Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: IncendiaryLemon on September 30, 2002, 02:44:23 pm
-
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1385026490
I have the FS1 DVD but I hadn't heard of FS2 on DVD. Were there any actual material improvements in that release?
-
Maybe its not real, or somebody just put it on DVD. Anyway, I didn't know you could seel fs2 anymore? Or is that just code modifications? Somebody maybe just put it on a DVD. Anyway, I don't have a credit card, so I can't buy it.
-
Maybee is a 3 CD's in one, those DVD disks can hold up to 7 gigs of memory.
-
I got FS2 DVD......
latest version (1.20)
Extra sounds (screwups etc)
some music
MTS Models
Desktops
Art stuff....
all the missions and such (multiplayer)
only downfall is everytime u insert CD it trys to install FS2 again...
-
All that stuff you said you got with it, it all came with the Sci-Fi SIM of the year edition. MTS models, some .mp3's, desktops, Singleplayer Gauntlet missions, Singleplayer Templar campaign, fs2 demo missions, and some extra single missions. All on Disk three baby!!
EDIT: Oh yeah, and it was already patched. Dang am I spoiled!!!:D
-
What are "MTS models?"
-
my friend has sim of the year but ti won't instal on my comp
-
WareZ are bad, m'kay?
-
Originally posted by diamondgeezer
WareZ are bad, m'kay?
Warez? Where'd that come into it? No one mentioned that... :nervous:
-
I liked this in the Description letter:
(FreeSpace2)It wiped out Conflict: Freespace and Wing Commander everyway possible.
:rolleyes:
FS1 wiped WingCommander 5,however FS1 was/still is ulteriory superior to FS2...
-
Originally posted by BD
FS1 wiped WingCommander 5,however FS1 was/still is ulteriory superior to FS2...
no.
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
no.
Might wanna put in some argument, there ain't much supporting that "no". Well, graphics maybe, that's about it...
-
You must be joking The plotline for FS2 was at least as good as that for FS1 but got hamstringed by the fact that FS3 was never made.
There is much more depth to the storyline in FS2. Look at the number of campaigns with different explainations for the shivans actions in Capella or for what Bosch was up to.
FS2 also allows you to play in a higher resolution and has nebulas which add a lot to the game.
I find I prefer to play in FS2 over FS1. A lot of people installed the port for exactly that reason. I don`t see any kind of huge effort to port FS2 to FS1 :D
-
You must be joking The plotline for FS2 was at least as good as that for FS1 but got hamstringed by the fact that FS3 was never made.
Exactly, which makes the FS2 storyline half good, and FS1 storyline totally good...at least I could "get into" the fs1 storyline (FS1 had emotional involvement on plot levels, instead of FS2's de-personalisation of the plot, you seem simply a cog in a very large wheel, in FS1, you /CAN/ Change the world...), thus not having to fly systematically mission after mission so I would be able to see the Command Briefing (high point of the game), as I did in FS2.
There is much more depth to the storyline in FS2. Look at the number of campaigns with different explainations for the shivans actions in Capella or for what Bosch was up to.
What you call "depth" is the fact that the story after FS2 wasn't finished, so everyone can take their little nutty idea and make his/her own FreeSpace3...and there is nothing "depth"-ty concerning that. And uhh, there were a lot of campaigns after FS1, however since :v: actually managed to make fs1 in the gray area of finished/non-finished (great move in my opinion, for the time being in 1998), there weren't so many options to choose the next story from.
FS2 also allows you to play in a higher resolution and has nebulas which add a lot to the game.
And what exactly do they add, except them being the core for the FS2 story :wtf: The useless tag missions? Lack of sensors? Escort missions that somehow manage to repeat themselves over and over? (not counting the copies of fs1 missions)
I find I prefer to play in FS2 over FS1. A lot of people installed the port for exactly that reason. I don`t see any kind of huge effort to port FS2 to FS1 :D
...because fs1 was SO DAMN GOOD that it just HAD to be put in a better graphic environment? FS2 is about graphics, that's the only big improvment you get.
The only three things good about FS2 are:
- It continues the story where FS1 left it (D'OH)
- It has better graphics(probably the biggest factor why people percieve it as "better")
- By :v: and Interplay parting ways, it gave everyone the time to think up their own FS3, so those people were able to waste additional 2-3 years (well not waste, I mean it is fun for the people doing it, as much fun as it is for me playing it, however if fs3 was released 2-3 years ago [as it should have been, {there was only a one year difference between fs1 and fs2}] then none of this would ever exist) in making their own campaigns.
...and that's it...while FS1 still heavily dominates the mission quality/sounds/animations/story (and not only because it managed to finish, but because it wasn't stretching out into oblivion, and trying to leave the important bits for its successor), not to mention its content/originality.
What was so great about fs2? Beams? Flaks? I'd take a 100 of those rupturing lasers - aka 3_direct_hits_and_you_=_dead (with sheilds of course :wtf: ), than any of the beams from FS2.
FS1 was balanced too, the ships were all equalistic, and the weapons were severely limited by energy intake if they were good (banshee), also flail was tactical, not like in FS2 (morning star) where it can actually be used to kill if you're good enough, in fs1 you would take a very very long time to do that....in fs2 shields have no real effect, in fs1 you could actually take the energy in your shields to hold off a few missiles and such.
-
the only way FS2 was superior to FS1 (excluding gfx/specialeffects) imho, is the net code, and even that's debatable....because in FS1 the net code didn't smooth out... but it also didn't register hits on your own computer if no impact was placed (something which leads to FS2 pilots claiming "I hit you but no effect!!!" -- which shows a total lack of understanding of lag).
FS2's storyline was less well thought out, less complete (even if you disreguard the lack of FS3)...
The other is a technical thing....FS2 is slightly less hackable...
Other then that, ermmmmmmmmmm......
FS1 is FAR better then FS2...
-
I actually like FS2 much better; just about every aspect is better for me. :D Probably the only exceptions are that some of the missions were played without shields, which raised the intensity quite a bit, and that the default multiplayer missions were better though out, gameplay-wise. (no RI-type missions and so on)
Exactly, which makes the FS2 storyline half good, and FS1 storyline totally good...at least I could "get into" the fs1 storyline (FS1 had emotional involvement on plot levels, instead of FS2's de-personalisation of the plot, you seem simply a cog in a very large wheel, in FS1, you /CAN/ Change the world...), thus not having to fly systematically mission after mission so I would be able to see the Command Briefing (high point of the game), as I did in FS2.
This is actually much more realistic though; this in my opinion was one of the best things about FS2's story structure, and which is absent in most other space sims. (FS1 did very well, but FS2 was even better in this respect) You are not a super-hotshot fighter ace that can take on entire armies alone, but you are simply a very small and insignificant part of a large whole.
What you call "depth" is the fact that the story after FS2 wasn't finished, so everyone can take their little nutty idea and make his/her own FreeSpace3...and there is nothing "depth"-ty concerning that. And uhh, there were a lot of campaigns after FS1, however since actually managed to make fs1 in the gray area of finished/non-finished (great move in my opinion, for the time being in 1998), there weren't so many options to choose the next story from.
Well, it certainly was more detailed than that of FS1. Lots of sub-plots within the main one, and there was much information in the command briefings about other battles going on simultaneously alongside the ones you are involved in. Also, notice all the errors and stuff in the command briefings in FS1 (nodemap, ship movements, etc.); FS2 didn't have any of that. Originality is not a big factor for me, but FS1 was basically a fairly standard, save-the-earth-from-aliens type story, although with a lot more detail, while I have not seen anything else even remotely like FS2 out there. Then FS2 had a general feeling of mystery to it that was not there at all in FS1; it kept you thinking and theorizing about the enemy. Silent Threat also did this quite well but was hampered by poor mission design.
What was so great about fs2? Beams? Flaks? I'd take a 100 of those rupturing lasers - aka 3_direct_hits_and_you_=_dead (with sheilds of course ), than any of the beams from FS2.
They never, ever hit you, though; way too slow. :p
By the way, how are things over at the SSC forums? I have not been there for months now; been somewhat busy with other things and just keep forgetting to stop by. :p I'll start coming over there regularly again sometime. :)
-
Originally posted by BD
Exactly, which makes the FS2 storyline half good, and FS1 storyline totally good...at least I could "get into" the fs1 storyline (FS1 had emotional involvement on plot levels, instead of FS2's de-personalisation of the plot, you seem simply a cog in a very large wheel, in FS1, you /CAN/ Change the world...), thus not having to fly systematically mission after mission so I would be able to see the Command Briefing (high point of the game), as I did in FS2.
Sorry but I prefer the FS2 approach. You aren`t a superhuman. Just a pilot who is recognised as being better than average. No "Alpha 1 you and you alone can save the day!"
Originally posted by BD
What you call "depth" is the fact that the story after FS2 wasn't finished, so everyone can take their little nutty idea and make his/her own FreeSpace3...and there is nothing "depth"-ty concerning that. And uhh, there were a lot of campaigns after FS1, however since :v: actually managed to make fs1 in the gray area of finished/non-finished (great move in my opinion, for the time being in 1998), there weren't so many options to choose the next story from.
Nope. I disagree there too. FS2 had a lot going on. In FS1 the entire plotline is a standard Alien invasion - old enemies must join together or be defeated style plotline. At the end the good guys find a chink in the enemies otherwise impenatrable armour and use that to destroy the death star... Sorry typo, I mean Lucifer.
Admittedly FS1 did it brilliantly but that's all there was to it.
FS2 has so much going on that FS1 seems very linear in comparison. First the shivans appear to be up to something completely different from any other sci-fi game I`ve seen. They have the forces to wipe out the GTVA and yet stay their hand and choose to blow up capella instead.
Then we have Bosch's insistance that the Terrans need to join up with the shivans rather than fighting them. What's all that about?
Even if these questions would have been answered by FS3 they were still presented first in FS2 so it has much more depth in my opinion.
Originally posted by BD
And what exactly do they add, except them being the core for the FS2 story :wtf: The useless tag missions? Lack of sensors? Escort missions that somehow manage to repeat themselves over and over? (not counting the copies of fs1 missions) [Snip]
...while FS1 still heavily dominates the mission quality/sounds/animations/story (and not only because it managed to finish, but because it wasn't stretching out into oblivion, and trying to leave the important bits for its successor), not to mention its content/originality.
I LIKE nebula missions. Not being able to see your enemy clearly makes a lot of missions more interesting. Yeah FS2 had a few weak missions but it had plenty of strong and original ones.
I can name similarly useless missions in FS1. What about the first one with a shivan Cain in it? Where you are ordered not to attack it for no good reason until it blows up the ship you were supposed to be captuing? Why not at least design the mission so that you were told to disarm the ship?
I like the vasudan exchange missions. The SOC ones are also fun as they don`t have you doing the same old things over and over again and the final mission has a far more unexpected end than anything in the heavily predictable final mission of FS1. Overall I`d say that the mission design of FS2 was better than that for FS1.
And as for the music. I prefer the music from FS2 anyway. I`ll quite happily sit and listen to Brief 4 or Brief 1 on repeat while FREDding
Originally posted by BD
What was so great about fs2? Beams? Flaks? I'd take a 100 of those rupturing lasers - aka 3_direct_hits_and_you_=_dead (with sheilds of course :wtf: ), than any of the beams from FS2.
So all you care about is the damage they cause to you? Nevermind that beams make missions look better and also give you something to do even in the missions with the big capships (such as High Noon and Bearbaiting) instead of just making you have to fly about attacking fighters which are little more than a nuisence to ships that size anyway.
Originally posted by BD
FS1 was balanced too, the ships were all equalistic....
I`ll give you that. They were all ridiculously powerful once the GTA had shields. A fighter shouldn`t be able to singlehandedly take down any craft in the game
-
Originally posted by CP5670
This is actually much more realistic though; this in my opinion was one of the best things about FS2's story structure, and which is absent in most other space sims. (FS1 did very well, but FS2 was even better in this respect) You are not a super-hotshot fighter ace that can take on entire armies alone, but you are simply a very small and insignificant part of a large whole.
Yes, and as we all know, FS2 is based on a real life story :wtf:...I'm not there to be a part of a whole with the AI that gets torn in 20 seconds, I'm there to be the best, and actually do something thats more important than nuke a sitting Orion...
Well, it certainly was more detailed than that of FS1. Lots of sub-plots within the main one, and there was much information in the command briefings about other battles going on simultaneously alongside the ones you are involved in. Also, notice all the errors and stuff in the command briefings in FS1 (nodemap, ship movements, etc.); FS2 didn't have any of that. Originality is not a big factor for me, but FS1 was basically a fairly standard, save-the-earth-from-aliens type story, although with a lot more detail, while I have not seen anything else even remotely like FS2 out there. Then FS2 had a general feeling of mystery to it that was not there at all in FS1; it kept you thinking and theorizing about the enemy. Silent Threat also did this quite well but was hampered by poor mission design.
[/b]
Yeah Silent Threat had poor but moreover pointless missions. The thing in FS2 with the mystery doesn't rock my socks, no matter how many sub-stories there are. Sure it's all nice and getting you into the story, but I was more excited (read: still am) when I see that animation where a couple of terrans get devoured by the big nasty shivans, than all of the ani's put together in fs2. The "where did Bosch go" and "oh NTF, and oh ETAK" etc. doesn't really compensate for, let's say, the missions that are horridly wasting my time. Comparing to the capture of Alexandar McCarthy, that mission was much more worth, fun and thrilling than the 100 missions trying to capture Bosch, but then he somehow escapes in the end, and oh wait, I JUST WAISTED ABOUT 3 HOURS!!! I'm not saying that the story of fs2 sucks...it was really good...just not THAT good...also fs1 went on a much larger scale...fs2 just kept to capella and gamma draconis, and some binary node where the main thing went on...the NTF parts were just choking some insignificant rebellion, which I knew will be beaten during the middle (or at the end) since I began playing the game for the first time...
They never, ever hit you, though; way too slow. :p
Keeps you on your toes, not to stop too much, and they do hit you sometimes...even I can't evade the fast ones all the time if I'm doing something else (well maybe if I were paying FULL attention, then I'd evade em). Whats the point with fighter beams? They are gonna hit you, you know it, the beam knows it, you can't escape other than going blindly for the turret thinking "will it shread me, how much will it shread me?"
By the way, how are things over at the SSC forums? I have not been there for months now; been somewhat busy with other things and just keep forgetting to stop by. :p I'll start coming over there regularly again sometime. :)
Check your E-mail and ICQ sometimes...I send you an e-mail not so long ago...
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Sorry but I prefer the FS2 approach. You aren`t a superhuman. Just a pilot who is recognised as being better than average. No "Alpha 1 you and you alone can save the day!"
Yes and I come here and play games because I just want to be another ant in the colony. Usually my real life is filled with adventures that include saving the Earth/Universe, so I need to come here and relieve the stress by being put just a bit above the average :wtf:.
Besides, it took 4 wings to get those reactors, not only myself (although that's doable if you play on very easy......). There wasn't anything superhuman about that...
FS2 had a lot going on. In FS1 the entire plotline is a standard Alien invasion - old enemies must join together or be defeated style plotline. At the end the good guys find a chink in the enemies otherwise impenatrable armour and use that to destroy the death star... Sorry typo, I mean Lucifer.
Yeah it's so much better to lose how much...millions upon millions of people and not being able to win in the end? The only releif I had was to stay behind and have myself killed too with the others, just because it was the best option to take. I only left Capella once just to see what the briefing gave afterwards, each and every time I would just shut my engines and look at the sun getting bigger... at least in FS1 you survive and get the bad guys...
Admittedly FS1 did it brilliantly but that's all there was to it.
FS2 has so much going on that FS1 seems very linear in comparison. First the shivans appear to be up to something completely different from any other sci-fi game I`ve seen. They have the forces to wipe out the GTVA and yet stay their hand and choose to blow up capella instead.
Then we have Bosch's insistance that the Terrans need to join up with the shivans rather than fighting them. What's all that about?
Even if these questions would have been answered by FS3 they were still presented first in FS2 so it has much more depth in my opinion.
a) Bosch pretty much explains that question
b) Petrarch told you (in a suptle way) a reason why they blew up Capella :wtf:
I LIKE nebula missions. Not being able to see your enemy clearly makes a lot of missions more interesting. Yeah FS2 had a few weak missions but it had plenty of strong and original ones.
I can name similarly useless missions in FS1. What about the first one with a shivan Cain in it? Where you are ordered not to attack it for no good reason until it blows up the ship you were supposed to be captuing? Why not at least design the mission so that you were told to disarm the ship?
Is that the only one you can think of?
Not to mention that it wasn't useless at all. It was a nice way of showing how priorities change, what's expendable and what isn't. When Taranis jumped in it suddenly became more important to the intelligence and the Vasudans were worthless - "Alpha, DO NOT engage the Taranis", so they let it go to capture it later, tow it to Tombaugh, etc. etc.
I like the vasudan exchange missions. The SOC ones are also fun as they don`t have you doing the same old things over and over again and the final mission has a far more unexpected end than anything in the heavily predictable final mission of FS1. Overall I`d say that the mission design of FS2 was better than that for FS1.
And as for the music. I prefer the music from FS2 anyway. I`ll quite happily sit and listen to Brief 4 or Brief 1 on repeat while FREDding
I'll give you that, the SOC missions and the Exchange Programme were the original things in the mission. It's just that after playing the 20 missions in the Vasudan outfit, 12 of them are boring garbage, makes me wanna quit the game for awhile because I can't stand it anymore. SOC missions were cool...no real objections on them...they were one of the only ones that were actually good...in fact "into the lions den" was the best mission in fs2 for me...but a hefty amount of missions were "copied" from fs1...re-runs...werther it had a reason or not (past repeats itself, stuff like that), I don't care, it was BORING.
So all you care about is the damage they cause to you? Nevermind that beams make missions look better and also give you something to do even in the missions with the big capships (such as High Noon and Bearbaiting) instead of just making you have to fly about attacking fighters which are little more than a nuisence to ships that size anyway.
And how they cause it...read the reply I gave to CP.
Fighter beams at least...the cap beams I can understand, Lucy used them in FS1, there needs to be a counter on Terran/Vasudan part...but fighter beams...Lucy how advanced it was, didn't have fighter beams...flak i can understand, but fighter beams are just added annoyance to extend the mission for about 3 seconds each time it hits you...
A fighter shouldn`t be able to singlehandedly take down any craft in the game
And you base that conclusion on?
-
Nowdays, a single F/A-18 Super Hornet can take out a very large ship, if it doesn't get hit with an AA missile.
-
Yes, and as we all know, FS2 is based on a real life story :wtf:...I'm not there to be a part of a whole with the AI that gets torn in 20 seconds, I'm there to be the best, and actually do something thats more important than nuke a sitting Orion...
Thing is, it needs to make some degree of logical sense, and thus become believable. The world does not revolve around a single person; it is the other way around. (what would the rest of the GTVA be thinking? people hear on the news, "the great Alpha 1 single-handedly took down two more Shivan destroyers yesterday, raising his kill count to 5325;" that would sound ridiculous :D) Although actually, FS2 is pretty much based on real life, as almost every game is; it is a depiction of what humans might be doing in the future, and is quite consistent with the science and politics of today. One GTVA pilot becoming that good and smashing entire fleets is like, say, the GTVA suddenly falling apart into independent factions for no reason; it simply doesn't make sense. The AI issue is more of a technical thing, but the enemy does not send waves upon waves of fighters and cruisers just to hopefully put a scratch in the almighty Alpha 1. :p (it sometimes does turn out like that due to the crappy AI, but ideally it should not be)
Yeah Silent Threat had poor but moreover pointless missions. The thing in FS2 with the mystery doesn't rock my socks, no matter how many sub-stories there are. Sure it's all nice and getting you into the story, but I was more excited (read: still am) when I see that animation where a couple of terrans get devoured by the big nasty shivans, than all of the ani's put together in fs2. The "where did Bosch go" and "oh NTF, and oh ETAK" etc. doesn't really compensate for, let's say, the missions that are horridly wasting my time. Comparing to the capture of Alexandar McCarthy, that mission was much more worth, fun and thrilling than the 100 missions trying to capture Bosch, but then he somehow escapes in the end, and oh wait, I JUST WAISTED ABOUT 3 HOURS!!! I'm not saying that the story of fs2 sucks...it was really good...just not THAT good...also fs1 went on a much larger scale...fs2 just kept to capella and gamma draconis, and some binary node where the main thing went on...the NTF parts were just choking some insignificant rebellion, which I knew will be beaten during the middle (or at the end) since I began playing the game for the first time...
I thought the FS2 missions were actually much better thought out; a lot more missions were distinctly memorable. Some filler missions are probably necessary to give the storyline a sense of plausibility but even there it is a good idea to put in some minor twist or something. Are you talking about missions for which your side loses? There were a lot of those in FS1 too; the Ramses mission, the shivan cargo depot ambush, the HOL outpost attack, the Galatea death mission, and the shivan cargo capture mission to name a few. Besides, that makes sense anyway; how can you expect to win every mission you partake in? The scale of the entire war was actually about the same, but your pilot stayed in only a couple of systems along with the rest of the fleet. As for the last part, you would know that in any game in existence, no matter how powerful the enemy is, your side will always somehow win, or there would be little point in playing through the game, so that doesn't mean much. :p
Keeps you on your toes, not to stop too much, and they do hit you sometimes...even I can't evade the fast ones all the time if I'm doing something else (well maybe if I were paying FULL attention, then I'd evade em). Whats the point with fighter beams? They are gonna hit you, you know it, the beam knows it, you can't escape other than going blindly for the turret thinking "will it shread me, how much will it shread me?"
The turrets? You mean the laser blob things, right? It seems that the slowest ships can dodge those without any problems at all on the highest difficulties. And for most of the capital ships, this is all the weaponry they had. Actually, I think that this was by far the biggest problem with FS1 - capital ships really could not fight back at all - and even if you were a little recon fighter or something, it was still possible to still crush destroyers by the numbers given enough time. If things work out this way, there is no point in building anything except just huge swarms of fighters, and have Alpha 1 train everyone. :D I remember that the first thing I did when I started modding FS1 was to give all of the destroyers different colored versions of Shivan Super Laser-like things along with making the turret shots move and fire four or five times faster, so that the capital ships would actually have some point to being in the game. You are right about the last part, and that raises the game intensity significantly when going larger enemy ships, whereas in FS1 you knew you would never be hit by the destroyer itself, but only by its fighter wings.
Check your E-mail and ICQ sometimes...I send you an e-mail not so long ago...
hmm...which address did you send it to? For a while I was changing mine every few weeks, so I think I have went through five or six of them in the last few months. :p :D My current one is [email protected] . Anyway, I will be coming to the SSC forums more often soon. ;)
-
Originally posted by BD
Yes and I come here and play games because I just want to be another ant in the colony. Usually my real life is filled with adventures that include saving the Earth/Universe, so I need to come here and relieve the stress by being put just a bit above the average :wtf:.
Besides, it took 4 wings to get those reactors, not only myself (although that's doable if you play on very easy......). There wasn't anything superhuman about that...
That was one of the few non-superhuman missions! The Lucifer had an achillies heel and that was a mission where you exploited it. I had no problem with that mission. I had a problem with all the other missions where alpha 1 does all the work. I don`t feel the need to play a superhuman character. I prefer to play an ordinary solider who manages to win some important victories. FS2 stikes the balance well between the stupidity of missions where everything counts on one fighter dispite there being 20 others present and the pointlessness of missions where the player can have no effect on the outcome of the mission.
FS1 leans more towards the "Evereything counts on you Alpha 1 - The rest of your wings are just cannon fodder"
Originally posted by BD
Yeah it's so much better to lose how much...millions upon millions of people and not being able to win in the end? The only releif I had was to stay behind and have myself killed too with the others, just because it was the best option to take. I only left Capella once just to see what the briefing gave afterwards, each and every time I would just shut my engines and look at the sun getting bigger... at least in FS1 you survive and get the bad guys...
I didn`t say that I wanted the shivans to win. I`m just saying that the indestrutable ship having an achillies heel is an old concept and certainly not original.
The end of FS2 wasn`t a complete loss for the GTVA. They were planning to seal off Capella anyway but the shivans suprised them by doing it themselves.
Originally posted by BD
a) Bosch pretty much explains that question
b) Petrarch told you (in a suptle way) a reason why they blew up Capella :wtf:
Nope. Bosch did NOT tell us why he wanted an alliance with the shivans. He only told us that humanity needed it. You can see he believed that the Terrans had no future with the vasudans but he never explained why.
I don`t know. Maybe you`ve got the teachers guide edition which explains why :D
As for the destruction of Capella even if you agree with Petrach's explaination (and he only raises it as a possibility himself!) That still doesn`t explain why they didn`t wipe out the GTVA first. In FS1 the Shivans were trying to wipe out the GTVA a very simple goal. Even if the shivans were trying to return home that still means that FS2 had more depth than FS1. The fact that the shivans goal wasn`t what we thought it was is far more suprising than anything in the FS1 plotline.
Originally posted by BD
Not to mention that it wasn't useless at all. It was a nice way of showing how priorities change, what's expendable and what isn't. When Taranis jumped in it suddenly became more important to the intelligence and the Vasudans were worthless - "Alpha, DO NOT engage the Taranis", so they let it go to capture it later, tow it to Tombaugh, etc. etc.
So why not allow alpha 1 to disarm the taranis? That would make it possible to capture both ships.
Originally posted by BD
I'll give you that, the SOC missions and the Exchange Programme were the original things in the mission. It's just that after playing the 20 missions in the Vasudan outfit, 12 of them are boring garbage, makes me wanna quit the game for awhile because I can't stand it anymore. SOC missions were cool...no real objections on them...they were one of the only ones that were actually good...in fact "into the lions den" was the best mission in fs2 for me...but a hefty amount of missions were "copied" from fs1...re-runs...werther it had a reason or not (past repeats itself, stuff like that), I don't care, it was BORING.
I found the officer exchange missions no more boring than many similar missions in FS1. If you`re complaining that they were boring cause you`d already played missions similar to them in FS1 that is a poor arguement. You can`t say that is a reason FS1 is better cause if you had played FS2 first and then gone back to FS1 you would have found them boring in FS1 instead.
Originally posted by BD
Fighter beams at least...the cap beams I can understand, Lucy used them in FS1, there needs to be a counter on Terran/Vasudan part...but fighter beams...Lucy how advanced it was, didn't have fighter beams...flak i can understand, but fighter beams are just added annoyance to extend the mission for about 3 seconds each time it hits you...
Of course you don`t like fighter beams. They prevent you from being Super-Uber-Pilot. Able to destroy shivan juggernauts singlehanded!
I don`t think that a single fighter should be able to take out capships without a good deal of personal risk. If fighters can take out caps with ease why would the GTVA waste time building the damn things? Why not just build fighters and destroyers to carry them?
In sci-fi it is generally taken as a given that a single fighter can`t destroy bigger, more powerful ships than him unless he comes up with a clever trick, achilles heel or has some kind of superpower. What you're saying is that FS1 is correct to stand that convention on its head and say that there is no good reason that a fighter (often armed with weapons that have trouble destroying ships its own size) shouldn't be able to destroy ships 100 times its own size.
I like FS2 for that reason. If you`re in a bomber you CAN destroy ships bigger than you but you'd better employ a stratagy other than fly straight at it and firing your guns cause you`ll be swatted down like a fly which is exactly the way I feel it should be.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
So why not allow alpha 1 to disarm the taranis? That would make it possible to capture both ships.
Funny thing is, I actually did that in the mission. And then wondered, why the hell there was no Return to base order. Stupid mission.
-
And what exactly do they (nebulae add, except them being the core for the FS2 story The useless tag missions? Lack of sensors? Escort missions that somehow manage to repeat themselves over and over? (not counting the copies of fs1 missions)
Lack of sensors. True. Very different.
Lack of visibility. Ships are much harder to hit in the nebula.
EM storms, even though the real EM was only in one mission.
And even without the EM storms, the lightning made seeing things a lot harder in the nebula.
-
Nebulas cause havok for sensors and visibility - they were another obstacle to overcome - I loved the nebby missions!
Also, when it comes to beams, they're actually more realistic than any of the other weapons, as they're basically HUGE lasers! And a laser is a BEAM not a pulse!
The FS2 'lasers' are FAR TOO SLOW to be lasers.
-
Nebbys....heh
I might point out that being in a nebula doesn't effect my performance in the slightest, in the SOC Rescue mission i spent almost my whole time (every time) under emp effect, i don't need my sensors.... most people who complain about nebulae, are those who can't play, OR, those with poor comps (like bds...sorta) who lag in nebs.. but neb motion can also give motion sickness and stuff, hehe, there are other problems... anyway
FS2 is dull, because you still CAN be invulnerable mr. i could save the universe -- you can still take out everything but stupid hard to kill caps......
i mean, my wingmen are even more of a liability in every mission then FS1.
You still have to do EVERYTHING yourself, only the escort missions at the end really require help from your wingmates (like luci did in fs1....)
In FS2, I don't know how many of you play FS2 multi, but BD and I can take out a full fleet probably on our own with 10 respawns if we're sleeping. (Breaking the seal, on our own, with wingmen yeah....but just us two and 6bombers, the whole shivan armada from FS1 in one mission (equiv fire power in my estimation). the only reason we ever fail is our Corvy dies...
The main complaint i have is fighters prims inability to destroy most caps... in fs1 it was good to see that you could do that....
hhmm.....
Generally...FS2 seemed fake, because you could be the greatest pilot in the universe, and have the skill to do anything....but you're limited by the games designs....blah!!!!!
taking out 100fighters and losing 10% hull then not being able to do anything against the ship it came outta so the game just sits there for ages being boooorrrrrrriiiiiinnnnnnngggggg........
yup FS2's great!:rolleyes:
-
Just for the record, I can fight in the nebula just the same as I can fight in open space, it's just a stupid add on in my opinion, which doesn't really serve a purpose other than telling a tale how a star exploded :wtf:
EMP nebula? I don't fly anything that needs aspect lock so it doesn't bother me...
-
The nebula's there because it looks cool, and makes things hard to see. It's not ****ing Faust here, why should there be any better reason than that it's pretty?
-
Werther it's pretty or not doesn't (read: shouldn't) have much baring on werther the game is good or not...you can have a million nebulas but if the missions are as bad and repetitive as they are in most cases in fs2, then it doesn't really help you does it?
-
Nebulas are kind of cool sometimes when you turn down the brightness, and all you see are your sensors. Its kind of cool to be fighting, and having to rely on you lead indicator and HUD gauges. Makes for a change.
A few of those nebulas are so dang bright! The one in the fs2 demo is so bright it freis my retina...well....almost.....maybe......okay...it doesn't..:nervous:
-
I like Fs2 better than FS1 because the command briefings were more detailed, you were transferred from squadron to squadron depending on the type of mission you had to fly, the nebula missions (while I dislike anything that hampers my visibility) looked incredible, and had well-scripted and believable characters in the story.
Take Bosch for instance. Most people will respond immediately that he's basically another Hitler. But we see in his monologues that he really isn't. He's a tortured soul who really believes that he's acting in humanity's ultimate interest. He hates the NTF that he created (he even calls them "an army of stupid cattle!") but is uterly convinced that if didn't make every effort (including creating the NTF, which Bosch viewed as a necessary evil) to ally with the Shivans, then humanity would become extinct in only a few years. Bosch is DEFINITELY not a one-dimensional bad guy; he has real motivation and defies easy stereotypes.
I think Snipes as a character was so well-scripted and interesting, I don't even need to explain why. He is anything but your run-of-the-mill cookie cutter soldier stereotype...and if you don't believe me, you need to play ALL of the SOC missions again.
As for feeling like a cog in the machine in FS2, that's realistic. Any video game involving a military, whether an army on the ground or a starfleet, shouldn't really, at least IMO, allow the player to be an uber-soldier unless he has some sort of superpower or is exploiting a weakness, just like karajorma said. Wars very rarely, if at all, hinge on the accomplishments of a single soldier. One man CAN make a difference, but that should only happen in rare circumstances, not throughout an entire game.
Fs2 is geared alot more than FS1 to the old military maxim: "Amateurs study tactics, but experts study logistics." FS2 had a lot more support ships (freighters, hospital ships, AWACS, etc.) and protecting these ships is what winning a space war is all about. You can have the best fleet in the Universe with the nastiest fighters, but if your supply lines get cut, you wont be able to feed, arm or heal your fleet. War isn't just about fighting; it's also about protecting your military infrastructure (command and control centers so your generals have a place to plan future missions; hospitals to heal your wounded; scouts and spies to gather intelligence on the enemy; supply lines to make sure your fleet stays well-equiped and well-repaired). FS2 seemed alot more geared to this than FS1 did, so it seemed a lot more realistic.
I remember reading a review of FS2 just after it came out (I think it was in CGW, but I need to check) that said while FS1 had "a more epic feel," FS2 was a better game in every other respect, and I agree.
-
Yeah, they even have the good old "lets build a really big fort that CANT possibly get killed!!! it'll just draw ALL The firepower from the enemy!!"
Logistical deployment is for those who do not care about anything but their military resources.
Tactical and Logistical deployment works occasionally, but modern 'tactics' have this stupid tendancy of having stuff like the collosus... sheesh...
baka....
-
Logistical deployment is for those who do not care about anything but their military resources.
uh...so, what else is there to care about in a war? :p
-
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Yeah, they even have the good old "lets build a really big fort that CANT possibly get killed!!! it'll just draw ALL The firepower from the enemy!!"
:lol: I call this the "Titanic Syndrome." As in: "This ship is so big, it can't possibly sink! God Himself could not sink this ship!"
Maybe it's my jadedness talking, but I get leery of claims of what God can't do. Let's see, God created the Universe, but can't shove a hundreds-of-tons-of-iron ship underwater? God doesn't need to sink the Titanic, He'll just get gravity and the negation of buoyancy from compartment flooding to do it for Him! DUH! :lol:
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Logistical deployment is for those who do not care about anything but their military resources.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, QD. When you're trying to win a war, it's all about preserving your military resources, or rather, preserving as much of them as possible, then deploying the least amount of military resources necessary in order to get the greatest return for the risk involved in deploying them. Sure, you need to preserve military resources as much as possible, but you'll eventually have to spend some of it to fight the enemy and there will be losses as a result.
Preservation of military resources is a means, not an end.
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Tactical and Logistical deployment works occasionally, but modern 'tactics' have this stupid tendancy of having stuff like the collosus... sheesh...
baka....
Having a powerful weapon like the Colossus isn't necessarily a bad thing. Remember, it was essential in helping to end the NTF Rebellion; we saw that when it took out the NTD Repulse and rear Admiral Koth.
You also need to remember that the Colossus was designed to repel Lucifer superdestroyers; when the Colossus was designed, no one knew about the Sathanas juggernauts.
Just think how useful a Colossus would be in hit-and-run raids on lone Sathanas juggernauts. Have the Colossus jump in behind a juggernaut, beam it to death from behind (where the juggernaut's main beams can't fire back) and jump out before reinforcements arrive. This is certainly a good tactic for deploying the Colossus when you have to contend with a juggernaut fleet.
No doubt some of you are thinking: guerilla tactics with a Colossus? Is that even feasible? Hey, anything is possible. The Iceni was only a rinky-dink command frigate that would have had trouble giving a Deimos a run for its money. But with Bosch (with his tactical and strategic brilliance) on board, the Iceni was the equivalent of a whole fleet! Think of the possibilities of intelligently deploying a ship like the Colossus....
The reason the Colossus was lost was because its captain refused to jump out when it was been beamed to death by a Sathanas. The Colossus' captain sacrificed himself and his ship and crew to buy the GTD Bastion more time to seal the Epsilon Pegasi node. The fact that he only bought a few more seconds (rather than run away to fight again later) is what made his tactic a failed one. Just think how much better the evacuation of Capella would have proceeded if the Colossus had jumped out and helped to secure the Vega node before the supernova occured. Thousands more refugees might have made it out before Capella blew had the Colossus been there.
I see people designing their campaigns saying that the Colossus had a "design flaw" and that was what was responsible for its destruction. I disagree. The Colossus was sufficiently designed, it's just that its captain sacrificed it to help save the GTVA. Arguably, he made a tactical error in doing so, but it was the captain's decision, not any "design flaw" as such, that resulted in the death of the Colossus.
-
But what about the Colossus' reactor and the weapon capacitors?
HOW MANY times did she nearly burn out the weapons? Or something went wrong?:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Killfrenzy
But what about the Colossus' reactor and the weapon capacitors?
HOW MANY times did she nearly burn out the weapons? Or something went wrong?:rolleyes:
IIRC, only twice did "things go wrong" onboard the Colossus.
1) The first time was when the Colossus nearly burned out her heat sinks when she fought the first Sathanas juggernaut in capella, true, but as I said, the Colossus wasn't designed to go against Sathanas juggernauts. That's not a design flaw, per se; it just means that the Colossus designers only anticipated that she would be fighting Lucifers in the assumption that the Lucy was the shivans' most powerful ship. No one knew at the time the Colossus was designed and built that Sathanas juggernauts even existed. Technically, that's not a design flaw; it's an after-the-fact oversight that could not have been prevented.
Just because you build a big ship that winds up getting destroyed by a bigger ship doesn't mean your ship had a design flaw.
2) The second time "something went wrong" onboard the Colossus was when her weapons refused to fire on the Iceni as it was fleeing through the Knossos portal. But that was due directly to sabotage from NTF spies already onboard posing as GTVA crewmen. And again, sabotage is not equivalent to an inherent design flaw.
If there is any evidence that the Colossus suffered from a design flaw in the main campaign, I haven't seen it yet.
-
well, the only time the big C burnt out its heat sinks were in the battle with the first Sathanas. When the Iceni escaped into the nebula, the Colossus had its weapons systems shut down by a spy onboard. And I can understand why they pushed the limit when fightning the only ship capable of destroying the Colossus with ease.
-
Originally posted by Killfrenzy
But what about the Colossus' reactor and the weapon capacitors?
HOW MANY times did she nearly burn out the weapons? Or something went wrong?:rolleyes:
It nearly burned them out once when it was overheating them deliberately in an attempt to kill the sathanas. If you try to drive your car at 70mph in first gear you can`t blame it on techical failure when the engine burns out.
The colossus was then sabotaged to allow the Iceni to get past.
Originally posted by Su-tehp
The reason the Colossus was lost was because its captain refused to jump out when it was been beamed to death by a Sathanas. The Colossus' captain sacrificed himself and his ship and crew to buy the GTD Bastion more time to seal the Epsilon Pegasi node. The fact that he only bought a few more seconds (rather than run away to fight again later) is what made his tactic a failed one. Just think how much better the evacuation of Capella would have proceeded if the Colossus had jumped out and helped to secure the Vega node before the supernova occured. Thousands more refugees might have made it out before Capella blew had the Colossus been there.
Actually the Captain of the Colossus was a chancer who wanted history to record him and his crew as heroes. He tells command that he and his men will fight valiantly to buy some extra time at the node. History records him and his crew as heroes (well for 10-20 years until the historians get at him).
Far better to be recorded that way then as unlucky and unable to jump out SINCE HIS ENGINES WERE DISABLED!
Play that mission again and note the status of the colossus. It's engines were disabled. It couldn`t have leaped out if it had wanted to :D In those circumstances why not be remembered as a hero?
-
Lol, in less than five minutes, me, Stunaep and Karajorma all said the same thing. :lol:
-
You know, the only thing is that...a leviathan/deimos can destroy a Sathanas if deployed/maneouvered correctly... the orion class destroyers were fitted well enough to demolish any kind of a "lucy" from their broad side...and then you can have a hecate jump in and turn on its 2 forward beam cannons making sure the lucy goes down...or a deimos for that matter...
20 years in the making for nothing...wow rear admiral koth bought it from the colossus, thats really something to spend 20 years on...instead they could have refitted everything with BFGreens and remove anything hostile on sight...hell, the hatshepsuts were probably enough to take a lucy head on...
Or...what about the GTD Hades? Why not make another one (or another 50, as it seemed the thing was built fairly quickly), it seems to be much MUCH more better than any colossus if fitted with BFGreens...
but no, the game needed a big big ship for the people who bought the game to gaze at...
but then again thats just my opinion...
...and facing it, the colossus wasn't the main or only one wrong thing about fs2, it was just another one in the series of mistakes...
-
I'm just against really large ships. The thing that I find the funniest is that even in a frontal assault, 20 fenris can take a sathanas...
-
Originally posted by Su-tehp
2) The second time "something went wrong" onboard the Colossus was when her weapons refused to fire on the Iceni as it was fleeing through the Knossos portal. But that was due directly to sabotage from NTF spies already onboard posing as GTVA crewmen. And again, sabotage is not equivalent to an inherent design flaw.
Actually, it's probable that the "NTF" spies aboard the Colossus were undercover SOC agents. Remember, there were quite a few missions where the SOC intentionally let the Iceni escape to later learn more about ETAK and capture Bosch. It's highly unlikely that NTF spies could have gotten aboard the Colossus and disarmed its weapons--SOC agents, desperately wanting to stop Bosch and the Iceni being destroyed, disarmed the Colossus. Then they posed as NTF spies to be arrested, and probably quietly released later once the right people had been contacted.
-
That's one of the most sensible posts I have yet heard in this topic. One telling us somethine that we didn't already know.
-
Originally posted by GalacticEmperor
Actually, it's probable that the "NTF" spies aboard the Colossus were undercover SOC agents. Remember, there were quite a few missions where the SOC intentionally let the Iceni escape to later learn more about ETAK and capture Bosch. It's highly unlikely that NTF spies could have gotten aboard the Colossus and disarmed its weapons--SOC agents, desperately wanting to stop Bosch and the Iceni being destroyed, disarmed the Colossus. Then they posed as NTF spies to be arrested, and probably quietly released later once the right people had been contacted.
Now that is a theory that would never have occured to me. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it does have merit.
SOC agents on the Colossus posing as NTF sabotuers to let the Iceni get away...this does make sense in a way. These SOC agents aren't putting any GTVA people in harm's way by sabotaging the Colossus' weapon at this time, because the Iceni, even with Bosch aboard, would have been no threat to the Colossus. Bosch wasn't striking at the Colossus; he was trying to retreat to the nebula. Even with the Colossus' weapons down, no one on the Colossus was in any real danger. Meanwhile, SOC gets another chance to find out what Bosch is really up to...
Yeah, this theory does have a lot of merit. :eek2:
-
Originally posted by BD
You know, the only thing is that...a leviathan/deimos can destroy a Sathanas if deployed/maneouvered correctly... the orion class destroyers were fitted well enough to demolish any kind of a "lucy" from their broad side...and then you can have a hecate jump in and turn on its 2 forward beam cannons making sure the lucy goes down...or a deimos for that matter...
20 years in the making for nothing...wow rear admiral koth bought it from the colossus, thats really something to spend 20 years on...instead they could have refitted everything with BFGreens and remove anything hostile on sight...hell, the hatshepsuts were probably enough to take a lucy head on...
Or...what about the GTD Hades? Why not make another one (or another 50, as it seemed the thing was built fairly quickly), it seems to be much MUCH more better than any colossus if fitted with BFGreens...
but no, the game needed a big big ship for the people who bought the game to gaze at...
but then again thats just my opinion...
BD, you do not just FIT BFGreens to any ship. To power something as powerful as a BFGreen, you will need a reactor the size of the Empire State Building, cannons the size of the Eiffel Tower, you do not just FIT these things on a Hecate.
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
BD, you do not just FIT BFGreens to any ship. To power something as powerful as a BFGreen, you will need a reactor the size of the Empire State Building, cannons the size of the Eiffel Tower, you do not just FIT these things on a Hecate.
Sure you can! I've fit a couple BFReds on an Amazon drone before. Boy did Alpha 1 get a surprise during TSM-103c... :D
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
BD, you do not just FIT BFGreens to any ship. To power something as powerful as a BFGreen, you will need a reactor the size of the Empire State Building, cannons the size of the Eiffel Tower, you do not just FIT these things on a Hecate.
I'm sure 10-15 years of research and money and resources (like they gave to the Colossus project) would be enough to figure out how to mount stuff like that on smaller vessels...
Originally posted by GalacticEmperor
Actually, it's probable that the "NTF" spies aboard the Colossus were undercover SOC agents. Remember, there were quite a few missions where the SOC intentionally let the Iceni escape to later learn more about ETAK and capture Bosch. It's highly unlikely that NTF spies could have gotten aboard the Colossus and disarmed its weapons--SOC agents, desperately wanting to stop Bosch and the Iceni being destroyed, disarmed the Colossus. Then they posed as NTF spies to be arrested, and probably quietly released later once the right people had been contacted.
I actually only thought that the Admiral/Captain of the Colossus was faking it and that nobody even touched those reactors...the things released later was just to back up a cover story that never took place, because even before, Command had the knowledge of letting the Iceni through. :wtf:
But maybe there were SOC agents on board, definatly a valid-er claim.
-
I think the theory that SOC let Bosch is more likely correct than wrong. How on earth did the Iceni get into Gamma Draconis in the first place?
In the mission where you guard the Capella-GD node you are told that the iceni has already run our blockade. How? Most likely they let him through.
-
That idea certainly makes sense to me, as the GTVA would need to let Bosch go without arousing the suspicion of the common people, and this was a good way to do it. It has been a long time since I have heard a novel theory on FS2. ;)
-
Back on topic.
I wanted to ask this earlier: Is there a FS2 DVD and does it have hi-res textures on it. If so, can anyone upload those textures here so we can download them?
;7
-
The real use of the nebula is to make the ships look bigger. The FS2 ships definitely look smaller than the same ships in FS1, so when you are flying alongside an Orion or Hecate, or approaching it, in 'empty space', it seems tiny. However, in the nebula, when you have to guard the Aquitaine against the ceaseless wings of Shivan bombers, it seems huge, as it looks like you are flying over vast amounts of ship to get to the other side to protect a critical beam cannon. or whack the next wave of bombers.
Also the idea that Bosch is allowed to escape has already been put forward, in the game. When you are told to chase the Iceni, and it is about 20km ahead of you, a wingman complains that "Command let Bosch escape! There's no other explanation."
-
How can I backup my FS2 disks before they get scratched beyond use? Is it as simple as just burning a copy? Most games will not read a simple burned disk instead keeps asking for the original.
As for the SOC... There is no such thing... All of you have been given orders to go to room 101 immediately for debriefing (ie red flashy thing). This conversation and all other before this DID NOT HAPPEN.;)
I must admit you guys have really started giving me ideas for future storylines... Keep up the good debates!
I like a mix of both being a countless cog (one of thousands) and also being the star of the hour (Alpha1 we need YOU to do this cuase only you can)...blah
Now someone thrashed the fun about the enemy fearing you personally and targeting you... Ummm Hello MAX STERLING?
In my mission Fare Well Big Brother not only do I kill Roy Fokker BUT the Zentreadi Ace Miriya Perina orders the others to stand down against "The Blue Micronian Devil" so she can get the honor of killing the enemy ace for herself. This has happened in rea life too (von richtoffen SP?) lol and Chiggy Von Richtoffen (SP?) :lol:
This should be done on moderation and good mission design but I see nothing wrong with it as long as it adds to the story and make it fun.
For example I plan on making Alpha1 the star of my mod only because the technology is so scarce (expensive) that only so many can be made to combat the new threat... But of course fleet involvement will be there also. Never forget your wingmen, take care of them and they take care of you!
Oh and one more thing: "It's ok to be scared..." :)
(Col TC Mcqueen)
-
Originally posted by <<ERROR>>
The real use of the nebula is to make the ships look bigger. The FS2 ships definitely look smaller than the same ships in FS1, so when you are flying alongside an Orion or Hecate, or approaching it, in 'empty space', it seems tiny. However, in the nebula, when you have to guard the Aquitaine against the ceaseless wings of Shivan bombers, it seems huge, as it looks like you are flying over vast amounts of ship to get to the other side to protect a critical beam cannon. or whack the next wave of bombers.
Also the idea that Bosch is allowed to escape has already been put forward, in the game. When you are told to chase the Iceni, and it is about 20km ahead of you, a wingman complains that "Command let Bosch escape! There's no other explanation."
Since I`ve only ever played FS2 in 1024x768 I`m not certain if that effect is just due to playing in a higher resolution (and thus seeing more of the ship at a time)
As for Bosch being let go no one disputes that command let him go in Deneb. Everyone agrees with that, but that the whole thing with the colossus was also a set up is new.