quote:Originally posted by EdipisReks: A Final Unity was super accurate and it was fun as hell! accuracy and game balance are not mutually exclusive! the BOP is a weak ship. there is no need to make it really powerful to "enhance game play value". the galaxy class can fire 10 torpedoes. a warbird (which is way too weak in the game, by the way) is still a match for a galaxy class despite this because it has really powerful disruptors. do the janes military sim games make crappy vehicles stronger for "game balance"? a BMP would never be given the same frontal armor as an M1A2 tank! that is basically what happened to the BOP. would an apache helicoptor have the cannon's rate of fire dropped so that soviet bloc vehicles have a better chance of survival? HELL NO! that is bascially what happened to the galaxy class. no onw would think of screwing with the stats of real vehicles for "fun and game balance". star trek should be treated the same way the military games are.
--jacob
First off, Jane's is a simulation. This is not based off real life, so therefore theres nothing to be 'real' about it.
Its a fun game, if you want to fucking cry about how inaccurate shit is you can go over in that corner with all the other comicbook-guy clones. And complain about how something is the "Worst Episode Ever"
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
i don't get it. everyone fucking beats off when anyone from the art department of star trek is contacted, and everyone treats star trek like a consistant system and complains if enterprise shows something that doesn't quite fit in with continuity. however, instead of being self consistant you fucking jump down anyone's throat when they make the same observations about a star trek product other than the show. how is bridge commander anything less of a simulation than US Navy Fighters, or Apache Longbow? if star trek isn't worth having a sim than you can't ever complain about continuity. i mean, come on, it's not even fucking real! besides, just from the context of general gaming, you should be concerned with the fact that the game is a regression. a much older game (A Final Unity) was much more accurate, and imho more fun, than a much newer games. other games get slammed when they aren't as good as older games (look at every fucking first person shooter since half-life), but just because it is a star trek game the developers get felated. how can you complain about continuity in star trek when you don't even have continuity within your own arguments? if you are happy with bridge commander, then fine, but don't be a prick and jump down the throat of anyone who isn't. otherwise, you are no better than a fanboy who goes berserk when their favorite show gets criticized in any way.
posted
Ooh, profanity. Well, I'm convinced this is an adult conversation worthy of staying open now.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
yeah, like you never use profanity in your posts like most 21 year old college students, i use profanity in daily language. the old addage about those who use profanity lacking vocabulary/intelligence/maturity just shows a lack of sufficient argument on the side of the addage user. case in point: read the above posts.
And in case you didn't get my subtle hint, this is the silliest thread since a prior tread which was very silly indeed.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by EdipisReks: i don't get it. everyone fucking beats off when anyone from the art department of star trek is contacted, and everyone treats star trek like a consistant system and complains if enterprise shows something that doesn't quite fit in with continuity. however, instead of being self consistant you fucking jump (clip)
Wow.. you spent too much time on that post. Waayy too much time...
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
it might be a silly thread, but i would appreciate it if people didn't jump other people for expecting quality in a game, especially one that claims to be an accurate representation of a fairly consistant universe. and why is it that profanity is not called out in other threads? are you just prejudiced against misspelled greek tragic heroes?
posted
Wow, even I didn't expect the topic to stray this far when I started the thread.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
Chris StarShade
Ex-Member
posted
Hmm... how strange...
As for continuity, if a fictitious world has no continuity, it loses the elements which tie it to reality, and soon the fans lose interest. (it'll happen eventually, Star Trek is just too good in other areas for it to happen immediately)
My sister hates the new Star Trek because they went backwards instead of forwards.
Now, as for the game, if it can't be true to the show, and the tech manuals, it doesn't deserve to be entitled Star Trek. In any event, I don't like that universe enough to buy any new games based on it. Final Unity was IT for me. (after the misuse of the Prime Directive at the end of that game, I decided never again to buy another trek game)
Ahh well, somehow Star Wars has managed to keep more continuity than Star Trek! (at least until Episode I came around, but they have a chance to fix that one... Bail Antilles instead of Bail Organa, and N-1 fighters with shields, when the later TIE Fighters are not equipped with those... The non-use of battle droids in the later movies can be accounted for by droid distrust.)
Oh well, I'll just stick with the original space simms. Next time I have some decent cash in my pocket, I'll go get Homeworld.
IP: Logged
posted
bah... i didnt care that much for its accuracy to the Trek universe, i would rather they balance the game out and make it fun.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
There are currently a little over eight-and-a-half hours of Star Wars to stay consistent. I'm not even going to try to figure out how much Trek there has been...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
TSN: that doesn't matter. After all, you don't need to rewatch all 600 hours of Star Trek to get the BoP's specs right. You just gotta be smart; come to these forums and ask, or check some of the better websites. And credit the people involved.
The Star Wars publications are NOWHERE near where they should be in terms of accuracy. The West End Games messed up a lot of the specs and ship proportions during the years they held the license. Nowadays, things have improved a bit, but you have yet to find an official publication that correctly scales an Executor-class star destroyer (they went from five miles to a compromise of eight miles, although the actual figure is 11 miles).
[ March 22, 2002, 20:27: Message edited by: Boris ]
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
like most 21 year old college students, i use profanity in daily language. the old addage about those who use profanity lacking vocabulary/intelligence/maturity just shows a lack of sufficient argument on the side of the addage user. case in point: read the above posts.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
