Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Lucika on February 03, 2009, 10:08:00 am
-
Which is the best? FS1 retail, FS2 retail or... what if?
-
What's the point in this thread?
-
let's see... I say better FS1.
the hole "new species" and "total evil" really punched me hard, but that's just me.
-
He's suggesting a FS3. Or that he's asking if you would prefer FS2 as "Another Great War".
-
well... If I understand correctly he's just asking what version of FS universe you like the most.. just like asking if you like better transcend or sync... really basic question.
-
But why is What If - Another Great War, some random campaign by SF-Junky (a very buggy one I may add) the only campaign up there?
-
but What if is a version of FS1 campaign, all other campaigns are completely non-cannon stuff, he's asking what version of FS you like the most.
-
Canon FS1.
-
Canon FS1 for me too, somehow because the bonus and secondary mission objectives were more neat :P.
(And the atmosphere was ... scarier).
-
they were both good, but i voted What if.
-
It's interesting.
It seems that most people who played FS1 first prefer FS1, and that most people who played FS2 first play FS2.
I always thought FS2 had a fascinating story and great atmosphere -- all about human hubris in the face of a vast and uncaring cosmos. FS1 seemed trite, shallow, and uninspired by comparison.
-
In FS1 things seemed a lot more fluid. In FS2 it was all over the place and it seemed a lot less refined.
For example, in FS1, you were fighting the same campaign all the time. There were different enemies, but there was a definite sense of momentum behind the missions. With FS2 on the other hand I never got that feeling since I was jumping from NTF to Shivans and back randomly. In FS1 all the ships seemed 'unified' in design, whereas in FS2 there was a serious rift.
-
For example, in FS1, you were fighting the same campaign all the time. There were different enemies, but there was a definite sense of momentum behind the missions. With FS2 on the other hand I never got that feeling since I was jumping from NTF to Shivans and back randomly.
Why would this be a bad thing?
In FS1 all the ships seemed 'unified' in design, whereas in FS2 there was a serious rift.
Same as above.
-
In FS1 things seemed a lot more fluid. In FS2 it was all over the place and it seemed a lot less refined.
For example, in FS1, you were fighting the same campaign all the time. There were different enemies, but there was a definite sense of momentum behind the missions. With FS2 on the other hand I never got that feeling since I was jumping from NTF to Shivans and back randomly. In FS1 all the ships seemed 'unified' in design, whereas in FS2 there was a serious rift.
Hrm. I liked the war-on-two-fronts business, especially since the two storylines converged. FS1 felt simplistic by comparison.
But I really agree about the ship designs. FS1's were largely better.
-
I liked FS-1 because there was more of a feeling of desperation. It just seemed there was more at risk. In FS-2 the Sathanus didn't seem as intimidating as the Lucifer and it wasn't invulnerable.
-
For me, FS1 was was like: "Oh my god we are doomed what should we do?"
FS2: "Hey, there are Shivans. Okay. Kill'em. Oh, there are more of them than us? Retreat. No desperation."
-
Probably FS1 but I'd play FS2 far more often.
-
I had the opposite experience. FS1 wasn't desperate because we won: the Lucifer went down right in the nick of time, as usual.
In FS2 all our best efforts were useless and all we could do was hide.
-
I had the opposite experience. FS1 wasn't desperate because we won: the Lucifer went down right in the nick of time, as usual.
In FS2 all our best efforts were useless and all we could do was hide.
Come on! Did you EVER feel desperateness and loneliness in FS2?
-
When you purposely have every fighter / bomber in the field go home, yes. ;7
-
When you purposely have every fighter / bomber in the field go home, yes. ;7
I felt so too... on the first time :)
For the second time, it was laaaaaaaaaaame.
FS2 is a copypaste of retreating and attacking.
-
I had the opposite experience. FS1 wasn't desperate because we won: the Lucifer went down right in the nick of time, as usual.
In FS2 all our best efforts were useless and all we could do was hide.
Come on! Did you EVER feel desperateness and loneliness in FS2?
Absolutely. As opposed to FS1, where I felt disengaged and flat. The final act of FS2 was utterly brilliant -- everything crumbling around you.
I'm not trying to say you're wrong. I'm trying to say it seems to depend on what order you played them in.
Also, Ransom Arceihn likes FS2's plot more, as I recall. And he knows a plot. CELEBRITY ENDORSEMENT.
-
tinfoilwantssnuffalupagusindapollkthxbai.
but, if there's no snuffalupagus i'll have to go with fs2. the final act is indeed brilliant.
-
What are the rumors of Descent 4?
FS2 is pretty nice. Both games have awesome musik.
-
Descent 4's dead as a doorknob... :doubt:
-
FS1 had all in all the better atmosphere in the campaign and I liked the BGM more. I played FS1 first.
However, FS2 was better gameplay wise. Larger battles, more usefull missiles, sometimes even strategic decisions.
And the last mission, especially on insane difficulty, just owned.
-
Conflict: FreeSpace is better
-
FS2 all the way. The vast majority of the missions had much greater plot cohesion, as opposed to FS1's multiple "hey, destroy this cargo depot/convoy for no real reason" tasks. And as the esteemed General already alluded to, FS2 had the benefit of the far more unconventional plot all the way through, with an ending that still has us talking ten years after the fact. It's no contest gameplay-wise, either.
-
In FS2 I never got the same feeling of mystery and epicness that I got while playing FS1. Partly because in FS2 everything just seemed happy and wonderful, even as the Sathanes converged around the star I felt like I was playing a fairy tale. Might be because of the flower colored nebula or the fact that the Shivans were complete joke in FS2 (compared to FS1 that is).
-
The music generally was much better in FS1 which enhanced to atmosphere.
Also in FS2 you know that everything is able to be killed with enough firepower but the Lucifer was just simply the ultimate enemy.
-
FS1 for atmosphere FS2 for gameplay. What If? by SF_Juncky attempted to make compromise between the two but IMHO added too many goofy dialogs and lost the atmosphere of hopelessness from FS1.
-
FS1 for atmosphere FS2 for gameplay.
Agreed. Never played Junky's What If, so I can't say anything about that.
The music generally was much better in FS1 which enhanced to atmosphere.
Also in FS2 you know that everything is able to be killed with enough firepower but the Lucifer was just simply the ultimate enemy.
Another thing with FS2 is that you knew there was no way you were gonna actually defeat the Sath fleet and that :v: was just gonna pull something outta the hat. But in FS1 you actually did win which gave a much better sense of accomplishment. Had there been an FS3 which tied up FS2 I guess that would've been different.
-
It seems that most people who played FS1 first prefer FS1, and that most people who played FS2 first play FS2.
Once again I do not fit in with 'most people', then.
Oh, by the way... What IS the 'What if' campaign thingy anyway?
-
Oh, by the way... What IS the 'What if' campaign thingy anyway?
The 'What If' campaign thingy (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,56156.0.html).
-
Oh, by the way... What IS the 'What if' campaign thingy anyway?
The 'What If' campaign thingy (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,56156.0.html).
TBH I haven't heard much about that except that it was uber buggy.
Is it worth the download? I liked SF-Junky's StormFront campaigns but I'm a bit hesitant to try this one.
-
Another thing with FS2 is that you knew there was no way you were gonna actually defeat the Sath fleet and that :v: was just gonna pull something outta the hat. But in FS1 you actually did win which gave a much better sense of accomplishment. Had there been an FS3 which tied up FS2 I guess that would've been different.
I actually kinda liked FS2 better for this reason. The ending of FS1 just seemed too... lucky. You happened to find the only weakness of the invincible Lucifer (no shields in subspace) because of a lucky break (the records on Altair) that happened because of another lucky-ish break (the scientists got shot down and happened to land on that planet). That said, though, it's a testament to :v: and their ability to draw up a plot that they still made the final mission--and really the entire FS1 story--as epic and memorable as it was.
The ending of FS2 was just... brilliant, though. Over those last few missions, every time I turned and saw the 80-plus Saths lined up near the star, it gave me chills. It was clear that there was no way to defeat that kind of firepower; the only hope was to find some way to maybe contain the Shivans. And even that seemed hopeless when you considered that 1) you saw the first Sathanas enter Gamma Draconis even after you thought you had destroyed the portal, and 2) if even one or two of the juggernauts decided to break off and try to reach Vega or Epsilon Pegasi, there would probably be no way to stop them from obliterating every system in GTVA space. There was just a much greater sense of desperation, knowing you had no choice but to run... and I really think that the Shivans' final demonstration in FS2 gave them a completely new aura of power, one they didn't quite reach in the original game, in the sense of "if they can do that... then what else are they capable of?"
I'll admit, though, I did miss the Valkyrie in FS2.
-
Another reason I liked FS1 was that the Shivans seemed to be working towards something you could actually relate to. I understand some people might like the Shivans' sense of "WTF are they up to" in FS2 but in FS1, the fact that you knew they were actually actively pursuing the destruction of the Terran and Vasudan races actually made it that much more desperate.
-
Oh, by the way... What IS the 'What if' campaign thingy anyway?
The 'What If' campaign thingy (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,56156.0.html).
TBH I haven't heard much about that except that it was uber buggy.
Is it worth the download? I liked SF-Junky's StormFront campaigns but I'm a bit hesitant to try this one.
I've been playing it for a bit and it has been reasonable. It also makes me wonder why your wingmen are so quiet during the FS1 and FS2 campaigns.
-
becuase unless you are on the easiest setting, they drop like flies and don't live through from one mission to the next. No time to get to know each other.
-
Maybe he was refering to the fact that, Snipes excluded, there are no prominent pilot characters in FreeSpace.
-
Once, again, that's because they drop like flies. It adds to the general desperation. It's kind of a "We've got to stop them so we're throwing every pilot we have at them, but none of you know each other and will most likely die. Good luck." The character has no time to meet any prominent people that live any length of time.
-
But then it gets to the point where it seems that Alpha One is the only pilot competent enough to actually survive and complete a mission...
-
Once, again, that's because they drop like flies. It adds to the general desperation. It's kind of a "We've got to stop them so we're throwing every pilot we have at them, but none of you know each other and will most likely die. Good luck." The character has no time to meet any prominent people that live any length of time.
Snipes survived. Many times. :D
But then it gets to the point where it seems that Alpha One is the only pilot competent enough to actually survive and complete a mission...
Possibly due to bad AI and/or overpowered weapons, although I may add that the low speeds used in FS2 have their importance. See how things change if you increase spacecraft speed values by 33% or even more.
-
Then wings drop even faster I've noticed.
-
Alright, that's weird...as far as I'm concerned fights last longer...
-
But then it gets to the point where it seems that Alpha One is the only pilot competent enough to actually survive and complete a mission...
Um, because you have the ability to replay.
Try playing on Insane and see how often you die compared to your wingmates. It's pretty comparable.
-
He's suggesting a FS3. Or that he's asking if you would prefer FS2 as "Another Great War".
but What if is a version of FS1 campaign, all other campaigns are completely non-cannon stuff, he's asking what version of FS you like the most.
SF-Junky made the "What if"-campaign a bit more after the 'reference bible'. It kooks like volition cut off some missions and story lines they had in mind during making of FS1, what could also explain some of the 'Inconsistencies' on the star maps shown.
( As an attachment a little map I which keeps me on track with the 'geography' of FS Space with many thanks to the BWO team.)
Why not making kinda 'Great War Mission Pack' as a grand tour of duty for Alpha 1, which could include a then further debugged 'What if' ( can't really see all the problems some other seems to have with it ), and some of the other then 'rejuvenated' Great War related missions and campaigns ( 'Rain on Ribos 4', 'Light of Antares', 'Hellgate Ikeya', 'Phantoms', 'Echo Gate' ), perhaps rearranged to give a proper timeline?
And as said already in this thread, the atmosphere of FS1, respectively 'What if' is IMO far more dense, than in FS2.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
FS1, I thought FS2 was a real let down when compared to the originals. But since I got the FSO, I really got into the FS2 campaigns. So far I've only done Derelict, but that blew my mind.
-
Freespace 1 was the first I played, and I couldn't get enough of it. From the beginning, I was intrigued by the story. The beginning movie, in Ross 128 really pulled me into the game. I'm just flying though, blasting Vasudans, and WHAMMO, scary red ships jump in, and destroy the Vasudans! I'm just about to say thanks, and then they jump out. I just shrug, and fly back to the Plato. Then, lo! Our friends come back! Crap, they just blew up the Plato. RUN FOR IT.
Playing Judas used to really thrill me, and I used to try as hard as I could to avoid getting pulverized by the Lucifer's fighters. (Before I knew that it was scripted.)
Freespace 2 was great, too. I was dissapointed somewhat that I was killing other humans, but then, woohoo! More badass Shivans!
Although, Freespace really made me think of the Shivans as the Great Destroyed, rather than omnipotent aliens who can't die. The Lucifer was INVULNERABLE, until the last second, and then you really fcked the human race by isolating their home planet.
What I mean by the Great Destroyed was, when you went against a Sathanas, all you had to do was take down FOUR beam turrets, and you WIN AT LIFE. Really not that hard. The flak and AAA hardly bother you. The Lucy, though, you had to take down five reactors in a time space of about 10 minutes in a hulky bomber with no shields. Not to mention the great Delta Serpentis footrace to get to the node.
FS1 takes the book for me, but if FS2 was still memorable.
-
( As an attachment a little map I which keeps me on track with the 'geography' of FS Space with many thanks to the BWO team.)
FYI that's 90% non-canon. :rolleyes:
-
Once, again, that's because they drop like flies. It adds to the general desperation. It's kind of a "We've got to stop them so we're throwing every pilot we have at them, but none of you know each other and will most likely die. Good luck." The character has no time to meet any prominent people that live any length of time.
And we ***** about PDSD today. HA! Alpha 1, if he doesent die, at the end he suicides.
-
FYI that's 90% non-canon. :rolleyes:
[/quote]
The 'core systems' and their connections from FS1 and FS2 are correct, the 'Inconsistencies' you can check in the wiki and the rest ..., well a lot ( not all. i.e. 'Cardinal Spear' ) of user-made campaigns ARE consistent to this map. :p
For me it's helpfull when playing the "Ueber-Alpha1" over a weekend or two or three or .. to keep track and ...errrh... 'combining' some of them. ;)
-
Why everyone keeps saying that What If is full of bugs? When I played it I had only minor problems, I found some other bugs more annoying.... like the one that allowed you to jump without engines to the next mission in ST:R.
-
Why everyone keeps saying that What If is full of bugs? When I played it I had only minor problems, I found some other bugs more annoying.... like the one that allowed you to jump without engines to the next mission in ST:R.
Neither I didn't experience bugs.
-
The 'core systems' and their connections from FS1 and FS2 are correct, the 'Inconsistencies' you can check in the wiki and the rest ..., well a lot ( not all. i.e. 'Cardinal Spear' ) of user-made campaigns ARE consistent to this map. :p
For me it's helpfull when playing the "Ueber-Alpha1" over a weekend or two or three or .. to keep track and ...errrh... 'combining' some of them. ;)
Doesn't change the fact that it's non-canon.
-
FS1, I thought FS2 was a real let down when compared to the originals. But since I got the FSO, I really got into the FS2 campaigns. So far I've only done Derelict, but that blew my mind.
Shame on you. FS2 was just as good. alot
-
I am interested in the opinions if What If-voters.
It's okay that wingmen communicate, but what makes it better than both of retail FS-s?