Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - FS2 Required => Blue Planet => Topic started by: FreeSpaceFreak on January 16, 2013, 03:42:38 pm
-
First of all, hats off to the team. You have arguably put an admirable amount of effort into Tenebra, and I have read nothing but positive reviews so far. It seems that, for the majority of players, you have hit the nail on the head with your design decisions. That said, it's nigh impossible to please everyone - so here I'll voice my disgruntled minority opinion :)
Blue Planet forgot Blue Planet
aka FSF's Tenebra review
Back in 2007, when Age of Aquarius was first released, it was immediately a smash hit. It was the first mod to bring a truly epic (in the true sense of the word) story into FreeSpace, a greater-than-life story of hope, despair, courage, self-sacrifice, perseverance, forgiveness - and even love. It was, if you will, the Lord of the Rings of FreeSpace modding. It was, and still is, a compelling mod that really draws its players in. After the climax that was Universal Truth (yes, that title was in AoA too) and the second passage through the Sol node, who didn't feel the rush of joy and relief when that non-GTVA, but definitely Terran frigate showed up and hailed us? Only to have all of our hopes and dreams shattered, no, pulverized mere moments later. That sequence left me in shock and horror for the rest of the day.
Then came the first release of War in Heaven. If AoA was the Lord of the Rings of FreeSpace modding, WiH:R1 was the Saving Private Ryan, the War Horse, the - damn, I don't watch enough war movies to make a proper comparison. Where AoA was a story of mystery and 'divine' intervention ('divine' meaning Kardashev type 3), WiH:R1 was a decidedly human story of war and the horrors it brings. What it did have in common with AoA, though, was the immersion into the story, now even more accentuated by the splendid narrations of life outside the cockpit. I have vivid memories of Kassim collapsing under the emotions, but also of zero-G sparring in a storage room, and of course paragliding through Valles Marineris. I felt part of the story. I felt the rush of relief when those two Jupiter Fleet Narayanas chased the Atreus from Rheza Station (in Darkest Hour). The triumph when we captured the GTL Agincourt. The despair when we found out how Steele was pulling the Vasudans into the war. Hell, I actually cried while the Indus was falling into the sun. And after playing, I had the feeling that I had caught a tiny glimpse - first-hand - of what a real war is like.
Then, War in Heaven: Tenebra. Continuing the movie analogies, this mod would best be compared with... any Michael Bay movie. No character development? Check. Contrived coincidences? Check. Gratuitous pyrotechnics? Check. Whimsical decisions about the fate of thousands? Check. Saving the goddamn Earth? Check! Now, the tropes in themselves would be acceptable, if there was a good storyline to back them up... but I missed that, it was nowhere near the quality of the previous releases. Let's do a thought experiment. Take a campaign in mind, keep its first and last mission the same, and shuffle all the others in random order. Try this with AoA or WiH:R1; their carefully constructed plotlines collapse like a house of cards. Now try it on Tenebra... does it make a difference? Does it really? Don't you have the feeling that, for instance, the Gef habitat mission could have been put somewhere else, or even removed entirely without affecting the story whatsoever?
Which brings me to my main gripe about Tenebra. It is arguably the most 'unconventional' Blue Planet yet: the player flies capships, commands fleets, organizes defences, and much more. Oh it's fun, definitely, and admirably well-executed... but I feel all this came to the detriment of the story. Hell, I'm willing to go out on a limb and state that the only missions that truly advanced the story were the first and the last ones. The first one to set the 'special ops' scene, and Universal Truth because it contains all the story of the entire act, as if to make up for the lack of plot in the previous missions. (Seriously, that was a *lot* of information in a *very* short time...)
And along with the story, out went that immersion, those grand emotions from the previous releases. We hardly get to know our wingmen at all - did you notice they are never even properly introduced? Noemi starts bad-mouthing to - was it Vidaura? - right in the first Dreamscape, and I have no idea why. Daily life on the Masyaf was a mystery too. Apart from a few allusions to showers and barbecues, all we get to see is the Dreamscape and our cockpit. Surely the Fedayeen are people too? They must have their own personalities, gripes, conflicts, inside jokes, funny walks for all I care. So why don't we get a taste of it? The Dreamscape was interesting, but not worth a fraction of the vivid narrations in WiH:R1. Honestly, even retail FS2 did a better job of drawing the player in - in Tenebra, I really felt as if I was fighting someone else's war.
Overall, I would rate Tenebra as the worst Blue Planet yet. In my eyes, the best part of Blue Planet was always its epic (in the true sense of the word) storyline, and its supreme narration that really draws the player in. In Tenebra, it appears as if Blue Planet has forgotten this critical element of Blue Planet. Tenebra did a very impressive job of combining capship command, turret defence and real-time strategy with our beloved old space-sim - but still I hope that the next release will return to the forefront what made the mod so great: its story.
-
Some fair criticism, but I think it's a little harsh at some points. Noemi definitely undergoes character development throughout the story, as does Falconer at the least, and we get more insight into a number of characters--Calder, Mandho, Samuel, Steele, Lopez, Ken, and more. I also think that, while the story in Tenebra was very disjointed, there was a lot there, even if it was a lot more subtle and buried around.
Your criticism about the missions being scrambled in order (aside from the first and last) is what probably resonates with me the most. One Future comes out of nowhere, with a premise that relies on setting details/mechanics that were never even foreshadowed before, and with very little connection to the rest of the plot or setting (it's just so...isolated. It could have been stuck in at any point.). That said, I think at least some of the reason behind this is that Tenebra was originally designed to be 'choose-your-own-order', with the dreamscape being the hub world connecting it all. In the end, they decided to switch back to a more ordered format, but the effects are still noticeable.
About the Michael Bay point: yes, for the most part, it did kind of give that feeling. I think it was more that it was just overwhelming--all high-octane epic action, all the time--every mission introduces a slew of new gameplay mechanics, mentalities, challenges, tools, and objective types. Her Finest Hour was laughably overwhelming to me even before I finished the briefing, but when I started the mission just to get an idea of what I'd be dealing with, I decided to call it quits for the day and watch a playthrough of the mission first. One Future, again, seems to be the biggest culprit to me: out of nowhere, isolated, unprecedented in scale and consequences, most bizarre setup (you fly a small cruiser that flies like a bomber, is shielded, and has controllable weapon banks, against a unique destroyer and several wings of fighters in front of a *giant* asteroid on a strict time limit), and most...flat (you, alone, fighting while grossly outnumbered in a super-advanced prototype, under a very strict time limit to save the world from a giant explosion of sorts from insane eco-terrorists, with threading the needle with a *cruiser* in said giant asteroid to blow up the reactor in its core as one of the two main mission paths...).
I feel, though, that Everything Is Permitted was on par with the first mission in both feel and plot relevance. Her Finest Hour had a number of very satisfying, emotional continuations (and conclusions) to some of the biggest threads left hanging in WiH1, even if they were buried in a mission jam-packed with the kitchen sink (all at once).
I really liked the Dreamscape, despite a few minor nitpicks, for its amazing atmosphere (especially the music), plot-driving qualities, characterization and character-development, and just how much it made me think about many things. It tied the disjointed missions together rather impressively for a single hub mission.
--
I suppose part of the problem with the smaller number of major characters introduced in Tenebra is that they're mysteries at their core until the end of the story, so it doesn't feel like we really get to know them until it's all over (and Tenebra itself is not that long). It also doesn't help that One Future doesn't include them at all.
--I have to cut this short, sorry.
-
I think the point of Tenebra is that humanity (characters) is/are becoming something rather beside the point.
-
The thing about Tenebra... it was a bad idea to release it early. They should have waited until acts 4 and 5 were done. It's very clear to me that they were meant to be interwoven, and that your actions among the fedayeen are meant to have consequences later on the campaign. The GEF mission seems to be tied to weather or not you will be able to recruit the less extremist GEF cells, the results of the convoy mission seem like they will affect GTA - VN relations in Sol, 'Her Finest Hour' will decide if you may or may not have a subversive element among GTVA personnel thanks to Lopez (or vice-versa?) The only mission I can see as standalone is therefore the assassination.
One thing I do agree with is the Michael Bay factor. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=v7ssUivM-eM#t=2s)
-
I disagree, Micheal Bay Factor to me is mindless action, Tenebra is most certainly not mindless action.
-
You make some good points, but comparing WIH:2 to Michael Bay is pretty rough. I don't think a michael bay film ever really gets into themes of psychological warfare. Michael bay is more of a cheesy military triumph driven largely by superb special effects, forced humor, and that unbelievable romance. Though, I will admit the comet mission is somewhat Michael Bay esque the way it gets thrown in. But really, can't we forgive those sort of moments in a video game?
The main reason I think there is a percieved lack of continuity in the game is that the story does not get moved forward in the missions themselves. Previous Blue Planet missions left the player floating and reading dialogue which moved the story forward. The player was not really involved. In this release, the player is steeped in something that I have found lacking in other mods, gameplay! Every mission had a wildly unique and creative mechanic for the player to learn and strategise with. This is what I believe the focus of the new release was, and it in my mind was pulled off well.
Story is not so much event driven in this release as much as it reveals the truths of the gameworld which have persisted through the first two releases. We find out the true nature of the vishnans, why the Eldar betrayed her people, we discover the Fedayeen, and much more.
Given all the events which have transpired in the previous releases, I don't believe this method of story telling is such a bad idea. It also offers the opportunity for some unique gameplay mechanics which previously would have been undoable.
-
Ahh, you mean the asteroid, right?
I'm not sure what the dev team was thinking, but from an outside perspective I would venture the conversation went like this:
"We have a nice model of a hollow asteroid."
"Can you blow it up?"
"Sure."
"GTVA would never use an asteroid to attack the UEF...that'd be too far fetched."
"Uh, ok, lets bring in a third party of fanatics to do that sort of thing. Fanatics always do that sort of thing."
"What does this have to do with BP?"
"Quit asking stupid questions. We have a model of an asteroid, and we are going to blow it up."
(Don't take it personally, guys!)
-
Even Mass Effect did that side story, so I don't really know what the fuss is all about.
-
Even Mass Effect did that side story, so I don't really know what the fuss is all about.
Unless we see some kind of back-story thing that originally meant to tie the asteroid thing into acts 4 and 5, the whole Asteroid Incident seems pretty far-fetched.
I mean, uptill now we've only seen the Gefs using outdated civillian fighters, Acts 1&2 portraying them as fanatics with no refinement whatsoever with regards to tactics, ships, weapons, etc. And all of a sudden, BAM! they have a huge asteroid that can apparently do a subspace jump to Earth? and collide, leaving all life on Earth destroyed? Really? like wtf!??! :wtf:
The first time I actually played that mission; I waited to see if the thing would actually jump...It was so ridiculous.
How can that asteroid even jump? Its larger in volume than any ship we've seen so far, It would require much more energy to jump it to subspace than from that puny Subspace gate and motivator (compared to its size)... I can also forgive the fact that the Gefs have a frikken Destroyer which has not been referenced anytime before...But the whole thing about "Fanatics/Terrorists using an asteroid to wipe all life off a planet" for mundane reasons is getting really old and ridiculous especially for a rich story like BP's. :doubt:
[/rant]
dont get mad at me....
-
Well I won't. I see your point. It came out of nowhere for me too.
-
I mean, uptill now we've only seen the Gefs using outdated civillian fighters, Acts 1&2 portraying them as fanatics with no refinement whatsoever with regards to tactics, ships, weapons, etc.
Scimitar is nowhere near outdated for people that don't have regular access to military suppliers. It would probably be somewhere near or above top-of-the-line on the civilian market. The Gefs are extremely well-equipped for a paramilitary faction. I mean, dude, they had frikkin' Warhammers in act2. Nuclear. Warheads. And the rest of their armament is definitely military-grade. And their tactics have kept them alive for decades despite all the might of Third Fleet trying to take em out.
I think players underestimate the Gefs because we never see them win in act1/2 and we mostly see them use a few fighters. They were already a major thorn in the UEF foot before the war, and they're even more so now, without Third Fleet to crack down on them and with all the bonus supply gifts they received from both GTVI and UEF Intelligence in hope to have them pick sides in the war.
They wouldn't have bothered to convince them to pick sides if they weren't gonna be significant assets in the war.
And all of a sudden, BAM! they have a huge asteroid that can apparently do a subspace jump to Earth? and collide, leaving all life on Earth destroyed? Really? like wtf!??! :wtf:
Gefs have always been living in asteroids and comets. Even in real life, the Kepler belt is full of asteroids more than large enough to cause a planetary extinction event. I don't see what's surprising here.
How can that asteroid even jump? Its larger in volume than any ship we've seen so far, It would require much more energy to jump it to subspace than from that puny Subspace gate and motivator (compared to its size)...
Oooh, glad to see you're a subspace expert. I bet the Gefs could use someone to tell them their plan isn't actually physically possible. Who knows, maybe it could be one more way to beat that mission ! :p Gotta love having many ways to beat a mission.
-
Ahh, you mean the asteroid, right?
I'm not sure what the dev team was thinking, but from an outside perspective I would venture the conversation went like this:
"We have a nice model of a hollow asteroid."
"Can you blow it up?"
"Sure."
"GTVA would never use an asteroid to attack the UEF...that'd be too far fetched."
"Uh, ok, lets bring in a third party of fanatics to do that sort of thing. Fanatics always do that sort of thing."
"What does this have to do with BP?"
"Quit asking stupid questions. We have a model of an asteroid, and we are going to blow it up."
(Don't take it personally, guys!)
yeah it was really lazy how they introduced the gaian effort and kostadin cell in that mission without any mention or exploration in the previous story-- wait what
-
Ahh, you mean the asteroid, right?
I'm not sure what the dev team was thinking, but from an outside perspective I would venture the conversation went like this:
"We have a nice model of a hollow asteroid."
"Can you blow it up?"
"Sure."
"GTVA would never use an asteroid to attack the UEF...that'd be too far fetched."
"Uh, ok, lets bring in a third party of fanatics to do that sort of thing. Fanatics always do that sort of thing."
"What does this have to do with BP?"
"Quit asking stupid questions. We have a model of an asteroid, and we are going to blow it up."
(Don't take it personally, guys!)
yeah it was really lazy how they introduced the gaian effort and kostadin cell in that mission without any mention or exploration in the previous story-- wait what
My response exactly. Kostadin Cell, and the Gaian Effort's way of living has been mentioned since Act 1. There has been lots of dialogue about just what they do, how they live, and how they achieve that. Saying this came out of nowhere is like saying the Taliban turning into an extremist group was totally an unforseen consequence when the US started arming them to fight the russians in Afghanistan.
I'm afraid I really don't agree with much of your criticism, just that about the constant introduction of new gameplay features, and for me that was actually a plus.
-
And all of a sudden, BAM! they have a huge asteroid that can apparently do a subspace jump to Earth? and collide, leaving all life on Earth destroyed? Really? like wtf!??! :wtf:
Gefs have always been living in asteroids and comets. Even in real life, the Kepler belt is full of asteroids more than large enough to cause a planetary extinction event. I don't see what's surprising here.
You are not getting my point! I'm surprised that they suddenly (atleast it appears to the player like that) have this capability to launch an omfghugeassasteroid into subspace on an attack vector to Earth!
Oooh, glad to see you're a subspace expert. I bet the Gefs could use someone to tell them their plan isn't actually physically possible. Who knows, maybe it could be one more way to beat that mission ! Gotta love having many ways to beat a mission.
Special Fedayeen Agent Subspace (Supreme) Expert Crybertrance reporting in sir!
-
That asteroid is their habitat, their very home, and houses thousands of people. They've habited it for potentially decades. They didn't want to loose it, and they've had all the time to search for ways to not have it be just a stationary target should it be discovered.
I doubt moving things this large through subspace is actually any kind of technological feat. It's just not something any of the other factions ever needed to do. Equipping the asteroid for subspace is also probably not cheap, but after years of raiding UEF shipping lanes and all the resources they've had to mine in the Kuiper belt (as well as all Kostadin gained by harassing other Gef cells), I'm pretty sure they didn't have any insurmountable trouble finding all the resources needed for that project.
-
yadda yadda Gefs yadda yadda
Guys, the plausibility of the asteroid mission was not the point I was trying to make. What I'm saying is that Tenebra has taken a completely different direction from previous BP releases, and that IMHO this change was not for the best.
You make some good points, but comparing WIH:2 to Michael Bay is pretty rough.
I wasn't quite happy with the analogy either, but it's the best I could think of. To be more accurate: Tenebra essentially felt like a technology demonstrator, a proof-of-concept campaign, with one big plot exposition mission at the end to make it relevant to the BP continuity. Oh I know, the war has taken significant turns: Tev-Vasudan relations deteriorated, the Kostadin cell is all but wiped out, the UEF defeated the Carthage and took back Neptune - but all that felt very anticlimactic, it didn't "stick". Hardly any consideration is given to the UEF's major victories in this campaign. For each of these events, a single mission was all it took! "Oh look, we vanquished the Carthage and took back Neptune. Nice. Now lemme go back to the Dreamscape." There was no buildup, no aftermath, nothing. Compare that to the long chase of the Duke in AoA, the heroic sacrifice of the Nelson in WiH (which was still being talked about six missions later), and the battle that developed around the Agincourt! See, those were memorable events, developing across the timespan of several missions. But in Tenebra? Nothing of the kind.
"But the effects will become apparent in later missions!" you say. "See, when you freed the Gefs in mission 1, you had to face more opposition around the asteroid!" Is that a good thing? Really? Were you waiting for a campaign that does that? At best, it leads to a much bigger playtesting effort, wasting dev time which could have been much better spent. At worst, I need to replay the entire frickin' campaign because a decision I made earlier makes a later mission too hard to complete. "But don't you feel you take decisions much more consciously now?" No, actually I don't. I can't go extrapolating the possible effects of every single decision I make - I'm not a chess computer, I'm a fighter pilot!
Now I have no problems with proof-of-concept campaigns (I can only applaud The Blade Itself), but please - please - not at the expense of the story. If people want different gameplay, there's plenty more possibilities out there - hell, some are even set in the BP universe! What makes Blue Planet unique - IMHO - is its storyline worth publication, and storytelling that makes the player part of it. Those are BP's irreplaceable assets, and I hope that future releases will again use them to their full power.
-
There was some proof of concept work in this campaign, I agree. However I think Tenebra was an important release for that. A lot of new things happened all of the sudden, but you gotta remember this is like 30 missions into the arc. Yes, some things should be ironed out, but repetitive gameplay has for the most part been avoided with outstanding success with an outstanding but spartan release of new assets. How many people here could say they enjoyed the flow of Sync? (I immensely enjoyed Sync, it was a completely different animal and I believe a proof of concept for Transcend?)
3-6 years down the road, when the story is told and the only newcomers are going to be some correspondent of a fan of the Freespace, I think Tenebra will be a master stroke that breaks the pace of things in BP. To say 'the groundwork has been laid' would be an understatement. If no mission in act IV or V has not already been restructured if not completely restarted based on the public release of Act III, I'd be surprised.
So, should I argue for more BP elixir to be released as soon as it is ready, or counter argue (and shoot myself in the foot) that without the full scope, playing one episode at once is just an unbearable tease? I'm gonna have to trust the developers on this one.
-
Wait...didn't I mention a headshot asteroid at some point?
I liked the mission, and I even wasn't surprised, given the fact that the GEF are some kind of crazy asteroid nomads.
-
Reread the thread again, and the argument FSF makes about the Carthage seems wrong to me. As far as story goes, Carthage made the kill list pretty early in the fiction viewer. The dreamscape and discussion on bringing the Carthage down seemed important and very Laporte centered. The fact that it was 'take 2' on the Carthage was even lampshaded. The Fedayeen 'advice' at the start of 'Her Finest Hour' also seemed to blur the line of subconscious and reality. How many special operations forces can you think of would actually have every member of the team go into an operation harboring a differing opinion on where to begin? Even Alpha 1's/ Laporte's thought going in is Carthago Delende Est, not voiced by any squad member, but felt by the player.
-
What I'm saying is that Tenebra has taken a completely different direction from previous BP releases, and that IMHO this change was not for the best.
Well I think you are wrong.
-
As far as story goes, Carthage made the kill list pretty early in the fiction viewer. The dreamscape and discussion on bringing the Carthage down seemed important and very Laporte centered.
This is true, but I have to admit that this doesn't happen in an actual missions. Both Aristea and Delenda Est had preceding missions that set the scene for the big battles, whereas in Act 3 the set up for Her Finest Hour is given in the fiction viewer or dreamscape.
It didn't bother me, as I felt the story still gave me proper context as to why this op had to be completed in one mission given the narrow window of opportunity, but I do see where he is coming from on this point.
-
One thing I found odd was that Karuna was moving away from a battle group it had no business tangling with at that angle. I believe another Karuna already had to retreat. My point being that as Fedayeen, we were surgically inserted as part of a much larger operation.
-
All this talk about the missions feeling disconnected makes sense from a certain angle, but I think you're coming at it the wrong way.
This is Act 3 of a 5-act story with multiple threads. It was released on its own because we were afraid development would peter to a halt otherwise.
It seems absurd to suggest that none of the missions in Act 3 have buildup. Mission 18 is the next mission in the Gef arc that began back in 'For the Wrong Reasons' and continued in 'What Binds Us' and 'Deals in Shadows'. Mission 18 directly causes Mission 20, the Kostadin Cell's last-ditch doomsday effort to drive humanity off Earth - an attack that's been foreshadowed since R1 if you were paying attention.
Mission 19 is the next mission in the 'mole/countermole' arc that's been running since 'The Plunder', particularly prominent in 'Deals in Shadows', 'Pawns', and 'Delenda Est'.
Mission 21 sees the player inserted into the ongoing broader war effort - an 'arc' that barely needs description.
Mission 22/23 are the next missions in the Ken arc that began in 'Ken'.
Does it feel disjointed to get just a couple more missions in each arc? Maybe. But we need to see how the Fedayeen alter each arc. Laporte has moved from a place of learning into a place of power over the war - but not yet mastery over herself. Act 3 is practically Laporte Strikes Back - she makes a decisive action in the context of each arc in which she was formerly powerless, but she makes no progress at all in the areas where she was once powerful: her relationship to Simms and to the core ideals of the Federation.
Everything in Tenebra is about trading humanity for tactical power and exigency. Humanity is subsumed by functionality and the machinery of war. The Fedayeen wingmen each develop as a mirror of some part of Laporte that's broken. The Masyaf is a ship populated by alienated shark people. They're the antithesis of the Wargods.
If you felt that Act 3 gave up something crucial about Blue Planet in favor of wild exploration - consider that in light of what's happening here. What is Laporte learning, and what has she forgotten in the process?
Even Mass Effect did that side story, so I don't really know what the fuss is all about.
Unless we see some kind of back-story thing that originally meant to tie the asteroid thing into acts 4 and 5, the whole Asteroid Incident seems pretty far-fetched.
I mean, uptill now we've only seen the Gefs using outdated civillian fighters, Acts 1&2 portraying them as fanatics with no refinement whatsoever with regards to tactics, ships, weapons, etc. And all of a sudden, BAM! they have a huge asteroid that can apparently do a subspace jump to Earth? and collide, leaving all life on Earth destroyed? Really? like wtf!??! :wtf:
The first time I actually played that mission; I waited to see if the thing would actually jump...It was so ridiculous.
How can that asteroid even jump? Its larger in volume than any ship we've seen so far, It would require much more energy to jump it to subspace than from that puny Subspace gate and motivator (compared to its size)... I can also forgive the fact that the Gefs have a frikken Destroyer which has not been referenced anytime before...But the whole thing about "Fanatics/Terrorists using an asteroid to wipe all life off a planet" for mundane reasons is getting really old and ridiculous especially for a rich story like BP's. :doubt:
[/rant]
dont get mad at me....
The only thing ridiculous about the idea of ramming an asteroid into the surface of a planet is that it doesn't happen all the time in FreeSpace.
Ahh, you mean the asteroid, right?
I'm not sure what the dev team was thinking, but from an outside perspective I would venture the conversation went like this:
"We have a nice model of a hollow asteroid."
"Can you blow it up?"
"Sure."
"GTVA would never use an asteroid to attack the UEF...that'd be too far fetched."
"Uh, ok, lets bring in a third party of fanatics to do that sort of thing. Fanatics always do that sort of thing."
"What does this have to do with BP?"
"Quit asking stupid questions. We have a model of an asteroid, and we are going to blow it up."
The Gef attack in 'One Future' was outlined since well before Act 1 ever released. They're some of the few clues in the story that the fanbase never picked up on or connected.
-
What were the clues?
-
One thing I found odd was that Karuna was moving away from a battle group it had no business tangling with at that angle. I believe another Karuna already had to retreat. My point being that as Fedayeen, we were surgically inserted as part of a much larger operation.
Even more so to the point: Why does it feel like we are being briefed on a mission AS it's taking place? This was easily the biggest failure of the mission design. You do not brief your special forces on a major battle, then update them as it happens, then say "Ok, well, we waited for it to get THIS BAD, now go clean up the mess, and you can play with the artillery guns or upload the virus...do whatever you feel like...including capturing or killing the carthage...IT'S UP TO YOU."
It doesn't take any hindsight to see that this kind of mentality does not even remotely exist in any chain of command. If Laporte's squadron of special forces is supposed to be the game breaker in this mission, why did they wait until the mission was broken and there was only a 13 minute window to deploy the virus, gun down all of the major warships and then do whatever with the Carthage?
Major operations like this aren't planned in the 5 minutes it takes to read the briefing, there should be no reason that the player feels like "Oh, sorry I'm late to the party..."
Even with the assassination mission, Laporte is able to scan the comm tower on an enemy installation BEFORE the mission starts. There is no reason she shouldn't have been given a head start in the neptune mission which is FAR more important.
As for the Karuna turning a 180 and getting shot at from behind, you are exactly right. I've never seen one freespace mission where a ship needed to physically turn away from the enemy and increase it's distance before jumping out. Being that impossibly close to the Carthage fleet, having turned a 180 and burning away isn't plausible.
As for the "GEF" having been introduced in WIH, yes, they were there. But there is a huge difference between a bunch of random fighters/pirates and a religious fanatic who builds a hyperspace capable asteroid with the sole purpose of smashing it into the Earth. One is people thrifting and scraping to survive, the other takes a massive war machine.
Even then, that's not the point. The point is now...everyone and his brother is trying to take down the Earth...and instead of protecting the earth FROM the Shivans being the major story plot, or the GTVA, or the Vishnans, now we have the GEFs.
Maybe this was in Blue Planet's original design, but that makes the original design now faulty because instead of being a Space Combat Simulator BP is just whoring itself out to any franchise, story or style of gameplay that gets fanboys on this forum. We now have a capital ship simulator, a tower defense game, some kind of weird virtual internet simulation (Yeah, I remember when people thought there would eventually be a 3D internet, anyone remember that?) and a flying nightmare simulator. Freespace pilots aren't human anymore, they are tripped up implanted cyborgs that connect to the Shivan hivemind, or psycho killers who've fallen from the ranks of the masses.
This isn't a believable fantasy anymore.
-
It doesn't take any hindsight to see that this kind of mentality does not even remotely exist in any chain of command. If Laporte's squadron of special forces is supposed to be the game breaker in this mission, why did they wait until the mission was broken and there was only a 13 minute window to deploy the virus, gun down all of the major warships and then do whatever with the Carthage?
Major operations like this aren't planned in the 5 minutes it takes to read the briefing, there should be no reason that the player feels like "Oh, sorry I'm late to the party..."
A Fedayeen is never late, nor is she early. She arrives precisely when she means to. The Fedayeen planned to attack when they did; I don't recall the briefing exactly, but it's likely that CASSANDRA ran simulations of the attack at various times and selected the best time to attack.
As for the Karuna turning a 180 and getting shot at from behind, you are exactly right. I've never seen one freespace mission where a ship needed to physically turn away from the enemy and increase it's distance before jumping out. Being that impossibly close to the Carthage fleet, having turned a 180 and burning away isn't plausible.
When was this? There was probably a reason for it.
As for the "GEF" having been introduced in WIH, yes, they were there. But there is a huge difference between a bunch of random fighters/pirates and a religious fanatic who builds a hyperspace capable asteroid with the sole purpose of smashing it into the Earth. One is people thrifting and scraping to survive, the other takes a massive war machine.
Even then, that's not the point. The point is now...everyone and his brother is trying to take down the Earth...and instead of protecting the earth FROM the Shivans being the major story plot, or the GTVA, or the Vishnans, now we have the GEFs.
The gefs were always a threat, and they were always crazy ecoterrorists (at least that was true for Kostadin Cell). Even if I missed the foreshadowing that pointed specifically at the asteroid launch, it didn't come as a total surprise given who we were dealing with.
Maybe this was in Blue Planet's original design, but that makes the original design now faulty because instead of being a Space Combat Simulator BP is just whoring itself out to any franchise, story or style of gameplay that gets fanboys on this forum. We now have a capital ship simulator, a tower defense game, some kind of weird virtual internet simulation (Yeah, I remember when people thought there would eventually be a 3D internet, anyone remember that?) and a flying nightmare simulator. Freespace pilots aren't human anymore, they are tripped up implanted cyborgs that connect to the Shivan hivemind, or psycho killers who've fallen from the ranks of the masses.
This isn't a believable fantasy anymore.
I agree on the gameplay - Tenebra tried some crazy, out-there gameplay stuff and I happened to like it. I know not everyone will. I also know they're toning it down for Acts 4 and 5, so don't get your panties in a wad. I saw Tenebra as a kind of "hey, Laporte is in the uber-elite spec ops with tons of awesome tech at her disposal, how can we go crazy with the gameplay just in this one chapter and see what works?"
The "weird virtual internet simulation" is no less believable than a shared dream in itself, which is entirely possible with a system as complex as a Shivan computer and a FS2-era understanding of the human brain. The "Flying nightmare simulator" makes exactly as much sense as the Ken mission- aliens are ****ing with Laporte's head in insane ways, and not just the Shivans and Vishnans (though they're bad enough). If Universal Truth had been all calm and noneventful other than the Shivan infodump, that would have been implausible.
I agree somewhat with the point that Tenebra seems disjointed, since it ties together several plot arcs without having a very strong one of its own (especially since the bonding and camaraderie between wingmates was nowhere near as present as in WiH p1), but the themes it presented (such as: now that Laporte has become a Shivan killing machine, how will she deal with all this power) were consistent enough that it felt like a campaign rather than a series of missions.
I had a disorganized, long-winded conclusion here, but I'll just say that in claiming that Tenebra is not "believable" you seem to be missing a crucial theme that's been building up since AoA and is the main point of Tenebra (that is: how much "humanity" and moral high ground can you lose to ensure the survival of your species? Implications include: how much has the Council of Elders already lost to the Vishnans and how much has the GTVA lost in attacking their home system, how is this affected by posthumanist stuff like linking yourself to the CASSANDRA network (and Bosch&co becoming Ken), and how will it affect the Shivans' and Vishnans' designs, etc etc).
lol I use too many parentheses and words
-
Even more so to the point: Why does it feel like we are being briefed on a mission AS it's taking place? This was easily the biggest failure of the mission design. You do not brief your special forces on a major battle, then update them as it happens, then say "Ok, well, we waited for it to get THIS BAD, now go clean up the mess, and you can play with the artillery guns or upload the virus...do whatever you feel like...including capturing or killing the carthage...IT'S UP TO YOU."
It doesn't take any hindsight to see that this kind of mentality does not even remotely exist in any chain of command. If Laporte's squadron of special forces is supposed to be the game breaker in this mission, why did they wait until the mission was broken and there was only a 13 minute window to deploy the virus, gun down all of the major warships and then do whatever with the Carthage?
Major operations like this aren't planned in the 5 minutes it takes to read the briefing, there should be no reason that the player feels like "Oh, sorry I'm late to the party..."
There's a few things you should consider here before you start damning every aspect of this mission's setup. The two most important ones being - 1) Given the speed combat in WiH tends to occur at, it is not unfeasible that the battle at neptune had been occurring for mere minutes before your briefing and arrival, and considering that in-system jump travel has been shown to last seconds at longest, it is also not unfeasible that you were out the briefing room door and fighting at neptune in another five. I'm sure the Fedayeen is intelligent enough to have kept your Ainsariis prepped and ready in case it was necessary to send a wing, so you're only "late to the party" in the sense that you didn't go in with the first wave, and 2) Ask yourself - why would you commit surgical strike stealth forces to the first wave of a mass assault, especially forces that cannot be replaced in a timely fashion? You're Fedayeen - not only are you the best of the best, you're part of what amounts to a paramilitary shadow organization utilizing technology and tactics far beyond the norm for for your faction. You don't waste assets like that by jamming them into a prepared enemies face - you commit them when necessary, and with proper cover so they can turn the tide for you. Say, cover like an enormous conventional push against said prepared enemy, which, as I'm sure you're aware, creates massive amounts of confusion, slowing enemy reaction times and allowing stealth assets to work with a bit more breathing room.
Even with the assassination mission, Laporte is able to scan the comm tower on an enemy installation BEFORE the mission starts. There is no reason she shouldn't have been given a head start in the neptune mission which is FAR more important.
See above. You're not with a squadron of gunships anymore, and you're not an asset to be flung stupidly at well defended military targets without support. The assassination was a wildly different sort of attack with wildly different stakes.
As for the "GEF" having been introduced in WIH, yes, they were there. But there is a huge difference between a bunch of random fighters/pirates and a religious fanatic who builds a hyperspace capable asteroid with the sole purpose of smashing it into the Earth. One is people thrifting and scraping to survive, the other takes a massive war machine.
The Gefs dwelling in comet farms and the like has been around since they appeared in WiH, and all it took to be aware was looking at the fiction viewer the BP team has constantly told everyone to look at. Whats more, the Kostadin Cell being crazy, well equipped, and willing to do stupid **** in the name of ecoterrorism has been in dialog since act 1. If you missed it, that fine, but you can hardly claim they came out of nowhere. On top of that, given how little is actually known about Subspace travel and it's limits, saying it's out of the realm of possibility for an entire society of thousands of individuals to equip a decent sized asteroid they've been living in for decades with one-shot subspace engines is kinda dumb. You're allowing your head-canon to overwrite someone else's storytelling.
Plus, and this has been mentioned before several times, the fact that no one in Freespace ever thought to just jump a rock into a target is kinda baffling. It would be ridiculously cost and time effective, even with how little canon information there is in Subspace drives.
Maybe this was in Blue Planet's original design, but that makes the original design now faulty because instead of being a Space Combat Simulator BP is just whoring itself out to any franchise, story or style of gameplay that gets fanboys on this forum. We now have a capital ship simulator, a tower defense game, some kind of weird virtual internet simulation (Yeah, I remember when people thought there would eventually be a 3D internet, anyone remember that?) and a flying nightmare simulator. Freespace pilots aren't human anymore, they are tripped up implanted cyborgs that connect to the Shivan hivemind, or psycho killers who've fallen from the ranks of the masses.
This isn't a believable fantasy anymore.
I'm going to address the second part of this rant first - the topics presented in Tenebra are actually pretty damn hard on the Science Fiction scale - most, if not all of it, has been in speculative fiction for years. Whats more, you seem to either have not understood most of them, or are trying to simplify them in order to make your criticism work better. If it's the former reason, then use the internet. You were on it to post, there's no reason you can't use it to educate yourself. It's much easier than complaining, and on top of that not using the wealth of information literally at your fingertips is criminal. If your choice of description is due to the latter reason, then shame on you, that's a terrible way to discuss a topic.
As for the first couple of sentences, it seems as though you'd prefer your Freespace as the same semi-mindless shooty space-sim as it was when it released - which is fine, Freespace 2 is an excellent game that did a ton of things right and there's no reason not to enjoy it. But, if thats the case, why come into a thread about a mod that has explicitly stated they're trying to be different and blast them for, well, trying to be different? The varied mission types and gimmicks are excellent examples of what can be done with the engine now, and most of them were even justified in the storyline, if that's your issue. But instead you seem to be angrily attacking Tenebra because of these different approaches, ranting about whoring and fanboys. That's not a great way to get your points across. If you feel there's legitimate issue to point out, tone it down a bit and discuss it, because right now you look like a more verbose Gamefaqs poster.
-
LOJIK BOM: An asteroid of density 5.23 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_asteroid_physical_characteristics#Density) g/cm^3, volume 404 (http://www.artdds.com/studio/toolbox/vol_n_mass_calc/) km^3 travelling at 2614 m/s (as observed on-scene) has a kinetic energy of 7.22*10^18 J or 1.73 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT_equivalent) Gigatonnes. (-10%: 1.6 GT). A harbinger: 5 Gigatonnes. Not to say that it wouldn't crack open a continent, but an asteroid of this calibre just isn't worth the effort to use in a combat situation. It's just as easy to throw an anti-matter warhead down to the planet from space.
-
As for the Karuna turning a 180 and getting shot at from behind, you are exactly right. I've never seen one freespace mission where a ship needed to physically turn away from the enemy and increase it's distance before jumping out. Being that impossibly close to the Carthage fleet, having turned a 180 and burning away isn't plausible.
Delenda Est. The Yangtze and the Indus both do it right in front of you.
-
-snipity snip snip-
Well, I didn't really look at it that way..It kinda makes sense now! :p
Btw, I don't really get why people are getting all offensive about the new gameplay mechanics and features. If Tenebra had Noemi flying with the Fedayeen and not have the new gameplay mechanics, it would stick out like a sore thumb. You are special forces for petes sake! You are supposed to do stuff that normal pilots can't. Also, haven't we all got outright bored with the standard FS mission styles and gameplay mechanics? The BP team imo have breathed new life into the Space Combat Sim genre...And its my earnest request that the BP team do not return to pure FS style gameplay...please!
-
As for the Karuna turning a 180 and getting shot at from behind, you are exactly right. I've never seen one freespace mission where a ship needed to physically turn away from the enemy and increase it's distance before jumping out. Being that impossibly close to the Carthage fleet, having turned a 180 and burning away isn't plausible.
Delenda Est. The Yangtze and the Indus both do it right in front of you.
Because its better to warp away from your target and make it out alive, than to warp towards your target. Not to mention, frigates take significantly longer to charge up jump drives (and to plot a safe jump) after a jump compared to fighters. Hence, it makes more sense to turn around and run, while prepping for emergency/crash jump rather than just sitting there waiting to get gutted my beam-fire.
-
I know that. docfu doesn't seem to.
His whole reasoning there is flawed. "I've never seen this in any FS campaign, so BP shouldn't be doing it." What?
-
And its my earnest request that the BP team do not return to pure FS style gameplay...please!
I've yet to finish the campaign and distill everything before turning on my "judgement engines", but early as I am I can definitely support Crybertrance's plead in this. Perhaps consider the existence of *a* learning curve, but still it's great to have these amazing new gameplays and have fun with them.
-
The Serenity in HFH is exactly where it is for a reason and if you pay attention to the dialogue and think a little it's not too hard to figure out.
-
Reading this thread makes me sick. Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text. You people disgust me.
Okay, I don't hate you THAT much but still... If this is what we have become I can see why people arequitting modding. People apparently don't want games any more but novels.
-
Acts 1-2 were not a snorefest. They were just different. The problem is judging any of them in a vacuum. They are all WiH. They should all be judged as though they were released together.
Acts 4-5 should be released simply as WiH. Everything together in one campaign file.
-
i'm sure the team are delighted to see you defending them by saying how much better tenebra is than the crap they came out with before
-
Hm...I like the whole BP-verse.
I enjoyed act 1, loved act 2, took some time with act 3 and honestly, this act is pure fun to play, just today I replayed the assasination and cursed the whole world, 'cause although I knew which transport was my target, it doesn't turned yellow, despite having the full signal strength, so in the end I just wasted the transport, which got me killed instantly.
-
The target transport actually changes every time for precisely that reason.
-
I knew that, I meant the fact that the signal strength gauge was full, but the transport which emitted the signal didn't turn yellow, like the game was saying: Screw you Crizza, not going to happen.
-
Haven't played Tenebra yet (which is why I skimmed over this thread instead of reading everything and spoiling it), so I won't comment on its quality.
Reading this thread makes me sick. Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text. You people disgust me.
You didn't like WiH1? I thought the sheer amount of messages were a little annoying, but the storyline more than made up for it.
EDIT: Oh and the "flying nightmare simulator" is rather fitting, since Tenebra is Latin for darkness.
-
i'm sure the team are delighted to see you defending them by saying how much better tenebra is than the crap they came out with before
The team is always delighted to see the heterodoxy of human preference in action. ;) Any piece of criticism has to be taken in perspective of the whole spectrum of responses. Sometimes useful information can be extracted; sometimes the player just didn't connect with the narrative or ludic design; sometimes the player never reached an important realization.
-
sometimes the player just didn't connect with the narrative or ludic design; sometimes the player never reached an important realization.
...it does occur to you these can result from failures of the designer, yes? Some of your replies have been a little Anne Rice-y of late and it's worrisome.
-
No, man, at no point in the design of this narratively and ludologically difficult and often opaque campaign did we ever worry, even once, about how to transmit information to the player
-
Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text.
Factoring in the dreamscape (which is admittedly optional), doesn't Tenebra seem to have more reading/dialogue in it than either Chrysalis or Apotheosis?
-
Acts 1-2 were not a snorefest. They were just different. The problem is judging any of them in a vacuum. They are all WiH. They should all be judged as though they were released together.
Acts 4-5 should be released simply as WiH. Everything together in one campaign file.
The thing is this entire thread is about judging the parts in a vacuum and comparing them to each other.
Which may very well indeed be a flawed analysis.
Reading this thread makes me sick. Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text. You people disgust me.
You didn't like WiH1? I thought the sheer amount of messages were a little annoying, but the storyline more than made up for it.
Nope, I didn't like it. I admit I did exaggerate a fair bit in my previous post, but IMO saying that WiHR1 was a boring snore fest gameplay-wise is on the order of magnitude is the same as saying that Tenebra had little to no coherent story.
There are about 3 missions with interesting gameplay in the entirety of WiH:R1, being The Intervention (Dating Simm), Aristea, and The Blade Itself. Aristea's concept was pulled off far better in Her Finest Hour, and The Blade Itself wasn't even part of the main campaign. The rest of the missions were essentially run off the mill escort/intercept missions with a ton of in-mission dialogue where I barely had to do anything. It was defined by a complete lack of noteworthy tasks for the player to perform. Hell, you didn't even have to disarm beam cannons until like, the last mission.
WiH:R1 is a nice piece of writing for sure, but it kind of falls flat as a game. However, it's the same gameplay as FS2, except diluted with more text. At times it borders on "fly-through cutscene".
Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text.
Factoring in the dreamscape (which is admittedly optional), doesn't Tenebra seem to have more reading/dialogue in it than either Chrysalis or Apotheosis?
The fact that it's optional, and that it's punctuated by excellent missions with unique concepts (rather than having the dialogue lodged in mundane missions design-wise) is the defining difference.
Ahh, you mean the asteroid, right?
I'm not sure what the dev team was thinking, but from an outside perspective I would venture the conversation went like this:
"We have a nice model of a hollow asteroid."
"Can you blow it up?"
"Sure."
"GTVA would never use an asteroid to attack the UEF...that'd be too far fetched."
"Uh, ok, lets bring in a third party of fanatics to do that sort of thing. Fanatics always do that sort of thing."
"What does this have to do with BP?"
"Quit asking stupid questions. We have a model of an asteroid, and we are going to blow it up."
As far as I'm concerned this is a perfectly legitimate way to design missions. Hell, I'll go as far as to say this is how most missions should be designed. It's certainly a preferable alternative to the opposite end of the spectrum. With this method at the end of the day you still have a technically impressive and fun-to-play mission even when abstracted from all context, which as a game, has value in of itself. You don't need a story to have a good game - you just need entertaining mechanics.
Why is Pac-Man eating the little dots and avoiding ghosts.
Why are you arranging those four-block shapes in Tetris.
More importantly, who the hell cares?
Meanwhile if you take the complete opposite end of the spectrum, that is - you purely consider how to use the "mission" as a method of conveying the story without caring for gameplay, you get a cutscene. I don't know about you but cutscenes, while cool to set the stage, aren't very fun to play through. Cutscenes happen to not be games.
I guess this is devolving into game design theory but w/e.
(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/6/68096/2077570-fps_map_design_super.jpg)
I bet you all love the one on the right? It certainly tells a story better.
-
Game design theory is cool and fun. Droid also has every right not to like WiHR1 and I think his work in FreeSpace modding is an incredible example of succeeding in areas where WiHR1 didn't excel.
-
Come on guys, let's keep it civil here...
As far as story goes, Carthage made the kill list pretty early in the fiction viewer. The dreamscape and discussion on bringing the Carthage down seemed important and very Laporte centered. The fact that it was 'take 2' on the Carthage was even lampshaded.
I remember exactly one passing mention in the Tenebra fiction viewer (the kill list, as you said) before HFH itself. Hardly a climactic buildup...
Well I think you are wrong.
You agree that BP has taken a different direction, or you disagree that this is not a good thing?
It seems absurd to suggest that none of the missions in Act 3 have buildup. Mission 18 is the next mission in the Gef arc that began back in 'For the Wrong Reasons' and continued in 'What Binds Us' and 'Deals in Shadows'. Mission 18 directly causes Mission 20, the Kostadin Cell's last-ditch doomsday effort to drive humanity off Earth - an attack that's been foreshadowed since R1 if you were paying attention.
Mission 19 is the next mission in the 'mole/countermole' arc that's been running since 'The Plunder', particularly prominent in 'Deals in Shadows', 'Pawns', and 'Delenda Est'.
Mission 21 sees the player inserted into the ongoing broader war effort - an 'arc' that barely needs description.
Mission 22/23 are the next missions in the Ken arc that began in 'Ken'.
Does it feel disjointed to get just a couple more missions in each arc? Maybe.
Yes, it felt very disjointed. Laporte seemed to be jumping all over the place. I can see how the missions carry on arcs from previous acts - but I think Tenebra crammed too many arcs into a too compact whole. It feels like chaos.
But we need to see how the Fedayeen alter each arc. Laporte has moved from a place of learning into a place of power over the war - but not yet mastery over herself. Act 3 is practically Laporte Strikes Back - she makes a decisive action in the context of each arc in which she was formerly powerless, but she makes no progress at all in the areas where she was once powerful: her relationship to Simms and to the core ideals of the Federation.
It felt like she was playing Deus Ex Machina in every single story arc. Come on, I'm sure the Fedayeen have more pilots... And she didn't fail a single mission. The entirety of Tenebra didn't have a single setback. Okay, CASSANDRA is good, but do the operators really never make a mistake? Misinterpret some data, under- or overestimate some parameter, spill coffee on the keyboard?
And if the Fedayeen are really *that* good at Deus Ex Machinaing (I'll buy it, given the power of their mainframe), why hasn't there been the slightest hint of their influence in previous acts? Things like destroying the Kostadin Cell and a joint op with Jupiter Fleet would be widely discussed across the Federation, so why didn't Noemi get any rumour of their actions before? I think it would have laid a better groundwork to support the Fedayeen's major strikes in Tenebra.
Everything in Tenebra is about trading humanity for tactical power and exigency. Humanity is subsumed by functionality and the machinery of war. The Fedayeen wingmen each develop as a mirror of some part of Laporte that's broken. The Masyaf is a ship populated by alienated shark people. They're the antithesis of the Wargods.
If you felt that Act 3 gave up something crucial about Blue Planet in favor of wild exploration - consider that in light of what's happening here. What is Laporte learning, and what has she forgotten in the process?
Well that went completely over my head in the campaign... From the very first mission, Noemi felt a completely different character from who she was in previous acts. Instead of a humane, moral character we suddenly get an emotionless killer, with hardly any time for the player to 'grow with' the change. Come to think of it, that may be one of the reasons why Tenebra felt so disjoint... We're not playing Noemi anymore.
The Gef attack in 'One Future' was outlined since well before Act 1 ever released. They're some of the few clues in the story that the fanbase never picked up on or connected.
What were the clues? The fact that nobody picked up on them could be an indication that they were hidden too deep... To me, the Gefs really felt like a bunch of space pirates (with ideals, but still) thrifting and scraping to survive, like docfu said. Playing nice to whoever pays/threatens them enough (in this case, Steele), just in order to survive out there. I had no idea they had the knowledge or resources to subspace-jump a solid rock that easily shadows a Sathanas, and especially that they were willing to wipe out a good fraction of humanity to accomplish their ideals! Scavenging convoys for supplies, harassing the military, sure, but destroying Earth - that was a surprise to me.
Btw, I don't really get why people are getting all offensive about the new gameplay mechanics and features. If Tenebra had Noemi flying with the Fedayeen and not have the new gameplay mechanics, it would stick out like a sore thumb. You are special forces for petes sake! You are supposed to do stuff that normal pilots can't. Also, haven't we all got outright bored with the standard FS mission styles and gameplay mechanics? The BP team imo have breathed new life into the Space Combat Sim genre...And its my earnest request that the BP team do not return to pure FS style gameplay...please!
"Hey guys, :v: here. We have some exciting news for you: we finally got the go-ahead to develop FreeSpace 3! But, eh, since the space sim genre is dead and all, it's gonna be a first-person shooter."
Come on, that's absurd. New gameplay mechanics are only fun up to a point. Tenebra's assassination mission was cool, and I enjoy mods like Vassago's Dirge and Between the Ashes - they capitalize on what FreeSpace does well, and give an interesting new twist to it. But if I want to command my own space fleet or play turret defence, there are and there always will be games out there that do a much better job at it (no offense to the devs). Rather than trying to be a jack-of-all-trades, I think it would be wiser to focus on being the king of space sim.
Reading this thread makes me sick. Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text. You people disgust me.
Different people have different opinions of what a good mod should be like, you as an experienced modder should know that :P What were boring walls of text to you was immersive storytelling to me, and what was fun gameplay to you was quite uninteresting to me. If I have to choose between either playing Pac-Man or Tetris for three hours, or watching a good movie for the same amount of time, I'd go for the movie anytime. And I respect your opinion if you wouldn't.
-
No, man, at no point in the design of this narratively and ludologically difficult and often opaque campaign did we ever worry, even once, about how to transmit information to the player
Hey, I'm calling it like you're posting it. You sound Dear Negative Reader and it gets scary for us peons.
-
Laporte discussed with Thorn how to hit the Tevs and they figured out that Lopez is the weakest part of Steeles gang and so on.
And I think this came up in two dreamscape sessions.
-
A lot of your questions are explicitly answered in the campaign, whether in R1 or here - the scope of previous Fedayeen action or the precise nature of Gef capabilities, for instance. I don't blame you for missing some of it, given the sheer amount of information flying around, but rest assured these are all questions that were carefully considered and answered.
Laporte has certainly become more ruthless, but again, that's an arc that should have been profoundly evident even before you hit Sunglare.
-
Reading this thread makes me sick. Singing praise at the snore feat that was WiH r1 and hating on Tenebra because it had the audacity to be FUN instead of force feeding you walls if text. You people disgust me.
Different people have different opinions of what a good mod should be like, you as an experienced modder should know that :P What were boring walls of text to you was immersive storytelling to me, and what was fun gameplay to you was quite uninteresting to me. If I have to choose between either playing Pac-Man or Tetris for three hours, or watching a good movie for the same amount of time, I'd go for the movie anytime. And I respect your opinion if you wouldn't.
I'm just bothered that people are almost demanding that a game be more like a movie.
If you want to watch a movie, by all means, go watch a movie. That's totally fine to prefer one over the other, or to have a preference towards one side, and I accept that some people would much rather be engaged in a good story than be engaged with gameplay.
It's just that I'm exceptionally confused as to why people are upset by there being (more) gameplay in a game.
I don't even feel that it came at the cost of any story depth, it's just that the story that is there is buried deeper within the optional texts and subtext and not presented to the player on a platter, so to speak. I feel that's the mark of a well-made game, where a rich story is there if you look for it, without getting in the way of the core gameplay.
Everything in Tenebra is about trading humanity for tactical power and exigency. Humanity is subsumed by functionality and the machinery of war. The Fedayeen wingmen each develop as a mirror of some part of Laporte that's broken. The Masyaf is a ship populated by alienated shark people. They're the antithesis of the Wargods.
If you felt that Act 3 gave up something crucial about Blue Planet in favor of wild exploration - consider that in light of what's happening here. What is Laporte learning, and what has she forgotten in the process?
Well that went completely over my head in the campaign... From the very first mission, Noemi felt a completely different character from who she was in previous acts. Instead of a humane, moral character we suddenly get an emotionless killer, with hardly any time for the player to 'grow with' the change. Come to think of it, that may be one of the reasons why Tenebra felt so disjoint... We're not playing Noemi anymore.
Seeing all your friends die tends to have an effect on your personality. Indeed, we're not playing Noemi anymore.
In Universal Truth, she contemplates that she should have died at Saturn with her friends. In some ways, that has already happened.
Disclaimer: I am terrible at reading the plot/characters, despite having read most/all of the walls of text. I may be horribly wrong.
-
I'm just bothered that people are almost demanding that a game be more like a movie.
If you want to watch a movie, by all means, go watch a movie. That's totally fine to prefer one over the other, or to have a preference towards one side, and I accept that some people would much rather be engaged in a good story than be engaged with gameplay.
My 2 cents. Game doesn't need to have simplified gameplay to have a rich story. Difference between good gameplay with good story and good gameplay without story is basically the difference between Delenda Est and HFH. I read the dreamscapes so I know what has been said and what hasn't, but the background and the feel of this mission is incomparable to DE. Some missions felt almost like beta-testing. Replaying DE, I'm like "IMMA KILL YOU, *****" every-single-time.
-
I bet you all love the one on the right? It certainly tells a story better.
please tell me how any freespace campaign more than 5 years old in any way resembles the one on the left
-
I'm just bothered that people are almost demanding that a game be more like a movie.
If you want to watch a movie, by all means, go watch a movie. That's totally fine to prefer one over the other, or to have a preference towards one side, and I accept that some people would much rather be engaged in a good story than be engaged with gameplay.
My 2 cents. Game doesn't need to have simplified gameplay to have a rich story. Difference between good gameplay with good story and good gameplay without story is basically the difference between Delenda Est and HFH. I read the dreamscapes so I know what has been said and what hasn't, but the background and the feel of this mission is incomparable to DE. Some missions felt almost like beta-testing. Replaying DE, I'm like "IMMA KILL YOU, *****" every-single-time.
I'm just curious: when was it you last played WiH p1?
I ask because it seems several people in this thread were emotionally moved by p1 but not p2. A lot of the impact of p2 is riding on the events of p1; it visits several plotlines but spends so little time on each one, some players don't return to an emotionally-invested state. So someone who has just played p1 would have that feeling of "IMMA KILL YOU, *****" (indeed, it would be magnified by the fact that they had just lost the battle a few missions ago), but someone who has picked up the campaign without replaying p1 will have been zipping through several different aspects of the war, and this one is presented as quickly as the others.
Would WiH acts 1-3, by any chance, be better off as a single campaign? (and when WiH is all finished, would a 1-3 and 4-5 split be better than a 1-2 and 3-5 split?) I appreciate the gravity of the Sunglare cliffhanger, and it would be terrible to lose the "we were sent for her" -> rise.ogg -> BP title -> aney.ogg -> Bei conversation which was so awesome in Sunglare, but the evidence shows that the split may not work well for some players, as Tenebra may not be a good place to pick up after a period of inactivity. This should be tested experimentally using science.
-
I think Droid hits the nail on the head on most parts.
My 2 cents. Game doesn't need to have simplified gameplay to have a rich story. Difference between good gameplay with good story and good gameplay without story is basically the difference between Delenda Est and HFH. I read the dreamscapes so I know what has been said and what hasn't, but the background and the feel of this mission is incomparable to DE. Some missions felt almost like beta-testing. Replaying DE, I'm like "IMMA KILL YOU, *****" every-single-time.
DE was so bugged for me that not even with cheats I could complete it properly!
HFH is so much better in so many ways its not even funny. Replaying DE, I'm like "**** THIS MISSION WHY DO THESE FRIGATES KEEP DYING WHAT THE HELL" every-single-time.
Replaying HFH, I'm like "Oh hell yeah in what way am I going to skin this cat this time. Options options, lets do this." every-single-time.
HFH is fun
I don't mean to smack talk act 1 and 2 too much, but I'm mostly with Droid on it. Gameplay wise it only had a few highpoints and otherwise wasn't terribly exciting. Act 3 does almost everything better in its mission design.
Well I think you are wrong.
You agree that BP has taken a different direction, or you disagree that this is not a good thing?
What do you think?
I bet you all love the one on the right? It certainly tells a story better.
please tell me how any freespace campaign more than 5 years old in any way resembles the one on the left
Looks like you are missing the point.
-
WiHR1 did not sacrifice freedom and player agency in gameplay for the sake of lazy storytelling. It did spend proportionately more time on storytelling, but I don't see how the actual combat sections are any more restrictive or linear than retail quality.
I actually only managed to complete Delenda Est without cheats and constant bugfixes half an hour ago. It was... cathartic. DE is a pretty good example of why you should be very careful when mixing gameplay and story, actually: putting the climax during an arduous, buggy, do-it-again-stupid segment which is liable to become unbalanced at any change in the engine saps all the momentum from the player.
-
Simple game design does not equal bad. There is nothing inherently wrong with designing highly polished missions that Freespace is known for. Not every campaign needs to be a total genre redefining experience.
The BP has, for the most part, done a good job balancing classic Freespace gameplay with new features. I happen to be of the opinion the team may have gone a bit overboard with features in WiH part 3, but as I have said previously, this does not reflect poorly on the entire experience.
So yeah, I strongly disagree that any new mod campaign HAS to be completely innovative, the devil is in the details.
-
I'd agree with that. Innovation is nice and can greatly enhance something, but ultimately it comes down to the basic level design. For example, Silent Threat Reborn manages to be an excellent campaign despite having few mods, no SCP-exclusive features, and gameplay that is basically a very competent clone of FS1's.
-
WiHR1 did not sacrifice freedom and player agency in gameplay for the sake of lazy storytelling. It did spend proportionately more time on storytelling, but I don't see how the actual combat sections are any more restrictive or linear than retail quality.
(I actually only managed to complete Delenda Est without cheats and constant bugfixes half an hour ago. It was... cathartic.)
Actually it did. There were a bunch of missions that had very little player agency and 'forced plot failures' of missions for the sake of storytelling.
The BP realized this and gave the player a LOT of agency in Act 3 while still telling an awesome story through the dreamscape (and the last mission is 5 missions worth of story telling). Big ****ing improvement if you ask me.
Simple game design does not equal bad. There is nothing inherently wrong with designing highly polished missions that Freespace is known for. Not every campaign needs to be a total genre redefining experience.
The BP has, for the most part, done a good job balancing classic Freespace gameplay with new features. I happen to be of the opinion the team may have gone a bit overboard with features in WiH part 3, but as I have said previously, this does not reflect poorly on the entire experience.
So yeah, I strongly disagree that any new mod campaign HAS to be completely innovative, the devil is in the details.
Nobody here is arguing that 'every campaign HAS to be innovative'. We're arguing how wierd it is that people are seemingly getting offended by the fact that Act 3 doesn't offer the same old retail mission design again.
It's down right depressing for a dev to have put in weeks of effort into making a mission that contains loads of gameplay, only to be met with a "I don't like it, I just want to shoot fighters with some dialogue to fill the gaps between the waves."
-
Actually it did. There were a bunch of missions that had very little player agency and 'forced plot failures' of missions for the sake of storytelling.
I really don't see how a forced failure is any worse than a 'forced' success in that regard. Again: I really can't think of any particular instances where WiH missions railroaded you more than FS2 ones.
-
I don't think anyone is implying act 3 was a failure, but constructive criticism helps result in better design down the road.
People thought Act I and II were too derivative, and some think Act III was too much. I think a few folks have said the later acts aren't as extreme in their design.
You can't please everyone, but I don't think pointing out what was flawed from an audience perspective is bad. Those that love it still will anyway. Those that don't have other things to look forward too.
-
A lot of your questions are explicitly answered in the campaign, whether in R1 or here - the scope of previous Fedayeen action or the precise nature of Gef capabilities, for instance. I don't blame you for missing some of it, given the sheer amount of information flying around, but rest assured these are all questions that were carefully considered and answered.
Laporte has certainly become more ruthless, but again, that's an arc that should have been profoundly evident even before you hit Sunglare.
That's... easy to say from a dev perspective, when you have all the arcs carefully lined out in front of you. From a player perspective, we have to find stuff out, puzzle clues together as we go - and by the responses here, there seems to be a significant amount of people for whom the clues were not clear enough.
But anyway, that's beside the point - I'm not so much seeking answers to questions, as much as wondering the fact that there are questions. I had very little doubts playing AoA or WiH:R1, but monumental amounts playing Tenebra. What changed?
I guess it might be the fact that, for the first time, I can't really identify with the main character anymore. Whether it's the all-consuming urge to kill, or simply the fact that she only seems to exist inside the cockpit and the Dreamscape - I don't know, maybe both.
Or it could be because Tenebra is so devoid of emotion. While AoA and WiH:R1 take the player on a grand tour through despair and hope, fear and audacity, sacrifice and heroism, Tenebra felt utterly empty in that area. Leaving the player to judge the story objectively and prick holes into it, rather than being part of it and being in awe of what happens.
It's just that I'm exceptionally confused as to why people are upset by there being (more) gameplay in a game.
I don't even feel that it came at the cost of any story depth, it's just that the story that is there is buried deeper within the optional texts and subtext and not presented to the player on a platter, so to speak. I feel that's the mark of a well-made game, where a rich story is there if you look for it, without getting in the way of the core gameplay.
I didn't make this thread because there's more gameplay per se (though apparently, some others are upset at it) - but because I do feel it came at the cost of storytelling. It's not even that the new gameplay gets in the way of the story, but rather I feel that the story has been neglected in favour of "fancy new features". A few accounts of daily life on board the Masyaf would have done wonders. Getting to know the people (including the new Noemi) behind the head anis. It is obvious that that daily life is there, given some mentions of showers and barbecues, but why not talk about it?
Yes, the Dreamscape made some effort towards exposing the characters - but it mostly felt like empty conversation to me. I play BP for entertainment as much as you do - entertainment, for me, is not trying to reconstruct some plot from shattered bits of information. That's archaeology. Presenting a story on a platter is not necessarily a bad thing, it eases immersion and boosts the overall experience - like in AoA and WiH:R1. From the Dreamscape, nothing really "stuck". Perhaps because there was a lack of imagery to stimulate the imagination, get the brain going... I vividly remember Lorna Simms standing next to the sparring ring, explaining how she thinks the war could be won by attacking the GTVA's logistics. It's as if I was there. The Dreamscape doesn't come even remotely close to that.
-
The characters are losing their humanity. Yes.
I think perhaps you are more on the Star Trek and less on the Solaris end of Science Fiction?
-
The things you see as mistakes are, I think, storytelling choices that didn't work for you. I can guarantee to you that the story was not neglected - the same people were involved, more raw time went into it. The same process that produced your favorite scenes from R1 was at work here. The story doesn't put its weight in the same places, however, because it's trying to talk about different things. And it sounds like those aren't things you're interested in.
I do find it a little frustrating to see you asking questions and then failing to actually ask them. Like this:
Getting to know the people (including the new Noemi) behind the head anis. It is obvious that that daily life is there, given some mentions of showers and barbecues, but why not talk about it?
Why, indeed? Why not talk about it? What point could there be in eliding the mundane humanity of the Fedayeen characters?
That's... easy to say from a dev perspective, when you have all the arcs carefully lined out in front of you. From a player perspective, we have to find stuff out, puzzle clues together as we go - and by the responses here, there seems to be a significant amount of people for whom the clues were not clear enough.
I think it's easy to say from a player perspective as well, since players have been so incredibly fast and talented at putting together the pieces.
-
I think perhaps you are more on the Star Trek and less on the Solaris end of Science Fiction?
I like Star Trek :nervous:
The things you see as mistakes are, I think, storytelling choices that didn't work for you. I can guarantee to you that the story was not neglected - the same people were involved, more raw time went into it. The same process that produced your favorite scenes from R1 was at work here. The story doesn't put its weight in the same places, however, because it's trying to talk about different things. And it sounds like those aren't things you're interested in.
That sounds reasonable, evidently you have a better view on the development process than I do... And like I said in OP, the majority of players seems to be very happy with the design choices, I'm just a disgruntled minority :)
Getting to know the people (including the new Noemi) behind the head anis. It is obvious that that daily life is there, given some mentions of showers and barbecues, but why not talk about it?
Why, indeed? Why not talk about it? What point could there be in eliding the mundane humanity of the Fedayeen characters?
Yet they still shower, they barbecue like ordinary people, and there does still seem to be some old-fashioned camaraderie between wingmen ("Let's see how much you can get out of me"). If you want to go the transhumanist route, why not go all the way?
That's... easy to say from a dev perspective, when you have all the arcs carefully lined out in front of you. From a player perspective, we have to find stuff out, puzzle clues together as we go - and by the responses here, there seems to be a significant amount of people for whom the clues were not clear enough.
I think it's easy to say from a player perspective as well, since players have been so incredibly fast and talented at putting together the pieces.
Some of the players puzzled some of the pieces together... You stated before that there are things nobody ever picked up on. Isn't that a valid reason to elaborate on them in subsequent releases?
-
I guess it might be the fact that, for the first time, I can't really identify with the main character anymore. Whether it's the all-consuming urge to kill, or simply the fact that she only seems to exist inside the cockpit and the Dreamscape - I don't know, maybe both.
Well I can identify with her. I'm playing a combat based video game, the whole idea about this huge genre of video games is that killing people is in some manner "fun". Whenever I take down an enemy in freespace (Or in TF2, or WoW, Torchlight, XCom or whatever other combat game happens to be on my desktop) I feel a slight amount of satisfaction. I just overpowered that avatar, character or person and it makes me feel more powerful in a small and very subtle way. But I know I shouldn't; killing is bad, but with no obvious consequences I put my conscious out of the way and call it a game. War in Heaven made that connection with me in the very first mission (well... second): "This is actually kinda' fun".
Getting to know the people (including the new Noemi) behind the head anis.
New Noemi? This isn't a new Noemi (IMHO), this is the exact same Noemi I fought as in Act 1, but she has accepted her violent nature in part because she is surrounded by comrades who support psychopathy (I'm not sure if that word means what I think it means) and feels as if she needs to be respected by them (something I do all the time (feel the need to be respected by people I don't even like (not that she doesn't like them))). You could say she's almost peer pressured into being violent, but it's more that she as unleashed that part of her personality perhaps a bit too readily and hidden away her love because it isn't helpful in her current situation and because it hurts.
This instalment for me was a dive into the heart of darkness (another term I use and don't know what it means), it is dark, it is edgy, and it is absolutely frightening. Not even Universal Truth frightening, but frightening because it felt so right. To expand on that statement: Everyone on the census thread seemed to say they felt the deaths of the federation fighters was necessary, and I though so too. I'm (or at least my idea of myself is) a pretty peaceful guy and I would never try and kill anyone and always avoid confrontation if possible, but Tenebra asked the question when everything is on the line. Not a war, not a petty fued between two idiotic governments over land and ruling rights, but the very survival of the human race. When everything is at stake, how far would you go? Tenebra made me fear the answer to that question, fear it far more than rise.ogg, shivans or shadows in the dark.
IMHO
-
-snip-
^This...all this right here...
-
Psychopathy is a personality disorder that has been variously characterized by shallow emotions (including reduced fear, a lack of empathy, and stress tolerance), coldheartedness, egocentricity, superficial charm, manipulativeness, irresponsibility, impulsivity, criminality, antisocial behavior, a lack of remorse, and a parasitic lifestyle. ~ Wikipedia
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-psychopaths-teach-us-about-how-to-succeed
-
Some of the players puzzled some of the pieces together... You stated before that there are things nobody ever picked up on. Isn't that a valid reason to elaborate on them in subsequent releases?
The things nobody ever picked up on were clues like 'what is the Nauticus' cargo and why are the Gefs and Tevs both after it'. But a lot of your questions, like the changing scope of Fedayeen operations, were answered directly to you in CBs. :p
-
Psychopathy is a personality disorder that has been variously characterized by shallow emotions (including reduced fear, a lack of empathy, and stress tolerance), coldheartedness, egocentricity, superficial charm, manipulativeness, irresponsibility, impulsivity, criminality, antisocial behavior, a lack of remorse, and a parasitic lifestyle. ~ Wikipedia
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-psychopaths-teach-us-about-how-to-succeed
This is me when I post negative reviews on a message board. 100% pure me.
When I said that I wasn't able to believe in WIH's story, it's not because the story is flawed. Act 3 definitely pushed the limits of Freespace but pushed them in multiple directions at once. That's not the problem. The problem is that I said it wasn't believable anymore.
Instead of playing myself and getting angry at the game for being difficult, I find myself, as some people have said, unable to connect to the main character, Laporte and the crazy situations this one character is getting pushed into. I'm not ripping into the dev's(at least, it wasn't my intention to) about how they've pushed Freespace to new limits. It's about how this one character, central to everything in the universe, is now in the "be everything, do everything" position that ultimately tips the scale of the war.
I said the character isn't believable because in my opinion she isn't.
That's no reason to throw out all of your work or start a huge flame war. It's just time to realize that "wow, not everyone gets it." Do you keep your work the way it is? Or change it to make it fit the people you are appealing to.
I go through this a lot with design. I do children's English learning materials in Japan. The one thing I've learned is that the more complex the directions get, even having a single piece of paper with more than one goal (such as write a word, vs choose when the word is used properly) things can go terribly, terribly wrong.
There are two schools of thought in education for a teachers purpose: one is to instruct the student, step by step, through a process. The other is to give the student a task and see if they can perform it on their own, then ask them what they've learned.
This may sound like it has little to do with BP, and that's true. But I have to point out: if the game's story is to be believable, I need to be guided through it with as little friction as possible. The goal with any science fiction story is to have the player give up as few notions of reality (aliens don't exist->shivans, everythings fine->we're all going to die) as possible while getting them into the action.
I can't be spending time trying to figure out the plot. I should, when I read the story, get a very clear understanding of the situation so I can enjoy the game. Even in a mystery novel, you'll see clues leading up to something, but if that something is not believable or if the clues aren't enough, it makes you want to throw the book in the trash and go find a new one because you've taken the readers relaxed understanding of reality and pushed it over the edge to where they look up and realize "I'm sitting here reading a book" instead of enjoying the story.
I'd like to go back and redo all of war in heaven and see where this stuff fits in, not because someone on the forum/dev team says it fits in, but because it FEELS like it does. That's a mighty high and lofty goal for me to set for you.
Don't worry about it though. I'm just a psychopath posting on your forum.
-
Huh? It felt like everything fit in rather well to me. If you were paying attention everything was mentioned and fits together remarkably well. Try replaying Act I-III together and make sure you aren't just doing Act III and relying on year-old memory for the events of Acts I and II. As I understand it, WiH is meant to be played as a single game, not as a series of sequels over years, it's just happening to be released over long spans of time to - as has been mentioned - keep development going (I'd assume by keeping people motivated by mostly positive community feedback?). It's quite a brilliant plot, really, and I look forward to see how things tie into Act IV and V, and how part 3 proceeds from there. Perhaps they'll finally finish the entire trilogy by the time I'm old. *snicker*
I worry that what some people are calling for is essentially a dumbing down and/or gutting of the plot (whether or not they really mean it as such, "changing story direction" due to popular demand or vocal minorities nearly always results in this). I'd prefer you guys not change your plans due to that kind of feedback and want to add my voice to things as such. Please keep along your present path, guys. Very awesome work that I enjoyed immensely. That, and I have an ulterior motive - to keep your guys' morale up and add to the folks saying they in fact love the game, including Act 3. Gotta keep your morale up! Like watering a plant and giving it sunlight. Maybe it will spout more Acts err I mean petals, and if we're very, very lucky, perhaps flower into a big ole' Blue Planetia Third-partus - a very rare and exquisite specimen indeed. I'm all for constructive crit, don't get me wrong, but really, I liked Act 3 quite a lot and would have to think on it a bit to give much good constructive crit on it. I'm sure I could find some, but it was pretty dang satisfying to me at least.
Also I'm one of the folks that enjoyed the mission variety. The only one that was kind of weak to me was the turret defense one and it was still worth having for the variety and the way it challenged the player. As far as why it seemed kind of weak to me, well, it's a decent idea, but not so sure the FSO engine quite handles the concept so well in terms of UI and usability. Worth a try, glad it's part of Act 3, but I'm not sure I'd include more things like it unless you can get mouse control into it, or a smoother key-based UI. That said, one of the things I liked about the mission variety was how I was constantly being challenged with new problems and issues, and being asked to approach them from vastly different angles (with various new mechanics) - from the perspective of a wing leader, an assassin, a cap-ship captain, and a general. Very VERY nifty assortment. I'm even glad the tower defense bit was in there, even if the UI was a bit awkward.
I hope we see some of the mechanics in Act 3 make a return - especially fleet command like Her Finest Hour. The capital ship command was pretty cool too, I'd admit. It'd be nifty to have both going on at once - hoping you guys have a mission or two somewhere in Act IV or V in mind where you are both a capship captain and the fleet commander at once. It would be glorious. Though perhaps tricky to pull off without overwhelming the player, depending on the size of the engagement and the complexity of the capship under your command.
-
Don't worry about it though. I'm just a psychopath posting on your forum.
docfu, I think you misunderstood An4 there. He was answering Killer Whale's question of "what is psychopathy", it was definitely not meant as a stab to you.
So, let me try to rephrase your problem. You think Tenebra jumped the shark with the suspension of disbelief for cramming to much new stuff without the proper fluidity? A curiosity from some of these complaints is that they share this sentiment of "too much too fast info", but they'll either say this about plot or about gameplay (or not at all).
-
As for the Karuna turning a 180 and getting shot at from behind, you are exactly right. I've never seen one freespace mission where a ship needed to physically turn away from the enemy and increase it's distance before jumping out. Being that impossibly close to the Carthage fleet, having turned a 180 and burning away isn't plausible.
Delenda Est. The Yangtze and the Indus both do it right in front of you.
Being able to quickly maneuver and get out of a bad situation is one of the primary design features of the Karuna. They demonstrate over and over that they're not near-immobile wallowers like the Orions, so I don't understand why people would expect them to move like Orions.
-
I'd like to go back and redo all of war in heaven and see where this stuff fits in, not because someone on the forum/dev team says it fits in, but because it FEELS like it does. That's a mighty high and lofty goal for me to set for you.
I'm confident it's one we've met, though!
-
Being able to quickly maneuver and get out of a bad situation is one of the primary design features of the Karuna. They demonstrate over and over that they're not near-immobile wallowers like the Orions, so I don't understand why people would expect them to move like Orions.
Sorry, I want to clarify this, there is no reason a Karuna should be that close to an enemy fleet alone. Even with the other two ships it was with withdrawing, there is no tactical advantage to rushing a thick wall of enemy ships first only to get cut down and leave the artillery defenseless. In the case of Post Meridian, the ship jumped off course. That is believable. Even all 3 ships getting cut down would be believable...but jumping in to see a Karuna with it's tail to the fleet because it turned a full 180 while two artillery ships sit back and pound targets...that's a NOT BELIEVABLE situation for me.
Even with conservation of momentum(or glide) it would make sense for the ship to veer off to one side and strafe the enemy or in the case of Post Meridian again, for the ships to change angle and warp out (in the case of the multiplayer version on hard/insane mode.)
But again...a FULL 180?
As for the comment about being a psychopath, I didn't take it personally. I just identified with it like anyone truly objective should. ;)
-
Being able to quickly maneuver and get out of a bad situation is one of the primary design features of the Karuna. They demonstrate over and over that they're not near-immobile wallowers like the Orions, so I don't understand why people would expect them to move like Orions.
Sorry, I want to clarify this, there is no reason a Karuna should be that close to an enemy fleet alone. Even with the other two ships it was with withdrawing, there is no tactical advantage to rushing a thick wall of enemy ships first only to get cut down and leave the artillery defenseless. In the case of Post Meridian, the ship jumped off course. That is believable. Even all 3 ships getting cut down would be believable...but jumping in to see a Karuna with it's tail to the fleet because it turned a full 180 while two artillery ships sit back and pound targets...that's a NOT BELIEVABLE situation for me.
Even with conservation of momentum(or glide) it would make sense for the ship to veer off to one side and strafe the enemy or in the case of Post Meridian again, for the ships to change angle and warp out (in the case of the multiplayer version on hard/insane mode.)
But again...a FULL 180?
As for the comment about being a psychopath, I didn't take it personally. I just identified with it like anyone truly objective should. ;)
Dude, did you even READ the briefing? The Serenity wasn't flying solo...it was Escorted by a whole bunch of cruisers (CruRon Alpha and CruRon Beta, each CruRon having atleast 2 cruisers each)... It was presumably deployed on the front-lines to attack the Carthage's Escort warships and to distract beamfire from the two artillery. Now by the time the mission starts...both CruRons have been decimated (some warped out, while others outright got gutted by beamfire)
Its good to keep in mind that the battle of HFH has being going on for some time now...and the Fedayeen were deployed because the "situation is (was) degrading fast"
-
But again...a FULL 180?
Yeah, Karunas tend to do it when running away from things they can't handle. The Indus sure as hell wasn't facing the Imperieuse when it jumps out in Delenda Est. And the Yangtze did a full 180 twice in that mission.
And like Crybertrance said, the Serenity wasn't alone at first.
-
Being able to quickly maneuver and get out of a bad situation is one of the primary design features of the Karuna. They demonstrate over and over that they're not near-immobile wallowers like the Orions, so I don't understand why people would expect them to move like Orions.
Sorry, I want to clarify this, there is no reason a Karuna should be that close to an enemy fleet alone. Even with the other two ships it was with withdrawing, there is no tactical advantage to rushing a thick wall of enemy ships first only to get cut down and leave the artillery defenseless. In the case of Post Meridian, the ship jumped off course. That is believable. Even all 3 ships getting cut down would be believable...but jumping in to see a Karuna with it's tail to the fleet because it turned a full 180 while two artillery ships sit back and pound targets...that's a NOT BELIEVABLE situation for me.
Even with conservation of momentum(or glide) it would make sense for the ship to veer off to one side and strafe the enemy or in the case of Post Meridian again, for the ships to change angle and warp out (in the case of the multiplayer version on hard/insane mode.)
But again...a FULL 180?
You're told exactly why the Serenity is where it is. Just pay attention.
As for the comment about being a psychopath, I didn't take it personally. I just identified with it like anyone truly objective should. ;)
No one called you a psychopath, christ. They were talking about Laporte and the Fedayeen.
-
As much as it pains me to be "that person" (meaning registering at the hlpbb just to post this), I feel I'd do this accomplished mod a disservice if I wouldn't try to give my honest feedback here. Allow me to explain:
Blue Planet has always been kinda unusual and I think there's no shame in acknowledging that past releases had their fair share of problems. Such as the convoluted story, being told through walls of text, endless (and unnecessary) exposition, doled out in (very) broad strokes and huge volumes. Or the heel/face-turn premise on which the whole storyline is based on.
Unfortunately Tenebra was (at least in my opinion) a move in the wrong direction on so many levels. Instead of tightening the overall game experience (less exposition, less wall of text, shorter and more focused missions, less "space magic"), the whole episode is bursting at the seams with new gameplay ideas and supernatural plot devices that it feels like a disjointed mess (let alone the protagonists god complex).
For the moment, let's ignore the core problems of infusing a quite down-to-earth (and therefore very approachable and still believable) scifi universe with all the supernatural stuff, thus straying far away from the premises of that original scifi universe. Let's say one can accept all these things happening in the "expanded universe" (as told by Blue Planet), Tenebra is just asking for too much suspension of disbelief.
It all starts with the fadeyeen premise: The fact that sol is so rich in resources that the UEF was able to construct a space navy able to withstand advanced (!) GTVA warships (designed to defeat much stronger foes) - very far fetched, but let's run with it for now. Now within that far-fetched premise there's a spec ops branch that not only has far more advanced technology than anything the GTVA has, computers that can predict the future through simulations and psychology, stealth fighters that are not only totally invisible (as long as they don't shoot), but have viral strikes that can shut down defense networks (and in later missions do whatever is needed for the sake of the mission or storytelling) because all GTVA systems have backdoors (as the hammer of light is much more powerful than ever thought). Whole battles are then won through deploying just 4 of those stealth fighters (with three of them always wearing story-armor).
Not only is Blue Planet asking the player to believe that all these things somehow fit into the quite reasonable (in scifi terms) Freespace universe, now it's asking to get away with even more outlandish ideas. But even that wouldn't be so bad if the gameplay wouldn't suffer for it.
There is a professional term for what has happened here and it's called a "designer's game" (or developer's game, take your pick). This happens if features or game mechanics are developed without the player (or majority of players) and their expectations and behaviors in mind, but only your own. Acknowledging that this is a mod done by volunteers using an engine enhanced by volunteers, that's absolutely understandable (expected even).
But I see so much potential and energy here that I hate to see it being wasted on bad design choices. The whole additional targeting/artillery/viral strike/etc mechanics are convoluted and could've been achieved without resorting to the deus-ex-machina viral strikes. The tower defense mission should've been scrapped entirely. The asteroid mission could've been done with the more interesting but underused mechanics of the original game (e.g. the TAG system), but should've been scrapped for the story premise alone.
It's quite simple really - if you ask your audience to believe a quite outlandish story continuation in an universe that was quite grounded, you shouldn't ask your audience to accept outlandish mission premises and convoluted mission mechanics at the same time. Do the story, do a mission with basic gameplay (but with high emotional stakes) to grip your audience, then do a more normal mission before showing off your magnum opus (the climax) which is followed by an aftermath mission. These are storytelling (and game design) basics. The previous chapters had their moments where these rules had been followed and they were better for it.
tl;dr: Even when ignoring the soap opera story riddled with deus ex machina plot devices, Tenebra is a convoluted albeit technically impressive mess lacking gameplay and storytelling focus and tries to shoehorn too many new mechanics and ideas into an established universe, thus straining the patience and willingness of less emotionally engaged players to believe in its premise.
-
There are literally no supernatural elements in Blue Planet, I'm not sure where you're pulling that from.
I definitely take issue with some of what you pitch as objective fact here, though I also think there's well-founded criticism in there. I'll pick it apart later, storm's a-comin
-
Personal Pet Peeve of Mine:
TL:DR synopsis' belong BEFORE a wall of text, not after. Otherwise you destroy the entire point of them being present in the first place because folks will have given up reading before ever getting to them.
I must now also acknowledge that my commentary there adds nothing to the discussion and will hope that others simply read it and move on as it is not worth discussion nor further derailment of the existing discussion.
-
General Battuta, the Shivans and Vishnans are sort of at the point where their sufficiently advanced means are pretty close to space magic. I know you can't see it. but they're very close as to be indistinguishable for some people.
-
The devs are clearly Vasudans, that's why they don't get it.
PS: I honestly don't see it, to me they are all just machines, both Shivan and Vishnan. This is clear enough in the dialogue style of the Shivans. But then, to me every living being in the universe is nothing more than an organic computer, so feel free to disagree.
-
General Battuta, the Shivans and Vishnans are sort of at the point where their sufficiently advanced means are pretty close to space magic. I know you can't see it. but they're very close as to be indistinguishable for some people.
No dude, they really aren't. They're pretty tame compared to a lot of the civilizations discussed in books we file under hard sf (wit. the Xeelee)
-
As much as it pains me to be "that person" (meaning registering at the hlpbb just to post this), I feel I'd do this accomplished mod a disservice if I wouldn't try to give my honest feedback here. Allow me to explain:
I want to just clean out the stuff that I think I fundamentally disagree with here, because there's a lot in here that could lead to really interesting ludological and narrative discussion and I want to focus on that.
less "space magic")
I'll paypal you $20 if you can find any genuinely supernatural space magic ;7
For the moment, let's ignore the core problems of infusing a quite down-to-earth (and therefore very approachable and still believable) scifi universe with all the supernatural stuff, thus straying far away from the premises of that original scifi universe. Let's say one can accept all these things happening in the "expanded universe" (as told by Blue Planet), Tenebra is just asking for too much suspension of disbelief.
'Disbelief' is an interesting thing, because it's very personal. But what's interesting to me about Blue Planet is that it's actually pretty much just the FreeSpace universe everted. Pick any given plot element in BP (save, I think, one) and I'll point you to its antecedent in FS1/FS2.
They're treated in a completely different fashion, though, which is where I think some people start frowning. The narrative approach is entirely different and a lot more maximalist.
It all starts with the fadeyeen premise: The fact that sol is so rich in resources that the UEF was able to construct a space navy able to withstand advanced (!) GTVA warships (designed to defeat much stronger foes) - very far fetched, but let's run with it for now.
This one I've got to call you out on - it's completely wrong. A single solar system (Sol, for instance) is not just rich enough in resources to construct a space navy, it's rich enough to support every space navy, warship, station, and piece of machinery ever built by humanity in the FreeSpace universe. Solar systems are incredibly big and incredibly full of stuff. The limiting factors on technological and industrial development in FreeSpace settings aren't raw materials - they're infrastructure and the human factor.
Set aside the objection that Sol could never supply the resources to build the UEF's comparatively modest fleet: it's wrong.
Set aside, too, the idea that Sol shouldn't have been able to match the GTVA in technological development. Pay close attention in FreeSpace 2 and you'll find that Earth contained the bulk of human industrial and scientific infrastructure, as well as close to or more than half of its population. You've fallen into a common trap: forgetting that every single colony outside of Sol has existed for less than a century. The real wonder you should be boggling at is that the GTVA is the power it is!
Now within that far-fetched premise there's a spec ops branch that not only has far more advanced technology than anything the GTVA has, computers that can predict the future through simulations and psychology
See above...
stealth fighters that are not only totally invisible (as long as they don't shoot)
The GTVA have these too!
but have viral strikes that can shut down defense networks (and in later missions do whatever is needed for the sake of the mission or storytelling) because all GTVA systems have backdoors (as the hammer of light is much more powerful than ever thought)
This exact plot device is actually used in FreeSpace 2 as well, though careful observation will suggest the most obvious perpetrator isn't actually the guilty party.
There is a professional term for what has happened here and it's called a "designer's game" (or developer's game, take your pick). This happens if features or game mechanics are developed without the player (or majority of players) and their expectations and behaviors in mind, but only your own. Acknowledging that this is a mod done by volunteers using an engine enhanced by volunteers, that's absolutely understandable (expected even).
There's something really interesting in here that I want to talk about, though I can certainly assure you the player was first on our mind through development - we use an iterative cycle that hits a lot of playtesting.
tl;dr: Even when ignoring the soap opera story riddled with deus ex machina plot devices
Again, I'll paypal you money if you can find me either. ;)
But you also said some really thoughtful stuff in there and I want to engage with that. Give me a bit.
-
I've got to agree with Juno here. While 'magic' may not be the right word, there is a lot of metaphysical stuff in Tenebra that wasn't at that level in Freespace 1 or 2.
Mind-computer link dreamscapes weren't ever a part of the gameplay and as far as I remember not mentioned either. Personality predicting computers weren't used by the humans or vasudans. Maybe the shivans used them, but if so that was all hidden behind the mystery shroud that could have hidden any number of other explanations just as well.
Bosh might have been talked to by the shivans, but he might also have been just insane.
Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with the story so far (at least in WiH, AoA wasn't as strong in my opinion), but it does feel as though the missions move further and further away from what FS1/2 were: space shooters. They weren't homeworld, or Starfleet Command or tower defence nor were they Deus Ex, they were Wing Commander or X-Wing.
Changing that core concept every now and then keeps it interesting, but Tenebra changed it drastically every mission and in different ways each time, never letting the player sit still and just enjoy any given part of it before asking them to learn new things.
I liked Tenebra, but I was having trouble getting into it the way I got into Acts 1 and 2. But I do worry that any further loss of focus will badly hurt an otherwise great mod.
-
I actually prefer the civil war/human story lines to the metaphysical "Shivan-Vishnan" story lines, but those latter story lines were hardly introduced out of the blue in Tenebrae. Every single one of those concepts have their roots in either retail Freespace or Age of Aquarius/WiH1&2. Yes the Shivans/Vishnans are sort of the "gods" of the FS universe ... and that's why they're named after gods; that's why the original game Freespace 1 called the Shivans ... Shivans. They are the mysterious, inscrutable, avenging Destroyers. FS1 and FS2, FS1 more so, do have some metaphysical lines (especially the Ancients in FS1). BP, esp. AoA and WiH3 with a little in WiH1&2, continues and expands on that though it is still all technology and the humans/vasudans are sometimes able to copy it once they have a grip on what they've just seen happen. :) Again I do prefer the more human story lines to the metaphysical ones and consequently enjoyed WiH1&2 the most. But if anything WiH brings more explanation to the previously purely inscrutable - it focuses more on the metaphysical, but with an eye towards making more apart of the universe than it was before.
I think the mission structures fit with the Fedayeen very well: they're a spec ops unit which has finally been unleashed by the UEF and are expect to be flexible in their abilities and operations. So you have one mission each incorporating a different aspect of the fifth column (though missing an infiltration/exfiltration of an asset :)): a frame job, an assassination, an anti-terror-cell takedown, a combined arms battle, and a special forces assault. The story lines in each mission are all continuations of the ones from the previous WiH episodes and aren't meant to be viewed in a bottle. Just considering missions, Act 3 is fairly short and tells how the Fedayeen provide an impulse, a direction on each of the story threads. And the Dreamscape is the mechanic that then fills in the rest of the story including the final "mission".
I'll grant you that all the new mechanics could be overwhelming and it usually took me a few tries to get a hang of them each mission and the briefings were a lot more complex (sometimes difficult to follow). I'll also grant that I'm looking forward to a longer Act 4 with more missions and more of the standard Freespace space sim-style missions thrown in. But the new mechanics were interesting and I don't think because FS1&2 didn't do it that the BP team should be shy about introducing them. I liked having to think about them and how to use them effectively; acting as a commander or an assassin instead of a fighter pilot was a refreshing change of gameplay pace - a palatte-cleanser if you will that also sets up some mechanics which can be reused as appropriate during the course of Acts 4 & 5.
It is true that you get less invested in the other characters, but that is sort of the point. Al-Da'wa is a projection/amalgam of the Fedayeen and Laporte is an amalgam of her physical wingmen and is gradually losing her humanity (though actually her connection humanity is in some ways both what could've driven her mad, trying to destroy herself, but is actually also what saved her - i.e. Simms being alive). Even without the Fedayeen ... uniqueness, these are sharks, not soldiers. They are operatives. It's meant to be a different, more distant mentality. One thing was that the Falconer/Laporte friction is rather abrupt - the beginning part felt compressed - it arcs nicely as it thaws, but the beginning was a little off.
I also agree that Act 3 doesn't provide the emotional roller-coaster that Acts 1 & 2 provided and I loved Acts 1 & 2 as it told a more human story. But I thought Act 3 was interesting and innovative and felt very much apart of the overall story. While it tells a self-contained tale in some ways, in others it also is very much a "linker" chapter - i.e. that it flows best and feels less disjointed when viewed in the context of the surrounding chapters - another reason why I also can't wait to see Act 4 to see how the threads continue. Hopefully the current team will one day finish the final chapters and viewed as a finished product, I can easily see Act 3 fitting in to the grand scheme. Act 3 is almost like the FS2 SOC loops made a mandatory, integral part of the main story with more varied and inventive mechanics to go with being special forces. That's how I view Act 3 and I think it works brilliantly as that.
------------
My criticisms are touch more nit-picky:
The GEFs in the first mission have to be sanitized for operational security, that should not really be a choice, and it was not communicated well that letting them live was letting them go entirely. I feel that was a mistake.
The aforementioned Falconer/Laporte friction felt off at first, some of the writing ... I dunno it seemed like references to stuff that got cut or just ... I'm not sure. The arc was fine.
Some of the new mechanics are bit buggy (like artillery stops responding to commands) and I would've liked a little bit more practice with them - i.e. a potentially neat idea would've been a short, optional training simulation before each mission to give you practice with the new mechanics when they could be explained in depth while you use them. I think this would also have helped then clean up the mission briefings a little as they wouldn't have had to explain them.
Those are my main gripes that come to mind.
-
I've got to agree with Juno here. While 'magic' may not be the right word, there is a lot of metaphysical stuff in Tenebra that wasn't at that level in Freespace 1 or 2.
I would say this is explicitly the opposite of what happens in Tenebra. Everything that was metaphysical in FS1 and FS2 - and there was loads of it - is ruthlessly dissected and exploited by a military operation.
e: Seriously this theme is hammered home over and over again in WiH, both in Act 1 and Act 3. Laporte is warned over and over - and you should be warned as well! - not to be lulled by the temptation to engage in mysticism or spirituality. By the end of Act 3 all the spiritual and mythological themes carried over from the FreeSpace games proper have been brutally inverted.
-
I've got to agree with Juno here. While 'magic' may not be the right word, there is a lot of metaphysical stuff in Tenebra that wasn't at that level in Freespace 1 or 2.
I would say this is explicitly the opposite of what happens in Tenebra. Everything that was metaphysical in FS1 and FS2 - and there was loads of it - is ruthlessly dissected and exploited by a military operation.
e: Seriously this theme is hammered home over and over again in WiH, both in Act 1 and Act 3. Laporte is warned over and over - and you should be warned as well! - not to be lulled by the temptation to engage in mysticism or spirituality. By the end of Act 3 all the spiritual and mythological themes carried over from the FreeSpace games proper have been brutally inverted.
I've been editing my giant post above to make it more cogent, but in short, I can see this. :) I think at the moment it feels like more simply because the Vishnans were introduced in AoA and you spend more time on stuff glossed over in the main campaigns. Of course the reason is because the humans are trying to figure out the metaphysical/mystical in order to survive powerful forces they don't quite yet understand.
-
First of all - I've always admired your willingness to openly engage in discussions and welcoming even negative feedback on these forums Battuta. This is far from common and should be applauded.
Now as there is nothing factually wrong with what you said in your rebuttal, here's the food for thought:
What this shows me is that Blue Planet expects the player to have dissected FS2 and all it's premises or plot points to the same degree as you guys did when you've created Blue Planet. By no means am I an active member of the hlp community, but I've been an avid Freespace 2 player the past years, replaying the (original) campaigns multiple times. So even if I would see the 'correctness' of all your design decisions (logic aka left side of the brain) after you carefully explain them all to me, (in the case of the original premise) my feelings tell me that it's a total 180 to what I would expect of an isolated star system not knowing of advancements made outside (emotion aka right side of the brain).
Good game design (especially in free 2 play titles and this thing here is as free as it gets), needs to focus on emotionally satisfying and engaging player expectations and less so using pure logic. Even if everything could've happened exactly the way you portrayed it in BP, it's a huge emotional shift in expectations and premises and this cognitive dissonance carries its way through the whole game, diminishing enjoyment (and willingness for experiments). Emotion doesn't mean that the plot uses emotive motifs or tropes, but it's more about the base emotions triggered within the player by your design choices.
So in that regard (and that's the tricky thing about game design), we're both right, because the facts are on your side, but the storytelling failed to bridge the disconnect felt from what FS2 originally was (I'd even go so far saying that AoA was perfect until the disconnect came at the end).
Last but not least, please take this as more of an 'consider these things when continuing development' kind of critique, as its far easier to spot these things if you're doing games for a living and have to engage the biggest possible group of players with stories and game designs. It's no exact science, but making sure to keep players' emotions (such as frustration with missions that can only be finished with perfect timings only) in check is of the utmost importance. Read Eurogamer's and RockPaperShotgun's reviews of 'Strike Suit Zero' to see examples of where a game failed to engage in that regard and was justified by saying something along the lines of 'this is made for the space shoot players who naturally like it hard and frustrating'.
BP is not a commercial product, but it's come so far along that it could (and needs to in my opinion) improve even more by taking lessons learned in those products. Or you can totally ignore all that which is absolutely your choice. But if you think about these things a little more when doing ep4 or 5 than I've achieved all I wanted to achieve here.
-
I'm honestly surprised at the amount of people bashing tenebra for the unorthodox methods employed by what is described as a secretive organization who's main goal is the preservation of humanity at any cost by any means necessary. There's plenty of alpha 1's out there that can shoot down infinity fighters bombers and kill beam turrets but it takes a special kind of person to fly a stealth fighter to murder a person who believed was doing the right thing behind enemy lines with their own tech (hacking the mjolnir is my preferred method as you might suspect).
On this point I think the only mission that could be considered over the top as far as developers trying to "show off" would be the tower defense extravaganza, not because of the mechanics but because at least for me that mission was poorly executed. Its too easy for starters if you drop the tanks in the optimal configuration, there's no penalty for simply starting the mission and dropping everything right away, from the briefing I got the idea that I was setting up an ambush so I tried to not drop stuff until it seemed like a major attack was about to come in, except it happens pretty much right away on the first wave after the scouts are killed, you can activate the tanks all at once while the transports are still really far off and they keep coming at you like lemmings.
Compared to the level of planning that every other mission had up to that point I found it really weak.
As far as magic goes... the only thing that is not easily explained to me is the whole Ken mission from r1 where you are basically told something is coming and they must prepare yet during universal truth we are told the shivans are merely trolling us with their tech and just seeing what we can do, while being defined as godslayers. Yet they must "prepare" for something.
While this type of narrative might not be for everyone it does have roots in freespace, or was the shivan's blowing up capella magic? Basically I think the whole pantheon of godlike races is BP's crew way of doing their own capella and people have trouble accepting this from a non cannon source.
-
So in that regard (and that's the tricky thing about game design), we're both right, because the facts are on your side, but the storytelling failed to bridge the disconnect felt from what FS2 originally was (I'd even go so far saying that AoA was perfect until the disconnect came at the end).
That's interesting: I found AoA to be, almost throughout the story, more disconnected in tone from the original games than any of the Acts in WiH so far, including the last one. The original games were often very minimalist in story structure and used that to convey a professional military cadence to the story. Even so, Freespace 1 had some metaphysical undertones and while FS2 had less of that, it also added more mysteries about the Shivans and their goals and some philosophizing in the form of Bosch. In AoA rather than simply being undercurrents, the mysterious and mystical completely surfaced. I enjoyed the game, parts of it particularly so, but I found the shift in tone of AoA with respect to the originals actually a little jarring when I first played it.
Good game design (especially in free 2 play titles and this thing here is as free as it gets), needs to focus on emotionally satisfying and engaging player expectations and less so using pure logic. Even if everything could've happened exactly the way you portrayed it in BP, it's a huge emotional shift in expectations and premises and this cognitive dissonance carries its way through the whole game, diminishing enjoyment (and willingness for experiments). Emotion doesn't mean that the plot uses emotive motifs or tropes, but it's more about the base emotions triggered within the player by your design choices.
Subversion of expectation can also be a powerful tool in storytelling. For instance, the BP team set up Delenda Est beautifully. I completely bought that the UEF was about to win a major victory and to have those hopes dashed was emotionally crushing ... in the best possible way. There are different types of player expectations, but even aforementioned shifts in the tone and style for a game are not necessarily a negative if done right. Some think that was achieved by the BP team, others disagree. Contrary to your assertion, one could in fact argue that a F2P mod made by the community has more freedom to explore different story structures, mechanics, and ideas than a commercial sequel would have precisely because it is not official, "non-canon", and therefore up to the player if they choose to accept its devices.
However, I can empathize with you on some of these points: I also believe the GTVA of the 2nd Shivan war would not have launched a strike on its own home as the current GTA administration has done, even in light of the revelations in Act 3. That would be out of character (I assume that is the cognitive dissonance to which you refer at the end of AoA?). But that is another case where the subversion of expectation was used to create an emotional shock. I was also surprised that Earth has as large and capable a fleet as it does (I even wrote so in the forum way back when). However, the writers have tried to convey the backstory and culture of the respective antagonists as much as possible within the story. As for the rest, the reasons for Earth's current capabilities and Earth's/GTA's shifts in culture are also covered in greater depth in the lore that the player can choose to read in the Tech Simulator. I suppose the idea is that: either the player will simply accept the world as given and enjoy the plot the writers have created moving forward from the setup, or question it further and investigate the details of how this situation 18 years after the second game came about - and >50 years since last contact with Earth. The BP team are pushing the original Freespace story structure past its original design and they have attempted to make it a believable future of the original games, while still leaving some mysteries as to what is happening and why to be filled in by later installments. I feel that most of what they have attempted in this regard has worked really well. But feel free to continue to disagree. :)
-
I'm honestly surprised at the amount of people bashing tenebra for the unorthodox methods employed by what is described as a secretive organization who's main goal is the preservation of humanity at any cost by any means necessary. There's plenty of alpha 1's out there that can shoot down infinity fighters bombers and kill beam turrets but it takes a special kind of person to fly a stealth fighter to murder a person who believed was doing the right thing behind enemy lines with their own tech (hacking the mjolnir is my preferred method as you might suspect).
The problem comes when the target audience is all those people who enjoyed being Alpha 1 in FS1/2 so much they're still with the game. Trying to make a mod to a really old game and then not emphasising the parts that those die hard fans liked about it is a risky thing.
FS2 had SOC missions, and they still remembered to be about dogfighting because that's what players of a space shooter look for in a space shooter. If you want to take out the dogfighting, you need to replace it with something those players will accept, and Tenebra was too all over the place to effectively do that. It didn't keep the Alpha 1s as a target but it also didn't go for any specific other group. As a result, many feel it is unfocused.
It may make sense plotwise, but one thing FS1/2 knew was that the plot shouldn't get in the way of a fun mission.
-
The problem comes when the target audience is all those people who enjoyed being Alpha 1 in FS1/2 so much they're still with the game. Trying to make a mod to a really old game and then not emphasising the parts that those die hard fans liked about it is a risky thing.
FS2 had SOC missions, and they still remembered to be about dogfighting because that's what players of a space shooter look for in a space shooter. If you want to take out the dogfighting, you need to replace it with something those players will accept, and Tenebra was too all over the place to effectively do that. It didn't keep the Alpha 1s as a target but it also didn't go for any specific other group. As a result, many feel it is unfocused.
It may make sense plotwise, but one thing FS1/2 knew was that the plot shouldn't get in the way of a fun mission.
To be fair, :v: had more time and experience in refining their missions and game design, it wouldn't be fair to expect that from a user created mod. Hell, I'm not even expecting that - I'm just saying that applying some of the design workflow to good use would make Blue Planet even better. I'm sensing the love and passion that goes into it and I want to like it, but I can't because of many things I explained in previous posts.
The archetypal "Alpha 1" player wants more content within FS2 and its universe, but he doesn't read lots of text. He doesn't read tech room scripts, skips over long dialog screens and is then served an utterly baffling game. "Don't go and play it then" is what most say, others might say "then this isn't for you". All I'm saying is "you're right, but there's no reason not telling them what it is that makes it »not for me«".
-
:facepalm:
:v: were the first people *ever* to design FS missions, and they had to make more than 30 of them in under a year. Are you seriously suggesting they were better at it than the BP team, who have far looser time constraints and are drawing from a far more sophisticated corpus of mission design?
-
To be fair, :v: had more time and experience in refining their missions and game design, it wouldn't be fair to expect that from a user created mod. Hell, I'm not even expecting that - I'm just saying that applying some of the design workflow to good use would make Blue Planet even better. I'm sensing the love and passion that goes into it and I want to like it, but I can't because of many things I explained in previous posts.
The archetypal "Alpha 1" player wants more content within FS2 and its universe, but he doesn't read lots of text. He doesn't read tech room scripts, skips over long dialog screens and is then served an utterly baffling game. "Don't go and play it then" is what most say, others might say "then this isn't for you". All I'm saying is "you're right, but there's no reason not telling them what it is that makes it »not for me«".
To be fair ... one might expect a user created mod to take more design risks both in story and mission structure precisely because it is a user created mod. It is free and not an official, or "canon", sequel so it can be discarded or made gospel as one wills it to be. Sadly, a :v-old: sequel will probably never be made. :sigh:
Personally I have found most of BP - story and missions - to be very well thought out and engaging. But you and I disagree on that ... and that's okay. :)
-
The archetypal "Alpha 1" player wants more content within FS2 and its universe, but he doesn't read lots of text. He doesn't read tech room scripts, skips over long dialog screens and is then served an utterly baffling game. "Don't go and play it then" is what most say, others might say "then this isn't for you". All I'm saying is "you're right, but there's no reason not telling them what it is that makes it »not for me«".
I would be very cross if BP changed its method of storytelling to suit the kind of player you describe. No danger of that, of course. The advantage of not needing to sell BP means it doesn't need to try to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
I'd point your Alpha 1 player to other campaigns instead.
BTW, pick any substantial WiH mission, and there are many fans here (myself included) who think it beats any and all FS2 missions for gameplay.
-
I like this discussion and I think that Juno's point about saying what is it in Tenebra that doesn't ring well for him is completely fair and justified. Unless of course you merely want a fan crowd yelling yes to everything the artists do.... which I don't think anyone here wants.
-
I'm not telling him to shut up, I'm explaining why I disagree. Ultimately, what Juno75 seeks may not be compatible with what most of us like about BP.
-
I'd argue you are calling him "the lowest common denominator" not very subtly, while it's a bit skewed to "disagree" with how Juno's experiencing WiH act 3. You can't really disagree with a fact...
Mind Aesaar, I am not saying I had the same experience as he had, just that I don't think it's a matter of "denominators" and so on.
Also, been spoiling me some fiction about the worm... very interesting! And I like its pof/texturing quite a lot. Did the idea for it come from a hyperdimensional fractal projected unto a 3D matrix or something? (Sure does look like it)
-
:facepalm:
:v: were the first people *ever* to design FS missions, and they had to make more than 30 of them in under a year. Are you seriously suggesting they were better at it than the BP team, who have far looser time constraints and are drawing from a far more sophisticated corpus of mission design?
That's a common misconception of people who've never worked in creative industries. First of all strict time constraints are actually better than loose (or no) time constraints. They help you focus on the key features and key statements that "make" your game or product. Constraints help you in making the hard decisions of simplifying features and ideas, thus streamlining them and creating a better experience that is suitable to a bigger chunk of your player base. Constraints are ensuring that you don't get overindulgent in your own ideas and help yourself in keeping track of the overall objectives. Having no time constraints is for all intents and purposes not a positive feat.
As for your statement about :v:: I think it's fair to say that they did a) market analysis, b) analysis of past titles in the same vein, c) did proper game design and iterative gameplay tests with QA and people trained (!) to judge what they're playing with other people's expectations in mind, ensuring that the biggest target audience possible will like it. This and the fact that Volition wasn't run by amateurs would prove you wrong.
I'm not telling him to shut up, I'm explaining why I disagree. Ultimately, what Juno75 seeks may not be compatible with what most of us like about BP.
I'd be very careful with such a sentiment - it's a well known fact that communities (especially in online forums) represent a small (albeit very vocal) part of the overall audience. You and I don't know what the silent majority (consisting of players like me, more players like you and even different gamers that came to FS2 Open and BP through other websites, youtube videos, et. al.) thinks.
Rest assured, I don't want to change "your" Blue Planet, I will play episodes 4 and 5 anyway as a testament to the achievements of the team behind it. Alas this is the internet, people will read into my criticism whatever they want of course.
-
I think the fact that FS2 has quite a lot of dud missions should factor into your condescension somewhere.
-
Juno: Even taking into account that there's a big silent majority of players who do not make their opinions heard on these forums, the feedback we get is skewed pretty decisively in the "positive" category.
Also, I am not quite sure what you are criticizing us for. That we're not professional game designers? That the BP team is not a professional game studio? I mean, ultimately, we're making this thing because it's the story we like to tell, there's no paycheck for us except for the occasional piece of insightful discussion.
-
The FS2 retail campaign Isn't really all that great mission design wise. (it's also full of little silly bugs that reveal time constraint and little testing)
That's a common misconception of people who've never worked in creative industries. First of all strict time constraints are actually better than loose (or no) time constraints. They help you focus on the key features and key statements that "make" your game or product. Constraints help you in making the hard decisions of simplifying features and ideas, thus streamlining them and creating a better experience that is suitable to a bigger chunk of your player base. Constraints are ensuring that you don't get overindulgent in your own ideas and help yourself in keeping track of the overall objectives. Having no time constraints is for all intents and purposes not a positive feat.
I disagree and call bull****.
Having focused and attainable goals = good
Being put on a forced time constraint (because the publisher only wants to fund so much) = nothing positive about that.
Also notice how that isn't at all relevant to a team of modders that isn't on any payroll and isn't out to make any profit. It's a labor of love.
As for your statement about :v:: I think it's fair to say that they did a) market analysis, b) analysis of past titles in the same vein, c) did proper game design and iterative gameplay tests with QA and people trained (!) to judge what they're playing with other people's expectations in mind, ensuring that the biggest target audience possible will like it. This and the fact that Volition wasn't run by amateurs would prove you wrong.
The game industry in 1997 was nothing like how the game industry is today.
Freespace was still made in the day when game developers just loved what they were doing and weren't just an other cog in the giant milk cow machine that the game industry is today. Here, check out http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2011/03/30/the-secret-history-of-volition.aspx this documentary of :v: (I think there is an other one somewhere out there too). Back then they didn't do the **** that you think they did. None of that business suit 'market analysis' and 'trained not amateurs'.
They made descent and freespace because thats what they felt like doing, thats what they were having fun and a passion for.
What you describe is also what makes the game industry so incredibly ****ty nowadays. "Streamlining" and "people trained (!) to judge what they're playing with other people's expectations in mind, ensuring that the biggest target audience possible will like it." = Aka dumbing **** down so that the the lowest common denominator will be able to understand and play the game. All for the sake of higher sales. This is also exactly why so many studios are running to crowdfunding. They wanna go back to what they love doing. Making games and not milking franchises for the sake of the publishers.
I'm glad that the BP team isn't **** like that and has greatly expanded on Freespace's gameplay with innovation and player choice.
It's fine if that isn't your cup of tea. But don't come in here striding on your high horse telling us in a condescending manner on 'how the pros would have done it.'
-
I'd love for BP to be more accessible, be more open for players completely new to FS to pick up and enjoy, but that was never, ever a design goal for us. We do expect people to have played FS2 at the very least, preferably FS1 and some of the other campaigns like ST:R, Derelict, Vassago's Dirge on top. It's very much made by, and made for, FS veterans who can C31 in their sleep, and while that means that there's a portion of the potential playerbase that's left behind, we feel that by not slowing down to explain stuff the vets already know, we can better concentrate on how to deliver the new things.
-
c31 is for dorks, A3 is where it's at
-
Well Spoon, I'm sorry to see that you take so much offense in what I said - it was neither my intention to offend nor to ride a "high horse". But it's quite clear that for the people active here BP is "as good as it is" and that there's no desire to adapt concepts from the schools of "commercial" game design. I voiced my opinion trying to put it into some context and I think we can leave it at that.
-
Look, we are definitely looking at the trends in game design. Most of us on the team are avid gamers, and have more than a passing interest in the trade of making games, but ultimately, we are making the game we want to make, and commercial wisdom be damned. We do not make a commercial game, and have no interest of doing so.
-
I couldn't agree more with E on this. Also, no one said that BP is "as good as it is", sure there is room for improvement, and not everyone is happy with it, but you are coming at it from a completely different angle.
-
There are plenty of other campaigns that allow you to be a traditional alpha 1 guarding convoys and blowing up capships.
What I love about BP is that the team are trying to develop new ways to play using what is a very old interface and they do come up with some ingenious missions. Ok if they had a massive budget and resources I'm sure it could be even better but what they do with what they have is unbelievable. I showed some guys who are crazy Arma modders the video for Icarus and their jaws hit the floor when I told them it was a 14 year old game that had been modded.
The attention to detail and hardwork that has gone into this far surpasses most professional developers products - their only flaw in my eyes is sometimes trying to do too much but even then they make it work.
Edit: that's not just the BP team that deserves credit but the whole HL modder community
-
Good game design (especially in free 2 play titles and this thing here is as free as it gets), needs to focus on emotionally satisfying and engaging player expectations and less so using pure logic. Even if everything could've happened exactly the way you portrayed it in BP, it's a huge emotional shift in expectations and premises and this cognitive dissonance carries its way through the whole game, diminishing enjoyment (and willingness for experiments). Emotion doesn't mean that the plot uses emotive motifs or tropes, but it's more about the base emotions triggered within the player by your design choices.
So in that regard (and that's the tricky thing about game design), we're both right, because the facts are on your side, but the storytelling failed to bridge the disconnect felt from what FS2 originally was (I'd even go so far saying that AoA was perfect until the disconnect came at the end).
I'm sure this is true for you, but as a trained statistician, I'm at the point where I can say with modest confidence that you have the opposite reaction of most players. We consistently hear that BP is more 'emotionally engaging' than FS2 (I feel like BioWare has that phrase copyrighted :nervous:).
So the facts are on my side in that I think we succeed more often than not - and in a way that lets people engage with the BPverse in a way they can't with FS2. FS2 is one of my favorite narratives in any medium, but survey players here and I think you'll find that for a lot of them, BP is their preferred 'take' on that universe, largely because of the way BP unpacks and rejiggers things to make them cohere better.
The problem comes when the target audience is all those people who enjoyed being Alpha 1 in FS1/2 so much they're still with the game. Trying to make a mod to a really old game and then not emphasising the parts that those die hard fans liked about it is a risky thing.
Yet it's a risk that seems to pay off! I guess there could be a silent majority out there, but the sample we have - and it's pretty good - suggests that BP is inordinately successful in its design goals. I'm constantly surprised by how well we connect with players given that we break a lot of traditional game storytelling 'rules'.
If anything I think you should've made the opposite critique - that we are too focused on delivering to those die hard fans that have been here for ten years.
To be fair, :v: had more time and experience in refining their missions and game design, it wouldn't be fair to expect that from a user created mod. Hell, I'm not even expecting that - I'm just saying that applying some of the design workflow to good use would make Blue Planet even better. I'm sensing the love and passion that goes into it and I want to like it, but I can't because of many things I explained in previous posts.
Our missions, and in fact I'd daresay our workflow, are significantly more advanced than Volition's. We could make :v: missions in our sleep. Part of the reason we don't is that we played them already, in 1999; part of the reason we don't is that we're incredibly capable with FRED and we would be bored stiff working at their level.
When you invoke :v: you also need to remember Jason Scott's opinion on narrative style in FreeSpace campaigns. He always thought heterodoxy would be the great strength of the community, and I think he's right. A monoculture of Volitionesque silent-protagonist minimalist implicit stories isn't better than what we have.
The archetypal "Alpha 1" player wants more content within FS2 and its universe, but he doesn't read lots of text. He doesn't read tech room scripts, skips over long dialog screens and is then served an utterly baffling game. "Don't go and play it then" is what most say, others might say "then this isn't for you". All I'm saying is "you're right, but there's no reason not telling them what it is that makes it »not for me«".
Where, then, is this archetypal Alpha 1 player? An archetype has to be archetypical. We've had years to judge reactions, and our sample of respondents is wide enough that I've even run into BP players, utterly by coincidence, in real life. And in a lot of ways some of your responses are the inverse of what we see the most - people tend to like WiH more than AoA, for instance. I don't believe in your archetypal Alpha 1 player because I can't find enough of that player in the real world to call it an archetype.
I like a lot of your feedback, but part of what you want us to do is actively opposed to what has made Blue Planet so successful. That said -
Well Spoon, I'm sorry to see that you take so much offense in what I said - it was neither my intention to offend nor to ride a "high horse". But it's quite clear that for the people active here BP is "as good as it is" and that there's no desire to adapt concepts from the schools of "commercial" game design. I voiced my opinion trying to put it into some context and I think we can leave it at that.
I think you underestimate the amount of self-critique that happens internally, as well as the attention we pay to design trends in the industry as a whole. Without investors or a publisher, though, we're free to get away with a lot of stuff, including the text-packed maximalist narrative style that can get so obnoxious without voice acting.
-
Re: new, non-dogfighting gameplay, I feel like BP requires that players have quite a background in FS1/2 and the other user-made campaigns that The E mentioned. This is one of BP's greatest strengths and why it cannot be a "commercial game": each portion builds on the last, starting with FS1 and 2.
AoA is pretty much FS2 gameplay picked up from the end of FS2 (shoot Shivans, kill beams), but with some awesome new tech added with which you'll need to familiarize yourself to understand WiH combat. WiH Acts 1 and 2 are still plenty of dogfighting, but build on many elements of FS2: the player should really already be familiar with Maxims, TAGs, SSMs (might require modding experience in addition to playing), Trebuchets, and beam overcharging. Then there's the neat new stuff: capital ships are smart (and you can fly one!), you don't have to shoot at beam cannons because other fighters can do it, and you can make a few decisions by pressing 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Act 3 actively discourages the player from dogfighting while packing a lot of new gameplay concepts into a few missions. That is why I said in the other thread, rather than as a departure from the tried-and-true FS-style dogfight, I see Act 3 as a tutorial meant to teach you these concepts so that you can use them in Act 4. That is why I fully expect I'll have to upload viruses heh I guess we used them all up and order capships around while I'm dogfighting in Act 4. And thank goodness I didn't have to dogfight in HFH. Then again, each installment of BP has surpassed my expectations, so we'll see.
(The above also applies to the story, although as BP is user-made post-Capella campaigns, that goes without saying.)
Act 3 does not stand alone. It is built on Acts 1 and 2, AoA, and FreeSpace. A new player picking it up as his first taste of FS ought to be completely overwhelmed.
-
I never meant that BP should be the same kind of game as FS1/2. What I am saying is that FS1/2 for the most part focused on a select few similar types of gameplay whereas Tenebra doesn't seem to.
If you focus well on one gameplay type, fans of that type will love you.
If you don't focus, there is something for everyone but few people will love all of it.
That doesn't mean you should focus too narrowly or focus on groups you don't want to cater to, but without some kind of focus, you run the risk of most people thinking of your work as average overall, and BP deserves better (I say based on WiH acts 1 and 2 which were amazing).
-
I never meant that BP should be the same kind of game as FS1/2. What I am saying is that FS1/2 for the most part focused on a select few similar types of gameplay whereas Tenebra doesn't seem to.
Probably because those same few similar types of gameplay have been remade and remade over and over again by about a hundred user-made campaigns for the past 13 years. People are getting bored of it.
-
I despise the whole "We need more campagnia genericae" attitude. It's terrible, there are hundreds of campaigns that stick to the original (and flawed as they may be) formulae.
I, for one, welcome our new textual narrative/content providing overlords.
-
I never meant that BP should be the same kind of game as FS1/2. What I am saying is that FS1/2 for the most part focused on a select few similar types of gameplay whereas Tenebra doesn't seem to.
I'd say it is focused, actually. Not focused on a specific gameplay mechanic, but the overall mission structure: Tenebra is a series of puzzles. Each is to be solved with whatever tools -- other than your fighter pilot prowess -- are at your disposal (varying from mission to mission).
-
I never meant that BP should be the same kind of game as FS1/2. What I am saying is that FS1/2 for the most part focused on a select few similar types of gameplay whereas Tenebra doesn't seem to.
Probably because those same few similar types of gameplay have been remade and remade over and over again by about a hundred user-made campaigns for the past 13 years. People are getting bored of it.
I'd find it odd if people keep a modding community alive for 13 years for a game that they're bored with.
I despise the whole "We need more campagnia genericae" attitude. It's terrible, there are hundreds of campaigns that stick to the original (and flawed as they may be) formulae.
I, for one, welcome our new textual narrative/content providing overlords.
There are hundreds of such campaigns because hundreds of people feel the need to make them. And they're not wrong if they enjoy doing so.
The Alpha 1s are not the enemy of BP.
I never meant that BP should be the same kind of game as FS1/2. What I am saying is that FS1/2 for the most part focused on a select few similar types of gameplay whereas Tenebra doesn't seem to.
I'd say it is focused, actually. Not focused on a specific gameplay mechanic, but the overall mission structure: Tenebra is a series of puzzles. Each is to be solved with whatever tools -- other than your fighter pilot prowess -- are at your disposal (varying from mission to mission).
Hm fair enough, I guess I hadn't looked at it that way. In that case, I have to say I'm not sure this is a particularly good use of the FS2 engine.
But most fans seem to be happy, so let's wait and see what act 4 and 5 bring.
-
I'd find it odd if people keep a modding community alive for 13 years for a game that they're bored with.
They are getting bored with the basic gameplay that FS2 offered, which has been replicated by a hundred user-made campaigns. But FSO can do so much more. As proven by Tenebra, Antagonist, DE, WoD...
There are hundreds of such campaigns because hundreds of people feel the need to make them. And they're not wrong if they enjoy doing so.
There is a hundred of such campaigns because that's the only thing people knew back then. And people weren't completely, utterly bored of it yet back then. Circumstances have changed, and thank unexistant god for that.
-
BP1 is basically core FS2 gameplay with more competent capships and a focus on an elite unit executing good tactics against a not-super-smart foe.
BP2 is a pretty significant departure at the fundamental level due to the AI changes. The way that missions were conceived and designed (particularly the way enemies were presented) is quite different.
-
They are getting bored with the basic gameplay that FS2 offered, which has been replicated by a hundred user-made campaigns.
speak for yourself. i still replay the FS2 campaign, and still enjoy it every time. i like freespace because i like dogfighting in space.
i enjoy BP for its extreme production quality, new ships and weapons, and well thought out (if overly emotional for my personal taste) fan-written story. i DO like the opportunity for novel gameplay in WiH, but AoA will always be my favorite from a pure gameplay perspective. pretty much the only thing holding it back from having as many replays as retail is sam's voice actor.
-
I still like basic FreeSpace gameplay a lot, and I've been playing it since first grade.
A little innovation is nice, though.
-
As usual, this is getting needlessly antagonistic. You might be bored with retail, you might not; but a little heterogeny isn't going to hurt.
-
That didn't sound antagonistic to me. Maybe "bored" isn't the best term. Confined? Happy with retail but yearning for something that's FreeSpace but deeper.
-
As usual, this is getting needlessly antagonistic. You might be bored with retail, you might not; but a little heterogeny isn't going to hurt.
Was that directed at me? Because I don't see how partially agreeing with everyone is antagonistic.
-
it was probably directed at me and my "speak for yourself" line. i didn't mean for that to sound hostile. i just meant to disagree with the point that the community at large is bored with "standard" FS2 gameplay.
in the interest of full disclosure, i haven't read most of the thread (because i also don't care for the.... charged emotions in the posts i read in the first couple pages), i just happened to see that one post and wanted to respond.
-
it was probably directed at me and my "speak for yourself" line. i didn't mean for that to sound hostile. i just meant to disagree with the point that the community at large is bored with "standard" FS2 gameplay.
in the interest of full disclosure, i haven't read most of the thread (because i also don't care for the.... charged emotions in the posts i read in the first couple pages), i just happened to see that one post and wanted to respond.
I don't think you sounded terribly hostile. Perhaps somewhat defensive, but not insulting.
This thread has taken an interesting course. We've gone from arguing over Tenebra's storyline to arguing over whether or not BP is science fantasy to arguing over whether or not retail gameplay is boring.
-
Intriguing thread. I've stayed out of it while I worked on finally finishing Act 3, but now that I have...
Anyone who frequents GD will know I'm a scientific rationalist by training and work in the uber-rationality of legislation by occupation. Looking at Tenebra from every angle I can come up with, I'm not seeing any space magic. Certainly not along the lines of the nonsense regularly injected into the ME series by BioWare.
My overarching reaction to WiH, and Tenebra in particular, is immensely positive. The mission design was spectacular, the plot coherent and meaningful (very little in terms of filler, although the Custos mission might qualify), and the experience in general was top-notch. It took me a while to get into it, but Tenebra isn't a traditional dogfight simulation like FS2 retail, and I don't think that's a bad change. We've all played as Alpha 1 enough to be able to do that in our sleep. AoA was an expanded version of that with character-centric narrative design. WiH P1 moved us a little further away from solo tactics into a command realm. Tenebra completes that arc. Tenebra seems to best be played almost like a tactical RTS, orchestrating the battle rather than fighting it. While that may not be for everyone, I think it's a great deal more interesting than traditional FreeSpace missions.
One of the major missing components in typical FreeSpace missions is player identity. BP stories are not driven by an anonymous hero but by real - and fallible - human characters. In fact, the only real objection I have to this method is the introduction of some plot-consequential player agency. My personal preference would have been for a canonical presentation of events, as if the campaign was history retold rather than history made (I just felt like it would have been a better fit with the background materials, but this is entirely a creative decision).
My criticisms of Tenebra are limited to the following:
- The mission difficulty was not something I was prepared for, having not played FS since the last BP release, and I felt they could be a little too unforgiving until they were played a half-dozen times. This was not a complaint echoed by everyone, however.
- The briefings were painful, and - related! - the DreamScape could have been used to at least model beginning mission parameters but was instead used purely for the "talky bits." I really enjoyed the "talky bits," and I know Batts already said time was a major factor, but I sincerely hope any future releases with complex behaviour have their briefing modelled in the DreamScape instead of just text.
- Some of the vocabulary and technical writing was - I thought - needlessly jargon-filled. I do understand why its written that way, but I felt like you didn't need to take that writing step to actually bring that part of the immersion across.
- Technical issue: Unconventional keybinds and their corresponding instructions mostly ended up as trial-and-error. Only a few missions had my non-standard keybinds properly working with correct descriptions in briefing or mission.
Anyway, I think Tenebra can be a really rewarding gameplay and plot experience if people go into it NOT expecting a traditional FS experience, and that is perhaps where people are getting hung up.
Also - loved Universal Truth. The universe is alive, and the Shivans are a nonrational immune system. Oh, and the Bosch tie-in, the retail mysteries cleared up? Fantastic. I really do feel like this could be the continuation of the retail plot with a new storytelling mechanism.
-
We recently discovered that due to an SCP bug, all weapon ROF and damage has been locked on Insane difficulty no matter what difficulty you select.
So that may be part of why people are finding it so hard.
-
We recently discovered that due to an SCP bug, all weapon ROF and damage has been locked on Insane difficulty no matter what difficulty you select.
So that may be part of why people are finding it so hard.
Hooray I don't just suck! :P
-
The reason some people (and formerly myself) think of it as space magic is because it takes a bunch of common fantasy conventions and alters them to fit soft sci-fi. Nothing is actually supernatural, but it can feel very mystical at times.
We recently discovered that due to an SCP bug, all weapon ROF and damage has been locked on Insane difficulty no matter what difficulty you select.
So that may be part of why people are finding it so hard.
Eos uses a slightly outdated version of Fury AI, so will this affect my mission balance? Or is it just limited to BP builds?
-
We recently discovered that due to an SCP bug, all weapon ROF and damage has been locked on Insane difficulty no matter what difficulty you select.
So that may be part of why people are finding it so hard.
And I will be posting new builds with that fix in place tomorrow.
Eos uses a slightly outdated version of Fury AI, so will this affect my mission balance? Or is it just limited to BP builds?
This bug affects the 3.6.16 stable release, and all other builds prior to the newest nightly build.
-
The reason some people (and formerly myself) think of it as space magic is because it takes a bunch of common fantasy conventions and alters them to fit soft sci-fi. Nothing is actually supernatural, but it can feel very mystical at times.
A thousand years ago the lay understanding of most natural phenomena was purely mystical.
Eos uses a slightly outdated version of Fury AI, so will this affect my mission balance? Or is it just limited to BP builds?
The AI table you use is irrelevant, it's all up to the executable you're running.
-
This bug affects the 3.6.16 stable release, and all other builds prior to the newest nightly build.
Whoa ... how long has it been like this? Are we talking about all the way since 3.6.12? Or even before?
-
Eos uses a slightly outdated version of Fury AI, so will this affect my mission balance? Or is it just limited to BP builds?
This bug affects the 3.6.16 stable release, and all other builds prior to the newest nightly build.
Now I understand why one of my missions has gotten harder despite nerfing a few enemies. Will you fix the official 3.6.16 builds, or just the BP ones?
The reason some people (and formerly myself) think of it as space magic is because it takes a bunch of common fantasy conventions and alters them to fit soft sci-fi. Nothing is actually supernatural, but it can feel very mystical at times.
A thousand years ago the lay understanding of most natural phenomena was purely mystical.
Yes, but a lot of stuff in BP still feels mystical and barely avoids the status of science fantasy. For example, the Vishnans and Shivans have enough power to be gods; you just choose to write them as incredibly advanced aliens.
EDIT: I could use that rationalization to call Lord of the Rings soft sci-fi even though it has a completely different writing style. It all depends on how you word things.
-
That's a dumb argument. By the standards of a civilization from 1500 BC we have enough power to be gods. We just...choose...to write ourselves as...incredibly advanced humans?
It makes no sense.
-
Ive split out the discussions about Shivans, their intentions and whether or not they are sentient. You can find it here: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=83738.0