Topic: Why there could be an SFC4!! Look at Starsiege 2845!!!

[GE-Raven]

Quote:
*yawn*
 
my "disdain" is for the arrogance of *some* indiivduals and the slapping down anyone who expresses opposition to those ideas.

Especially when the facts support such individuals...  Sorry Nanner... but to say SFB is not "trek" is like saying apple pie is not apples.

SFB started with trek and made a pie.  SFC 1 started with SFB and made another cobbler.

To attempt to say one is and one is not based on trek is pretty sketchy logic.  Is SFC closer to "TV and Movie Trek" Thank SFB.  Of course... it was allowed to be.  Was every starting point of the concept founded on SFB?  Yeah I think that is pretty obvious.

SFC would not be here without SFB, period.

GE-Raven
Non-SFB player  

[Merlinfmct87]

Quote:
*yawn*
 
my "disdain" is for the arrogance of *some* indiivduals and the slapping down anyone who expresses opposition to those ideas.

If you are that sick and tired about people bitching about SFC3 not being up to snuff, what in blazes are you doing here? You certainly haven't gotten warm praise and sympathy, you've had your butt chewed out(top notch job here btw).

You don't like SFC OP? Fine.

We do.

We like Complexity.

You obviously don't. Simple as that. I see no reason to make this personal. You play your games, we will play ours, and we will voice our opinions, but that above post is simply childish and moronic. I'd expect more from a two-year-old.  

[FPF_TraceyG]

Quote:
the A model is not an x-ship. SFB is roughly based on trek cannon. klingons have always had disruptors (shooting that green stuff at the enterprise) and the Enterprise has always shot phasers and photons back.  klingons and romulans never had phasers (let alone phaser 1s, 2s and 3s).

this is not a bad thing. i am simply making the distinction between the two sfb is in its own right somthing seperate. this is a major cause (at least for me) of a lot of grief. that is one thing that sfc3 does have going for it is that at least its weapons are very close to trek.

again, that is not saying that one has a game play advantage over the other. simply that they are different.  

Actually, again I must point out an innaccuracy here. During TOS, the script writer's guide used and compiled by directors for the show described the Klingon Battlecruiser as bristling with phasers, but were never actually shown to be firing in the show itself. ADB nevertheless attempted to stick to the original cannon material (as I pointed out above) and based on the script writer's guide, the Enterprise really should have been no match at all for a D7 Battlecruiser. In game terms, ADB resolved this inconsistancy by creating different types of phasers, eg Ph-I, Ph-II, Ph-III.

[FPF_TraceyG]

I might add one more interesting point here, the term "D7 Battlecruiser" was never used in the original television show at all and its first official reference to being called as such was within Starfleet Battles and is a creation by fans.
The term was later picked up by Paramount.

[nx_adam_1701]

I love phasers, but If only I had a green one, I wouldnt complain so much about it in the game, then the roms and klinks can have all the green phasers they want lol, it just doesnt feel right when I see klinks and rommies fire orange beams at ships


adam out

[J. Carney]

I can't argue with that...  

[red_green]

Quote:
I thought I would counter Red Green's bogus thread "Why there will never be an SFC4".

It's baffling why Red Green would slam SFB fans since they are mostly the only one's left supporting the SFC series and even bothering to post here.

I
You have SFB fans mostly to thank for that............Red Green.  
     

yadda, yadda

 Its fun to bash SFB players cause they take this so seriously  Plus I think just as many people play SFC3 as OP. They just don't post here. I believe that SFC3 players are made up of a younger crowd who tend to just download ships/mods and play. They still realize there playing a game  The SFB base is older, made up of people that like to play a complicated game, whoop someones azz, then come here and brag about it. The SFB fan thinks that SFB isbased on reality  

Just funning here- maybe we can somehow find something in common-wait I know StarTrek.

[nx_adam_1701]

Thanks lol, it wouldnt be so much of a big deal, in my opinion, if the game was more modable than it is now, Im not complaining, because it is much better than it was before, but you still cant create weapons, or atleast copy them, change the damage, stuff, assign a texture and a sound and thats it, lol sounds to good to be true, that way everyone could have the TNG and there SFB all in one, shoot I dont care if the romulans or klingons have phasers, put them on, but make it green, different sound, than its ok, but its like giving everybody the same stuff over and over, no variety, i believe who ever created SFB didnt intended it to be like this, maybe its simplier to have everyone call all phaser beams phasers, but not all alien empires have the same weapons, swapping them back and forth, this is why I think so many people beef about SFB, they think its totally not like the TV show ans stuff, I bet if they were allowed to do it SFB, the klingons would have loads of kooler weapons instead of having the same old Disruptors and photons, and BTW the only episode in where a klingon fire a photon was in TMP movies, I never saw one do it after that in the series, only pulse disruptors, I hope you SFB fans do get it your way in the future, I would love to see how it works out

adam out

[nx_adam_1701]

 

[Crimmy]

Quote:
yadda, yadda

 Its fun to bash SFB players cause they take this so seriously  Plus I think just as many people play SFC3 as OP. They just don't post here. I believe that SFC3 players are made up of a younger crowd who tend to just download ships/mods and play. They still realize there playing a game  The SFB base is older, made up of people that like to play a complicated game, whoop someones azz, then come here and brag about it. The SFB fan thinks that SFB isbased on reality  

Just funning here- maybe we can somehow find something in common-wait I know StarTrek.  

Yes...a common interest in trek is a great baseline...

And if your first post had been in this tone....I'm sure peeps wouldnt have jumped all over it  

The demographics for 1,2, and OP are different than 3.....but then that was part of the goal...to reach a different crowd....

New blood is never a bad thing as far as revenue is concerned...as far as community is concerned...it can be a mixed bag....

To clarify...ALL trek is fantasy based.....no one part is any more "real" than any other part...

Hard core Trek fans cant even agree to what "canon" even is....

The Trek universe is comprised of....

The pilot
The Original Series
The Motion Pictures
The Next Generation
Deep Spase 9
VOYager
ENTerprise
The animated series
The novel series
The comics series
The console game realm
The PC realm

AND I will argue come hell or high water...Star Fleet Battles

PLUS I believe there was an obscure spin off having to do with the Starfleet academy

There are Trek fans of each.....and some of most.....BUT extremely rare is the fan of ALL....

The "purist" claims "If it wasnt shown in TOS or on film or DIRECTLY approved by Gene....its not "canon"

But the Trek purist is in denial.....

Even the "canon" Trek universe (if you accept the purists definition) is not consistant...and often...contradicts itself...

IMHO....ANYTHING either blessed or endorsed by Paramount is canon...because Paramount OWNS the intellectual property....and YES...that means ANYTHING Trek is canon...including SFC...and because SFC is 90% SFB..AND approved by Paramount...it is ALSO "canon"

Again...It's simply a fool's arguement to claim that one part of this fantasy universe is "more real" than any other part...because it's ALL fantasy....

But poking another type of fan with a stick and claiming superiority is the surest way to start a flame war...on ANY trek fan forum....


   

[EmeraldEdge]

Quote:
if the game was more modable than it is now, Im not complaining, because it is much better than it was before, but you still cant create weapons, or atleast copy them, change the damage, stuff, assign a texture and a sound and thats it, lol sounds to good to be true, that way everyone could have the TNG and there SFB all in one

You know, I remember way back when, there were a number of "construction set" games.  I think EA made one called the "Adventure Construction Set" or something like that where it gave all the tools to make an RPG, you made your own map, placed NPC's gave them text, placed items, etc.  

I wonder how it would sell, if they did the same with an SFC style engine (heck, or any engine, I'd play online campaigns with a 3d movement engine, as long as you can effect the universe and stuff).  Fleet Command Construction Set or something.  Make everything moddable.  Everything would have tags so you could change the texture, sound effect, damage/function, and so forth.  Then they could just tack on a quickie universe if they wanted to (I think a few of the old ones came with a small campaign).

The beauty would be that they would really open things up for mods.  I mean if you went out and bought the game, and folks made the mods you could end up buying many games for the price of one.  I mean folks building a pirate universe (tall ships), modern navy, space, and maybe even Trek.  Heck, sounds good to me, if the graphics and tools were good enough.  It would have to have an online mode (notice the Battlefield games are pretty much only online and still popular.  I think a single player mode would be good though, so people could download custom campaigns and stuff to augment the experience, especially if they aren't the multiplayer sort).

Anyhow, it's something cool to think about anyway.   Maybe somebody could do something with their engine.  I know the concept would interest a whole lot of folks around here (and I'm sure around a few other places as well).  

[Mr. Hypergol]

 

Quote:
 The SFB base is older, made up of people that like to play a complicated game

Well I'm 36 today and I learned SFB when I was about 14 years old.  Most of today's SFB fans also learned the game and loved it at a young age.

So are you saying that the attention span of today's youth is too short to focus on anything that requires thought?  Unfortunately you might be right.  More evidence of the "instant gratification" mentality.

Quote:
 The SFB fan thinks that SFB is based on reality

Funny you should say this.

The "realism" of SFB is what I like most about the game.  So much thought has gone into the most minute details of the game that it FEELS real even though it's complete fiction.  As an engineer "in real life" I admire this greatly.  The design of the game is magnificent.

I enjoy feeling like a REAL starship captain when I play SFB.  It's a challenge,...... and most of all it's FUN.

Isn't escaping reality the goal of great entertainment?

By the way I don't really feel insulted by any of your previous comments.  I just enjoy a good debate about things I really enjoy.

I really enjoy SFB and SFC.

     

[Merlinfmct87]

FYI, many "Hard SF" readers consiter Star Trek to be a bunch of fanciful junk in no way influenced by the laws of physics.

I respond to this outlook the same way Sybock does...After all, they said the Sound Barrier would never be broken...look where THAT idea ended up .  

[Merlinfmct87]

P.S. Thank you for starting this thread..."Hope is kindled" as one of my favorite movies says...

Merlin