Night Owl 9/Night Owl CD-ROM (NOPV9) (Night Owl Publisher) (1993).ISO/024a/scom.txt

Text File | 1993-05-01 | 16KB | 278 lines

This mini-review is based on three messages I posted earlier this
week.  Since then, I've played about a dozen campaign missions and
a number of practice missions.  I've added some information based on
what I've gleaned from spending some time with the game.

I've been reading the various messages regarding Strike Commander with
some interest.  I'm not sure what people were expecting, and certainly
the long wait didn't help.  I think part of the problem is the SC is
fundamentally a different game.  It's really an adventure / roleplaying
game with a pretty good flight sim built in.  It doesn't give you
complete versimilitude... but then, with a plot like SC's, it's not
meant to.

Let's talk about the flight part, first (this is FS forum, right?)

1.  Flight model.  The flight model seems fairly good, just a notch
    below the Complex flight model in Falcon.  You lose speed in
    turning duels like you should, you can stall the plane, and the
    plane is a pig when carrying heavy iron.  The roll rate is good,
    but not quite F3's roll rate in the updated (OFT) complex model.
    What's limiting is that 10 throttle values, 5 military and 5 AB.

    In addition, there is a rudder function, although rudder pedals
    are not supported.  The rudder uses the "<" and ">" keys, just
    like the original Red Baron.  Interestingly, the rudder works at
    450+ knots.  My understanding of the F-16 (I'm not a pilot) is that
    rudders are basically useless above about 300 knots.  Like real
    life, there is inertia -- i.e., you can "skid" the aircraft
    sideways by using the rudder while maintaining level flight or
    performing an aileron turn in the opposite direction -- useful
    for ground attacks, lining up that gun kill or dodging 20 Mike-Mike.

2.  Avionics.  The avionics is limited; I'd put it on a par with the
    avionics in Harrier Jump Jet.  Better than JF2, not as good as
    F3's and not nearly as detailed as SEIII.  The real problem is
    that a lot of the modes are buried because the MFD's are really
    pop-up screens.  What is configurable are options that are
    reasonably real (equivalent to F3's SAM mode), but configurable
    to "Godlike" (i.e., F3's SAD mode.)

3.  Weapons modelling is good.  AIM9J's miss more often than they
    hit.  There's an "easy" and a standard gun mode.  If you lose
    tracking with the GBU-15, it can miss the target.  Mavericks seem
    to almost always hit, although I did see one miss once.  The dumb
    bombs (Mk. 82s, Durandels and CBU20s are used in the game) work
    pretty much like Falcon, with the addition of a CCRP mode, along
    with the more familiar CCIP mode.  It's VERY easy to miss with
    dumb bombs, UNLIKE most Microprose games.

    While we're talking about weapons, lets discuss the 20MM cannon.
    One somewhat unrealistic item is the availability of 1000 rounds
    of 20MM (small elves must reload the belt periodically...)  However,
    there's a good reason (from a game designer's perspective) for this,
    er, enhancement to the F-16:  you spend an AWFUL lot of time engaging
    with guns.  Why?

    Remember the "future history" of the game.  You are a mercenary.
    AIM-9Js cost $30,000.  AIM-9Ms cost $60,000.  AAMRAMs cost $100,000!
    Cannon shells are essentially free.  The same holds true for your
    opponents in the game.  Additionally, enemy pilot AI at levels
    below Ace (there are three levels altogether) will close for gun
    duels and don't seem to use missiles.  (More on AI later.)

    So you spend a lot of time racking up gun kills (which are more
    satisfying than missile kills, anyway.)  To enhance this, there
    is an "easy" and a "standard" gun mode ("easy" means it's easier
    to hit the target.)

    Once you get past this little fiction, the gun is modelled well.
    There's a LCOS gunsight -- you put the pipper on the target and
    pull the trigger (more difficult than it sounds.)  BTW, there's also
    a neat weapons mode, DGFT (dogfight), in which the W key (which is
    the normal weapons toggle) only toggles between AA weapons.  (Falcon
    3.0 and other sims have this too, but it seems easier to use here.)

4.  Enemy AI is decent, but not great (although I've only been playing
    at the "Veteran", not "Ace" mode; there are three AI levels.  It's
    definitely better than SEIII's, but not as good as the higher levels
    in F3.  However, the SAM operator's are quite good, although they
    can be spoofed.  I've been nailed by aircraft only a couple of times,
    but the SAMs are very tough.

    Part of the problem -- and part of the fun, actually, is the nature
    of the air combat.  Part of the premise of being in a mercenary unit
    is that weapons are EXPENSIVE!  Using a missile is not always cost
    effective, so you close to guns range -- and so does the enemy.
    So there's lots of turning duels, and the enemy planes jink pretty
    well.  They're not great shots, however.  (I admit that I've been
    using the "easy" guns mode as I learn the game.)  The enemy AI does
    use limited 3D maneuvers (mostly split S), but usually just turn a lot.

    Since I wrote the preceding two paragraphs, I've had to up my
    estimation of the enemy AI.  At ace level, they use missiles -- and
    they use them correctly.  Also, early in the game, you may be
    somewhat perturbed by the ease at which you rack up kills.  I had
    forty kills by the 11th (or so) mission.  The game is setting you up!
    In most of the early campaign missions, you're fighting Libyans, or
    South Americans, or other mercs of questionable quality... which
    makes you real cocky in a hurry.

    Then you fight American pilots.

    Then you get shot down.

    I ran into some "California Air Force" pilots over San Francisco in
    F-15s.  They were tough.  First of all, lining up gun or rear aspect
    shots were very difficult -- they jink all over the place.
    Second, they use lots of vertical and other sophisticated
    maneuvers.  I swear at least once, one of them used one of the
    Yo-Yo variants to nail me.  They also use flares and chaff
    intelligently.  It was the first mission in which my wingman
    got shot down.

    By the way, UNLIKE most Microprose sims, you have computer wingmen
    that fly with you.  All of them (there are five in the game so far)
    are pretty good, and like real life, they have varying strengths and
    weaknesses.  Some are good at dogfighting, others at moving mud.

5.  Controls.  It doesn't support rudder pedals (too bad.)  They only
    seem really useful in ground attack.  When I get my WCS UPROM, I
    plan on programming the rocker switch as the rudder.  It has the
    same deficiency as F3 -- you can control the rudder manually, unlike
    the real F16.

    The real problem is getting past the (initial) joystick calibration
    routine.  I have two joysticks, a FCS pro and a Flightstick.  Part
    of my problem is that my x-axis pot in the WCS is starting to act
    up.  I could NOT calibrate it -- and kept getting a message "incorrect
    calibration" -- and could not enter the game.  I'll be either
    adjusting the pot or sending the stick back to Thrustmaster.

    Despite what you may have read, the game does support dedicated
    game cards.  I'm using the Thrustmaster ACM card (with the
    Flightstick) and a friend of mine is successfully flying with
    the Gravis card and a WCS (non-pro).  Both of us did unplug our
    rudder pedals.  One note:  the joystick routines are very sensitive,
    so if you have an adjustable card, turn it way down.

    Some people have complained about the pop-up windows, but I like
    them.  The only time they are a bit of a problem is when you also
    magify the HUD; the pop-ups can display some useful information,
    like how much ordnance you have left.  Gotta get those WCS uproms...

Now let's talk about the game.

A lot of people here complain about the cinematic sequences.  You really
have to change your thinking a bit (or not get the game) to enjoy this
game.  The cinematic stuff is the campaign.  Like Wing Commander, there's
a mission tree, so the nature of your next mission, and the success of
your mercenary unit is dependent on the success of each mission (UNLIKE
X-wing, which demands complete success.)

Also, the cinematic sequences do some character development.  Think of
it as a movie in which you get to fly around a lot.  If you don't like
this kind of approach, or can't suspend your disbelief, then you probably
won't like the game.  I play a fair number of roleplaying games, and
tend to enjoy that aspect of SC quite a bit.  The manual adds to the
effect, containing some pretty good fiction writing.

In fact, as I play the game more, there are interesting branches and
plot twists that occur, which add to the atmosphere of the game.  I save
after every mission, successful or not, and have reflown unsuccessful
missions (and saved to a different file -- you can have up to 100 saves).
The result have been twists in the plot, and even different missions
flown.  It's been great fun.  Also, turn down missions on occasion.
Interesting twists develop there, too.

The graphics, IMHO, are very good; they tend towards some pretty realistic
touches.  A number of people have complained about the haze effect, but
it's not any different than flying on a relatively hazy or misty day.
I've also heard people complaining about the lack of altitude cues, but
I've had very few problems in this area, and when I do, "bitchin' Betty"
tells me to pull up.  The only graphics that seem a bit cheesy are the
close-ups of the explosions when an aircraft takes a hit.  The city
graphics are stunning.  Ground explosions are amazing, and there are
occasional secondary explosion effects when appropriate.  After the
explosion, you can actually see the shells of buildings, or burning
vehicles, rather than just holes in the ground.

Be prepared to pay a price, though.  I have a 66 Mhz DX2 with an ATI
localbus Ultra Pro, and I still notice a bit of a slowdown (though not
radically) in dogfights.  However, on my system, I notice similar kinds
of slowdowns in AOTP in those crazy missions where you encounter 12 enemy
planes.  But you need the horsepower if you have all the features turned
on.  (Note:  I have seen slowdowns more significant over terrain that
is feature-laden, such as cities.  Not enough to be unplayable on my
system, but enough to be noticeable.

I like the game quite a bit, although it would have seemed more of a
technological advance to me if it had come out even six months back.
The game combines technical features we've seen singly in many games.

There have been a large number of complaints about the performance.
Folks, that's the price you pay.  This game combines a number of
advanced graphics techniques, and the result is heavy CPU and graphics
usage.  And that's at 320x200x256.  I'm surprised (and a little disappointed)
that Chris Robert's team didn't implement some accelerated video
drivers.  In the future, sims should seriously consider accelerated
video, since Windows has made them commonplace.  (Personally, I'd suggest
S3, ATI Mach 32 & Mach 8 (although you could get by with 8514, I suppose),
P9000, Western Digital, Tseng ET-4000w32 and Cirrus Logic.  That would
cover more than 90% of the accelerated video cards.  Of course, what
needs to happen really, is that VESA needs to develop a set of standards
for accelerated video.)

As sims move up in resolution (Aces over Europe will do texture mapping,
Gourard shading and 320x400x256, although they claim performance will be
no worse than AOTP), more horsepower will be required.  Even a Pentium
won't cut it -- the sim designers will have to use accelerated graphics.
Of course, 32-bit flat mode will help by cutting all the segmentation
overhead.

I think the real issue boils down to two things:  the technical problems
people have been having, particularly with the joystick calibration,
and the fact that the real thing after all the tremendous anticipation has
caused an inevitable letdown.  That, coupled with the fact that it is not
a traditional flight sim, has been sources of frustration.

Actually, I think there's a third problem:  a lot of people are also
disappointed because of the aforementioned performance issues.  People
who are able to run F3 adequately on a 386/33 can't run Strike Commander
(or F15-III for that matter).  It's the price of progress, and the
price of greater realism.  (I wonder if that means there'll be a good
market niche for sims that target 386s, as opposed to 486s...)

Technical hints, or how to get the damn thing to play.

Despite what Origin says, you DON'T need to pull your dedicated game
card.  However, if your joystick has a third axis (i.e., the throttle
wheel on the Flightstick or the Thrustmaster hat, then removing any
additional attachments (third joystick or rudder pedals) fixes the
problem.  Adjusting the sensitivity helps too.  If your gear is at
all flaky, you'll have problems (I'm starting to lose the pot on
my FCSpro, but it's playable with other games; not SC.)

Joystick calibration, by the way seems to have a tremendous impact on
the game.  If your stick is slightly out of kilter, the music slows
down, and so does your frame rate.

I have 386MAX 6.02, and Adaptec 1742A SCSI adaptor and use Norton's
NCACHE2 and DOS 6.0 (no doublespace).  I have lots of stuff loaded
into high memory (CD-ROM, PAS-16 driver, share, vesa driver.)
The game runs fine, but it seems to have flaky sound detection.  I
have a Pro Studio Spectrum, which is just a PAS-16 with less noisy
components, and it couldn't detect it as a PAS card.  When I configured
it as a Soundblaster, it worked well.  Also, the Roland audio (I have
an LAPC-1) is terrific.

Bottom line:  It's a very interesting, and somewhat flawed, attempt to
meld a pretty good flight sim with a cinematic storyline.  The end result
is not perfect, and unfortunately, a lot of folks were expecting
perfection -- or at least that "AHA!" feeling of a new breakthrough
(like when you first played Wing Commander or Battle of Britain.)  That
feeling isn't there.  But for me, the plot and the future history
causes a very welcome suspension of disbelief.  I get sucked into the
plot, and it makes what would be an above average, but not superb flight
sim seem all the more entertaining.

Approach it with some caution, get it from a store that has a good
return policy and make sure your hardware is set up to work with SC.
I think if you take the time, you'll enjoy the game... providing you
like the NATURE of the game (as opposed to the nature of the SIM.)
I admire Origin for taking the risk it took to make this game, and
I hope all the naysayers don't cause Origin to stop taking chances in
the future.  At worst, it's a glorious failure.  But I suspect many
people will be pretty entertained.  But not everyone; computer games
tends to be an intensely personal experience.  Everyone hear can
certainly vouch for that!

However, I find that as I play it more, it grows on me.  I started
out cautiously liking it somewhat and now I have to confess I'm a real
fan.  Now if I can just get past those damned Eagle drivers and take
out the oil tanker in San Franciso bay...

As ever,
Loyd Case