"Scheme" isn't really an appropriate wording for this subject - Black Wolf

What about "Disease"? Figuratively, I mean - TopAce

It's traditionally been called "Battle of Endor Syndrome" AFAIK. - Black Wolf

I did not want to use that title, I wanted a new one. - TopAce

Why? - Black Wolf

Only to differenciate the two articles. - TopAce

Article moved. - TopAce

I question the validity of this article in this day and age; most of the anti-BOE resources cite FS1 limitations. I can cite several campaigns that have had well-executed Endor-esque situations off the top of my head. If the mission fell apart it was for other reasons. I'll agree it's not for the novice FREDder, but unless and until you can properly execute a large mission, you haven't really earned your spurs.-ngtm1r

In my opinion, the modern-day objections about BOE missions can be boiled down to two points:
*The complexity of a BOE mission requires a very skilled FREDder to pull off effectively
*Because of scale, it is difficult or impossible for the player to affect the outcome of a BOE mission in any way, something that is usually desirable from a gameplay standpoint
I think these points adequately justify the continuing prejudice against these kinds of missions. This, of course, does not imply that it cannot be done, only that it is very difficult. I can cite the penultimate mission of Inferno as an excellent example of a BOE mission done right, IMHO. --[[User:Goober5000|Goober5000]]00:43, 1 January 2007 (CST)

Altered the article, and considering further alterations, considering that we're basically agreed upon that A: such missions are possible and B: it isn't technical limitations holding the game back from them anymore. --[[User:ngtm1r|ngtm1r]] 10:21, 2 October 2007 (PST)

Whether you consider it possible or not there have been many, many user-made campaigns featuring decent BoEs. The main reason for prejudice against them is that someone who didn't know how to use FRED tried to make one, then wrote a VolitionWatch article a long time ago about it. 'Bout time, nghtm1r, and thank you. [[User:Mustang19|Mustang19]] 13:39, 2 October 2007 (CDT)

As the person who wrote the Volition Watch article and had 2 missions on the Game of the Year edition, I disagree and removed the uninformed slur. Back at the creation of FS1, there were significant technical constraints and Volition programmers put limits into place to restrain their mission editors. The initial FRED discussion list (FDL) was concerned with how poorly designed missions were impacting user reaction to FreeSpace, and making the community difficult to gain respectability among all the trash missions that were released. That's why I worked with Peter Drake on explaining the initial FRED docs and pioneered a community peer-review system. While technology has advanced even in FreeSpace 2, such missions are not just difficult to appropriately test and balance (as those at Volition Watch who worked on Inferno were well aware). A well-crafted battle and story relies on specific set pieces, rather than just letting the AI simulation cover up the lack of design. It's not prejudice, it's a recognition of good design. - Zarathud 6/13/08 10:00 CT

Beg differ. It is ''extremely'' difficult for what you say to take place. A mission where it does will have bigger problems then this; indeed, a campaign where it does will have problems even in non-Endorish missions. As observed before as well, a well-crafted battle relies on suspension of disbelief just to get there; capitals moving and attacking in groups helps establish this. And more to the point, you are speaking from an FS1 sensablity in regards to not only mission design and technology, but also storytelling. In FreeSpace 1 it was much more acceptable for such things to occur. The Shivans were overpowering the PVE and GTA. You fought without support, without reinforcements, because all available assets were commited already. Things were stretched beyond the breaking point. As for the Shivans, they didn't need more than one or perhaps two capitals to wreak all the havoc they wanted. FreeSpace 1's missions are also designed to reflect a degree of desperation; a fight for absolute survival.

These things aren't true in FreeSpace 2 for the most part, and that fact made the game's sins as mentioned in the article much more grevious. It placed opposing sides on much more equal footings, where both sides had more than single capital ships available to commit and could have made good use of those extra ships. Also, though things certainly got desperate, they never deterioriated to the point they did in FS1; there was always a plan, and it was always feasible. These points also hold true for the vast majority of user-made campaigns and missions as well.

It is a prejudice. It is a prejudice against the recognition that letting the AI work for you can ''be'' good design (Clash of the Titans, the first one, called). It is a prejudice that conveniently forgets missions like Evangelist and the one that followed it, or Clash of the Titans, all the way back in FreeSpace 1. It is a prejudice against expanding the scope of your story so that it is clear Alpha 1 is not the sole savior of the universe and the Terran and Vasudan races, but part of a team; it could not have been done without him/her, but they could not have done it alone...or even that perhaps it could have been done without them, but at greater cost. It is a prejudice, in short, from telling a different story or telling the same story differently. And that in the end will be far more deadly to the community then bad design. To be blunt, Transcend's missions particularly as originally released were, from quite a few standpoints, not all that great in design. But Transcend is regarded as a must-play campaign, and it did truly transcend the boundaries of what most of us thought were the kind of stories that could be told through the medium of FreeSpace.

Someone saying you are "inexperienced" is hardly a slur, particularly as since compared to now, or even a year ago from this date, when that article was written FREDding was in its infancy. However because you seem to have taken personal offense, I did add a comment to this effect...though I would point out taking personal offense at that is frankly a sign that you shouldn't be editing this stuff because it is supposed to be unemotional. And as a statement of fact, as I already said, it's almost undoubtedly true.

Reverted.- [[User:Ngtm1r|Ngtm1r]] 01:44, 14 June 2008 (PST)

Battle of Endor syndrome has always referred to the tendency (mainly amongst novice FREDders) to make missions so large that they either crash the machine they are on or (usually due to the inexperience of the FREDder) are boring/unplayable. It does not refer to any mission which has a lot of ships in it. That is a big misuse of the term. Zarathud made it pretty clear in his original article what he was referring to. If you actually look at the missions that were being released at that time you'll see that the quality of the BoE missions was very low. The article served it's purpose of warning people of the dangers of trying to recreate Star Wars by simply sticking a few ships and events into a mission and hoping for the best.

Secondly, claiming that Zarathud was "inexperienced" is basically the same as saying STFU N00b rather than actually addressing his argument. That sort of thing has no place in a discussion (It's an ad hominem) let alone set in stone in a wiki article. Furthermore it's foolish to claim that the article was written that way simply because Zarathud was inexperienced because if I were to write an article on the subject I doubt it would be very different. I assume no one is dumb enough to try to claim I'm an inexperienced FREDder. :p

Furthermore FS2_Open has made it harder to make a good BoE mission in many ways. You can't get away with blaming flaws in your mission on things the engine won't let you do half as often because the engine allows you to do more. The bar is higher these days. So bad newbie missions that suffer from BoE look even worse.

BoE Syndrome is not a prejudice. It's nothing more than "No AWOL debrief syndrome" or any other syndrome you could make up from a common newbie mistake. - Karajorma 18/06/08

I think that the article is pretty balanced as it is. It warns of the difficulties of making these missions yet doesn't reject the BoE concept entirely, as the original version did.

The point is that Zarathud warned people ''not to make a BoE under any circumstances'', inexperienced or not. That's why this article has been changed from its original form. As for the personal drama, all of the ad homimem seems to be going on in this talk page, not the article. So I don't see a need for any changes to the article, if that's what either of you are suggesting. [[User:Mustang19|Mustang19]] 14:56, 20 June 2008 (CDT)

Yes he did warn them not to make BoE missions. However he also defined exactly what a Battle of Endor mission was. The missions you've picked as examples of good BoE missions have little resemblance to the one he gave. Instead of realising what the article is actually on about you've chosen to ignore that definition, assign your own strawman definition and then label him a n00b for believing it. As for ad hominem you haven't refuted Zarathud's article, you've simply said "Don't listen to him, he didn't know better when he said it." That is by definition an ad hominem since even if he was inexperienced that doesn't make a jot of difference as to whether he is right or not.

And he is right. As I said earlier I pretty much agree with every single thing he said in that article now (for retail) and most of it still applies to SCP. So either remove the flame on an active HLP member and argue on merit or I'll write my own article and dare you to say that I'm saying it cause I'm inexperienced as a FREDder. :p [[User:Karajorma|Karajorma]]

It's not ad hominem by definition since I happen to be looking at the definition right here. It's calling into question his arguments as being argument from ignorance, which is perfectly sound and something you do to TrashMan all the time. Also, his article was very much imprecise on what constituted a "Battle of Endor" mission, and before you start talking about our cited examples of mission done right, he didn't cite ANY example missions. When he starts citing common failures of the missions he's failed to provide specific examples for, it gets downright silly. These are either not problems that exist solely with this type of mission but rather with any ill-designed mission, things I've never seen in practice (no missiles available? I guess FRED1 had them off by default. This isn't the case in FRED2 and you of all people should know that Kara.), things we've warned against (difficulty!), or things that FS2 has eliminated (caps will now engage each other, because capital ship beams don't shoot at fighters). If you're agreeing with it you either haven't actually read it closely, and I have too much respect for your intelligence and reasonableness to consider other options.

The VolitionWatch article contains almost no specific admonitions to mission designers of any real use, and saying things like "Volition Inc. never created any mission like the Battle of Endor. Why? For many reasons, surely. One Volition employee (Jason Hoffoss) commented on FDL that the key to successful mission design was "Zen and the Art of FreeSpace Design."" doesn't tell anyone anything at all. It's pointless, nebulous. Vague does not mean deep. Vague does not belong on a wiki. There's also a rather blantant insertion of the author's own sense of aesthetics towards the end. After rereading the VWatch article it has seriously crossed my mind to petition for its deletion as it is either redundant, incorrect, or doesn't see the forest for the trees. Any possible value it has left in this day and age is historical and not practical.

In essence, the VWatch article basically says "Noobs make these missions, so they're bad." Only it does very poorly. That's also an attitude that's downright stupid; just because a lot of inexperienced people try something does not mean every attempt will have the same flaws. I am really left with the belief that Zarathud did not know what the problem he was trying to deal with was. He argues failures that will exist in any mission with poor design as failures of a specific type of mission that happens to be the least forgiving of design failures.

As for arguing your FRED experience, careful now. How much have you released? :p [[User:Ngtm1r|Ngtm1r]] 23:32, 20 June 2008 (CDT)

*You seem to have missed the fact that the whole VW article is aimed at inexperienced FREDders, not people who have been FREDding for years. Given that fact, everything said there makes sense. He's pointing out very real mistakes that a newcomer to FREDding is very likely to make. Also note that a BoE mission by his definition is a mission where the many capships are involved in the action around the player, not a background battle as seen in Derelict for example. And it is in such a situation that it is indeed ''extremely'' difficult to balance the mission so that the player has an effect on the outcome of the battle instead of just feeling left out. [[User:Shade|Shade]] 06:08, 21 June 2008 (CDT)

**Funny he forgot to mention who the article was directed at, then, hmm? [[User:Ngtm1r|Ngtm1r]] 23:08, 21 June 2008 (CDT)

*He did, if not directly: "It seems that everyone's first impulse upon opening up FRED is to fill all that beautiful empty space, without realizing that space is supposed to be empty". That line makes it perfectly clear to me that it is not aimed at veteran FREDders. [[User:Shade|Shade]] 07:40, 22 June 2008 (CDT)

Let's put to rest this argument that I'm inexperienced, arguing from inexperience or the comments were limited to FreeSpace 1. The comments were made based on observations by the FRED community at large in the run-up to FreeSpace 2, and informal input from Volition designers (including Jason) about mission design. Some of the changes from FS_Open involved undoing some of the [u]intentional[/u] design limitations placed in the engine to restrain their own designers.

"Any possible value it has left in this day and age is historical and not practical."
That you're not aware of the historical context of the article suggests the changes should be restored, not that the article be deleted. The support I received from this BoE article helped lead to the first community-based reviews dedicated to helping experienced and inexperienced FREDers improve their missions. It was the rallying cry for the community to organize itself and build some way to support n00b design, rather than allow the flood of poor design to overwhelm players with bad impressions of Volition's game. The lessons were also cautions against the hubris that could trap experienced FRED designers. That caution seems to have been lost over the years.

"He argues failures that will exist in any mission with poor design as failures of a specific type of mission that happens to be the least forgiving of design failures."
Yes, that a mission is fun to play doesn't excuse that it probably has poor design. The VolitionWatch team reviewed hundreds of missions by n00bs and experienced designers alike. Derelict was designed by people I worked with at VolitionWatch, and were well aware of my viewpoint on the need to carefully design missions to give the impression of a larger space battle without actually throwing all the elements at the player.

Design was the watchword then, and it should still be now. That committment to design is why two missions I designed were placed in the Game of the Year edition, and a job offer at the time to join Volition for Silent Threat and FreeSpace 2.

Most daming IMO is that the reversion omits the most inescapable loss in a Battle of Endor mission -- the story. I'm not arguing that Alpha 1 must be the "hero," but that Alpha 1's presence means they're experiencing the key turning points in a campaign. If they're too busy to observe that set piece in a critical event, you've lost the ability to focus the players on what events they're supposed to be experiencing.

Changing the title to "why should I make missions" is just the equivalent of trolling.

Talk:Second Shivan Incursion

2008-06-14T04:06:09Z

Zarathud:

Maximizing Your FS2 Performance

2008-05-08T04:44:13Z

Zarathud: /* Maximizing Your FS2 Performance */

==Maximizing Your FS2 Performance==
by: Old Staff (Zarathud) - November 21, 1999 for Freespace Watch

FreeSpace 2 is a beautiful, eye-dropping game at any detail setting and should run smoothly on the minimum system requirements. However, not everyone may understand enough about the game to maximize their FreeSpace 2 performance. I expect that gamers new to FreeSpace 2 might find the following technical information helpful, and even fans from the original haven't seen all this information about the game's performance all in one location. My thanks to Dave Baranec, FreeSpace 2's lead programmer, for having answered all these questions before in various places.

With that said, let's get right to the details and tips on how to maximize your FreeSpace 2 performance.

===1. System Specifications===

FreeSpace requires a 3D accelerator that supports either a Glide or D3D API. A high-speed 3D card and extra RAM will take the strain off your processor and will result in better performance. The debate between the Glide and Direct3D APIs should no longer be such a major issue (for those who have not used these FreeSpace Direct3D registry tweaks), as FreeSpace 2 supports Direct3D at the same level as Glide. Quite a few bugs in Direct3D have been fixed from the original FreeSpace.

To achieve maximum performance, the fillrate speed of your 3d video card will be important for the nebula effect. A Voodoo 1 will work well, but a Voodoo 3, TNT2 or G400 will be preferable for the most smooth framerate which results from their high fillrate speed.

If you're looking to upgrade your 3d card with FreeSpace in mind, keep in mind the following critical requirements:

* Direct3D or Glide API compatibility (your choice)
* Speed of fillrate
* Recent generation 3D chipset for 1024x724 mode

The next important factor for frame rates is "definitely memory." One of the biggest sources of "lag" reports is hard drive swapping, where Windows uses much slower virtual memory on the hard drive to substitute for RAM. There are several ways to reduce hard drive swapping, but the best solution is to have 64 MB or more of RAM installed.

Compared to the above, the CPU speed "isn't too much of an issue" if you have a decent video card (Voodoo 1 and later). The original FreeSpace engine often ran at much lower than the system minimum requirements, so I wasn't surprised when one demo beta tester reported satisfactory performance on a Pentium 166MHz and a Voodoo 2. However, there are various levels of detail and features you can de-select in order to improve performance (all while still looking very good).

===2. Screen Resolution===

FreeSpace 2 supports a larger screen resolution of 1024x724, in addition to the standard 640x480 resolution. However, a single Voodoo 2 won't be able to handle this higher resolution. You'll need two connected in SLI mode or one of the most recent generation 3D chipsets (TNT2, Voodoo3, G400, Rage 128 or later) in order to choose the 1024x724 mode. A resolution of 800x600 is not supported, because this would require a third set of interface art and animations. Either you have a high-end system or you don't, end of story.

Of course, even the best video card won't do any good if you fail to install the high-resolution art required for 1024x724 resolution. Make sure you choose this option when installing FreeSpace 2, and look for the file "sparky_hi_fs2.vp" in the directory you've installed FreeSpace. You'll need an extra 252 MB on your hard drive, but the additional detail is definitely worth every last byte. The HUD scales back so that you can see even more of the jaw-dropping visuals that FreeSpace 2 does so well.

FreeSpace 2 also supports both 32 bit and 16 bit color. Among the changes to the graphic engine is a revamp of the bitmap and texture manager so that everything internally is in 16 bits, but video cards with 32 bit color support will have much nicer alpha blending in the nebula effect. The nebula effect is simply stunning in 32 bit color, demonstrating to me that 32 bit color does make a noticeable difference on my TNT2.

===3. CD-ROM===

Since FreeSpace 2 covers three CDs, you'll be using your CD-ROM drive quite heavily as the game loads. If you don't have the hard drive space to install the full 1 GB of FreeSpace 2, you'll use that CD-ROM drive even more frequently. This requires your CD-ROM performance to be optimized, otherwise you may experience some difficulties loading animations and cutscenes in FreeSpace 2. The solution to this problem is rather simple, but easily overlooked.

Go to your System Properties (either through the Control Panel or by right-clicking on My Computer). Click on the Performance tab. Look on the bottom in the Advanced Settings area and select the File System button. Now select the tab for your CD-ROM. Now make sure that your supplemental cache size is set to the largest possible (all the way to the right). While you're here, check that you have optimized access pattern for Quad-speed and higher CD-ROM drives.

Without these settings, your computer will not manage CD-ROM data access efficiently -- resulting in problems while the CD-ROM loads, even if you have an incredibly fast drive. Take my word for it, a SCSI-3 Ultra 40x CD-ROM will have difficulties if you don't have a full supplemental cache for your system.

===4. Virtual Memory===

The more daring will wish to adjust their virtual memory settings. This trick is something I learned a long time ago playing Unreal (an expecially system-demanding game), but it's not something which should be entered into lightly. Any problems you cause with your system is on your own head -- so tread carefully and be very careful you understand the consequences before you do anything.

One possible cause of delays and apparent hiccups during gameplay is the virtual memory resizing itself as more (or less) hard drive space is required for the additional memory Windows creates on your hard drive (virtual memory). The constant resizing of the virtual memory causes something called "thrashing," which can delay your games because of the constant change in the size of virtual memory required. Often, gamers will find that setting your own virtual memory settings for memory-intensive games will be more efficient than letting Windows manage it for you.

On my system at home, I have set aside a 500 MB minimum and maximum space for virtual memory on my primary hard drive. The size of the virtual memory no longer changes, because any reading or writing to the virtual memory is now in the same amount of dedicated space -- any free space will sit unused until the program requires that it be filled again. Windows and the hard drive no longer has to spend valuable clock-cycles increasing and decreasing the size of the virtual memory, thus reducing the thrashing. I have found the result to be a more consistent performance in games.

===5. Game Settings===

There is always a trade-off between graphics and performance in computer games. Higher resolutions, more detail and additional features will result in an impact on your performance, even if it is unnoticable. FreeSpace 2 is no different. If you're having difficulty with FreeSpace 2's performance, be certain to use the Setup Option in the FreeSpace 2 Launcher to auto-detect the default detail level. Even at "low" detail settings, FreeSpace 2 is a gorgeous game. However, the first impulse of every gamer is to crank up the visual details. Call it the Spinal Tap Syndrome...everything just seems better when set to 11 instead of 10, even if there is no difference at all. Let reason prevail -- tweak back your game settings a little if you're looking for more performance and you might find yourself a lot happier.

On nebula missions, which really taxes your system, turning the nebula detail to "minimum" has a negligible effect on visual quality but has an incredible effect to reduce system thrashing and improving frame rate. If you're having any difficulties in these nebula missions, you can go a long way towards fixing the problem this way while losing very little of the effect.

Do you know of additional ways to optimize your performance in FreeSpace 2? If so, let me know. If you have technical problems with FreeSpace 2, then contact Interplay's techical support or visit the Interplay FreeSpace 2 support site. They know much more about different systems and special compatability problems than I do. No, really, truthfully. Just ask my mother. :) Believe it or not, technical support has been known to send more helpful replies to problems than I have (bascially because that's what they get paid to do).

[[Category:VW Articles]]

Freespace 2 - In Need of Support From Its Publisher

2008-05-08T04:43:52Z

Zarathud: /* Freespace 2 - In Need of Support From Its Publisher */

==Freespace 2 - In Need of Support From Its Publisher==
by: Old Staff (Zarathud) - November 08, 1999 for Freespace Watch

Similar to the original, FreeSpace 2 has been well received by gamers and the gaming press. Every review gives FreeSpace 2 high marks for its impressive graphics, captivating gameplay, and improved multiplayer support. Many Wing Commander fans are giving FreeSpace their hard-earned respect and my local friends have (finally) found something worthy to replace StarCraft during our frequent LAN parties. FreeSpace 2 is bigger and better than the original, which was a damn good game to start. All indicators point to FreeSpace 2 being another critically-acclaimed hit with overwhelming support for "Best Space Simulation of 1999." In addition, the enthusiastic voice of the FreeSpace community will definitely be heard when the inevitable polls are taken on the "Best Games of 1999."

With this level of support from the gaming community, you would expect the game developer and publisher to announce a sequel or add-on disk. However, this will not be the case for FreeSpace 2. Volition's president, Mike Kulas, announced on the Volition Bulletin Board that: "Prior to the release of FS2 and shortly thereafter it was my assumption that we'd be working on an addon. For a variety of reasons things changed and Interplay elected to not have us go ahead with development." Read another way, Interplay decided that it didn’t support the idea of a FreeSpace 2 add-on or mission disk. Why?

Whatever the possible reasons for their decision, Interplay doesn't have a very good track record for its support and promotion of FreeSpace 2. With the decision not to go forward with a FreeSpace 2 add-on or mission disk, serious questions are raised about interplay's commitment to FreeSpace 2. Let's take a look at the evidence that leads me to this conclusion:

The lack of support is obvious when you look at Interplay's FreeSpace 1 web site and compare it to Interplay's FreeSpace 2 web site. To support the original FreeSpace, Interplay supported a major mission design contest and commissioned fiction from science-fiction writers and fans. Compare their FreeSpace 2 website, which lacks even the correct system specifications for FreeSpace 2. If the publisher can't even bother to update its web site, what does this tell you about their support for the game in the marketplace? Volition's FreeSpace 2 web site shows what a game page should look like -- it is not only well designed but also constantly updated with relevant news about the game. The comparison between the developer's site and the publisher's site is especially appalling, as the reason a developer obtains a publisher in the first place is to obtain the best marketing and distribution exposure possible for its game.

Unfortunately, Interplay has also failed to generate the attention in the gaming news which FreeSpace 2 richly deserves. Compare the pre-game hype generated before the release of FreeSpace 1 to the circumstances surrounding the release of FreeSpace 2. Before the original's release, there were lengthy previews in almost every video game magazine and a wide release of the demo. (It was the preview in PC Gamer caught my attention, and the excellent gameplay and customizable controls in the original demo converted me from a skeptic to a hard-core FreeSpace fan). However, you would have hardly noticed the release of FreeSpace 2, other than the entire controversy over whether the game was, in fact, released to the duplicators (going "gold"). What happened to the pre-release buzz over the first space simulation game which creates epic capital ship battles in all their glory? The initial reaction at E3 was an overwhelming impression that the jaw-dropping graphics of FreeSpace 2 was something to look forward to during the holidays. Why, then, was next-to nothing heard about the release of this much-awaited game? Even now, post-release, you'll hear more in the gaming news about Tachyon and Starlancer than FreeSpace 2 (not to mention Homeworld). Why do the promises of a game still in development receive more press than a game that delivers the goods in abundance that's on store shelves right now?

If a casual gamer can't find a game on the shelves of a local retailer, they often won't even know that the title exists. To get this exposure, many retailers require publishers to guarantee a title's sales or pay for shelf-space. This is the price for the opportunity sales received from wandering gift-givers looking for "something to buy" for that special gamer. In my experience, I found it hard to find FreeSpace 2 on the shelves of large retailers. That's not because the game has been selling off the shelves, but because of its poor placement in major retailers. In the CompUSA on Chicago's Michigan Avenue, FreeSpace 2 was tucked away in the middle of all of the realistic flight simulators and far, far away from similar action games such as X-Wing Alliance and Descent 3. In what was clearly the high-visibility "Interplay self space," I saw several rows of Descent 3 and Starfleet Command boxes. Although I certainly won't complain about Descent 3 receiving shelf space, the decision to devote all of the remaining shelf space to Starfleet Command indicates that Interplay is trying to sell a product in a licensed universe over its proprietary universe (as Interplay owns the rights to FreeSpace). Worst of all, this high-traffic CompUSA had only ordered five copies on its original order -- and they arrived several weeks after the game's release. Even the smaller retailers didn't seem to be buying many copies of FreeSpace 2. Electronics Boutique was sold out in two of the three Chicago locations on the day of its release, and the copy I did receive was only one of ten reserved by the Old Orchard EBX. That's not an overwhelming show of support by retailers, who are influenced by the sales pitch of the publishers. With the excellent marketing and awards of the original FreeSpace, why couldn't Interplay find a way to effectively convince retailers to purchase copies of FreeSpace 2?

The longer I spend writing this editorial, the more convinced I am that Interplay has only put forth the minimum effort at distributing and marketing FreeSpace 2. In my opinion, it appears that FreeSpace 2 has fallen victim to one of the worst aspects of the gaming industry -- poor support of the titles from independent developers by large publishers. The marketplace is overlooking too many good titles due to the decision by publishers and gamers alike to focus on only a few "mass-market" titles of the moment. But when a publisher doesn't even support their good games, then what are its chances of realizing its full potential audience? In the crowded holiday market, I fear that FreeSpace 2 will not receive the attention and distribution that it deserves. This is a shame, especially when there is already a growing body of FreeSpace developers using FRED 2 to create excellent user-designed missions and campaigns that could be enjoyed in the months to come.

Fortunately, Volition has been more than supportive of FreeSpace 2 and has re-affirmed their support of FreeSpace community and their fans. But Interplay seems to be leaving Volition to take over basic marketing and public relations support. Even though Volition has done a great job, it's not right for the publishers to ignore their own efforts.

What, then, can we do about it? That's a good question, and one for which I wish I knew the answer. The best thing to do, of course, is to buy a copy of the game (for yourself or for a friend). The next best thing is to tell your friends and fellow gamers about how FreeSpace 2 is one of the "best games" of its genre, a great game that everyone who enjoys a space dogfighting simulator should buy. You can help create the buzz by posting on newsgroups and participating in the FreeSpace community. Another option would be a collective e-mail from the FreeSpace community (and friends) to Interplay, suggesting that they quickly reconsider their decision not to support FreeSpace 2. Look for such a petition to appear at the Descent Chronicles in the near future.

To anyone at Interplay who reads this editorial, I suggest that you take a second look at FreeSpace 2 and you'll see what a good game you have on your hands. With a "Best of its Class" title on your hands, why not promote the game fully to reach a wider audience? When you have a good product, you tell people about it, get it into stores and sell it to the wider market who are hungry for a good game like FreeSpace 2, but don't know that much about the title. The best way to recapture the hype and convince people to take a second look at FreeSpace 2 would be to create an add-on pack that would extend the life of the game. That's the strategy that worked well with the original FreeSpace, and the strategy that's being taken with Descent 3. Why not FreeSpace 2? It's every bit as good of a game, if not better, than the other two titles. FreeSpace 2 is set to dominate the space dogfight simulation market, if only it receives the support it deserves. Whatever internal difficulties you're experiencing, it doesn't pay to let a winner fall by the wayside for lack of support. Get FreeSpace 2 the exposure it deserves, and you'll find that it makes good business sense. Isn't that why your motto is "By Gamers For Gamers"?

[[Category:VW Articles]]

FreeSpace Chronicled: The First Three Months

2008-05-08T04:43:17Z

Zarathud: /* FreeSpace Chronicled: The First Three Months */

==FreeSpace Chronicled: The First Three Months==
by: Old Staff (Zarathud) - September 13, 1998 for Freespace Watch

About three months ago, Volition Inc. and Interplay Productions released an incredible game called FreeSpace. Aside from receiving wonderful reviews from the gaming press, FreeSpace found a home on many hard drives. This column will attempt to highlight the major events in FreeSpace history. Those active in the FreeSpace community will remember many, if not all, of these events, but those new to FreeSpace will find this column provides some context. In many respects, this is my attempt to answer a message I once read that "FreeSpace is Dead." To the contrary, the FreeSpace community is dynamic and energetic. And, from all indications, the FreeSpace community shall continue to grow and prosper.

The most visible embodiment of the FreeSpace community, its Internet presence, has changed in the last few months. These changes were reflected in the Official FreeSpace Webring, which changed with the community. Many of the original FreeSpace news sites (the TTD, FSC and FSE) closed, but other sites resolved to fill the gap and expand their content. Descent-FreeSpace.com and FreeSpace Intelligence continued unaffected by changes in the community, but the changes resulted in the Descent Chronicles being revitalized as its team expanded. Other news sites, such as Strobe and A Talent For War, continued after being hosted at new locations. Fan interest resulted in a number of personal FreeSpace pages, often with personal tools, resources, and missions. Groups of fans created FreeSpace squardon sites. One squad, the CyberRaptors, created a "Site of the Month" award for FreeSpace sites. Each site continued its search to find a niche in the FreeSpace community.

With the release of FRED, the FreeSpace editor, the design community flourished after the release of FreeSpace. Volition showed their presence in the design community, helping answer many questions about FRED and mission design. More experienced designers continue to assist other authors with their design questions on the FDL. Peter Drake created a comprehensive FRED FAQ, and then included a walkthrough of mission design. Pastel created a FreeSpace FAQ and continues to be one of the authoritative voices on FreeSpace design. As mission design issues became more complex, sites such as the SwapMeet and the FDL Review were created to give more detailed mission feedback. The Descent Chronicles staff began to review and rate missions for gamers, and other sites announced a similar intent.

Xanadu's Mission Archive soon became the central location for these third-party mission designs, providing a Top 10 and polls for the FreeSpace community. The number and quality of missions were noticed by Volition and Interplay. Interplay announced a FreeSpace mission pack called "Silent Threat" that would contain missions designed by the the FreeSpace community, as well as a new campaign. Many authors submitted their designs to Interplay's Mission Design Contest in hopes of winning prizes and securing a free copy of Silent Threat.

Many tools were released to assist those designers. The DDN released VPView32, which allowed users to peek inside the VP game files. This allowed animation and sound lists to be created. The AC utility allowed conversion of ANI animation files into PCX files. John Hanton created new ships and weapons for the FreeSpace Universe by editing the game files. And Garry Knudson created a Ship Viewer. Programmers in the community continue their work on several other tools, such as a mission organizer, a ship editor and a sound mixer.

Others in the community called for more detail in the FreeSpace universe. A group of FreeSpace fans created the FreeSpace Universe Reference Project, in hopes of filling in the technical gaps and creating a backstory. I created several summaries of the Great War campaign. Others began to debate the physics of FreeSpace wherever they could. Volition created an official star map and released clips of Vasuan speech and, finally, its FreeSpace Reference Bible of game development information. Interplay contributed weekly "FreeSpace Stories" from well-known science fiction authors, and announced another contest for amateur authors to contribute to the FreeSpace mythology. Techical and general FreeSpace discussions continue on FreeSpace bulletin boards at Deathlands (formerly ELM) and the FreeSpace Forum.

Internet and multiplayer play recieved attention as well, at first for their underachivements. But Volition continued to improve multiplayer performance, releasing several patches and a separate standalone server program. Many of the initial problems were resolved by the version 1.03 patch, but additional improvements should be noticed after the upcoming 1.04 patch. Parallax Online (PXO), the multiplayer service integrated with FreeSpace, promises to accurately track pilot statistics after the 1.04 patch. And to avoid an existing problem with some multiplayer missions giving excessive scores, multiplayer missions will be "verified" in the future. However, PXO allowed the FreeSpace community a central location to meet and fly missions against other pilots.

Single player gameplay revolves around completing the Great War campaign on ever-harder levels of difficulty and third party created missions or campaigns. The most difficult missions in the Great War campaign have created much discussion, particularly Clash of the Titans and Playing Judas.The cheat codes were finally published, allowing gamers to experiment within the game.

In the next few months, we can look forward to more missions and the Silent Threat mission pack. New animations, sounds and music is sure to be released by fans. And we can only hope for a release of a ship editor. Mission authors are developing more advanced designs and many campaigns are in the works. Resources for the designer are available and we can expect many will use them to fill in the gaps within the FreeSpace universe. More detailed FAQs are sure to be created, and current ones will inevitably be revised. With accurate ranking on PXO, squadrons can be expected to flourish and ladders will likely be created. Walkthroughs must surely be on the horizon to assist those still struggling with the Great War campaign. All things considered, the future of FreeSpace is very bright indeed. I am proud to be a part of the FreeSpace community, and I hope that many others join in to create the content necessary to make this wonderful game a classic, never to be forgotten.

Author's Note:
I am sure that I have missed or, perhaps, misdescribed some of the important FreeSpace events during the last few months. Any inaccuracies or omissions are my own oversights, so please let me know of them. It is difficult to keep track of everything that happens, but I have done my best and hope that that everyone considers the scope of this task. However, I believe that this chronicle highlights many of the important developments in the FreeSpace community.

[[Category:VW Articles]]

Find the MOON Challenge Results

2008-05-08T04:42:41Z

Zarathud: /* Find the MOON Challenge Results */

==Find the MOON Challenge Results==
''Freespace Mini-Contest Results'' 
by: Old Staff (Zarathud) - May 13, 1999 for Freespace Watch

===The Origin of the Challenge===

A few people have been looking for hidden "features" and Easter Eggs in FreeSpace. Only a small handfull were found, such as these:

* Cheat codes: Type in Volition's web address (www.volition-inc.com) and the cheats will be enabled.
* Planet code: If any object in the game is named "planet," then a piece of legacy code where Volition was experimenting with planetary effects will kick in. The result will be that approaching within a distance of the object will result in a message "You are too close to planet!" and your hull will begin to take damage.
* Secret Weapon 1 (GTW-99 Shield Breaker): Hidden in the weapon tables (weapons.tbl) was an unused weapon designed to damage shields.
* Secret Weapon 2 (GTW-99 Railgun): Also hidden in the weapon tables (weapons.tbl) was an unused weapon designed to decimate subsystems.
* Red-Alert Ship Loadouts: Simply by creating red-alert missions, which force the player to use a particular ship and weapon loadout, in FRED the player will be able to pilot Vasudan or Shivan fighters and bombers.
* "Unique" Ships: In the game, certain ships have unique effects, like the GTSC Faustus#2 (big boom), or unique texture maps, like the GTD Orion#1 (Galatea) or the GTD Orion#2 (Bastion). Simply by opening up any mission in a text editor, you can edit the ship names to modify a ship to any of these unique ships which are hidden under FRED.
* Silent Threat Secret Graphics: One of many reasons to buy the Silent Threat mission pack for the true FreeSpace enthusiast is the handfull of movies and images hidden in the secret/supersecret sub-directory on the CD. One of the favorites is the Headz box, where a Vasudan pulls a Volitionite's decapitated head out of a box in the company's kitchen (in their old quarters).

For a game the size of FreeSpace, that wasn't very many. But there was at least one hidden bit of FreeSpace trivia still unknown to the majority of the FreeSpace community. So, in a mixture of abundant slap-happiness, youthful humor and a really bad pun, the idea for the contest was born.

===The Challenge===

Somewhere hidden in one of the FreeSpace graphic game files, there is someone that is mooning you. Yes, "mooning" -- that juvenile prak where you show your bottom to the rest of the world. On Wednesday, May 12, 1999, I challenged the FreeSpace community to find this file, which several of us in the know believed that no one would be able to find. The rules were this:

* Tell me WHAT the graphic is;
* WHERE on the graphic the "moon" can be found; and
* Send me an e-mail with the subject "Find the Moon".

We're not sure that anyone actually could find it, but it IS there somewhere. When you're told where it is, you'll kick yourself. :) Read on...

===The Big Ass Losers===

All right, I couldn't help but think of good old Bobcatt when thinking of rear ends. :P You could call it part of his charm (and he does all those cute Disney cartoon voices, too!)

Most of the answers were submitted rather early on Wednesday evening. Here are three of the more interesting responses, along with the images they refer to:

====Vision of the Moon====
[[Image:bassl1.jpg]]

"...in the Freespace reference bible (pdf file) there is a screenshot taken from the opening movie. A head shot of the panicked GTA Pilot. His eyes are staring up to the left. Following his eyes, you can see three or four small images. I think its part of the cockpit. These images appear to be of someone bending over and mooning the pilot, with the full moon appearing closest to his eye. You have zoom in quite a bit, butt it really, really looks like it." - from Ray

Well, actually, it is part of the cockpit. This was perhaps the most imaginative answer I received. Like an inkblot test, sometimes you find what you're looking for only out of the imagination of your own mind. In this case, it's merely a vision of a moon. Not a winner, but a good guess.

====Twin Moons====
[[Image:bassl2.jpg]]

"Well, this probably doesnt count, but on CrIm09.pcx, theres a Shivan Space Marine showing his naked, ugly and purple ass to not just the rest of the world, but the entire universe." - from DreAdFaq

Hmmm...that's not the answer I expected. I suppose it could be a correct answer, but do Shivans even have asses? Perhaps we should ask a certain South Park mad scientist to clone them a few if they don't. But the contest (as re-explained) did mention that we were looking for game graphic images. And images from the Silent Threat secret directory aren't game files, they're extra goodies to reward fans. Still, at least it is the rear end of something and there is also a real moon in the back to boot. This would have been a fun one to win...a "double moon" if you will. But, no soup for you.

====Butt He's Dead, Jim====
[[Image:deadbutt.jpg]]

"You people must be really bored to come up with this....I must be even more bored to try to find it...." - from Sewer Urchin

No comment, since anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.

This image of Vasudan roadkill was taken from one of the model textures (skins for those who play that Other Ground-Based Shooter that We Don't Care About ™) for the Vasudan Escape Pod.

This submission is very interesting, certainly not something I had thought of even though I was aware of this one. Sometimes it takes a contest to remind you that something you're used to is in fact an easter egg. Certainly Vasudans do have rear ends, but this isn't what I was thinking of, since it required opening up the graphic files. We're not that sadistic (despite allegations to the contrary received yesterday by ICQ). A very good guess, and we'd give him a prize except....

===We Have a Winner===
[[Image:mooning.jpg]]

"I really didn't know where it was, but i figured it had to be on some obscure vasudan ship since a shivan ship wasn't likely to have a mooning shivan (how could you tell?) and all terran ships are too common to put an easter egg like that in... escape pods and support ships were my first guess, looks like it was a good one." - from Sewer Urchin

We're not completely sure it's fair to sweep both runner up and grand prize winner, but Sewer Urchin did have the answer we were looking for. He identified the Vausdan escape pod as the correct ship and the back window of the ship as the specific part of the ship where you're mooning. And, in fact, this is the appropriate place to put this type of joke. Most "mooning" I can recall happened from the back of a packed schoolbus. Why should Vasudans be any different? Maybe there is a ritual in the Vasudan culture to "moon" your opponents, in an act of spite and defiance, when you must flee from battle.

Congratulations to Sewer Urchin. When we can think of an appropriate prize, we'll be sending one in the mail. In the meatime, I'll be trying to think of sending something other than Moon Pies (a frozen ice cream product which I doubt would ship well). Perhaps someone has a great idea for a prize (with an appropriate theme and less than $30 value), if so send your prize suggestion to me.

===What did we learn?===

Add to the FreeSpace 2 wish list: more easter eggs.

Perhaps the monkey currently being used as a placeholder for distant planets should be left in the game somewhere for us to find. Or maybe we could have a few of the running jokes in the FreeSpace community added into the game somewhere. What about a hidden pilot picture of Mr. T? Or maybe some anime-inspired ships. What about having a capital ship weapon on a fighter? Or maybe make a few of the FreeSpace2 rumors actually become true.

Sure, the FreeSpace community could make these cool toys themselves. But it's always a little more fun to have them already there, and all we in the community need to do is look hard enough to find them. We're a clever bunch out here...challenge us to find them and we will, given enough time and an incentive to find them.

[[Category:VW Articles]]

FRED and the Battle of Endor Syndrome

2008-05-08T04:39:00Z

Zarathud: /* FRED and the Battle of Endor Syndrome */

==FRED and the Battle of Endor Syndrome==
''The Infection Plagues Us All'' 
by: Old Staff (Zarathud) - August 05, 1998 for Freespace Watch

FreeSpace is the first game that captured my imagination enough to design a level. I had toyed with many level editors before: Age of Empires, Battlezone, Command & Conquer, Duke Nukem, Lords of the Realm 2, Quake, and Starcraft to name just a few. You'll never see any of my levels for those games, mostly because I closed or crashed out of the level editor in frustration. My idea was usually so simple, but didn't translate into the game or couldn't be done or didn't feel right.

The FreeSpace Editor (FRED) changed all that. FRED is easy to use and the menus/checkboxes are intuitive. Numerous options exist for the properties of each object. The events functions are extremely powerful and somewhat familiar to anyone with a basic understanding of logic or programming. The briefings and objectives provide flexibility to put those dreams into effect. And, early on, I discovered Peter Drake's FRED FAQ and the FreeSpace Developer's List (FDL).

For all of the kudos that FRED deserves, FRED alone cannot explain why so many have flocked to FreeSpace mission design. It could be that people want to see for themselves just how much bigger those massive capital ships are compared to your little fighter. Perhaps 3D design is just plain easier when you don't have a small series of tile sets to work with and you don't have to worry about tunnels, walls, ceilings and the like. Maybe it is somehow easier to visualize a space conflict because of the tremendous influence of Star Wars during my formative years. Or possibly a number of other reasons all running around in the back my head.

After giving it some thought, I think the answer is Star Wars. Everyone remembers the Battle of Endor sequence at the end of the movie "Return of the Jedi." If you don't remember it, then you really need to visit your local movie rental center and probably have something better to do than read this editorial (like watch the movie!). It also seems to be the first thing racing through everyone's mind as they open up FRED...since most author's first missions released have been one version or another of that epic battle.

The result is what I have taken to calling the "Battle of Endor Syndrome" as I play through missions. Simply put, the "Battle of Endor Syndrome" is the temptation to recreate a massive space battle between the Terran, Vasudan and Shivan fleets. The more capital ships, the merrier. Fighter wings will respawn wave after wave. Something like a gunslinger battle of the old West, where each fleet will warp in 1,000 m away on a two-dimensional plane and then slowly begin marching towards each other.

The only problem is that FreeSpace wasn't meant for this type of epic space battle. At all. Those who own lower-end machines or must use software rendering mode know the reason: the mission will crash on their system. Even when the mission does run, it will rarely run at high frame rates. FRED is more powerful than the engine or your computer can support. Volition Inc. patched FRED to reduce some of the problems user-designed missions could create.

In addition, these designs usually suffer from a number of repeating design flaws:

* The capital ship AI tends to defend itself against the tiny fighters rather than pounding away at the big targets.
* The damage these capital ships seem to inflict on each other is minimal compared to the hurt that Alpha 1 can inflict in the same amount of time using a tiny fighter.
* The capital ships will sit hovering in space because the AI wasn't given any orders. Other times, ships will end up ramming each other and causing interesting fender-benders and space traffic jams because of flawed AI movement orders (such as move fleet ship 1, 2, 3....101 to waypoint 1).
* Either the fighters will die quickly to leave the capital ships hovering unprotected in space or the fighters will respawn wave after wave after endless wave.
* The mission is either too hard (capital ships kill Alpha 1 instantly) or too easy (Alpha 1 can destroy lots of capital ships).
* Few events, if any, exist to make the mission dynamic and interesting.
* Few missiles, if any, are available on the ship loadouts to arm the player.
* Often, bombers will be available but no missiles will be available to fill the bomb bays.

Volition Inc. never created any mission like the Battle of Endor. Why? For many reasons, surely. One Volition employee (Jason Hoffoss) commented on FDL that the key to successful mission design was "Zen and the Art of FreeSpace Design." I agree with this statement, and at least one person has predicted that I plan to author a book by that same name (to which I have to say "no comment", on the grounds that I might incriminate myself before others who suspect me of harboring secret Buddhist tendencies).

It seems that everyone's first impulse upon opening up FRED is to fill all that beautiful empty space, without realizing that space is supposed to be empty. That's what space is...vaccum and nothingness. Maybe a few particles here and there, but basically just space.

Why ruin the beauty of such empty space in the rush to create a mission? Few missions suffering from Battle of Endor Syndrome are any good. At best, these missions have a plethora of targets. At worst, the player has little influence on the battle.

Stay away from these Battle of Endor missions like the plague. Perhaps, after everyone gets this irresistable impulse out of their system, the FreeSpace mission design community will regain its sanity. Then we can all enjoy the good work.

[[Category:VW Articles]]