What is this piece of CRAP.....! [Archive]

reaper67

October 9th, 2003, 09:41 PM

I cannot believe what an AWFUL, AWFUL game this is!!! I have been an avid player of Space Empires IV for YEARS, and as such I was expecting REALLY good things from this game...I even pre-ordered it TWO MONTHS before-hand...now, in hindsight, I wish I'd saved my �30! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

For a start, the game has a 2D play field - whaaaat??!!?
Even the most BASIC game of this kind, even those available waaay before the millenium allowed 3D movement - even ELITE did, for God's sake!!
Secondly, as this wasn't bad enough, the ship GUI is so small (even in 1024 res) you have to virtually have your nose against the monitor to be able to see ANYTHING, particularly the system minimap which is completely unreadable.
The explosions and weapon effects are mediocre at best, the sound effects are uninspiring, even the music is tedious - christ, I could go on until the death knell of the world..

Personally, I think Malfador should have stuck to what they do best - good, solid 4X4 Empire building strategy - and left the 3D Privateer/Elite/Freelancer games arena to the big boys, cuz frankly they are EONS behind.

Richard

October 10th, 2003, 12:06 AM

Actually SFC, which is a favorite of mine, is 2D movement (in a 3D engine) as well.

Sorry that the game was not what you were looking for.

Suicide Junkie

October 10th, 2003, 12:34 AM

Why are you surprised about a flat map?
SE has used 2-D maps since the beginning!

-----

From here, the status panel takes up 20% of the screen...
If you really wanted to, you could mod it bigger, but there are already mods out to make it smaller so you can see more of the actual view.

If you're stuck with a 14" monitor or something, then yeah, you may need it bigger I suppose. Can be done, no prob.

-----

The "minimap" radar screen is not intended for what you're trying to use it for. Use the full screen, zoomable scrollable, fully rendered map for gritty details, searching for stuff and planning routes.
Press R to get into a full radar mode around your ship, and you'll see the important things like the pirate ship behind you and the missiles heading towards your aft hull.

-----

What is so wrong with the effects and sound?
Seems quite reasonable, to me...
You got your whine and PSORCH of beams, POomf of torpedoes and Boomf, crack-blam of hits.

For a REAL space sounds realism mod?
- Unplug your speakers.
For pop culture space sounds?
- Record some and replace the existing sound files.

Someone with a digital camera can take some pictures of fireballs and smoke with a lighter and some miscellaneous chemicals if you want superrealistic images...

----

Basically, it sounds to me like you're in this for the wrong reasons.
If you want a pretty, poofy game that looks like a babylon 5 movie, there are games for you elsewhere that cost a couple million dollars to make.
If you want Space Empires: Up Close and Personal, then you've come to the right place.

----

Take some deep breaths, play a round of SE 3, and then sell your copy on Ebay for a profit if you still want to.

General Woundwort

October 10th, 2003, 02:28 AM

If you've played SEIV for years, you should realize that MM has always traded off "state-of-the-art" graphics and other bells and whistles for modability. Yes, Starfury is not as multi-dimensional and pretty as Freelancer, say. But I triple-dog-dare you to try to mod Freelancer. For the amount of effort you'd have to sink into that project, you could come up with 2-3 Starfury mods that include totally new sectors, weapons, graphics, etc. MM's trademark has always been a good basic game engine, with modability that puts the rest of the game's development in the players' hands.

I guess Starfury, like SEIV, is another niche game. Well, that's fine with me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Renegade 13

October 10th, 2003, 03:25 AM

Maybe its just me, but maybe we've been spoiled in the past, expecting the very best from a small company. I like it as is. And the moddability is indeed one of the jewels of any MM game.

October 10th, 2003, 07:41 AM

Originally posted by General Woundwort:
Yes, Starfury is not as multi-dimensional and pretty as Freelancer, say. But I triple-dog-dare you to try to mod Freelancer. For the amount of effort you'd have to sink into that project, you could come up with 2-3 Starfury mods that include totally new sectors, weapons, graphics, etc.Freelancer is not hard to mod really, just more mathematical. Been there done all that. In fact it is a lot of fun modding that game too and I actually had the motivation to write a complete tutorial on hardpoints modding myself. Starfury is so much easier to mod because it sacrifies game play.

[ October 10, 2003, 06:55: Message edited by: CW ]

DeadZone

October 10th, 2003, 08:50 AM

AHEM
AHEM
AHEM

Lets see here...

Freelancer - Has lots and lots of money for dev. and has a dev team
Starfury - Very little money, and a one person team

So how would anyone expect Aaron to make SF anywhere near as good as the likes of Freelancer or even any 3D game for that fact

Most games ppl use as an example tend to have huge support from big companies
Granted SF might not be as good as ppl expected, but give it sometime and a few patches before you go on a ramage

October 10th, 2003, 11:13 AM

Before this discussion gets too hot, please let me make it clear that I do not like the topic title of this thread and I do not mean offense to Aaron or anbody else, I'm only interested in stating the facts.

DeadZone,

Lets see here...

Freelancer - $29.99 on Gamestop.com
Starfury - $34.95

As a humble average consumer, shouldn't I expect more from Starfury?

So how would anyone expect Aaron to make SF anywhere near as good as the likes of Freelancer or even any 3D game for that fact?You hit it right on the head. Perhaps Malfador should concentrate on something that does not rely so much on manpower-intensive and expensive 3D graphics. SEIV was a success because Malfador concentrated rightly on game play.

[ October 10, 2003, 10:42: Message edited by: CW ]

DeadZone

October 10th, 2003, 12:42 PM

However (correct me if Im wrong)
When Freelancer came out wasnt it about $40 but it has been out quite a while so the price has dropped

October 10th, 2003, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by DeadZone:
However (correct me if Im wrong)
When Freelancer came out wasnt it about $40 but it has been out quite a while so the price has droppedThat's the point. You can get Freelancer for less money at this very moment. Even Freelancer itself is being considered as old already.

[ October 10, 2003, 11:52: Message edited by: CW ]

gregebowman

October 10th, 2003, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by Richard:
But that's always been the way Malfador's game have been designed. SE:IV is a much more basic game than even it's own 4X brothers, mainly because it has to be to be so open. Same with DO, same with Starfury.

I am sorry that it isn't what you want, but it is what it was advertised as and sold as. This is the game Aaron intended to make, and I think the price is more than fair.I've been playing Galactic Civilizations lately, and that has been a good game. I never tried to buy MOO3 after all of the bad publicity. I know GC had a whole team to develop the game, and it sells for about $5 less than what SEIVG sells for. I still can't talk about Starfury, as I'm still having problems with mine. I don't really care for a "3D" background, but my computer should handle it. I can't believe Reaper67 is disappointed over that particular detail. Big deal. As long as the game works as advertised, everyone should be happy.

Baron Munchausen

October 10th, 2003, 05:44 PM

Yeah, MOO3 is a terrible disappointment precisely because of the huge number of features you can see in the config files that were cut. It's a mess due to all the stuff they slashed out and then tried to re-design the game in a hurry.

Richard

October 11th, 2003, 01:20 AM

But that's always been the way Malfador's game have been designed. SE:IV is a much more basic game than even it's own 4X brothers, mainly because it has to be to be so open. Same with DO, same with Starfury.

I am sorry that it isn't what you want, but it is what it was advertised as and sold as. This is the game Aaron intended to make, and I think the price is more than fair.

Jake Monroe

October 11th, 2003, 02:55 AM

Originally posted by CW:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DeadZone:
However (correct me if Im wrong)
When Freelancer came out wasnt it about $40 but it has been out quite a while so the price has droppedThat's the point. You can get Freelancer for less money at this very moment. Even Freelancer itself is being considered as old already.<hr /></blockquote>You're also forgetting that Freelancer was made by a big company expecting to sell to millions of people. Malfador is a small company with basicly no advertising at all which is never going to sell to the same volume of gamers as a game made by a bigger company. As such the price would have to be higher in order to compensate for the lower number of buyers. It's simple Economics.

Gandalph

October 11th, 2003, 03:11 AM

Originally posted by reaper67:
I cannot believe what an AWFUL, AWFUL game this is!!! I have been an avid player of Space Empires IV for YEARS, and as such I was expecting REALLY good things from this game...I even pre-ordered it TWO MONTHS before-hand...now, in hindsight, I wish I'd saved my �30! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

For a start, the game has a 2D play field - whaaaat??!!?
Even the most BASIC game of this kind, even those available waaay before the millenium allowed 3D movement - even ELITE did, for God's sake!!
Secondly, as this wasn't bad enough, the ship GUI is so small (even in 1024 res) you have to virtually have your nose against the monitor to be able to see ANYTHING, particularly the system minimap which is completely unreadable.
The explosions and weapon effects are mediocre at best, the sound effects are uninspiring, even the music is tedious - christ, I could go on until the death knell of the world..

Personally, I think Malfador should have stuck to what they do best - good, solid 4X4 Empire building strategy - and left the 3D Privateer/Elite/Freelancer games arena to the big boys, cuz frankly they are EONS behind.Sorry to dredge this back up from the depths, but.....

I, also, preordered Starfury. It has, so far, lived up to my expectations. To take my long time familiararity with SEIV into this immersive 3D environment, despite it's 2d plane of movement, has been mesmorizing at least! Because of the modibility, I soon hope to be piloting the USS Voyager through mission after mission, all in 3D!!!! COOL!!!!

If what you wanted was another hurried, bugged, 3D gaming experience, I guess you came to the wrong place. If you wanted a game that would make you a Captain of your own ship in an SEIV environment, and expecting the kind of support that was given the SE series, then this game will have no bounds and generate the replayability that has garnished SEIV!!

Gandalph the Grey

DarkStar

October 11th, 2003, 06:32 AM

I too was surprised by the lack of 3D movement in the game. When I first heard about the game and how it was going to be like Elite I thought that it would include some type of 3D movement, even if it was basic. It wasn't until I tried the demo that I found out it was some strange 2D arcade movement and didn't feel like moving in space. Even the old Elite on the Commodore 64 felt like you were in space, and had basic 3D movement, and a VERY slick map that showed Z values with the height of the lines, very nice design IMHO.

I haven't played enough of the DEMO to know if it really matters or not, but does seem strange that it's 2D when all those older games had 3D movement in them, and it is 2003. I think adding 3D would have made the game much better.

I don't really have any problems with the graphics or sound I think they are fine and are at the level I expected.

I will say that I don't really like the way the movement/turning of the ship is done. It really seems like I'm driving a car on the freeway and it's some type of space racing game or something. I don't get the feeling I'm moving a ship thru space, and it's like I'm stuck on a rail, also there is no drift accel, or deccel on the movement which again feels very strange and arcade like.

Everything else I think is great and works very well, overall a good design. Outfitting your ship and all that is pretty cool, and fun. The combat is good, but again could be better if it was 3D.

I have liked all MM games (and own them all, including SE4, and SE4 GOLD), and the fact you can mod it is a big plus. The demo seems pretty fun, so I'm sure I'll pick it up at some point.

Just my 2 cents...

DeadZone

October 11th, 2003, 12:35 PM

I do believe that movement can be vastly improved over time
And perhaps Aaron could try his hand of put a little 3D into even if you only go high and low enuf to avoid small planets
Basically put, lets just hope by SEV, or even SF2 (if he does it) he will have been able to put some sort of 3D into it
If not, then nvr mind still a great game IMO

Corporate Dog

October 12th, 2003, 05:18 AM

Just installed the game, haven't really played it yet at all (just kinda moved my ship around the starting sector) and I too am a little disappointed in the 2D-only plane of movement.

For those of you saying "it would be so hard to implement 3D movement", and "the 2D-only movement makes it easier to mod"... you're coming across as big-time apologists for Malfador.

Technically, the game IS a 3D game already. Unless the ships in the game are prerendered (and I'm 99.9% sure they aren't) then Malfador's already using the Direct3D API to display, scale, and move everything around in the form of 3D models. A third axis of movement is already accounted for in all the API function calls... it's just not being used.

And since, in order to mod the ships, we're going to have to edit 3D models anyway, it doesn't make modding easier AT ALL.

So, in the end, I'm guessing the 2D movement was a DESIGN consideration. Malfador wanted the game to play as less of a flight simulator and more of a tactical game.

That's fine, and I certainly intend to play more of the game before I dismiss it as casually as the first poster did (it's still got a lot of the features that make Elite one of my favorite games)... but just from my brief foray into the game, I have to say it doesn't feel like I'm controlling a starship at all.

Regards,
Corporate Dog

[ October 12, 2003, 04:23: Message edited by: Corporate Dog ]

milo

October 12th, 2003, 07:39 AM

I'm guessing the 2D movement was a DESIGN considerationYes, of course it was. As you rightly point out, adding 3D movement to a 3D environment is not a great technical hurdle. However, just providing the player with some kind of pitch control would not be sufficient. Just off the top of my head, the game would also need:
 New AI algorithms for NPC ships to take advantage of 3D New weapon and shield rules to account for elevation as well as azimuth New camera system to help player see targets above and below his ship 6DOF physics model for all ships
All that would result in a huge change of emphasis in the way Starfury plays. The game would become less goal-oriented, and more process-oriented. It would also become more difficult, especially for people who have a hard time solving spacial puzzles.

DeadZone

October 12th, 2003, 12:13 PM

That does sound good
Just SF Grid funtion could look bad with 3d movement so if Aaron does go for it perhaps instead the grid could be a sphere

[ October 12, 2003, 11:13: Message edited by: DeadZone ]

Corporate Dog

October 12th, 2003, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by milo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />I'm guessing the 2D movement was a DESIGN considerationYes, of course it was.<hr /></blockquote>... as opposed to a lack of programming skill or resources, which the first poster seemed to imply. I was on your side with that statement.

However, just providing the player with some kind of pitch control would not be sufficient. Just off the top of my head, the game would also need:Believe me, I fully understand and appreciate all the other functions that would be needed to bring 3D movement into the game (AI is certainly a very large consideration). I'm not coming into this discussion as a player, but as a programmer myself.

Still, I feel that just producing the game that they produced was half the battle right there.

All that would result in a huge change of emphasis in the way Starfury plays. The game would become less goal-oriented, and more process-oriented. It would also become more difficult, especially for people who have a hard time solving spacial puzzles.Very true. It WOULD have been a completely different game. That isn't necessarily a bad thing... first person shooters are difficult for me, but that doesn't mean they're poorly designed.

I think some of us were coming from the angle of "Wow. It's Elite with capitol-class ships, a third-person view, and more strategic considerations."

From a super-tactical point of view, yes, that's exactly what it is. You've got a mostly freeform trading game with ship-to-ship combat, and vessel design.

From a tactical viewpoint, that's not what we got at all. Spacial "puzzles" were a key part of Elite, but they aren't quite there in Starfury (or at least not in a 3D environment).

Take a look at 'Star Trek: Bridge Commander'. I think the gameplay could've been improved significantly in that title by streamlining and simplifying all of the combat/control options, and that's sort of what I expected out of Starfury.

In spite of that, I felt that Bridge Commander managed to provide a game with an EXTREMELY strategic/tactical feel in three dimensions. In that game, it FELT like you were piloting a capitol ship.

I've seriously considered building a "Car Wars" mod for Starfury. That's how generic the 2D movement feels to me (and, on the flipside, shows how flexible the modability feature is).

Regards,
Corporate Dog

PvK

October 12th, 2003, 04:32 PM

Has there yet been a space combat computer game with 3D movement and an emphasis on maneuver tactics, which had a good usable interface which allows one to easily understand the positions and movements of the ships?

The best that I can think of is the Independence War series, which is very good at what it does, but still can get bewildering to try to see and understand what is going on if there are several ships in different directions.

Unless someone does know of a very good example of a 3D tactical interface, it seems to me that 2D space games remain a very reasonable design decision, if you want to be able to have several ships involved in a combat, and still be able to easily see what maneuvers are occurring.

Even with the 2D movement, I think it's actually somewhat difficult to tell what's going on around one's ship in Star Fury, because of the sideways views, the speed of play, and the lack of automated alerts warning of attacks and other approaching objects. Zoomed-out top-down view is best for situational awareness, except then you can't see distant objects.

With 3D movement... it'd probably be a much different sort of game, which Independence War already does rather well. An RTS-like interface with elevation lines might be a way to get a more tactical interface, although either would be challenging to present in a way that had the same ease of play as a 2D system.

Although people have widely different tastes, the first post on this thread surprises me somewhat, unless it's a troll post. Why would an SE4 fan want or expect a 3D game with eye candy comparable to something it took Microsoft Games what, four years (?) and literally millions of dollars, to polish (and which has extremely lame tactical gameplay, from all intelligent accounts I've read)?

Certainly SF is a lot prettier than SE4, and it has far more potential for tactical interestingness, especially with modding, than Freelancer.

However I'm not entirely surprised - everyone has different tastes, and a lot of game enjoyment comes from the imagination, and pretty 3D graphics do engage the imagination, at least until a player figures out the game (or lack thereof) behind the graphics.

PvK

ColdSteel

October 12th, 2003, 05:18 PM

I think a lot of people are completely missing what kind of game genre Starfury fits into.

Starfury is basically Diablo in space. It's, at heart, a simple space CRPG. It's all about the stuff; getting better ships and equipment, boosting stats, solving quests and becoming the baddest deathdealer in the galaxy. If you don't like very open-ended CRPGs, and instead like traditional space sims, I don't think you'll be that happy with the game.

Starfury is NOT a space sim. I think MM wanted it to be simple to play and not require a joystick or game controller to do so. It does require a bit of dexterity but most of the decisions made in combat are tactical and the results are usually not much dependant on eye-hand coordination. I think this was a good decision based on the number of complaints I've seen about collisions. I don't think anyone who has played any flight based based games is going to be having trouble running into stuff in this game. I sure haven't.

By keeping the flight model very simple, they make the game more accessible to the turn based strategy crowd (read SE4 players). After all, MM wants to apply this engine to SE5.

I think it is a good engine. The graphics are quite good for a company with the resources that MM has to work with. I commend them. I think it's great fun.

The moddability of the game is staggering. While the stock campaigns and game framework may be fairly vanilla, and there isn't a whole lot of depth there yet, I expect that to change. It's as if MM has built a very customizable framework for a whole game universe and sketched in just the highpoints. What happens next is up to the modders. Personally, I expect some fantastic mods once everyone figures out how to go about it.

The one thing that I wish MM had done was to provide more information on the mod specs. Lack of information will not deter the diehard SE4 modders in the slightest, but it will slow down the newcomers quite a bit until some examples or tutorials are posted.

Overall, I really like this game and hope that MM continues to flesh it out. I hope they don't just consider this an experiement for SE5 and abandon it as a game. Frankly, right now I'm having more fun with Starfury than I did with SE4.

My 2 cents,

-ColdSteel

Baron Munchausen

October 12th, 2003, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by ColdSteel:
I think a lot of people are completely missing what kind of game genre Starfury fits into.

Starfury is basically Diablo in space. It's, at heart, a simple space CRPG. It's all about the stuff; getting better ships and equipment, boosting stats, solving quests and becoming the baddest deathdealer in the galaxy. If you don't like very open-ended CRPGs, and instead like traditional space sims, I don't think you'll be that happy with the game.

... snip ...

My 2 cents,

-ColdSteelHeh... you should have seen the comments in the beta forum about the 'magic potions' for recharging your shields and armor. Many people considered that a bit too free 'recycling' of code from DO. They have been toned down somewhat, but you can see they are still present. You can just click on emergency shield/armor/hull components and 'magically' regain damage.

Baron Munchausen

October 12th, 2003, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by Corporate Dog:

I've seriously considered building a "Car Wars" mod for Starfury. That's how generic the 2D movement feels to me (and, on the flipside, shows how flexible the modability feature is).

Regards,
Corporate DogHow about a Submarine mod? I suggested this to MM during the beta process. If he could add 'levels' (not completely 'free form' 3D, just 'flight levels') to the movement system that would be 3D enough for a quite workable and fun Submarine game of some sort. You could change 'depths' or 'levels' with a special command key.

I do agree that the shield/armor system would need some adjustment for a multi-level combat model, though. Hmm... might be very difficult.

jpowell

October 12th, 2003, 06:57 PM

I played the demo, and decided not to buy the game.

- Judging from the demo, the game isn't very stable. My system is far above the minimums, but it crashed every session.
- The ship you start with is a destroyer, but the game mechanics were that of a fighter. I never felt I was in charge of a crew and substantial vessel. Larger ships were somewhat better, but the game didn't simulate the experience of captaining a capital ship.
- Size relationships were way off. Planets looked like beach balls, even close up. Other than the distance "gauge", you couldn't tell how close you were to a celestial body until you impacted.
- There are much better tactical space games on the market. You want tactics, great graphics, modability and 3D movement? Try any of the Homeworld games.

Don't get me wrong, I have spent hundreds of hours with SEIV. I love 4X games, and have been playing them since Reach for the Stars on the C64. But the relationship between SEIV and SESF is tenuous at best. One game is graphically simple but with gameplay as deep as the Grand Canyon. The other is graphically simple and...well, plays simply too.

Every artist has his genius and his limitations. Picasso never wrote a symphony; Beethoven never produced a still life. MM should stick to 4X games; that is his genius.

Mehrunes

October 12th, 2003, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by jpowell:
- There are much better tactical space games on the market. You want tactics, great graphics, modability and 3D movement? Try any of the Homeworld games.Homeworld is an RTS, you have no direct control over anything. If you want to compare apples to something that's less orange-like than homeworld than perhaps I-War 2 would be a good example, however it emphasizes combat more and the options for modifying your ship (or getting new ones) are much more limited.

PvK

October 12th, 2003, 09:45 PM

The thing I couldn't stand about Homeworld was the RTS aspect. Gee, shall I pay attention to recon and combat, OR shall I mine an asteroid field and double the size of my fleet in the next five-to-ten minutes? Argh. There were a couple of play modes without the RTS resource/research aspect, but they weren't really the main mode of play. Some pretty spectacular (to look at, anyway) combat, but also weak on some details like damage to ships (all-or-nothing generic damage effects).

PvK

[ October 12, 2003, 20:46: Message edited by: PvK ]

jpowell

October 13th, 2003, 03:51 AM

SESF is supposed to be real-time, and representative of the real world. It is pretty clear from many of the Posts that the game's lack-luster graphics and arcade physics limit many players' suspension of disbelief. Whatever you may feel about Homeworld or Independence War, or STBC, these games do a better job of presenting "the real world" and involving the player in a way that SESF doesn't. SESF's "modability" begs the question: the game doesn't provide the expected experience "out of the box".

MM's low-budget limitations don't excuse (or explain) SESF's weaknesses. SEIV is the premier 4X game on the market despite its thrifty origins. This is because the depth and replayability of the game are unsurpassed. MM simply missed the boat with SESF.

This is not to say that SESF is a wasted effort. MM's forte is 4X strategic gaming. The SESF engine (appropriately tweaked) would make an interesting tactical battle module for SEV.

Suicide Junkie

October 13th, 2003, 04:08 AM

SESF is supposed to be real-time, and representative of the real worldThat's just wrong.
It is supposed to be a "continuous-time" (we are talking sublight space travel between planets) game, and representative of the SE universe.

Mehrunes

October 13th, 2003, 05:18 AM

Originally posted by jpowell:
It is pretty clear from many of the Posts that the game's lack-luster graphics and arcade physics limit many players' suspension of disbelief.Works well enough for Star Control I/II/III, Escape Velocity/Override/Nova, Starfleet Command I/II/III, Starflight I/II, Darkspace, etc...

[ October 13, 2003, 04:18: Message edited by: Mehrunes ]

Pulaski

October 13th, 2003, 02:32 PM

Uh jpowell, You say SE IV is the premire 4x game and SESF is lame, maybe we have to compare SESF to SE I or II.
Don't get me wrong, I still think it's boring as is but I KNOW it will be amazing based on MM's record. Should I have waited to buy it? Maybe, but I prefer to support the developer.

Although I'm still waiting for the refund on my 2nd day air shipping on the pre-order... thought I didn't notice I paid 11 bucks for 3 dollars of postage? Basically, I paid full price for pre-ordering and waiting for several extra months.

Fyron

October 13th, 2003, 10:10 PM

If the game got to you 2 days from when it shipped, you paid the correct amount. The order was not "it will be here 2 days from the order", it was "it will be here 2 days after shipped, after the game is released).

TerranC

October 13th, 2003, 10:27 PM

- Judging from the demo, the game isn't very stable. My system is far above the minimums, but it crashed every session.

So is mine. 2.6 ghz Intel pentium 4 processor, 80GB Hard disk, NVidia GeForce4 5600 356Mhz, 1024 MB of RAM, with Windows 2000 Professional. I'd consider that far above the minimums, and it sure as heck doesn't crash on mine.

- The ship you start with is a destroyer, but the game mechanics were that of a fighter. I never felt I was in charge of a crew and substantial vessel. Larger ships were somewhat better, but the game didn't simulate the experience of captaining a capital ship.

You can always mod the effect.

- Size relationships were way off. Planets looked like beach balls, even close up. Other than the distance "gauge", you couldn't tell how close you were to a celestial body until you impacted.

Size relationships are way off in any space game; show me one game that ever got it right.

- There are much better tactical space games on the market. You want tactics, great graphics, modability and 3D movement? Try any of the Homeworld games.

Homeworld is not a tactical game; it's an RTS. Starflet command is a better example; but then again, when you compare Starfleet command with Starfury, there isn't much to compare.

And Modding Homeworld is a *****.

Mehrunes

October 13th, 2003, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by TerranC:
Size relationships are way off in any space game; show me one game that ever got it right.Umm, Elite/Frontier/FFE, I-War 1/2, Starshatter, and (dare I mention it) Battlecruiser 3000 A.D. are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

I think I-War 1 and 2 were the only games that actually have been published to be realistic and still have enjoyable combat. Not counting sequels, Starshatter might be #2 on that list (assuming milo ever releases it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif ).

milo

October 13th, 2003, 11:50 PM

@Mehrunes: Oh, stop picking on me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

I think Terminus was meant to use realistic astronomical proportion as well. And possibly EVE.

PvK

October 14th, 2003, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by TerranC:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
- The ship you start with is a destroyer, but the game mechanics were that of a fighter. I never felt I was in charge of a crew and substantial vessel. Larger ships were somewhat better, but the game didn't simulate the experience of captaining a capital ship.You can always mod the effect.
<hr /></blockquote>I'm really not convinced "the experience of captaining a capital ship" can be modded very well in this game system. The patch to add 1/8 time scale will help somewhat, but it's still possible to crash your ship into planets and other objects because you were looking the wrong way, and in general the feel is that the player has no help at all from the crew - you have to do everything manually without so much as an "Um, captain, we're being attacked from a direction you aren't looking at the moment."

<blockquote>quote:<hr />- Size relationships were way off. Planets looked like beach balls, even close up. Other than the distance "gauge", you couldn't tell how close you were to a celestial body until you impacted.Size relationships are way off in any space game; show me one game that ever got it right.
<hr /></blockquote>The I-War series did a rather good job. Omnitrend's Universe back in the 1980's even had realistic gravity effects.

Moreover, Star Fury doesn't even seem to try to get scale right at all, when ships and planets are nearly the same size, and it's taken literally, with ships actually in danger of collision (or accidental weapon hits) when they should be hundreds of kilometers apart, and their weapon arcs and ranges actually measured as if they were planet-sized ships. Meanwhile, due to the decision to use one-scale-fits-all for both combat and long-range movement, simply spending a few seconds admiring the view from different directions causes your ship to be in danger of surprise attack or navigational error for days or months of game time.

I'm not saying these are incompetant game decisions. Star Fury can be a lot of fun and many players don't notice or care about these things. However some of us do, and it doesn't make sense to say they don't exist, or to say all other games are the same way.

PvK

[ October 13, 2003, 23:17: Message edited by: PvK ]

Krsqk

October 14th, 2003, 01:45 AM

I think it is a difficult job to merge the third-person viewpoint (so you can see all the action) with the first-person/captain's-chair feel. Captaining, by nature, limits the action portion--you give the orders and you see on your readouts what action has been taken; but it's more of a "follow-the-numbers-on-the-pretty-screen" sort of job. There just isn't much direct interaction with the different systems.

That said, it would be nice to receive status reports from each area: "APB 1 down, sir!" "Engine power down to 75%." "Port shields completely recharged." "Torpedo incoming on vector 215!" and so on. The trick would be to have enough helpful Messages, but not to overdo it in stressful times (for instance, WP ambushes). I really don't want to know if I'm being tracked by 15 IPMs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Atrocities

October 14th, 2003, 03:09 AM

I like the game.

NutButter

October 15th, 2003, 11:44 PM

I loved SE4. The graphics were fair but the game is the best in its class if strategy and tactics are what you are looking for.

Starfury is just too prehistoric for me. The graphics are way under par with today's programming and hardware capabilities. Nice attempt, but not good enough.

Too many responses to critics of this game rely on the modders. Who thinks their will be a huge modding community, anyway? Sure, their will be some, but at the SE4 level? Will it take 2 or 3 generations of improvements to get the modders motivated? And why does the modding community make it a better game? Shouldn't it come out of the gates a winner and then move to excellency (uhum, SE4)? Cow dung will look and smell like cow dung. I'm not going to wait for a bunch of chemists to change its aroma or appearance before its acceptable to me - it never will be! Starfury isn't cow dung, but I think you get the point.

SE4 was genious - Starfury has that ambition, but lacks severely. But even without comparison, it desperately lacks good gameplay on its own.

Thanks to this forum, I avoided the purchase and went with Freelancer. Not only did I save a few bucks, but am having a great time playing the game. The graphics are a feast to the eyes and the gameplay is simple and fun. Though not as complex as SE4 (and a different genre altogether), it works for me.

NutButter

October 15th, 2003, 11:45 PM

PvK

October 16th, 2003, 12:47 AM

Just talking about graphics, are you saying you think Star Fury graphics are a step backwards from Space Empires graphics?

Or do you just think the "bar" for a game with continuous action and 3D rendering is higher than for turn-based strategy games?

If you thought Star Fury's gameplay was awesome, would you be complaining about the graphics?

PvK

DeadZone

October 16th, 2003, 11:03 AM

Personally I dont have a problem with the graphics, I think I may actually be the only 19 yr old who doesnt care about graphics when its comes to games
The reason for this is becasue I only look at gameplay, wot does it offer, and does it work
Now from the demo I believe Starfury dos fall under par, but not by how much many ppl are saying, I believe a few patches may solve that

And if anyone says that it should come out at a point of not needing patches to improve it then look at todays market, 80% of PC games are now coming out bugged in some way, shape or form

Hopefully, since the demise of the master of orion series, seeing as after 3 patches it was still barely playable, Games may start coming out how they use to.

IMO its not the Devs fault for the state of the games, its down to the time they have, Im seeing games being rushed out faster than usual just to meet demand and save money and this is having a profound effect on the quality, and alot of games are now sacruficing game play for graphics

Hell Im still finding games made in 1998 better than most of todays games, sure graphics are nowhere near as good as the modern games, but they still play a hell of a lot better and are far more enjoyable

Thats my 2 pence (changed due to the fact Im British http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

[ October 16, 2003, 10:05: Message edited by: DeadZone ]

General Woundwort

October 16th, 2003, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by DeadZone:
Hell Im still finding games made in 1998 better than most of todays games, sure graphics are nowhere near as good as the modern games, but they still play a hell of a lot better and are far more enjoyable.I second the remarks of the distinguished MP from Britannia. I'd give my left arm to be able to play Star Control II again... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

gregebowman

October 16th, 2003, 06:26 PM

I'm with Deadzone. Graphics may be nice, but I'd rather have good and enjoyable gameplay over the eye candy. Even if I have a computer now that can play some of the good graphics game, I'd rather play a game with generic graphics with good gameplay that I enjoy playing (like SEIV Gold), than playing a good looking pile of dog doo-doo that I'm ready to throw through the window. If game developers and their publishers would realize that, then maybe there would be a few less buggy games released too soon.

NutButter

October 16th, 2003, 09:43 PM

{Just talking about graphics, are you saying you think Star Fury graphics are a step backwards from Space Empires graphics?}

Not at all. For the attempt, however, I'm not impressed. The graphics are more of a distraction from today's expectations than they are a benefit to improved gameplay. It seems as if gameplay was sacrificed for improved graphics. SE4, far from state-of-the-art graphics, held its weight in tactics and complexity - Starfury, on its own and stripped of graphics is nothing but a less action-packed downgraded tactical Version of SE4. This is the wrong direction!

There seems to be a lot of truth to DeadZone's comment about devs being pushed to production. Out of the box games today arrive loaded with bugs and desperately need patches to even be playable. I don't dislike Starfury because it is buggy, I just don't like it because it lacks the discipline of mastering either the gameplay and/or graphics, like I have come to expect from their previous effort. It would have been incredibley awesome if it had evolved into a serious SE5 instead of a mutated half-attempt at graphic appeal. All that energy wasted!

I can't depend on MOO anymore. Gal Civ was cool, but somewhat shallow. Pax Imperia came close, but still was a bit short. SE4 absolutely ruled! I guess I'll have to wait another couple of years (hope)!

Instar

October 16th, 2003, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by DeadZone:
Hell Im still finding games made in 1998 better than most of todays games, sure graphics are nowhere near as good as the modern games, but they still play a hell of a lot better and are far more enjoyable
I am still playing Doom 1, 2, Evilution, and Final Doom. With an emulator, no modern setup can run the game properly.

Mehrunes

October 16th, 2003, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by NutButter:
There seems to be a lot of truth to DeadZone's comment about devs being pushed to production. Out of the box games today arrive loaded with bugs and desperately need patches to even be playable. I don't dislike Starfury because it is buggy, I just don't like it because it lacks the discipline of mastering either the gameplay and/or graphics, like I have come to expect from their previous effort. It would have been incredibley awesome if it had evolved into a serious SE5 instead of a mutated half-attempt at graphic appeal. All that energy wasted!

I can't depend on MOO anymore. Gal Civ was cool, but somewhat shallow. Pax Imperia came close, but still was a bit short. SE4 absolutely ruled! I guess I'll have to wait another couple of years (hope)!What gave you the idea that this was supposed to be a 4X game? Some elements (the 3D engine in particular) may make into the next Version of Space Empires, but this isn't Space Empires (despite what the name says, just like Descent: Freespace was most certainly not Descent; it's all in the branding http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ). It's an entirely different game and if you look at it with expectations based on a different kind of game then you're the only one who's at fault if you're disappointed.

Those of you who are capable of looking at Starfury for what it is and are enjoying it (like me) might also want to check out some of the other excellent games that use the same style of gameplay. Such as Star Control II and Escape Velocity: Nova. I'd be happy to see Starfury refined over time into a classic like those two. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Phoenix-D

October 16th, 2003, 11:58 PM

Right, the complaining makes a LOT more sense if you assumed SF was supposed to be SE:V. (as it was listed in some spots)

As anyone who has played even the demo knows..its not.

dbt1949

October 17th, 2003, 12:25 AM

So far I've just finished the 1st campaign. I'm afraid at this rate this just isn't going to be my cup of tea.
It's my own fault however for buying before trying.
I'd give it a 50% rating.
I'll finish the other campaigns and I'll get my money's worth but still feel the game is a little disappointing.

Ed Kolis

October 17th, 2003, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by General Woundwort:
I second the remarks of the distinguished MP from Britannia. I'd give my left arm to be able to play Star Control II again... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Did you ever try The Ur-Quan Masters (http://sc2.sourceforge.net/)? Great remake of SC2! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

edit: There was a Commander Hayes in SC2? Hmm, that name sounds familiar... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 16, 2003, 12:10: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

Fyron

October 17th, 2003, 02:09 AM

Personally I dont have a problem with the graphics, I think I may actually be the only 19 yr old who doesnt care about graphics when its comes to games Think again buddy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Fyron

October 17th, 2003, 02:14 AM

Keep in mind that SF was made primarily to test a theoretical combat model for SEV (though in SEV one would hope it would be much less complicated, so you can still get 100s of ships flying around per side)... well, that is how it started, anyways.

Rollo

October 17th, 2003, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Keep in mind that SF was made primarily to test a theoretical combat model for SEV...I don't think this is true. The only statement that I recall is that the graphic engine would be used. I reckon combat in SE5 will be carried out differently than in SF.

General Woundwort

October 17th, 2003, 02:36 AM

Originally posted by Ed Kolis:
Did you ever try The Ur-Quan Masters (http://sc2.sourceforge.net/)? Great remake of SC2! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

edit: There was a Commander Hayes in SC2? Hmm, that name sounds familiar... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Ohhhh boy!

Well, I guess I'll have to wait, I've got so much else on my plate. But many thanks for the link... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

narf poit chez BOOM

October 17th, 2003, 05:32 AM

CARP IS A FISH.
FISH GO IN MY DISH.
THE ISH-WISH DISH!

DeadZone

October 17th, 2003, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Personally I dont have a problem with the graphics, I think I may actually be the only 19 yr old who doesnt care about graphics when its comes to games Think again buddy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>Of course, how could I forget you Fyron http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Needless to say, too many ppl base a game on its graphics and as companies are now looking into only making a game look good the game play and lifeline of games are now bcoming Pathetic

I shall dare to give an example

EA Sports
Fifa football
The fist fifa games I played was fifa95 for the mega drive, rally good enjoyable game
Then I played 97, improvement on graphics but played not as well
Then I got a Playstation, first game I got for it was Fifa 99, Great graphics, fantastic game play
Then Fifa 2000, played that, wot a disappointment that was, gameplay had gone down the drain completely IMO and PS2 fifa releases had the same problem, and it put me off of any game made by EA Sports

Then earlier this month, I thought I would give them another chance and brought Fifa 2003 for the Gamecube
And all I can say is that they got their act together, needless to say I think it was the first time, since I got broadband year ago August that, I didnt go on my computer for a week

Now I know these are console games and not PC, but the same rules apply, EA had started to rush out products which caused crap games even tho thy looked cool, then they got their act together and now are producing games that look good and play good, BUT THEN, they do own Westwood studios, which is the best computer graphics stuidios in th world, so you should expect their games too look good anyway, and now they are utilizing their ppl properly their games have vastly improved, but also they hav the advantage that the publish their own games so they work to their own timescale

Now SF, dont have all these luxuries, so we shouldnt expect a brilliant game, and perhaps if the game was given a few extra months when the project came to be, then things would have been diff.

NutButter

October 17th, 2003, 05:46 PM

[What gave you the idea that this was supposed to be a 4X game? Some elements (the 3D engine in particular) may make into the next Version of Space Empires, but this isn't Space Empires (despite what the name says, just like Descent: Freespace was most certainly not Descent; it's all in the branding ). It's an entirely different game and if you look at it with expectations based on a different kind of game then you're the only one who's at fault if you're disappointed.]

No, Starfury clearly didn't look like a 4x game. That's why I tried the demo instead of buying it. But I do like Starfury's genre of gameplay. So why is it MY fault that the game was poorly developed?

Your expectations are obviously more satisfied sooner than mine. It seems a bit idealistic to allow Starfury to stand on its own and forget why you like the other games you play. However, lock me in a box with Starfury alone, I'm sure I would learn to like it. But I don't have all day to wait for modders or patches or the next generation to make it right.

You obviously understand that the game needs "refining", and I agree. I'll take your advice and move on to games that succeeded.

DeadZone

October 17th, 2003, 06:51 PM

You do rise valid points there

But, most of the ppl that are satisfied with this game are the type of ppl that prefer the ability to mass mod (like myself) or like the prospects of loads of other mods wheather they be fantasy or based on their favourite TV show/movie (ie. Star Trek and Babylon 5) as game makers cannot put in such things without a proper license (which costs) due to copyright laws

Alot of other games I see that I like dont have the modability of SE & SF and anything you can mod takes alot longer and alot more effort and usually requires a team of modders rather than a single modder (Which is why my first mod attempt for SE:IV failed, cos the style of modding was new to me as I was used to being apart of a team)

NutButter

October 17th, 2003, 09:29 PM

I think you nailed it DeadZone. Starfury, like SE4, is a playground for modders. From that standpoint, it deserves alot more respect from those who design and use the mods. To you, it probably appears to be more of a new construction set, and you appreciate the ability to alter its form with new ideas. To me, I appreciate the package as a whole, and don't have the skill or patience to deal with the mechanics to make it work.

To each his own, indeed! Hope I didn't show any disrespect to anyone!

Mehrunes

October 17th, 2003, 09:31 PM

Originally posted by NutButter:
Your expectations are obviously more satisfied sooner than mine. It seems a bit idealistic to allow Starfury to stand on its own and forget why you like the other games you play. That's funny, I find it overly idealistic to base your opinion of a game based on expectations derived from other games you have played. My opinions are clearly that of a realist, I have very few expectations and base my opinions primarily on my level of enjoyment while playing the game itself.

In any case, you contradict yourself far too much for me to believe you. You say you enjoy Starfury's genre and realise it's not a 4X game, yet in your initial post you call it a "nothing but a less action-packed, downgraded Version of SE4" and "...mutated half-attempt at graphic appeal". Sorry, I don't buy it for a second.

Starfury isn't the game for you, but that doesn't mean it's not the game for anyone.

NutButter

October 17th, 2003, 11:02 PM

It's cool, Mehrunes.

I didn't want to get into a philisophical debate on the merits of idealism or penmanship relative to quality gaming, but it is becoming such. The game simply doesn't work for me, and I'll deal with it. And if you think I was trying to convince you to change your mind, that really wasn't my intention at all.

I came to this Board to see what others were saying after playing the demo. If my negative comments help others decide, so be it - but everyone knows it is their decision to choose.

Mephisto

October 18th, 2003, 12:07 AM

NutButter, you are always welcome to voice your opinion and IMHO you did in a reasonable manner. Just like you said, to each its own. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Renegade 13

October 18th, 2003, 12:31 AM

The voicing of opinions is part of the purpose of forums such as these. Opinions, either favorable to the game or otherwise, are valuable. They help those who are undecided to make up their minds and perhaps avoid making an unwise purchase. Everyone should feel free, and be encouraged, to voice their opinions.

DeadZone

October 18th, 2003, 06:55 PM

As long as they arent like the first post of this topic I shall always respect your opinions

Oh yeah, and it is completely strange that the guy who done that post hasnt even been back to even defend his opinions or anything

If you arent willing to evn attempt to defnd your opinions or correct them if you later change your mind, then your opinions are null or void in my opinion

[ October 18, 2003, 17:58: Message edited by: DeadZone ]

Mephisto

October 20th, 2003, 10:08 AM

Originally posted by DeadZone:
Oh yeah, and it is completely strange that the guy who done that post hasnt even been back to even defend his opinions or anythingI think this it called a "Troll". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Instar

October 20th, 2003, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by Mephisto:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DeadZone:
Oh yeah, and it is completely strange that the guy who done that post hasnt even been back to even defend his opinions or anythingI think this it called a "Troll". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>Any of the old time SEIV people can remember that game got some trolls at first too, just had to ignore them.

Renegade 13

October 21st, 2003, 03:43 AM

Originally posted by Instar:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Mephisto:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DeadZone:
Oh yeah, and it is completely strange that the guy who done that post hasnt even been back to even defend his opinions or anythingI think this it called a "Troll". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr /></blockquote>Any of the old time SEIV people can remember that game got some trolls at first too, just had to ignore them. <hr /></blockquote>Whats a troll?? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

Fyron

October 21st, 2003, 05:31 AM

A troll is someone that registers on a forum wiht the express purpose of making an inflammatory post just to get lots of responses (and hopefully incite flame wars). Occasionally, an additional post or two along the way is needed to prod the trolling on, but most of the time, it is done so that the troll only ever has to make the initial post.

Though, it looks like this troll vastly underestimated the SE community. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ October 21, 2003, 04:34: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

DeadZone

October 21st, 2003, 08:36 AM

Thats an understatement

After that post none of us were even at each others throat, we just expressed our opinions in a calm collective manner and backed up our thoughts and opinions

Hell I think we should thank this troll, this thread is already the 2nd highest posted in in the SF forum lol

[ October 21, 2003, 07:37: Message edited by: DeadZone ]

NutButter

October 22nd, 2003, 03:24 AM

One of the things that really impressed me before buying SE4 (about a yewar ago) was the forum activity. The game had already been out for quite a long time and I just happened to hear about the game after looking through www.the-underdogs.org (http://www.the-underdogs.org) (Not a game on retails shelves, for certain). There was more activity then than the day after any other game release I have ever played. That pretty much convinced me this was probably a good purchase and I wasn't disappointed!!

Rarely do I see trolls on this Board, but they are around pretty much everywhere else. I've had a hard time liking SF, but there isn't much more to say if I don't keep playing it. This Board brought me to Freelancer after reading the post, and for the most part, I am enjoying it. But it is getting rather dull and repetitive. Maybe this, alone, will bring me back to SF for another whirl. Who knows!!

DeadZone

October 22nd, 2003, 12:28 PM

lol, strange that, I just brought Freelancer
And Im finding it fun, but then one of my mates play it so we are Online teaming up kicking everyones asses lol

NutButter

October 22nd, 2003, 05:29 PM

I'm only playing the single player in Freelancer amd am at Level 11. At this point, there is little to do other than run several minor missions to level up so you can continue the story, then repeat. Upgrades to ships and weapons are rare, even at this level (So far, I have had 3 ship upgrades and 3 weapon upgrades). The game is still beautiful and the story interesting, but there isn't much flexibility.

(now why did I not like Starfury??)

I bought the game at CompUSA and the clerk told me the Online MP was the real hit. I should give it a go.

DeadZone

October 23rd, 2003, 12:15 PM

Nothing beats MP with games

Executron

October 23rd, 2003, 05:07 PM

I finished Freelancer http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

At some missions i had to spent at much as 3 hours... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

CEO TROLL

October 26th, 2003, 08:05 PM

BACK OFF TROLL,
This is my territory!

Actually I wasn't impresssed with the DEMO, at first.
Just how do you stop playing this game anyway?

If I take a scan planets mission, do I need a scanner or have to do anything special?

Can I communicate with other ships?
What is the negotiation skill for?

[ October 26, 2003, 18:11: Message edited by: CEO TROLL ]

Phoenix-D

October 26th, 2003, 08:17 PM

to scan, you just need to get close.

No way to commincate with other ships..negotations lowers the price you pay for components.

atari_eric

October 27th, 2003, 05:30 AM

Keep in mind, Space Empires IV doesn't have that 'IV' at the end just because Aaron decided to pick a ramdom number and stick it on the end. Yes, the first iteration will be a bit rough, even the release Version. Anyone remember the original Space Empires? Heck, does anyone feel the difference between 3 and 4? I am confident Aaron will continue to improve on Starfury (if he decides to do sequels) and when Starfury IV: The War Over Ruins comes out, it will rock my airlocks off.

Fyron

October 27th, 2003, 07:14 AM

The original Space Empires was not sold... it was just a personal project. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif SE II was the first one sold.

Heck, does anyone feel the difference between 3 and 4? Sharply, and with occasional pains... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ October 27, 2003, 05:14: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Instar

October 27th, 2003, 04:13 PM

I've played Space Empires 1. It was pretty simple, but I can see the development of SEII and SEIII from it.

Wardad

October 27th, 2003, 10:12 PM

This thread has just given a troll 80 entries or 80 points. He gets deducted for is own entries and spawned threads are bonuses.

Let's stop feeding this troll.

Mephisto

October 27th, 2003, 11:20 PM

Wardad, do you have the link with the rules at hand? Maybe even the link to record holder on this rpg net?

Ed Kolis

October 28th, 2003, 01:23 AM

http://www.criticalmiss.com/issue9/troll1.html

Read this site. Now! It is very funny! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

edit: and I even have an article in issue 9! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

edit 2: uh-oh, haven't read the article in a while, doesn't everyone get negative points when someone mentions the game??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

[ October 27, 2003, 23:29: Message edited by: Ed Kolis ]

Mephisto

October 28th, 2003, 10:53 AM

Thanks, Ed! That was the one I was looking for. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Wardad

October 28th, 2003, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by Ed Kolis:
http://www.criticalmiss.com/issue9/troll1.html

Read this site. Now! It is very funny! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

edit: and I even have an article in issue 9! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

edit 2: uh-oh, haven't read the article in a while, doesn't everyone get negative points when someone mentions the game??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Ed, Which article did you write? I do not see authors names on the articles.

[ October 29, 2003, 15:11: Message edited by: Wardad ]

Sefter Aruna

November 13th, 2003, 07:41 PM

This is to that guy who started this. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

I whant to know if he has ever played Space Empires:IV? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif

Space Empires: Star Fury is based on SE:IV, thus the 2D and the size difference.

And donot compare this with other games that are not CRPG.

I have played the starfleet command series and the graphics are about the same from those games and Star Fury. Star Fury is far better than i had first expected.

[ November 13, 2003, 17:45: Message edited by: Sefter Quad ]