boy.. take a vacation and look what happens.. that said there are a couple things I would like to throw into the ring.
Harry, thank you for taking time to do an interview. I sincerly hope that people take the fact in a positive manner. Many companies and devs just do not do that anymore as they spend time working on a game instead of answering every message tit for tat.
thank you.
I dont wish to cause any flamage....and all props to Harry....but I must simply address the following...
Secondly, to some in here who think that sfc2 is the end all to be all and that "90%" wanted another sfc2 - you are wrong.
This is why I respond.....it is addressed to me, amongst others...not by name .....but by sentiment
Since I can harkin up no thread that proves this.... I will simply remind you of the poll that Erik took concerning the path of SFC that the "community" wanted followed....
That thread was recapped by Erik twords the end , and showed the overwleming support was for an SFB "based' SFC4......(this was done during release of SFC3)....
Lets not try to get into another flame war -
I strive NOT to.....but some comments I might make could be miscontrued into flamage...woe to those who fan such flames...
but even in the situation it was released in - if more support had been given - and the game had not been RMA'd - it would have done a lot better than what some think. in fact, from my knowledge of the situation - it was A LOT better than what some around here believe.
Having been a member of both testing groups(as you were)...I can confirm this.....but NOT for the reasons you infer..
There was quite alot of resistance to suggestions that SFC3 should contain MORE detailed content(aka SFB)...and often you where part of that controversy as my adversary...
Lets look at your next statement:
IMO, the problem with sfc3 is that they took too much out.
As I recall....that was my biggest beef....that hey had abandoned an entire rule set in favor of "newness"..or even defered to "canon" vs "old mentality"
had time been given i think that more important things would have been added back in to add the levels of detail. Look at some of the popular sfc3 mods out there - including my own - all which people love and enjoy.. the key to many of them was an increased level of detail..
I agree...but for different reasons....had they simply added the level of detail ALLREADY present in OP it would have made a better baseline....
And Kudos to you for taking the time to support SFC3 with your mod....I really mean that..
...although I would note that your own mod adds more elements of the D2 realm.
that all said, what i am trying to say is that I hope that paramount - when they talk to a developer and publisher - will talk to them in simple terms to make sure there is an adequate ammount of detail in the game.
I fully agree...in fact...I would engourage Harry to press for access to ANY testers group so he can get feedback first hand...from the end user....rather than from the dev team....he might get relevent impressions long before reviewers get a demo..
It does not need to be as rule anal retentive (and non star trek) as some of the sfb stuff (and let me be clear - sfb stuff is NOT trek..) -
Stop...right there...
You simply CANNOT support one game ruleset without disparaging the other three games in the series....and this continues to floor me...
SFB IS trek....at least the material used so far in the SFC series...and it became so when Paramount gave blessing for SFC itself....using the SFB ruleset and official ADB SSD's for ship stats...
SFB is as much "TreK" as...
The Original Series...
The novel series...
The Console game series...
The PC games...
The comics series...
The animated series...
The Motion Picture era..
The Next Generation series..
The Deep Space 9 series...
The Voyager series...
The "Enterprise" series....
It's ALL canon...because it has ALL been approved by Paramount.....period.
but i do believe that sfc 1(which blows away all copies of sfc) proved that people were looking for a trek combat sim with a good level of detail.
Hmmm..this runs counter to your previous statement:
"sfb stuff is NOT trek"
SFC1 is BASED on SFB...it says so right on the damn box......
we can debate the rest until we are blue in the face and it will be nothing more than speculation since we do not have the marketing report/survey in front of us.
Untrue....YOU can continue to debate it, not the rest of us.....because you have NEVER accepted SFB as Trek.....and I suspect you never will.....you even say so yourself....
Bottom line is Harry, I think a lot of us cannot wait to see a detailed RPG game or another killer space sim. Too bad Bridge Commander ended up the way it did. Add in a lot more ships/variations and a good number of changes on multiplayer and I think it would be a good game (especially being 3d driven - join in progress combat and true warping from system to system).
I've never played BC...so I cant speak to it's flaws....but I fully agree with your sentiment..
One last thing.. Victor - I do not think it is right for you to speak for harry. He is a grown man who can talk for him self.
Yup....agreed..
The one thing I do agree with you about Victor is that if and when the next big (and i do mean successful/decent) trek sim comes out, sfc will be gone. In the end it is all about game play.
As I recall.....you said the same thing about SFC3......that the people would speak for "progress" and SFC2/OP style of play would be obsolete....and die...
Curious....we are still playing SFC:op...so what gives?
Harry. I would like to thank you for the guidence on sfc3. For us Trek fans, it gets us the closest to trek cannon as we can get.
Please...dont assume to speak for all ...
I love the correct primary/heavy weapon configuration among the good things.. So SFC3 is not as bad as some might content. It simply needed more detail and content. Please remember that!
Remember what?...that the refit system is one of the biggest gripes that previous SFC fans had with the game?...as evidenced by comments in this very thread? and that it was developed in a vaccume in absence of any baseline?
Please take note about what made these games so successful.
Many of us have...and continue to point out....the factor is SFB.....
That being said...
SFC is NOT sfb...any more than chicken soup is chicken....but upon removal of the chicken...the soup has lost it's flavor...
I cannot wait to see what you might have up your sleave.
Nor can I....but I suspect that what ever it is....it will not enitce me from my current favor of play...this genre is now dominated by SFB based SFC....
Yes...I believe that SFC created a new genre...
If you want to sell a better mouse trap...you better figure out the bait needed...
It need not be SFB...but it MUST be highly detailed and make common sence....
And like chicken soup for a cold.....
SFB may not help....but it couldnt hurt...
Topic: Paramount hath spoken (Read 60796 times)