Anything but, in fact, 'cause as we've seen, Blue Planet has a completely different atmosphere to FS2 and is more character driven.
You completely misunderstood me.
I'm not doubtful of BP's characterization and plot originality. I'm worried about the battles...what I wouldn't like to see is an unplausible overpwning of GTVA forces entering Sol or defending Delta Serpentis(should the player's faction succeed in the first phase). You may find cool watching 3 Orions die in 2 missions or stuff like that but you have to admit that it would look pretty n00bish, it tends to BoE concepts and player overpresence(the most important event occur when the player is on the battlefield).
You're basically criticizing here something that you have no idea about. You haven't seen a single mission from WiH that includes an implausible and overkill battle and yet, you're already criticizing it. That seems to me completely illogical. Also I'm pretty sure that even if the war is a main bit of the WiH, as I said before it'll be done in such a way that it isn't cliché and done badly. Remember we saw a lot of interesting new themes like the artillery ship, railguns, salvo turrets, etc. which will certainly make battles very interesting if not more believable.
Another misunderstanding, wow...
Isn't the video on YouTube about the war with the GTVA? Don't you see overpwnage?
Not really... IMO, in fact, I actually think this war is an absolutely excellent opportunity for character development. It's humans fighting against humans for no clear reason. There can be character development on both the GTVA and UEF sides. The GTVA are the main enemy now, and they're not bad guys. They're humans just like the UEF, unlike in AoA where the main enemy were the Shivans, who are (as far as we know) faceless pawns. There's so much room for character-centered storyline development, just because there's a war doesn't mean it's not going to have character development.
Third misunderstanding?
Please note the difference between a war and someone's attempt to get back home. In the second case you have a better chance of focusing on characterization but in the first you have other thing to think and talk about. In case of war there will be little space for personal logs and confidential messages and more space for "official" cbs about the current status of the war...they're needed afterall, how can you expect a war to be carried on without informing any combatant?
Obviously, we don't know if the whole BP2 release will be about the war.
I like cheese.
The funny thing about you is the fact that you have poor experience of this genre of games if we exclude FS2. That doesn't put you in the right position to talk about cliches... :p
-
I can talk because the replacement has a believable explanation. :P
Uh, the Gate is different from the original node? Really?
Well, the node moving of its own accord for no reason makes much less sense than the node moving after a 50+ year hiatus.
I'm not doubtful of BP's characterization and plot originality. I'm worried about the battles...what I wouldn't like to see is an unplausible overpwning of GTVA forces entering Sol or defending Delta Serpentis(should the player's faction succeed in the first phase). You may find cool watching 3 Orions die in 2 missions or stuff like that but you have to admit that it would look pretty n00bish, it tends to BoE concepts and player overpresence(the most important event occur when the player is on the battlefield).
I'm pretty sure Darius wouldn't be stupid enough to have 3 Orions dying in the first mission, because he is not a n00b.
And despite telling a story, BP is a game, not a movie. It's a fighter-centric game too, not a space RTS. So it would make sense that the most important events occur when the player (a fighter/bomber) is on the battlefield. If the most important events happen when the player is doing nothing then there's obviously something wrong there. Remember that BP focuses intensely on story but also has to include good gameplay and balance. Therefore, it's much better to experience the events and fight through them than simply hearing about them (What would be better, seeing the Galatea's destruction or just being told about it?).
Isn't the video on YouTube about the war with the GTVA? Don't you see overpwnage?
It's been stated that a single GTD Titan would be able to destroy the UED Solaris one on one. In the video, one destroyer kills 2 corvettes. Wouldn't it be expected that 1 destroyer would be able to destroy 2 corvettes?
Please note the difference between a war and someone's attempt to get back home. In the second case you have a better chance of focusing on characterization but in the first you have other thing to think and talk about. In case of war there will be little space for personal logs and confidential messages and more space for "official" cbs about the current status of the war...they're needed afterall, how can you expect a war to be carried on without informing any combatant?
Obviously, we don't know if the whole BP2 release will be about the war.
There could be both!
For example, there could be a command briefing and then a small chapter at the end in which the pilot admits he has had second thoughts about the events of the previous mission, in which he killed thousands of people on board a destroyer or some such. Sure there's a difference between a war and an attempt to get home, but there is still massive room for character development. Character development of a different dimension but character development none the less.
You completely misunderstood me.
Another misunderstanding, wow...
Third misunderstanding?
u hav2 lrn 2 Xpress urslf mre clearly or els we dun t no wat yor taking about lol like u made loads of speling mistakes an you cont write proprly we cont understand u cant say i misunderstud u since u cont spel lol
I like cheese.
The funny thing about you is the fact that you have poor experience of this genre of games if we exclude FS2. That doesn't put you in the right position to talk about cliches... :p
What the hell does that have to do with cheese? :wtf:
-
This conversation makes me want to kick a puppy off a roof.
-
This conversation makes me want to kick a puppy off a roof.
Oi. You're watching the legendary Mobius - Snail debates.
-
Snail always wins because he doesn't take things too seriously.
Another misunderstanding, wow...
Isn't the video on YouTube about the war with the GTVA? Don't you see overpwnage?
Two Deimos corvettes -- outdated and awful -- are destroyed by a top-of-the-line UEF destroyer. Following which we see a Titan destroyer, a modern GTVA ship, closing in on the UEF destroyer. There is no overpwnage whatsoever.
It has been established by Darius that UEF ships are inferior to their GTVA counterparts in direct fights.
Furthermore, did you miss the part at the end of Blue Planet where most of the GTVA expeditionary force defected to Sol?
Lastly, the amount of time spent on characterization is up to Darius. He's not in any way controlled by the fact that he's depicting a war.
-
Even when I first lurked on HLP, I figured Mobius-Snail debates were normal in their epicity and ... welll ... randomness. I like cheese too btw.
-
Mobius - Snail debates are awesome :P
-
I can't wait 'til I get to see 'em debate politics.
-
Mobius - Snail debates are awesome :P
To you, maybe, but I bet it gives the admins a headache.
-
But you have to admit that some of them are pure and authentic classics.
Now, keeping in mind that this is the Blue Planet: Age of Aquarius release thread...
-
*headache*
Thank you Mobius, your feedback is always welcome. Although it may be best to withhold feedback of the sequel until it gets released, but your enthusiasm is noted :P
-
Mobius and Snail are more alike than they think
-
Mobius and Snail are more alike than they think
That's idiotic. :rolleyes:
-
Mobius and Snail are more alike than they think
Wonder what would happen if we locked them in a room together... :shaking:
***
Anyway, I agree with snail. Criticizing WiH based on the Videos is stupid. There is very little point in criticizing something that hasn't been released yet when you are using test footage as the basis of your argument. I mean, when WiH is released, those missions shown in the videos could be completely different. Therefore I'm willing to reserve judgment until I've played WiH.
Also, just be cause INF R1 was (as far as i know) the first FRED project to feature a major war with the Sol forces, doesn't make it a cliche. IMHO that would make INF R1 a cliche of the Colony Wars games
-
Mobius and Snail are more alike than they think
That's idiotic. :rolleyes:
But they MOD well together, that's a fact.
-
Guys, srsly...
-
Yeah, let's move on.
-
Well, the node moving of its own accord for no reason makes much less sense than the node moving after a 50+ year hiatus.
Why "after" and not "during"? This part of the discussion is based on nothing, not even fanon. In BP the GTVA fleet arrives in Sol and some Aurora fighters need to make the jump to Earth as if everyone already knows that the node isn't where it was supposed to be. There's no explanation. INFA has one and I hope you're not going to bring it to this discussion.
I'm pretty sure Darius wouldn't be stupid enough to have 3 Orions dying in the first mission, because he is not a n00b.
And despite telling a story, BP is a game, not a movie. It's a fighter-centric game too, not a space RTS. So it would make sense that the most important events occur when the player (a fighter/bomber) is on the battlefield. If the most important events happen when the player is doing nothing then there's obviously something wrong there. Remember that BP focuses intensely on story but also has to include good gameplay and balance. Therefore, it's much better to experience the events and fight through them than simply hearing about them (What would be better, seeing the Galatea's destruction or just being told about it?).
Things need to be plausible in a well designed plotline and frankly an Overpresent player who eyewitnesses the most important events even when he shouldn't can be boring. Maybe people play and don't pay attention on this - but I'd suggest you all to wonder if important things really need to happen when the player is there. There are messages, command briefings, briefings and now even cutscenes. As long as the player is in his cockpit things go well and the faction he fights for pwns... do you think it's plausible? I want more defeats because they're normal and, more importantly, human. As you know I'm working on NTV - do you think an overpwnage of GTVA forces and a "perfect" war with no major NTF losses is plausible? I don't think so.
For example, there could be a command briefing and then a small chapter at the end in which the pilot admits he has had second thoughts about the events of the previous mission, in which he killed thousands of people on board a destroyer or some such. Sure there's a difference between a war and an attempt to get home, but there is still massive room for character development. Character development of a different dimension but character development none the less.
Exactly, but you have to admit that it can't have the same intensity. There may be second thoughts, correct, but what about them?
"I killed 2,000 people today [...]"
"I killed 13,000 people today [...]"
"I killed 600 civilians today [...]"
...you can't pretend all these kind of comments to work, at least not always.
What the hell does that have to do with cheese? :wtf:
"I like cheese" was your reply to a comment of mine you have completely ignored. You do have poor gaming experience and although FS is a wonderful series you need to more experience to learn how to deal with stuff like inconsistencies - your way to interpret them is, in fact, uncommon and weird.
Snail always wins because he doesn't take things too seriously.
That is questionable since discussions end with a Mod lock or a loss of interest.
Two Deimos corvettes -- outdated and awful -- are destroyed by a top-of-the-line UEF destroyer. Following which we see a Titan destroyer, a modern GTVA ship, closing in on the UEF destroyer. There is no overpwnage whatsoever.
It has been established by Darius that UEF ships are inferior to their GTVA counterparts in direct fights.
Furthermore, did you miss the part at the end of Blue Planet where most of the GTVA expeditionary force defected to Sol?
Today: two corvettes. Tomorrow: one destroyer. The day after tomorrow: another destroyer and several cruisers...it's cool but it's very hard to find it serious... :rolleyes:
No, I didn't miss that part. I don't see the point, anyway - they're not going to make the difference in terms of firepower. They can be used effectively, though.
-
Ok, time to excise from the AoA feedback thread.
The jump node isn't located near Earth, since it's nowhere stated that jump points orbit around a star at a certain speed, location or direction. Also, the only place where I've seen the node near Earth was the FS1 end cinematic which struck me more as artistic effect than something to be taken as true canon.
-
Why "after" and not "during"? This part of the discussion is based on nothing, not even fanon. In BP the GTVA fleet arrives in Sol and some Aurora fighters need to make the jump to Earth as if everyone already knows that the node isn't where it was supposed to be. There's no explanation. INFA has one and I hope you're not going to bring it to this discussion.
So there's supposed to be some mystic force that moves Jump Nodes around for no damn reason, as you stated in INFA? I don't understand this bit.
What makes more sense:
1) After 50 years of being unstable, an artificial node is created, and the Jump Node location moves from near Earth to somewhere else in the solar system.
2) The Node moves, within a few hours/minutes or so, from Earth to somewhere near Saturn. And I see no explanation, except for the fact that DySko thought "it'd be cool!".
Things need to be plausible in a well designed plotline and frankly an Overpresent player who eyewitnesses the most important events even when he shouldn't can be boring. Maybe people play and don't pay attention on this - but I'd suggest you all to wonder if important things really need to happen when the player is there. There are messages, command briefings, briefings and now even cutscenes. As long as the player is in his cockpit things go well and the faction he fights for pwns... do you think it's plausible? I want more defeats because they're normal and, more importantly, human. As you know I'm working on NTV - do you think an overpwnage of GTVA forces and a "perfect" war with no major NTF losses is plausible? I don't think so.
So... You're saying most events should happen without the player witnessing them, for the sake of realism?
I ask you this. What is more important to Blue Planet - Storytelling, or realism?
Exactly, but you have to admit that it can't have the same intensity. There may be second thoughts, correct, but what about them?
"I killed 2,000 people today [...]"
"I killed 13,000 people today [...]"
"I killed 600 civilians today [...]"
...you can't pretend all these kind of comments to work, at least not always.
Do you really think he'd write the same comment over and over like that?
It seems to me you're assuming that BP will do everything badly.
"I like cheese" was your reply to a comment of mine you have completely ignored. You do have poor gaming experience and although FS is a wonderful series you need to more experience to learn how to deal with stuff like inconsistencies - your way to interpret them is, in fact, uncommon and weird.
I fail to see how this is related, in any way, shape or form, to cheese, which is the subject I brought up.
The fact that you are criticizing something that has nothing to do with the subject (the subject being, of course, cheese) shows you have an incoherent train of thought.
Today: two corvettes. Tomorrow: one destroyer. The day after tomorrow: another destroyer and several cruisers...it's cool but it's very hard to find it serious... :rolleyes:
So you're saying that little or no GTVA ships are allowed to be destroyed for storyline related reasons?
-
The jump node isn't located near Earth, since it's nowhere stated that jump points orbit around a star at a certain speed, location or direction. Also, the only place where I've seen the node near Earth was the FS1 end cinematic which struck me more as artistic effect than something to be taken as true canon.
That's exactly what I thought but, nevertheless, it's canon to have the node near Earth. As you said, however, there's no canon evidence(as far as we know) stating that nodes are affected by gravity and move alongside planets.
So there's supposed to be some mystic force that moves Jump Nodes around for no damn reason, as you stated in INFA? I don't understand this bit.
What makes more sense:
1) After 50 years of being unstable, an artificial node is created, and the Jump Node location moves from near Earth to somewhere else in the solar system.
2) The Node moves, within a few hours/minutes or so, from Earth to somewhere near Saturn. And I see no explanation, except for the fact that DySko thought "it'd be cool!".
There's no "mystic" force...
1) I'm a bit confused...the BP node that connects Delta Serpentis with Sol was created? It wasn't the same node the Lucifer led to collapse with its destruction?
2) The only possible explanation is that the node. That would be strange in terms of canon - if nodes move bloackade ships should move as well, and this doesn't happen.
So... You're saying most events should happen without the player witnessing them, for the sake of realism?
I ask you this. What is more important to Blue Planet - Storytelling, or realism?
No, not most events, but many of them. At least in a war, where the player can't be Overpresent. When a player and/or his ship is/are alone it's quite obvious that he/they eyewitness important events, everything is set about him/them.
You said storytelling - isn't that possible with messages and descriptions?
I fail to see how this is related, in any way, shape or form, to cheese, which is the subject I brought up.
The fact that you are criticizing something that has nothing to do with the subject (the subject being, of course, cheese) shows you have an incoherent train of thought.
You're doing it again - you're basically avoiding to answer me. There's no incoherence, you were the one who changed subject in the first place and you're still doing it.
So you're saying that little or no GTVA ships are allowed to be destroyed for storyline related reasons?
Surely not by the player and in rapid succession...would you like a campaign that resembles "King's Gambit", "The Sicilian Defense" and "Endgame"? There should be more like dogfights, recon missions(if possible), capture operations, depot raids and so on. There are many possibilities, "pure battle" isn't the only one.
Little or no isn't correct - it should be "not so many" or, at least, not in an easy way.
-
That's exactly what I thought but, nevertheless, it's canon to have the node near Earth. As you said, however, there's no canon evidence(as far as we know) stating that nodes are affected by gravity and move alongside planets.
Stars tend to move. If nodes weren't affected by gravity, they'd get lost pretty quickly. Of course, there's no such thing as still in space anyway.
Surely not by the player and in rapid succession...would you like a campaign that resembles "King's Gambit", "The Sicilian Defense" and "Endgame"? There should be more like dogfights, recon missions(if possible), capture operations, depot raids and so on. There are many possibilities, "pure battle" isn't the only one.
Little or no isn't correct - it should be "not so many" or, at least, not in an easy way.
And you judge the frequency of those missions in an unreleased campaign how?
-
There's no "mystic" force...
1) I'm a bit confused...the BP node that connects Delta Serpentis with Sol was created? It wasn't the same node the Lucifer led to collapse with its destruction?
2) The only possible explanation is that the node. That would be strange in terms of canon - if nodes move bloackade ships should move as well, and this doesn't happen.
1) Yes, it's the same node. But in 50 years, it could move, and, as blowfish said, the planets revolve around the sun. Nodes may not necessarily follow them around.
2) "The only possible explanation is the node..." The node what? What would be strange in canon? It appears something was omitted from your post.
No, not most events, but many of them. At least in a war, where the player can't be Overpresent. When a player and/or his ship is/are alone it's quite obvious that he/they eyewitness important events, everything is set about him/them.
You said storytelling - isn't that possible with messages and descriptions?
Classic storytelling rule - Show, don't tell.
Just telling the player stuff without letting him experience it would deduct from the enjoyment of playing the campaign. If you didn't get the point, this is a 'bad' thing.
For example, would you rather just read the storyline of WiH, or would you like to play through it? Same principal.
You're doing it again - you're basically avoiding to answer me. There's no incoherence, you were the one who changed subject in the first place and you're still doing it.
Blue is just how the human brain interprets a certain wavelength of visible light... As such, if all humans die out, does the color blue also cease to exist? If no one hears a tree falling, does it still make a noise? If you go back in time and kill your grandfather, what happens? Why is there more matter than anti-matter in the universe? Is the moon made out of cheese or is there a massive NASA cover up?
Surely not by the player and in rapid succession...would you like a campaign that resembles "King's Gambit", "The Sicilian Defense" and "Endgame"? There should be more like dogfights, recon missions(if possible), capture operations, depot raids and so on. There are many possibilities, "pure battle" isn't the only one.
Is there something wrong with those missions, then? They were fine from my point of view. Besides I doubt all missions would be like that and there's sure to be some kind of twist in the story sooner or later in the campaign. For example, what was the actual reason behind "Forced Ejection", the trailer mission? If the UEF is on the defensive why would it want to get out of its home system? Perhaps they're trying to get in contact with the Vishnans or some such. You can't criticize what you can't see.
Mobius, remember that this is a game. This is supposed to have good gameplay and such, so large battles are necessary; how fun would a game be if no ships were destroyed? And it's supposed to tell a good story, how good would the story be if the player doesn't witness the events?
-
This is nucking futs...
-
This is nucking futs...
Better than those Creationism vs. Evolution debates any day of the week.
-
But every bit as pointless ;) It's not like either side is going to change their minds.
-
1) That's fine but the point is if their movements are influenced by stars, only, or if they have something to do with planets.
2) I post my hopes...
Please note that despite the misunderstandings mine is meant as a constructive criticism - I agree in claiming that BP is one of the best campaigns ever, that's why I'd like the second release to maintain a very high quality standard. :)
1) Yes, it's the same node. But in 50 years, it could move, and, as blowfish said, the planets revolve around the sun. Nodes may not necessarily follow them around.
That's what I said above - we don't know if planets influence their movements. Stars should because they revolve around the center of the galaxy.
Classic storytelling rule - Show, don't tell.
Just telling the player stuff without letting him experience it would deduct from the enjoyment of playing the campaign. If you didn't get the point, this is a 'bad' thing.
For example, would you rather just read the storyline of WiH, or would you like to play through it? Same principal.
I fail to understand why you don't consider cutscenes and temporary player changes. Player means two separate things, the character (1) and the FreeSpace fan (2). (2) can still experience certain events by using another character, not necessarily (1). Missions in which (2) plays the role of the GTVA pilot aren't forbidden, Snail. They'd show many, interesting aspects of the storyline.
Blue is just how the human brain interprets a certain wavelength of visible light... As such, if all humans die out, does the color blue also cease to exist? If no one hears a tree falling, does it still make a noise? If you go back in time and kill your grandfather, what happens? Why is there more matter than anti-matter in the universe? Is the moon made out of cheese or is there a massive NASA cover up?
:wtf:
Is there something wrong with those missions, then? They were fine from my point of view. Besides I doubt all missions would be like that and there's sure to be some kind of twist in the story sooner or later in the campaign. For example, what was the actual reason behind "Forced Ejection", the trailer mission? If the UEF is on the defensive why would it want to get out of its home system? Perhaps they're trying to get in contact with the Vishnans or some such. You can't criticize what you can't see.
In fact I do really have great hopes for possible twists. All I said is that BP should keep its standard of very high quality by managing the GTVA-UEF war in a plausible way. You got my comments in a wrong way and though I sort of hate BP2 even before the release for an apparently unknown reason :wtf:
Mobius, remember that this is a game. This is supposed to have good gameplay and such, so large battles are necessary; how fun would a game be if no ships were destroyed? And it's supposed to tell a good story, how good would the story be if the player doesn't witness the events?
Another thing: you don't tolerate moderation. I said no overpwnages, it doesn't mean "no destructions at all". That would be strange and unplausible.
As I posted above it's player (2) who should eyewitness most if not all events, not necessarily player (1)... :)
-
That's what I said above - we don't know if planets influence their movements. Stars should because they revolve around the center of the galaxy.
There is evidence that Jump Nodes don't move a large distance in a short amount of time. At least 3 jump nodes reside in Asteroid Fields (Antares - Beta Cygni Jump Node, Paving the Way; Epsilon Pegasi - Capella Jump Node, Into the Maelstrom; Regulus - Polaris, Rebels and Renegades). If these Jump Nodes moved around it would be assumed that there would be 'seasons' or time zones during which the Jump Node was located outside of an asteroid field. Which would be pretty strange if you ask me...
I fail to understand why you don't consider cutscenes and temporary player changes. Player means two separate things, the character (1) and the FreeSpace fan (2). (2) can still experience certain events by using another character, not necessarily (1). Missions in which (2) plays the role of the GTVA pilot aren't forbidden, Snail. They'd show many, interesting aspects of the storyline.
That's a pretty good idea actually, and would fit with BP's sort of storytelling style.
Kind of shows that I didn't actually read what you were writing. :blah:
:wtf:
'Cos this is Thriller, Thriller Night, and I can thrill you more than any ghoul could ever daaaare tryyyy...
In fact I do really have great hopes for possible twists. All I said is that BP should keep its standard of very high quality by managing the GTVA-UEF war in a plausible way. You got my comments in a wrong way and though I sort of hate BP2 even before the release for an apparently unknown reason :wtf:
I found some of your comments either unfounded, founded on the basis of blatantly false assumptions or else easily refutable.
Another thing: you don't tolerate moderation. I said no overpwnages, it doesn't mean "no destructions at all". That would be strange and unplausible.
I'm going out to the hyper-bowl.
-
Mobius, you're being incoherent and immature. Furthermore, you're imagining criticisms of a campaign that hasn't been released yet -- and, in the process, convincing yourself that these problems will occur. I imagine when it comes out you'll say 'see, told you so!' no matter what the campaign is like.
Darius, please, ignore him and just keep doing what you're doing. Blue Planet has been great because of the lack of drama surrounding it, so let's try to keep it that way.
-
Mobius, you're being incoherent and immature.
Are you sure you're not getting me confused with him?
-
Allow me to paraphrase.