I would like to be the first person to express my grave reservations about
- Thread starter Fatcat
- Start date
- Status
While most of the commentary on another thread seems negative, I don't see any reason to write "the Vista thing" off. Heck, a quick look at the "News" section on the XBox website shows that the top story is the cross-platform play, written a couple of weeks ago. It sounds like the features would initially be limited, but would gradually expand through the rest of the year. Given the rich tradition WC has, based almost entirely in PCs, I imagine EA and Gaia are clamoring for Microsoft to get it working, as it would allow the companies to tap the resource of PC users (cough cough).
Of course, this means that we'd probably have to wait a few months after the initial release, but that's fine with me. After all, I've waited about a decade; what's a couple more months?
The 360 is currently the best selling new console out there. PC gaming is not doing well right now, so EA will release it wherever there's the most money to be made, that was my argument for that point. Most of these points no longer stand, seeing as how we have LOAF now giving us something real and solid to base our concerns or hopes of the game off of though.
Arena is an arcade game, but up until now, WC games were NOT arcade games, that's my problem with it.
I thought it was obvious that EA did the least amount of work when it came to making games. Madden 04, 05, 06, 07. I fully expected to see Arena 1, 2, 3, 4.
Apparently, you think of the WC world when you hear the name Wing Commander. I think of a game series, on the other hand. You would be fine with a WC Board game being released, maybe UNO WC. I wouldn't mind Arena if WC was alive and well, but as it stands right now, spinoffs aren't the best way to revive a franchise, because usually, that's where the franchise then remains.
I never said we shouldn't buy it, I said we should make our voice heard that we don't want an Arena 2 when we have proven we're still around and active. After ten years of waiting, do we deserve anything less than a real sequel to the game? They've certainly had enough time to figure something out.
There, I have one section for each reply of yours to my post. I hope you are now better informed as to what decisions I've made, and why.
As for LeHah...
We're PC gamers. Why would we NOT have a PC ready? Did you suddenly stop PC gaming when WC stopped having sequels? Because that's just pathetic sounding.
I cannot believe you. Even if you were blind, you would probably buy Arena and try to play it. You're at a point now where you're not buying something for it's quality as a WC game, but buying it because it says Wing Commander all over it. This is just what I was referring to in my post about EA expecting people to blindly purchase it. I guess this would be taken literally in your case.
Arena I'm sure, is a quality game. LOAF has just proven that. But I did not expect it in any way to be anything like the other WC games, because the Genre is so incredibly different. I'm also a fan of Star Fox, fast shoot-em-up arcade game, but there's a community developing a Star Fox mod for Freespace 2. There's no way I'm going to enjoy it as much as Star Fox, because one is an arcade game, and the other is a flight simulator! Most people don't understand the difference until they play the two, and they realize how incredibly simple one is, and how complex the other is in contrast.
And what the hell is with you and these quotes? Are you just having fun discovering the wonders of quotationspage.com or something? Yeesh.
Arena is an arcade game, but up until now, WC games were NOT arcade games, that's my problem with it.
I thought it was obvious that EA did the least amount of work when it came to making games. Madden 04, 05, 06, 07. I fully expected to see Arena 1, 2, 3, 4.
Apparently, you think of the WC world when you hear the name Wing Commander. I think of a game series, on the other hand. You would be fine with a WC Board game being released, maybe UNO WC. I wouldn't mind Arena if WC was alive and well, but as it stands right now, spinoffs aren't the best way to revive a franchise, because usually, that's where the franchise then remains.
I never said we shouldn't buy it, I said we should make our voice heard that we don't want an Arena 2 when we have proven we're still around and active. After ten years of waiting, do we deserve anything less than a real sequel to the game? They've certainly had enough time to figure something out.
There, I have one section for each reply of yours to my post. I hope you are now better informed as to what decisions I've made, and why.
As for LeHah...
We're PC gamers. Why would we NOT have a PC ready? Did you suddenly stop PC gaming when WC stopped having sequels? Because that's just pathetic sounding.
I cannot believe you. Even if you were blind, you would probably buy Arena and try to play it. You're at a point now where you're not buying something for it's quality as a WC game, but buying it because it says Wing Commander all over it. This is just what I was referring to in my post about EA expecting people to blindly purchase it. I guess this would be taken literally in your case.
Arena I'm sure, is a quality game. LOAF has just proven that. But I did not expect it in any way to be anything like the other WC games, because the Genre is so incredibly different. I'm also a fan of Star Fox, fast shoot-em-up arcade game, but there's a community developing a Star Fox mod for Freespace 2. There's no way I'm going to enjoy it as much as Star Fox, because one is an arcade game, and the other is a flight simulator! Most people don't understand the difference until they play the two, and they realize how incredibly simple one is, and how complex the other is in contrast.
And what the hell is with you and these quotes? Are you just having fun discovering the wonders of quotationspage.com or something? Yeesh.
floundericiousMI
Commodore
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Well, he does help those who help themselves...
Completely disagree -- the average Xbox Live user wouldn't touch the original Wing Commander with a 10-foot pole, the graphics are far too primitive. That's assuming they would be willing to jump through the hoops required to get it to run on a modern PC in the first place.
A more likely scenario is that they'll play the heck out of it for awhile and then move on to the next flavor-of-the-month game.
LeHah
212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
No, I just enjoy all kinds of games. Limiting myself to a single platform - PC or console - is absolutely silly. If there are good games to play on it, why wouldn't I want to play them?
The PC gaming market is not what it once was, however.
How is it that you agree with LOAF on this but disagree with me - when him and I are saying the exact same thing in different tones?
You're assuming your opinion means anything to me. Very cute.
That said though - I don't think you read my various statements that since Wing Commander has had nothing but high-quality gaming in it's long run, that it's a very good chance that Arena will as well. LOAF just confirmed that. Stop running yourself in circles.
Anyone whos listened to me for a long period of time knows I throw stuff out there like this. Everything has been said better by someone else before me, so I perfer to use their words instead of my own sometimes. If you don't like it, I don't care.
(I did have a quote to close this entry - but Deadwood wouldn't go over well here.)
floundericiousMI
Commodore
Indeed!
I'm getting more geeked about Arena, the more I think about it...
I was wondering... if we generate some discussions here about what folks would like to see in the game or get some discussions going about the particulars (when you are in the middle of the capship vs. capship battle, exactly WHAT and HOW do you batter down the other ship?), do you think we'd be able to formulate some ideas and get ya'll to send them on?
Also, just a thought, would CIC or Crius.net be able to get a beta group going to help advise the developers?
Anyways... this is great!
I'm getting more geeked about Arena, the more I think about it...
I was wondering... if we generate some discussions here about what folks would like to see in the game or get some discussions going about the particulars (when you are in the middle of the capship vs. capship battle, exactly WHAT and HOW do you batter down the other ship?), do you think we'd be able to formulate some ideas and get ya'll to send them on?
Also, just a thought, would CIC or Crius.net be able to get a beta group going to help advise the developers?
Anyways... this is great!
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
I'm reasonably sure EA is already paying attention to threads like this -- the game's producers are very interested in what the community thinks of it.
You've been hoping for a watered-down, 2D arcade shooter?
User was banned for this post
floundericiousMI
Commodore
remo, that's a good way to get banned.... don't get surly or snide, it serves no purpose. If you're truly concerned, keep pumping for more details... make the questions deeper. It sounds like there IS a feedback loop here to the developers.
If you give up and become surly, you'll not have the ability to affect anything! hang in there!
edit: well, it was a nice thought!
If you give up and become surly, you'll not have the ability to affect anything! hang in there!
edit: well, it was a nice thought!
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Did something get removed from it?
Now that we've all had our passive-aggressive lessons, tell me what you really think. By which I mean read the thread before you post again.
LeHah
212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
Any company worth their salt listens to their target audience. EA is no exception and I think they'd be very interested to hear what the fans have to say.
As it is though, I think we should wait for Arena to reach our hands first. Once we get a little experience with it, our thoughts will be all that more refined and clear!
I disagree with you because you're being an ass about it, Lehah.
'I'm going to debate with you, and clearly tell you I don't give a damn'
One of the first rules of debate is that you cannot have an argument with someone whom you do not respect. I'm trying to form opinions and clearly convey them to the best of my abilities, and you're trying to have a debate with me about it, while saying you don't care about the debate you've engaged in? It's impolite, absurd, and flat out moronic.
LOAF has been taking an extremely mature stance on all this, and I respect him for that. He's doing a better job than either you or I. While you're saying "I don't care about you, and by the way, you're wrong" he's saying "Well I've tried it first hand and in my opinion, it's actually quite good."
Do you see the difference there? If you can, that should help explain a lot.
'I'm going to debate with you, and clearly tell you I don't give a damn'
One of the first rules of debate is that you cannot have an argument with someone whom you do not respect. I'm trying to form opinions and clearly convey them to the best of my abilities, and you're trying to have a debate with me about it, while saying you don't care about the debate you've engaged in? It's impolite, absurd, and flat out moronic.
LOAF has been taking an extremely mature stance on all this, and I respect him for that. He's doing a better job than either you or I. While you're saying "I don't care about you, and by the way, you're wrong" he's saying "Well I've tried it first hand and in my opinion, it's actually quite good."
Do you see the difference there? If you can, that should help explain a lot.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Well, lets just agree to have no more postings towards this particular personal argument.
floundericiousMI
Commodore
Well here's a question for you lucky dogs who've played it (ENVY)...
When you're attacking an enemy capital ship, what are the damage zones?
My current thought:
Are there "power relays" near the surface under armored covers?
These might have the following features:
- feed the big banks of cannon
- feed smaller defensive turrets
- enhance the refire rate of weapons on the hull
- etc.
In a protracted fight WITHOUT bombers, the ability to find/hit/knock out such relays would be essential to prevailing. Whether it was because it degrades defensive fire along the hull or because it slows down their ability to kill your carrier... Perhaps make it something self-repairing...so, after a period of time, the relay is repaired and active again.
Keeping them knocked out would require the ability to hit them whilst dodging defensive fire, fighters, and keeping the other team's fighters from doing the same thing to your ship.
When you're attacking an enemy capital ship, what are the damage zones?
My current thought:
Are there "power relays" near the surface under armored covers?
These might have the following features:
- feed the big banks of cannon
- feed smaller defensive turrets
- enhance the refire rate of weapons on the hull
- etc.
In a protracted fight WITHOUT bombers, the ability to find/hit/knock out such relays would be essential to prevailing. Whether it was because it degrades defensive fire along the hull or because it slows down their ability to kill your carrier... Perhaps make it something self-repairing...so, after a period of time, the relay is repaired and active again.
Keeping them knocked out would require the ability to hit them whilst dodging defensive fire, fighters, and keeping the other team's fighters from doing the same thing to your ship.
ScAvenger001
Spaceman
Well, here's my $.02. I'm probably not going to say anything that's not already been said, but I like to think I'll cite my logic more clearly.
WC: Arena may well be a fun game in and of itself. To me, it looks like multiplayer Asteroids, but what's wrong with that? Asteroids is fun. Prettying it up and putting a known brand on it can't hurt, and may well help. I won't be buying it because I don't own a console, but I won't begrudge anyone who does get it and enjoys it.
My concern is the executive mindset. Either Arena will do well, or it won't. If it doesn't do well, TPTB will say to themselves "apparently people don't want Wing Commander, so stick it back on the shelf for another decade." If it does do well, though, the conclusion will be "apparently people want more WC:Arena, so let's make another one," and the next game will be WC:Arena II, and those of us who want a game on the PC more in line with the previous Wing Commander games are going to be left high and dry. From my personal non-console-owning point of view, that sounds pretty much lose-lose. I'm not just voicing unsubstantiated fears here, either: what I described is pretty much exactly what happened with MechAssault, which is to MechWarrior what Arena is to the other WC games. MechAssault came out console only, was perceived as being very dumbed down compared to the rest of the franchise, nevertheless sold and reviewed very well, and appears to have (at least for the moment) completely supplanted its more traditional brethren to the annoyance of much of the existing fan base. It's not a scenario without precedent, is what I'm saying.
This isn't bad news per se: it's not like I was knee-deep in new Wing Commander releases up to this point, fan projects notwithstanding. In that light, WC: Arena can't meaningfully make things worse, and it does give the franchise some air. I'm just concerned that it'll tie Wing Commander to Arena-style gaming in a lasting way.
WC: Arena may well be a fun game in and of itself. To me, it looks like multiplayer Asteroids, but what's wrong with that? Asteroids is fun. Prettying it up and putting a known brand on it can't hurt, and may well help. I won't be buying it because I don't own a console, but I won't begrudge anyone who does get it and enjoys it.
My concern is the executive mindset. Either Arena will do well, or it won't. If it doesn't do well, TPTB will say to themselves "apparently people don't want Wing Commander, so stick it back on the shelf for another decade." If it does do well, though, the conclusion will be "apparently people want more WC:Arena, so let's make another one," and the next game will be WC:Arena II, and those of us who want a game on the PC more in line with the previous Wing Commander games are going to be left high and dry. From my personal non-console-owning point of view, that sounds pretty much lose-lose. I'm not just voicing unsubstantiated fears here, either: what I described is pretty much exactly what happened with MechAssault, which is to MechWarrior what Arena is to the other WC games. MechAssault came out console only, was perceived as being very dumbed down compared to the rest of the franchise, nevertheless sold and reviewed very well, and appears to have (at least for the moment) completely supplanted its more traditional brethren to the annoyance of much of the existing fan base. It's not a scenario without precedent, is what I'm saying.
This isn't bad news per se: it's not like I was knee-deep in new Wing Commander releases up to this point, fan projects notwithstanding. In that light, WC: Arena can't meaningfully make things worse, and it does give the franchise some air. I'm just concerned that it'll tie Wing Commander to Arena-style gaming in a lasting way.
I'm not nearly the Wing Commander fan that the majority of you are. I like Wing Commander for very much the same reasons, and I find it very enjoyable to play. I come here because there are Modifications of the game that I would find very enjoyable to play. Also, there are news items, updates, stories and infomation about a franchise that I have grown to love, as well as the occasional interesting forum topic or two.
However, after going through this whole topic I think I've boiled it down to several key opinions. I had this written out earlier, but I lost it, so here it is.
1. Wing Commander: Arena is not what I want, therefore I don't like it.
-This is to be expected. If I don't like something, I'm not going to want it. It's a personal opinion.
2. It's a new Wing Commander game! That's great! I want it!
-Also to be expected. If I really love a franchise (as I know some of us here do) I'm going to want to get/know everything about it. These are called collectors. It's something they enjoy doing.
3. I'm excited about a new game, but a little reserved about it's execution.
-Once again, a standard opinion. Long time fans of a series want more of what made that series favorable. Any changes are usually brought about in a negative light, but if I recall correctly there have been several Wing Commander games that have diverted from the norm. I haven't heard many complaints about them. Maybe there were forum posts like this when the games first came out, before I was an internet user? I would usually belong in this group, but if I get a chance to play the game, I will quickly change my opinion, depending on if I like it or not.
4. I've played the game and have found it immensely enjoyable/I've had personal experience with this game, mostly positive.
-This opinion has mostly come from Bandit LOAF, but is, in my opinion, the argument with the most validity here. In all honest truth, I'll play it if it's fun/if I find it to my liking. I won't play it if I don't like it. Only actually playing the game will ultimately affect my opinion on wither or not it is worthy to be called "Wing Commander". I played Wing Commander because it was fun, nothing more.
Though I have not been entirely satisfied with some of EA's attempts at certain franchises, I have to disagree with some previous arguments in this thread along these lines:
I enjoy BattleField immensely. I feel that there were just as many innovations between 1942 and BattleField 2 as there were between Wing Commander 1-3. THAT formula is just the same. Make a few small changes, but otherwise give players more of what they want. Arena changes this only because it's been so long since the last Wing Commander most people probably won't recognize it.
Similarly, I found Need for Speed: Most Wanted a refreshing new take on the series. I hadn't been that excieted about it since the original Hot Pursuit. I haven't played Carbon, but if they continue the update the series as they had with Most Wanted, I see it as being far from dead. Maybe people argue about this because Racing Games in general are not as popular as they once were? Maybe they'll die out too someday...
Commmand and Conqor is coming out with a sequel! How is this bad? I admit, I'm no fan of Generals, but if they make C&C3 a hit (hard to do with the return of Kane and the Mammoth Tanks) then I couldn't care less if they were just slapping the name on some other RTS just to sell it. In the end, they came through (and probably with a much bigger fanbase to satify those who loved to original and those who loved Generals, who, according to someone here, are two very different groups.)
All in all, I see Wing Commander: Arena as nothing but good news as the reinstallation of a series that has long since been dead. the fact that they even bothered to link it in any way to the original series tells me that they're not entirely flipping us the bird. Seeing what appears to be a Rapier flying around a Midway class carrier is almost something that we all want to see in a fan-mod. It tells me that they actually put some thought into this! Give the guys some credit, at least. If you don't like it, just ignore it. Stick with the mods and developments that other fans have made (that are apparently more to your liking) and you'll be no better off than you were a week ago. I will probably never get the chance to play Arena, I'm just a poor university student who would probably buy a Wii if he had a choice anyway, but if the opportunity arises, I'll give it a shot. Nonetheless, I'll look forward to the future of Wing Commander, because if this is a hit, it's gonna come upon us if we like it or not.
However, after going through this whole topic I think I've boiled it down to several key opinions. I had this written out earlier, but I lost it, so here it is.
1. Wing Commander: Arena is not what I want, therefore I don't like it.
-This is to be expected. If I don't like something, I'm not going to want it. It's a personal opinion.
2. It's a new Wing Commander game! That's great! I want it!
-Also to be expected. If I really love a franchise (as I know some of us here do) I'm going to want to get/know everything about it. These are called collectors. It's something they enjoy doing.
3. I'm excited about a new game, but a little reserved about it's execution.
-Once again, a standard opinion. Long time fans of a series want more of what made that series favorable. Any changes are usually brought about in a negative light, but if I recall correctly there have been several Wing Commander games that have diverted from the norm. I haven't heard many complaints about them. Maybe there were forum posts like this when the games first came out, before I was an internet user? I would usually belong in this group, but if I get a chance to play the game, I will quickly change my opinion, depending on if I like it or not.
4. I've played the game and have found it immensely enjoyable/I've had personal experience with this game, mostly positive.
-This opinion has mostly come from Bandit LOAF, but is, in my opinion, the argument with the most validity here. In all honest truth, I'll play it if it's fun/if I find it to my liking. I won't play it if I don't like it. Only actually playing the game will ultimately affect my opinion on wither or not it is worthy to be called "Wing Commander". I played Wing Commander because it was fun, nothing more.
Though I have not been entirely satisfied with some of EA's attempts at certain franchises, I have to disagree with some previous arguments in this thread along these lines:
I enjoy BattleField immensely. I feel that there were just as many innovations between 1942 and BattleField 2 as there were between Wing Commander 1-3. THAT formula is just the same. Make a few small changes, but otherwise give players more of what they want. Arena changes this only because it's been so long since the last Wing Commander most people probably won't recognize it.
Similarly, I found Need for Speed: Most Wanted a refreshing new take on the series. I hadn't been that excieted about it since the original Hot Pursuit. I haven't played Carbon, but if they continue the update the series as they had with Most Wanted, I see it as being far from dead. Maybe people argue about this because Racing Games in general are not as popular as they once were? Maybe they'll die out too someday...
Commmand and Conqor is coming out with a sequel! How is this bad? I admit, I'm no fan of Generals, but if they make C&C3 a hit (hard to do with the return of Kane and the Mammoth Tanks) then I couldn't care less if they were just slapping the name on some other RTS just to sell it. In the end, they came through (and probably with a much bigger fanbase to satify those who loved to original and those who loved Generals, who, according to someone here, are two very different groups.)
All in all, I see Wing Commander: Arena as nothing but good news as the reinstallation of a series that has long since been dead. the fact that they even bothered to link it in any way to the original series tells me that they're not entirely flipping us the bird. Seeing what appears to be a Rapier flying around a Midway class carrier is almost something that we all want to see in a fan-mod. It tells me that they actually put some thought into this! Give the guys some credit, at least. If you don't like it, just ignore it. Stick with the mods and developments that other fans have made (that are apparently more to your liking) and you'll be no better off than you were a week ago. I will probably never get the chance to play Arena, I'm just a poor university student who would probably buy a Wii if he had a choice anyway, but if the opportunity arises, I'll give it a shot. Nonetheless, I'll look forward to the future of Wing Commander, because if this is a hit, it's gonna come upon us if we like it or not.
- Status