Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Snail on March 30, 2007, 02:04:54 pm
-
I was wondering about this. Although FS2 had better gameplay and stuff, I liked the FS1 atmosphere much better. The fact that you just couldn't kill those Shivans made me much more scared of them in FS1 than FS2. In FS2, we wiped the floor with them basically. Those Sathani just didn't make themselves all that scary for some reason. All the Shivans needed in FS1 to kill us all was one crummy superdestroyer. The Shivans in FS2... Well they didn't get anywhere even with 80 Jugs (whether or not they wanted to get through is beside the point here). The FS2 Shivans just seemed weaker than those in FS1...
What do you think, take in to account atmosphere and storyline; not only atmosphere.
-
I concur! Shivans in FS1 where more dangerous then ever, we had o pull back every time and we had one change to stop them.
Now in FS2 we can just shoot their cruisers down like they where normal Henris class cruisers.
-
Yarr, FS2's atmosphere didn't terrify me as much as FS1.
I notice this is another wanton act of sacrilege. :P
-
I answered FS2, because I bought them bundled and the difference in graphics was great enough to turn the tide for FS2.
However, I would ultimately like to answer FS Port, and obviously FS2_Open... and TBP, and likely all the upcoming total conversions as well.
In fact, TBP was how I found out about FS2_Open in the first place. Before that I was cluelessly playing with retail FS2... :nervous:
-
I don't know about them being weaker in FS2. The impression I got from the nebular conflict (and especially from the subsequent Capella invasion) was that no matter how many Shivan ships got blasted, three more came to take its place. I felt the GTVA was fighting an uphill battle for the entire campaign.
Basically, the impression I got was that the Shivans outnumbered the GTVA a hundred to one (and not just with the Sathanas Fleet, I'm talking about with their destroyers, cruisers, etc.).
As for the atmosphere... that's a toss-up. FS1 had a creepy atmoshpere, FS2 had an (to me anyway) epic atmosphere, and neither of them can hold a candle to Sync/Transcend. :p
-
Perhaps I shouldn't have said "Which do you ENJOY the most", the main question was which sort of atmosphere was the best, really.
-
...reset the poll; edit the first post and change the title to Best atmosphere: FS1 or FS2?
-
The atmospere in Freespace 1 was better, but the storyline in Freespace 2 was better. I felt like it was scarier in Freespace 1 because of the lucifer being invincible and all, but the story in Freespace 2 was more interesting to me.
-
the only way i could enjoy freespace 1 fully is to go bak 2 wen i first played the campaign. the atmosphere was brillaint, but it was missing from freespace 2.
-
FS1 just had that 'spook' to it, but FS2 just didn't...
-
I preferred FS2 as you were fighting a war throughout on two fronts, the NTF and the Shivans, In FS1 you were fighting the Vasudans, then you were fighting the Shivans and allied to the Vasudans. Wjat would have been better if there would have been a hardcore rebel group of Vasudnas in FS1 who fought back harder after the arrival of the Shivans as it was the Terrans who brought down the wrath of the Great Destroyers upon them (Hammer of light in reverse???? :nervous: :confused:)
-
Why not just plain HoL?
-
FreeSpace 2 was my first freespace
and I enjoyed it the most
-
Freespace 1 was much better. It had better atmosphere and better storyline. In fs 2 you killed 1 shivan, 3 more popped up in its placed, but then you just destroyed them too(except for the sathanas fleet).
-
The overall atmosphere was about equally good in both of them (certain cutscenes played a large role there in both games), but FS2's story had way more depth and originality to it.
-
FS1 made my hair stand on end alot. FS2, sometimes (DIVE!...). I think what some people are noticing is the sense of utter vulnerability felt with FS1. You get shields, great, the Lucy has impenetrable shields. You get better fighters, but you feel like you're in a MiG 21 vs an F-15 most of the time. You get the sensation of a bug being played with by a mean school kid that is stomping the ground, not squishing his prey just yet; he wants to play first. The ending kind of hangs by a thread.
Now, in FS2, you have the big C... which evens things out a bit. Your fighters don't suck quite as much (except for the Herc2, unfortunately), and you feel that, with a lot of effort, you might just turn the tide of this war. The Knossos brings a sense of awe and wondering, but when the Shivans come in, you pretty much think "Oh, great, now the C has something to shoot".
When you see the Sathanas, you realize that the Shivans are extremely powerful, and this isn't going to be easy; you get a bit scared. Then, when you find out there are 80 of them, you start getting the FS1 atmosphere, but it is quickly replaced by confusion as the fleet just sits at Cappella, surrounding the sun, which is still worrying. At the end, you're kind of struck with the Shivan's huge technical superiority and strength, but so many more questions are raised, and almost none answered. You don't have time to develop the horror that you sense in FS1. If it had taken longer for the Sath fleet to arrive, then maybe...
-
Your fighters don't suck quite as much (except for the Herc2, unfortunately),
Sort of a threadjack, but the Herc II is more of a missile-boat. Yeah if you try dogfighting and using primaries, it doesn't have the punch that the Herc1 or even the Myrm has. But the thing can carry over 70 Harpoons, enough for about 35 splashes on their own. The primaries are just for cleanup, or to load a Maxim. If you want short-range power, bring along a load of Tempests, one bay can hold a few hundred of them. The shielding is really tough too. I think the Herc2 is a great assault fighter if you load it out right.
As for the comparison...I love battling around capital ships, which makes FS2's atmosphere better for me. Not as much in the overall story (although it did have much more depth than FS1, I loved the Bosch/ETAK angle), but the individual missions involving capital ships were much more exciting. Whether to take the time and risk of blasting vital beam and flak turrets off cruisers was something you had to consider carefully every time they showed up. Not to mention being under heavy flak, slamming your burners to get away while staring at your shield indicator hoping they can stay up just long enough to get you out of range. I thought the new, dangerous capital ships added a lot of 'atmosphere' to the missions.
-
(http://www.hard-light.net/forums/Smileys/HLP/welcome2hlpbb.gif)
WELCOME TO THE HLPBB! 25th!
I think it's just because of beam cannons.
-
I played the fs1 demo and liked it, then i found the fs2 demo and like it better. Then i bought fs2 and beat it. And then i bought fs1 and beat it. It's really fun to play games with the sequel first and work your way down to the first game. Playing fs2 first made fs1 really interesting.
-
Played ST yet?
-
I'm assuming your question includes the FSport as FS1... a distinction not addressed in your question.
Freespace 2 combat is kinda boring... you can basically sit there and lob Trebuchets at everything... honestly I like the gameplay of FS1 more than that of FS2... and now that people mention it, the storyline was better as well... the only place I think it falls behind is in voice acting.
-
Actually, I was talking about the authentic FS1, in which the nebulae were just streaks, which made space seem more mysterious than FS2's OMG PUT SPACE CLOUDS EVERYWHERE OMG OMG OMG!!!
-
the only place I think it falls behind is in voice acting.
'xcept for Command. FS2 Command is e)
a) Loudmouth
b) Know it all
c) Pompous
d) Doesn't have a clue
e) All of the above
-
Possible spoilers below, but I think most people know what happens anyway... and I'm going to be vague. =P
Admittedly, I haven't played FS2 yet, but after beating the FS1 conversion... it's going to be tough to find a game that had atmosphere that excited me like FS1s did.
The way the game starts off fealing like you're doing things that are perfectly normal, and then you get the Shivans. Terrifying, unstoppable, unbeatable.
And you kill one. And it's thrilling. (At leat, the first time I killed one without having to use the reticle... just spamming Fury's, I was elated.)
And things seem to pick up... at first. And then the game spirals downard, all hell breaking loose around the Lucifer and HoL. The way the events play out, and the briefing voices, really make you think, "Oh ****... We're doomed." It really get's desperate. Especially as the missions get harder and more hectic.
Couple that with a joystick, and the game is one of the most immersive I have ever played, which is saying something since my imagination never lends itself to immersion. =/ I'll be amazed if FS2 even comes close, when I get around to playing it.
-
FS1 was better; it had more a sense of vulnerability, etc. IOW, what everyone else said.
ALSO:
-FS1 had much better cutscenes; esp. the first one. The more human faces shown, the better.
-FS2 seemed (to me) to be just a rerun of FS1. "Hey, there's bad guys! Crush them! O-NO-ITS-THE-SHIVANS-AND-THEY'RE-KILLING-US-RUN! Augh, we lost a system! But they're gone. Goody."
-FS1 had a much better ending. You lose contact with your home planet, and then...
-FS2 (like others have said) is basically just blowing up shipaftershipaftership in a scary(?) nebula/storm. FS1 actually had you doing missions like capturing shivan technology, protecting cap ships in an asteroid field against superior ships, etc. In FS2 it's just "hold off the fighters until our cap ships get there and take over with their lightsabers."
-In FS2 Command was unrealistically cocky. Anybody with a brain could see that the Colossus was not "superior" to the Sathanas. The Sathanas just happened to be half dead. Heck, they TOLD you to half kill it.
Also, the Shivans being invisible at first was just... freaky.
-m
-
I felt that some of the FS2 nebulae missions were monotonous, which is why I personally do not like nebula missions. I prefer the mysterious black void of [sub?]space...
Nebulae is more like flying through clouds. It would've been cool if you had to dodge lightning too.... ;)
-
Subspace is blue, or sometimes red (I think), note the mission where you take down the Lucy.
-
Red subspace was never canon, it was added by fans very early on to make Subspace Shivan-ish.
-
Said fans probably got the idea from the FSRefBible, which reveals that Shivans originally were going to have red subspce vortices.
-
I just have more fun playing FS2
-
-In FS2 Command was unrealistically cocky. Anybody with a brain could see that the Colossus was not "superior" to the Sathanas.
Heck, they TOLD you to half kill it.
::)
Maybe thats why they told you to half kill it.
-
Freespace 2 combat is kinda boring... you can basically sit there and lob Trebuchets at everything... honestly I like the gameplay of FS1 more than that of FS2...
Yes, there is something to be said for this. The missiles were not nearly as powerful or accurate in FS1 and you mainly had to rely on primary weapons, so battles between fighters lasted a lot longer. On the other hand, anything involving larger ships was better in FS2 due to the addition of flak and anti-fighter beams.
Although I almost never use trebuchets; they take forever to reach their targets. :p In most situations, you can rack up kills much faster using tempests.
-FS1 had much better cutscenes; esp. the first one. The more human faces shown, the better.
Well, that mainly applies to the intro. I think the Bosch cutscenes were much better than the Ancient ones. Actually, I was pretty confused by the Ancient ones the first time I played through FS1 and only figured out what they were about later on. Even now, I don't think they add a whole lot to the game. Several cutscenes in the reference bible that were dropped from the final game look like they would been much better.
-
I played FS1 for a few years before I ever so much as touched a FS2 disk, but I'll never for the life of me understand for an instant how anyone can call it better than the sequel. FS2 took everything that FS1 did right and improved upon it exponentially. The combat was so much more intense and fast-paced; though it's been said so many times before, capital ships went from being the equivalent of trash barges to being something to be feared and avoided at all costs. Oh, and missiles started to do something other than, you know, miss. The storyline was so much more involved and continuous; as much as I loved FS1, there was a whole stretch in the middle of the game where you were flying pretty much nothing but random sorties that didn't contribute at all to the overlying plot. FS2 had no such down-time; as soon as you finished off one angle of the story, it was right on to the next. The nebula environment was incredible to fly in; I was never so much on-edge in either game than when I was flying a patrol out into that near-impenetrable fog, straining my eyes for any sign of hostiles. As for FS1's so-called "superior atmosphere," maybe I'm the exception, but I just didn't feel it all that much. Oh, it had plenty of amazing moments, but FS2 was the game that really sustained the dramatic tension throughout the entire campaign.
So yeah, it's no toss-up for me; FS2 earned those Game of the Year awards and amazingly high ratings. Beam-free-all and light it up, baby. 8)
-
I guess FS1 was more spooky, but FS2 had a more popular epic (as DH said) atmosphere.
A good example is the music. Compare the music such as Spook, Haunted or Monolith to Joshua, Leviticus and Revelation.
-
I liked taking a Valk and hiding in a Demon class destroyer... Prometheus cannons and Avengers all day long. Massive points on multiplayer... think that's how I got Capitan (highest i got during fs1 multi).
FS2 was great during PXO, I played a lot online and loved using the lag to my advantage on Rebel Intercept. shooting like 4 helios torpedoes at once. it's a toss up for me
-
The combat was so much more intense and fast-paced;
In fighter to fighter combat, I find honestly the complete opposite. In Freespace 1 I get a sense of speed,
In Freespace 2 it feels like a constant slug match, I often feel like I'm playing underwater
-
I think that depends on your combat style, I dunno.
-
Fs1 ships were slower on average. A whole bunch of terran fighters were 65ms, with the valkyrie as the exception of the fastest, and the hercules bombers slower than average space superiority fighters. Now while the fs2 fighters were a lot more powerful (more gunbanks and more missile space), and a lot faster, usually the fighters in fs2 were 65-70ms with the exception of the horus and the perseus as the fastest and the hercules mark2 and the bombers slower than the average space superiority fighters.
While the fighters in fs2 were faster they had good afterburners to get by on, until you play with the slower fighters in fs1 that have afterburners that made you think the developers were on crack to give you so much afterburner reserve.
I really like fs2 ships much better than fs1's. Of course fs1 had me at athena and apollo. The only ships i hate to death in fs2 is the artemis variants(gtva should have stuck with an upgraded athena on that one).
-
Heh, for max speed I love the BtRL ships... the AB on them sucks, though (only +40 speed :wtf: )
-
They both have a distinctly "different" atmosphere. FreeSpace 1 seemed a lot more hopeless and tragic/epic...the music helped that idea. It was like the GTA and PVN, already bleeding to death from the 14 year war, were going to die no matter what, and they knew it. The opening cutscene kind of pushes that across, as does the loss of the Galatea, and the loss of Vasuda Prime, and the story of the ancients paralleling yours. Which makes the end that much better.
FreeSpace 2 was a lot more desperate and heroic/epic, it seemed...the NTF civil war is pretty much at its apex, 18 months in, during FS2 (i guess the high water mark for the NTF is at the Epsilon Pegasi campaign), as opposed to stalemated 14 years later. The sudden appearance of the Shivans, the Colossus and the Sathanas, the blockades, the sacrifice of the Colossus, the HUGE ups and HUGE downs...
idk. i like both. The one thing i did wish that FS1 had that FS2 had is definite squadrons...just a small thing.
-
I really liked both games. Played the demo of FS1 a long, long time ago at a friend's house, and fell in love, went out and purchased it. I was about to shell out $60+ on eBay for a copy of FS2 before I found Home of the Underdogs and the SCP. The Freespace series really is one of the best I've ever played, in terms of atmosphere and such.
I have to admit, I really liked the FS1 'hopeless' atmosphere- especially near the end, as Vasuda Prime was nuked, the Galatea was destroyed, and Earth itself was under threat. The idea of a inscrutable, indestructible enemy worked really well in this case.
FS2 had its 'set-piece' moments as well- Kappa 3 desperately telling Command to shut down the portal, the Vasudan destroyer trying to spearhead an expedition into the second portal before being vaporized, the moment the Lysander and Actium encountered the destroyer, etc. The Sathanas wasn't nearly as scary the first time around as the Lucifer, though. One thing FS2 does really well in this regard, is maintaining that sinking feeling in your stomach...'how many more of them ARE there?'. There are always these little clues throughout the camapign that point to a much greater Shivan presence than Command will let on to.
One thing that FS2 did really well, though, was gameplay atmosphere. I hated capital ship battles in FS1. The capital ships weren't that scary, their lasers were really kind of useless, and they were helpless against a determined bomber squadron. Having flak, beam cannons, etc. just makes it so much more epic, and actually gives capships a reason to exist.
As for the intros, I liked FS1's intro a LOT better than FS2's. FS1's was dramatic and very well-done. FS2's battle scene was kind of cheesy (maybe too much SCP goodness...I think that, with the exception of the hundreds of fighters, the SCP could probably render a better-looking scene in real-time). The laser that blew up the one Medusa looked like a solid plastic spear. And the narration wasn't that good, either...there are some really good quotes in FS1 and FS2, but I found the opening narration rather pointless. :(
-
ive noticed the lucifer destroyed an orion class destroyer (is it the galatea?) using a beam from the side, but it doesnt have beams there.
-
No, it's widely believed to be the Legion. It's not canon, but during an interview it was alluded to.
-
Freespace 2, hinging solely on the capital ships. In FS1, capital ships were giant floating bricks. Leviathons were floating catches of points, and nothing more. Orions, for the love of god...giant dustbins, I tell you.
In FS2, capital ships have powerful, death-dealing flak and beam turrets that actually make them a credible threat to other capital ships and to the player.
-
ive noticed the lucifer destroyed an orion class destroyer (is it the galatea?) using a beam from the side, but it doesnt have beams there.
...
Anyways, in response to the actuall topic, depends on what mood i'm in. Dark mood, FS1, blow **** up, FS2
...And yes, FS1 missles did suck compared against fs2 missles, but 32 year difference and all...
-
Freespace 2, hinging solely on the capital ships. In FS1, capital ships were giant floating bricks. Leviathons were floating catches of points, and nothing more. Orions, for the love of god...giant dustbins, I tell you.
In FS2, capital ships have powerful, death-dealing flak and beam turrets that actually make them a credible threat to other capital ships and to the player.
It's a problem that affected most games. Remember that the programmers' concept of both AA guns and warship defenses was poor at that time. Just like for Colony Wars, ships became dangerous to attack when programmers realized that they're nothing but sitting ducks.
No, it's widely believed to be the Legion. It's not canon, but during an interview it was alluded to.
Never heard of that interview. Link? References? A thread here on HLP about it?
-
I agree that developers in the past have had crappy concepts of capital ship defenses...but heck, even the old Star Wars games had deadly capital ships...and all they had to work with was little green and red laser puffs.
*spits at FS1 discs until dies of dehydration*
-
*spits at FS1 discs until dies of dehydration*
Urgh...
Anyways, they wanted the player to be concentrated on something else. And ships able to defend themselves mean, yeah, dangerous strike missions...but it also means easier escort missions ;)
-
*spits at FS1 discs until dies of dehydration*
BAD BOY!
-
More than bad, I would say "Spit Man"! :D
No offense, of course.
-
*spits at FS1 discs until dies of dehydration*
You should probley clean that stuff up. Oh, also, stop jacking off to equlibrium, no, John Preston cannot beat the FEAR pointman, assholes!
Er...*runs*
-
Maybe I wants to make his FS1 discs look good, they're pretty old and some...urgh...liquid could have the same effect the specular option has on shipmodels!
-
Maybe I wants to make his FS1 discs look good, they're pretty old and some...urgh...liquid could have the same effect the specular option has on shipmodels!
Yeah... Liquid, apparently he yanked the toy too hard while watching Equilibrium. :nervous:
-
ive noticed the lucifer destroyed an orion class destroyer (is it the galatea?) using a beam from the side, but it doesnt have beams there.
On the sides of the lucifer there are beam cannons yes. In the animation where the lucifer destroyed that one space station it did it with the side beam cannons, which are used for normal everyday ship destroying or glassing planets.
-
Too...many...in...jokes...
*collapses*
-
I don't particularly have a favorite, primarily because each game has its ups and downs.
Freespace 1 has the most complete storyline. I like this because it keeps my interest and pulls you in.
Freespace 2 is better organized, with squadrons and battlegroups, as well as clarifying communications between both sides.
-
FS2 for me...capital ships actually have a purpose greater than just being carriers. Shields really buggered them in terms of being a threat. Storyline was deeper and more interesting as well, just felt more epic.
-
FS2 capital ships, although stronger than FS1, are badly overrated. Remember that FS1 had pretty mediocre capship defenses. Compare attacking an Orion to, say, a "puny" Galspan frigate. Flak and beams are sexy, but really all they do is prevent you from doing something really stupid like staying in one place and holding down the primary fire button.
First, flak. How many times have you been killed by flak? It does very little damage when you come to think of it, and is really only good for shooting down bombs or softening bombers up to be killed by fighters. Rarely does flak kill you outright. Now, some of the beams- some- are good fighter-distracters, but unless you acidentally get hit by a BGreen a beam isn't going to do more than send you spinning and give you a few percent hull damage. All you have to do is stay out of range, kill turrets with Treb or Rockeye, and close for the kill. If you must bomb, then quick in-and-out runs are the way to go. You'll only take a few percentage points of damage if you're quick (and yes, I do play on Insane). On linked fire, it only takes 3-4 Cyclops salvos to kill a corvette yourself. Destroyers (other than the Orion) are tougher nuts to crack, but if you have a few bomber wingmen you can take them down.
FS2 capital ship flaks are still nothing more than distracters. Fighters and bombers are the core of every space shooter game, and the only thing that really saves your capships is fighter escort.
-
*Ha hem* Aeolus *Ha hem*
Another thing in favor of FS2 is the end of the NTF rebellion. Cool part(it's a human faction, not Vasudan or Shivan, so the feelings of the player usually are different).
During the blockade and the following attacks on rebel rallying points, you watched thousands of people die, and no one gave them the possibility to surrender. That part invited me to reflect :eek:
-
FS2 capital ships, although stronger than FS1, are badly overrated. Remember that FS1 had pretty mediocre capship defenses. Compare attacking an Orion to, say, a "puny" Galspan frigate. Flak and beams are sexy, but really all they do is prevent you from doing something really stupid like staying in one place and holding down the primary fire button.
First, flak. How many times have you been killed by flak? It does very little damage when you come to think of it, and is really only good for shooting down bombs or softening bombers up to be killed by fighters. Rarely does flak kill you outright. Now, some of the beams- some- are good fighter-distracters, but unless you acidentally get hit by a BGreen a beam isn't going to do more than send you spinning and give you a few percent hull damage. All you have to do is stay out of range, kill turrets with Treb or Rockeye, and close for the kill. If you must bomb, then quick in-and-out runs are the way to go. You'll only take a few percentage points of damage if you're quick (and yes, I do play on Insane). On linked fire, it only takes 3-4 Cyclops salvos to kill a corvette yourself. Destroyers (other than the Orion) are tougher nuts to crack, but if you have a few bomber wingmen you can take them down.
FS2 capital ship flaks are still nothing more than distracters. Fighters and bombers are the core of every space shooter game, and the only thing that really saves your capships is fighter escort.
Flaks can definitely kill you. They weaken your shields, and then they impact your hull. When 1 flak gun is shooting at you, you're probably not going to take too much damage. But when 2-3 guns are firing at you, you've got problems. I'm always diving and swerving, but those bastards just travel so fast and they have a large damage area (splash damage), and the only way to escape is to get out of range.
And about AAA guns. Whenever they hit me, I'm always bashed around, weakened by at least 1/4 of health. Sometimes, if all three shots hit me, I can be damaged by almost 3/4 or even down to 10%.
I don't know what difficulty you're playing on (I usually do either Medium when I'm doing it for fun and Insane when I want to be suicidal), but your perception of flak and AAA is wrong.
-
Yes, the Aeolus is the one decent anti-fighter ship of the game. But apparently the GTVA's shipbuilders could only do this by specializing it as a air-defense ship. And even then, 4 Artemis could probably kill if you aren't smart enough to just stand off and use Rockeyes or Treb. Or Tornadoes, etc., if you're quick in and out.
Strange, Snail. The beams can indeed be deadly. But flak only kills me if I get too close, most of the time. Basically, what flak teaches me is to not hang around in a capship's deadly zone for too long, but quick runs are perfectly safe. You've played Slaying Ravana, right? How hard was it for you?
-
He might be playing at Easy, since the damage AAA beams inflict is contained and flak are almost good for nothing.
Also, depends on the type of flak gun, we know that there are many types of flaks and we also know that some ships(Hecate)have flak turrets that fire two shots per time. There are Standar Flak guns, Heavy Flak ones and Long Range.
Also, only the tech description of the Aeolus refers to it as a poor Anti-warship platform. It has twice the firepower of the Leviathan, and it can hit targets at about 160°, unlike the Leviathan.
-
Yes, the Aeolus is the one decent anti-fighter ship of the game. But apparently the GTVA's shipbuilders could only do this by specializing it as a air-defense ship. And even then, 4 Artemis could probably kill if you aren't smart enough to just stand off and use Rockeyes or Treb. Or Tornadoes, etc., if you're quick in and out.
Strange, Snail. The beams can indeed be deadly. But flak only kills me if I get too close, most of the time. Basically, what flak teaches me is to not hang around in a capship's deadly zone for too long, but quick runs are perfectly safe. You've played Slaying Ravana, right? How hard was it for you?
BTW, Flak does nothing against bombs.
-
FS2 for me...capital ships actually have a purpose greater than just being carriers. Shields really buggered them in terms of being a threat. Storyline was deeper and more interesting as well, just felt more epic.
I can agree with it being more epic. FS2 is more gripping, but the story is a little rushed.
*Ha hem* Aeolus *Ha hem*
Another thing in favor of FS2 is the end of the NTF rebellion. Cool part(it's a human faction, not Vasudan or Shivan, so the feelings of the player usually are different).
During the blockade and the following attacks on rebel rallying points, you watched thousands of people die, and no one gave them the possibility to surrender. That part invited me to reflect :eek:
The end of FS1 and the words in the final cinematic really had me sit, reflect, and think.
BTW, Flak does nothing against bombs.
I've seen flak knock bombs clear out of flight without me firing at it. If that's not the case, then something else--a wingman or stray fire--knocked it out.
-
They may hit a few times, but according to the all-knowing Mars, they don't.
-
Flak are good against bombs but I guess that they need time to destroy a bomb because the programmers wanted some eyecandy(flak explosion all around the bomb, then it explodes after a few seconds).
-
I've probably played Bearbaiting too many times. Those forward flak guns on the Sath are worthless. But really, I don't usually get killed by AAA unless I stay on one place for too long. I can usually survive 3-4 bombing runs on a large ship, which is usually enough to kill it, even when taking damage from flak. So what if your hull is at 5% afterwards? It only takes a few bombs.
-
You're basically saying that the anti capital ship platforms (i.e. bombers) are.....good at taking out capital ships. Well, duh, of course they are. Flak is defintely more effective against fighters, which is why trying to dogfight near enemy capital ships involves a pretty severe pucker factor. The biggest thing that always gets me about AAA, especially when flying right at the capship in a bomber, is it nails your subsystems. More than a few times has it blasted my weapons or sensors system as I come in for a bombing pass.
-
He said it's Insane... but I'm with you... flak is a major PIA, and sometimes deadly, specially if you don't have too much manuverability. Although, sometimes it doesn't seem to work right... I guess it just depends on how many targets the cannons have to shoot at. If you're ahead of your wing, bad... if you are the only survivor... bad.
-
I rekon freespace 1 was far better when it comes to atmosphere and storyline, it was the first computer game our family ever bought, back in 98/99, i cant rememebr exactly, and me and dad usted to sit around the PC playing it, i was only a wee lad back then, and the opening video just terrified me throughout my life of playing it.
When freespace 2 came around, i was older, and the intro video was more poignant than scary, so the atmosphere would never again really scare me.
About flak, i've never really considered it a terrible threat, once you have taken out the AAA beams, then it becomes your next biggest problem, but compared against the AAA beams, it isnt even worth worring aqbout
-
AIEEEE THREAD HIJACK!
Just to get us more off-topic, here are two missions I made in FRED. The first shows an attack of four Artemis on an Aeolus. The Artemis have nothing more than one bank of Cyclops (4 bombs) and a Subach. The bombers will kill the Aeolus in a matter of seconds once they get within range adn take only light damage. I found that the first salvo is very important. If you give the bombers less Cyclops or remove just one bomber, the attack will not succeed. But I think that four Artemis is a good trade for one Aeolus. The strongest flak ship on FS, taken down by 4 bombers.
The second mission has fighter escort involved. Three Myrs escort the four Artemis. Four Perseus escort the Aeolus. The bombers will fail, but inflict heavy damage. As you can see, flak and beams are little more than distraction against a serious assault. Fighters are the main defenses of capships.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
The main thing I see here is the fact that the Aeolus has not enough blob turrets. Believe it or not, blobs are the main defense against bombs, not flak. All the times I played those missions, none of the bombs were destroyed. Why? Flak sucks ;).
Now, play the first mission again, but replace the Aeolus with Leviathan (and change its name just for good measure ;)). The Leviathan has four Anti-Fighter beams, whereas the Aeolus has only two. 3/3 times the Leviathan dies, but, usually 2/4 of 'Attack' wing is destroyed. Anti-Fighter beams are much more dangerous than Flak, and take down more bombs. So the Aeolus may seem more fearsome because your screen is always pulsing red, but the Leviathan is more dangerous.
Next, change it to Lilith. I see, 3/3 times the Lilith is destroyed, and the damage to 'Attack' wing is very light (most damage is done by the single SAAA gun anyway). However, it takes down quite a few bombs, but not as many as the Leviathan. This is proof that Flak guns hit bombs 1/10 times, but blob turrets are far more accurate and usually hit bombs. However, blob turrets do next to no damage to bombers or fighters.
Conclusion:
Flak Guns - Flak guns are okay against fighters/bombers but can't hit bombs.
Blob Turrets - USELESS against fighters but good against bombs.
Anti-Fighter Beams - Good against both fighters and bombs.
Wait a sec, how'd this get so off topic?
-
idk about you guys. But flak always kills me when i least expect it to.
-
BTW, change the bombers to Ursas, you can see the Flak guns are far more effective against slow targets.
-
idk about you guys. But flak always kills me when i least expect it to.
I agree. While AAA beams are always a potent threat, if your shields are hurting, heavy flak fire can do a world of hurt to you before you've even realized it. There have been numerous occasions when I've been so preoccupied at trying to take out beam weapons on a cruiser or corvette that I've failed to notice that flak was swiftly chewing its way through my hull.
-
Yeah, now I seem to remember that flak turrets don't bother you when you're in a fast / manueverable craft, but if you're using said craft to attack the cap ship, it won't bode too well unless you strafe across it, not head on. (like in SW with the X-Wing strafing runs) That makes sense now... in WWII, you don't ever hear too much about fighters having problems with flak.
-
In RL, flak (or any type of air defense) is meant to complicate a bomber's task, not so much to destroy it outright. I read that during the US bombing campaign in WW2 it was found that heavy flak fire could reduce accuracy by as much as 80%. The evasive manuevers, higher altitude, and other steps that the bombers had to take makes their job a lot harder. In Vietnam, the South Vietnamese air force was trained for "low and slow" bombing runs by their US advisers, and they got torn up by North Vietnamese antiaircraft. They flew higher and faster during their runs afterwards, and although their losses were light the quality of their accuracy was degraded. Same in 1973 when the Arab SAM umbrella forced the Israelis to fly low, which is less fuel-efficient and forced them to dodge all kinds of gun fire from the ground.
This is basically the effect that flak has on me. Beams will kill you out of nowhere, but flak can be avoided. It shakes you up so you can't aquire bomb lock and forces you to fly evasively (e.g. not just sit in one place and hold down the primary fire button like you could in FS1). But it's been a while since flak has actually killed me.
Personally, I think that capships should scrap their flak turrets and replace them with 6-barrel Kaysers. Or better yet, Morning Stars. 8)
-
****, Aeolus Morning Stars! :eek2:
-
Owwee
-
Well, Mustang19, you're damn right. I totally agree with your description of flak guns.
-
I've only completed FS2 and most of (I think) Derelict, and I have to say, I think Derelict is better than FS2 retail's campaign, so far anyhow. There are creepy moments, there are other personalities (Mackie and Alpha 3) and there are epic moments with the Shivans. I just completed the Mission where the ship with the Meson Bomb Cannon (cannot remember the ships name) fires at and kills a huge Shivan Destroyer only to overload it's core and explode itself.
I sat there with my finger on 'Z', first watching the beam annihilate the Shivan ship in one shot then flipped the mouse over to watch the cannon ship explode itself -- it was one of the coolest moments I've seen in this game yet.
After Derelict, I think I'm going to play the FS1 Port, then I'll ring in...but where does Derelict rank, for you guys? I think it's amazing.
-
Yes, yes, we all know how great Derelict is because we've all played it and loved it. :D
The ship with the Meson Bomb Cannon was the Gorgon Cannon (insert roman numeral here). BTW, instead of holding down your finger on Z, you could just press [BackSpace], you know.... And [\] when you want to go full speed without keeping your finger on [A]... :blah:
You're getting near to the end of the campaign, BTW.
-
Yes, yes, we all know how great Derelict is because we've all played it and loved it. :D
The ship with the Meson Bomb Cannon was the Gorgon Cannon (insert roman numeral here). BTW, instead of holding down your finger on Z, you could just press [BackSpace], you know.... And [\] when you want to go full speed without keeping your finger on [A]... :blah:
You're getting near to the end of the campaign, BTW.
I know I can just press backspace, but I think at that moment, I just sort of freaked out because I knew what was going to happen and I wanted to sort of make sure I had a good seat to watch it.
And, it looks like it's all for nothing that I've gotten towards the end of the campaign, as my pilot file has become corrupted. So all of my stats from the original campaign and derelict, as well as the recognition of what mission I'm up to is now gone. :(
-
though a bit tooo late to vote
fs1 scared the crap outta me .. :shaking: to this day anytime i see a SF Dragon .. even though i splashed alot of them .... that damn ship still scare me * burrr*
fs2 ..... better gameplay.... improved story... epic feel..
fs1 still frightens me to this day
-
fs1 still frightens me to this day
You have played FSPort, right? With the mediavps, right? *points to Turey's Installer link in siggy*
-
fs1 still frightens me to this day
You have played FSPort, right? With the mediavps, right? *points to Turey's Installer link in siggy*
working on that..... as we speak........
-
FS1 scared me back when I was 11 years old... not anymore. I remember the first time playing through the campaign, I got depressed after loosing Clash of the Titans again and again. It was my first real video game, and I was really involved in the storyline... it made me really sad that the Lucifer kept blowing up Earth. As for FS2, I usually didn't feel very involved in the storyline, possibly because HLP ruined all the surprises. It did feel really cool before Their Finest Hour when Petrarch said, "this is our Alamo, pilots"; you get that FS1 feel of being surrounded and outmoded. But TFH was a crap mission, and it should have felt a lot more difficult and desperate. Volition had plenty of justification for turning that into a BoE mission with hordes of Shivan capships assaulting your outnumbered force, but they didn't take that chance. They instead beam-locked most of the friendly ships to create some sort of difficulty...
Yeah, BoE has a bad rap, but if you define it as 5+ capital ships, there are lots of good BoE missions. The only reason people throw mud at the idea is because of a few articles written by n00bs who didn't know how to use FRED. You can do it. It just takes a little more work than usual, and I wouldn't recommend it for "my fiirst misssion".
-
Hmm... did you actually see a cutscene of the Lucy blowing up Earth? If so, do you still have those discs?
-
Was that cutscene ever actually made? I thought it existed only as a script in the ReferenceBible.
-
He didn't say that he saw a cutscene (and how could he, since said cutscene doesn't exist), just that that was what happened, which it would have if that mission were failed.
-
Rats... I know there wasn't supposed to be one, but I was kinda hoping that some little know newer release had it...
EDIT: actually, I wonder if it would be possible to make that cutscene using the cutscene SEXPs?
-
EDIT: actually, I wonder if it would be possible to make that cutscene using the cutscene SEXPs?
Sure. You should be able to see an example...if either one of my 123536263084713r5335236347673262473587295323726506136326321502 192560127035927518907540927515718027525 WIP Campaigns is completed :)
-
www.planetgamecam.com
It's probably the best free movie-maker out there. It records what you see on your screen while playing a game and saves it as AVI, although SCP uses .OGG for cutscenes. Anyway, it wouldn't be difficult at all to make a cutscene, it's just that noone's done it before (except WCP, I don't know how exactly). Use GameCam, save your movie, convert it to OGG somehow, and there's your cutscene.
-
No, I was referring to the SCP ability to make a cutscene using a mission. All events are scripted. There's supposedly a way to make the camera move to different locations, etc... I've never tried it before. (m has, but he hasn't worked on his campaign in quite a while...)
-
Finally i can get rid of ****ty ass fraps that i pirated. I hate that ****ing program. It doesn't do anything useful, and what it does do, it's already been bested by other programs. Did i mention fraps sucks at say recording video which is one of it's touted features.
Gonna try out gamecam, which should go great along with my powerful computer.
-
Funny. I've never had a problem with FRAPS. Then again, I bought my version. ;)
-
i just hate it when there's only one thing to turn to when it comes to anything. Usually when it comes to recording video games it turns to fraps only. And i think fraps sucks at what it does for that. Who knows, i'll just have to try out gamecam to see if it's just as bad.
-
You can go ahead and make cutscenes in SCP. It's just an underused feature. In fact, the only time I've seen it used is during the YMCA sequence in JAD II :lol:. I've never done it before, but it looks self-explanatory.
-
It's easy but harder than you may think.
I've tried, it looks easy but I found it a bit harder than I initially thought.
-
You can go ahead and make cutscenes in SCP. It's just an underused feature. In fact, the only time I've seen it used is during the YMCA sequence in JAD II :lol:. I've never done it before, but it looks self-explanatory.
EDIT: actually, I wonder if it would be possible to make that cutscene using the cutscene SEXPs?
Sure. You should be able to see an example...if either one of my 123536263084713r5335236347673262473587295323726506136326321502 192560127035927518907540927515718027525 WIP Campaigns is completed :)
Got it? :)
And no, they're not underused. More and more FREDders are using them. Just think about campaigns like STL and FOW, they had their cutscenes. And maybe we should release a demo of Steadfast.... :)
-
Honestly with fs1, i never got scared, i just didn't like dragons until i got a well placed missile on them or got far away from them. And the taranis was just another shivan cruiser that's relatively easy to take out. Fs1 set in real good and deep that hopeless feeling.
What actually scared me was a good deal of the nebula missions in fs2, and the second soc loop where it's nothing but shivan territory. That was scary.
-
Yah, those gave me shivers, too.
-
Blah. The FS1 missions were scary because you didn't have nebula placed everywhere to make it look like abstract art.
-
What sucks for FS2 is that all the good names were already taken. Apollo is one of my favorite ships, and judging from its popularity in campaigns, it must be pretty popular. Apollo was a cool ship with a cool name, as were the Ulysses, Leviathan, Medusa, and Valkyrie. When you heard names like that, a picture popped into your head. Even "Ursa" made you think of a big bomber, or at least reminded you of the disney character. But it's kind of hard to get excited by names like Myrmidon, Artemis, and Erinyes... I know you're "supposed" to learn all this Greek mythology stuff at some point, it's just that none of this stuff invokes a mental image like Hercules, Apollo, and Orion did.
Same for weapons. Names like ML-16, Flail, Avenger, Prometheus, and Bashee really matched the "use" of the weapons. But Subach, Mekhu, and the like don't have the same martial ring. The weapons also feel just like imitations of FS1 weapons, and I think :v: could've done better. Cyclops and Harpoon are OK names, for example, but Tsunami and Harbinger were good names for big explosives, and Interceptor matched the missile's role perfectly (actually, Harpoon may be a better name, I'm just such an FS1 junkie that I prefer interceptor). FS1 already snatched up a lot of good names, so FS2 had to make do with second-best in some places.