A Manifesto

Penta2

Spaceman
All,

I've been reading, reading, reading...Witnessing the dispute between the various factions which seem to be emerging with what I'm calling the "Vega Stream" (Privateer-Remake and WCU, the Wing Commander mods/remakes/we-gotta-find-a-better-word-than-those using the VegaStrike engine).

OK, thusfar we've two sides, one of which I'll call the Retros, (with apologies to those in this camp, as I can't think of a better term at the moment), and the other I'll call the Expansionists.

The Retros want a remake with high fidelity, almost complete fidelity, to the 1993 DOS version of Privateer. No expansions, no new features, at the least. I'm unsure what the general position is amongst this camp on "technical updates", such as fixing the bugs in Privateer, or with regards to graphics and sound and the like, so I'll just note that and go on.

The Expansionists are the types who want to add new features. Often, lots of new features. Whether it be ejection seats, turret AI, wingmen, new fixers, new commodities, or what.

There's divergence. That's good and healthy, not to mention inevitable.

Unfortunately, it's seemed to have gone beyond simply having differences into throwing rocks at each other. The fact that such rocks have apparently (whether it's true or not, it's what is percieved in some quarters; I can't speak to it either way) included bans on persons admin disagree with solely for disagreeing with them makes matters worse.

Which is a shame.

Why?

Because you have two mods, in more or less the same universe, working from the same technical base (VegaStrike). There is a lot of room for collaboration, for sharing skills, ideas, bugfixes, and product (such as art among other things). And that collaboration can only make things better. Better for developers, and (most importantly) better for players.

So I'm going to ask everybody to call a truce. My thoughts on what such a truce would entail:

Within the Privateer Remake outside of the WCU mod, there could be a case made for an "Expanded Edition", incorporating some of the new features but staying within Gemini. A third prong to the WC...sharp object, if you will.:) That's not my decision though; I can't code, do art, or do much useful in terms of development.

Both sides should cease the sniping. There's no reason that you can't be civil when you disagree. Sometimes, just agree to disagree and move on. The 'fanboy' snipes (which I mention just because they stick in my mind, not because they're at all egregious) are a useful example of what we should avoid.

Both sides should find things they can work together on. Whether this be modifications to the VegaStrike engine to better fit the WC Universe, developing art (something I would feel ashamed of everyone if there wasn't collaboration on), or developing new music and sounds (an appreciative nod of the head to Pas-2 for his work is certainly in order), even if the last just means taking what was composed in MIDI and such and doing it in the higher-quality formats we have today (which would certainly seem to be a good idea).

Then, do that. Ensure that where commonality is a good idea, there is commonality. In Art and Graphics stuff, for example, set up a common depository/workshop. Modeling would be especially improved with a determined collaborative effort, if just to make moving between the forks easier on the player (no wondering what we're looking at!:)). The same in sound stuff. In coding, try to ensure that everybody works off of a common WC VegaStrike code. This especially applies to things like the properties of space, in my opinion. (Asteroids are an example.)

Now, will this require compromise? Yes. Retros may have to accept that, even if it's not exactly faithful to the original, changes may need to be made (such as to allow non-English keyboards to not have issues), or may simply be desirable (the current UI with the ability to directly choose comm choices without hitting C may not be as in the original, but seems a cleaner interface choice, for example).

Similarly, expansionists may need to restrain themselves. Yes, you COULD have something that mixes Wing Commander and Star Trek, or WC and Star Wars, or whatever. But, I would avoid that. You COULD, potentially, add new races beyond what we know of from canon. I would, similarly, avoid that. (Focus is your friend...)

Also, as a gesture of goodwill, could I ask the admin to reconsider some of the bans applied, and to not (seemingly) be so hasty in the future? That seems to poison things immensely, which is never a good thing.

And, finally. I'd like to remind everybody that: A. These are games we speak of. There's no reason to get oneself worked up about them, particularly to get angry about them. B. At the end of the day, we're all the same stripe of geek, and geeks need to stick together.:)

(Now, if nobody minds, I'm going to post this to both sections of the Crius forums, and to the vegastrike WCU forum, in the hopes of wide distribution.)

Could we...try to get along?
 
There was never any war! At least as far as I am concerned. Even I started doing TWO patches: one that was supposed to end up integrated in the Priv Remake which covered cosmetic details only, and one that expanded the universe which is now WCU.

I agree with you overall. Just some people get mad about canon deviations.

I'm going to play Cassandra and say that eventually there'll be three forks:

(1) Fidelity build: Exactly as the original Priv was, only better graphics.
(2) Remake: More or less what's there now.
(3) WCU.
 
we've a common modeling thread which folks who model/texture are to post to for review. thus far, it has been ignored. seeing that i'm overall qaulity control on what models go into the engine...kind of a vital thing, especially fro ensuring all modeling work is kept to one standard.
 
I gladly put my signature onto the Manifesto. In fact, I only opposed the Retro side because it seemed to be gaining the upper hand and I didn't like the direction that's been taking. Like the "Just Say NO" post. All I really want is that there be dialogue, without rule of thumb bans, or "fan boy syndrome" type name-calling. I've been saying for years that Privateer was the best game ever in my opinion. But that doesn't mean I'm blind to its many, MANY failings. And I do consider a remake would be a wonderful opportunity for fixes. So, I'm not much of an Expansionist. In fact, I'm more of a Retro. Let me give you an example, Modificationist side first:

Example of a fix: The commodities screen, the original had a failing: I would have had 2 columns, one for quantity in stock, one for quantity in ship, and buy/sell buttons.
Now from my Retro side: I'd like the commodities screen to look otherwise as close as possible to the original, rather than like a vegastrike screen.

Another example of fix: Draymans in the original are virtually defenseless; I wouldn't mind them having the 6 turrets proposed by spiritplumber.

Now a couple of examples from my expansionist side (to show its moderation): Turrets having leading autotracking, as a feature you can enable or disable for your own ship and/or enemy ships through the setup program. If many such options crop up, there could be also an overriding checkbox for "fidelity" that would set all other options to follow the original game.

Another expansionist idea of mine: A new piece to the story, to serve as glue between part 1 and Righteous Fire. It could also be as long a story as either part 1 or RF themselves. I think it would be quite appropriate, since, as Loaf pointed out, RF begins "one year later", and there's a hint at a reduction of tensions at the Kilrathi front. So there's room for a story that fills in these gaps. Not to mention that there's huge room for a story to tie Privateer 1 and Privateer 2 The Darkening. I'd also like to throw in the suggestion that The Darkening had a superb story line, but that Origin ruined that game by removing the random mission generators, throwing in way too many pirates (and way too many pirate factions), and most of all by putting in videos. Personally I hated the... not the videos, as videos, but... I hated having videos in the first place; they don't match artistically with the virtual reality setting of the rest of the game. A printed out narrative with still pictures would have fit better. Maybe it's just me. But I think, anyhow, that The Darkening could be remade, same story, but in the style and spirit of the Original Privateer. That would be a hit! ;-)

Or, if some people would volunteer to produce 3D Studio Max generated videos, I'd go for that 100%, just as long as it's NOT actual videos with real, flesh and bone actors.

But, to summarize, I'm certainly willing to compromise, as long as there can be dialogue.
 
my biggest thing overall. i personally don't see any failings in privateer. also, i'm a BIG proponent of if you're going to (and this is applying specifically to 3d work here, nevermind the other stuff which gets my blood up) model a ship, model it as close to 100% as possible. some of the things which i've read and heard about are just insanely ludicrous ideas, and i'm sure all fans can agree that loading up a drayman with 40 turrets, an orion with a chin turret, adding details that don't belong, or weren't there on the original models, is a pretty bad idea.

the other major thing too. the game was perfectly balanced in its original form. had the remake setout to make a 'clone' (i use the word loosely, dictionary folks...don't go there) and THEN set out to make additions, that would have made things a LOT easier, also more enjoyable. it'd give a great starting point for the folks who know the game exceptionally well (me and a few others) a really nice burst of nostalgia, and folks who are just now being introduced to privateer an experience they may have missed out on entirely and been like 'wow! that's how it was to begin with'. you have to have a solid foundation from which to build on, and unfortanately (as i'm sure many can agree) we don't have that in this release. we have this wildly sporadic amalgamation of features and this and that which have horribly unbalanced the game and served to confuse the crap out of some people.

i'm not 100% opposed to the greater WCU deal, though i'm sure i've sounded like i am. I want it done right to begin with, so later deals are just as good and sqaured away as the begining deal.

only thing i don't budge on at all is adding details that do not belong on models because 'there were engine limitations'. tha'ts crap no 2 ways about it, and if i have to start posting up pics of the original models to prove it...i will.

Brad Mick

p.s. - yeah, i'm a 'retro', and i can compromise. but if its not good, then i'm going to raise a ruccus. thats the way it goes.
 
Thank you, Penta2. Thank you very much. I will gladly place my signature on your manifesto. You have won my respect.
 
spiritplumber said:
While playtesting I found that six turrets is to much, but three is fine. :)
How about 4? Reason I say this is with 4 you can get more of a spherical coverage around the ship (pointing them like the vertexes of a tetrahedron). FYI, tetrahedron is like a pyramid with a triangular base, instead of a square base, and where the base as well as the 3 sides are equilateral triangles. So, for instance, two turrets at the front and sides, oriented partly forward and partly outwards, one at the top back, leaning partly back from vertical, and one smack at the bottom.

BTW, I went to the SOL system and didn't find dear Earth... :-(
 
Dan_w: I'm not sure whether or not to include P2 as a Wing Commander game. I recall (perhaps an urban legend?) that the reason it doesn't have the WC title on it is because it got sent back from QA with the comment 'This isn't Wing Commander'.

Also, it was just...a bad game.
 
Add my Hancock to the list.

A defenceless Dray may be 'canon' and what the diehard Retros want, but let's be real here please.

In the origional Priv, the enemy pilots flew, as the hero puts it, like a blind grandmother. They weren't very good. Here, they fly like they're demented, pulling stunts that the Blue Angels wouldn't dare. Nevermind that they're oblivious to asteroids and often fly right into them.

Strip naked and jump into a tiger cage at the zoo. Chances are you won't last long, and any spectators would think you're suesidal crazy, or more than likely just plain Darwin Award stupid.
The Dray as it is - utterly defenceless - is that naked guy in the tiger cage, and as anyone who has tried to beat that infamous Oxford mission 40 times over knows, the cage has a whole lot of very hungry, recklessly fast tigers in it. Nix the 'canon' talk already, the naked guy Dray needs clothing and at least a big stick, as in a few laser turrets, to hold off the tigers until the zookeeper arrives. Otherwise pass it a Darwin and let it die fast so it don't breed.

Wanna call me a fanboy? Fine, go for it. I'm just stating facts here.
 
Penta2 said:
Dan_w: I'm not sure whether or not to include P2 as a Wing Commander game. I recall (perhaps an urban legend?) that the reason it doesn't have the WC title on it is because it got sent back from QA with the comment 'This isn't Wing Commander'.

Also, it was just...a bad game.

You may be right. I did enjoy P2, I must say, to some extent. I enjoyed the story. The images of bases were awsome. And the ships were 3D. Most of all, I enjoyed the feeling of depth at the bases, where you'd take a train ride to a nearby town, walk down a street and go see someone at his or her house or apartment. The first thing I thought of, when I started playing Privateer, was, wouldn't it be cool to combine a Doom engine with it, so that planets could be 3D? But while adding a second 3D engine for life on the ground would be trivial, these days, I realize that the biggest problem then would be generating 3D data for so many planets. P2 had this sort of compromise where bases had limited depth, with Myst style 3D, and I celebrated that; so I do not dislike P2 as much as you do, perhaps. Story-wise it seemed completely un-related, though; that's for sure. And what I really hated was having movies. I played the demo of WC Prophesy, and it also had movies, so I didn't buy it.

I think P2 could be considered WC if one were to place at some point in time centuries after P1. And this is what I was thinking when I said there'd be a lot of room for story making to fill the void between.
 
p.s. - yeah, i'm a 'retro', and i can compromise. but if its not good, then i'm going to raise a ruccus. thats the way it goes.

Well, Brad, like I said I'm pretty much a retro too. We seem to have very different priorities though. My retro side's TOP priority: Getting rid of those commodity and upgrade screens in Vegastrike style. This is for me the biggest obstacle to my nostalgic cravings. Whether a Drayman has one turret or a dozen makes absolutely no difference to my nostalgia, and I think four turrets, with leading autotracking, would be right, not because of nostalgia, or even in spite of nostalgia, but because of Drayman with only one turret is a bug.

Now, in terms of this attrition warfare that's been going on betwee pro/anti retro, I'm willing to hang my gun as quickly as I picked it up. All I ask is that there be room to discuss proposals on their merits, rather than an outright ban; and that the terms "fan boy" and "fan boy syndrome" be put to rest for good.

EDIT:
Another bug in the original Privateer, it seems to me in retrospect (though I haven't tested it on the original) is with the type and mountpoints of guns in capital ships. I found a way, while playing the remake, to destroy capital ships, that is fool-proof. With nothing but lasers on all four mounts, I put my speed at zero, then press F9 to match speed to the Khamak, then I start firing my lasers and tapping the afterburner until I'm just close enough to start hitting it. Its weapons cannot reach me, now, because lasers have longer range than any other gun, and because of the placement of the guns in the Khamak, it can do nothing to me, while I can just sit back until my lasers obliterate it. I suppose it could try launching missiles instead, but for some reason the AI doesn't. And I have ECM level 3 anyhow.
 
Taste righteous fire!!!!

No, seriously -- this is an open source project. It pretty much goes without saying that some stuff is shared, like graphics and so on. You want to take a Talon and mount eighty turrets on it? There's the units.csv, go nuts. Not sure people will play it though... this is where free market works I guess, people will play what they like.

About WCU, I definitely welcome the wisdom of those who know more about the universe than me. About the Drayman... Six turrets is OK if they're lasers playability wise, I suppose that a player Dray can be upgraded as much as the player wants. About P2, I think it DOES happen quite a lot of time after P1 (a hundred years?).

Again, I believe we'll end up with a "strict fidelity" PrivR build, an "improved playability" PrivR build, and WCU will evolve along similar ways -- I predict that at some point it will fork between pre-WCP and post-WCP. I didn't like WCP much, so I'm doing mostly pre right now, but changing that is a matter of punching in Neph ships and changing faction relations and can probably be done by one person in a weekend.
 
dan_w said:
I think P2 could be considered WC if one were to place at some point in time centuries after P1. And this is what I was thinking when I said there'd be a lot of room for story making to fill the void between.

I think it's better if we ignore P2. It's just too different.
 
Penta2 said:
included bans on persons admin disagree with solely for disagreeing with them makes matters worse.

This is certainly not the place to discuss the decisions of Administrators with regards to the rules or how they do their jobs. Any such complaints or discussions should be taken up via e-mail (chatzone@wcnews.com) and will be properly addressed. Bringing up these topics on the board has proven, in the past, to generally lead to stupid arguments or discussions that could easily have been avioded.
 
Unfortunately, it's seemed to have gone beyond simply having differences into throwing rocks at each other. The fact that such rocks have apparently (whether it's true or not, it's what is percieved in some quarters; I can't speak to it either way) included bans on persons admin disagree with solely for disagreeing with them makes matters worse.

That just plain isn't true. The *only* people on the ban list right now are someone named "X-Ray" (who was spamming rap albums) and someone named "WCSUCKS". The latter didn't post anything, but we decided discretion was the better part of valor in that case.

There are people who just don't like the community (or who just don't like me or Chris or whoever) who'll spread crap like that - but we're very, very slow to ban anyone -- and even slower to do it permanently. The average ban is a few hours to cool down a heated flamewar.

And in response to the other part of this thread: Privateer 2 is certainly a Wing Commander game.
 
A suggestion for the Draymans...

[Stealth Mode OFF]

I've a suggestion for the Draymans...back in the old days, there was this wicked fantastic Simulation called Falcon3 -- Yeah, I'm an Olde Farte -- it was a high-fidelity simulation of the F-16 Falcon...only problem was that the shoulder-launched SAM's were WAY too fast, WAY too powerful, WAY too hard to shake and they could go WAY too high, compared to the real SA-7 and SA-16 shoulder-launched SAMs. In the unpatched game, shoulder-launched SAMs could reach 20,000 feet, travelled at Mach2+ and almost always knocked you out of the sky -- not very realistic.

Someone came up with an executable patch-utility for Falcon3 that dealt specifically and ONLY with the Soviet-Bloc shoulder-launched SAMs...to wit, it gave you a choice of three different models, the SA-7a, the SA-7b and the SA-16 Gremlin (if memory serves)...each model had its own performance envelope, ie, speed, acceleration, altitude ceiling, turning radius, difficulty to 'spoof' and finally the power of its blast and the blast radius itelf.

The individual user was able to read the documentation, decide which model he/she wanted those pesky commie footsoldiers to have, and set the simulation accordingly.

So...somebody design an executable patch which will alter the Drayman to a 3-turret design...Retros can simply choose not to use it. Every reasonable player should be happy over this one, I think.

Peace, regards, etc...


.H*P*D.

"When in doubt, I whip it out!"
 
Back
Top