The following Q&A is a composite from notes taken during over two hours of discussion with people at Spectrum HoloByte. Any text in [brackets] are my own personal comments.
IMG: What is the story behind Falcon MC's small screen size, 16 colors, faulty flight model, and long development time?
Spectrum HoloByte: We first started working on a color version of Falcon for the Mac around 1988, soon after Falcon 2.x was released. During the next couple of years three separate programmers worked on the project for awhile before moving on. In 1990, two more Mac programmers joined the company and went to work on a color Falcon, but were temporarily assigned to another project involving one of the Tetris family of games. During this time, the demand for a color version of Falcon never relented, and we realized that a color version was definitely needed.
When the two programmers were finally able to give Falcon MC their unwavering attention, two major constraints appeared: time and the original Falcon flight-model. Time was a limiting factor because of the need to produce a product to meet the demand, and this imposed deadlines on the flight-model. The original flight-model had some major quirks in it [like the problem with going vertical and not being able to roll out on any heading], but rewriting it to more realistic levels would take at least two years. We didn't have two years so the decision was made to base Falcon MC on the original flight-model. Some minor changes were made, but the flight-model's architecture dictated that major changes would require a complete rewrite.
Once we'd decided to use the original flight-model, we turned to the question of screen size and number of colors. Our programmers wanted build multiple-screen support into Falcon MC, but lacked the time to do so. Thus we decided to support the lowest common denominator, the 12" screen, so that owners of LCs [and now of Color Classics] would not be excluded. Time also played a part in the number of colors Falcon MC would display. Not having enough time to create a 256 color [8 bit] 3D world forced us to settle for the 16 color [4 bit] world that was included. The number of colors was also constrained by the flight-model, which would have slowed down to appalling frame rates at 256 colors.
[As we all know, frame rates are one of the most important aspects of flight simulators. Contrast Hellcats' high frame rate and high popularity with Red Baron's low frame rate and low popularity.]
Those are the reasons we released Falcon MC as a 16-color game that ran in a 12" window. Compared to Falcon 2.x, Falcon MC represents a significant improvement.
IMG: What are the missile parameters for Falcon MC and why do the GBU-12 TV guided bombs fly faster than the plane that released them?
Spectrum HoloByte: The missile ranges in the game are those that are listed in the manual. The air-to-air missiles [both U.S.- and Soviet-made] have proximity fuses that will detonate them if they are within a lethal radius of your plane [thereby making them very hard to evade, especially the AA-7 Apex with its 88-lb. fragmentation warhead. The surface-to-air missiles only have contact fuses, so all you have to do is get out of their way, but quickly. Incidentally, real SA-2s and SA-6s have proximity fuses.]
The GBU-12 TV guided bombs behave the way they do because the game treats them as AGM-65B Mavericks. A bug in the program gives them slightly more forward velocity than the plane, but their homing and flight characteristics are based on those of the Mavericks. If we were going to accurately display all the weapons [both free flight and guided] in flight, we would have to include miniature flight-models for each weapon in the simulation.
IMG: At the moment, MiGs are generated within 5 miles of our F-16s and the Airborne Early Warning aircraft don't let us know about them until they are within missile range. Why are the AWACS so shortsighted?
Spectrum HoloByte: The MiGs come in at low level to avoid radar detection, popping up once they are well within missile range.
[The APG-66 radar in the F-16 might not be able to separate low flying targets from the ground targets, but the AWACS should be able to pick up the incoming MiGs. After all, AWACS can even track vehicles on roads.]
IMG: Why is the Falcon MC communications module so touchy? [I have yet to achieve a solid connection at 9600 baud.]
Spectrum HoloByte: The communications module suffered from the same syndrome as the rest of Falcon MC. We wanted to completely redo it, but time constraints forced us to base the Falcon MC communications module on the Falcon 2.x module. We have managed to fix some of the problems with head-to-head combat on networks [see below for more stuff that is in the update to Falcon MC 1.0.1. I bet that the communications module would also benefit from a new and improved flight-module.]
IMG: We hear that you are releasing an update for Falcon MC. When can we expect it and what will it fix?
Spectrum HoloByte: As of today [the interview took place on 3/11/93] the update is ready for duplication and verification. All that remains to be done is the completion of the Read Me file that will accompany the update. We expect it will be released within a week. The update fixes some of the MouseStick problems, hides the background and menu bar, fixes the promotion bug [no more Generals and civilians with over 8000 points] and fixes the synchronization problem in head-to-head engagements on networks.
[By the time you read this, the update should be available from Spectrum HoloByte and on various online services.]
IMG: Falcon 1.0 and Falcon 2.x both showed increased speed with increased CPU speed. Why doesn't Falcon MC run much faster on a fast Mac [e.g., a Quadra 950] as it does on a slow Mac [e.g., a IIsi]?
Spectrum HoloByte: Combining the original flight model with the 16-color 3D world restricted the maximum frame rate to 15 frames per second [fps]. While you will see improvements in speed until you reach 15 fps, Falcon MC will not exceed this speed by much, so owners of Quadras fly at the same speed that IIci owners do. Falcon 1.0 and Falcon 2.x depended purely on CPU speed, which is why faster speeds were seen on faster machines [playing Falcon 2.x on a IIci was interesting, to say the least]. If you'd like to squeeze the maximum performance out of your Mac, make sure that: (1) you have no Inits, Extensions, or other programs running at the same time as Falcon MC, and where possible drive your monitor with an accelerated video card instead of the built-in video.
IMG: In the view of the current limitations and great potential of Falcon MC, does Spectrum HoloByte have plans for any major upgrades?
Spectrum HoloByte: Not for Falcon MC. The next color Falcon for the Mac will be created entirely from scratch. Our programmers would like to start with a brand new flight-model, a 256-color 3D world, and create everything from scratch. We intend to do it right next time.
[It looks like Spectrum HoloByte is committed to eventually coming out with an improved modern air combat simulator for the Mac, but not in the immediate future. Read on for the juicy details.]
IMG: At the same time that Falcon MC's upcoming release was announced, Spectrum HoloByte also mentioned that they were going to release Falcon 2.5, a black and white upgrade of Falcon 2.2.x. Whatever happened to Falcon 2.5?
Spectrum HoloByte: Good question. Kyle Brink [technical writer and customer service representative] is looking into the fate of Falcon 2.5. As soon as we hear from him we'll let you know where it is and what happened to it.
IMG: A common question Falcon MC owners ask is why it isn't the Macintosh equivalent of Falcon 3.0 [for PCs]?
Spectrum HoloByte: The main reasons behind the big differences between Falcon MC and Falcon 3.0 are the time available for development, and the resources that were available. Falcon 3.0 was a major effort that took six or seven programmers, eight or nine artists, and four writers about two years to complete. Spectrum HoloByte didn't have the resources for a similar effort for Falcon MC.
[Some of you may remember Spectrum HoloByte's quest for good Mac programmers a couple of years ago. Apparently most good Mac programmers get snatched by business application developers who can pay more than game developers can. Even so, programmers make much more than we lowly fisheries biologists do. Porting Falcon 3.0 from the PC over to the Mac isn't a good idea. Look at what happened to Red Baron when it was ported. Ports always seem to work better when they go from Mac to PC.]
IMG: After the success of Tetris, Super Tetris, Welltris, Wordtris and Faces-Tris III, does Spectrum HoloByte have plans for more x-Tris games?
Spectrum HoloByte: Games of the Tetris genre are very popular and are relatively easy to develop. We'd gladly produce more if we could come up with ideas for a new game. Any suggestions? Incidentally, Tetris style games for the Mac look and play better than their PC counterparts. [No surprise there…after all, a Mac is a Mac.]
IMG: We've heard that you are going to release a game on CD-ROM called Iron Helix. What is Iron Helix and when is it expected to ship?
Spectrum HoloByte: [this is an excerpt from the press release]: Iron Helix, created by development house Drew Pictures Inc., will be published and distributed by Spectrum HoloByte. A March 1993 release is expected for the Macintosh CD-ROM platform. Rendered in full-color photorealistic 3-D animation, Iron Helix is an action adventure set in a cold-war future where a terrible biological weapon threatens to touch off a galactic holocaust. Players must stop the weapon from reaching its target by piloting a small robotic probe within an impossibly huge maze-like spaceship, all the while evading the ship's deadly security drone. Be speeding through corridors, shafts and chambers in this six level monolith, players must guide the probe to the clues that will stop the drone and destroy the monstrous ship. But there's a catch: the player's probe was developed for biological research and thus carries no weapons, making Iron Helix a race of wits and time.
IMG: A rumor that Spectrum HoloByte was abandoning the Mac market recently circulated on some online services. In light of this rumor, we were wondering what Spectrum HoloByte's strategic goals are for the next few years?
Spectrum HoloByte: Our company is driven by the same forces that drive all companies, namely, the need to remain profitable and the need to provide returns for our investors. We are currently in a physical growth phase, adding more people to bring our staff up to about 110 people. [And relieving technical writers like Kyle from having to do double duty as customer service representatives.] Our short term objective is to develop products that have high returns in order to satisfy the investors who are funding our growth phase. Once this phase is complete and we have stabilized again, we'll be able to allocate more resources to less profitable areas.
The need for high returns per effort invested dictates the type of projects we can undertake for the next couple of years. While Mac games are profitable, their return per effort invested is not as high as that of PC games. Conversely, the return from Mac or PC games is not as high as that from cartridges for home entertainment systems [Sega, Nintendo, etc.]. Therefore you can expect Spectrum HoloByte to focus their in-house product development on high-return projects, at least until we can afford to resume developing products for less profitable areas.
This does not mean that we are abandoning the Mac market. As is the case with Drew Pictures Inc. and Iron Helix, Spectrum HoloByte is more than happy to help small companies publish and distribute their quality Mac games.
[This type of arrangement is beneficial to everyone involved; Spectrum HoloByte gets some revenue, the small company gets some capital and can take advantage of Spectrum HoloByte's marketing and distribution expertise and we, the consumers, keep getting cool Mac games. Does it matter who writes them?]
IMG: Do you see any future trends in game hardware or software?
Spectrum HoloByte: One trend that is apparent is the increasing size of games. Currently large games are being distributed on floppy disks, but it is cheaper to distribute a game on CD-ROM than on a couple dozen high density floppies. Right now the CD-ROM installed base is small, but provided the price of CD-ROM drives continues to drop and Apple keeps releasing new Macs with built in CD-ROM drives, a critical mass will be reached, making distributing games via CD-ROM a viable option.
IMG: Does Spectrum HoloByte plan to develop games for the Power PC, the end result of the Apple–IBM alliance?
Spectrum HoloByte: Yes. Once the installed base is large enough, we will develop games for the Power PC. If the Power PC maintains compatibility with existing Mac and IBM platforms, then the development process will be faster and easier [and we Mac F-16 jocks can settle a few scores with certain Falcon 3.0 jocks].
—End of Interview—
So there you have it, the synthesis from the interview with Spectrum HoloByte. My personal conclusions? Well, Spectrum HoloByte is not the Evil Empire. They are just another company driven by the same forces that all other companies are driven by, time and money. Unlike some companies, Spectrum HoloByte has a large number of incumbent Mac users who will probably guarantee that the company not abandon the Mac market until the Mac itself is gone. As far as Falcon MC goes, what we have is a classic example of a product that was created under pressure to meet a massive demand and that suffered because of a lack of development time and resources. Hopefully all future Spectrum HoloByte releases will not have to suffer from these ailments.
I'd like to thank the following people at Spectrum HoloByte for putting up with me, hour late that I was, and for allowing me to barrage them with an endless series of questions and comments.
Judy Biletnikoff, Public Relations Assistant
Mark Blattel, Software Engineer
Kyle Brink, Technical Writer and Customer Service Representative
Robert Giedt, Technical Writer
Brian Lewis, Software Engineer
A special thank you is reserved for Kyle Brink, who not only answered many of my questions but also arranged the Spectrum HoloByte side of the interview, and gave great directions to Spectrum HoloByte. Without him, there would have been no interview, and I would still be driving around Alameda looking for the right building.
