[Kamikaze]

gaaah, don't turn this into an argument about why Freespace was made - PLEAAAASE!

anyway my thoughts, if it were made it'd be kinda cool to have character cards ya know... like

Snipes or even Forum charactesr as "legends" so to speak (not that it'll be some magic clone...)

"I play my Shrike, all of your orions are destroyed except for that one in the hot gothic chick outfit!"  

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Kamikaze
gaaah, don't turn this into an argument about why Freespace was made - PLEAAAASE!

We're not. It was an example. Calm down. Exits are to the rear. There is a barf bag in the seat pocket in front of you.

anyway my thoughts, if it were made it'd be kinda cool to have character cards ya know... like

Snipes or even Forum charactesr as "legends" so to speak (not that it'll be some magic clone...)

"I play my Shrike, all of your orions are destroyed except for that one in the hot gothic chick outfit!"  

I'm not sure if you're joking or not. Its a great idea, until you start talking about Forum people. Being able to field an Aken Bosch card, or Admiral Petrarch or whatever would be groovy though. Hotshot pilots, bold commanders, etc.

[Kamikaze]

well the forum cards would be "special" cards - you know the promotional thingies they make for fun

Actual FS2 heroes would be cool - snipes, zero, xinny, Alpha 1 () etc.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Kamikaze
"I play my Shrike, all of your orions are destroyed except for that one in the hot gothic chick outfit!"  

*cough*  What?  Never mind, I'm better off just pretending this didn't happen...

Instead I'll put it in my siggy.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Kamikaze
... Alpha 1 () ...

I can see it now...

Tap Alpha 1 during your turn to replay this game repeatedly until you win.

[Kamikaze]

Originally posted by Shrike
*cough*  What?  Never mind, I'm better off just pretending this didn't happen...

Instead I'll put it in my siggy.

FAME! THEPLANHASWORKED!...............errr....

I can see it now... Tap Alpha 1 during your turn to replay this game repeatedly until you win.

[Levyathan]

Originally posted by mikhael
Um... that's what I just said.

Um... no. You said story was a reason to create a new game, while I said a same game can support different stories (that's what I meant using the Magic expansions example, in case you didn't get it).

Originally posted by mikhael
There is no 'maximum level of enhancement'. What you consider an enhancement, I consider crap. Witness Iwar2. I think that newtonian physics is the only good way to do it. Most of this board disagrees. Who's right? Which one is the "Maximum level of enhancement"? Your argument makes no sense.

In that example the game hasn't reached the maximum level of enhancement. If it had, everyone would equally like it. It's as simple as that.

Originally posted by mikhael
The odds were against Thief3 ever being made--ah but it is. So why can't the guy give it a shot? Some games suck and some games don't AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHICH IS WHICH UNTIL YOU PLAY THEM. Give the guy a break.

Give the guy a break? Was I personally offending him or something? He asked for opinions, I gave my opinion, you disagreed with it, I disagreed with yours. I can't see a problem.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Levyathan

In that example the game hasn't reached the maximum level of enhancement. If it had, everyone would equally like it. It's as simple as that.
 

There is no "maximum level of enhancement". There is no state in which a game can appeal to all people constantly. I hate Quake. I will always hate Quake. Quake cannot be redeemed. Why? Its a FPS. As long as it is not transformed into Quake: The Sprite Based RPG or Quake: Turn-Based-Strategy, it will always suck. You can't make a basic FPS like Quake good, no matter how you enhance it. That's my opinion. As long as one person holds a basic opinion like that, you your mythical 'maximum level of enhancement' can never be reached.

In simpler terms, any game can be enhanced indefinately with enough work. Witness Freespace Modding.

[deep_eyes]

please be aware that his thread is a non-flaming issue, its purly constructive and anyone taking offense to anything is because someone overstated there opionion, was rude, or doesntknow how to take a joke.

anyways nice replies. i will have the stats posted in a few days, i already made the ship charecteristics. im working on fleet "cards" now.

[Levyathan]

Originally posted by mikhael
There is no "maximum level of enhancement". There is no state in which a game can appeal to all people constantly. I hate Quake. I will always hate Quake. Quake cannot be redeemed. Why? Its a FPS. As long as it is not transformed into Quake: The Sprite Based RPG or Quake: Turn-Based-Strategy, it will always suck. You can't make a basic FPS like Quake good, no matter how you enhance it. That's my opinion. As long as one person holds a basic opinion like that, you your mythical 'maximum level of enhancement' can never be reached.

What makes you not like Quake? Thinking that way, you'll find out what's wrong with it, and how it can be enhanced. At some point, there will be nothing wrong (or not so right) with it, and therefore you can't enhance it anymore.

Originally posted by mikhael
In simpler terms, any game can be enhanced indefinately with enough work. Witness Freespace Modding.

The actual enhancement in this case is minimal. What you're talking about is new stories, new ships and new weapons. We've already talked about that.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Levyathan


What makes you not like Quake? Thinking that way, you'll find out what's wrong with it, and how it can be enhanced. At some point, there will be nothing wrong (or not so right) with it, and therefore you can't enhance it anymore.

Reread what I said. That will tell you what's wrong with Quake. Its a first person shooter. You can't fix it without changing it to something I do like, such as an RPG. If you do that, its not Quake anymore. Same goes for Real Time Strategy games. I don't like Real Time strategy. I like Turn Based Strategy. Enhancing a Real Time Strategy game would require turning it into Turn Based Strategy, another fundamental change. That's not an enhancement.

The actual enhancement in this case is minimal. What you're talking about is new stories, new ships and new weapons. We've already talked about that.

You percieve that the enhancement is minimal. This is a subjective opinion. I would consider the ability to sit down in the student union with a couple of friends and throw down a fleet battle without a computer to be a great enhancement.

[Levyathan]

Originally posted by mikhael
Reread what I said. That will tell you what's wrong with Quake. Its a first person shooter. You can't fix it without changing it to something I do like, such as an RPG. If you do that, its not Quake anymore. Same goes for Real Time Strategy games. I don't like Real Time strategy. I like Turn Based Strategy. Enhancing a Real Time Strategy game would require turning it into Turn Based Strategy, another fundamental change. That's not an enhancement.

Maybe I didn't express myself well enough. You probably dislike Quake not because it's an FPS, but because it lacks some features you'd appreciate. Like a consistent story, or maybe four-legged suicide monkeys. If you dislike it because it's a FPS, it doesn't even make sense to enhance it at all.

Let me give you an example of a real good FPS game: System Shock 1. It's not an RPG, it's not an adventure, it's purely and simply an FPS. Yet, it's one of the (if not the) best game(s) ever. If you can't see that, then maybe we should end this discussion now.

Originally posted by mikhael
You percieve that the enhancement is minimal. This is a subjective opinion. I would consider the ability to sit down in the student union with a couple of friends and throw down a fleet battle without a computer to be a great enhancement.

It would be the opposite of enhancement. I'd call it a dehancement, but that's because I don't know the proper word in English. Anyway, you have to ask yourself which one is more entertaining. A multiplayer card game or a multiplayer real time space simulation game. I'd go for the latter.

[deep_eyes]

uh oh... oh wellz.... like i said im doing my thing to make it happen, BUMP!

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Levyathan


Maybe I didn't express myself well enough. You probably dislike Quake not because it's an FPS, but because it lacks some features you'd appreciate. Like a consistent story, or maybe four-legged suicide monkeys. If you dislike it because it's a FPS, it doesn't even make sense to enhance it at all.

Thus my point is proven: you can't necessarily enhance a game to the point where it appeals to everyone.

Let me give you an example of a real good FPS game: System Shock 1. It's not an RPG, it's not an adventure, it's purely and simply an FPS. Yet, it's one of the (if not the) best game(s) ever. If you can't see that, then maybe we should end this discussion now.

I'll have to take your word for it. I've never played it. System Shock 2, on the other hand... Best action RPG ever.

It would be the opposite of enhancement. I'd call it a dehancement, but that's because I don't know the proper word in English. Anyway, you have to ask yourself which one is more entertaining. A multiplayer card game or a multiplayer real time space simulation game. I'd go for the latter.

Subjective opinion. I can't stand Magic as a computer game, but I like it as a card game. I can't stand Netrunner as a card game but CP2020 is one of my favorite pen and paper RPGs. Star Wars, as an RPG sucks, but the card game is pretty good. Star Trek sucks pretty much all the way around except as a tabletop wargame.  IN MY OPINION. Now, that doesn't say that I don't occasionally get the urge to watch Star Trek or play a Star Trek game. Sometimes I'm in the mood for different things.

A Freespace card game would let people who wanted to play it enjoy the Freespace universe away from their computers. I'd like to play a Freespace card game against, say, Narol or Codedog or Ryx or many of the other people I've worked with. I wouldn't play Freespace (the computer game) against any of them. I don't like to game online (see my posts in other threads).

[deep_eyes]

You guys have very good points etc. and of people are telling me the same thing mikhail has been saying.

even so if it was to play like node wars, all in a FORUM, with everyone having the same stats and all, people could text write there moves ards used etc, the forms of data of each players ships could be done this way.

this is why i joined HLP, feedback like that!:thepimp:

[Levyathan]

Originally posted by mikhael
Thus my point is proven: you can't necessarily enhance a game to the point where it appeals to everyone.

Proven? I said you disliked it not because of the style, but because it's poorly done. Thus, it can be enhanced to match your tastes.

Originally posted by mikhael
I'll have to take your word for it. I've never played it. System Shock 2, on the other hand... Best action RPG ever.

If you play it you might end up changing your opinion about FPS games. Just because one of them sucks doesn't mean all of them do. Some RPGs suck too, others don't. That's how it is.

Originally posted by mikhael
Subjective opinion. I can't stand Magic as a computer game, but I like it as a card game. I can't stand Netrunner as a card game but CP2020 is one of my favorite pen and paper RPGs. Star Wars, as an RPG sucks, but the card game is pretty good. Star Trek sucks pretty much all the way around except as a tabletop wargame.  IN MY OPINION. Now, that doesn't say that I don't occasionally get the urge to watch Star Trek or play a Star Trek game. Sometimes I'm in the mood for different things.

A Freespace card game would let people who wanted to play it enjoy the Freespace universe away from their computers. I'd like to play a Freespace card game against, say, Narol or Codedog or Ryx or many of the other people I've worked with. I wouldn't play Freespace (the computer game) against any of them. I don't like to game online (see my posts in other threads).

Let me see... You don't like all those games you mentioned because they still have something wrong. Once this is fixed, you might begin to like them. If you dislike them simply because you do, you're just trying to prove your point.

[mikhael]

The things I dislike about most games (like FPS games) cannot be changed without changing them to a different sort of game all together.

Thief is a First Person game that I like, but its not a SHOOTER. ITs a sneaker. The game play in Thief is totally different from the gameplay in Quake. Its the game PLAY that is different, not the game technology. Quake cannot be salvaged without it becomeing something that is NOT QUAKE.  THAT is my point. You can't enhance it. If there's a "maximum level of enhancement" Quake has already reached it and that level has fallen short of the mark.

I recognize that poeple like games that I don't. I recognize that games can be improved. I also recognize that there is a point when improvement has transformed the game into something altogether different. You can look at Doom and enhance it again and again and again and get Anachronox, but Anachronox is a totally different game, in a totally different genre, with a totally different play style.  I'm not longer playing an FPS when I play Anachronox. I am playing a console/computer RPG that is based off a first person shooter engine.

They didn't fix what was wrong with First Person Shooters to make Anachronox. They threw out the first person shooter and put in an RPG. That's not enhancement. Its transformation.

[Levyathan]

Yeah, Thief is not an FPS. But didn't I use the System Shock example already? Maybe you didn't understand how much of an FPS it actually is. It's an FPS, I tell you. You go around shooting things. You pick up a weapon. You use it to shoot bigger and nastier things. Now and then, you pick up a piece of hardware, the called cybernetic implants. Those are nothing more than equipment. No RPG elements involved. You don't get to improve your character's stats or skills. Quite often, you find audio logs and recieve emails, which tell you parts of the story happening at the Station. Unless a good story is considered an RPG element, I can't see this game as anything more than an FPS. Still, it's so much better than Quake, and so different, that it's hard to believe both are based on the same principle. But they are. The main difference is that SS is at a much higher level of enhancement.

[deep_eyes]

Bump me....