It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)New release: Star Control 1+2(125 posts)(125 posts)
(125 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 19, 2011
If you like Science Fiction, look no further. You can't possibly go wrong with these two addictive Sci-Fi games, each with a cult following of its own.

First, there was [url=http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/star_control_1_2]Star Control, a turn-based strategy game with an addictive real-time arcade combat mode called Mêlée. This was essentially a relatively close-quarters duel between two spaceships. The most impressive thing about this mode, and the game in general, was that, somehow, the game's creators managed to make the dozen or so race-specific ship types completely different from each other, yet at the same time balanced.

Star Control 2 added even more races and ships to the fray, while retaining balance in the Mêlée mode, but changed the underlying gameplay considerably. The sequel was turned into more of a space-faring adventure game, with quests, diplomacy and character progression in the form of ship upgrades. The gameplay is as addictive as ever and the storyline is both good and believable, with tons of memorable characters, races and humor that will make you go back to this game again and again.
Posted April 20, 2011
Not interested in it at all.

I'm a graphics whore. And by graphics whore I mean they must have at least 1998 quality graphics
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
RetroVortex: For some reason the ships move like molasses (I think it might be me need in to set up controls on that part)
avatar
Wishbone: It's not the controls, your ship just moves and steers like a supertanker at first. Your first goal should definitely be to gather enough ressources to upgrade the thrusters and attitude jets to the maximum. Trust me, it'll feel much more comfortable after that.
Until you get all the thrusters, after which it moves and steers like a cross between a spinning top and a dancer.
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
Rakasta: Haaaaalelujah! Could you guys release the original version of Transport Tycoon Deluxe (which has the correct music) as well?
avatar
Hillsy_: Transport Tycoon Deluxe another goodie! +1 here too!
Man that game is awesome, really would LOVE to see it here! so addictive!
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
RetroVortex: Just got this game, and I'm liking it so far.
(Haven't played it before)

But man its already pretty tough.

For some reason the ships move like molasses (I think it might be me need in to set up controls on that part), but the dialogue and the graphics are pretty good for a game in that period.

I died as soon as I left the milky way.
But on my second try I did go to pluto and got a nice conversation and a recruit.
(Fwiffo is so daaawwwww!)

Mined a few planets. Which I assume will come in handy later (trading and that I guess).

Will definately play it some more. :D
It's a very very hard game in the sense that completing it on your first playthrough is as good as impossible.

What you need to do is:

- take a LOT of notes. Every hint they give you, you have to write down. If an alien says "I spotted something weird near system X", then GO to system X and investigate, but also plan your trips. Don't go there and return to fuel up but write down all the systems you want to investigate, use the map and try to find systems that are on the same route.

- the game is limited in time - after a few years, the game won't end but you won't be able to complete it anymore. Basically, your first play should be gathering info, writing down locations, getting a hang of the best strategy. Your second play through may still be hard, too but should be doable - just.

Star Control 2 is one of my all time favorite game but it's one of the hardest I ever played. It's huge, has so many aspects, etc. If it could be made so the game does not have a time limit, it would be more enjoyable though. Then you could have completed it in a single play through. In fact, SC2 is the reason why I'm skeptical of any game with a time limit.
avatar
CaptainGyro: Not interested in it at all.

I'm a graphics whore. And by graphics whore I mean they must have at least 1998 quality graphics
Are you serious? This game has some of the best 2D graphics (in fact, probably the best music of the early 90s as well) I've ever seen in PC games. The atmosphere drips off this game.
Post edited April 20, 2011 by Red_Avatar
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: Not interested in it at all.

I'm a graphics whore. And by graphics whore I mean they must have at least 1998 quality graphics
avatar
Red_Avatar: Are you serious? This game has some of the best 2D graphics (in fact, probably the best music of the early 90s as well) I've ever seen in PC games. The atmosphere drips off this game.
Totally agree, One thing is graphics power and another one is good artwork. I could tell you a lot of oldies with beatiful pixel artwork, and also state-of-the-art screen nightmares which make your eyes bleed. You might as well say the Mona Lisa is stale because it's sooo XVI century...
Posted April 20, 2011
yes I was serious.

And no I shouldn't just say the Mona Lisa is stale while I'm at it because the comparison of paying for a videogame to play and admiring a piece of art is stupid for many reasons. Sorry.
Post edited April 20, 2011 by CaptainGyro
Posted April 20, 2011
Well got this after everyone recommended it and i have to say great games especially the second game. Great Humor lots to do a great classic which i cant believe i missed when it was originally released
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: yes I was serious.

And no I shouldn't just say the Mona Lisa is stale while I'm at it because the comparison of paying for a videogame to play and admiring a piece of art is stupid for many reasons. Sorry.
Don't be sorry, I say stupid things all the time; sometimes I even admire videogames and play art pieces, just for the heck of it.
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: yes I was serious.
And no I shouldn't just say the Mona Lisa is stale while I'm at it because the comparison of paying for a videogame to play and admiring a piece of art is stupid for many reasons. Sorry.
Categorically rejecting games because they are older then '98 is also stupid for many reasons. And not just nostalgia makes those games great. Back then, a lot of graphics were still drawn and looked a lot better then much of the early steps of full 3d. I personally find the time around 96 most straining graphically, because of that. (Boy was Quake ugly back then...)

And of course playing and looking is very different, but you only complain about graphics, not considering gameplay. Therefore I find the Mona Lisa comparison not that much of ..

Star Control 2 is "tripping of atmosphere" as somebody rightfully mentioned earlier. This statement nails it.
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: yes I was serious.

And no I shouldn't just say the Mona Lisa is stale while I'm at it because the comparison is stupid for many reasons. Sorry.
No it's not. The only limitation of 2D graphics back then, was resolution and colour pallet and with a resolution of 320x240 and 256 colours you can already make amazing art. If you had said a Tandy computer, okay, you'd have had a point, but Star Control 2 WAS a beautiful game. So was Outcast, a 1999 game that ran at a very low resolution compared to other games because of the voxel engine but it was still gorgeous. I'm sorry but as a graphic designer, I know all too well that the means don't matter in the end - you can use a biro to make a beautiful drawing or a piece of chalk, just like you can make beautiful art with 20 year old hardware.
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: yes I was serious.

And no I shouldn't just say the Mona Lisa is stale while I'm at it because the comparison is stupid for many reasons. Sorry.
avatar
Red_Avatar: No it's not. The only limitation of 2D graphics back then, was resolution and colour pallet and with a resolution of 320x240 and 256 colours you can already make amazing art. If you had said a Tandy computer, okay, you'd have had a point, but Star Control 2 WAS a beautiful game. So was Outcast, a 1999 game that ran at a very low resolution compared to other games because of the voxel engine but it was still gorgeous. I'm sorry but as a graphic designer, I know all too well that the means don't matter in the end - you can use a biro to make a beautiful drawing or a piece of chalk, just like you can make beautiful art with 20 year old hardware.
What the hell are you talking about? I haven't even given my reasons why it's stupid, how can you even tell if I have a valid point or not?
Post edited April 20, 2011 by CaptainGyro
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: What the hell are you talking about? I haven't even given my reasons why it's stupid, how can you even tell if I have a point?
He made the comparison, not you, and I can see his reasoning - you set an arbitrary number of a year as a limit which is ridiculous as well considering, at the time, we had some of the ugliest games in history due to very primitive 3D. Compared to the beautifully hand drawn and painted backdrops of 2D games a few years before, it's idiotic to claim 1998 is somehow better than 1992-1993 in a broad sense like that anyway.

That's why he made the comparison, because the hardware back then in no way made a game uglier. Less sophisticated, maybe, and at a lower resolution but it didn't stop the game from being beautiful and engaging. And in the same sense, a painting from several hundreds of years ago isn't less beautiful because digital art allows for so much more detailed and colourful designs.
Posted April 20, 2011
avatar
CaptainGyro: What the hell are you talking about? I haven't even given my reasons why it's stupid, how can you even tell if I have a point?
avatar
Red_Avatar: He made the comparison, not you, and I can see his reasoning .
Ok.
You agree with him. I don't. That's about all there is to it.
Post edited April 20, 2011 by CaptainGyro
Posted April 20, 2011
Im interested in Star Control 1 more than SC2, as I've already played The Ur-Quan Masters.

I remember playing SC1 on Sega Megadrive, is the PC version different?
avatar
CaptainGyro: yes I was serious.
And no I shouldn't just say the Mona Lisa is stale while I'm at it because the comparison of paying for a videogame to play and admiring a piece of art is stupid for many reasons. Sorry.
avatar
SimonG: Categorically rejecting games because they are older then '98 is also stupid for many reasons. And not just nostalgia makes those games great. Back then, a lot of graphics were still drawn and looked a lot better then much of the early steps of full 3d. I personally find the time around 96 most straining graphically, because of that. (Boy was Quake ugly back then...)

And of course playing and looking is very different, but you only complain about graphics, not considering gameplay. Therefore I find the Mona Lisa comparison not that much of ..

Star Control 2 is "tripping of atmosphere" as somebody rightfully mentioned earlier. This statement nails it.
Dude, Quake 1 graphics is awesome.

That said, Star Control 2 graphics was kinda bad even for it's time. The dialogue sequence are very good, the space navigation part, not so much. It's still a very awesome game, with a great story and a great gameplay. It's better than today sci-fi stuff like Mass Effect i'd say
Post edited April 20, 2011 by Eclipse
Posted April 20, 2011
I wish I played this a LONG time ago...First time playing

Verdict so far: Hard but well made (Dang Sylandro Probes! can't I have a Shock wave cannon or something!?!?!) I think I might take notes using the star map that came with it

I think Bioware took notes of this game when making Mass Effect
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)New release: Star Control 1+2(125 posts)(125 posts)
(125 posts)