[NGTM-1R]

If, on the other hand, you put every story that you come across into a preceonceived box  (i.e. "because this is a military story"), then it's no wonder really that you couldn't enjoy Windmills.

Oh come now. I didn't build the box, Ransom did, because he told his story through the view of a pilot and officer (presumably GTVA, but perhaps NTF). I didn't put the story in the box. The story came inside the box, the usual four-walls-and-one's-transparent box that stories always come inside. That box had the markings and accoutrements of a military story, because of who it was being told about (pilot and officer), and what it was telling (military operations).

Instead, it wanted to be Ender's Game, but it missed the critical point that Ender's Game was framed about someone who should be bewildered and have everything military sound strange to them. So it had to make everything that was military truly strange and bewildering, which causes those of us on the other side of the fourth wall to sit up and go "wtf was that man", destroying suspension of disbelief.

It's not a bad story, as I've said. It was born into the wrong medium, though, and hence can't be told well.

[General Battuta]

Stop making definitive statements. Most of the people in this thread are disagreeing with you and believe it was told well. And given that Ransom claims he was 'terrified' of that reaction, I think you may be discouraging him and others from doing such original work in the future.

Which is not a good idea.

Freespace is not 'the wrong medium' for this story. Your assumptions about it are the wrong medium for this story, and if you could free yourself from those assumptions, you would enjoy it more.

[NGTM-1R]

Stop making definitive statements. Most of the people in this thread are disagreeing with you and believe it was told well. And given that Ransom claims he was 'terrified' of that reaction, I think you may be discouraging him and others from doing such original work in the future.

Which is not a good idea.

If they take it as discouragement like that, then that is their issue. If they take it as the criticism it is, which mentions where things went wrong and hence how not to do it again, then perhaps something will be learned.

I know most of the people in this thread are disagreeing with me. This is not a situation I'm terribly unfamilar with, seeing it frequently when I review written forms of fanfiction. I could, perhaps, argue that they don't have the training (hence the proper context or knowing the right terms) or experience of somebody who graduated with a creative writing major. I won't, however, and simple say that I have high standards. Yes, there were many bright points, and I do not dispute that. But Ransom was right to be afraid of this particular reaction, because this lightbulb was DOA, and if you notice it was DOA, then everything starts to unravel as the "reader" is forcefully ejected from the story.

[chief1983]

You...review...fanfic?  That's like, a thing someone can do with their time?

[NGTM-1R]

You...review...fanfic?  That's like, a thing someone can do with their time?

Question: How is creating missions for your mod not fanfic?

Do you not do some form of quality control on them?

That's reviewing fanfic too.

[Goober5000]

Stop making definitive statements.

Most of the people in this thread are disagreeing with you and believe it was told well.

But note, not all.  It's a legitimate review, even if it is a minority opinion.

And given that Ransom claims he was 'terrified' of that reaction, I think you may be discouraging him and others from doing such original work in the future.

First, I think Ransom is exaggerating; second, I think any artist who is genuinely interested in making a particular campaign is not going to let previous reviews dissuade him.

I think this kind of discussion is good.  And furthermore, regardless of whether NGTM-1R and I (or anyone else) think the story immersion was successful, I think we both agree that the campaign was a first-rate technical achievement.

[General Battuta]

I'm concerned that the way NGTM-1R phrases his review indicates a narrow view towards 'good' Freespace campaigns.

I worry that he's confusing militophilia (is there a better word for that?) with valid entertainment. And, to be honest, I'm concerned that part of his 'unique' reviewing style is poking holes in things that don't conform to, say, the standards of the US military.

My primary concern is that he doesn't think it's a first-rate technical achievement, he thinks the whole thing was DOA.

The Internet is a clumsy medium for this kind of discourse. As long as Ransom views it as a success, and others view it as worth emulating (and improving on), I'm satisfied.

But I am dissatisfied with what I perceive as NGTM-1R's need to protect himself from moral ambiguity by resorting to military trivia. It feels like an attempt to create a third answer to the dilemmas raised in Windmills: "I'd never have to make these choices, because in real Freespace life, they'd never come up."

In this particular situation, mind -- I'm not drawing any dispositional conclusions about him as a person.

EDIT:

Let me clarify. This is a good thing to read in depth, since it is basically the disconnect between me and NGTM-1R.

I saw all the problems he did, recognized that this clearly couldn't be a regular officer training simulation, and then immediately made the leap I was invited to make: into wondering what it really was.

'Windmills' doesn't answer that question. But the question itself is a vital part of the atmosphere. It's something that's supposed to be nagging at you the whole time.

And I (I, mind you!) find it a bit absurd to stand about nitpicking at the question, when the question itself is clearly an invitation and a key element of the narrative.

It feels like NGTM-1R missed the boat everybody else jumped into. Which is why he's still standing on the shore declaring the campaign DOA.

[Jake2447]

I'm concerned that the way NGTM-1R phrases his review indicates a narrow view towards 'good' Freespace campaigns.

I worry that he's confusing militophilia (is there a better word for that?) with valid entertainment. And, to be honest, I'm concerned that part of his 'unique' reviewing style is poking holes in things that don't conform to, say, the standards of the US military.

My primary concern is that he doesn't think it's a first-rate technical achievement, he thinks the whole thing was DOA.

The Internet is a clumsy medium for this kind of discourse. As long as Ransom views it as a success, and others view it as worth emulating (and improving on), I'm satisfied.

But I am dissatisfied with what I perceive as NGTM-1R's need to protect himself from moral ambiguity by resorting to military trivia. It feels like an attempt to create a third answer to the dilemmas raised in Windmills: "I'd never have to make these choices, because in real Freespace life, they'd never come up."

In this particular situation, mind -- I'm not drawing any dispositional conclusions about him as a person.

EDIT:

Let me clarify. This is a good thing to read in depth, since it is basically the disconnect between me and NGTM-1R.

I saw all the problems he did, recognized that this clearly couldn't be a regular officer training simulation, and then immediately made the leap I was invited to make: into wondering what it really was.

'Windmills' doesn't answer that question. But the question itself is a vital part of the atmosphere. It's something that's supposed to be nagging at you the whole time.

And I (I, mind you!) find it a bit absurd to stand about nitpicking at the question, when the question itself is clearly an invitation and a key element of the narrative.

It feels like NGTM-1R missed the boat everybody else jumped into. Which is why he's still standing on the shore declaring the campaign DOA.

Not to make a personal attack on NTGM-1R, as I am sure there are others that would agree with his expectations for a Freespace campaign, but I would have to agree with General Battuta that he is missing the point.  I think everyone playing this campaign realizes that this is not an attempt to create a realistic interpretation of what an officers' training simulation in the Freespace universe would be like.  This is presented directly by the campaign itself, as the ships are obviously rendered realistically.  We already know from canon Freespace that training simulations are very realistic simulations of combat in the Freespace universe.  As such, approaching this campaign as you would approach any other Freespace campaign is clearly out of the question, not only because of the differing artistic style, but because the game is played from an entirely different point of view, that of an officer in the (presumably) GTVA.

This is why Windmills succeeds, it differs from the standard Freespace campaign; it cannot be compared to any others.  As I already stated, it attempts to remove context from the battles which take place.  As such you cannot approach this as if it were what is typically understood to be a story or plot.  Not to say that story or plot is not important to the campaign, but not in the traditional sense.  As General Battuta said, this ambiguity is integral to the enjoyment of the game; while you may not entirely understand what it is, it still evokes powerful emotions, arguably moreso that a campaign in which that context suggests doom for the human race.  To approach it as a fanfic would be inappropriate, as many of the campaigns strengths are subjective; the user defines choices and the response to losses.

I don't think it is wrong to approach a game expecting to be drawn in by a traditional plot, especially for a game as plot driven as Feespace.  However, this mod's gameplay moves away from that of Freespace (obviously).  As such, it deserves a different approach.  I think the insistence on a traditional approach to criticism of this campaign is what limits NTGM-1R's enjoyment.  To make an analogy, many people approach Walden in the same way as they would any other book.  As a result, many people who read the book hate it.  However, by approaching it differently, examining it for what it's worth, we can see Walden as one of the greatest pieces of literature of all time.

[Dilmah G]

What he said ^^^^

The moment you stop expecting this to be "True2Life" Officer Training, and focus on the actual campaign, the more you'll enjoy it and respect Ransom.

[General Battuta]

I keep thinking of the metaphor of Portal. Obviously, the moment you start the game, you know this isn't how a wormhole-gun-testing 'Enrichment Center' would really be run.

And part of the game's impact is wondering why.

[Mobius]

I wonder why people are discussing the obvious.

We all know, having played Transcend and Sync, what Ransom's style is like. I'm not a great fan of that style (but I somewhat like it) and I don't see the point in discussing it even more. How can I pretend Ransom to adapt his style to my own? People discuss as if we're all obliged to play campaigns and therefore we have the right to complain and pretend changes.


De Gustibus Non Disputandum Est

[Mongoose]

Mobius, try reading the thread before commenting next time.  NGTM-1R isn't disputing Ransom's style in general; he's taking fault with how this specific campaign was presented.  Several other people and myself seem to be disagreeing with his fundamental assertion, but that doesn't make his opinion any less valid than anyone else's.

[Nemesis6]

Hm, crashed at the stealth fighter level, might have been random... interesting concept though.

[ssmit132]

I've just played this campaign, and in my opinion it's excellent. I really thought it was great how the Simulation kept asking rhetoric questions, which were to make you think. Also, another nice touch was that your performance in the previous missions affected how the last mission proceeded.

My performance:

Spoiler:

Mission 1 (The end part): I tried to make sure that a good proportion of both sides made it out. However, the medical frigate and science cruiser were destroyed. All the military vessels made it out

Mission 2: Really, not much to say about that - all the green capital ships were still alive when I lost communications. However, since I didn't want to get a shock from the voice-acted line, I turned down the volume. Too much, unfortunately, which meant I didn't hear it at all, which disappointed me a bit. I'm not going to go play that mission again just for that line, since I can probably hazard a guess on how it's played out.

Mission 3: I got the stealth fighters to go around doing all the things that came up along the way, which meant they ended up getting abducted by the void.

Mission 4: I decided to keep my cruisers at 01 so I could mince all the enemy ships as they came, until the sides switched. I then struck up a balance between offense and defense like the Simulation said. I managed to destroy 01 with 02 at around 50-70% (I don't quite remember). I let the transport go, though, since I didn't think it necessary to destroy it.

I actually liked the 'retro' red and green graphics - they made it so you focused more on the action and not on how pretty the ships were (I had a problem with the second mission, though, where the enemy corvette appeared as the HTL model with textures as opposed to the plain red ship). It reminded me of a nuclear war game I played once, where everything was minimalist - I think the missiles were like pyramids flying through the air, and you had the retro-style spark-looking things and aircraft made out of lines.

The name, too - while I don't really know what it signifies - I like how an innocent word like 'Windmills' can be a facade for something not so innocent.

However, I don't think I got as much impact as other people did, as I try to not take games too seriously. I still think that this is an excellent campaign, and one I would recommend to others.

[Dilmah G]

I like the Red and Green interface, it felt "Realistic" I tend to take games too seriously and as such I thought the end was the best part of the game and subsequently told all my friends who were into gaming

[maelstrom0511]

So what is with the name anyways?

[The E]

Check out Don Quixote, for one possible interpretation.

[Commander Zane]

I'm still trying to figure out what the music on the fourth mission has to do with anything.

[maelstrom0511]

Check out Don Quixote, for one possible interpretation.

That was my first thought.... just not sure.

[Mobius]

Mobius, try reading the thread before commenting next time.  NGTM-1R isn't disputing Ransom's style in general; he's taking fault with how this specific campaign was presented.  Several other people and myself seem to be disagreeing with his fundamental assertion, but that doesn't make his opinion any less valid than anyone else's.

Isn't that connected to Ransom's style?