Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Dobralov on November 06, 2006, 08:10:02 pm

Title: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dobralov on November 06, 2006, 08:10:02 pm
From the Wikipedia article on Descent: Freespace--

"Even though FreeSpace 2 was lauded by the gaming press, it failed to sell very well, effectively marking the end of the era for this style of the space simulation video game."

Does anyone have a theory on what this means?  Why did this style of game die?  Shooters abound, even today in 2006, but why did the space shooter die?  I just don't get it--perhaps it's so simple as economics.  Since FS2 didn't sell, publishers didn't want to front money for any more "space shooters."  It sounds purely reactionary, and it seems silly to think that game developers, after seven years, wouldn't give it another shot.  We could even play the shooters on consoles.

Please, this isn't another dreaded "FS3" thread; I'm just trying to start a conversation about why space shooters lost the marketability...

Dobralov
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Turey on November 06, 2006, 08:44:42 pm
Everybody says that the Genre ended in 1999, with the failure of FS2. That's bull****. The Genre ended in 1999, when millions of Space Shooter fans were plunged into a three-year-long depression with the release of Episode 1, which featured very little in the way of space battles. This depression was prolonged with booster shots in 2002 and 2005, when the next two Star Wars were released which, ironically, contained very few "Star Wars". I predict that the current Space Shooter Depression will end in 2008, when the effects of the Star Wars prequels will wear off.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mefustae on November 06, 2006, 08:49:03 pm
I'm just trying to start a conversation about why space shooters lost the marketability...
Well, according to the friendly folks over at CIC, FS2 killed it. :doubt:
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dobralov on November 06, 2006, 09:03:13 pm

[/quote]Well, according to the friendly folks over at CIC, FS2 killed it. :doubt:
[/quote]

I've never understood why FS2 sold so relatively few copies, especially given the greatness of the graphics and storyline.  Saturation, maybe?  Between the five Wing Commanders and two Freespaces, perhaps the market had enough.  It sounds implausible, however, since those seven games span roughly 9 years of time, and we had ten times as many 1st person shooters in that time.  Yet people still buy them.

I like the "Star Wars" theory, even if it's on the fringe.  I'm more than happy to blame George Lucas for all of my problems, such as my debt, my receding hair line, and my lack of new space shooter simulations.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Aardwolf on November 06, 2006, 09:15:07 pm
I wholeheartedly agree and concur with the above statement. Sort of.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 06, 2006, 09:21:27 pm
Dobralov, seeing as how I doubt you've recieved this in your 8 posts.....

:welcome:

yada yada yada, Don't go into the ducts, our resident Shivan, nicknamed Carl, is up there. If you are unlucky enough to need to enter said ducts, bring a lunch. If Carl comes, throw him the lunch and slowly back away. Flamethrowers are located under your seat, however, due to the suckiness of the last server, they only have holy water. Don't EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES mention the letters "S", "F", and "3" in the (im)proper order. You will be flamed, shot, beamed, mocked, brought back from the dead, and have the process repeated.




If I recall correctly, Freespace 1 didn't do so hot, and Freespace 2 didn't get much publicity. However, they DID allow people to share the discs. This erm.....loophole was found in the EULA.

I disagree with the genre being dead. Freelancer didn't do terribly, and obviously wasn't near Freespace's greatness, but it kept the genre alive. Also, the quasi-sequel to Freelancer, DarkStar One came out a few months ago. Haven't played it, but I think it did well enough to keeep genre alive....
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dark Hunter on November 06, 2006, 09:26:11 pm
I always thought that FS2 sold badly due to Interplay being idiots in the department of marketing... I mean, I was a huge fan of FS1, and would have gotten FS2 on launch day had I know about it... as it was, I didn't even hear about it until about two years ago... too bad I didn't hear about HLP until six months after that, cause I could've saved $60 (dammit eBay!).


Kudos to the DarkStar One people for trying to revitalize this genre, but I don't think DS1 is doing well enough to have much effect...


@Spartan: Wrong. FS1 did very well as I recall.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 06, 2006, 09:30:20 pm
anyone have any concrete evidence on the success of FS1???

@Dobralov: sorry, I think Hunter beat me to the welcome beam, he's better at it than I am anyway........

@Admins: we REALLY should get an automatic welcome speech so that n00bs don't get confused....
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dark Hunter on November 06, 2006, 09:37:27 pm
The beauty of the welcome speech is that there are so many different versions: it allows people to be creative. You can't have an authoritative "Official Welcome Speech"; and besides, I can't think of a noob who wouldn't be confused upon seeing the Welcome Speech for the first time (I was)!
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: BlackDove on November 06, 2006, 09:53:38 pm
I never really saw Space Sims that popular anyway in any kind of past.

Wing Commander pretty much ruled all, and then that flopped when they fired Roberts for the Prophecy. FS1 outperformed Prophecy, and in a very short time, FS2 was released, generating below par sales for a game that was so good by any and all standards, it blew any kind of potential competition away.

If I was a developer out to make a Space Sim, I really wouldn't bother with it. A game as good as FS that didn't sell well - anything I'd be able to make, which would probably be worse, would be pointless if I couldn't profit from it.

So instead of going for a space sim, you can always just make another ****ing World War 2 game. After all, everyone hates the Germans because that's the only lesson they memorized from school, and that **** just sells too well to miss out on the opportunity if you already have the means to make a game.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Thor on November 06, 2006, 10:06:35 pm
the space genre died for the simple reason that not enough people are buying them for it to be thriving... DS1 will not likely sell millions of copies, there for it is not the game that'll revitalize the genre.  why won't it sell millions of copies?  cause no one outside of the community knows about it.  It'll take a few combinations of factors to reinvigorate the genre.

1) Huge Sci-Fi film/series featuring space combat
2) a tie-in product that doesn't suck
3) said tie-in product selling millions of games.
4) other developers jumping on the band wagon and making great games for us to buy

without that tie-in, no publisher with boats of money to advertise a game will touch and push a space combat sim...  and from the current crop of sci-fi...only battlestar has that tie in potential really...and the last battlestar game apparently wasn't too spectacular. 

and don't get upset, but its likely any game is gonna be on all platforms too. 

The other option is for some very rich fans to make a wicked game, spend crap loads of their own money four-walling it, and hope to god that other people like it enough to get the attention of the mainstream...

so anyone got any money?

and all that said...is there a viable market for such games?  i hate to say it, but from a marketing perspective, can any space sim match the market size of DOOM?  HL2?  The Sims?

....not likely  :sigh:
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: foolfromhell on November 06, 2006, 10:20:14 pm
1) Huge Sci-Fi film/series featuring space combat
2) a tie-in product that doesn't suck
3) said tie-in product selling millions of games.
4) other developers jumping on the band wagon and making great games for us to buy

Looks like the current Space Fighting series doing spectacularly well is BSG (Battlestar Galactica). If they can make a truly good space shooter *and* they get it to sell, that might revitalize the market for space shooters. I sure hope they do. a good BSG game would rock
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dysko on November 07, 2006, 01:06:45 am
anyone have any concrete evidence on the success of FS1???
Well, on the box of the Italian version there is written under the title: "The sequel of the much applauded 1998's space shooter" (well, it may be only for marketing reasons, but anyway it is a clue).
Yes, I know the box can't be considered complete truth... (also seeing that Lucifer behind the Deimos... :rolleyes:)

IMHO, people nowadays don't buy space shooters because they don't want to face only-a-little-bit-harder-than-usual games. Here's my experience:
I borrowed my FS2 CDs to some classmates, and many of them said: "No, I don't like this game! It's too ****ing hard!"
After all, the same thing is happening to sim games, especially combat flight simulators: very few people buy them because they don't want to spend a bit of time learning how to use the game, they prefer games which can be played almost "without thinking" like FPSs.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bizzybody on November 07, 2006, 03:04:30 am
Quote
"Never ask Darth DySkO something related to airplanes... It's asking for troubles..."

What do you know of the Douglas F5D Skylancer, and what would you say if I mentioned there's one sitting at the Ontario, Oregon airport? It's been cosmetically restored and painted in the colors it wore as a NASA engine testbed. It was hacked over so many times then broken up for scrap so it wasn't possible (without mega mega mega $$$) to make it flyable.

oooo. A flyable paper model (http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/AC/aircraft/Douglas-Skyray/skyray.php) of the Douglas F4D Skyray. Came before the Skylancer, looks similar but they're really two completely different aircraft.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dysko on November 07, 2006, 07:08:06 am
What do you know of the Douglas F5D Skylancer, and what would you say if I mentioned there's one sitting at the Ontario, Oregon airport?
Not very much :nervous: I only read a small article about it a long time ago.
I know only it was similar in performance to the F8U, it was not chosen by the Navy and used as a test plane by the NASA.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Colonol Dekker on November 07, 2006, 07:12:26 am
From Elite to WC4 the Coach that is the  scs genre flourished on its journey, Prophecy was the first bump in the road up time mountain, then Alligience promptly smacked the driver with a golf club causing our little traveller to pull an Italian Job, The rest of the games were over the mountian, balance just maintained by FS1, FS1 saw an opening and hopped off th ebus to continue on foot, while Prohecy, secret ops and other *more stupid* games died a flaming death in the valleys below.......
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 07, 2006, 10:04:01 am
After all, the same thing is happening to sim games, especially combat flight simulators: very few people buy them because they don't want to spend a bit of time learning how to use the game, they prefer games which can be played almost "without thinking" like FPSs.

FPS games aren't hard to play, they're hard to play well. It takes a lot of time and patience. And a good internet connection...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Taristin on November 07, 2006, 10:59:14 am
The beauty of the welcome speech is that there are so many different versions: it allows people to be creative. You can't have an authoritative "Official Welcome Speech"; and besides, I can't think of a noob who wouldn't be confused upon seeing the Welcome Speech for the first time (I was)!

Actually the "beauty" of the welcome beam was that it was an old tradition that faded away, until fairly recently. It's since lost it's beauty... particularly since it tends to pull up ancient jokes from the early years of the community, despite always being given by new members to other new members.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Roanoke on November 07, 2006, 12:35:09 pm
It's generally accepted that Interplay got their priorities wrong at launch and FS2 suffered as a result. I bought it after it made the top5 space sims in (IIRC) PC Gamer.

The one thing that does my head in is the way the hostiles can straife (slide ?) so they can hammer you as they go past but you can't return the favour. Always annoying when devs take the lazy route and give hostiles special abilities. Such as the way bad gays can stop and turn on the spot in AC3, soliders shooting you while not anctually poiting their gun at you in the original Medal of Honour etc etc
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: aldo_14 on November 07, 2006, 01:10:24 pm
It's generally accepted that Interplay got their priorities wrong at launch and FS2 suffered as a result. I bought it after it made the top5 space sims in (IIRC) PC Gamer.

The one thing that does my head in is the way the hostiles can straife (slide ?) so they can hammer you as they go past but you can't return the favour. Always annoying when devs take the lazy route and give hostiles special abilities. Such as the way bad gays can stop and turn on the spot in AC3, soliders shooting you while not anctually poiting their gun at you in the original Medal of Honour etc etc

To be fair, the hostiles are a hyper-advanced alien race; it's not like Herr Schmidt spontaneously developing ESP.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 07, 2006, 01:22:19 pm
Space combat games are often treated like 'Flight Simulators in Space', which is why there is limited appeal. Most Spce-shooters require a myriad of controls for various actions, like controlling shields/power, sending messages etc.

Without sounding cynical, modern Pop culture prefers Glitter games, lots of special effects, not much depth, and a shallow learning/completion curve.

Problem with FS2 is that it is neither one or other, too simplified for a simulator, too complex for a throwaway distraction.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dobralov on November 07, 2006, 01:50:30 pm
Thank you, Spartan, for the warm welcome.  I wasn't trying to poke at the hornets' nest with a pointy stick when I mentioned "3," "S," and "F" in a phrase.  I know enough about the game to appreciate the wisdom in not constantly reminding a widow(er) about the death of their spouse (I read that analogy somewhere).

So...FS2 didn't cater to the streamlined, lowest-common denominator gaming market, and that's why Volition took a financial beating?  Depressing.  I prefer PC games to console games precisely because of the availability of deep strategic titles like Total War, Civilization, Heroes of Might and Magic.  Freespace is by no means a "deep strategic title," but it certainly is more complicated than your garden-variety shooter.  Doom 3, though beautiful, bored me into a coma after the first three levels.  Still, I know plenty of PC-gamers who prefer "deep" games to sterile, mind-numbing shooters (although "mind-numbing" is precisely what I want sometimes, especially after a hard day at work).  Are there not enough of us types to make a space shooter a reasonable financial investment? 

From a developer and publisher standpoint, I suppose it boils down to risk.  We can RISK making an excellent game in a sick genre, or we can make another sequel to a proven and safe success. 

And a word on Darkstar One: It's receiving mediocre reviews at best.  Normally, I disregard "outlier" reviews, but when I keep hearing the same complaints in multiple reviews from different sources, I pay attention.  I guess I'm "stuck" with FS2 Open, which is fine with me because it 1)looks freaking beautiful, and 2) our beloved technologically-competent fanbase keeps producing quality campaigns.

As long as the industry churns out an occasional game like Medieval Total War 2 or Bioshock (yes, I'm guilty of assuming these will be amazing games), I'll continue to dwell on the fringe.  It's nice and quiet out here, especially for a misanthrope like me...

Dobralov

Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dark Hunter on November 07, 2006, 05:29:04 pm
Games don't have to be deep and stategic to be good. Look at Volition's earlier series (they were still Parallax when they made it): Descent. I don't think I'd call Descent deep, yet it tops out as one of my top ten games of all time.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Turey on November 07, 2006, 05:44:25 pm
Actually the "beauty" of the welcome beam was that it was an old tradition that faded away, until fairly recently. It's since lost it's beauty... particularly since it tends to pull up ancient jokes from the early years of the community, despite always being given by new members to other new members.

I'm very sorry that I wasn't intelligent enough to find this community when it first started. Please excuse me for trying to have a little fun. I'll stop now.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 07, 2006, 06:09:14 pm
Both Hunter and Dobralov are right. FPS games SHOULD have an involved storyline (Halo being, IMHO the GREATEST plotline created). However, it's not an FPS without mind-numbing shooting of hostiles. One also has to look at HOW the FPS works. Being a fan of FPSs over anything else, I've spent considerable time contemplating what makes a good FPS, and I've compiled a fair list:

1) Decent storyline - Nothing too fancy, just enough to believe that we're killing the right thing. In BattleFront 2, you kill droids because they're part of the Confederation that you want to re-join with the Republic. The droids are killing clones because their masters believe that the government wasn't truly listening to them. There, a good storyline that explains WHY you're killing something, not just violence for the sake of violence.

2) Good HUD - No gamer wants to be left wondering how much ammo is left. Again, I think Halo had the best HUD of its time, with Halo 2 adapting well to the times. There shouldn't be any stupid looking reticle in the center. We just want a hole to shoot through. If shields are involved, and health ALWAYS is, we want to know how much of either we have left. However, the exception that I allow is Halo 2 because your health regenerates with your shields, almost eliminating the need for the health bar. It'd be nice, but unnecessary. Ammo is important, but we don't necessarily need to know how much EACH of our weapon holds. Just the one we have out is fine. Grenade counters are REALLY nice in an FPS, because you don't want to be trying to throw a grenade when you don't have one.

3) Good, All Around Weapons - Nothing's more annoying that carrying around a weapon you don't want. Again, Halo did an EXCELLENT job of having the right weapons when you need them, and left out the ones you don't need. I, personally, am a short-range specialist. Nothing feels better than blowing something up, or watching your enemy die right in front of you. However, there are those of you out there who enjoy the mid-range weapons, like the Battle Rifle from Halo, or the Pulse Rifle from UT2004 (I probably misnamed the latter). Finally, there are those of you (wimps) who prefer to pick off enemies from afar. There should be weapons for all three weapon favorites (jk on the wimps part). The developers can let you choose what weapon you want to use where, not pick them (oft times wrongly) for you. 

4) Sequels, but no Prequels - Almost never in a game can the developer create a sealed plotline that starts where the player starts and ends when the player ends. Most games have sequels, which is good for developers and gamers alike. Developers can make mucho dinero when it comes to a sequel. It's a safe bet that a sequel will sell somewhere in the vincinity of the first game, assuming the developer takes the time to re-write the game enough to be different, but, at the same time, plays true to the previous game. And us gamers enjoy playing a sequel because we already know most of the characters, and don't mind another story (how many stories did you have your parents read to you when you were younger?). What gamers don't want is the same game with the same exact characters doing exactly what they did last time with the same weapons. It's boring to just write that. However, Prequels are mostly nasty. There have been a few prequels that did well (Star Wars Episodes I-III told the story that they were supposed to tell, even with Hayden Christensen and Natlie Portman sucking major ...). But mostly, we've already been told the story, we know what's going to happen to the characters, we know what weapons are going to be developed, etc. IMHO, it's just not smart to develop a prequel.

5) Graphics - Hunter's going to disagree with me, but graphics DO add to a game. The time has come and gone to shoot pixelated monsters that we can't distinguish from ourselfs (Doom...sorta). Deep down inside, we like things to look pretty (Women like to look pretty, men like to look at pretty things). IMHO though, you still shouldn't override a game with good graphics but turn the game into a resource hog. It'll be soon enough when our processors are 100GHz, with 1 Teraflop of RAM. Until then, make the game look pretty, but don't let only those with big $$$ enjoy the game. UT2004 did REALLY well, IMHO, with graphics. Currently (though I REALLY hope to upgrade SOON!) I'm running a Nvidia GeForce Fx 5500. UT2004 looks pretty good, even at 1024 X 768 with shadows turned off.


IMHO, the above should be considered BEFORE making a decent FPS...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Turey on November 07, 2006, 06:32:33 pm
Can we get this moved to games and gaming? It seems to be turning into more of an all around games thread than a FreeSpace TGW/2/Open thread.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Polpolion on November 07, 2006, 07:20:21 pm
Who was the person who turned it from "the death of the space shooter" into the "Good FPSs" topic?


BTW, FS2 didn't do well because interplay sucks at life.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dark Hunter on November 07, 2006, 09:25:23 pm
Who was the person who turned it from "the death of the space shooter" into the "Good FPSs" topic?


Spartan_0214

@Spartan: I said absolutely nothing about FPS's, and the main topic is Space Shooters. I think Dobralov was just comparing them to FPS's because they are the Space Shooter's main rivals.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 07, 2006, 09:28:57 pm
apologies, didn't mean to turn this topic around. You guys go ahead and talk pessimisticly about a genre that hasn't really done well to begin with, and I'll continue being optimistic towards FPSs. (notices irony in statement.  Doesn't care.)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: ShivanSpS on November 07, 2006, 09:31:06 pm
Space combat games are often treated like 'Flight Simulators in Space', which is why there is limited appeal. Most Spce-shooters require a myriad of controls for various actions, like controlling shields/power, sending messages etc.

Without sounding cynical, modern Pop culture prefers Glitter games, lots of special effects, not much depth, and a shallow learning/completion curve.

Problem with FS2 is that it is neither one or other, too simplified for a simulator, too complex for a throwaway distraction.

Well, for me, FS2 has the best learning/completion curve of all, the PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, its you who learns to avoid and destruct ship, is you who learns to evade missiles, its you who learns to bombering, etc. Not a fuc* number on screen, or on a virtual pilot. That for me the best than pass 2 months playing a game to do anything better, like X2, X3 do it...

Microsoft has do it well to, Starlancer was good, but suffer of a extremly stupit AI, and their do it well in Freelancer too, but they fail on giving to that king of game a "Free style" after finish the story fine, Freelancer is good, but after finish the storyline, there is nothing more to do (I remember to get sleep two times when playing Freelancer in the midle of a fight!, that never happend and will not happen which FS2).

But I agree FS2 could give something of progress... Like the ranks... the ranks are nothing more than a name and a few stars (mm no, I remember that in FS1 multiplayer a Vice admiral guy who can give departing orders to ships  criticals in the mission), but that sounds more like a bug, there should be not allowed to give the departing order to the Hope for example :P... That guy... was Hurricane if a remember well.)

Anyway, FS2 fail on two things, Ranks and marketing.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 07, 2006, 09:38:44 pm
Quote
Problem with FS2 is that it is neither one or other, too simplified for a simulator, too complex for a throwaway distraction.

who wants a cheap distraction?

Anyway, FS2 fail on two things, Ranks and marketing.

I dunno. The ranking system works until you get to Admiral and aren't .... Oh .... say ..... ACTING like an Admiral. Admirals do NOT fly fancy little fighters into battle, OH NO, they're too valuble. We have to insulate them in big fancy ships with big fancy weapons... --------------------------------------------Dead Air--------------------------------------------. Anyway, the ranking system would work if you could actually conceivably be allowed to pilot one of those ships (btw, you can, but if you try to go third person, the game crashes).

yea, the marketing of FS2 was really bad, that's why we don't have....... n00bs, close your ears, turn off your monitors.....FS3....
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 07, 2006, 09:56:36 pm
Yup, part of the simplicity of Freespace 2 is the physics, that's why it's 'neither one nor the other' as it were. In one way, at least, Spartan is correct about one fact, Space Combat games have been on shaky ground since the Wing Commander, Star Wars and Freespace 1 era.

Maybe it's because we aren't simply satisfied in the 'same thing with prettier graphics', even SCP is as much, if not more about improving the functionality of FS2, the graphics are a great boon, but what makes the SCP so incredible is the potential.

As for the cheap distraction, I mean the stream of games with similar gameplay, which simply look like the same engine with different graphics. Every so often there are some interesting exceptions, but for the main part, I find the current market to be saturated with 'Pop' games, like Pop music, they are pushed out quick and similar.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: TrashMan on November 08, 2006, 05:55:21 am

Maybe it's because we aren't simply satisfied in the 'same thing with prettier graphics', even SCP is as much, if not more about improving the functionality of FS2, the graphics are a great boon, but what makes the SCP so incredible is the potential.

As for the cheap distraction, I mean the stream of games with similar gameplay, which simply look like the same engine with different graphics. Every so often there are some interesting exceptions, but for the main part, I find the current market to be saturated with 'Pop' games, like Pop music, they are pushed out quick and similar.

Eh? Don't RTS's and FPS's fall into that category far more than space sims? You have so friggin many of those 2 genres that there really all do even feel the same (mostly)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 08, 2006, 12:21:08 pm

Maybe it's because we aren't simply satisfied in the 'same thing with prettier graphics', even SCP is as much, if not more about improving the functionality of FS2, the graphics are a great boon, but what makes the SCP so incredible is the potential.




Eh? Don't RTS's and FPS's fall into that category far more than space sims? You have so friggin many of those 2 genres that there really all do even feel the same (mostly)

Exactly, Pop Culture gets away with it with the myriad of FPS and RTS games out there, but the more complex games, like simluators and RPG's tend to face a far tougher crowd because we aren't as easily mugged by pretty pictures.
As for the cheap distraction, I mean the stream of games with similar gameplay, which simply look like the same engine with different graphics. Every so often there are some interesting exceptions, but for the main part, I find the current market to be saturated with 'Pop' games, like Pop music, they are pushed out quick and similar.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: karajorma on November 08, 2006, 01:33:38 pm
The one thing that does my head in is the way the hostiles can straife (slide ?) so they can hammer you as they go past but you can't return the favour. Always annoying when devs take the lazy route and give hostiles special abilities. Such as the way bad gays can stop and turn on the spot in AC3, soliders shooting you while not anctually poiting their gun at you in the original Medal of Honour etc etc

I don't usually point out typos cause I make plenty of my own but this one was too amusing to let pass :D Curiosity about AC 3 jumps up several levels :)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mustang19 on November 08, 2006, 06:03:30 pm
It's not space shooters dying, it's SciFi as a theme in general. There are a lot of interesting space shooters and strategy games out there (Empire at War, ORB, anyone heard of those?) that are very good, it's just that most of the attention has drifted away from SciFi. The only people who like space combat are a few hard-core nerds like us. Most major games now have a basically modern theme even if they claim to take place in the future (Half-Life and Warhammer, for example). There's just not a big audience for old-style "alien invasion" games like Freespace. In a few years the trend will switch back, but in the mean time there's just a trend toward modern and semi-modern gaming (and past history) rather than really futuristic games. No big title like EA is going to sponsor a space shooter for a while, and signficiantly the whole video game industry has shifted focus in the last few years. Game releases are more profit-oriented and companies are less willing to take risks exploring new genres.

The other thing you have to consider is replayability. The idea behind FS is that you play the campaign and then use FRED to design your own missions. People who aren't mission designers would just get bored and throw the game away, while FPS has a lot of multiplayer potential. Most people today see FPS as more replayable than space shooters even if FPS usually doesn't have powerful mission editing tools.

Just a little interesting off-topic tidbit: Wing Commander movie- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Commander_%28film%29
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Thor on November 08, 2006, 09:53:34 pm
oh the wing commander movie....

Yeah...one day there will be an awesome space sim game....one day
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Styphelus on November 09, 2006, 03:00:05 pm
Well...flight sims made a big come back and all it took was a really good game like IL2.

Space sims just need a really good game to re-ignite the spark.

To be honest, I just found out about FS2 recently and I'm a big space sim fan. Played all the X-wing games, Wing Commander, Starlancer, FS1 and even a bit of Independence war which by the way, only found out about a few years ago.

Basically, FS2 and independence wars never got any real advertising. Even fans of the genre did not know they existed at all.

Wing Commander and X-Wing really kept flight sims afloat. They were names people recognized. But that dreadfull Wing Commander movie did more to ruin the genre than anything else.

To say FS2 killed space sims is ridiculous simply because no one even knew it was out. How can a game that no one knows anything about ruing a whole gaming genre?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 09, 2006, 03:36:59 pm
FSX, YAY! I have "2004: A Century of Flight", and I love it!!! I don't like the "missions", but I think that most people will still enjoy it....

Sadly, I haven't played any of the X-Wing video games, but I have read the books....which don't apply at all to the video games....wonder where I can get the X-Wing games (are they for PC?).

DarkStar One IMHO was a good try to restart the series, but all it is is a re-vamped Freelancer, minus the coolness of different ships....(unless there are mods for it, which I doubt)

FS2 COULDN'T POSSIBLY have killed the space sim, it's too good a game...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mustang19 on November 09, 2006, 04:20:02 pm
Well...flight sims made a big come back and all it took was a really good game like IL2.


Flight sims always had a strong support base- IL2 had nothing to do with it, they just never died in the first place. Space shooters just got old- there was nothing new, anyone looking for storyline or action went for FPS, anyone looking for piloting picked up a flight sim.

And I think FS2 did kill the genre- from a business viewpoint. When developers pump millions of dollars into games like Tachyon and Freespace only to see them flop, it kind of turns them away.

Face it. Freespace didn't die because of marketing. It just wasn't popular. Pretty much the only people who support space shooters are the people on forums like these who keep  hoping the game will come back to life. Let's say there's a thousand people actively part of Hard Light, Hade's Combine, etc. Even that's 1/10th of the number of people who wanted to buy a new space sim, that would only be 10,000 people. Now consider that even very small companies expect their first game to sell 50,000-100,000 copies if the company is to survive, and those are the cheap, made-by-three-guys-in-a-garage-feel games. No major publisher would start a big project to cater to 10,000 or even 100,000 customers.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dark Hunter on November 09, 2006, 07:31:07 pm
How many members does HLP have?

Now to narrow it down: how many active members does HLP have? :)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mars on November 09, 2006, 10:42:24 pm
Too many

Too few
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: karajorma on November 10, 2006, 04:21:09 am
Face it. Freespace didn't die because of marketing. It just wasn't popular.

Wanna explain to us why FS1 did sell well then?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Colonol Dekker on November 10, 2006, 04:26:27 am
I bought it based on the Demo alone so :p never read a reviewof FS1 i my life.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Styphelus on November 10, 2006, 09:25:42 am
"Flight sims always had a strong support base- IL2 had nothing to do with it, they just never died in the first place."

And in what planet have you been living in?

Obvioulsy you are not a Flight sim fan. Flight sims were doing so bad at one point that the once popular Jane series of flight sims was completly cancelled. For years there wasn't one single decent flight sim. Falcon 4 came out full of bugs and did nothing to help matters. Every gaming site out there was preaching the death of the sim and blaming it's demanding community for its demise. It wasn't until IL2 came along that flight sims slowlly started taking off and now there are quite a few good ones to choose from.

To say the Flight Sim never died is a huge understatement.

Adventure games also went through a huge slump until Syberia showed up and revitalized that genre so there is still hope for space sims.

There have been a few attempts here and there but none have been great so there is still hope.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Turey on November 10, 2006, 10:16:46 am
I'm still hoping that Tarr Chronicles (http://quazar-studio.com/tarr/) will get a worldwide release and revive the space shooter genre. It's certainly pretty enough to do it.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: aldo_14 on November 10, 2006, 11:08:54 am
I'm still hoping that Tarr Chronicles (http://quazar-studio.com/tarr/) will get a worldwide release and revive the space shooter genre. It's certainly pretty enough to do it.

But why would anyone want to play a game about road surfacing?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mustang19 on November 10, 2006, 11:39:18 am
Quote
And in what planet have you been living in?

I wonder, when was this? In years?

1995- Micrsoft Flight Sim 95
1997- Fighters Anthology (yeah, wasn't a killer hit, but it was something)
1999- A lot of Janes games were big at this time, like Longbow, F-15, etc.
2000-present: Flight simulation isn't the largest genre, but it still is a big deal, with many different industry magazines.

When was it that there were no active flight sim games? There was a lapse around 2000-2003, but there were still new games on the shelves all through this period, and not a seven-year gap like we're seeing in space combat sim.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Turey on November 10, 2006, 12:43:20 pm
But why would anyone want to play a game about road surfacing?
1000110 1010101 1000011 1001011 0100000 1011001 1001111 1010101 0100001
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 10, 2006, 12:58:07 pm
70 85 67 80 32 81 79 85 33
I'm not even going to start converting that to Ascii, if that's what it is....

And keep the same number-length damn you :p
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Blue Haired Maniac on November 10, 2006, 01:32:33 pm
The Death of the Space Shooter was this...

(http://www.hitparade.ch/movieimages/wing_commander.jpg)

Undoing all the great work by Luke Skywalker.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Styphelus on November 10, 2006, 01:41:45 pm
"not a seven-year gap like we're seeing in space combat sim"

And where's the 7 year gap? There have been plenty space games since 1999. Just not very good ones, and maybe not exactly the same style as FS2, but good enough for any space fan.

Do I need to list them all?

2000 - Tachyon
2000 - X: Tension
2000 - Stralancer
2001 - Independence War 2: Edge of Chaos (this one was awesome)
2001 - Jumpgate: The Reconstruction Initiative
2002 - Star Wars: Star Fighter
2003 - Eve Online
2003 - Freelancer
2003 - X2: The Threat
2004 - Nexus: The Jupiter Incident
2005 - X3: Reunion
2006. DarkStar One

See, plenty of space games....


And I tattaly agree with Blue Haired Maniac. That movie killed space games.
 
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 10, 2006, 06:17:04 pm
OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOGMG!

NO!!!!!!!!

Freddy Prince Jr. SHOULD NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER be in a space-sim crappy movie done by Hollywood.....
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AdmiralRalwood on November 10, 2006, 08:19:02 pm
2004 - Nexus: The Jupiter Incident
I'd call Nexus a tactical strategy game, myself.

Also, I notice you included Star Wars; Starfighter but not Star Wars: Jedi Starfighter. I mean, if you're going to include one crappy Star Wars console flight sim, you should include both. :P
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 10, 2006, 08:21:38 pm
whoa, they actually made a Jedi Starfigher vg?

Lucas Arts is WAY over-worked, no wonder why they can only pour out crap (save Battlefront II, and a few others)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 10, 2006, 08:26:57 pm
Quite frankly, the entire prequel series was designed around Merchandising, the first 3 made good video games by accident, the second three were designed to produce spin-offs and most of them suck. Kind of ironic really.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 10, 2006, 08:50:38 pm
yea..... Lucas Arts, IMHO, didn't really do so well with Republic Commando. The gameplay was too stiff. There was really only one weapon used: The DC-17
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Turey on November 10, 2006, 11:56:54 pm
whoa, they actually made a Jedi Starfigher vg?

They made two of them. I got them bundled, for half the price of one regular PS2 game.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on November 11, 2006, 01:38:01 am
Sci-Fi sims died likely for the same reason the thriving Mechwarrior series was destroyed.

they are to hard for the homogenous crowd to understand.

actually learning how to make use of an interface is a skill most notably recquired but the PC segment got flooded with First person shooters that stole the show and the interface in them translates across games very easily.

Space Sims along with the Mechwarrior series came built in with a recquired learning curve that intimidated buyers who didn't realise what they were missing.

StarLancer in my opinion was a disappointment directly due to it's lack of joystick support and while I have X 2 and X 3 I decided not to install them as the StarForce copy protection is quite invasive has been rumour'd to cause issues and I refuse to support any company that makes or has made use of it.

all of that said I miss the Mechwarrior series which was desperate for a remake following Mercenaries the graphics are simply to old and I also miss flight sims but mainly I wish FS 2 had done much better and spawned sequels because the game is even to this day still amazing.

before I found HLP I had re-installed it on my system old graphics be dammed and was playing it..... then I stumbled on SCP and I'm so happy it's like the sequel that was never released.

P.S. Wing Commander was so incredibly bad..... truly a stupid worthless movie that was painful to watch and usually I really really try to forgive Sci-Fi movies because they are so few and far between.

Chris Roberts really couldn't have dropped the ball any worse than coming up with the completely worthless waste of film, truly shocking how bad it really was... here was a movie that could have spawned a new WC game and instead killed the concept.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 11, 2006, 02:29:28 pm
StarLancer in my opinion was a disappointment directly due to it's lack of joystick support and while I have X 2 and X 3 I decided not to install them as the StarForce copy protection is quite invasive has been rumour'd to cause issues and I refuse to support any company that makes or has made use of it.

y'mean Freelancer?

Meh, I've found a way past the no-joystick suckiness: Programmable Saitek P880 Gamepad (not a true joystick, but it's what I use for FS2. IMHO, much easier than a joystick).  :drevil:
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: ShivanSpS on November 11, 2006, 03:41:02 pm
StarLancer in my opinion was a disappointment directly due to it's lack of joystick support and while I have X 2 and X 3 I decided not to install them as the StarForce copy protection is quite invasive has been rumour'd to cause issues and I refuse to support any company that makes or has made use of it.

y'mean Freelancer?

Meh, I've found a way past the no-joystick suckiness: Programmable Saitek P880 Gamepad (not a true joystick, but it's what I use for FS2. IMHO, much easier than a joystick).  :drevil:

Freelancer is the sequel of StarLancer, or something like that.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: karajorma on November 11, 2006, 05:50:51 pm
Yeah but Starlancer allowed you to use a stick. Although the commies in space plotline more than made up for that in terms of stupidity.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Ghostavo on November 11, 2006, 06:16:25 pm
Sci-Fi sims died likely for the same reason the thriving Mechwarrior series was destroyed.

they are to hard for the homogenous crowd to understand.

actually learning how to make use of an interface is a skill most notably recquired but the PC segment got flooded with First person shooters that stole the show and the interface in them translates across games very easily.

Space Sims along with the Mechwarrior series came built in with a recquired learning curve that intimidated buyers who didn't realise what they were missing.

If that's the case, why haven't flight simulators gone down the drain despite having much higher learning curves?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 11, 2006, 09:18:28 pm
because people that fly planes for real use Microsoft Flight Simulator to practice on planes that don't crash or take up massive amounts of fuel...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Thor on November 11, 2006, 09:24:39 pm
cause flight sims are less games then they are virtual real life activities...like in theory, you could take what you learn from a good flight sim, and go fly a real plane (into the ground most likely).  But people don't want to spend a long time learning how to control their mech or space ship.  they wanna jump in and blow **** up.  thats why I-war wasn't bigger then it was....its freaking hard to play.  I'm by no means the greatest pilot ever, but I-war 2 kicked my ass routinely, and i through in the towel.  most people don't want realistic physics, or complex controls.  they want that star wars experience, the massive battles and the thrill of sticking it to a star destroyer.

In many ways, Freelancer lost the point by being too detached from the flying experience (who flys with a mouse?), and suffered from a pretty weak story.  I-war lost people with physics.  DS1 just seems way to big, with no variety of ships and missions, plus its not that well advertised.  Really, Tachyon and Starlancer where the last true biggish Spacesims, but FS2 was the last great space sim (IMHO).

Actually, I think that a free roaming space sim is problematic.  I found myself really bored in Freelancer, just traveling place to place took too much time, and all the non-story missions really achieved was to slow down the pace of the story, which was unfortunate, cause it was a plot that needed that urgency.

It'll take a more linear moving game with an epic story to really revitalize the genre, cause if your wrapped in story, even slightly weaker game play will be forgivable.  I wish i had pots of money and knew a bunch of coders...I'd write my own game...alas

But the space sim shall return one day...someday soon i hope.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Unknown Target on November 11, 2006, 09:36:48 pm
Plus flight sims really have gone down the hill, they're just receiving a minor popularity bump thanks to established brands like the FS series, and the truly awesome game that is encased within IL-2 Sturmovik's box. If you look back maybe...8-10 years, pretty much every game shelf had at least a few simulators stocked - the era of Jane's and Microprose and the like. Nowadays, we just have two mega sims - IL2 and FS. Everything else is gone.

Sorry, semi-off topic rant.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Blue Haired Maniac on November 11, 2006, 10:41:42 pm
IL-2...now that's an awesome sim right there.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: NGTM-1R on November 11, 2006, 10:55:40 pm
I'd argue that IL2 isn't even surviving because it's a flight sim.

It's where it is today because it's a detail freak. It has exasperated the one advantage that most PCs retain over consoles: complexity of control. IL2 succeeds because the consoles cannot follow, not because of any inherent qualities.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: shadowhunter100 on November 12, 2006, 01:08:59 am
Probably just me but I consider flight sims not to be hugely attractive to the population due to the following-

Its not taught in our classes

Ask yourself, when was the last time your history or war buff teacher telling you about the greatness of aerial/space combat? (Save for the massive bombings done by the wealthier countries on the poor).

The only time someone tells you something great about space and aerial dynamics is your math or science teacher that is cramming your head with formulas and physics.

It's lacking that "epic" scope

Take for example combat in FS2. On average you see about what? 3 capital ships in a mission duking it out and about 1 to 3 allied squads against steady and scripted waves of enemies.

Where as in CoD (Call of Duty) you're constantly telling yourself "omg this is WW2!" and being shelled by Artillery constantly.

Space is not pretty[/u]
-Save for the beautiful planets and stars that are drawn in game and what Hubo the telescope tells us, we know for a fact that there are no sounds in REAL space and that living in space merely sucks the air outta you and you die in 15 seconds.

Compare that to say, HL2. You see and can well, "feel" whats around you in game. Whereas in FS. you only ponder around in Space waiting to blast the next sucker into space dust.

The lack of a universal multiplayer connection.

-HL2 has STEAM for all the wonderful nubs like me so I can move on and get fragged quickly in the second server after leaving the first server.

-Strategy games such as Warcraft provided battle.net to browse games and provided adquete game servers.

Media Presentation

-Name a GREAT movie based on space flight. Don't say star wars cause the new ones suck and its all people remember.

-Star Trek is about people lost in space looking for the next hostile alien race.

-Firefly or Serenity is about the same as above, but with the government after them instead of aliens.

I think that generally sums up about why Space sims games are dying  :blah:
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: castor on November 12, 2006, 06:36:47 am
I think the production costs these days are simply too high for a few nerds to pay.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on November 12, 2006, 12:56:40 pm
my mistake the game was Freelancer and it blew, Starlancer was ok but really easy untill the final mission which for some reason no matter what I couldn't finnish it.

kill off every fighter the moment they arrive and still nothing..... it was really grating.

FS2 source code project is growing and is more than keeping quality games in the pipeline but the segment is niche and not attarctive enough for a developer.

I'd like to see the games compiled and distributed via Steam with enough income to keep Hard Light up and running.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy a real copy of FS2 open with all of the updates along with access to updates via Steam network...... but my guess is something about the license won't allow for it.

****ing interplay dead like doornail but stupid copywrite laws are reaching beyond the grave to enforce much ado about nothing.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 12, 2006, 01:02:40 pm
Quote
-Name a GREAT movie based on space flight. Don't say star wars cause the new ones suck and its all people remember.

Battlestar Galactica.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dark Hunter on November 12, 2006, 01:02:58 pm
Quote
Ask yourself, when was the last time your history or war buff teacher telling you about the greatness of aerial/space combat?

About half a year ago. :nod:
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on November 12, 2006, 01:16:09 pm
Quote
Battlestar Galactica.
BSG is pretty inconsistent at times it's exceptional and at other times it's pitifully bad but what hurts the series impact is that it's Sci-Fi exclusive and written for IQ's above 90.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: karajorma on November 12, 2006, 01:34:25 pm
I'd like to see the games compiled and distributed via Steam with enough income to keep Hard Light up and running.

I wouldn't. Lets not mention Steam again so that I don't have to start hurting people. :p
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mathwiz6 on November 12, 2006, 01:36:13 pm
It's lacking that "epic" scope

Take for example combat in FS2. On average you see about what? 3 capital ships in a mission duking it out and about 1 to 3 allied squads against steady and scripted waves of enemies.

Where as in CoD (Call of Duty) you're constantly telling yourself "omg this is WW2!" and being shelled by Artillery constantly.


Meh, flak is epic enough for me :D. You get shelled, and killed in about 30 seconds. As opposed to unaimed flak, which would be rather dumb.

Anyway, you aren't nearly as powerful is FS2 as in other games. In Halo, for instance, you can actually win, without much difficulty, on the highest setting. Most people, even here, play FS2 on about moderate. Hell, I get my ass kicked by more than two fighters at the same time on hard!

Epicness, and making a difference = uber OP character.
Mininess, and making a diff = balanced char.
Epicness and making no diff = movie.

And if the mininess can feel epic, without making you OP, even better,
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: MetalDestroyer on November 12, 2006, 01:53:36 pm
Hum I guess people doesn't like game with a lot of buttons to memorize. The Freespace series and the X wing series (X wing vs Tie Fighter, Balance of Power, X Wing Alliance) have both an average of 110 keys buttons.

For the Freespace 2 failure I think Interplay was in cause and the official Trailer wasn't too excited compared to the Freespace 1 trailer (I know it was the Intro). I mean in the trailer we didn't see any cool action sequence. Plus, where I live, the day Freespace 1 and 2 was released it was very hard to find it and when I find one, there was no enought copy compare to other games.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Styphelus on November 13, 2006, 06:41:11 am
"both an average of 110 keys buttons'

That is why I use game commander to program voice commands for these games. No way i can memorize all the keys. It's much easier to just scream what i want done.

First I use up all the buttons on my joystick, and than program everything through voice. The only keyboard function I use is hypersace just to avoid jumping in the middle of a mission by mistake.

These games should simply come with voice commands pre-programed ito them to make it easier for everyone.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Styphelus on November 13, 2006, 07:01:31 am
"BSG is pretty inconsistent at times it's exceptional and at other times it's pitifully bad but what hurts the series impact is that it's Sci-Fi exclusive and written for IQ's above 90"

Err????  Battlestar is not exclusive to Sci-Fi. You don't even have to like Sci-Fi to enjoy Battlestar. The show is about human interaction and social analysis. It's about people confined to a space ship and fighting for their survival. It's just happens to take place in space.

Plus 90% people have an IQ over 90 anyway so it's accessible to everyone except the mentally challenged. Battlestar hasn't been called the best show on television for no reason, and it's huge success has not been due to sci-fi fans either.

The show as a whole is great. The writting is top notch, the production is better than most movies these days, and the acting is simply supperb.

I'm not a fan os sci-fi stuff like Star Trek, or Babillon 5, or Andromeda or any other sci-fi space show on TV for that matter but I have to admit that the only show I wait for everyweek is Battlestar.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Colonol Dekker on November 13, 2006, 07:02:57 am
But buck rogers had erin gray, so there ;7

Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: ShivanSpS on November 13, 2006, 09:30:58 am
It's lacking that "epic" scope

Take for example combat in FS2. On average you see about what? 3 capital ships in a mission duking it out and about 1 to 3 allied squads against steady and scripted waves of enemies.

Where as in CoD (Call of Duty) you're constantly telling yourself "omg this is WW2!" and being shelled by Artillery constantly.


Meh, flak is epic enough for me :D. You get shelled, and killed in about 30 seconds. As opposed to unaimed flak, which would be rather dumb.

Anyway, you aren't nearly as powerful is FS2 as in other games. In Halo, for instance, you can actually win, without much difficulty, on the highest setting. Most people, even here, play FS2 on about moderate. Hell, I get my ass kicked by more than two fighters at the same time on hard!

Epicness, and making a difference = uber OP character.
Mininess, and making a diff = balanced char.
Epicness and making no diff = movie.

And if the mininess can feel epic, without making you OP, even better,

the flaks of X3 also have auto aim and can kill M3 Fighters is just 2-3 shoots.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mustang19 on November 13, 2006, 10:27:35 am
Nowadays, we just have two mega sims - IL2 and FS. Everything else is gone.

Umm...

Falcon 4.0
Lock On
Jetfighter

... are gone?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Colonol Dekker on November 13, 2006, 10:31:57 am
 :nod: i've never played those 3 so they must be pants.
Anyway, they're not space shooters :p
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dysko on November 13, 2006, 10:54:34 am
Lock On
I've got that. It's quite buggy.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Blue Haired Maniac on November 13, 2006, 11:42:50 am
Any self respecting simmer would laugh at the prospect of the Jetfighter series being considered a "sim".
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: NGTM-1R on November 13, 2006, 12:04:18 pm
Clearly you never played Jetfighter and Jetfighter II.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mathwiz6 on November 13, 2006, 02:39:18 pm
It's lacking that "epic" scope

Take for example combat in FS2. On average you see about what? 3 capital ships in a mission duking it out and about 1 to 3 allied squads against steady and scripted waves of enemies.

Where as in CoD (Call of Duty) you're constantly telling yourself "omg this is WW2!" and being shelled by Artillery constantly.


Meh, flak is epic enough for me :D. You get shelled, and killed in about 30 seconds. As opposed to unaimed flak, which would be rather dumb.

Anyway, you aren't nearly as powerful is FS2 as in other games. In Halo, for instance, you can actually win, without much difficulty, on the highest setting. Most people, even here, play FS2 on about moderate. Hell, I get my ass kicked by more than two fighters at the same time on hard!

Epicness, and making a difference = uber OP character.
Mininess, and making a diff = balanced char.
Epicness and making no diff = movie.

And if the mininess can feel epic, without making you OP, even better,

the flaks of X3 also have auto aim and can kill M3 Fighters is just 2-3 shoots.

That means that you can't even get near... so flak isn't really then applicable it would seem. If you die that fast, then you stay out of the way, and so get no effects.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Blue Haired Maniac on November 15, 2006, 01:37:20 pm
Clearly you never played Jetfighter and Jetfighter II.
Still doesn't deny the existance of Jetfighter III and IV.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Vidmaster on November 21, 2006, 12:13:37 pm
Well, according to the friendly folks over at CIC, FS2 killed it. :doubt:

FS2 HAS killed the space shooter !

The perfect space shooter was created. There was not even hope that someone could make a better one.
So why die trying ?  :yes:
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Unknown Target on November 21, 2006, 01:21:39 pm
Nowadays, we just have two mega sims - IL2 and FS. Everything else is gone.

Umm...

Falcon 4.0
Lock On
Jetfighter

... are gone?

But are they mega sims? Lock On is buggy as hell and almost impossible to play on a non-uber computer (you need the Flaming Cliffs expansion to make it anywhere near decent, which is another $20-$40). Falcon 4.0 defines the term "niche" - it's so complex you could probably fly the real F-16 after learning that game. And Jetfighter doesn't count as a sim. :p

The only (relatively) mainstream, well known, and "mega" sims are the ones I listed - IL2 and Microsoft FS. If someone asks "Hey, what's the best WW2 flight sim?" - everyone will say the IL-2 series (all combined, of course). If someone asks "Hey, what's the best civil flight sim?" then everyone will say FS (although I disagree with that statement :)). If you say "what's the best modern jet sim?" then you'll get a bunch of conflicting answers. Granted, I should have included at least one in my statement, but no modern jet fighter sim is a "mega" sim franchise. They all have released only one game (with the exception of Falcon), and almost all are relatively obscure (with the exception of Falcon - but that's only known because it's so abso-friggin-lutely hard to learn).
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Dysko on November 21, 2006, 01:33:12 pm
If someone asks "Hey, what's the best civil flight sim?" then everyone will say FS (although I disagree with that statement :))
Me too. Read my siggy! :D
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: IPAndrews on November 21, 2006, 01:42:28 pm
The perfect space shooter was created.

It's not quite perfect. Although the SCP team are trying damn hard to rectify the few problems.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: MetalDestroyer on November 22, 2006, 12:25:34 am
Well, according to the friendly folks over at CIC, FS2 killed it. :doubt:

FS2 HAS killed the space shooter !

The perfect space shooter was created. There was not even hope that someone could make a better one.
So why die trying ?  :yes:

Not really. We still don't have mission with hyperspace jump between 2 coordinates like X Wing Alliance does or Independance War 2 : Edge of Chaos. The AI isn't perfect at all.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Fury on November 22, 2006, 01:05:13 am
Babillon 5
B-a-b-y-l-o-n, like the ancient city in Mesopotamia.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Vidmaster on November 22, 2006, 08:19:08 am
The perfect space shooter was created.

It's not quite perfect. Although the SCP team are trying damn hard to rectify the few problems.

No, it is not, you are right. That was just a weak try from myself of being funny.

But (and this IS my opinion), FS2 is the best space shooter game available, at least I have not played any better one.
And I have played a lot of them, the WingCommader Series, Shockwave, Freespace1 and ST of course, Battlestar Gal, Battlecruiser Series, Freelancer, the X-Series, Privateer, that strange new one from russia were you hunt fishlike aliens (dont know the name right now), all the StarWars Games (like X-Wing, Starfighter, Rouge Squadron and so on) and many more.

And still, FS2 is the best of them. Wonderfull music and story, fast battles, cool graphics and desgins. Everything a player wants.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AdmiralRalwood on November 22, 2006, 01:31:20 pm
And still, FS2 is the best of them. Wonderfull music and story, fast battles, cool graphics and desgins. Everything a player wants.
When X-style open-ended universe-wide playing in which you can own massive fleets and space stations and switch between tiny fighters to gigantic capital ships is implemented in FS2, then it will be the best. Add realistic physics and a few other goodies and it will be unbeatable. But it is not the best. It's not exactly not the best... it's just right now, the different types of space sims are so different it's difficult to compare them.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: achtung on November 22, 2006, 01:39:24 pm
And still, FS2 is the best of them. Wonderfull music and story, fast battles, cool graphics and desgins. Everything a player wants.
When X-style open-ended universe-wide playing in which you can own massive fleets and space stations and switch between tiny fighters to gigantic capital ships is implemented in FS2, then it will be the best. Add realistic physics and a few other goodies and it will be unbeatable. But it is not the best. It's not exactly not the best... it's just right now, the different types of space sims are so different it's difficult to compare them.
It's the best as of now.  If the genre is ever revived, I'm sure we'll see some really great things happen.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 22, 2006, 02:09:07 pm
Darkstar One was an attempt to bring back the genre. The problem was that it didn't have the ability to buy different ships, which turned me off to buying it. Though I still might. The genre just isn't all that popular....
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Unknown Target on November 23, 2006, 09:38:52 am
And still, FS2 is the best of them. Wonderfull music and story, fast battles, cool graphics and desgins. Everything a player wants.
When X-style open-ended universe-wide playing in which you can own massive fleets and space stations and switch between tiny fighters to gigantic capital ships is implemented in FS2, then it will be the best. Add realistic physics and a few other goodies and it will be unbeatable. But it is not the best. It's not exactly not the best... it's just right now, the different types of space sims are so different it's difficult to compare them.

Except if you added all that stuff, it wouldn't be Freespace...it'd be something else.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: ShivanSpS on November 23, 2006, 02:02:39 pm
What about Bioware? is developing a game of something like "Freelancer" style, called Mass Effect...

http://masseffect.bioware.com/ (http://masseffect.bioware.com/)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AlphaOne on November 23, 2006, 02:52:51 pm
Well as far as I know FS2 is still considered by many game magazines as a reference game for the space shooter genre. Also I saw in a tiny show about computer games and software a small reportage about FS2 and it is still considered one of the best space shooter games off all time.

So you can not blame the game but rather blame Interplay for not knowing how to advertise a very good product. You can have the most fenomenal game of all time but if noone knows about it then they wont buy it hell they wont even try the free demo.

Also i blame the loads of dead brain idiots out there who play CS & Co. 8-10 hours a day. 9 out of 10 people that i have met and are gamers prefer to play CS and similar games that give a try to an actual inteligent game or should i say a game wich actualy chalangers you to think before you shoot.

Also blame George Lucas for the last Star Wars series. They were good i enjoyed watching them but they were far the original series.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Styphelus on November 23, 2006, 03:19:44 pm
I completly agree. FS2 was not advertised at all. People didn't know it existed until they found it by accident sitting on a shelf at the local computer store.

And for those new to the space shooter, tey were probably picking up X-Wing Alliance or Wing Commander because those were well know brands.

You can't blame FS2 for killing the space shooter. Instead, blame Interplay for their lousy marketing non-existing advertising.

If there was ever an example of how not to release a game, FS2 was it. No advertising, no buzz, no marketing strategy...nothing! They just shipped it to stores and left it at that.

Even people like myself who were into space games didn't know FS2 was out. I only became aware of it when i got a free copy of Freespace 2 Colossus with my video card a few years ago.


Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AdmiralRalwood on November 24, 2006, 01:19:22 pm
And still, FS2 is the best of them. Wonderfull music and story, fast battles, cool graphics and desgins. Everything a player wants.
When X-style open-ended universe-wide playing in which you can own massive fleets and space stations and switch between tiny fighters to gigantic capital ships is implemented in FS2, then it will be the best. Add realistic physics and a few other goodies and it will be unbeatable. But it is not the best. It's not exactly not the best... it's just right now, the different types of space sims are so different it's difficult to compare them.
Except if you added all that stuff, it wouldn't be Freespace...it'd be something else.
You don't need to force that type of stuff onto the player, you just need to make it an option that a mod can take advantage of. Wasn't there a thread earlier about trying to implement an Elite-style trading system?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 24, 2006, 01:34:48 pm
It would be nice to have that kind of flexibility, though X3 has its own problems that are inherent to that engine type, i.e, Pilot AI which isn't noticeably better than Freespaces, since collisions are often fatal (which is actually the way I think things should work, but I can understand why it doesn't in FS) and, in the immortal words of Montgommery Scott, 'The more complicated they make the plumbing....'

I'm not certain making the FS2 engine all-singing all-dancing is really the way to make it the best, the most flexible, certainly, but there's usually a trade-off somewhere along the line.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AdmiralRalwood on November 24, 2006, 01:47:03 pm
It would be nice to have that kind of flexibility, though X3 has its own problems that are inherent to that engine type, i.e, Pilot AI which isn't noticeably better than Freespaces, since collisions are often fatal (which is actually the way I think things should work, but I can understand why it doesn't in FS) and, in the immortal words of Montgommery Scott, 'The more complicated they make the plumbing....'

I'm not certain making the FS2 engine all-singing all-dancing is really the way to make it the best, the most flexible, certainly, but there's usually a trade-off somewhere along the line.
I had actually been referring to X2, I've never played X3. There were only a few things I didn't like about X2, and one of them was that I didn't quite like space combat.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on November 24, 2006, 03:14:01 pm
Ah, sorry :) X2 was a fine game, but yeah, combat was wierd, it never felt quite like it 'meshed' properly with the game, it sort of sat halfway between Freespace physics and I-War physics.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Cabbie on November 26, 2006, 11:32:41 pm
All these Elite type complex sandbox games seem to be the rage right now and that’s fine with me. But I would prefer developers to spend their time and effort simply focusing on making the space combat as solid and intense as possible. Instead of spending months programming a huge universe and a complex economy why not put that effort in making a well thought-out (Single and Multiplayer) dynamic campaign instead ala Falcon 4?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mustang19 on November 27, 2006, 09:52:31 am
Falcon 4 has to be one of my favorite games of all time, after Freespace and a few other things you guys probably haven't heard of (Panzer General, Team Apache, anyone?). Now a Dynamic campaign in space- THAT would be interesting! Most space games give you the feeling of being isolated, with nothing really important going on around you even though you have a vague idea of battles taking place here and there.

Falcon is complicated, but if you're a flight simmer that's a good thing. You call it a "niche" game, but realistic flight sim is a very large niche, with thousands of people playing it and two major industry magazines. You can't say that about space sims or even FPS (a lot of people play FPS, although most of them aren't hard-core gamers- they buy some stereotypical WW2 shooter and throw it away after maybe a few weeks- that's why there's no major game magazine specifically for shooters).

If you're looking for a niche game, Freespace is it. Not many people still love it- it's very much a cult thing. Although there isn't much multiplayer action anymore and you have only one campaign in single player, IMO what keeps that game going is FRED. Think about it, guys- wouldn't you stick with X3 or Tachyon a little longer if there was a large online community pumping out new campaigns?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AdmiralRalwood on November 29, 2006, 06:59:37 pm
One of the reasons freeform sims are so popular is that you don't need the fanbase to pump out campaigns... you make your own as you play. The problem is that these sims have design flaws that narrow down your choices if you want some desireable outcome.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Quest_techie on November 30, 2006, 03:39:31 am
I saw a post and had to register

someone said that people prefer games that they don't have to learn to use, that you don't have to think to play, like FPS's

I fall into that category, that is in fact, why I love space shooters

they are very natural for me, I can't tell you how gleeful I was when I found out battlefield 1942 had flight, and I can't tell you how frustrated I was when I found out you had to lock the throttle through a spare axis or something and that the flight model in general was trash

I love flight sims because they let me tune in and turn off and just hunt <except the nebula missions, I have to turn on the HUD for those, and I hate that> I love to just get in open space with a myrm or perseus <god I effing love the perseus> full of guns, maybe a few rockeyes or on the odd occasion some infyrno's and just go hunting

I love the game "Janes fighter anthology" <with accuracy mods, god the f-117 really needed it's fuel cap fixed> because I can just fill the sky with fighters and just take them down <or bombers and toy with them :D>

FPS's on the other hand, well, damn, they're always forcing you to do a puzzle or some crap before you can shoot more stuff, space shooters I have yet to encounter any kind of puzzle, flight sims I have yet to encounter anything requiring more thought than a carrier landing

I think the space shooter suffered a lot because for awhile there we had almost no space battle sci fi, it was stargate, farscape, others that elude me atm, I'm hoping battlestar galactica will help, I'm looking forward to a good newtonian space shooter
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: AdmiralRalwood on November 30, 2006, 05:10:39 pm
I saw a post and had to register

someone said that people prefer games that they don't have to learn to use, that you don't have to think to play, like FPS's

I fall into that category, that is in fact, why I love space shooters

they are very natural for me, I can't tell you how gleeful I was when I found out battlefield 1942 had flight, and I can't tell you how frustrated I was when I found out you had to lock the throttle through a spare axis or something and that the flight model in general was trash

I love flight sims because they let me tune in and turn off and just hunt <except the nebula missions, I have to turn on the HUD for those, and I hate that> I love to just get in open space with a myrm or perseus <god I effing love the perseus> full of guns, maybe a few rockeyes or on the odd occasion some infyrno's and just go hunting

I love the game "Janes fighter anthology" <with accuracy mods, god the f-117 really needed it's fuel cap fixed> because I can just fill the sky with fighters and just take them down <or bombers and toy with them :D>

FPS's on the other hand, well, damn, they're always forcing you to do a puzzle or some crap before you can shoot more stuff, space shooters I have yet to encounter any kind of puzzle, flight sims I have yet to encounter anything requiring more thought than a carrier landing

I think the space shooter suffered a lot because for awhile there we had almost no space battle sci fi, it was stargate, farscape, others that elude me atm, I'm hoping battlestar galactica will help, I'm looking forward to a good newtonian space shooter
I have only two words for you. Unreal Tournament.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 30, 2006, 05:46:19 pm
Ayup, that pretty much sums it up.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Quest_techie on November 30, 2006, 07:42:22 pm
I saw a post and had to register

someone said that people prefer games that they don't have to learn to use, that you don't have to think to play, like FPS's

I fall into that category, that is in fact, why I love space shooters

they are very natural for me, I can't tell you how gleeful I was when I found out battlefield 1942 had flight, and I can't tell you how frustrated I was when I found out you had to lock the throttle through a spare axis or something and that the flight model in general was trash

I love flight sims because they let me tune in and turn off and just hunt <except the nebula missions, I have to turn on the HUD for those, and I hate that> I love to just get in open space with a myrm or perseus <god I effing love the perseus> full of guns, maybe a few rockeyes or on the odd occasion some infyrno's and just go hunting

I love the game "Janes fighter anthology" <with accuracy mods, god the f-117 really needed it's fuel cap fixed> because I can just fill the sky with fighters and just take them down <or bombers and toy with them :D>

FPS's on the other hand, well, damn, they're always forcing you to do a puzzle or some crap before you can shoot more stuff, space shooters I have yet to encounter any kind of puzzle, flight sims I have yet to encounter anything requiring more thought than a carrier landing

I think the space shooter suffered a lot because for awhile there we had almost no space battle sci fi, it was stargate, farscape, others that elude me atm, I'm hoping battlestar galactica will help, I'm looking forward to a good newtonian space shooter
I have only two words for you. Unreal Tournament.

haven't hit that one yet, I'll go hunting, thanks
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on November 30, 2006, 09:50:52 pm
You haven't played Unreal Tournament?
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Quest_techie on November 30, 2006, 11:43:25 pm
I spent two years doing nothing but RTS
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Vengence on December 01, 2006, 08:45:36 am
All I can say is that I was really missing out on all things freespace. I only discovered Freespace 1 because of my friend next door and he got it in 2003! I think I may have seen FS2 on a shelf but I had no idea what it was. When I played FS1 I was obsessed. It was the best space sim I had ever played. I often found myself asking my friend to borrow the 2 cds so I can play the campaign all over again. When I heard of FS2 from him I jumped on my seat and searched the internet. Imagine my happiness when I found HLP and those huge complete FS2 downloads.

My oppinion of the Space Sim failure: Indeed, terrible advertising. I never heard of the greatness of the Freespace series until 2005. And then there are those FPSs which clogged the market, personally I'm an RTS lover. Most of the games I have are RTSs and 2 good ones are coming out next year. Hard controls? Indeed, but I take the time to know the keys which I need most of the time (the critically aclaimed 'B' key for targetting bombs!). I am greatly saddend with the lack of awesome space sims like FS2. Really, all I see recently are those crappy open space sims like Freelancer and the X-series. All of the recent space sims seem to open like that! Personally, I'm getting tired of games where you play as a mercenary, there are just too many of them IMO!

What would it take to revitilize the genre? I don't know. All I can say is hope things get better. Those of you who know me should know my mod. I have never really officially announced it and I have no intension of doing so other than post pics. Why? It's a long term project that MAY become the next great space/mech/whatever sim or RTS. If a new, better, and easier engine comes out them I'm on it. So far FS2's engine is perfect for my project. I won't go into rambling details, but I have great hope for this story.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: -Joshua- on December 01, 2006, 11:23:13 am
The reason why the Space Shooters we're abandoned is beceuse the fact that the games were focussing to much on the veterans. You always needed a joystick to play, the system requirements where extremely high, and it was difficult for beginners to start. And when beginners don't get in, and the veterans go out, you've got a problem. The game that could have relaunched the genre was Freelancer, (mouse controls, easy to do, fun, low system requirements etc.) but it was released to late, and the game didn't give much profit to microsoft, since it was developed since 1997. The only thing that can save us, is Elite 4, but that is now as invinceble as an shivan fighter on sensors before the great war.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on December 01, 2006, 12:20:39 pm
Quote
You haven't played Unreal Tournament?
lol I find that amazing.....

I spent 3 years playing Unreal tournament off and on and wihtout a doubt loved it to death.... I still try to play it on occasion and while the graphics are old and dated the gameplay is as frenetic as ever along with the soundtrack and attitude.

Unreal 2004 was a big jump forward in most regards but the insults went backward..... while the graphics and gameplay were comparable in quality until you changed the announcer back to the original voice was terrible and almost all of the new insults were just plain silly and worthless.

they just released another Unreal Anthology I think I'm going to buy this time around it has all of the Unreal games included I have all of them save the original Unreal and Expansion which I played and finnished years after Unreal tournament was released..... but I don't have originals of them.

depends on price.

Joshua I agree and disagree... the whole point of the Sci Fi flight sim was to use a joystick and Freelancer may have been a step forward in some ways but it offered no joystick support at all which hurt it quite badly.

I finnished Beta testing a Sci Fi flight sim a few weeks ago that was ok but had nothing compelling to offer and overall was a step backwards, it was neat but hadn't improved over time I believe the game designers were harkening back to the good ol' days but the good ol' days are done and gone if you can't build on success then your doomed to repeat the failures of the past.

Freelancer was pretty close to an MMORPG given the time spent warping and the faction system within the game, it was also late and catered to a non-existent audience while abandoning the core one.

it was a risk and it disapointed because it abandoned the main audience condeming them to playing the way teh programmers decided and dictating to gamers a new way to play rarely works.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on December 01, 2006, 12:21:53 pm
I'm going to move this to Games and Gaming, since it is now covering a whole spectrum of games.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: NGTM-1R on December 01, 2006, 03:03:15 pm
You haven't played Unreal Tournament?

No, and I hope I never do.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 01, 2006, 03:12:25 pm
Quote
Unreal 2004 was a big jump forward in most regards but the insults went backward..... while the graphics and gameplay were comparable in quality until you changed the announcer back to the original voice was terrible and almost all of the new insults were just plain silly and worthless.

Actually, I and a lot of other long time UT players found UT2004 to be a serious disappointment due to the gameplay changes they made. The combat mechanics and weapon balance in the original game were almost perfect, but they modified a lot of things in the newer games, toning down most weapons (but not all, messing up the balance) and generally making the entire game slower paced. It's a pity, as UT2004 was jam-packed with features and got everything right except for the gameplay. I'm still holding some hope that UT2007 will go back to the old style again, based on some comments from the developers to that effect.

Quote
they just released another Unreal Anthology I think I'm going to buy this time around it has all of the Unreal games included I have all of them save the original Unreal and Expansion which I played and finnished years after Unreal tournament was released..... but I don't have originals of them.

Have you tried the Excessive Unreal mod by any chance? If I had more time, I would be inspired to make something similar for the FS2 campaign. :D
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on December 01, 2006, 03:14:29 pm
Unreal Tournament is debatably the BEST FPS ever made. Halo was good, but it used the Unreal Tournament (can't remember which number) Engine. Unreal Tournament was a major turning point in FPSs. Easy learning curve, extremely difficult end-of-level "boss," and finally, the game's very own engine. Which, btw, is the platform for many of today's FPSs. Actually, it's the first FPS I've ever played. Oh yea, also, they support modding, just like FS2...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 01, 2006, 03:41:37 pm
Quote
extremely difficult end-of-level "boss,"

:confused: Are you referring to the original Unreal? Also, Halo uses it's own engine.

I wouldn't say UT is the best FPS of any sort (that would be Deus Ex), but it's certainly the best multiplayer one I have played. I was completely hooked for a little under two years and went up very high in some of the ladders. The game still looks pretty decent too. The S3TC textures in particular (together with the detail texture effect) are better than any those in any modern game.

On the other hand, I never got much into UT2004 due to its generally slow-paced nature and balance issues. There are mutators available to fix them, but they aren't sufficiently popular online. I suppose I didn't have enough free time to get seriously into the game by that point anyway.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Roanoke on December 01, 2006, 03:56:37 pm
I hate boss' in FPS.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Quest_techie on December 01, 2006, 04:10:11 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightspeed_%28computer_game%29

that is my favorite space game ever

shallow, terrible graphics, and slow paced

but it still, to this day, fascinates me completly

I need to find a copy of it and figure out how to run it on windows xp 64, the hard drive computer I had it on died a horrible death
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Roanoke on December 01, 2006, 04:16:47 pm
hey that sounds pretty good.  :)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 01, 2006, 05:56:22 pm
Have any of you played The Last Dynasty? It's a combination of a space sim and an adventure game with a somewhat weird story and goofy cutscenes. Some of the space missions were pretty cool and the adventure part was very good from what I remember. I think it was actually the first space sim I played, although I never beat the adventure portion. One of my CDs for it is cracked and I recently bought a new copy off ebay, but the seller is taking forever to ship it. :p
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on December 02, 2006, 04:28:55 am
yeah some of the weapon balance was ruined in Unreal 2004 but you can't ignore the huge outdoor environments and the vehicles along with the new game variations that were added.

it was a tragedy what they did to the plasma rifle.... a tragedy.

I walked away from the deathmatch style gameplay immediately once I got it and only played onslaught I think it was called where you had to capture way points and battles were focused around contested way points.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 02, 2006, 10:36:11 am
Quote
it was a tragedy what they did to the plasma rifle.... a tragedy.

And the rocket launcher, sniper rifle, flak cannon, shock rifle, etc. :doubt: Even the weapon sounds were horribly wimpy compared to the ones in UT. The minigun was kept about the same though, which made it overpowered compared to the other stuff. The basic walking speed was also turned down a bit, which, combined with the weak weapons, made it feel almost like UT in slow motion.

Onslaught could have been great but suffered from similar issues. The biggest problem was that you needed a vehicle to do anything on most maps, as players on foot were too slow and weak in comparison and didn't have any effective weapons (the Avril was crap), so you had to wait in lines at the vehicle spawn areas, BF2 style. :p Some of the vehicle weapons also needed a lot of work. The Scorpion's main weapon was too powerful (this will be changed in UT2007) while its secondary blade attack was next to useless. The Hellbender was also very underpowered, practically useless with one person and possessing a rear turret that was too weak.

Also, where did Domination go? In the original game I played that and CTF almost exclusively. The DD mode was fun but not much of a substitute.

Sorry, just venting a bit. I really wanted to like this game; it had immense potential with its brilliant level design (some of the Assault ones particularly come to mind) and variety of gameplay modes and mutators, which makes the core gameplay flaws all the more disappointing. I would still easily take it over any other recent multiplayer FPS, but man, it could have been so much better. :(
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Roanoke on December 02, 2006, 03:28:23 pm
I really liked UT04 though I had played very little of previous versions.

Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on December 02, 2006, 04:21:54 pm
I love UT2004, but I do have one compalint. Onslaught was terrible all around. Could have been much better...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Roanoke on December 02, 2006, 04:34:29 pm
I liked onslaught.....
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on December 02, 2006, 11:53:20 pm
Quote
the rocket launcher, sniper rifle, flak cannon, shock rifle
yeah forgot how bad they poached the rocket launcher, the flack was fine, shock rifle was more than good in most ways. and they re-introduced the original sniper rifle that was way over powered and the new one was pretty gay but far better balanced compared to the original.
Quote
I love UT2004, but I do have one compalint. Onslaught was terrible all around. Could have been much better.
Onslaught was terrible...... let me say that again, you think Onslaught was terrible.... :lol: Onslaught was the only real reason to play multiplayer online every other aspect of the game was a homogenous remake of the original done worse.

p.s. they really should have done a better job with the Avril.......
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 03, 2006, 12:18:15 am
Quote
yeah forgot how bad they poached the rocket launcher, the flack was fine, shock rifle was more than good in most ways. and they re-introduced the original sniper rifle that was way over powered and the new one was pretty gay but far better balanced compared to the original.

They halved the rate of fire for the flak cannon's main attack and reduced the damage for its secondary attack. In the first game, a direct hit from the flak mortar shell used to result in an instant kill on someone at 100 health. I used to do that all the time. In UT2004, it takes at least two hits. The shock rifle's combo attack was made dramatically weaker. It used be quite powerful in UT and had a wide range of effect but in UT2004, it's hardly worth putting in the effort to master the technique. As for the UT sniper rifle, it was quite balanced compared to the other weapons in that game. The new one was toned down a lot even by UT2004's standards, both doing less damage and firing at maybe a quarter of the speed of the old one.

Even your starting weapons were weakened. The enforcer was replaced with the pathetic assault rifle (seriously, it was useless against anything) and the shield gun's damage was reduced over that of the old impact hammer.

In contrast, the minigun was still just as powerful as before and was far and away the best standard weapon in UT2004. The biorifle was also pretty good, although its range was reduced from the UT one.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on December 03, 2006, 02:01:05 pm
I never had problems killing ppl with the new shock rifle's combo attack, also the added advantage of repelling oncoming vehicles was fantastic, I always considered the original's way over powered and with a too large area effect.... so I have to disagree with you on that one.

the flak gun in the New UT is fine the bigger problem is the size of the maps and the original was a little over powered so I disagree on that one.

the UT sniper was overpowered, the new one a dramatic improvement devastating if you get a headshot absolutely useless anywhere else as it should be and while the rate of fire is slow it made it a true sniper weapon and not a viable assault weapon which I agree with entirely..... although the massive amount of smoke after firing was really stupid.

the starting weapon are absolutely worthless in single or dual weild variant I agree on that... a complete piece of crap even against ppl let alone vehicles and I missed the pistols which were just plain dam fun while viable weapons as well..



Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 03, 2006, 02:27:40 pm
Well, I suppose I'm biased towards the UT style after having played it for so long, but that has traditionally been how the Unreal and UT game mechanics have operated. All the weapons were heavily overpowered in a sense, so everything ended up perfectly balanced. You could say that while UT2004 was a good game, it simply wasn't a UT game.

As I said earlier, some of the developers have said that they're going to go closer to the classic UT style in UT2007, so I can't wait until that is released. It has been delayed well into next year, unfortunately.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on December 03, 2006, 05:33:14 pm
Hmm, let's see Unreal Tournament 2007 released in 2007. Whoa, what a concept.

\spartan wonders why they didnt' release it on the year on the title...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Flipside on December 03, 2006, 06:01:50 pm
I think the operative phrase is 'Well into', which suggests that you won't see it till post September of that year, else they are going to have to consider a name change.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on December 03, 2006, 06:05:05 pm
Ah, okay....  :(
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: CP5670 on December 03, 2006, 06:25:04 pm
I think they last said Q2, which would probably mean some time in the summer.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: spartan_0214 on December 03, 2006, 08:51:53 pm
Q2 is Spring...
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Inquisitor on December 03, 2006, 08:52:43 pm
April, May or June.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Suzaku on December 04, 2006, 03:07:35 am
This is one of those things that's really hard to put your finger on.  Marketing and publisher strength goes a long way these days in the video game industry; you just don't see the sort of "grassroots" sales efforts that you saw in the past.  It's all about pre-release buzz and the initial shipments.  Otherwise you fall flat.  This is why Freelancer was the last real flash in the pan for the genre; it had a lot of support from Microsoft and debuted at #4 on the PC sales chart and subsequently like a stone.  It got stomped by the last Command & Conquer game. 

I see two reasons why the genre has now essentially failed.  First, I don't think we're going to see a revitalization of the genre until a publisher puts a lot of money behind development and gives a project the chance for long-term support with multiple sequels.  Of course, the developers actually have to complete the project.  No more Freelancers.  Second, there hasn't been a good intellectual property in years.  I personally loved Freelancer's IP, but it doesn't help any when it's completely unsupported by a half-ass campaign.  So we're left with FreeSpace and Star Wars as our last good examples.  People won't buy a game based on the prequels, we've already had 20+ years of games based on the original trilogy, and FreeSpace is dead.

So what's the solution?  Either spend a lot of time investing in development of a good IP, or license something compelling like Star Wars and do something completely new with it, like Knights of the Old Republic.  Maybe there's a good book series that's made the rounds lately that I haven't heard of?  I think everyone can agree that something FreeSpace quality with 2006 graphics will shake up the industry.  Someone just has to find the hook that not only gets publishers' attention, but also the market's.

Personally, I think it's amazing that I haven't seen a good sandbox game since Privateer, especialy since that sort of game has been "in" lately.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Quest_techie on December 05, 2006, 01:37:08 am
supposedly spore is going to be sandbox, but by the time it is a sandbox you're too powerful for anyone to stand against you, so that will have problems
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Roanoke on December 05, 2006, 12:42:19 pm
sandbox is over-rated. Gimme level structure anytime of the day.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: bloated on December 05, 2006, 01:29:53 pm
it's nice to be in a forum with so many gamers as opposed to the other one I visit, very refreshing.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: tifi on December 07, 2006, 05:45:39 am
Hehe.... Why do I get the impression that I'm one of the few that does actually fly FS with a mouse?
Comes from too many years of ELITE (well, First Encounters) I think :lol:

I must admit though that FS2 is probably my favorite space shooter, followed by FFE then X2.
Tachyon was quite fun but way to easy (with far too many tricks to make it even easier), and Privateer 2 was awesome except for the stupid navigation rules (which is about 95% of the game).

Seriously though, I've never been able to get the hang of joystick flying.
Its great for fast sweeping turns but I could never aim for toffee, a mouse make aiming far simpler and I can still dodge well enough to not die (all the time, at least :P)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Mustang19 on December 07, 2006, 08:38:57 am
I really liked Tachyon. Not all games are meant to be super-difficult. Tachyon is a game that you play for storyline, fighting through the missions and getting them right on the first time (like it should be), but getting stuck on a few every once and a while.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: tifi on December 07, 2006, 08:59:52 am
I will admit to finding Mr. Campbell's voice acting in Tachyon rather amusing :lol:
(Not to mention the whole presentation of it was rather well done.)
I found it dissapointing that you can't alter the difficulty though, I would have though that was pretty much part of the standard gaming package by now...
It still found its way into my collection though, despite the loopholes pretty much killing the replayabilty :p



Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Singh on December 07, 2006, 09:50:30 am
Agreed on most counts.

The space sim Genre is pretty much dead - look at Jupiter: the nexus incident. Fabulous graphics, good gameplay, pretty decent storyline...and yet it crashed. Badly. The new Nexus 2 engine was shown off recently, but the company's pretty much abandoned the series, since they weren't getting enough sales and such. :(

In any case, dont think people are gonna bother with this genre for a while - save for maybe EVE-online and such, but that's a somewhat different style, IMHO.

Oh, and tiffi, your not the only one who plays by mouse. I've never used a joystick, save for one or two occasions, and finished all of FS2 on mouse alone. :D
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: tifi on December 07, 2006, 10:07:39 am
If you think about it though, pretty much all game genres have been sliding into a fiery contentless abyss for the past few years.

Everything now revolves around looking the prettiest and sounding the nicest - granted, these things are quite important and help set up a decent atmosphere, but are nothing compared to the gameplay aspects.
After all, it doesn't matter if your game has the *best* (TM) graphics or whatever, if its dull to play you've created a chore with eyecandy not a game.

Sadly the entire gaming industry seems drawn to this method of producing games like a moth to a flame, all in the name of making a 'quick buck' resulting in hoardes of empty graphical shells posing as games, and a flock of mindless fan bois (TM) devoted to thier respective game (shell) because it has the *best* (TM) whatever. :(


I really miss the days when graphics and sounds were bobbins at best, and the games had to be immersing otherwise they'd flop....
That said, there have been a few pretty decent games made recently - you just have to find them ;)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: asyikarea51 on December 07, 2006, 10:13:06 am
I fly solely on mouse. :D
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Beanboy on December 07, 2006, 04:53:22 pm
Such a shame the space shooter is nearly dead..   I buy every one these days, crap or not, just to keep the flag flying. :wtf:

When you see what today's technology can offer it makes me so sad that it's not being immediately worked on and offered to us.  Look at this showreel of the Nexus 2 engine...

http://www.gametrailers.com/umwatcher.php?id=16457

Awesome... and dead in the water....  :(
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Fineus on December 07, 2006, 06:05:52 pm
I think the important thing to remember with space shooters is that they have absolutely no basis in the real world. If you're playing a space-sim then you're playing science fiction or fantasty, unlike FPSs which (generally) give you some impression of your place in the world and the way that world works.

Space sims have their work cut out for them - as they have to explain why everything is the way it is... from the species and races to the ships, weapons and whatever else they introduce.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: asyikarea51 on December 07, 2006, 06:38:53 pm
@ Beanboy

Now THAT... is what I'd like a space battle to be. Just have FS-style beam cannons, and whoop-dee-doo. :(

(edited out my own rant because I don't want to offend anybody.)
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: tifi on December 08, 2006, 02:28:26 am

Space sims have their work cut out for them - as they have to explain why everything is the way it is... from the species and races to the ships, weapons and whatever else they introduce.

Personally, I've never quite understood this particular reasoning.
If you're given a pretty much blank 'canvas' the only limit should be your imagination, yet people insist on binding themselves with the rules which govern our existance *now*....

Its like the difference between a book and the film of a book.
The film *looks* better but is constrained to the limits of what we are capable of displaying.
The book is theoretically limitless, imagination knows no bounds and has no limits.  :D

Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: aldo_14 on December 08, 2006, 02:48:35 am

Space sims have their work cut out for them - as they have to explain why everything is the way it is... from the species and races to the ships, weapons and whatever else they introduce.

Personally, I've never quite understood this particular reasoning.
If you're given a pretty much blank 'canvas' the only limit should be your imagination, yet people insist on binding themselves with the rules which govern our existance *now*....

Its like the difference between a book and the film of a book.
The film *looks* better but is constrained to the limits of what we are capable of displaying.
The book is theoretically limitless, imagination knows no bounds and has no limits.  :D



I think books are pretty good examples of "the less you show, the less you need to explain"; as soon as you have something visual on a screen, that becomes the product of someone elses imagination rather than your own; and I think that makes your brain less willing to 'accept' it.
Title: Re: The Death of the Space shooter
Post by: Maxwell on December 08, 2006, 06:26:02 am
Story wise, space shooters are not any more of a leap in faith than something like, say, doom or unreal.
Halo's story would be ZOMGWTFBBQ~! compared to something as standard as freespace.

What makes this line unpopular is the fact we had  a pile of games dumped on the market that were, in effect, nothing but remakes of wing commander.
One can only scan so many crates before this gets old.

You might be able to sell freespace to a new generation with a graphics update, but if you want the genre to stick around then some serious innovation on the play style will be needed.