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, so what I read from him, which to me was clear I assumed was accurate, I wouldnt need to check anything else unless I somehow misinterpreted him.
My guess would be that he's thinking of the game as of some particular point -- probably the film shoot, as much of the game's "universe" was locked in at this point. As you can see from my second post, he went to England to make Privateer 2. Maybe he considers the Privateer 2: Darkside project a different game. The studio was bought by EA specifically for that project, though, and the team and much of the concept stayed the same... there was an engine shift (from RealSpace to BRender) which might be enough to constitute different projects in his mind... though that happened sometime after it'd become The Darkening.
You should also consider the context, though -- Erin is specifically trying to explain why Privateer 2 is different from other Wing Commander games in his 'speech'.
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?
Yes and no. Consider, though, that the big ID characters who went off to develop their own DooM-style shooters (John Romero, in particular) ended up shredded by reviews specifically because they *weren't* developing DooM (or Quake ).
It's important to note that 'after the fact' in this case, though, doesn't mean 'after the game was released' -- it means after some work was done on it. ' They didn't wake up a week later and decided to add Privateer 2 to the name -- they chose to do this before it was published.
(Which, speaking to your earlier analogy, is exactly what happened with Quake II -- which went through quite a bit of its development life under a different name... and this is apparent in the finished project, although it's certainly accepted by Quake fans.)
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?
Well, first you're thinking of Chris Roberts... and second, he didn't develop FreeLancer. FL was completely retooled after Chris left Digital Anvil, and has little in common with his original concept (nor did he do the original Privateer, though...). That said, what's the number one criticism of FreeLancer? How it stands up to the original Privateer -- specifically because it was the same guys working on it (in the public mind, anyway).
