Topic: Which SFC game is your favorite?

[WindFire]

Quote:


Kieran, op was what the community made it. there were by far more bugs with eaw than when op came out. this was a conscience decision by many in the eaw community to snub op.  there might be a bug or two left in op, but nothing that could be over come if people wanted to embrace it and use it - but they decided not to. the decision to dump op was purely political. of course what i find funny to some degree is that op is more sfb like than eaw ranging from maulers to k-fx arcs. <shrug>

 

I would be curious to see how you think people can overcome the DV interaction issues caused by the cartel map and some of the other critical issues with the OP D2.  There was a decent size following that played OP D2 that enjoyed it very much, but were and are continually frustrated by the bugs that have not been fixed.

Windfire  

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Nannerslug: /quote "The sky is green." /end quote

Pointless.

Have a nice day!

 

[LongTooth]

Well I voted for OP
But in another thread it seems that even to there will be a new pacth for op(after the long wait) it will not fix the D2 problems
Frankly I think this stinks op was never given a chance and now due to its age its not going to get one
I liked sfc3 but apart from the cloak and how the D3 works  its nothing new if any thing its less
Having just 4 races in it was a bad idea (imho) if they relese an add on for sfc3 I hope its going to add more races and weapons
Playing op online (D2 ) is pointless till its fixed its a shame as rooks3 was the best campaine I ever played in

[Whiplash]

If you remove the online gameplay context, OP is a superior game all the way to EAW. There is NOTHING to recommend EAW over OP. OP has absolutely everything EAW does and more. If you don't like Advanced era, you need not play with them.

Its only the popularity of the EAW online that made it a more attractive game, and we all know why that is, but its not the fault of the game itself, only the politics surrounding it.

W.
 

[Kieran Forester]

Of course there's more mainstream Trek than there is SFB. Trek is a cultural phenomenon. SFB is a wargame, and wargames don't appeal to nearly as many people as does mainstream Trek.  However, the ruleset has been tried and true for about 20 or 30 years, which gives it an advantage over the made from scratch mechanics of other Trek games. I simply think that SFB is the right way to go for the SFC series.

As for EAW vs OP, I honestly am not sure what you're talking about. I never 'snubbed' OP, nor did anyone that I know. It was more a decision of necessity than of politics, due to the fact that EAW was always patched and fixed up before OP. There may have been fewer overall bugs in OP at release time than in EAW, but as far as I remember, OP's D2 was the same piece of software, with the same bugs, as EAW D2.Heck, there are bugs in OP's D2 that were fixed ages ago in EAW's. You could be right, I suppose, but you can't speak for all of the D2 community when you say it.

And sure, a Trek game doesn't need SFB to be good. Look at Elite Force and Bridge Commander. Two great games without a shred of SFB in them anywhere. As I said above, however, I think SFB is the right way to go for SFC. Sales of SFC3 agree with me.

I'm looking at the facts, too, and I know just as well what makes a good game. I'm not sure what you mean, however, by your comment about background and demographics. What does that have to do with anything?

Thanks,
Kieran

[FatherTed]

Quote:
If you remove the online gameplay context, OP is a superior game all the way to EAW. There is NOTHING to recommend EAW over OP. OP has absolutely everything EAW does and more. If you don't like Advanced era, you need not play with them.

A functional D2 is why EAW is king of SFC2. And Advanced era(particulary 2X) is Wisconsin's finest.  

Quote:
Its only the popularity of the EAW online that made it a more attractive game, and we all know why that is, but its not the fault of the game itself, only the politics surrounding it.

W.
 

I'm curious, how would politics have anything to do with the fact that the OP Dynaverse doesn't work? I think I can safely say that the majority of D2 pilots would move to OP if they ever fix it, simply because of the possibilities it offers.  

[Karnak]

EAW.

 

[NannerSlug]

Quote:
A functional D2 is why EAW is king of SFC2. And Advanced era(particulary 2X) is Wisconsin's finest.  <snip>

I'm curious, how would politics have anything to do with the fact that the OP Dynaverse doesn't work? I think I can safely say that the majority of D2 pilots would move to OP if they ever fix it, simply because of the possibilities it offers.    

simple ted... a) there are ways of removing the x ships without making a downloadable shiplist. simple fix. b) at the time op had a more stable d2 while there are issues with pirates, etc that does not make it perfect. c) politics involved very heavily with op regarding d2 campaigns, black balling due to said x ships (which could have been removed), "magic photons" or what ever excuse..  in addition to the e word (effort). As with any game OP was (or was not) what we made it.

just ask some of the d2 server ops running campaigns at the height of op/eaw.

[Scipio_66]

Quote:

simple ted... a) there are ways of removing the x ships without making a downloadable shiplist. simple fix.

Removing x-ships accomplishes nothing. You can take out all the x ships you want and the OP dynaverse still simply does not work.  The cartel map interaction bugs kill it cold.  If Articfire patches the dynaverse then maybe something can be made of it.  Until then........

-S'Cipio

 

[FireSoul]

Quote:
Removing x-ships accomplishes nothing. You can take out all the x ships you want and the OP dynaverse still simply does not work.  The cartel map interaction bugs kill it cold.  If Articfire patches the dynaverse then maybe something can be made of it.  Until then........
 

Should this poll be re-posted once OP D2 fixes are public?
-- Luc

[NannerSlug]

look Scipi.. the point is simple.. if you want make somthing work bad enough you over look all the pimples and make it work. such is the case for *anything*.

back when OP was released, or shortly thereafter, things could have been done to resolve situations. look at sfcx and how they have advanced OP (or all the other servers ranging from the triangle to slave girls to rook's tavern). so to say that the OP dyanverse is unplayable is not true at all. the truth is - it just was not politically correct in some circles for what ever reason and never recieved the full support from the community which it deserved.

of course what made me laugh is how many of people who wanted to play *only* eaw and not buy op wanted all the toys of OP patched into EAW (minus the x ships in most cases).

so, in short.. if people really wanted to support OP - instead of finding reasons why it didnt work - they would have made it work - just like it is in EAW (still).

for what its worth - that does not take away from the issues/ problems which do exsist. it does, however, reflect the nature of a deeper problem.

[Cleaven]

Who cares about the X-ships? I don't go near them in GSA and once a working D2 is available you can bet the first thing some of the admins with EAW experience would do is moderate them a tad, but to say

"there are issues with pirates, etc that does not make it perfect."

is a bit of an understatement.

And I keep forgetting about that Fed speed bug thing too. Now that was a political stick of dynamite I must admit. No level of D2 map interaction fixing could have saved the outcome of that either.

So it's still down to OP being a game which is 98% good (excellent even) except for the 2% bit which is essential to D2 and which is currently floating in the fish tank with it's ventral fins in the air.  

[Toasty0]

Quote:

Quote:
Removing x-ships accomplishes nothing. You can take out all the x ships you want and the OP dynaverse still simply does not work.  The cartel map interaction bugs kill it cold.  If Articfire patches the dynaverse then maybe something can be made of it.  Until then........
 

Should this poll be re-posted once OP D2 fixes are public?
-- Luc  

I'm not sure. I think to comment now would possibly invoke the Hiesenburg(sp--I know I mangled that one) effect.

Best,
Jerry  

[FireSoul]

Quote:
I'm not sure. I think to comment now would possibly invoke the Hiesenburg(sp--I know I mangled that one) effect.

Explain? I am not familiar with that name.

-- Luc

[Cleaven]

Heissenberg Uncertainty is a product of quantum theory and essentially states that it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of an atomic particle, because the act of observing one changes the other.      

[FireSoul]

Ah.. that one. Ok.

-- Luc

[Karnak]

Quote:
  Originally posted by Nanner:
last time ajtk.. my only point in responding to you is simply this: there were many factors to why sfc3 has not sold as well as people had hopped - you cannot pin it on any single thing. just as if i were to sit here and say (if sfc3 was successful) that the sole reason for its success was the rule change. that just is not true. most people bought/buy sfc because a) its trek and b) its the best game out there pitting trek ships against each other. it really is that simple.

Games like Battlefield 1942 were voted PCGamer's game of the year for 2002.  They did not need a movie to help it along.  Similarly, Ensemble Studios has sold a gazillion copies of their RTS Age of Empires series with their latest version, Age of Mythology, bringing in sizeable revenuse to bulge Microsoft's coffers.  Why?  Because, Bill Gates stuck with the same basic RTS formula for all the games.  Even LucasArts paid for the rights to use AoE's RTS model for its Clone War campaign game last summer. This is why Age of Empires series lives on even after doing 3 releases in,  I think, 4 years, about the same time period of the SFC series.  You build a niche product that sells and you stick with it.  This is  why MS never needed demos to get people excited about their games.  I certainly don't remember a demo for AoM.

Quote:
Originally posted by Nanner:
See.. if rule sets where the ONLY reason for sfc rise/fall, then you fail to talk about is the success/ lack of financial success of Orion Pirates. It was a stand alone expansion pack which actually comes to the closest to emulating sfb.. i do not see many people playing it while it is superior to eaw in every aspect.

regarding marketing, etc.. it could have been bill shatner or patrick stewart and it probably would have flopped - period. this goes much deeper than what you think.

that said, however, if you were to do your marketing research - you will find that the people with demographics lean toward the tng - like it or not. i am by far a tmp person more than tng (do not try to equate tng/tos with sfb/nonsfb rule sets - that is false.. im talking about trek - not rule sets) and i even realize it.

if you stick your head outside of this community and look around at other games and what takes to drive/ build them - it is simple economics that regardless of what rule set, there are issues. (there are more people playing total annihilation now than sfc2 - and TA came out a couple of years before sfc2 - and thats not talking about games like rainbow 6 or even mech warrior 3 or 4).

finally.. its not so much being antisfb as it is saying that things can be improved on.. if that is antisfb - then hey, ill wear that badge proudly simply because sfb is not sacred scripture or text. its an evolving rule set which may work great for pen and paper stuff.. but many, many things change or need to be changed.. or can be improved on with the use of a computer.

if you like 100% pure sfb straight up with no adaptations, then i do recommend www.sfbonline.com (i think thats it). the fact remains, that even with sfc1/2/op, there is more different with it and sfb than similar. why? because the game is of realtime nature.

one last thing about this "poll" regarding scientific and nonscientific..  i would say that this forum represents a skewed segment of the population - just as most any forum does. this is a fact, not opinion. so before anyone takes anything from it- i would caution against it. that would be regardless of the results.

so ajtk - please vent your anger some where else.  the "fact" is, there are many, many things that effect the situation.

 

Excuses made to hide the problem will never solve the problem.  Based on your track record in the CIC regarding Drone-G rack/SFC3 issues, and, on these forums, you have yet to grasp this principle.    

[jdmckinney]

I posted this elsewhere in response to something Nanner mentioned regarding OP. I think it has some weight in this thread, as well.

---------------------------

OP's status is not solely due to "politics." If the D2 had gotten reasonable patches (show of progress, not full-fledged perfection), people would likely have stuck with it. At one point, there were 3 "major" servers trying to share players and schedule around each other: The Triangle, Slave Girls, and Rook's Tavern. The admins were making headway, but most of the time the campaigns would degenerate into flamefests because of the speed bug and the inability to reliably take and defend territory. This has not changed one bit in a year.

Off topic: why is it apparently such a sore spot with Taldren when OP's D2 comes up (or an ignored topic, at least)? Is it that they feel unjustly ridiculed for the lack of D2 fixes? Is it that some of the criticisms, though harsh, are spot-on about Taldren dropping the ball and failing to keep a promise? Is it that they just don't want to discuss a dead project? Let's get to the heart of this ugly thing. If there were progress being made on OP D2, people wouldn't feel the need to bring it up. Can we at least agree that more could have been done? Is there any hope more WILL be done?

"Politics" aren't the real problem with OP. X-ships can't be blamed for everything, though they were certainly a lighting rod. People bashed SFC3 much the same as they did OP, yet people are enjoying it. OP has a set of major flaws that need to be addressed. Until then, it can't be fairly judged as a success or failure. I, for one, am convinced it has a dedicated following based on the reactions to the OP+ shiplist and Evil Dave missions, yet almost universally everyone says they don't play it because of the D2 bugs. There's more potential there if only the D2 got some decent attention.

------------------------------

That said, I think OP would have sold more copies if its D2 had been fixed inside of a year. I am certain a number of people who adopted a "wait and see" attitude about it, much as they have with SFC3, would have ended up buying OP if its D2 could support the sorts of campaigns people want to play. That's one thing I think Taldren and/or their publishers have failed miserably at: looking at what is popular in D2 campaigns and enhancing those aspects for OP and SFC3. In many ways, D3 is a step back in that respect, even while it steps forward in others.

[NannerSlug]

you have some good points nomad.. i think that several are valid - however i do believe deep down that it was those lighting rods or excuses which some people used as political whipping post to not support OP and do what ever. i remember the discussion very vividly about why some people would "never touch op" (many were are the same who oppose sfc3 in many form) - even though at the time of release the code base was by far more stable. remember all the post about the community splitting and what not?

some people can argue that op being a stand alone could have effected the end result.. but again, like battlefield 1942 or spearhead (Both were stand alone expansion packs to a degree - yes, you had to have the older copy - but the installation and price of these expansion packs were the same as the game its self) prove other wise that the business model can work.

who knows.. maybe there is somthing for the sales of op which none of us know or understand about it. i do know that within the sfc realm that as with any game - you make it what you want it to be. i believe that if people wanted to make op work (just as you and the other people who ran op campaigns did), it could have happened. (that is where the politics comes in)

one other issue about the whole OP patch process.. taldren was working on sfc3 during the last few months.. anyone think that their efforts were on patching and developing sfc3 and that the op patch had to be on hold until sfc3 was to a certain point? that is my bet regarding taldren.

finally, karnak - the reality of the matter is i understand the process about g-racks, etc  too well. i understand the implications of what many were trying to pull in the name of sfb. (hence my problem with rules lawyers)

[DiggityDank]

Quote:
finally, karnak - the reality of the matter is i understand the process about g-racks, etc  too well. i understand the implications of what many were trying to pull in the name of sfb. (hence my problem with rules lawyers)  

LOL, the king of the instigators talks of other folks 'pulling' stuff...
Oh My Freakin' God that is too funny!