NEWS : Ingame HUD System
- Thread starter Starman©
- Start date
Howard Day
Random art guy.
Anything I can do to make amends?
Don
Rear Admiral
ScoobyDoo said:
Yep
http://www.programurl.com/freespace-pro.htm
This also points out to my earlier post:
And its quite confusing seeing that the first title was named differently for a US and a European release.
U
Unregistered
Guest
the only reason why "descent" was in the title was to avoid trademark infringment on a disk management suite named the same - in the uk it was "conflict: freespace"
yet again, loaf proves that he';s a total fucking retard who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground and should shoot himself
yet again, loaf proves that he';s a total fucking retard who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground and should shoot himself
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Don't try to defend Freespace people again. They're basically here for us to make fun of them.
We've already established that this is an absolutely unsupported claim on the part of apologist fanboys -- read the thread.
MajorCamKollent
My ride
Calling LOAF a "fucking retard" is a pretty stupid thing to do.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
MajorCamKollent said:
Descent has a pretty stupid fandom.
U
Unregistered
Guest
Bandit LOAF said:
O'RLY?
United States Trademark:
Word Mark FREESPACE
Goods and Services (CANCELLED) IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer software for data compression and expansion; and related manuals sold together as a unit. FIRST USE: 19970715. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19970919
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Design Search Code
Serial Number 75328805
Filing Date July 22, 1997
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1B
Supplemental Register Date June 1, 1998
Registration Number 2190114
Registration Date September 15, 1998
Owner (REGISTRANT) Mijenix Corporation CORPORATION WISCONSIN 6666 Odana Road Ste 122 Madison WISCONSIN 53719
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register SUPPLEMENTAL
Live/Dead Indicator DEAD
Cancellation Date June 18, 2005
Bandit LOAF said:
Descent was my first ever game, WC3 was my second when I found it. I thought descent was fun-ish in a kind of twisted masochistic way. Got stuck at one part so I gave up totally and never played it again. I never played any other Descent games and still havent played Freespace at all. Just clarifying that, as Im clearly not a Descent or Freespace fan
Now other than the title and possibly (though I read theres none?) some connection in the storyline somewhere, the games are so different practically speaking that if you are a fan of descent you might not (I'd say probably not) necessarily be a fan of Freespace, and if you are a fan of Freespace you might very well not be a fan of the Descent games. So if someone defends Freespace, why does it make sence to assume they are defending Descent in general? The same being true for someone defending the Descent defending Freespace.
Isnt it kind of like if there was someone saying they hated Privateer 2, thought it was bad in every way and then assuming because Privateer 2 was tied to Wing Commander he was also speaking of the other Wing Commander games s well. Or, the other way round. Like if someone said they loved Wing Commander games and also assuming they also loved Armada, Privateer and Privateer 2. I know the comparison doesnt work completely in case you were going to point out small differences, but I think it makes the point in trying to make.
So, my point is, when you say "descent fans" but are referring specifically to Freespace, how does it really describe what you're talking about?
U
Unregistered
Guest
you also didn't establish anything - you posted a bare assertion "this couldn't possibly be true" because you LACK KNOWLEDGE about how it could have been true
well mr LOAF - that's because you're not a software developer or a lawyer
well mr LOAF - that's because you're not a software developer or a lawyer
U
Unregistered
Guest
Edx - don't try to talk sense into LOAF - it's impossible
Bandit LOAF said:
I know youve seen tons more stuff than I have, but I was sure this was wrong because I remember learning something different when I read this news article not so long ago. Anyway now Im confused when I went back to check.
"To be clear, when we first started working on the game it was only known as the "Darkening", not Privateer 2, that was to come later."
So here it definitely sounds like at the beginning it was not known as Privateer 2. In fact it wasnt even known as Privateer. "only known as "Darkening"'. and the only connection I read is where he talks about is the connection to Privateers gameplay.
"Due to the increase in our development costs, it was decided (by people outside the development team and to be fair many at Origin also) that the Darkening had to be tied into the Wing Commander Universe."
And here I understood this that they decided at some point that they needed to tie The Darkening to Wing Commander as a marketing statagy becuase they were scared about not making back the money they had spent on the FMV. IE. That it wasnt meant to be a Wing Commander game originally. So okay, maybe you could say that Privateer wasnt really a Wing Commander either in some sence.
"Although P2 was not set in WC space, we created a number of tie ins through missions and rumours to connect the two universes, to allow the new branding to take place"
But then here, just clarifies it completely for me. The universes were not connected, obviously, since it wasnt meant to. That they had to make it fit by adding things, because originally it wasnt supposed to fit as it wasnt a Privateer game.
So to me I just learned that the title wasnt originally "Privateer 2", it was only known as "The Darkening". It was connected to Wing Commander for marketing reasons later, and elements were added to the game so that the "new branding" connected the two universes and that none of that was there to begin with because it wasnt originally meant to be. This to me sounds like the opposite of what you said.
I dont know how much clearer he could get but maybe you know something I dont, I dont know, but I dont see how you can interpete these comments any other way. And Erin Roberts isnt exactly a bad source to cite. I cant imagine you havent read this, so whats the deal with this then? Especially as you say you "absolutely" established what you said
Last edited by a moderator:
U
Unregistered
Guest
Edx - drop it before he bans you - this is The World According to BanditLOAF - anyone who disagrees with him gets banned.
you can have enough evidence to hold up in court and he'll simply ban you for proving him wrong.
he's an irrational dipwad who does disgraces the wing commander community with his presence.
you can have enough evidence to hold up in court and he'll simply ban you for proving him wrong.
he's an irrational dipwad who does disgraces the wing commander community with his presence.
U
Unregistered
Guest
don't - simply disagreeing with LOAF is grounds for bannination
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
DeGaulle!
But seriously, you're playing with the big boys here -- you actually have to prove something.
We all know there's a compression utility called Freespace... what we don't know is whether or not that has anything to do with the decision to add 'Descent' to the name of the game.
(Wait! Of course! That obscure US law which requires that you add 'Descent' to all names used in the past... except in other countries, even when they share copyright enforcement...)
In fact, the kind of copyright situation you're describing is *very* rare. It's very, very difficult to prevent someone from reusing a title when works are notably different. That's why we have Wing Commander space games and then a whole set of unrelated Wing Commander flying stories (a book, a movie and another video game).
I established that you fanboys had no honest citation for your 'fact' -- which you've proven several times over (one of you even went so far as to say so).
I don't understand what you're asking -- you seem to be going against how descriptive terms work. If my neighbor has a cat, I can identify it as "a cat". Yes, I can be more specific (that black and white cat, that black and white cat with yellow eyes, etc.), but there's no intended offense to all cats in... well, literally calling a spade a spade.
If you feel offended as a Descent fan, then I apologize -- but your real beef is with Interplay, not with LOAF.
Actually... I can argue with some technicality towards both roles -- though neither would be relevant to this argument.
Actually, I gave up my moderator status -- I can't ban you, I can just beat you into the ground in a stand-up argument.
Of course, if you keep trolling, someone else probably will ban you.
Don't practice selective reading. The project the team began in England was originally called Privateer: Darkside (in 1995). There's even a bit about the original project in that same birthday material -- how they started off working on a direct sequel and even rendered some of the original ships (which is where the Talon in P2 comes from).
The game went through many stages, including months of being 'Privateer: The Darkening', just 'The Darkening', 'Privateer: The Darkening' again and then finally, at the last minute, Privateer 2: The Darkening.
This was much later, after it had been 'The Darkening'. It wasn't just a matter of marketing, though -- for all practical purposes, it *was* Privateer -- it's exactly the same gameplay, developed by the same person. If Sid Meier released "WORLD CONQUEST" with the same gameplay as Civilization, we'd all laugh at it.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
From the Paul Hughes interview: couple of months in we had to rename the game as (I beleive) there was already another P2 in development over in Austin. A few months further into development it was renamed P2 - The Darkening and we built some 3D versions of some of the ships that were in Erin's original. (https://www.wcnews.com/articles/p2paulhughes.shtml)
As I say, there's no doubt that it spent time as just 'The Darkening'... but it both started and ended as a Privateer sequel.
One of the reasons this debate always seems idiotic to the long-time online fans is because we've been around long enough to remember the period after WC3, where Origin's PR people would specifically tell everyone that Privateer 2 was being developed in England by Erin Roberts.
Wander through Google Groups a bit -- search for 'Privateer' and 'DarkSide' (or 'Dark Light', another early name) and you'll find all the early-1995 stuff from when the game was just starting up.
Chris Roberts decided to develop his own Privateer 2 in-house towards the end of WC4's development cycle, which is what turned P2 into just 'The Darkening'. I suppose a lot of current WC fans remember only this point in time, since WC4 came with a 'Darkening' advertisement that didn't mention Privateer (and believe it or not, at the time we had exactly the *opposite* argument at Origin's Chat Zone -- how dare they *drop* the Privateer sequel?)
As I say, there's no doubt that it spent time as just 'The Darkening'... but it both started and ended as a Privateer sequel.
One of the reasons this debate always seems idiotic to the long-time online fans is because we've been around long enough to remember the period after WC3, where Origin's PR people would specifically tell everyone that Privateer 2 was being developed in England by Erin Roberts.
Wander through Google Groups a bit -- search for 'Privateer' and 'DarkSide' (or 'Dark Light', another early name) and you'll find all the early-1995 stuff from when the game was just starting up.
Chris Roberts decided to develop his own Privateer 2 in-house towards the end of WC4's development cycle, which is what turned P2 into just 'The Darkening'. I suppose a lot of current WC fans remember only this point in time, since WC4 came with a 'Darkening' advertisement that didn't mention Privateer (and believe it or not, at the time we had exactly the *opposite* argument at Origin's Chat Zone -- how dare they *drop* the Privateer sequel?)
Last edited by a moderator:
U
Unregistered
Guest
Mr LOAF - you seem incapable of reading United States TRADEMARK office records
that's the most assinine assertion i've read.... in a long time
they owned the trademarks to Descent, the needed to avoid infringing on the compression software trademark
put two and two togeather
then contractual reasons had it "Conflict: FreeSpace" in europe
you're just a jackass - i don't know why i try to talk sense into you - it's like trying to teach a down's syndrome child to do quantum physics: you just don't have enough brain power to handle the truth
that's the most assinine assertion i've read.... in a long time
they owned the trademarks to Descent, the needed to avoid infringing on the compression software trademark
put two and two togeather
then contractual reasons had it "Conflict: FreeSpace" in europe
you're just a jackass - i don't know why i try to talk sense into you - it's like trying to teach a down's syndrome child to do quantum physics: you just don't have enough brain power to handle the truth
Well, I wasnt really. I havent read everything as I said and Im not really that bothered, thats why I asked since what you said seemed to contradict what I read in that interview. The reason Im asking is just because I was interested to know why. Erin was the big boss man i figured that what I read from him, which to me was clear I assumed, was accurate and I wouldnt need to check anything else unless I somehow misinterpreted him.Bandit LOAF said:
Hmm, thats interesting and Im sure you have good reason to say that, but assuming thats correct can you explain why Erin doesnt mention any of it and even says things that contradicts the above? Does he just not know about it?
Honestly man, Im, not trying to wind you up I just dont get it. 
Yea, but thats one of the things isnt? Erin says it was "only" known as The Darkening. Why would he say that? And why would he say that after saying he is going to "clarify" the situation? (and so choose his words more carefully) Thats what made me think that. And the only mention of Privateer that I can see is how they wanted to make a Privateer-like game.
Well, sort of developed by the same person according to what I understood from that interview. But anyway even if it was, and Im not bothered if it was or wasnt since to me its irrelevant, imagine if the maker of Doom wanted to make a game and wanted to make it Doom-like, that doesnt mean it IS Doom. And lets say down the road they decide to specifically connect it to Doom later on for whatever reason. That still wouldnt make it, originally, a Doom game. To me that would be the backwards of the fact. But if it were, surely that would mean that every first person shooter developed by the Doom creator is a Doom game, just because they wanted to make it Doom-like, right?
I mean, Chris Carter developed Freelancer, but that doesnt mean it is or was necessarily a "Privateer game" at any stage just because they had wanted to make it Privateer-like. Does that make sence? EDIT: Just to let you know I wrote this before I saw your next post. Im going to read it now.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Trademark? That's even less relevant -- it would be very hard to argue an expected confusion between a disk utility and a video game.
No, and this is key: determining the history of something doesn't ever, ever, ever involve 'putting two and two together'. That's exactly the problem here. You kids are deciding things by finding facts that don't argue anything and then insisting that your game has to look a particular way for posterity. If you were a Wing Commander fan, you'd track down interviews and press releases and official documents to prove absolutely what happened -- you're not, and all you have is supposition.
The impetus in this entire saga is figuring out why Interplay did what they did -- not pointing to what may or may not have been unrelated background. They must have done it because they had the Descent license? You just skipped a million steps in the thought process, all to make your game look good. It's nonsense, and it doesn't tell us anything about the history. They had the Star Trek license and the Baldur's Gate license and a hundred others, too... they could even make up their own mark, if it were necessary (and it was not, if your disk utility is actually what scared them).
Interesting. Where did you here this?
And there's the crux of the problem -- you didnt' hear this, your lame community decided this. It's vague nonsense. Contractual reasons? Have you ever signed a contract?
Oops!, Interplay said, we just realized -- we signed a 'don't name any more games Descent' contract with our European duplication house last year! Better make up a new name! Which we couldn't do before, because of ________.
The blank is yours, Descent fans! You can make up another unproven assertion! You don't need facts, apparently! The world is yours!
Debate not going well?