Thu Feb 27, 2003 3:22 pm
Why are the previews/reviews so wrong
Almost every preview I've read of Freelancer has raved about the game. Apparently, the graphics, sound and gameplay are all revolutionary.
So now we have the demo - why are these previewers got it so wrong.
The facts are:
The graphics are poor. Sure they are fast and smooth, but the lighting model is inadequate. Has anyone seen a darkside of a planet or space station yet? Have you noticed how ships that fly on the "dark" side of another ship remain lit up?
The on-planet graphics are amateurish. It all looks like some freeware demo that an enthusiast has put out. I would say the the groundscapes in Wing Commander III of ten years ago had more detail.
The sound is at best mediocre. The music is good, but the dialogue is plain awful. Anyone who rates it as good has spent too much time watching daytime soaps.
The control interface: Where is this intelligent interface we read about. the mouse is used simply as a joystick alternative, with an added point and click. Starglider on the Atari ST and PC did this back in 1986. Having used this in the demo, I was wishing for Joystick support - at least with a joystick, I feel that I'm controlling the game.
So why did the reviewers miss all these points? Did Microsoft promise them that they would be fixed in the final release? Were lots of alcohol involved? Did Microsoft use their favourite trick of supplying a reviewers guide, effectively telling the reviewers what to write?
In my opinion, anyone who is new to space sims would be better off going a finding a bargain basement copy of Wing Commander 4 or Prophecy than this overhyped, out-dated rubbish.
So now we have the demo - why are these previewers got it so wrong.
The facts are:
The graphics are poor. Sure they are fast and smooth, but the lighting model is inadequate. Has anyone seen a darkside of a planet or space station yet? Have you noticed how ships that fly on the "dark" side of another ship remain lit up?
The on-planet graphics are amateurish. It all looks like some freeware demo that an enthusiast has put out. I would say the the groundscapes in Wing Commander III of ten years ago had more detail.
The sound is at best mediocre. The music is good, but the dialogue is plain awful. Anyone who rates it as good has spent too much time watching daytime soaps.
The control interface: Where is this intelligent interface we read about. the mouse is used simply as a joystick alternative, with an added point and click. Starglider on the Atari ST and PC did this back in 1986. Having used this in the demo, I was wishing for Joystick support - at least with a joystick, I feel that I'm controlling the game.
So why did the reviewers miss all these points? Did Microsoft promise them that they would be fixed in the final release? Were lots of alcohol involved? Did Microsoft use their favourite trick of supplying a reviewers guide, effectively telling the reviewers what to write?
In my opinion, anyone who is new to space sims would be better off going a finding a bargain basement copy of Wing Commander 4 or Prophecy than this overhyped, out-dated rubbish.