Is the game still in development?

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
M-k. In light of that, I retract "but left out the others around it". Apologies. However, it looks exactly as I had remembered it, as a discussion about modding, and spirit suggested vegastrike. I might add that the mention of WCU was simply to offer using pre rendered ships, not to advertise the mod itself.

It looks to me like it's someone specifically asking for help with *Secret Ops*... to which Spirit replies saying he should be using WCU.

Ok for one thing spirit is a SHE!!!!!

No, he's not. If dressing up as a woman is your creepy sex thing, more power to you... I'm sure we all have horrible, terrible creepy sex things... but Spirit uses it to take advantage of my community, not as some kind of free expression.

In the context of that awful livejournal, I can compare it only to how actual women pretend to be men on the internet because they *do* want to be treated equally. We have several cases of that here, I consider it the height of nobility... and Spirit is the point furthest from that. He wants to be special, he wants to use people - so he's a cute little girl online.

The problem lies within the fact that the CIC pretty much belongs to the more senior members here. Ergo they feel they have the right to push their own agendas, and do not appreciate others pushing a different agenda. Since WCU / PR / VS-in-general is not part of the 'CIC' agenda, it's a touchy subject and spirit was the unfortunate victim of championing her cause on a handful of occasions in what she considered to be a helpful manner. LOAF considered it spamming.

See, the problem here is that you're crazy. There's no "CIC agenda" - that's a kind of stupid conspiracy theory that's well beyond our poor power. We barely manage to write a pair of news updates every day -- we're not meeting in dark rooms and plotting the downfall of kings and princes. 'I'm being oppressed! They're out to get me!' is a sentiment that only seems cool to the person making it... it's the most tired, see-through cliche of all to everybody watching in 2005.

You're only shooting yourself in the foot by developing incestously. Here's a fun example: someone posted a 'title screen' image to use with WCU to your forums. Everybody there responded with some attaboys. You're so great, you're so find, etc. But you know what? Any real Wing Commander fan looks at that title screen and laughs his ass off -- because right there, center screen is a Concordia-class carrier... and you forgot to flip it. Seems completely inconsequential to the casual viewer - but to everybody here it's the absolute biggest possiblye sign that your fly is open. We all go 'hah! that model is straight out of RealSpace!'

Yes, we're a rough, coarse group - if we saw it, we'd make fun of it instead of patting you on the back... somebody would have to feel bad for a minute... but we'd mean well, and your mod would get fixed. Learn to handle that and you can have a good game someday.
 

John Cordell

Spaceman
charlieg said:
WCU has 'gone elsewhere', as has PR for that matter after the PGG fiasco.

PR moved elsewhere a month before PGG was released. PR would have moved with or without PGG. Believe it or not, there was no "fiasco" ;)

If Spirit would have posted only to the WCU forum about WCU things i'm sure nobody would have banned her. Every forum (community) has rules and when you break them you get "punished".
 

klauss

Spaceman
John Cordell said:
PR moved elsewhere a month before PGG was released.
That's true... I remember that. There was a period in which PR's site forwarded you to VegaStrike's.

BTW... why did it move?
I think it had something to do with PGG, though... I think people here were too strongly biased towards PGG rather than PR's view or something like that.
 

BradMick

Vice Admiral
BusbyLogic said:
Ok for one thing spirit is a SHE!!!!!


No sir, he is not. I've had many a conversation with Spiritplumber, and i'm not going to air anything out here. No need to. But, the she you claim HIM to be is false. It's a dude. I don't mean to be rude towards Spiritplumber, but it's the gods honest truth. Its a guy.

Anyway, the biggest gripe i have (and will always have) with WCU is the fact that its masqeurades as WC. You've got folks over there who are 'i want this so put it in!' running rampant. 'this isn't realistic enough, that caernavon would melt down in .003823545342 seconds if it doesn't have these heat sinks on it!' and all kinds of other crap like that which in the overall have completely destroyed any form of respect i once had. Its a great concept, but its used wing commander and the Remake as a crutch to create some kind of all encompassing game that isn't wing commander hardly at all. its god awful.

also, yes. LOAF is dead on. As an art guy myself, that image posted was awful not just because the carrier wasn't flipped, but because it shows the overwhelming lack of high qaulity work you'd expect from a wing commander project. if you look at Standoff, UE, the shots for (i dunno if its alive or what) Red Point Mod, and Flight Commander, there is an amazing level of visual qaulity and consistency. God, look at Gemini Gold as well. John has busted ass trying to ensure authenticity with that mod, and it has turned out abso-freaking-tastic! also, features != a great game. period. it just doesn't. You overwhelm the player with a bunch of useless crap that ultimately does nothing and they get lost and then bored, and stop playing. sure its a great novelty to be able to spin the toilet paper roll in the bathroom stall, but ultimately its pointless, and serves no purpose. Streamline. Give the player what they need to get from point a to b effectively and while having the greatest time possible. worrying about what religion a certain faction player is and all that kind of stuff is just insane. magazines you can pick up what news articles they'll have. i dont think you people realize the sheer volume of work that goes into this stuff. its all well and good to have a high and lofty goal, but when its so high and lofty so as to be un-reachable...gah, thats when it becomes time to re-evaluate and re-prioritize.
 

klauss

Spaceman
BradMick said:
Anyway, the biggest gripe i have (and will always have) with WCU is the fact that its masqeurades as WC. You've got folks over there who are 'i want this so put it in!' running rampant. 'this isn't realistic enough, that caernavon would melt down in .003823545342 seconds if it doesn't have these heat sinks on it!' and all kinds of other crap like that which in the overall have completely destroyed any form of respect i once had. Its a great concept, but its used wing commander and the Remake as a crutch to create some kind of all encompassing game that isn't wing commander hardly at all. its god awful.
Well... you can't go overboard with reality with a WC project, but a little bit of realistic features won't bother me and shouldn't bother you. I mean... you can't tell me the Caernaven (what's the correct spelling anyway?) is graphically perfect and shouldn't be changed... it's simplicity is due to the technical limitations of the time. Retexturing it is absolutely needed, more than just acceptable, and adding a heatsink is just a form of greeble - you can comment freely on the tastyness of such greebling, though, but that's most decidedly got nothing to do with WC, just pure art.

BradMick said:
also, yes. LOAF is dead on. As an art guy myself, that image posted was awful not just because the carrier wasn't flipped, but because it shows the overwhelming lack of high qaulity work you'd expect from a wing commander project. if you look at Standoff, UE, the shots for (i dunno if its alive or what) Red Point Mod, and Flight Commander, there is an amazing level of visual qaulity and consistency.
Well... I don't mind constructive criticism. But, having been some time around this board, people here shoot to kill first. A great part of all the criticism around here is either nonconstructive, bordering plain meanness, or just incorrectly (IMO) biased by fanatic adherence to canon. I don't mean that there isn't constructive criticism... only that the other kind is overly abundant.

BradMick said:
God, look at Gemini Gold as well. John has busted ass trying to ensure authenticity with that mod, and it has turned out abso-freaking-tastic!
I think you're wrong. The reason why GG turned out so great isn't exactly because of authenticity, but because of the attention to detail. Most places where things worked not that great, be it bugs or glitches in the engine or whatever, were carefully tweaked until everything fit together perfectly. Lack of bugs and glitches, really, is what IMO makes GG so great.

BradMick said:
also, features != a great game. period. it just doesn't.
You're damn right.

BradMick said:
You overwhelm the player with a bunch of useless crap that ultimately does nothing and they get lost and then bored, and stop playing.
But WCU is not a game... Priv3 (or whatever the name ends up being) will. WCU is a bunch of features, which you can grab, to make your own mod - saving you the time of trying to implement the features yourself. Incidentally, you can play WCU and it's fun... but WCU is not aiming at that.

BradMick said:
...but when its so high and lofty so as to be un-reachable...gah, thats when it becomes time to re-evaluate and re-prioritize.

That's right. But I usually consider a good thing to start aiming high, and if that ends up being an impossible shot, lower your aim a bit, until you get to a possible target.
 

BradMick

Vice Admiral
my main means of designing anything is to start with the smallest possible handful, well...possible. once that has been accomplished and is 100%, then add a little more. start small, then go bigger. that way you dont have this insanely daunting task laid out before you that never gets done because the intimidation factor overwhelms you.


its not so much adherance to canon so much as putting something like a heat sink on a ship from WC is rediculous, ugly...and...well, the greeble textures are just awful. seriously, i dont mean to be mean here, but NO game studio would ever dream of allowing something like that caernavon texture into a game. period. its tachy. theres no visual interest to it what so ever. also, WC has never been about being the most realistic kid on the block with regards to science things. ships zippin around at KPS, takes the Tarawa about an hour to boost up to 10,000 kps. all the guns firing like mad in combat and not exploding from heat issues, hydrogen scoops slowing a ship down..and on and on. trying to put those things into wc is really a bad move.

i agree, sure the textures could do with a bit of a revamping, but not like what has been done. all the textures should be standardized for the most part. either with the standoff look, or pioneer look, or whatever. pick a visual style, get one artist to do up the textures in that style, and then see how much better it all looks. not this piece meal deal you guys have going on. in addition to publishing a stable, unique editor for people to create whatever their heart desires with WC, you need it to LOOK professional as well. it is a great concept, so far its execution has been awful.
 

Halman

PSY-YI-YI
klauss said:
Well... you can't go overboard with reality with a WC project, but a little bit of realistic features won't bother me and shouldn't bother you. I mean... you can't tell me the Caernaven (what's the correct spelling anyway?) is graphically perfect and shouldn't be changed... it's simplicity is due to the technical limitations of the time. Retexturing it is absolutely needed, more than just acceptable, and adding a heatsink is just a form of greeble - you can comment freely on the tastyness of such greebling, though, but that's most decidedly got nothing to do with WC, just pure art.

First off, you can go overboard with everything. And you guys have, with everything.

Second, the thing that really - REALLY - steams me off is that you take carte blanche with regards to modifying other people's work and then defend it by saying that is how they would have done it if they'd had a choice.

So no, it isn't 'just a form of greeble'. It's an example of purest arrogance. Good job WCU!

Well... I don't mind constructive criticism. But, having been some time around this board, people here shoot to kill first. A great part of all the criticism around here is either nonconstructive, bordering plain meanness, or just incorrectly (IMO) biased by fanatic adherence to canon. I don't mean that there isn't constructive criticism... only that the other kind is overly abundant.

Ok yeah, you got me. But whats the point in telling pudding to stand up? Whenever helpful suggestions or criticism were given, it always seemed to be ignored in favor of what you'd already done. I wonder why we stopped trying.

I think you're wrong. The reason why GG turned out so great isn't exactly because of authenticity, but because of the attention to detail. Most places where things worked not that great, be it bugs or glitches in the engine or whatever, were carefully tweaked until everything fit together perfectly. Lack of bugs and glitches, really, is what IMO makes GG so great.

So, what you're saying is that the reason it's good is that it somehow managed to be the only VegaStrike game that wasn't crippled by bugs?

I'd like to think it's because he got rid of all the other 'brilliant' stuff added to PR to make it 'fun'.


But WCU is not a game... Priv3 (or whatever the name ends up being) will. WCU is a bunch of features, which you can grab, to make your own mod - saving you the time of trying to implement the features yourself. Incidentally, you can play WCU and it's fun... but WCU is not aiming at that.

Again, the same overbearing arrogance that you would even use the name during your development cycle.(I refer to the use of 'Priv 3', which isn't yours to use in any way, I know you open source jerks forget that EA would probably frown on you making a privateer style game called Privateer 3. )

As to the use of WCU as a development toolkit, your various buglists suggest it would be easier to start from scratch.

That's right. But I usually consider a good thing to start aiming high, and if that ends up being an impossible shot, lower your aim a bit, until you get to a possible target.

I can't think of a clever way to say something mean here. :)
 

klauss

Spaceman
Halman said:
First off, you can go overboard with everything. And you guys have, with everything.
I think I was clear, but just in case: I meant that it's wrong going overboard with realism in anything WC-related.

Halman said:
Second, the thing that really - REALLY - steams me off is that you take carte blanche with regards to modifying other people's work and then defend it by saying that is how they would have done it if they'd had a choice.
Come on... tell me one reason why you think ships can't be beautified that isn't just fanatism.

Halman said:
So no, it isn't 'just a form of greeble'. It's an example of purest arrogance. Good job WCU!
And I rest my case (shoot to kill)


Halman said:
Whenever helpful suggestions or criticism were given, it always seemed to be ignored in favor of what you'd already done. I wonder why we stopped trying.
You're the one that was fervently opposed to the Priv3 (more on that name later) storyline there at sourceforge?
Man... you can't get like this just because people don't agree with you.


Halman said:
So, what you're saying is that the reason it's good is that it somehow managed to be the only VegaStrike game that wasn't crippled by bugs?
That sounds ugly... but it's true. GG took PR, which at the time had lots of bugs (now it's much cleaner), and while removing anything non-canon, it also removed bugs and glitches. Ships/Stations that didn't look good were made to look good, the navmap (hideous navmap the one in PR) was made to look better within the constraints of the engine (for instance, you can't change the icons), the font bug (an engine bug, fonts looked strange) was circumvented by limiting the game to a maximum resolution of 800x600, things like that. A game may be good even if it has bugs... buf if you take that game and strip it of its bugs, it becomes a great game. If you didn't try PR, you should try it after the rebalancing (which will make it much better by fixing those horribly difficult missions). It became much less buggy and all.
Anyway, I wasn't referring to just bugs. Inbalances, inconsistencies, things like that. Details.

Halman said:
I'd like to think it's because he got rid of all the other 'brilliant' stuff added to PR to make it 'fun'.
Think what you want. I said what I think. But you can't tell me that the missing bugs are not a big part of that betterness.


Halman said:
Again, the same overbearing arrogance that you would even use the name during your development cycle.(I refer to the use of 'Priv 3', which isn't yours to use in any way, I know you open source jerks forget that EA would probably frown on you making a privateer style game called Privateer 3. )
Well... right and wrong. Right, P3 is not a good name... if anything, Privateer 2.5, because it takes place between P1 and P2. But, anyway, P3 is a nonexistent game... why wouldn't we be able to use the name? Why would it be arrogance? Don't just say things like that... you have to back them up, you know. Otherwise, I won't take you seriously.

Halman said:
As to the use of WCU as a development toolkit, your various buglists suggest it would be easier to start from scratch.
Do you undersand the concept behind "Work in progress"? Why am I asking... you obviously don't.



Halman said:
I can't think of a clever way to say something mean here. :)
Phew...
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
Well... I don't mind constructive criticism. But, having been some time around this board, people here shoot to kill first. A great part of all the criticism around here is either nonconstructive, bordering plain meanness, or just incorrectly (IMO) biased by fanatic adherence to canon. I don't mean that there isn't constructive criticism... only that the other kind is overly abundant.

See, this is an issue that WCU specifically created. Every other project understands how this works. You are fitting into the community, the community is not fitting around you.

People look at the fan games and they find continuity errors. This is what science fiction fans on the internet do. Before we had an internet, we published fanzines specifically for this purpose. A vast percentage of Wing Commander discussion is about doing just this to the real games, movies, books, etc. Applying this standard to a fan project is not the personal affront Spirit et. al. are certain is being commited against them. Rather, it's something that *helps* the project *and* is something that's done to *every* project.

Your elitist little bunch is still whining about a thread where people dared, dared to tell them what the armament of a Drayman is. It was six or eight months ago, and it's still stuck in Spirit's craw that someone would correct this.

You are seeing electric eels in all the shadows - when someone quotes a novel and gives you a page source, they're *specifically going out of their way* to help you. It's not some esoteric pseudintellctualism, though surely many of us are classically trained in that area... it's so that you can come back and go '... ah, but two paragraphs later!'.

*That* is how it's done. Most fan projects have someone smart enough to make arguments for the decicions they don't want to change, and they're also smart enough not to take any of it personally. Quarto and I can spar all we want about how many torpedoes there should be in Standoff, but at the end of the day I still think those guys are brilliant and I'll play anything they let me download. I assume, since he's still willing to debate me about amazingly pointless little things, he feels the same way about me. Debate is good, by the way. It's a highly, highly respectable art form... and in terms of Wing Commander, we treat intelligent debate way up there. Citing something isn't an end to an argument - it's the start of one.

The proper response to "Claw Marks says the Drayman has X turrets" is "ah, but they weren't simulated here, and in terms of gameplay balance we felt this was important because {explanation}". The wrong response - and let me stress this - is "SCREW YOU GUYS! WE LIKE IT THIS WAY! YOU'RE JUST BEING NERDS POINTING OUT STUFF LIKE THIS! WE'RE TAKING OUR CAKE AND GOING HOME!" The reason there aren't masses of people agreeing with the WCU 'point of view' in these silly little fights is because their point of view is inherently offensive to the community they're claiming to serve.



Well... right and wrong. Right, P3 is not a good name... if anything, Privateer 2.5, because it takes place between P1 and P2. But, anyway, P3 is a nonexistent game... why wouldn't we be able to use the name? Why would it be arrogance? Don't just say things like that... you have to back them up, you know. Otherwise, I won't take you seriously.

Electronic Arts has shown a strong willingness to pursue legal action against 'sequel' games using its trademarks. The best way to get your Ultima fan game a cease and desist letter is to call it 'Ultima X'.

Again, Halman is trying to warn you about a legitimate issue - and you're offended that he'd even talk to you. That's not a good attitude to have.

(And what if he had cited sources? Past performance suggests you'd just call him an obesssive geek for doing so in the first place...)
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
Come on... tell me one reason why you think ships can't be beautified that isn't just fanatism.

I wanted to add some thoughts on this.

One, it's an example of the argument that just doesn't work - don't agree with me, then you're a fanatic.

Second, you're misrepresenting the issue. The problem isn't that you're changing the texture of the frigate - you're also presuming to literally (a post earlier) tell us that your way is right.

That's what doesn't fly in the Wing Commander community - the claim that Origin would have made the frigate look your way if they'd had the ability.

For one thing, it's clearly not true - there's high res renderings of the thing, there's an archive of sketches of how theyw anted it to look, etc... but *that* is the arrogance Halman is talking about, not the desire to spiff if up in the first place.

You have a terrible black and white view of things that if anyone says anything negative, they must be purely against all aspects of it. If people do'nt like your claim about the frigate, that means they must hate the fact that you've done X, Y and Z to it. No one is sayiing that. If you devleop a new look for the frigate, more power to you - but the fact that you're going around telling everyone that it's the best (and the only natural) look and that they're "fanatics" for disagreeing with you is what's making them not particularly impressed.
 

klauss

Spaceman
Man... why am I so little understood around here?
Everything I say is took the wrong way... let me try to explain.

Bandit LOAF said:
See, this is an issue that WCU specifically created. Every other project understands how this works. You are fitting into the community, the community is not fitting around you.
I could argue that. This will sound egocentric at first... read it all before thinking about it.
I'm the comunity.
You're the comunity.
WE are the comunity.
Noone fits nowhere... we just get along... or don't.
And, although I'm involved in WCU, WCU is not my project (I don't consider it mine - I just help with it).
But... should it be my project... I would be the one calling the shots on it. If anyone wants to give ideas, probably hoping to convince me that they're good and getting me to implement them, they shouldn't get all worked up if they fail. Sometimes people agree, sometimes they don't. That doesn't mean that one of us doesn't like WingCommander or that one of us is insulting WingCommander, their creators or their fans... it just means we think differently.
What I meant earlier is that people here don't see differences that way... they do get all worked up, and quickly start bashing against the divergent minority.

Bandit LOAF said:
People look at the fan games and they find continuity errors. This is what science fiction fans on the internet do. Before we had an internet, we published fanzines specifically for this purpose. A vast percentage of Wing Commander discussion is about doing just this to the real games, movies, books, etc. Applying this standard to a fan project is not the personal affront Spirit et. al. are certain is being commited against them. Rather, it's something that *helps* the project *and* is something that's done to *every* project.
Hey... I have nothing against that. I was never referring to comments on continuity errors... it's the comments on really irrelevant stuff that I call fanatism, like, for instance, calling an act of arrogance an attempt to beautify a ship. If you do that, you at least have to get a little deeper on your motives, otherwise it's just an insult, and noone will say "Great, thanks for your insights" when facing an insult.
Well... at least without sarcasm in mind.

Bandit LOAF said:
Your elitist little bunch is still whining about a thread where people dared, dared to tell them what the armament of a Drayman is. It was six or eight months ago, and it's still stuck in Spirit's craw that someone would correct this.
I'm not. I hardly remember that one.

Bandit LOAF said:
You are seeing electric eels in all the shadows - when someone quotes a novel and gives you a page source, they're *specifically going out of their way* to help you. It's not some esoteric pseudintellctualism, though surely many of us are classically trained in that area... it's so that you can come back and go '... ah, but two paragraphs later!'
Again... not my point. What about, instead of quoting that book: "Your an arrogant bunch, modifying other people's work because you think that's what they would have done had they been able to" (which, you must recognize, I'm not making up - perhaps paraphrasing).
If someone quoted a book on his/her comments, you should know by know, I would debate with an open mind until either one of us gets convinced of a) my POV, b) the other one's POV, or c) a new POV, better than both. It's my way. Yet, that's not what I've seen when someone defends canon. Perhaps I've seen little, but I can only talk out of my own experience.

Bandit LOAF said:
The proper response to "Claw Marks says the Drayman has X turrets" is "ah, but they weren't simulated here, and in terms of gameplay balance we felt this was important because {explanation}". The wrong response - and let me stress this - is "SCREW YOU GUYS! WE LIKE IT THIS WAY! YOU'RE JUST BEING NERDS POINTING OUT STUFF LIKE THIS! WE'RE TAKING OUR CAKE AND GOING HOME!"
When did I give the impression of thinking otherwise?

Bandit LOAF said:
Electronic Arts has shown a strong willingness to pursue legal action against 'sequel' games using its trademarks. The best way to get your Ultima fan game a cease and desist letter is to call it 'Ultima X'.
I know we can't use Privateer 3 as the final name. It's just the development name, as Chicago for Windows98. I thought that was clear, given:

Halman said:
Again, the same overbearing arrogance that you would even use the name during your development cycle.

So,

Bandit LOAF said:
Again, Halman is trying to warn you about a legitimate issue - and you're offended that he'd even talk to you. That's not a good attitude to have.
Was not the case, and

Bandit LOAF said:
Again, Halman is trying to warn you about a legitimate issue - and you're offended that he'd even talk to you. That's not a good attitude to have.
That is neither. I'm "offended" (not that much, really) because he called me arrogant. Not once. Many times.

Bandit LOAF said:
(And what if he had cited sources? Past performance suggests you'd just call him an obesssive geek for doing so in the first place...)

Wow... Past performance?
Where?
I don't recall acting like that ever.
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
I'd write out a lengthier response, but again you're taking personal offense for yourself when the actual thing being discussed is the project and the actions of the projects at large. I barely know you, and I certainly don't know what part you may or may not have played in WCU's decisions and actions in the past... but *those* are what we're discussing, not you personally.
 

klauss

Spaceman
Bandit LOAF said:
I wanted to add some thoughts on this.

One, it's an example of the argument that just doesn't work - don't agree with me, then you're a fanatic.

Second, you're misrepresenting the issue. The problem isn't that you're changing the texture of the frigate - you're also presuming to literally (a post earlier) tell us that your way is right.

That's what doesn't fly in the Wing Commander community - the claim that Origin would have made the frigate look your way if they'd had the ability.

For one thing, it's clearly not true - there's high res renderings of the thing, there's an archive of sketches of how theyw anted it to look, etc... but *that* is the arrogance Halman is talking about, not the desire to spiff if up in the first place.

You have a terrible black and white view of things that if anyone says anything negative, they must be purely against all aspects of it. If people do'nt like your claim about the frigate, that means they must hate the fact that you've done X, Y and Z to it. No one is sayiing that. If you devleop a new look for the frigate, more power to you - but the fact that you're going around telling everyone that it's the best (and the only natural) look and that they're "fanatics" for disagreeing with you is what's making them not particularly impressed.

LOAF, Halman didn't even give precisions. What was I supposed to assume?
That is what bothers me.

If he had said:

You're arrogant in thinking that they would have wanted it to look like what you made it look. Couldn't it have been different? Did you bother doing some research, looking for concept art?

I probably wouldn't have minded. Basically, I would have said:

Hm... concept art... where?

But not. He said:
You're arrogant


Bandit LOAF said:
but the fact that you're going around telling everyone that it's the best (and the only natural) look and that they're "fanatics" for disagreeing with you is what's making them not particularly impressed.
I never said that. That's so untrue. Show me a quote of myself... I dare you. I'm not like that. I don't say those things. Now... you may have misinterpreted something, that's possible.
 

klauss

Spaceman
Bandit LOAF said:
I'd write out a lengthier response, but again you're taking personal offense for yourself when the actual thing being discussed is the project and the actions of the projects at large. I barely know you, and I certainly don't know what part you may or may not have played in WCU's decisions and actions in the past... but *those* are what we're discussing, not you personally.

I'm not taking anything personal.
Basically, I've had little to do with past decisions on WCU.
I've been mostly concentrating on the technical issues, and I want to get sound working right. That's all.

But it does amaze me how badly people understand what I'm saying. I mean, I say one thing, and then a post answering as if I had said the exact opposite. That does reflect personally... I do want to be understood.
And just leaving without clarifying would be worse, I think.
 

klauss

Spaceman
Sorry for the multiple posting, but I thought this was better than editing:

Also, there's people correcting canon inconsistencies within WCU wherever possible. We do give importance to canon. But, sometimes, canon itself is inconsistent or incomplete. Then, we get to make up things because canon does not give us a solution. If we ever get to making up things when canon gave us a clear solution, I'm sure we would take it... if anything, that's ignorance, not arrogance.
And I'm certainly quite ignorant of WC canon. I mean, I know most games, but not all, and so I have a very incomplete view of things. If I mess up, I expect people correcting me politely, for I have not insulted anyone, and I don't intend to.
 
LOAF, you said once that "Any real Wing Commander fan looks at that title screen and laughs his ass off -- because right there, center screen is a Concordia-class carrier... and you forgot to flip it." I repeat, "Any real wing commander fan." What the hell does that mean? Just because we play WCU that we aren't wing commander fans? Suddenly anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't worthy of the title or something. Because we didn't say "You suck for not flipping the tower you retard! " If that isn't arrogance, what is? And BradMick, you aren't the only artist in the world, so there isn't any reason to take you seriously when you flame Master Wookies picture.
 

klauss

Spaceman
Blue_paladin, I know you're defending us, and that's good, but your argumenting using an ad-hominem falacy. It won't help.

Although it's an interesting remark... I hadn't noticed.

However, paladin... looking at that title screen shows how badly the models in WCU need beautifying.

So... regardless of anything said, I really like the "concept art" idea.
I repeat:

Hm... concept art... where?
 

BradMick

Vice Admiral
Well Paladin, I guess if you discount the numerous ways i've proven myself as a competent artist these past few years (if you need examples i'll load you up), then no...I guess my opinion doesn't much matter. But taking into account I know what the hell i'm talking about, then yeah my opinion matters quite a bit i'd think. I'm pretty sure also if I asked Eder or some of the other exceptionally talented individuals who've been around here for a while what they thought of master wookies piece of work, they'd all agree. When folks who know what they're talking about say 'it's not good' that's pretty good cause for listening and fixing. But hey, what do I know...I only have all my artwork picked apart everyday at school (since art is my major and all) by my peers, and their a lot worse than me when it comes to picking something apart.
 

klauss

Spaceman
Brad, just for your ease, I really think you're a great artist and I would always pay attention to what you say. I must confess, though, that I'm a little bit out of context regarding this specific issue. But... I would say your opinion matters. Perhaps it's just the way of expressing such opinion. Anyway, I've never seen you expressing it in an offending manner... so... paladin... what are you talking about?
 
Top