🚀 go-pugleaf

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:NcWdneto4ZPTAE-iRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
>
>
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
>
> >>>Strange, it looked basically the same to me. But its not just the
> >
> > graphics,
> >
> >>>like I said. WC4 FELT like a whole new sequel even though they had
> >
> > clearly
> >
> >>>used a cannibalized WC3 engine.
> >>
> >>No, you're missing the point. By "requires the base engine from a parent
> >>game", I mean the parent game must be installed so that the add-on can
> >>utilize its files in order to run. WCSO is self-contained.
> >
> >
> > Good point, but you see the first thought I had when they announced SO
and I
> > got the details (although I must not have read them as well as I first
> > though) was that it was a WCP addon, they had decided to make availible
to
> > everyone and deliver it in episodes, and try and make it make sence to
> > people who hadent played the originals. Thats feeling didnt stop either
when
> > I played it. I even thought their was something wrong with my copy for a
> > brief period when I didnt see any videos, I had gotten so used to it!
> >
> >
> >>>>>>As for being able to argue with it, yes someone can.  Like with all
> >>>>>>subjective opinions (regardless of my opinion regarding the logic
> >>>>>>behind it) though, doing so is an exercise in mental masturbation,
at
> >>>>>>best.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Sure, its subjective. But thats (see above) my reasons for thinking
> >
> > what
> >
> >>>I
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>do.
> >>>>
> >>>>How about the following changes from WCP, besides the aforementioned
> >>>>tweaked graphical engine:
> >>>>
> >>>>- episodic delivery
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>so? Cut up WCProphecy in the same way and how would that be different?
> >>
> >>To an extent, yes. You could say the same about ANY game...hindsight is
> >>crystal clear. But WCSO was one of, if not THE, first to deliver a game
> >>this way. It required different planning and software development cycle
> >>processes.
> >
> >
> > I still dont see how thats relevant at all. If it was a full game I
wouldnt
> > expect it to be done this way.
>
> Just the way it was planned.
>
> >>>>- story narrated via news bursts, annoucements, and character e-mails
> >>>>instead of video clips
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>They added some of that, which was welcomed, but I still think it was a
> >>>cheap way of not having to spend any money on video. In my mind, it was
> >
> > a a
> >
> >>>cheap way to add on to the Prophecy story.
> >>
> >>SOME of that? This method was how the entire narrative story was driven.
> >>
> >>And I wonder why you keep bringing up the money angle. Money was not a
> >>direct issue with WCSO. True, WCIV and WCP didn't rake in tremendous
> >>amounts of income as WCIII had done, but both were profitable
> >>nonetheless. Origin as a company was in good shape. The methodologies of
> >>WCSO's gameplay, story, and delivery were not based on finances (or lack
> >>thereof).
> >
> >
> > Well if they had the money I think they made a terrible decision in
removing
> > so much of the content that I enjoyed in WC3,4 and Prophecy. I thought
the
> > primary reason they did what they did was BECAUSE they had so little
money
>
> Because it was an episodic release, via the Internet, the downloads had
> to be kept relatively small. The video sequences that we all loved from
> WCIII through WCP are immense in file size. See, this all plays in
> together: episodic, downloadable game requires small files, thus no video.
>
> > after WCP . Sure, make game-play better! But why remove the other parts
like
> > cool CGI cut scenes and full motion video? Oh yes thats right, its a
> > "different kind of game"... I don't want that excuse, it doesn't cut it
for
>
> See above. Does that logic make sense?
>
> > me. I happened to enjoy the CGI cut scenes and filming real actors , and
I
> > think it really added something to the game, then they took it away?! It
> > seemed like a step back to me, justifiable ONLY if it was a kind of
weird
> > addon or that they had no money to do it. I liked the video stuff beuase
it
> > made me feel like I was playing in a movie. Even in Wc2 they had talking
> > cartoon heads which was clearly a cheap way (understandable at the time)
of
> > not being able to not filming real actors but STILL I felt better
because of
> > it.
> >
> > Theres no right or wrong in this argument, Ive said all along I thought
it
> > felt like an addon to me. I know it was marketed as a standalone, but
that
> > doesnt change how I felt when I played it.
>
> Okay. You're making that clear now. However, at the beginning, it seemed
> like you were trying to argue that the game couldn't be considered
> anything BUT an add-on.
>
> >>>>- different and more detailed storyline (yes, a continuation of
Casey's
> >>>>story, but an entirely different arc than that of WCP)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Irrelevent.
> >>
> >>WHAT? Incredibly relevant, perhaps the most relevant point after not
> >>needing a parent game's files.
> >
> >
> > Irrelevent to me at least, they could have used the same story in a
> > different way and I would have not thought it felt like an addon. Its
the
> > way they used it. Thats why its irrelevent to me.
>
> I wouldn't call that irrelevant. Perhaps a vague choice, unwise even,
> but not irrelevant.
>
> >>>>- several new ships, including your base of operations
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Irrelevant.
> >>
> >> From a general standpoint, yes, irrelevant. From a historic WC
> >>viewpoint, hardly insignificant. Each successive sequel in the WC
> >>universe has seen the primary character flying from a new base ship,
> >>while the add-ons have been aboard that of the vessel from the previous
> >>main game (due to needing the parent game's files, go figure).
> >
> >
> > Im not disputing that it was a standalone, so you dont need to prove
that to
> > me. All I am saying that FOR ME I thought it FELT like I was playing an
> > addon. If they brought out a new game that had the Midway as the main
"base
> > of operations" but didnt take away from it the things that I had listed
> > earlier I am certian I wouldnt have just considered it an addon.
>
> Of course not. One aspect alone doesn't make or break how a game is
> perceived. It talkes several factors, which is why I've tried to explain
> the important ones, and how they tie together.
>
> >>>>and the primary reason why WCSO was not merely an add-on to WCP --
> >>>>because Origin said so.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>*shrugs*... ok, but like I said I think it "FEELS" like an addon "TO
> >
> > ME".
> >
> >>>And it would make sence that the makers would say it is a 'Stand Alone
> >
> > Full
> >
> >>>Game' just to make it sound better.
> >>
> >>That would be false advertising.
> >
> >
> > Not really. If it was a full game why didnt I see it being sold in its
own
>
> Because it its initial release was the aforementioned Internet episodic
> method.
>
> The later WCP Gold included WCSO for the same reason that Kilrathi Saga
> included WCI, WCII, and WCIII --  a common main character's exploits
> within the same general conflict.

Small but key point here is the title itself. WCP Gold. Wing Commander
Prophecy Gold Edition. If Origin indeed did market SO as a stand alone
product then yes indeed, it WAS false advertising. If you think Origin is
above that, I believe your mistaken. How many people bought Secret Missions
1 and 2 for Wing1 and SO 1 and 2 for Wing2? I would venture to guess it was
nowhere near the sales of the "parent" game. Im willing to bet Origin
planned from the beginning to package this with WCP and sell it. If its just
a add on how many people would have wanted to get it? Die hards yeah,
average person no. However you say its a new game from the beginning then
put it in a pretty box in time for Christmas later, and suddenly people want
it because hey "TWO GAMES FOR ONE!". The Kilrathi Saga is a compilation that
I'm sure would have been renamed the "Wing Commander Saga" had Wing4 been
out a little longer. The difference is in the title, straight from Origin.
So if your so willing to take origins side in what they say, then look at
the title. Wing Commander-Secret Missions. Wing Commander2- Special
Operations. AND.... Wing Commander Prophecy Gold Edition. Take those and put
it up against Wing Commander the Kilrathi Saga. The difference is in the
title. Different conflict you say? Then it should have been named Wing
Commander the Nephiliam Saga or something.

Here the reason why I consider this an add on. I consider how I FOUND this
game. It was in a review for a magazine. How was it titled? Wing Commander
Prophecy SO. End of story. Go on the internet and type up SO or Secret
Operations or Special Operations and see what you come up with. Then type in
Wing Commander Prophecy Secret Operations (or special im not sure at the
moment which word it was) and you will most definitely find what you are
looking for. Did Origin stamp the add on label to this game? No. Doesn't
mean anything. Just like you they TOO can go into detail about how they
tweaked this and tweaked that and say "hey its not the same". Sure its
not... The one guys movie comparison is very valid. If this was another game
all together there is NOWAY it would not have included movies. I dont think
its a money issue at all, they would put actors in any new Wing game. It was
a teaser. To get the die hards ready for the next big thing. Which never
came. If troubled hadn't occurred and Wing Commander 6 was out a year after
SO was, then I doubt anyone would be questioning this. Wing1 SM1 and 2 were
to get the die hards by till Wing2. Wing2 SO 1 and 2 to get them by till
Wing3 came out. WCPSO was also a game to get you by until Wing6 came out. It
never came out did it? Have Orgin market what you would consider Wing
Commander 7 with no movies... Ship it for 40 bucks and you see what the
sales on that sucker is. Origin may not say it, but their actions prove it.
Stand alone game? It all comes down to the title. WCPSO, I guess Origin didn
't have the balls to "truly" market it as a stand alone game by changing the
title did they? That is why this is an add on in my book.


>
> > box? It had Prophecy sold WITH SO! Which made sence, as I considered it
a
> > weird addon to the 'fuller' WCP. Why did they deliver it in episodes in
the
> > first place? Ahh yes, it was a "different kind of game', right?...  Well
to
>
> Not a different kind of game per se ... a different kind of delivery.
>
> > me a large multiplayer online experience is a "different kind of game"!
But
> > as it was the episodic delivery for SO just appeared, at least to me, to
be
> > a way of not having to release it properly. After all what happenes when
you
> > join all these episodes together? It just becomes another game! How is
it
> > then different to if you had bought it in a store like you bought Wc4
and
> > WcP?
>
> It's not, hence the clarifying comment that it was a different DELIVERY,
> which required some changes to how the game was developed.
>
> >>>Im NOT telling you it that it was an addon, just that it FELT like a
> >
> > addon
> >
> >>>TO ME.
> >>
> >>Which is where the subjective aspect comes into play. However, you
> >>haven't really provided much clearcut, factual basis to support your
> >>view. Everything has been based on your "feelings"
> >
> >
> > All I was providing was the reasons which leads me to view SO as feeling
> > like an addon, TOO ME. I dont find my view entirly lacking in factual
basis,
> > although I do appreciate your argument (or was that someone else?) that
I
> > havent played every single Wing Commander game.
>
> That was Karl, I believe.
>
> >>and a mistaken idea
> >>that Origin didn't have any money.
> >
> >
> > I find their decisions very strange then. I see no good reason why they
> > would not include the things I listed above, if they had the money. "But
its
>
> I think I outline that pretty clearly above.
>
> > a different kind of game" isnt a good reason for me considering what
they
> > gave us.
> >
> >
> >> If the game feels like an add-on to
> >>you, that's fine, but it can't really be justified from a technical
> >>and/or definitive standpoint.
> >
> >
> > *shrugs*.
>
> As I said, nobody is chastising you for how you felt about it. Rather,
> just trying to make it clear that your reasoning behind it isn't
> technically valid.
>
> --
>
> *** Remove the DELETE from my address to reply ***
>
> ======================================================
>   Kevin Scholl                http://www.ksscholl.com/
>   kscholl@comcast.DELETE.net
> ------------------------------------------------------
>   Information Architecture, Web Design and Development
> ------------------------------------------------------
>   We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of
>   the dreams...
> ======================================================
>