2nd September 2003, 12:10 PM
Quote:No, I've always loved the actual combat in TIE Fighter as well, not just the power management and the whole gameplay experience (its Star Wars and you're the bad guys!)... just like how I never liked Wing Commander's nearly as much. Its just too simple!
... okay, yes, the power management is a big part of why I love TIE Fighter /X-Wing. But I DO like the combat itsself! Definitely.
Well nobody's going to stop you from liking it...
Quote:No, but the reviews didn't make it sound THAT long... long? Yes, but mostly because of the optional stuff, not the main game...
"Optional" stuff??!! On the contrary, the main mission is much more optional than the rest of the game. The main "story mode" is about as short as a linear space sim, but that's not even a tenth of the game. The "meat" of Freelancer and all other non-linear space sims is the exploration, freelancing aspect of it. Freelancer is Elite but with a main story mode slapped on, which is most certainly not the main part of the game. You are very confused, ABF.
Quote:No, its not exactly like either of those games, but the control scheme (mouse/keyboard to fly in 3d space) was pioneered by Descent... and its by the people who made Wing Commander, so the connections there are obvious! In that demo mission where you have to go out and find the pirates... it made me think "Wing Commander" SO strongly... well, except for the combat, of course. Even Wing Commander has more complex combat than Freelancer... it has VERY simple combat. Now... I know, the game is good because of all the extras, not the combat itsself. But the fact remains -- the combat is so, so simple!
First of all, Freelancer was made by most of the team that did the Privateer games, not Wing Commander. And secondly, you're nuts. But you already know that (or at least I hope you do). Wing Commander's combat is insanely simple; it's just TIE Fighter but without the power management. You fly, you see something zip past you, you shoot, turn, repeat. In Freelancer you are actually battling decent-to-good enemy AI (which makes a HUGE difference), you have to manage your weapons much more carefully than Wing Commander (equiping certain lasers, missiles, and mines is key, and then switching between which weapons to use against different enemy shielding is very important), you can actually chase an enemy like you're supposed to (unlike the crappy "sit, shoot real fast, then turn all the way around to find the enemy" combat seen in the X-Wing series and every other space sim), you have to learn how to effectively use the side boosters and then of course the difficult-to-learn sliding technique (which I'm 100% positive you didn't do). The stuff in the demo was just the very basics of combat, but of course you try to pretend that you know a lot about the game.
The main difference between my side and your side is that I actually have a lot of experience with all of the games in question, while you do not. The only thing you have at your side is plain old ignorance, as per usual.
Quote:This arguement is really making me want to play TIE Fighter... reminding me of how much I love that game...
For a whole lot of reasons, from the fact that it was my first space sim of course, but also the mission design (I like the mission style of the game...), the combat, story, controls, etc...
When I played X-Wing Alliance by far the biggest 'problem' was that the keyboard keys were all different, forcing me to learn a whole new keyboard layout... I don't think I ever fully got it down, which is part of why I still like TIE Fighter better -- that one I have memorized the keyboard layout of.
As for Wing Commander... haven't played lots of those games, but based on what I have played of various games in the series it just isn't very interesting. I never even got interested enough in StarLancer to finish the demo, for example...
That's very sad, and only further proves my point. You only have experience with the X-Wing games, so it's very sad to see you trying to argue about a genre that you've played so little of.