🚀 go-pugleaf

Heh heh heh. Such a header might excite some folks, until they realize 
that we already HAVE what is technically WCVI -- Secret Ops.

But amusing nonetheless.


Shane D. Maudiss wrote:

> In this game you can play the aliens and destroy the stupid humans
> once and for all !

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

Kevin Scholl <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote:
: Heh heh heh. Such a header might excite some folks, until they realize 
: that we already HAVE what is technically WCVI -- Secret Ops.

: But amusing nonetheless.

SO is WC5pt2 :)

Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and 
therefore is not "pt2" of anything.


ewd_tang@ateceatdoteecsdotconcordiadot.ca wrote:

> Kevin Scholl <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote:
> : Heh heh heh. Such a header might excite some folks, until they realize 
> : that we already HAVE what is technically WCVI -- Secret Ops.
> 
> : But amusing nonetheless.
> 
> SO is WC5pt2 :)
> 

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:34:30 -0500, Kevin Scholl <kscholl@comcast.net>
wrote:

> ewd_tang@ateceatdoteecsdotconcordiadot.ca wrote:
> 
> > Kevin Scholl <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote:
> > : Heh heh heh. Such a header might excite some folks, until they realize 
> > : that we already HAVE what is technically WCVI -- Secret Ops.
> > 
> > : But amusing nonetheless.
> > 
> > SO is WC5pt2 :)
> > 
> Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and 
> therefore is not "pt2" of anything.

Would you like some help extracting that hook from your cheek, Kevin?

You've been around here for a while now, you should know by now that
Gene's comments tend to have a certain lack of contact with facts...

(And you should know top-posting is bad, but anyhow... :P )

SubCrid Death
-- 
Official Net.Nazi, LOAF's Merry Guild http://www.wcnews.com/loaf/
ICQ UIN 3908950  <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
A Meeting of Minds <http://nohbody.com/schtuff/meeting.html> - a
(mostly) cliche-free first contact story (updated periodically)

Death wrote:

>>>Kevin Scholl <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>: Heh heh heh. Such a header might excite some folks, until they realize 
>>>: that we already HAVE what is technically WCVI -- Secret Ops.
>>>
>>>: But amusing nonetheless.
>>>
>>>SO is WC5pt2 :)
>>>
>>
>>Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and 
>>therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
> 
> 
> Would you like some help extracting that hook from your cheek, Kevin?
> 
> You've been around here for a while now, you should know by now that
> Gene's comments tend to have a certain lack of contact with facts...

Of course *I* know that. But someone who happens across this discussion 
who isn't a regular (and isn't well-informed) might not.

> (And you should know top-posting is bad, but anyhow... :P )

Indeed. This what happens when one is in a hurry. My apologies.


-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kuadnXyg_LcWB1eiRVn-jg@comcast.com...
> Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
> therefore is not "pt2" of anything.

But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?

Ed

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:31:08 -0000, "Ineedmoney"
<mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

> 
> "Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:kuadnXyg_LcWB1eiRVn-jg@comcast.com...
> > Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
> > therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
> 
> But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?

Why, because it uses a modified version of the WCP engine?  WC4 was a
modified WC3 engine, but most people don't claim the former is an
add-on to the latter.

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.

SubCrid Death
-- 
Official Net.Nazi, LOAF's Merry Guild http://www.wcnews.com/loaf/
ICQ UIN 3908950  <http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3908950>
A Meeting of Minds <http://nohbody.com/schtuff/meeting.html> - a
(mostly) cliche-free first contact story (updated periodically)

Ineedmoney wrote:

>>Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
>>therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
> 
> 
> But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?

Actually ... yes, I can. Didn't feel any more an add-on than WCIV felt 
like an add-on to WCIII. That is to say, not really at all.

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

Ineedmoney wrote:

> But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?

With that logic you would also name Academy a WC2 addon I suppose?

-- 
... Unfortunately, you have reached technical
  support and we do not have any information ...
         -- Jeff S, EA Online
[Delete the karl after the @ to avoid my spam trap]

"Death" <look@my.reply-to.address> wrote in message
news:Zwbzb.374$g97.332@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:31:08 -0000, "Ineedmoney"
> <mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:kuadnXyg_LcWB1eiRVn-jg@comcast.com...
> > > Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
> > > therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
> >
> > But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?
>
> Why, because it uses a modified version of the WCP engine?  WC4 was a
> modified WC3 engine, but most people don't claim the former is an
> add-on to the latter.

Thats because WC4 is is a LOT different to WC3 in more ways than just the
graphics, but WC Secret Ops just LOOKS like an addon to WCP instead of a
whole new game like WC4 was to WC3, or WC3 was to WC2. The following is my
reasoning;

Basically, WC3 brought more to the Wing Commander Universe because of the
movies and lot of other extras that I shouldnt have to tell you about. WC4
was quite different to Wc3 in its HEAVY use and huge budget for the movies.
Wc4 made you feel like you were choosing missions and your own destiny, an
illusion of course... but still another step up from Wc3. WCProphecy decided
to upgrade the graphics, which was a big step up. However, they didn't use
so much video, which some people can debate as to if this hindered the game.
Nevertheless it was obviously not just an addon for Wc4. -

As for Secret Ops, it didn't have ANY video, all cinematics were ingame
rendered. It didnt have ANY prerendred CGI. I didnt have ANY character
models and all the character interaction happened in flight, for example
with a in-game graphical sequence showing your ship and the voices of the
characters which you couldn't even see. There was no noticable improvment on
the graphics, except improving and adding some additional weapons. The ONLY
thing I think Secret Ops innovated was an improvement on character
interaction in-game, which was welcomes but not enough for me to consider it
a whole new game like Wc3, Wc4 and WcP are. All WC games, at least since Wc2
have been very innovative, at least in the wing commander series anyway, but
Secret Ops doesnt seem to provide anything additional that we didnt already
see in Prophecy. If anything, it removed much because of their budget.
Therefore I see Secret Ops as an Add-On to Prophecy than a totally new game
that Prophecy was to Wing 4, for example. It was still fun to play, and it
wasnt bad but I still see it as an addon.


> 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.

Ed

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:qbednZQvcP6V-FCiRVn-sw@comcast.com...
>
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
> >>Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
> >>therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
> >
> >
> > But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?
>
> Actually ... yes, I can. Didn't feel any more an add-on than WCIV felt
> like an add-on to WCIII. That is to say, not really at all.

No I felt WcIV was a definite sequel. It had a much larger scope in terms of
the much larger movie sequences and obvious budget increase the way the game
play was structured. WC4 provided a much better illusion of being able to
determine your destiny than Wc3 had for me. Wc4 certainly felt like a
sequel.

If Wc4 had removed all video. No CGI. Didnt try and create ingame movies
with character interaction.9I dont want to just hear their voices) If they
failed to innovate any, or hardly any (I cant think of anything stunning)
new gameplay features... just stuff like that... I would have thought it
looked like an addon.

Ed

"Karl Frank" <karl@karl.frank.name> wrote in message
news:1070436706.202374@news.ainet.at...
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
> > But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?
>
> With that logic you would also name Academy a WC2 addon I suppose?

I dont know, I never played it. See my other posts for my reasoning.

Ed

Ineedmoney wrote:

>>>>Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
>>>>therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
>>>
>>>But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?
>>
>>Why, because it uses a modified version of the WCP engine?  WC4 was a
>>modified WC3 engine, but most people don't claim the former is an
>>add-on to the latter.
> 
> 
> Thats because WC4 is is a LOT different to WC3 in more ways than just the
> graphics, but WC Secret Ops just LOOKS like an addon to WCP instead of a
> whole new game like WC4 was to WC3, or WC3 was to WC2. The following is my
> reasoning;

WCSO is different from WCP in many ways as well. Important ways. See my 
list at the end...

> Basically, WC3 brought more to the Wing Commander Universe because of the
> movies and lot of other extras that I shouldnt have to tell you about. WC4
> was quite different to Wc3 in its HEAVY use and huge budget for the movies.
> Wc4 made you feel like you were choosing missions and your own destiny, an
> illusion of course... but still another step up from Wc3. WCProphecy decided
> to upgrade the graphics, which was a big step up. However, they didn't use
> so much video, which some people can debate as to if this hindered the game.
> Nevertheless it was obviously not just an addon for Wc4. -

Nobody is arguing that. :)

> As for Secret Ops, it didn't have ANY video, all cinematics were ingame

So? Since when does the amount of video determine whether a game is is 
standalone? And ironically, the fact that the cinematics were ingame and 
not video clips, is one significant difference that could be counted 
against WCSO being an add-on.

> rendered. It didnt have ANY prerendred CGI. I didnt have ANY character
> models and all the character interaction happened in flight, for example
> with a in-game graphical sequence showing your ship and the voices of the
> characters which you couldn't even see. There was no noticable improvment on
> the graphics, except improving and adding some additional weapons. The ONLY

Minor point...the flight engine was tweaked to allow better detail. But 
we've already determined that the graphics alone do not an add-on make.

> thing I think Secret Ops innovated was an improvement on character
> interaction in-game, which was welcomes but not enough for me to consider it
> a whole new game like Wc3, Wc4 and WcP are. All WC games, at least since Wc2
> have been very innovative, at least in the wing commander series anyway, but
> Secret Ops doesnt seem to provide anything additional that we didnt already

I vehemently disagree.

> see in Prophecy. If anything, it removed much because of their budget.

No, much was removed because WCSO was a different kind of game.

> Therefore I see Secret Ops as an Add-On to Prophecy than a totally new game
> that Prophecy was to Wing 4, for example. It was still fun to play, and it
> wasnt bad but I still see it as an addon.

By definition, an add-on requires the base engine from a parent game. 
This was not the case with WCSO. That notwithstanding...

>>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
- story narrated via news bursts, annoucements, and character e-mails 
instead of video clips
- different and more detailed storyline (yes, a continuation of Casey's 
story, but an entirely different arc than that of WCP)
- several new ships, including your base of operations

and the primary reason why WCSO was not merely an add-on to WCP -- 
because Origin said so.

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

Kevin Scholl <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote:
: Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and 
: therefore is not "pt2" of anything.


Ultima VIII Pt2 is also standalone
Homeworld Cataclysm (HW1pt2) is also standalone 

Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries is also standalone (and not MW3) :)

Ineedmoney wrote:

>>With that logic you would also name Academy a WC2 addon I suppose?
> I dont know, I never played it. See my other posts for my reasoning.

Maybe you shouldn't compare WC games as long as you don't know all of 
them...

FWIIW - Academy is the same as WC2 when it comes to engine used. 
Graphics are identical. 2 new ships. Gameplay wise, if you can name it 
gameplay that is, Academy is just a mission simulator like the ones in 
WC1, WC3 and WCP. You can either play gauntlet mode or you can load one 
of the defined missions. No storyline besides the little that is in the 
manual. The only inovation is that Academy is the only WC game where you 
can create your own missions as it has a built in (weak) mission editor.
Academy is considered the worst of all games in the WC univers (besides 
for those people that just need to mod everything ;) )

--
A politican is a person who divides his or her time between running for
office and running for cover.

[Delete the karl after the @ to avoid my spam trap]

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:suydnQocaPVVgU2i4p2dnA@comcast.com...
>
>
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
> >>>>Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
> >>>>therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
> >>>
> >>>But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?
> >>
> >>Why, because it uses a modified version of the WCP engine?  WC4 was a
> >>modified WC3 engine, but most people don't claim the former is an
> >>add-on to the latter.
> >
> >
> > Thats because WC4 is is a LOT different to WC3 in more ways than just
the
> > graphics, but WC Secret Ops just LOOKS like an addon to WCP instead of a
> > whole new game like WC4 was to WC3, or WC3 was to WC2. The following is
my
> > reasoning;
>
> WCSO is different from WCP in many ways as well. Important ways. See my
> list at the end...

see below

> > Basically, WC3 brought more to the Wing Commander Universe because of
the
> > movies and lot of other extras that I shouldnt have to tell you about.
WC4
> > was quite different to Wc3 in its HEAVY use and huge budget for the
movies.
> > Wc4 made you feel like you were choosing missions and your own destiny,
an
> > illusion of course... but still another step up from Wc3. WCProphecy
decided
> > to upgrade the graphics, which was a big step up. However, they didn't
use
> > so much video, which some people can debate as to if this hindered the
game.
> > Nevertheless it was obviously not just an addon for Wc4. -
>
> Nobody is arguing that. :)

good :)

> > As for Secret Ops, it didn't have ANY video, all cinematics were ingame
>
> So? Since when does the amount of video determine whether a game is is
> standalone? And ironically, the fact that the cinematics were ingame and
> not video clips, is one significant difference that could be counted
> against WCSO being an add-on.

Hows that? The way I see it is that if it was an addon, this is the way they
would make it. They couldnt afford to do video and even CGI so they simply
did it in-game. The way Secret Ops appears is exactly the way I would expect
an addon to look!

> > rendered. It didnt have ANY prerendred CGI. I didnt have ANY character
> > models and all the character interaction happened in flight, for example
> > with a in-game graphical sequence showing your ship and the voices of
the
> > characters which you couldn't even see. There was no noticable
improvment on
> > the graphics, except improving and adding some additional weapons. The
ONLY
>
> Minor point...the flight engine was tweaked to allow better detail. But
> we've already determined that the graphics alone do not an add-on make.

I've already said that as well.

> > thing I think Secret Ops innovated was an improvement on character
> > interaction in-game, which was welcomes but not enough for me to
consider it
> > a whole new game like Wc3, Wc4 and WcP are. All WC games, at least since
Wc2
> > have been very innovative, at least in the wing commander series anyway,
but
> > Secret Ops doesnt seem to provide anything additional that we didnt
already
>
> I vehemently disagree.
>
> > see in Prophecy. If anything, it removed much because of their budget.
>
> No, much was removed because WCSO was a different kind of game.

 They removed much becuase they couldnt afford to do anything, and thus to
me it looked like an addon.

> > Therefore I see Secret Ops as an Add-On to Prophecy than a totally new
game
> > that Prophecy was to Wing 4, for example. It was still fun to play, and
it
> > wasnt bad but I still see it as an addon.
>
> By definition, an add-on requires the base engine from a parent game.
> This was not the case with WCSO. That notwithstanding...

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.

> >>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?

> - 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.

> - different and more detailed storyline (yes, a continuation of Casey's
> story, but an entirely different arc than that of WCP)

Irrelevent.

> - several new ships, including your base of operations

Irrelevant.

> 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.

Im NOT telling you it that it was an addon, just that it FELT like a addon
TO ME.

Ed

"Karl Frank" <karl@karl.frank.name> wrote in message
news:1070612714.56512@news.ainet.at...
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
> >>With that logic you would also name Academy a WC2 addon I suppose?
> > I dont know, I never played it. See my other posts for my reasoning.
>
> Maybe you shouldn't compare WC games as long as you don't know all of
> them...

Why do I have to? Ive played WC2, 3, 4 and Prophecy and Secret Ops... and I
know how Secret Ops made me feel.

> FWIIW - Academy is the same as WC2 when it comes to engine used.
> Graphics are identical. 2 new ships. Gameplay wise, if you can name it
> gameplay that is, Academy is just a mission simulator like the ones in
> WC1, WC3 and WCP. You can either play gauntlet mode or you can load one
> of the defined missions. No storyline besides the little that is in the
> manual. The only inovation is that Academy is the only WC game where you
> can create your own missions as it has a built in (weak) mission editor.
> Academy is considered the worst of all games in the WC univers (besides
> for those people that just need to mod everything ;) )
>
> --
> A politican is a person who divides his or her time between running for
> office and running for cover.
>
> [Delete the karl after the @ to avoid my spam trap]
>

Ineedmoney wrote:
> "Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:suydnQocaPVVgU2i4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> 
>>
>>Ineedmoney wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
>>>>>>therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
>>>>>
>>>>>But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?
>>>>
>>>>Why, because it uses a modified version of the WCP engine?  WC4 was a
>>>>modified WC3 engine, but most people don't claim the former is an
>>>>add-on to the latter.
>>>
>>>
>>>Thats because WC4 is is a LOT different to WC3 in more ways than just
> 
> the
> 
>>>graphics, but WC Secret Ops just LOOKS like an addon to WCP instead of a
>>>whole new game like WC4 was to WC3, or WC3 was to WC2. The following is
> 
> my
> 
>>>reasoning;
>>
>>WCSO is different from WCP in many ways as well. Important ways. See my
>>list at the end...
> 
> 
> see below
> 
> 
>>>Basically, WC3 brought more to the Wing Commander Universe because of
> 
> the
> 
>>>movies and lot of other extras that I shouldnt have to tell you about.
> 
> WC4
> 
>>>was quite different to Wc3 in its HEAVY use and huge budget for the
> 
> movies.
> 
>>>Wc4 made you feel like you were choosing missions and your own destiny,
> 
> an
> 
>>>illusion of course... but still another step up from Wc3. WCProphecy
> 
> decided
> 
>>>to upgrade the graphics, which was a big step up. However, they didn't
> 
> use
> 
>>>so much video, which some people can debate as to if this hindered the
> 
> game.
> 
>>>Nevertheless it was obviously not just an addon for Wc4. -
>>
>>Nobody is arguing that. :)
> 
> 
> good :)
> 
> 
>>>As for Secret Ops, it didn't have ANY video, all cinematics were ingame
>>
>>So? Since when does the amount of video determine whether a game is is
>>standalone? And ironically, the fact that the cinematics were ingame and
>>not video clips, is one significant difference that could be counted
>>against WCSO being an add-on.
> 
> 
> Hows that? The way I see it is that if it was an addon, this is the way they
> would make it. They couldnt afford to do video and even CGI so they simply
> did it in-game. The way Secret Ops appears is exactly the way I would expect
> an addon to look!
> 
> 
>>>rendered. It didnt have ANY prerendred CGI. I didnt have ANY character
>>>models and all the character interaction happened in flight, for example
>>>with a in-game graphical sequence showing your ship and the voices of
> 
> the
> 
>>>characters which you couldn't even see. There was no noticable
> 
> improvment on
> 
>>>the graphics, except improving and adding some additional weapons. The
> 
> ONLY
> 
>>Minor point...the flight engine was tweaked to allow better detail. But
>>we've already determined that the graphics alone do not an add-on make.
> 
> 
> I've already said that as well.

Yes, which is why I was agreeing with you.

>>>thing I think Secret Ops innovated was an improvement on character
>>>interaction in-game, which was welcomes but not enough for me to
> 
> consider it
> 
>>>a whole new game like Wc3, Wc4 and WcP are. All WC games, at least since
> 
> Wc2
> 
>>>have been very innovative, at least in the wing commander series anyway,
> 
> but
> 
>>>Secret Ops doesnt seem to provide anything additional that we didnt
> 
> already
> 
>>I vehemently disagree.
>>
>>
>>>see in Prophecy. If anything, it removed much because of their budget.
>>
>>No, much was removed because WCSO was a different kind of game.
> 
> 
>  They removed much becuase they couldnt afford to do anything, and thus to
> me it looked like an addon.
> 
> 
>>>Therefore I see Secret Ops as an Add-On to Prophecy than a totally new
> 
> game
> 
>>>that Prophecy was to Wing 4, for example. It was still fun to play, and
> 
> it
> 
>>>wasnt bad but I still see it as an addon.
>>
>>By definition, an add-on requires the base engine from a parent game.
>>This was not the case with WCSO. That notwithstanding...
> 
> 
> 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.

>>>>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.

>>- 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).

>>- 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.

>>- 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).

>>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.

> 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" and a mistaken idea 
that Origin didn't have any money. 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.

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

Ineedmoney wrote:

>>Maybe you shouldn't compare WC games as long as you don't know all of
>>them...
> Why do I have to? Ive played WC2, 3, 4 and Prophecy and Secret Ops... and I
> know how Secret Ops made me feel.

Well there you start... You do not know WC1 and its addons, which 
Prophecy tried to remake to some point. You also don't write if you have 
the addons to WC2? If not you don't have addons to any WC game, yet you 
compare Secret Ops to something. You also missed the awesome Privateer 1 
which is a real shame (WC4 and P1 are considered by far the best 2 WC 
games). P1 OTOH for example (and to a lesser extend WC1) does have its 
story very much delivered like Secret Ops does. You can count the 
rendered sequences on one hand, most story is delivered by talking heads 
with subtitles. You problem IS your lack of WC games as you only own 
those that either have filmed footage (WC3, WC4, WCP) or have extremely 
many rendered stuff like WC2. About every other game (besides Privateer 
2) in the WC universe that you don't have, would remind you much more of 
Secret Ops.

--
Why is a government worker like a shotgun with a broken firing pin?
It won't work and you can't fire it.

[Delete the karl after the @ to avoid my spam trap]

"Karl Frank" <karl@karl.frank.name> wrote in message
news:1070700529.122584@news.ainet.at...
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
> >>Maybe you shouldn't compare WC games as long as you don't know all of
> >>them...
> > Why do I have to? Ive played WC2, 3, 4 and Prophecy and Secret Ops...
and I
> > know how Secret Ops made me feel.
>
> Well there you start... You do not know WC1 and its addons, which
> Prophecy tried to remake to some point. You also don't write if you have
> the addons to WC2? If not you don't have addons to any WC game, yet you
> compare Secret Ops to something. You also missed the awesome Privateer 1
> which is a real shame (WC4 and P1 are considered by far the best 2 WC
> games). P1 OTOH for example (and to a lesser extend WC1) does have its
> story very much delivered like Secret Ops does. You can count the
> rendered sequences on one hand, most story is delivered by talking heads
> with subtitles. You problem IS your lack of WC games as you only own
> those that either have filmed footage (WC3, WC4, WCP) or have extremely
> many rendered stuff like WC2. About every other game (besides Privateer
> 2) in the WC universe that you don't have, would remind you much more of
> Secret Ops.

All fair points. But as a gamer, that admidtedly hasnt played all the Wing
Commander games, Secret Ops did make me feel like I was playing an addon. Do
I really have to justify my opinion anymore?

Ed

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Tt6dndwl8OcAhEyiRVn-tw@comcast.com...

<snip>

> > 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.

> >>- 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
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
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.

> >>- 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.

> >>- 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.

> >>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
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
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?

> > 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.

>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
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*.

Ed

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.

> 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...
======================================================

"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...
> ======================================================
>

Shot wrote:


> Small but key point here is the title itself. WCP Gold. Wing Commander

The name of the compilation is largely irrelevant. We're talking about 
the game itself, not the compilation package that came later.

> 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

Actually, I'd bet the vast majority of those who got WCSO got it as part 
of the episodic release, downloadable off the 'Net. In fact, many people 
got Prophecy Gold for the sole purpose of the new, vastly better manual.

> 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.

WCP Gold came about well after Origin decided to halt the series. It was 
really nothign more than an attempt to squeeze a bit more from the 
franchise. I'd bet that if there had been concrete plans to develop 
another CD-based, FMV game a la Prophecy, we never would have seen WCP 
Gold. Instead, we would have waited until the arc was complete and 
likely seen a Nephilim Saga or something of that nature.

That all said, your argument is not without some justification, but is 
rather weak. Certainly not enough, IMO, to offset all the other aspects 
which relate to the game being stand-alone.

> 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

Then you came across a magazine that improperly titled the game. It's 
proper name is "Wing Commander Secret Ops". Nowhere in the proper title 
is Prophecy mentioned.

> 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

Wrong. I type in "Secret Ops" in Google, and I get links to the official 
site (top spots), and Origin-recognized sites with information about the 
game. I type in "Prophecy Secret Ops", and all I see are non-sanctioned, 
third-party cheat sites, and a few no-name reviews.

> 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

I disagree. You can't have FMV in a downloadable game, and THAT was the 
biggest draw to WCSO -- it's episodic, downloadable nature.

> 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.

Sorry, but you offer conjecture, not proof. The key is that Secret 
Missions (WCI) and Special Operations (WCII) absoutely required the 
presence of the parent game on your computer in order to run. This is 
the definition of add-on. WCSO did not require WCP; it was developed 
from the get-go as a stand-alone game.

> 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.

See above. The official names does NOT include "Prophecy" in any way, 
shape, or form. Nor was it marketed as such from any reputable or 
sanctioned source.

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:sfadndiWvP8Gf0qiRVn-vg@comcast.com...

>
> I disagree. You can't have FMV in a downloadable game, and THAT was the
> biggest draw to WCSO -- it's episodic, downloadable nature.

<snip>

Thats the point isnt? If Origin were not in trouble financially how could
they justify removing so much FMV content in the game? Oh thats right,
release it on the Internet! Perfect, that way they could use the EXCUSE that
SO couldnt have FMV's because on how big they would be.

If Origin were not in trouble, they would have included FMV's and they would
have released it properly IF it was a standalone game to continue the Wing
Comander series.What they did was to release it in a unique but weird way,
but then use that "way" as an excuse for how the reason why they didn't film
any FMV's.

Your argument here is simply an excuse!! It was THEIR decision to release it
in the way they did, and if they had the money they would have released it
properly.


Ed

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:sfadndiWvP8Gf0qiRVn-vg@comcast.com...
>
> Shot wrote:
>
>
> > Small but key point here is the title itself. WCP Gold. Wing Commander
>
> The name of the compilation is largely irrelevant. We're talking about
> the game itself, not the compilation package that came later.


Well I know you are talking about SO, but it sure doesn't help your case
knowing that they packaged the two together as Prophecy Gold. In order to
have a compilation of anything a common thread must be there. In record
sales its the person, Billy Joel's Greatest Hits for example. You can then
focus it even more by saying Billy Joel's 70's hits. Common thread there is
the 70's. Common thread in the Kilrathi Saga were games that involved the
Kilrathi, which were 1,2, and 3. If your going to make a compilation
advertising 101 says get to the point in the title. You would not put
WingCommander4 in "The Kilrathi Saga". You just sum it up, and here the
summery of the compilation is Wing Commander Prophecy Gold Edition. I really
don't think that's an irrelevant point. I can't see why Origin would name
the compilation that if they thought SO was a completely separate game. Its
Wing Commander Prophecy, GOLD. Gold. Yes, you may have been talking about
the game itself, but I'm bringing this into the conversation. I think its a
good point. Don't peg me down as dead set just yet though, I see your points
too so keep reading ;)

>
> > 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
>
> Actually, I'd bet the vast majority of those who got WCSO got it as part
> of the episodic release, downloadable off the 'Net. In fact, many people
> got Prophecy Gold for the sole purpose of the new, vastly better manual.

I do agree with this, I didn't present this to you the way I wanted to. I
agree that the vast majority downloaded the game, however I am just saying
that I bet Origin planned from the beginning to "eventually" put this in a
package with Prophecy and make a couple bucks at least. I mean they did bump
the price right back up there when Gold Edition came out. The person that
already owned Prophecy probably wouldn't buy Gold Edition, but the person
that has not and sees this extra "completely independent game" with this
other completely independent game might be more inclined to buy it because
it would be looked at as two games for one. If you marketed it as "just an
add on" from the beginning then a person might be less inclined to buy the
compilation (although it would be more then just the stand alone Prophecy
game). I bought Prophecy and downloaded SO, so I can't speak of the Gold
manual. Though on a side-note I'm not sure that's a good enough reason to
pay $40 for a game you already have.
>
> > 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.
>
> WCP Gold came about well after Origin decided to halt the series. It was
> really nothign more than an attempt to squeeze a bit more from the
> franchise. I'd bet that if there had been concrete plans to develop
> another CD-based, FMV game a la Prophecy, we never would have seen WCP
> Gold. Instead, we would have waited until the arc was complete and
> likely seen a Nephilim Saga or something of that nature.


This could be true. I do remember reading at one time that there were plans
for at least 3 more games in the series. However I don't remember when I
read this. It was either right after Prophecy was released or when I saw the
review for SO (which by the way was indeed titled Wing Commander Prophecy SO
in the review and WCPSO or just SO for short). I know WCP Gold came out
after they halted the series but I'm not sure SO itself came out after
Origin axed it. Wasn't it made just a year after the game? If it was then it
was probably in production the same year Prophecy was released. I don't
believe Origin planned to cut the series off THAT soon after it was
released. So my theory that they were giving us something to chew on till
the next installment might still hold up, however you may be right. That
said I myself always WANTED some add ons to these games. I thought it was a
shame after Wing2 they never made any. Don't misread what I say about SO, I
LOVED IT! I'm not saying its a bad thing, im just saying I look at it as an
add on. I don't think that's a bad thing. I smiled when I read about this. I
thought from the beginning that it was an add on and it brought me back to
the Secret Missions and Special Operations of Wing1 and 2. I genuinely liked
the idea of an add on to a newer Wing Commander game.

>
> That all said, your argument is not without some justification, but is
> rather weak. Certainly not enough, IMO, to offset all the other aspects
> which relate to the game being stand-alone.
>
> > 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
>
> Then you came across a magazine that improperly titled the game. It's
> proper name is "Wing Commander Secret Ops". Nowhere in the proper title
> is Prophecy mentioned.

I will except this. I did note above that I indeed did see it written as
Wing Commander Prophecy Secret Ops and WCPSO for short. However I am willing
to concede that the game itself was not titled this. Which does kill my
point about the main game's title. It does not totally destroy my point on
the compilation title however. So on the main games title you got me, but I
still wouldn't say Origin would never falsely advertise a product.
Technically it is indeed i concede to you a different game. The things you
mentioned are indeed good reasons to call this Wing Commander 6 from a
technical standpoint. However I look at Origin and they too can quote this
stuff. If someone sued them for false advertising they could present what
you presented in court and they would win. I think Origin knew this well.
Its just a little advertising trick. They knew they couldn't get in troubled
for it so why market it as just an add on? But you have to ask yourself,
what did the game designers and people in charge think? Especially the
people in charge. I believe that they thought of this as an add on.
Technically you are right, its different enough to be called a new game...
but come on, that doesn't mean concretely in the "spirit" of things it is.
Just look around the room you are in now. I'm sure you could find a couple
of products that are made by many companies that are very similar. Maybe its
just a coke. Whos against coke? Pepsi. Cherry Coke, Cherry Pepsi, Vanilla
Coke, and Vanilla Pepsi. Coke came out with Vanilla flavor first. It was a
success. Then Pepsi did it. Look on the back and the ingredients are
different indeed. Just enough to get Pepsi off. They stole the idea, Coke
probably stole the idea too, but its different enough to be considered a
different product. In spirit Coke and Pepsi are the same thing. However
technically they are not. Secret Operations is technically a different game,
but I know im not sure if it was in spirit. Its not a bad thing to me
because I like the add on idea. If Origin creates a new Wing Commander and
call its Wing Commander 6 instead of 7, ill except that SO was a stand alone
game. Though you could even technically argue that Prophecy wasn't even Wing
Commander 5 because it wasn't called that. Almost a Privateer move to
distance itself a little.
>
> > 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
>
> Wrong. I type in "Secret Ops" in Google, and I get links to the official
> site (top spots), and Origin-recognized sites with information about the
> game. I type in "Prophecy Secret Ops", and all I see are non-sanctioned,
> third-party cheat sites, and a few no-name reviews.

Alright, I said that thinking at the time that the official title was WCPSO.
I concede that the "official" title is just SO and so a search would indeed
pull up the official sites.
>
> > 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
>
> I disagree. You can't have FMV in a downloadable game, and THAT was the
> biggest draw to WCSO -- it's episodic, downloadable nature.

I know that you can't have FMV in a downloadable game. I agree that it was a
very nice draw to this game. But it made me believe it was an add on. Again
I didn't think this was a bad thing, its just something I believed. Maybe
just the fact that there is an argument is reason enough to question. You
are right technically, you have great facts to support your opinion. I ask
though, can you find even one person who doubts Prophecy as a stand alone
game to Wing Commander 4? Wing Commander 2 to 1? Or 3 to 2? I don't think
ONE soul would doubt it, and that is the only "clear cut and indisputable"
thing with the title's. I didn't like how you (im sorry if it wasn't you)
approached this topic in the beginning. I believe you said something about
how you didn't believe anyone was arguing about how SO wasn't a stand-alone
game, that the facts proved this wrong. Maybe the facts do prove it wrong,
but at least in the spirit of things just the fact that its questioned by
anyone is enough reason to at least "look" at it and not dismiss it. I
remember a reputable gaming magazine at the time calling Wing4 wing
Commander 3 part 2, even despite the FACT that it was called Wing Commander
"4". You got to look at that. I looked at it. The gaming engine was indeed
the same, but I thought the story was so completely different from Wing3
that it was its own game. Then you had Prophecy which wasn't even called 5
and NO ONE questioned it being a completely separate title. It was obvious
and you didn't have to look into it to find out. If you have to quote things
to prove the game is different then its an add on. Even for Wing4 I didn't
have to quote anything to say it was a different game I just said the story
was completely different and that's it. There are things that are different
about SO but there are things that remind me strikingly of Prophecy and its
story in ways. When you have to defend the fact that its a stand alone
game... then maybe it really isn't one. Just look at that word, "stand
alone". Alone, no comparisons. You have your own little spot and no one is
near it. Just the fact that there are people that say this is an add on
taints the logic of this game standing alone. Kind of deep I guess.
>
> > 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.
>
> Sorry, but you offer conjecture, not proof. The key is that Secret
> Missions (WCI) and Special Operations (WCII) absoutely required the
> presence of the parent game on your computer in order to run. This is
> the definition of add-on. WCSO did not require WCP; it was developed
> from the get-go as a stand-alone game.

I know its conjecture. Its all I have to support my opinion because the
facts DO support yours. Doesn't mean im wrong though. I don't believe in
God, and its a fact that there is no proof that a God exists, its all
conjecture. People "guess" that the one little atom that started the big
bang couldn't have been created without a God. Its a guess, its conjecture,
its an opinion based on guesswork. It doesn't make them wrong, and that's an
atheist talking. I am firm believer in always supporting your opinion with
facts. However sometimes you cant do that. My favorite color is red. I do
not know why. I just like the color red. It is a "fact" that "I" think red
is the best color. That's about the only way I can put the word fact in an
opinion about a favorite color. On big things yes, always support it with
facts. You like President Bush, then you support your opinion that he is
good with facts of the things hes done. You think hes a horrible president,
then you support your opinion with facts about the things hes done. That is
"big" thing. I compare this debate on SO being Wing Commander 6 with a
individuals favorite color. Its about "feeling". Its all conjecture. I am
basing my opinion on my gut and then I give you scenarios evolving Origin
and how they felt. I have no idea how they felt, I can only guess. I did
look at the facts though so maybe im not completely horrible here. I looked
at the facts about release dates and a title of their compilation
collection. Look at Origins actions and ask yourself is it beyond a
reasonable doubt that this is a stand-alone game? I think there is a
reasonable doubt so its "for sure". Its not clear cut. There is reason to
doubt what Origin thought this was. Technically speaking this IS a
stand-alone game, your facts support your opinion. I loose there. However I
think I have a STRONG case on if this was in "essence" a stand alone game.
On that front I think I present a very good case. It's a case that cannot be
proven, but a "thinker" none the less I believe.
>
>>
> --
>
> *** 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...
> ======================================================
>

Ineedmoney wrote:
> "Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:sfadndiWvP8Gf0qiRVn-vg@comcast.com...
> 
> 
>>I disagree. You can't have FMV in a downloadable game, and THAT was the
>>biggest draw to WCSO -- it's episodic, downloadable nature.
> 
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Thats the point isnt? If Origin were not in trouble financially how could
> they justify removing so much FMV content in the game? Oh thats right,
> release it on the Internet! Perfect, that way they could use the EXCUSE that
> SO couldnt have FMV's because on how big they would be.

You sound like a broken record. Try, please to understand this: the 
decision to release an episodic game via the Internet was NOT an excuse. 
It was PLANNED that way from the beginning. There is no indication 
whatsover that Origin was in financial difficulty. The simple fact is 
that the space combat genre was no longer as viable as it had been, so 
Origin decided to try something different.

> If Origin were not in trouble, they would have included FMV's and they would
> have released it properly IF it was a standalone game to continue the Wing
> Comander series.What they did was to release it in a unique but weird way,
> but then use that "way" as an excuse for how the reason why they didn't film
> any FMV's.

There is no indication whatsover that Origin was in financial 
difficulty. The simple fact is that the space combat genre was no longer 
as viable as it had been, so Origin decided to try something different.

> Your argument here is simply an excuse!! It was THEIR decision to release it
> in the way they did, and if they had the money they would have released it
> properly.

"Properly" is subjective in this case.

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

Ineedmoney wrote:

> Thats the point isnt? If Origin were not in trouble financially how could
> they justify removing so much FMV content in the game? Oh thats right,
> release it on the Internet! Perfect, that way they could use the EXCUSE that
> SO couldnt have FMV's because on how big they would be.

Argh - that degree of twisted logic makes my head hurt in the morning.
I don't know how you came to the conclusion that Origin was in financial 
trouble (especially as WCP made them more profit then WC3 or WC4).
Can you say EXPERIMENT? To my knowledge SO is the only game that was 
ever released in this fashion (episode by episode over a two months 
timeframe). And at least for the players it also was a huge success 
IMHO. Never had there been so much conversation around a game as for SO 
in the WC community - simply because we had been forced to only play 
small parts instead of rushing through the whole thing in two days.

> If Origin were not in trouble, they would have included FMV's and they would
> have released it properly IF it was a standalone game to continue the Wing
> Comander series.What they did was to release it in a unique but weird way,
> but then use that "way" as an excuse for how the reason why they didn't film
> any FMV's.

How many percent of people had broadband when SO was released? How many 
of the last 10 space sims released feature FMV? How many of ALL games 
released last year use FMV? How did the profit of the whole industry 
develop over the last 2-3 years?
(Hint:
Very very few, especially outside the USA
0
I don't know any, but certainly few
Dramatic rise in profits, surpassing the movie business AFAIK)

Oh, and BTW: I can name at least one other space sim that was first 
distributed for free and now is in the shelves as full retail version!
Halcyon Sun... No it also doesn't have FMV, so don't bother buying it.

--
Q: How many Gill Bateses does it take to change a light bulb?
A: One. He puts the bulb in and lets the world revolve around him.

[Delete the karl after the @ to avoid my spam trap]

"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:S9ednRNNd8XDs0SiRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
>
>
> Ineedmoney wrote:
> > "Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:sfadndiWvP8Gf0qiRVn-vg@comcast.com...
> >
> >
> >>I disagree. You can't have FMV in a downloadable game, and THAT was the
> >>biggest draw to WCSO -- it's episodic, downloadable nature.
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Thats the point isnt? If Origin were not in trouble financially how
could
> > they justify removing so much FMV content in the game? Oh thats right,
> > release it on the Internet! Perfect, that way they could use the EXCUSE
that
> > SO couldnt have FMV's because on how big they would be.
>
> You sound like a broken record. Try, please to understand this: the
> decision to release an episodic game via the Internet was NOT an excuse.
> It was PLANNED that way from the beginning. There is no indication
> whatsover that Origin was in financial difficulty. The simple fact is
> that the space combat genre was no longer as viable as it had been, so
> Origin decided to try something different.

You dont seem to understand. I KNOW it was planned, and now I KNOW they were
not in financial difficulty except both of which leads me to suspect it was
always an addon for Prophecy, a precursor to the next FULL WingCommander
game. It was free, thus allowing everyone to get it... to make people aware
that hadent played the games of Wing Commander. It was then released WITH
Prophecy with almost the same graphics on the box. None of this is what I
would expect if its a stand alone game (like Wing 3, 4 and WcP), with a
company that is not in  financial trouble!

> > If Origin were not in trouble, they would have included FMV's and they
would
> > have released it properly IF it was a standalone game to continue the
Wing
> > Comander series.What they did was to release it in a unique but weird
way,
> > but then use that "way" as an excuse for how the reason why they didn't
film
> > any FMV's.
>
> There is no indication whatsover that Origin was in financial

You've made that clear, which now only strengthens my belief as I see no
good reason for them to treat SO the way they did, UNLESS it was an addon.

> difficulty. The simple fact is that the space combat genre was no longer
> as viable as it had been, so Origin decided to try something different.

So they didnt think they would make enough money off it? Isnt that the same
as 'not being able to afford FMV's', like I said at the beginning?

> > Your argument here is simply an excuse!! It was THEIR decision to
release it
> > in the way they did, and if they had the money they would have released
it
> > properly.
>
> "Properly" is subjective in this case.

'Properly', in the sense that every other game gets released.

Ed

"Karl Frank" <karl@karl.frank.name> wrote in message
news:1071218416.375549@news.ainet.at...
> Ineedmoney wrote:
>
> > Thats the point isnt? If Origin were not in trouble financially how
could
> > they justify removing so much FMV content in the game? Oh thats right,
> > release it on the Internet! Perfect, that way they could use the EXCUSE
that
> > SO couldnt have FMV's because on how big they would be.
>
> Argh - that degree of twisted logic makes my head hurt in the morning.
> I don't know how you came to the conclusion that Origin was in financial
> trouble (especially as WCP made them more profit then WC3 or WC4).
> Can you say EXPERIMENT? To my knowledge SO is the only game that was
> ever released in this fashion (episode by episode over a two months
> timeframe). And at least for the players it also was a huge success
> IMHO. Never had there been so much conversation around a game as for SO
> in the WC community - simply because we had been forced to only play
> small parts instead of rushing through the whole thing in two days.

...Im entirely sure  you understood my point.

> > If Origin were not in trouble, they would have included FMV's and they
would
> > have released it properly IF it was a standalone game to continue the
Wing
> > Comander series.What they did was to release it in a unique but weird
way,
> > but then use that "way" as an excuse for how the reason why they didn't
film
> > any FMV's.
>
> How many percent of people had broadband when SO was released? How many
> of the last 10 space sims released feature FMV? How many of ALL games
> released last year use FMV? How did the profit of the whole industry
> develop over the last 2-3 years?
> (Hint:
> Very very few, especially outside the USA
> 0
> I don't know any, but certainly few
> Dramatic rise in profits, surpassing the movie business AFAIK)

So WingCommander has to be like every other game? FMV's had become a staple
of WingCommander after Wing3 and something I for one looked forward to.

> Oh, and BTW: I can name at least one other space sim that was first
> distributed for free and now is in the shelves as full retail version!
> Halcyon Sun... No it also doesn't have FMV, so don't bother buying it.

Oh yea that game. First of all, YES it did in fact have FMV's. They were
with in-game graphics I'll grant you, but at least you could see characters
instead of just a ship with voices in the background. SO was much more fun
than Halcyon Sun which I actually took back to the shop to get my money
back. It was released, with the copy I bought anyway, with some low budget
SCI-FI cable film, which was a lot more entertaining than the terrible game
that it came with. I had high standards when I compared it to Wing
Commander, after all. And Im pretty sure if the makers of Halcyon Sun had a
bigger budget they would have made FMV's.

Ed

"Ineedmoney" <mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:brciib$g68$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Karl Frank" <karl@karl.frank.name> wrote in message
> news:1071218416.375549@news.ainet.at...
> > Ineedmoney wrote:
> >
> > > Thats the point isnt? If Origin were not in trouble financially how
> could
> > > they justify removing so much FMV content in the game? Oh thats right,
> > > release it on the Internet! Perfect, that way they could use the
EXCUSE
> that
> > > SO couldnt have FMV's because on how big they would be.
> >
> > Argh - that degree of twisted logic makes my head hurt in the morning.
> > I don't know how you came to the conclusion that Origin was in financial
> > trouble (especially as WCP made them more profit then WC3 or WC4).
> > Can you say EXPERIMENT? To my knowledge SO is the only game that was
> > ever released in this fashion (episode by episode over a two months
> > timeframe). And at least for the players it also was a huge success
> > IMHO. Never had there been so much conversation around a game as for SO
> > in the WC community - simply because we had been forced to only play
> > small parts instead of rushing through the whole thing in two days.
>
> ...Im entirely sure  you understood my point.

"NOT" entirely sure. I meant to say.

Ed

Ineedmoney wrote:

> So WingCommander has to be like every other game? FMV's had become a staple
> of WingCommander after Wing3 and something I for one looked forward to.

No, it hasn't but you cannot ignore where the whole industry is heading 
when looking at Wing Commander. And the industry has spoken against FMV.

> Oh yea that game. First of all, YES it did in fact have FMV's. They were
> with in-game graphics I'll grant you, but at least you could see characters
> instead of just a ship with voices in the background.

Which is merely an artistic difference. Some of SO's cutscenes had been 
pretty cool IMHO.

> SO was much more fun
> than Halcyon Sun which I actually took back to the shop to get my money
> back.

So the seriously crippeled game without FMW is better then the one which 
is. As I said earlier - you have a bad basis for comparision with your 
set of WC games. Try comparing SO to the games you miss or to any other 
space sim on the market.

> It was released, with the copy I bought anyway, with some low budget
> SCI-FI cable film, which was a lot more entertaining than the terrible game
> that it came with. I had high standards when I compared it to Wing
> Commander, after all. And Im pretty sure if the makers of Halcyon Sun had a
> bigger budget they would have made FMV's.

Well I got it for free (well actually I had to 'pay' by watching ads at 
freeloader), so I am not complaining. It is still better then Freespace 
in my book however.

--
"Why is it that when we talk to God we're said to
be praying, but when God talks to us we're schizophrenic?"
                                                Lily Tomlin

[Delete the karl after the @ to avoid my spam trap]

Ineedmoney wrote:

>>You sound like a broken record. Try, please to understand this: the
>>decision to release an episodic game via the Internet was NOT an excuse.
>>It was PLANNED that way from the beginning. There is no indication
>>whatsover that Origin was in financial difficulty. The simple fact is
>>that the space combat genre was no longer as viable as it had been, so
>>Origin decided to try something different.
> 
> 
> You dont seem to understand. I KNOW it was planned, and now I KNOW they were
> not in financial difficulty except both of which leads me to suspect it was
> always an addon for Prophecy, a precursor to the next FULL WingCommander

I just don't see how planning a different delivery method, and not being 
in financial difficulty leads to WCSO being an add-on. There's no logic 
there.

> game. It was free, thus allowing everyone to get it... to make people aware
> that hadent played the games of Wing Commander. It was then released WITH
> Prophecy with almost the same graphics on the box. None of this is what I

Which I explained in an earlier post. Had the series not been canceled, 
it's very likely that we wouldn't have seen Prophecy Gold. We probably 
would have seen a "Nephilim Saga" or something of that nature once the 
games of that conflict were completed.

The fact that WCSO was packaged with WCP, and the compilation was called 
Prophecy Gold, means little if anything.

> would expect if its a stand alone game (like Wing 3, 4 and WcP), with a
> company that is not in  financial trouble!

[snip]

>>There is no indication whatsover that Origin was in financial
> 
> 
> You've made that clear, which now only strengthens my belief as I see no
> good reason for them to treat SO the way they did, UNLESS it was an addon.

Again, there's no logic in that belief.

>>difficulty. The simple fact is that the space combat genre was no longer
>>as viable as it had been, so Origin decided to try something different.
> 
> 
> So they didnt think they would make enough money off it? Isnt that the same
> as 'not being able to afford FMV's', like I said at the beginning?

No, don't try to read between lines that aren't there. WCSO was 
developed and released before Origin decided to stop the series; its 
nature had nothing to do with finances or discontinuing the series. 
However, Prophecy Gold DID come after the cessation of the series, 
likely to squeeze a last little bit out of it. Mutually exclusive 
situations.

>>>Your argument here is simply an excuse!! It was THEIR decision to
> 
> release it
> 
>>>in the way they did, and if they had the money they would have released
> 
> it
> 
>>>properly.
>>
>>"Properly" is subjective in this case.
> 
> 
> 'Properly', in the sense that every other game gets released.

Sigh. I think I'm through discussing this with you. You just keep going 
around in circles, ignoring common logic, and making stuff up as you go. 
It's not worth it. You think WCSO is an add-on to Prophecy, fine, that's 
your perogative. Obviously no amount of evidence to the contrary is 
going to sway you.

-- 

*** 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...
======================================================

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:31:08 -0000, "Ineedmoney"
<mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:kuadnXyg_LcWB1eiRVn-jg@comcast.com...
>> Oh, Lord, here we go again. Secret Ops was a stand-alone game, and
>> therefore is not "pt2" of anything.
>
>But it "feels" like an addon. You cant argue with that, can you?

   It doesn't feel like an addon.. It's a full size full fledged
campaign, new ships and items, everything.

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 01:42:17 -0000, "Ineedmoney"
<mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"Kevin Scholl" <kscholl@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:qbednZQvcP6V-FCiRVn-sw@comcast.com...

>> Actually ... yes, I can. Didn't feel any more an add-on than WCIV felt
>> like an add-on to WCIII. That is to say, not really at all.
>
>No I felt WcIV was a definite sequel. It had a much larger scope in terms of
>the much larger movie sequences and obvious budget increase the way the game
>play was structured. WC4 provided a much better illusion of being able to
>determine your destiny than Wc3 had for me. Wc4 certainly felt like a
>sequel.
>
>If Wc4 had removed all video. No CGI. Didnt try and create ingame movies
>with character interaction.9I dont want to just hear their voices) If they
>failed to innovate any, or hardly any (I cant think of anything stunning)
>new gameplay features... just stuff like that... I would have thought it
>looked like an addon.

   WC4 wasn't any more innovative than WC3 though.  They made it in
record time, just like SO, and lots of the innovative stuff never made
it.  It's pretty much the same core game as the one before it, just
another campaign, just like Secret Ops.

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 01:54:16 -0000, "Ineedmoney"
<mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"Karl Frank" <karl@karl.frank.name> wrote:
>> Well there you start... You do not know WC1 and its addons, which
>> Prophecy tried to remake to some point. You also don't write if you have
>> the addons to WC2? If not you don't have addons to any WC game, yet you
>> compare Secret Ops to something. You also missed the awesome Privateer 1
>> which is a real shame (WC4 and P1 are considered by far the best 2 WC
>> games). P1 OTOH for example (and to a lesser extend WC1) does have its
>> story very much delivered like Secret Ops does. You can count the
>> rendered sequences on one hand, most story is delivered by talking heads
>> with subtitles. You problem IS your lack of WC games as you only own
>> those that either have filmed footage (WC3, WC4, WCP) or have extremely
>> many rendered stuff like WC2. About every other game (besides Privateer
>> 2) in the WC universe that you don't have, would remind you much more of
>> Secret Ops.
>
>All fair points. But as a gamer, that admidtedly hasnt played all the Wing
>Commander games, Secret Ops did make me feel like I was playing an addon. Do
>I really have to justify my opinion anymore?

   If you're going to debate it, then yes.  If you're just stating your
opinion, then you wouldn't be still talking about it.  Knowledge of the
size and scope of other addons in the WC universe is critical when
evaluating Secret Ops.