A message to the developers

First step:
Glide on G instead of ALT+G

atleast i couldnt find how to remap glide i didnt find it under movement keys, thats why i had to go to the forums to even find out how to active glide.. well whatever the controls is just my opionion, would be nice with a control mode called "classic" or something.

Glide will probably not be an issue after this new patch

If you need help in identifing what key does what, F1 during the game is always an option to find out what key does what. F2 takes you into a screen where you can configure various aspects of the game including key strokes.

Note: Making G for glide will conflict with another fuction, unless you change the original G function and ensure it doesn't conflict with any other key stroke functions.

personally i wish i could bind glide to tab-G but tab isn't available for combo's

Well, this got off-topic in a hurry =_=.

yep! we are a well oiled machine good job everyone!

Silk_Sk wrote: I'm sure many gamers can relate to the conviction that lowering the difficulty=failure. It is, quite frankly, not an option. Stating otherwise is not only ignorant, it's the equivalent of telling us to put on our floaties and get in the kiddie pool. You should also understand that the "that's how the old games were" argument is a horrible excuse for bad game design.

Ok, first of all. "put on [y]our floaties and get in the kiddie pool" is exactly what this game is supposed to tell people who can't cut it on higher difficulty levels. And second of all, just because not every guy who simply sucks at flying can feel like a superhero in this game doesn't make it a bad game. There are wargames out there in which the AI would totally rape you. And people out there love those games. Are those games badly designed only because you don't even begin to have a chance of beating them? Is chess designed badly only because every average player can kick my butt back to my mommy in it? Sorry, no.

And franky, this attitude of "Every idiot and his baby brother must be able to play this game and feel like Bruce Willis having an orgasm with this" has destroyed good game designs nowadays. Look at the most successful games out there. Modern Warfare and Call of Duty. Are you honestly telling me that those games a well designed games? Those are not even games. They're half-interactive action movies for over-zealous American teenagers. And guess what: That's not our target audience.

As for your other point of us being supposed to make this genre bigger on the current market: Well guess what. I don't WANT a bigger market for this genre. Because making a genre "big on the market" pretty much screwed that genre for the original target audience, EVERY SINGLE TIME. So if you are expecting a mass market Wing Commander for me, my answer is No Fucking Way. That is actually my biggest nightmare. I'd rather never see a Wing Commander again than something like that, because I know exactly what it would look like. Loads of savepoints, you can control it with one button and lots of "Every time you hit a button something awesome has to happen". Yeah... right - not.

Sorry for the rant, but this game was designed for hardcore space sim fans, the real old fans of the genre who will beat you in any flight simulator out there and who can land a F16 in Falcon 4.0 in their sleep (or going a little overbord here but you get the idea). It was NOT meant to be picked up by the mass market and it was not meant to open up this genre for the average joe out there. And to be perfectly clear on this: If you are telling me that I successfully prevented the SciFi genre from going mass market, then you just made me the happiest man on Earth.

That's all I gotta say. Btw... if you make a mistake in chess... you lose the game... and you have to start over completely. Even if you played for one hour. And guess what. There's no savepoint after every 5th move. Not even an optional autosave.

Love it or leave it. I got not problem with that.

KeldorKatarn wrote:

Silk_Sk wrote: I'm sure many gamers can relate to the conviction that lowering the difficulty=failure. It is, quite frankly, not an option. Stating otherwise is not only ignorant, it's the equivalent of telling us to put on our floaties and get in the kiddie pool. You should also understand that the "that's how the old games were" argument is a horrible excuse for bad game design.

Ok, first of all. "put on [y]our floaties and get in the kiddie pool" is exactly what this game is supposed to tell people who can't cut it on higher difficulty levels. And second of all, just because not every guy who simply sucks at flying can feel like a superhero in this game doesn't make it a bad game. There are wargames out there in which the AI would totally rape you. And people out there love those games. Are those games badly designed only because you don't even begin to have a chance of beating them? Is chess designed badly only because every average player can kick my butt back to my mommy in it? Sorry, no.

And franky, this attitude of "Every idiot and his baby brother must be able to play this game and feel like Bruce Willis having an orgasm with this" has destroyed good game designs nowadays. Look at the most successful games out there. Modern Warfare and Call of Duty. Are you honestly telling me that those games a well designed games? Those are not even games. They're half-interactive action movies for over-zealous American teenagers. And guess what: That's not our target audience.

As for your other point of us being supposed to make this genre bigger on the current market: Well guess what. I don't WANT a bigger market for this genre. Because making a genre "big on the market" pretty much screwed that genre for the original target audience, EVERY SINGLE TIME. So if you are expecting a mass market Wing Commander for me, my answer is No Fucking Way. That is actually my biggest nightmare. I'd rather never see a Wing Commander again than something like that, because I know exactly what it would look like. Loads of savepoints, you can control it with one button and lots of "Every time you hit a button something awesome has to happen". Yeah... right - not.

Sorry for the rant, but this game was designed for hardcore space sim fans, the real old fans of the genre who will beat you in any flight simulator out there and who can land a F16 in Falcon 4.0 in their sleep (or going a little overbord here but you get the idea). It was NOT meant to be picked up by the mass market and it was not meant to open up this genre for the average joe out there. And to be perfectly clear on this: If you are telling me that I successfully prevented the SciFi genre from going mass market, then you just made me the happiest man on Earth.

That's all I gotta say. Btw... if you make a mistake in chess... you lose the game... and you have to start over completely. Even if you played for one hour. And guess what. There's no savepoint after every 5th move. Not even an optional autosave.

Love it or leave it. I got not problem with that.

THANK YOU. Finally, a response that's on topic, and a very good one as well. In fact, I'm a little ashamed for not expecting this particular reply. You've made a very good point, and one that I cannot disagree with easily because I feel largely the same. However, I must disagree anyway.

I disagree because I think gaming is no longer a niche activity for social outcasts. It has become something I can enjoy and talk about with anybody, not just a small circle of friends. Gaming has evolved both for better and for worse, but whatever your stance on mainstream design trends, you cannot deny that everything is more enjoyable when you have others to enjoy it with. I greatly enjoy this game, but I'm the only one I know who has even heard of it. I want friends who have played it and love it just as much as I do, and that's not going to happen if we selfishly maintain the purity of a less refined and less mature era.

That said, thank you for understanding my message. Congrats on making a fantastic game as well. I only wish it didn't make me feel so lonely.

Thank you for you reply. However I think you didn't get my point.
I'm not talking about maintaining any purity or anything less refined or mature. And I certainly don't consider mass-market games to be more refined and mature.

A lot of people these days seem to have a hard time seeing the difference between "trying to please everybody" and "trying to please a very specific target audience". Chess is a wonderful game, but to some players it will simply never have any appeal. Some people will never like RPG games or go to a real life RPG meeting. Some people love board games, some people couldn't care less.

I'm sorry if I design a board game I design it in a way so my target audience gets the most out of it. I do not design it so people who don't like such games give it a shot. If I do that I need to make certain compromises to get rid of stuff that's keeping these people from playing board games and that's usually the beginning of the end.

To get this across once more in clear words: Saga is designed for a very very clear target audience. It was NEVER designed to get the mass market to love Space Sims because we consider such an endeavour prone to failure and harming the genre. We wanted to show that the target audience might be bigger than anyone expects, but we did NOT try to prove that SciFiSims are a great genre to invest in if you want to reach the BIG audience. That will not work, that SHOULD not work. There are wonderful GREAT games out there in niches like hex-field strategy. And guess what. Those games are great. Does everybody like them? No. is Sherlok Holmes a GREAT novel series? Without a doubt. Does everybody love it? No.

Sorry gaming is not a niche anymore, yes. but that doesn't mean that EVERY game has to appeal to EVERYBODY. That's simply nonsense. We are aware that we made some design decisions that conflict with modern ergonomics and stuff like that. But keep in mind this is a retro game. not a new modern design. if we had to design a modern space shooter we'd do quite a few things differently and first off throw this enfine out of the door and get a different one. But, we still wouldn't try to please a mass market because the only thing that could do would be hurting the genre. If you want that, go to EA.

You apparently think only games that end up on covers of magazines and being promoted like crazy on every single convention out there with sexy girls parading around as in-game characters are good. Well think again. There's TONS of good games out there that are fantastic and have a large fan base and you have never even heard of these games. Why? Because the developers don't target you. They are not even interested in you. They have a core fanbase that guarantees them regular income as long as they deliver what that target audience expects. And I for one would rather develop such a game than the next CoD even though the latter would probably earn me a little more money (although not really since the developers rarely see any of that big profit. They get payed their income no matter how successful the game is).

Sorry we didn't turn Wing Commander Saga into the next Mass Effect or something but at least we didn't screw you over with the ending.

KeldorKatarn wrote: Thank you for you reply. However I think you didn't get my point.
I'm not talking about maintaining any purity or anything less refined or mature. And I certainly don't consider mass-market games to be more refined and mature.

A lot of people these days seem to have a hard time seeing the difference between "trying to please everybody" and "trying to please a very specific target audience". Chess is a wonderful game, but to some players it will simply never have any appeal. Some people will never like RPG games or go to a real life RPG meeting. Some people love board games, some people couldn't care less.

I'm sorry if I design a board game I design it in a way so my target audience gets the most out of it. I do not design it so people who don't like such games give it a shot. If I do that I need to make certain compromises to get rid of stuff that's keeping these people from playing board games and that's usually the beginning of the end.

To get this across once more in clear words: Saga is designed for a very very clear target audience. It was NEVER designed to get the mass market to love Space Sims because we consider such an endeavour prone to failure and harming the genre. We wanted to show that the target audience might be bigger than anyone expects, but we did NOT try to prove that SciFiSims are a great genre to invest in if you want to reach the BIG audience. That will not work, that SHOULD not work. There are wonderful GREAT games out there in niches like hex-field strategy. And guess what. Those games are great. Does everybody like them? No. is Sherlok Holmes a GREAT novel series? Without a doubt. Does everybody love it? No.

Sorry gaming is not a niche anymore, yes. but that doesn't mean that EVERY game has to appeal to EVERYBODY. That's simply nonsense. We are aware that we made some design decisions that conflict with modern ergonomics and stuff like that. But keep in mind this is a retro game. not a new modern design. if we had to design a modern space shooter we'd do quite a few things differently and first off throw this enfine out of the door and get a different one. But, we still wouldn't try to please a mass market because the only thing that could do would be hurting the genre. If you want that, go to EA.

You apparently think only games that end up on covers of magazines and being promoted like crazy on every single convention out there with sexy girls parading around as in-game characters are good. Well think again. There's TONS of good games out there that are fantastic and have a large fan base and you have never even heard of these games. Why? Because the developers don't target you. They are not even interested in you. They have a core fanbase that guarantees them regular income as long as they deliver what that target audience expects. And I for one would rather develop such a game than the next CoD even though the latter would probably earn me a little more money (although not really since the developers rarely see any of that big profit. They get payed their income no matter how successful the game is).

Sorry we didn't turn Wing Commander Saga into the next Mass Effect or something but at least we didn't screw you over with the ending.

I'm sorry for making you repeat yourself. I understood fully what you were trying to say the first time. But, you're putting some pretty disgusting words in my mouth when you say "You apparently think only games that end up on covers of magazines and being promoted like crazy on every single convention out there with sexy girls parading around as in-game characters are good." Haven't I been saying over and over that I think this is a fantastic game and I'm enjoying every second of it?

What I'm saying is simply this: that I want more people to enjoy this game and more people to enjoy this game with, and that means making it more accessible. No, not "easy." Accessible. I have understood, followed, and greatly sympathized with everything you've said. But look at it this way; pretend you just made an awesome building with a perpetual party inside, the only problem is most of the population is in wheelchairs and you don't want to make the building handicap accessible. How hard would it be to put a ramp up the side so everyone else isn't locked out? I don't see the harm in making a simple, optional, checkpoint system that I can make fun of my friends for being pussies for needing. Yes, I realize that in my analogy I'd be laughing at the handicapped but I can stand being a jerk if it means more people get to see how great this game is. That's all I'm saying.