What is this piece of CRAP.....!

[NutButter]

I loved SE4. The graphics were fair but the game is the best in its class if strategy and tactics are what you are looking for.

Starfury is just too prehistoric for me. The graphics are way under par with today's programming and hardware capabilities. Nice attempt, but not good enough.

Too many responses to critics of this game rely on the modders. Who thinks their will be a huge modding community, anyway? Sure, their will be some, but at the SE4 level? Will it take 2 or 3 generations of improvements to get the modders motivated? And why does the modding community make it a better game? Shouldn't it come out of the gates a winner and then move to excellency (uhum, SE4)? Cow dung will look and smell like cow dung. I'm not going to wait for a bunch of chemists to change its aroma or appearance before its acceptable to me - it never will be! Starfury isn't cow dung, but I think you get the point.

SE4 was genious - Starfury has that ambition, but lacks severely. But even without comparison, it desperately lacks good gameplay on its own.

Thanks to this forum, I avoided the purchase and went with Freelancer. Not only did I save a few bucks, but am having a great time playing the game. The graphics are a feast to the eyes and the gameplay is simple and fun. Though not as complex as SE4 (and a different genre altogether), it works for me.

[PvK]

Just talking about graphics, are you saying you think Star Fury graphics are a step backwards from Space Empires graphics?

Or do you just think the "bar" for a game with continuous action and 3D rendering is higher than for turn-based strategy games?

If you thought Star Fury's gameplay was awesome, would you be complaining about the graphics?

PvK

[DeadZone]

Personally I dont have a problem with the graphics, I think I may actually be the only 19 yr old who doesnt care about graphics when its comes to games
The reason for this is becasue I only look at gameplay, wot does it offer, and does it work
Now from the demo I believe Starfury dos fall under par, but not by how much many ppl are saying, I believe a few patches may solve that

And if anyone says that it should come out at a point of not needing patches to improve it then look at todays market, 80% of PC games are now coming out bugged in some way, shape or form

Hopefully, since the demise of the master of orion series, seeing as after 3 patches it was still barely playable, Games may start coming out how they use to.

IMO its not the Devs fault for the state of the games, its down to the time they have, Im seeing games being rushed out faster than usual just to meet demand and save money and this is having a profound effect on the quality, and alot of games are now sacruficing game play for graphics

Hell Im still finding games made in 1998 better than most of todays games, sure graphics are nowhere near as good as the modern games, but they still play a hell of a lot better and are far more enjoyable

Thats my 2 pence (changed due to the fact Im British )

[ October 16, 2003, 10:05: Message edited by: DeadZone ]

[General Woundwort]

Originally posted by DeadZone:
Hell Im still finding games made in 1998 better than most of todays games, sure graphics are nowhere near as good as the modern games, but they still play a hell of a lot better and are far more enjoyable.

I second the remarks of the distinguished MP from Britannia. I'd give my left arm to be able to play Star Control II again...

[gregebowman]

I'm with Deadzone. Graphics may be nice, but I'd rather have good and enjoyable gameplay over the eye candy. Even if I have a computer now that can play some of the good graphics game, I'd rather play a game with generic graphics with good gameplay that I enjoy playing (like SEIV Gold), than playing a good looking pile of dog doo-doo that I'm ready to throw through the window. If game developers and their publishers would realize that, then maybe there would be a few less buggy games released too soon.

[NutButter]

{Just talking about graphics, are you saying you think Star Fury graphics are a step backwards from Space Empires graphics?}

Not at all. For the attempt, however, I'm not impressed. The graphics are more of a distraction from today's expectations than they are a benefit to improved gameplay. It seems as if gameplay was sacrificed for improved graphics. SE4, far from state-of-the-art graphics, held its weight in tactics and complexity - Starfury, on its own and stripped of graphics is nothing but a less action-packed downgraded tactical Version of SE4. This is the wrong direction!

There seems to be a lot of truth to DeadZone's comment about devs being pushed to production. Out of the box games today arrive loaded with bugs and desperately need patches to even be playable. I don't dislike Starfury because it is buggy, I just don't like it because it lacks the discipline of mastering either the gameplay and/or graphics, like I have come to expect from their previous effort. It would have been incredibley awesome if it had evolved into a serious SE5 instead of a mutated half-attempt at graphic appeal. All that energy wasted!

I can't depend on MOO anymore. Gal Civ was cool, but somewhat shallow. Pax Imperia came close, but still was a bit short. SE4 absolutely ruled! I guess I'll have to wait another couple of years (hope)!

[Instar]

Originally posted by DeadZone:
Hell Im still finding games made in 1998 better than most of todays games, sure graphics are nowhere near as good as the modern games, but they still play a hell of a lot better and are far more enjoyable

I am still playing Doom 1, 2, Evilution, and Final Doom. With an emulator, no modern setup can run the game properly.

[Mehrunes]

Originally posted by NutButter:
There seems to be a lot of truth to DeadZone's comment about devs being pushed to production. Out of the box games today arrive loaded with bugs and desperately need patches to even be playable. I don't dislike Starfury because it is buggy, I just don't like it because it lacks the discipline of mastering either the gameplay and/or graphics, like I have come to expect from their previous effort. It would have been incredibley awesome if it had evolved into a serious SE5 instead of a mutated half-attempt at graphic appeal. All that energy wasted!

I can't depend on MOO anymore. Gal Civ was cool, but somewhat shallow. Pax Imperia came close, but still was a bit short. SE4 absolutely ruled! I guess I'll have to wait another couple of years (hope)!

What gave you the idea that this was supposed to be a 4X game? Some elements (the 3D engine in particular) may make into the next Version of Space Empires, but this isn't Space Empires (despite what the name says, just like Descent: Freespace was most certainly not Descent; it's all in the branding ). It's an entirely different game and if you look at it with expectations based on a different kind of game then you're the only one who's at fault if you're disappointed.

Those of you who are capable of looking at Starfury for what it is and are enjoying it (like me) might also want to check out some of the other excellent games that use the same style of gameplay. Such as Star Control II and Escape Velocity: Nova. I'd be happy to see Starfury refined over time into a classic like those two.

[Phoenix-D]

Right, the complaining makes a LOT more sense if you assumed SF was supposed to be SE:V. (as it was listed in some spots)

As anyone who has played even the demo knows..its not.

[dbt1949]

So far I've just finished the 1st campaign. I'm afraid at this rate this just isn't going to be my cup of tea.
It's my own fault however for buying before trying.
I'd give it a 50% rating.
I'll finish the other campaigns and I'll get my money's worth but still feel the game is a little disappointing.