Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mainwaring]

On an entirely flipped side of the coin, I bought SFC3 because it *wasn't* SFB. And I can think of a fair number of others who did. Of course, all I continue to play it for is TNZ, which is just a thoroughly awesome mod an community. If not for that... well. But to me, SFB has never felt like a real trek game. Things... just don't feel right. SFC3 isn't quite entirely there, either, but it's close enough to count, especially with the DW and TNZ mods to plug some gaps.

My only comment in response to your comments, Nanner, at least at the moment, is that I have some issues with power management (hotkey slider memory sets would be killer), but Let's not confuse fine detail control with quality. Can you *really* juggle that many sliders in the thick of combat? How far can you split your attention? When does micro-managing your ship take over from playing the game? the way i see it, what SFC3 has in that regard is right where it should be-- enough detail that you can juggle the power to your liking on the fly, but also little enough that you don't spend most of your time doing it, which means that gameplay doesn't bog down.

Now, if only it was just a *little* more mod-able and we could get a real patch out of it.

[jimmi7769]

Quote:
On an entirely flipped side of the coin, I bought SFC3 because it *wasn't* SFB. And I can think of a fair number of others who did. Of course, all I continue to play it for is TNZ, which is just a thoroughly awesome mod an community. If not for that... well. But to me, SFB has never felt like a real trek game. Things... just don't feel right. SFC3 isn't quite entirely there, either, but it's close enough to count, especially with the DW and TNZ mods to plug some gaps.

My only comment in response to your comments, Nanner, at least at the moment, is that I have some issues with power management (hotkey slider memory sets would be killer), but Let's not confuse fine detail control with quality. Can you *really* juggle that many sliders in the thick of combat? How far can you split your attention? When does micro-managing your ship take over from playing the game? the way i see it, what SFC3 has in that regard is right where it should be-- enough detail that you can juggle the power to your liking on the fly, but also little enough that you don't spend most of your time doing it, which means that gameplay doesn't bog down.

Now, if only it was just a *little* more mod-able and we could get a real patch out of it.  

And this attitude is entirely fine but, how many games out there don't use the SFB rules???? and how many do???  Us SFB nerds like to have something we enjoy as well.  I enjoy plenty of games without SFB rules.  Freelancer is one I play a lot, no SFB in there.  

But, for those of us that do like SFB when SFC came out touting that it was using SFB as a base we were all very excited about it.  I know it was the first game I ever pre ordered off the internet.  The next was SFC2.  I bought 3 and I did enjoy playing it and the dom wars and TNZ modsand now that SG3 is over I might play some more if I can figure out what I have to download.  

[NannerSlug]

one other thing i forgot to post would be adding in detail to the hard points.. instead of simply piling all the mass into a single generalization - each hard point would have its own mass restriction. this would really add detail to the ship  - in addition to taking care of some of the odd-ball whacked out designs.

regarding power management: i just want full control of my ship.

[Fire_Ant]

Quote:
bah.

I'll say once more: I bought SFC for the SFB content. I never bought SFC3.

-- Luc  

Same here.  I grabbed up SFC1 at the same time I was buying my system.  I loved it!  My intro to SFB was actually through FASAs Star Trek Starship Tactical Combat Simulator.  A mouthfull to be sure which I later discovered  was basically a ripoff of SFB.  So I got into SFB but never really found anyone who wanted to learn the basic rules for some reason. LOL  So playing it on the computer was a joy, but it fell so short of what SFB actually was.  When SFC2 came out I snatched it right up and was enamored by how much more of SFB was in it as well as all the improvements.  I had high hopes for SFC3.  I was looking forward to seeing the Andromidans and the Tholians as well as additional systems found in SFB.  When I heard SFC3 was TNG it was a major disappointment.  I knew the SFB world was out the window and the game would be as dissappointing to me as the TV series.  (Bring back DS9 that was real ST)  I'm waiting until I get my new system to get OP and hoping SFC4 will go back to SFB.  If they dont then I dont plan on buying any more ST games.  If you dont like SFB based ST than there are a number of ST games out to suit you.  None of which you will find on my computer.  

[rmahannah]

I also feel that SFC 3 could have been more complete right down to the ship explosion graphics and sounds.  I do like SFC 3 for some of the new features like warping and cloak scan, but I was a little let down when I played it the first time.  When it was released, I was really into SFC 2, and that was probably part of the problem.  I miss T-Bombs, and the more intricate ship management found in SFC 1 and 2.  I guess I felt more in command of the ship with more to do, after all a Starship should make you feel that you are busy when flying her!  Anyway, that's my 2 cents.  I am waiting for the "Final" patch for SFC 3 before I download those MODS everyone is talking about, but I am looking forward to it!!!    

[jimmi7769]

Quote:
I also feel that SFC 3 could have been more complete right down to the ship explosion graphics and sounds.  I do like SFC 3 for some of the new features like warping and cloak scan, but I was a little let down when I played it the first time.  When it was released, I was really into SFC 2, and that was probably part of the problem.  I miss T-Bombs, and the more intricate ship management found in SFC 1 and 2.  I guess I felt more in command of the ship with more to do, after all a Starship should make you feel that you are busy when flying her!  Anyway, that's my 2 cents.  I am waiting for the "Final" patch for SFC 3 before I download those MODS everyone is talking about, but I am looking forward to it!!!      

Don't wait, download the mods now.  They really change the game for the better

Also, you may be waiting for a loooonnnngggg time.

[Sethan]

I own SFC, SFC2, and OP.  I will buy a copy of SFC3 to support Taldren as soon as I have a regular job again, but it will never leave shrinkwrap - I simply have no interest in the game.

Like Firesoul, I bought SFC for the SFB content.

SFC3 went away from its roots, and away from what many of the SFC fans wanted.  Taldren had to make the game someone would pay them to make.  Activision wanted a simpler TNG based version of SFC, and that is what they got.

SFC2 has great staying power because it is a great game, despite the remaining bugs.  I expect it to be played long after SFC3 is forgotten.  I just wish someone would finance GaW while it is still possible to do.

[SPQR Renegade001]

Quote:
My only comment in response to your comments, Nanner, at least at the moment, is that I have some issues with power management (hotkey slider memory sets would be killer), but Let's not confuse fine detail control with quality. Can you *really* juggle that many sliders in the thick of combat? How far can you split your attention? When does micro-managing your ship take over from playing the game? the way i see it, what SFC3 has in that regard is right where it should be-- enough detail that you can juggle the power to your liking on the fly, but also little enough that you don't spend most of your time doing it, which means that gameplay doesn't bog down.

I think the level of control and effect Nanner is talking about, would give some performance advantage to a player who choose to micro-manage his ship, at the cost of a bit of tactical awareness. The player who chooses to manage his power closely, is going eek the last bit of performance out of his ship, but in doing so might not be completly aware of the battle running around him. A player who can manage his power and keep his situational awareness high is going to be truely leathal when compared to a player who lets his ship run itself or one who manages at the cost of battle.

As for bogging gameplay... Taking the time to manage power doesn't bog gameplay, the game continues wether or not you choose to pay attention to it.  

[Kieran Forester]

Nanner, in response to what you said above about Chris Jones' mods never being used in a server, I can give you a simple reason: The download is frickin' huge. Each of his major mods are over 100 MB with the first installment - and the updates he adds afterwards jack it up even more. The OP TNG mod alone, with all the updates, is over 500 MB. 56k'ers would probably spend as much time downloading the thing as they would playing on the server.

And also, what you said about D2 mod servers is not entirely true - Day of the Eagle was a mod server, and we've been having servers with modded shiplists(but no actual new models) for a long time.

[Lepton1]

I haven't read the whole thread but here are my remarks.  SFC3 is not SFC2.  Turning it into SFC2 is not the answer since that cannot be done nor is Taldren likely to put out a new SFC title.  They have pretty much stated that.

What SFC3 needs is the adoption of a standard mod to reinvigorate the players.  I would suggest the TNZ mod or some synthesis of existing mods.  The TNZ players are fanatical such that they are willing to donate money to upkeep and update their server. I don't think they are particularly fanatical people, but I do think the mod is very good.  More ships, more weapons, more races.  That's what SFC3 is missing and mods can provide that.

[grave]

this is just my thoughts on this... i feel that if any one from talgren really visited these fourms and went through the posts befor makeing the game sfc3 then they would have realised that even though we were all screaming "were is SFC3! we have been wateing forever!" that most of us would have perfered that they had taken the additional time to FINISH the game befor reliceing it. its easy to tell that the had planed on more races from the files with race names including things like species 8472 and what not. its my feeling that ther dont give a rats A@# about us the gamer. I also feel verry betrayed by them for not reliceing a stable game that they knew would not be up to par. If taldren had taken the time to finish the game prior to reliceing it with out saying to them selves "oh people wont care its not ready they will wate for a patch fr as long as it takes us to do it"and had finished the game I feel it COULD have a good game.                                                                                                                                                                                                    now that thats said. i also wanted to say that i have ALL the mods for SFC3 that i have seen come out on this fourm. i have added a few together like the TNZ mod wich i love and the MIRANDA sp? mod. like its ben posted i use dial up( ya i know it sucks but cant get dsl or brodband were im at) to download them all. and it HAS taken a verry long time to get them all. but the mods have added some flair and playability to the game that was verry lacking when it was shiped. BUt even with all of the mods ive tryed and played (and ive been playing sence SFC1 first came out) id rather play SFC1 then fight with an unfinishd porly made and non suported SFC3...
well thats my 2 cents worth thanks for listening to me ramble  

[Whiplash]

They need to make a GOOD game, and it does not HAVE TO BE SFB based. It is possible for a game to be good that is not based on SFB.

However, SFB is a proven, balanced system that had DECADES of playtesting and thought behind it. Any new game they hack together and spend less than a YEAR playtesting is just not going to stack up. SFC3 is a perfect example of that.

Games that keep you coming back have a certain DEPTH of play. That requires some complexity, and you can't playtest that quickly.

W.

[NannerSlug]

sfc3 is closer than you think. many like it. sure, there need to be some things added and changed.. but its darned close.. and there are many, many other games which did just fine in the time of development - ranging from total annihilation to rainbow 6 and battlefield 1942.

sfb did provide a compelling base for the game.. but it is not the end all to be all.

if you have tried the tnz or dw mods, i think you will find that many of the gaps have been filled.. not that its complete, because there are a number of things which could have been added to the detail column (fya, lya, restrictions on ship yard, t-bombs, different arcs, individual hard point mass restrictions, individualized power managment) which would add more to it.. but it has a lot more potential and game play then you are giving it credit for.

[FireSoul]

Although I agree that many like SFC3 and that it's a game on its own, I don't agree on the following statement:

Quote:

sfb did provide a compelling base for the game.. but it is not the end all to be all.

For me it is. It's why I bought the games in the first place. I would not have touched the titles otherwise.

[Mr. Hypergol]

 

Quote:
 For me it is. It's why I bought the games in the first place. I would not have touched the titles otherwise.
 

Same here. (big surprise I know....LOL)

The SFC series are the only Star Trek computer games I have ever owned (although I'm thinking about picking up the Armada and Elite Force games now).

For those who dismiss SFB please understand that I already have a shelf FULL of games "not" based on SFB.  I want  just one of these game series to be based on SFB......and stay that way.  

[jimmi7769]

Quote:
 

Quote:
 For me it is. It's why I bought the games in the first place. I would not have touched the titles otherwise.
 

Same here. (big surprise I know....LOL)

The SFC series are the only Star Trek computer games I have ever owned (although I'm thinking about picking up the Armada and Elite Force games now).

For those who dismiss SFB please understand that I already have a shelf FULL of games "not" based on SFB.  I want  just one of these game series to be based on SFB......and stay that way.  

Hyper's right, I've got loads of Video games not based on SFB, and when I was younger I played many paper and pencil games that were not SFB, but it was nice to have some games in both areas that were(are) based on my favorite game system.

Heck, I spend more time playing Freelancer right now anyway and the only things trek in there are a few models and no SFB at all.

I'd try TNZ or Dom Wars more but there was never any room on the server of TNZ and no one playing on Dom Wars so I lost interest.

[Jim]

Absolutely.  SFC is a great game because it is based on SFB.  Not Trek.  SFB could have changed all the names of the races and weapons and it would have still been the best space wargame ever made.  And ADB could have had full control over all the content.

I think that someone *should* make SFC:GAW based entirely on SFB and add all the missing stuff back in.  Change ALL the races to eliminate any mention of Trek so that you get rid of the licensing mess.  The game doesn't need Trek as a crutch to survive.

And as to good Trek games... to date there aren't any.  SFC is NOT a Trek game.  It just happened to have called the original races names from Star Trek.  I bet Steve Cole wishes he had made up his own races now.

Anyway...  here's to hoping that someday the entire SFB rulebook gets computerized into a great game.  If they make it, it will sell.

Jim  

[NannerSlug]

Quote:
 The SFC series are the only Star Trek computer games I have ever owned (although I'm thinking about picking up the Armada and Elite Force games now).

For those who dismiss SFB please understand that I already have a shelf FULL of games "not" based on SFB.  I want  just one of these game series to be based on SFB......and stay that way.  

thats great hyper.. and im not saying that in a belittling fashion (or to firesoul for that matter).. but what makes that so special beyond your personal perferences.. e.g. what is the purpose of the game.. is it to produce a good trek game which with the best possible rule set or replicate sfb as best as possible within the real time setting. therein lies the issue for my self. from my understanding and discussions with many folk - the purpose was to produce as strong a trek game as possible using the best rule set. in sfc1/2 that was sfb (even then, there are more differences with the sfb rule set than similarities - but it does use that as a basis). that said, then the game is not held to what i would refere to as the bonds of a particular rule set - but is opened up to interpretation and development.

i mean, what make's anyone's vision of a particular rule set better over someone else's. some would say performance (which i can agree with), some might say the over all experience. it simply varies and there again lies another issue to be dealt with.

for me, as someone who plays a HUGE ammount of games (probably more than i should  - and i need to spend more time with my family, really) - i see it as a simple matter of preferences in rule sets. nothing more, nothing less. it is about the performance of the game and what the individual likes. i see nothing special about the sfb rule set - only that it was a good foundation for the sfc series to start from (and it was a good start) - but that it can be improved on, modified or simply taken out in the end. after all, the foundation of the rule set is not even developed for a computer. (16% range breaks, etc) that is my opinion, though - and people on both sides of the issue should realize that.

again, it all goes back to who really are the core players of sfc and what is the goal of the game?

[FireSoul]

Quote:

again, it all goes back to who really are the core players of sfc and what is the goal of the game?

I'm a SFC player because I'm a SFB player. I don't care if I'm not part of the core players of SFC. The goal of the game is to make money.

[Scipio_66]

Quote:
what is the purpose of the game.. is it to produce a good trek game which with the best possible rule set or replicate sfb as best as possible within the real time setting.

That's the same thing!  There is no need to discuss distinctions without a difference!

Quote:
 <In SFC 1 and 2> there are more differences with the sfb rule set than similarities - but it does use that as a basis).

Rubbish!  Pure and simple rubbish!  (without meaning to be insulting).  There are a *few* departures here and there, but the game was and remains amazingly faithful.

That being said, I bought SFC 1, 2, and OP (multiple copies of each) because they were based upon SFB.  No other reason.   If they hadn't been I'd have left them sitting on the shelf right next to lots of other games and (eventually) right next to SFC3.

I didn't buy SFC3 because it:

1) Wasn't based upon SFB (I bought OP because it was, even though I wasn't jazzed about it)
2) Wasn't SFC3.  (It was TNG 1, or some such.)
3) Was boring to play.  (to me)

I did try out a friends copy.  The game felt like a demo, so I'm not sure you can say no demo was made.  

Good game or bad game, SFC3 (sic)  had a core audience it walked away from.  That's never a good thing for a sequel.

-S'Cipio

[NannerSlug]

actually scippy, there is a stark contrast between the goal of developing a good game and simply replicating the sfb rule set.. and when you compare everything that is in sfc and even basic elements of sfb - there are vast differences.. ranging from drone (missiles in sfc) and plasma speed to double internals to pfs to fighters/restrictions to the DAC and weapon effects. there are many more differences in sfc/sfb than what you might think.. but that is the truth.  that is not to say that sfc does not use the sfb rule set as a basis -because it does.. but it artistically interprets many, many things if you were to try and compare them to said rule set. why were many elements artistically interpeted? because many elements would not work properly in a real time environment.. (speed 32 plasma anyone? speed 8 drones? burnable uim?)

sfc may have walked away from part of an audience.. but without marketing numbers infront of me, i take issue with the term "core". i do not say this out of disrespect. sfc was sold as a trek game first and foremost. yes, they used the sfb "inspired" rule set in the beginning.. but why was it used? again, was the purpose of the game to simply replicate sfb - or to build a good trek game and use sfb inspired rule set to make a good trek game. there is a vast difference between the two. one strives to replicate the board game exactly.. the other seeks to develop a good game and simply uses/intprets an already written rule set to achieve their means.

one other thing - and firesoul is correct.. the ultimate goal of the game is to make cash. that said, go back to the marketing numbers to see how the "core" of the game is determined (when it gets right down to it, the core is determined by that - not by somthing either of us would like to promote).

i would really, honestly love to see those numbers - and what the numbers of sfc1/2, op and 3 are.  (and the marketing research done on each of those games)

[FireSoul]

Fact remains that SFC2, EAW or OP, has a following.. a dedicated group of players. We are these players and We have our own reasons to play SFC2.

Now, Nanners, please end the argument. We've heard it all already. Of course I would like to say the same about SFC2 players dissing SFC3.. or EAW players dissing OP players, etc! The games are different. So what. Go play what you like best and leave it at that.

Ok? Enough? End of argument? Finished.
-- Luc

[Kieran Forester]

Nanner,

Why are you pointing out the name differences between drones and missles as if it means something? They are the same thing, from game to game. A drone by any other name impacts just as hard..

Apart from what you pointed out, Nanner, I have to agree with Scippy - SFC1 through OP were as faithful to SFB as the developers could manage with the transition to real time and the limitations of the engine. Granted, there are some departures, but most of them were not because the developers didn't feel like putting them in, or didn't want to make a totally SFB-based game, but because whatever wasn't there was too difficult to code in, especially in OP when Taldren had finally squeezed in as much stuff from SFB as they could successfully code.

SFC3 did walk away from a very large part of its old audience, and it was only saved because it attracted a new group of twitch gamers that were veterans of other arcade-y TNG games(no offense intended guys). I know of few in the D2 forum who even have SFC3, and of those, fewer still who still have it installed on their machines. I can't give you exact sales numbers on SFC3, as I don't work for Taldren/Activision, but I have heard that they were quite disappointing - less than both SFC2 and OP. I'd like to see the numbers as well, myself, as this is only what I've heard from outside sources.
 

[NannerSlug]

thats my point forrester.. im challenging even that belief about who the "core" is.. i think that the "core" sfc players = sfb players is a myth.. it is true that you can be an sfb and trek fan.. but who and what is the game aimed at - sfb players or the trek population? what was the core audience which was targeted via marketing.. you could be right and the core audience was sfb folk.. but i suspect market research might prove otherwise.. but niether of us have the numbers to prove it.

seperately, you might believe that sfc is very close.. but i beg to differ - i know more about sfb than what you might think.. (yes, the name drones/missiles.. there are differences in what those are a drone is different than a missile).. when you look at the sfb rule set as a whole - sfc uses a fraction of the rules and does not even stay true to many of the basics - whether your talking about double internals, burnable uim, the speeds of drones/plasma.. plasma D.. photons.. yes even g-racks.. (narrow salvos variable overloads.. etc)  there are more differences than similarities between the two games.. thats not to demean anyone or anything - but is a statment of fact.. there had to be modifications and changes made for the game to be adapted to real time - and lord only knows why other things were not added in.. and that is not a bad thing, and yes, the result was very pleasing.

however, that does not mean that the rule set currently used is hard-core sfb.. nor does it mean that changes did not need to be made.. it just all depends on someone's personal opinion. especially when it comes to game development and the gaming industry. what some people really, truly want is not so much sfc1, 2, 3 - but a single sfc with expansion packs to it.. and thats not a bad thing either.. but you need to realize that in the gaming industry world you cant just add a couple of races and a couple of weapons and call it a new game. (and sell it to a publisher that way anyhow)

i hope some of this is making sense.

one other thing.. more people are playing sfc3 than you think. last night when i was on d3 for the tnz server i noticed there were ~ 100 folk on (this was like at 1-2 am my time) the patched servers.. (~ 35-40 on tnz - 25-30 on dom wars, and the other were scattered between another 10 or so servers) - i dont know how many are on unpatched.. like i said before.. sfc3 was not - nor has not been given a fraction of the time, support or effort by some.. had it recieved a demo and a supported patch a few months ago (like close to after release) i think you would see a much different story right now.. but even then, i am wondering what the sales numbers really are.

[NannerSlug]

Quote:
Fact remains that SFC2, EAW or OP, has a following.. a dedicated group of players. We are these players and We have our own reasons to play SFC2.

Now, Nanners, please end the argument. We've heard it all already. Of course I would like to say the same about SFC2 players dissing SFC3.. or EAW players dissing OP players, etc! The games are different. So what. Go play what you like best and leave it at that.

Ok? Enough? End of argument? Finished.
-- Luc  

thats fine firesoul.. and i think its great.. but i think the main issue here i personally would like to see put to rest are a) the personal insults ive seen laid here at people who play play or prefere sfc3 b) the assumption that sfc2 is superior or that the "core" of sfc fandom are the sfb only folk and c) sfc3 has recieved the short end of just about every stick possible.

in short.. yeah, the games are different - if you love sfc2 and op, thats great (they are not bad games - i certain enjoyed playing them or why would i be here?) and i think its wonderful some of the improvments that have been made and forth comming.. however, at the same time, would it be possible to  let people enjoy what they play and please refrain from insulting them, or the games they enjoy (i am not saying you do, but i know others have). instead, would it be possible to lift a helping finger as a pose to throwing a stone?

take it easy.
 

[FireSoul]

Quote:

however, at the same time, would it be possible to let people enjoy what they play and please refrain from insulting them, or the games they enjoy (i am not saying you do, but i know others have).

It's very hard for me to do too, just so you know. I have been very careful to not post my exactly opinion of SFC3.. and instead am trying to make it a defused situation.

[Toasty0]

Quote:

Quote:
Fact remains that SFC2, EAW or OP, has a following.. a dedicated group of players. We are these players and We have our own reasons to play SFC2.

Now, Nanners, please end the argument. We've heard it all already. Of course I would like to say the same about SFC2 players dissing SFC3.. or EAW players dissing OP players, etc! The games are different. So what. Go play what you like best and leave it at that.

Ok? Enough? End of argument? Finished.
-- Luc  

thats fine firesoul.. and i think its great.. but i think the main issue here i personally would like to see put to rest are a) the personal insults ive seen laid here at people who play play or prefere sfc3 b) the assumption that sfc2 is superior or that the "core" of sfc fandom are the sfb only folk and c) sfc3 has recieved the short end of just about every stick possible.

in short.. yeah, the games are different - if you love sfc2 and op, thats great (they are not bad games - i certain enjoyed playing them or why would i be here?) and i think its wonderful some of the improvments that have been made and forth comming.. however, at the same time, would it be possible to  let people enjoy what they play and please refrain from insulting them, or the games they enjoy (i am not saying you do, but i know others have). instead, would it be possible to lift a helping finger as a pose to throwing a stone?

take it easy.
 

Nanner, you need to check that at the door!

Luc has worked his fingers off both with new shiplists.txt(s) and also with thorough and extensives beta testing. With your usual hyperbolic arguments you imply he hasn't done anything to make this community a better gaming community.

Well, you are flat wrong. And don't use the excuse you were addressing your comments at some unseen, unknown they. Your comment are both intentionally barped and pointed at Luc and written as to mislead the reader.

Boy-oh, I hope you are willing to correct any misimpression you have given the reader of your posts about Luc.

Best,
Jerry
 

[Mog]

Talking of personal insults, I distinctly remember a set of posts in the D3 forum by Nannerslug, describing his view of D2 and its players. The aim of the game, according to him, was hex munching and avoiding pvp. I, and many other D2 players, found the latter part extremely insulting. I am no coward, in fact I've often publicised the fact that pvp is what I play for. What's even more ironic is that said fellow was avoiding pvp left , right and centre on the recent SG3 server, under his pseudonym of SalsaFlavoredDoritos.

Typical Nannerslug BS.

[FPF_TraceyG]

Rightyo, all you lot.
<gets out a very VERY big Phaser Assault Rifle from underneath the bar's counter>
<click> <----- sound of weapon being set ot disintegrate.

These sort of arguments will get people nowhere. Agree to disagree and leave it that, each to his/her own. Enough said. I can't believe this crap is being brought up again. Go out the back and the beat the living daylights out of each other if it will make you feel better, haven't we seen enough of this shcoolyard posturing already? Its a <fricken> game, treat it as such.

 

[NannerSlug]

actually mog - you leave out the previous thread(s) which were no more than insults and slams about sfc3 - the alledge post i made simply pointed out how the 2 dynas were designed - no more, no less. how you personally took it is upto you. in short, quit looking for a way to crucify me. (the d2 was designed and works best when you avoid pvp and hex munch.. dont believe me? how did we win sg3? d3 is designed for more pvp action and engaging your opponent.. those are facts and reflect nothing about the people playing the game)

yes toasty, firesoul has done quite a bit for op and what not, and my post was not made to belittle that effort at all. i think the work firesoul has put into the game is great and should be commended.

that said, though, there is a general lack of respect from some people around here for those who do play or work on enjoying sfc3. where is the respect for people like korah or pelican? why the constant insults for those who like and play sfc3?

in short - agree to disagree - but stop the stone throwing  (if you dont believe me - read that other thread arround here where some guy thought sfc3 was too hard) and start supporting each other. i know that might be hard for some people - but its doable and is what is needed.