[Woolie Wool]

I've started playing FS1 for the first time, and it's pretty good, even better than the FS Port. The FS Port feels like a mod for FS2, but FS1 itself is a completely different experience. In many ways, FS1 is superior to its sequel. The sounds are better, the mainhalls are better, the music and the way music is handledi s better, the menu interface is better, and the HUD is much, much better. It seems like the changes made to these aspects in FS2 were made just to make it different, not to make it better. Overall, FS1 is a more polished and complete-feeling game (indeed, it took two years to create instead of one year for FS2). There are these subtle things in FS1 that makes FS2 seem sloppy by comparison--the animated loadout graphics, the extra music tracks, the greater attention to detail put into the models and  textures (the Chronos is a MUCH better model than the Triton).

Some gripes:
- Missiles track poorly. I could easily hit a Manticore with double Interceptors in the Port, but they rarely hit in FS1. Hornets seem to be the exception--they are far more accurate than in FS2 or the Port, where they were nearly useless.
- Textures display at far lower res than in FS2. even though the textures themselves are in high-res.
-The sun is always blue-white.
-The Valkyrie can carry the Banshee, but not the Ulysses, making the Uly suck even more (not only do I get few missiles, I am denied the best primary in the game). I flew most of the missions in the Apollo or Herc.
- The Dragon, once merely annoying, is a huge pain in the ass.
- I hated Paving the Way in the Port, and Galatea being able to fire on asteroids only makes me hate it a little less. I had to replay it because the Galatea refused to jump the first time around.
- The transports never arrived to capture the Ramses! I waited outside the weapons range of the Taranis and shot up incoming Shivan fighters for a terribly long time, but the transports still didn't come. I was down to 22% hull integrity and one remaining wingman by the time I was 25 minutes into the mission, so I jumped out. Fortunately, I was able to continue the campaign (and I got an Ace medal). If the transports ever did come after I left, they would arrive to find a derelict Ramses with all of the subsystems gone and an alive-and-well Shivan cruiser (Even with no beams, I did NOT want to attack a Cain in a Valkyrie. Every hit hurts a lot when you have 200 shields and 200 armor).
-A Headz picture appears in the Credits screen after a while but there's no Headz movie on the disc.

[Drew]

argh, apart from the cutscenes, i didnt like Fs1 at all. Fs2 is wayyy cooler

[redsniper]

music is better in FS1 but that's it

[karajorma]

I prefer FS2 overall.

As for the lower res textures have a look in the technical section of my FAQ. The registry hacks apply to FS1 just as much as they apply to FS2.

[jdjtcagle]

The headz movie is on the silent threat cd

[Lynx]

FS1 showed how to make capships good-looking with individual textures. Fs2 showed how to make capships ugly with texture tiling. 'Nuff said.

[Nico]

I prefer FS1 too, actually.

[Lynx]

FS1 feels much more polished and has an own style, mostly. And it was something new to me, at least at the beginning, without shields and all. I was a bit dissappointed when I got shields later in the game, I have to admit. And the terran and vasudan ship designs were *much* better than in the second part, too. And the story line was much better, IMO.

The terran and vasudan ships in FS2 weren't as appealing to me with their smooth- and roundness, and the terran capships looked as if they were just thrown together in a hurry. I have to say I wouldn't have touched FS2 if it wasn't so mod-friendly.

[Lightspeed]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool
I've started playing FS1 for the first time, and it's pretty good, even better than the FS Port.

Wow... that took you a while

 

The FS Port feels like a mod for FS2, but FS1 itself is a completely different experience. In many ways, FS1 is superior to its sequel. The sounds are better, the mainhalls are better, the music and the way music is handledi s better, the menu interface is better, and the HUD is much, much better.

The sounds are about equal. The mainhalls definately ARE better in Freespace 1.
The music was really great in Freespace1, whereas in Freespace2 there was some ...weirdo... singing all round making it sound like cheap rubbish compared to the genius quality of Freespace 1 music. The music is handled exactly the same way as in Freespace 2, though.
The HUD sucks in Freespace1. Freespace2 improved it, quite a lot.

 

It seems like the changes made to these aspects in FS2 were made just to make it different, not to make it better. Overall, FS1 is a more polished and complete-feeling game (indeed, it took two years to create instead of one year for FS2). There are these subtle things in FS1 that makes FS2 seem sloppy by comparison--the animated loadout graphics, the extra music tracks, the greater attention to detail put into the models and  textures (the Chronos is a MUCH better model than the Triton).

Freespace 2 focussed on MODdability. The animated Loadout graphics made it near impossible to implement new fighters or bombers. Freespace 2 shows the information in 'Text mode' next to a seperate ANI. This way it's thousands of times easier to modify. The models in Freespace 1 were superb, the FS2 models were indeed sloppy jobs compared to them.

 

Some gripes:
- Missiles track poorly. I could easily hit a Manticore with double Interceptors in the Port, but they rarely hit in FS1. Hornets seem to be the exception--they are far more accurate than in FS2 or the Port, where they were nearly useless.
- Textures display at far lower res than in FS2. even though the textures themselves are in high-res.
-The sun is always blue-white.
-The Valkyrie can carry the Banshee, but not the Ulysses, making the Uly suck even more (not only do I get few missiles, I am denied the best primary in the game). I flew most of the missions in the Apollo or Herc.
- The Dragon, once merely annoying, is a huge pain in the ass.
 

Missiles are fine in FS1. They're toned down so it's not like the n00bish FS2 where 8 missiles is enough to kill ANY enemy without even aiming. You CAN hit with missiles, it just requires the little thingy called 'skill'.

The textures problem can be fixed by tweaking the Registry or running it in Glide mode (if you have glide ) -- see karajorma's FAQ for it.

There is only one sun image in FS1. Never really cared about that, though.

The Apollo is easily the worst ship ever constructed, the Hercules is okay but the best ship there ever way in any part of the FS series is the Valkyrie.

The Dragon is good fun to fight, isnt it? The ONLY shivan ship that requires skill to be beaten, maybe except the scorpion.

I love FS1

especially the story and movies.

However, FS2's story is also very good if you can count 1+1 together.

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by Lynx
FS1 feels much more polished and has an own style, mostly. And it was something new to me, at least at the beginning, without shields and all. I was a bit dissappointed when I got shields later in the game, I have to admit.

I was glad to have shields. Being without shields among Shivans is like fighting in the infantry bare naked. They introduced shields, targeting Shivans, and the Avenger at the exact right time. If it had been longer before we got shields and decent weapons, the player would have gotten frustrated by being completely overwhelmed. If we got it earlier, it would be very disappointing. Just when it seems that all hope is lost, a breakthrough is achieved.

And the terran and vasudan ship designs were *much* better than in the second part, too. And the story line was much better, IMO.

The ship designs were much better, but the story is a bit cliché and lacks the depth of FS2.

The terran and vasudan ships in FS2 weren't as appealing to me with their smooth- and roundness, and the terran capships looked as if they were just thrown together in a hurry.

I agree.

I have to say I wouldn't have touched FS2 if it wasn't so mod-friendly.

*reaches for pistol*

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by Lightspeed


Wow... that took you a while

 

The sounds are about equal. The mainhalls definately ARE better in Freespace 1.

Mmm, I would say that the Shivan sounds and interface sounds were better in FS1, but the rest is equal.

The music was really great in Freespace1, whereas in Freespace2 there was some ...weirdo... singing all round making it sound like cheap rubbish compared to the genius quality of Freespace 1 music.

The vocals are really good, especially Exodus. It's the techno/rock/guitar **** in Revelations, Deuteronomy, and that other track that's annoying.

The music is handled exactly the same way as in Freespace 2, though.

Not quite. There are two or three ambient songs in each FS1 sound track, and FS1 picks a different one in each lull in the fighting. FS1 also picks a different battle tune to start off with in each period of combat.

The HUD sucks in Freespace1. Freespace2 improved it, quite a lot.

I disagree. There may not be as much color customizability, but the layout and look of the FS1 HUD is much better.
 

Freespace 2 focussed on MODdability. The animated Loadout graphics made it near impossible to implement new fighters or bombers. Freespace 2 shows the information in 'Text mode' next to a seperate ANI. This way it's thousands of times easier to modify. The models in Freespace 1 were superb, the FS2 models were indeed sloppy jobs compared to them.

I know, but it's kind of cool. A choice between ANI and PCX when making loadout graphics would be great. The FS1 method of putting the stats in the ANI was also bad for modding, but the large anis and cool decloaking effect is great.  

Missiles are fine in FS1. They're toned down so it's not like the n00bish FS2 where 8 missiles is enough to kill ANY enemy without even aiming. You CAN hit with missiles, it just requires the little thingy called 'skill'.

Heh. I guess my missiles always go wide because I never needed to aim in FS2. Just gain lock and fire (unless you have Hornets).

The textures problem can be fixed by tweaking the Registry or running it in Glide mode (if you have glide ) -- see karajorma's FAQ for it.

I'll use the registry hack. Is it also possible to registry-hack self-illumination in Direct3D? Why was Glide abandoned when nVidia acquired 3DFX?

The Apollo is easily the worst ship ever constructed.

I strongly disagree. I love my Apollo. When armed with Subachs and Harpoons, it is very competitive even in FS2. An Apollo may not be as fast, maneuverable, or tough as a Myrmidon, but it is a much smaller target from most angles (the Myrmidon is VERY easy to hit) and has more missiles and better-placed guns. And don't ever call any ship the worst ever constructed until you've flown an Anubis with no shields and Vasudan Light Lasers. You'll never laugh at a Fenris again.

but the best ship there ever way in any part of the FS series is the Valkyrie.

Only if you're not fighting anything bigger than a Ma'at.

The Dragon is good fun to fight, isnt it? The ONLY shivan ship that requires skill to be beaten, maybe except the scorpion.

They're not that bad in normal missions, I was really referring to them in the Gauntlet when I mentioned "nightmare". You vs. 5 Dragons and a Demon...

However, FS2's story is also very good if you can count 1+1 together.

FS2's story is less derivative and more interesting than FS1's.

[castor]

FS1 was the beginning -- no way I could rate it objectively now.
But its good, it is..

[Akalabeth Angel]

Not sure what's with the big comparison between FS1 + 2, they're both great games I think. They just have very different atmospheres. A few comments:

Mainhalls:
   I'm not sure why people think the FS1 mainhalls were better. The Galatea looked like a garage ; the Bastion was good but I'm not sure how its superior to the Psamtik or the whatever it was.

Music:
   The music for both is good, though some of the FS2 songs vary in quality. I prefer the gothic, haunting music to some degree in FS2.

Storylines:
   Both are pretty good. Though one thing I don't like is the rapid tech progression in FS1. I remember there's one mission in FS2 where your wingmen are saying "no shields, no flak cannons, no beam turrets, it musta sucked" but the player doesn't lack shields for very long. Some of you have said that the game would have been bad without shields but remember TIE Fighter? Most of that game you fly around in a ship that can take 2 or 3 hits at most. And that's possibly the best SW simulator out of the whole lot. They could have just had the "locking on" problem solved in FS1 and then have the shields come a bit later. The missions still would have been alright.

HUD
   The FS1 hud is hard on the eyes except when its blue. I don't much care for it at all. Playability wise, I like being able to press "B" to lock onto bombers and not just their launched ordanance.

Playability
    I have two main gripes with FS2:

Cruisers are meat. After playing FS2 for a long time I replayed FS1. My first time out against an Aten in a Valkyrie I got my butt handed to me on a platter. There's actually a whole mission in FS1 to capture a Cain. A cain! In FS2 it's like "hey, beta wing, can you spare 30 seconds to kill that Cain over there?". One of the reasons why they're bad is that the mission designers have made it easier for the player; specifically locking AAAf beams and the like.

But this trend actually started in ST when the first mission out is some "go kill these 5 Atens".

My other gripe is that missiles are probably a bit too effective in FS2. Fire off a pack of tornados and you can turn your back because the target is smoked. Enemy fighters drop like flies against Kaysers and Prometheus-S cannons. Trebuchets are one of the best missiles in the game but in FS1 you're lucky if a Phoenix-V comes anywhere near the target. And so on.

But in summary, I like 'em both but have problems with both of them as well.

[Woolie Wool]

I've brought back some of the difficulty of fighting a cruiser in Starforce. It will go down quickly, but will beat the **** out you before it does. A few clean hits with a heavy pulse cannon can take you out, and AAA beams will make fighters drop like flies. Also, compared to you, cruisers themselves are a bit tougher than in FS2.

SIF Talon light fighter: 450 shields, 290 hitpoints
BSC Dainishi cruiser: 70000 hitpoints
MCC Jeremiah cruiser: 90000 hitpoints
SIC Eurus cruiser: 110000 hitpoints

GTF Perseus light fighter: 350 shields, 265 hitpoints
GTC Fenris cruiser: 10000 hitpoints
GTC Aeolus cruiser:38000 hitpoints
SC Rakshasa cruiser: 45000 hitpoints

[Nico]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool
Only if you're not fighting anything bigger than a Ma'at.

The second time I played FS1 ( played it only two times ), I never left my Valkyrie unless I was forced to. The Valk is the best FS/FS2 playable ship, nothing will change my mind. The Perseus is really a step back compared to it, imho. Too bad it didn't look that good.

[Woolie Wool]

The Perseus is really better than the Valk for what you encounter in FS2. The Valkyrie is a death trap now that cap ships are fitted with AAA beams. I'd take the Apollo over both of them.

Remember, you are the only pilot in the entire galaxy who can just click a button and try again. The GTVA designs planes for pilots that have but one life.  Even the best pilots get hit by AAA fire sometimes, and AAA is lethal to a thinly armored Valkyrie.

[Bri_Dog]

The original is always better. But FS1 evolved into FS2, therefore they both kick ass.

[Solatar]

Love the fs2 engine.

Love Apollo vs. Anubis style combat.

Me lost my fs1 CDs = port all the way.

[Charmande]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool
I've brought back some of the difficulty of fighting a cruiser in Starforce. It will go down quickly, but will beat the **** out you before it does. A few clean hits with a heavy pulse cannon can take you out, and AAA beams will make fighters drop like flies. Also, compared to you, cruisers themselves are a bit tougher than in FS2.

SIF Talon light fighter: 450 shields, 290 hitpoints
BSC Dainishi cruiser: 70000 hitpoints
MCC Jeremiah cruiser: 90000 hitpoints
SIC Eurus cruiser: 110000 hitpoints

GTF Perseus light fighter: 350 shields, 265 hitpoints
GTC Fenris cruiser: 10000 hitpoints
GTC Aeolus cruiser:38000 hitpoints
SC Rakshasa cruiser: 45000 hitpoints

I'm pretty sure a Rakshasa only has 40000 hitpoints.

..........

yeah, see... it does... look...

$Hitpoints:             40000

there.

[Stryke 9]

Well, it's a sequel.

The games are pretty different in a whole ****load of ways, it's actually pretty impressive how little changed in FS2 but how much that tiny amount mattered. Basically, they're just different styles of shooter- FS1 is a challenging, story-based game where you're basically horribly outgunned and outnumbered the entire time but have to fight anyway, where what you're doing is deciding the fate of the universe, and FS2 is a heretical Ramboesque slugfest where you don't really know what's going on or give a **** but hey look at that pretty explosion. And that one on the kilometer-long superdestroyer I just rammed into until it died. Much truer to the feel of the old Descent series, it's like they decided to wax maudlin long enough for one game and then snapped out of it.