From: opus@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (robin.g.kim)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games
Subject: Re: Red Baron, Spectrum Holobyte, Falcon 3.0
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:37:28 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <Bu70yD.LED@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> ptran@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (Phat H Tran) writes:
>In article <Bu6pqE.179@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cs125b64@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu (cs125 student) writes:
>>ptran@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (Phat H Tran) writes:
>>
>>>If SH were to wrap a WWI/WWII
>>>scenario (planes, theatres, ordnance, politics, etc.) around their 
>>>sim engine, then they'll have all of the simulation market to themselves.
>>
>>Or maybe not.  RB: Works!, has great bitmapped graphics, sounds better than 
>>Falcon on my Roland, uses a creative interface, chews less disk space, and 
>>basically does a good job already.  What would SH bring in that RB hasn't 
>>already?  WWI flight models are simple enough, they arent lacking there - 
>>where most jet sims pale to Falcon.  There is even a networled version.
>>You just have to call the (expensive) Sierra network.  At least it always
>>means there is someone to play.
>>
>
>Does Red Baron have a complex, dynamic world model?  No.
>In Red Baron, is there an actual, observable war that's occurring
>outside of you cockpit?  Do you actually see individual units do 
>battle on the ground?  Is there an enemy intelligence?  Do subsequent
>missions depend on the state of the theatre?  All no.  Red Baron's
>world model and campaign engine is static and uninteresting.
>Do the fellows at Dynamix know how to model flight as well as SH?  No.
>Does Red Baron let you assign flights and waypoints, and have your 
>actions and those of you squadron affect the outcome of the war?  No.
>Does Red Baron allow you to experiment with and explore tactical and
>strategic possibilities?  No.  Red Baron is simply a shoot-em-up.  It
>is tactically limited, and has no strategic aspects.
>Is Red Baron's sky filled with Non-player planes fulfilling their own
>agenda?  No.  It's only you, your wingmen, and the bandits you're 
>supposed to kill in a very sterile and rigged confrontation.
>Does Red Baron have a free multi-player option?  No.  I don't think
>the multi-player Red Baron on TSN even has a cooperative mode.
>
>And so on.  SH has already brought all this to Falcon 3.0, and one can
>only hope that they'll do the same to WWI/WWII.
>
>Phat.

Very interesting discussion.  I, too, once asked myself how great it would
be if SH did a prop-plane simulation with the Falcon 3.0 engine.  While it
would have many strengths (most or all of which Phat outlined above), it would
be far inferior in terms of airplane graphics.  Maybe this isn't important
to some people, but in my opinion, accurate plane graphics are very important
in these earlier eras, if only so that the planes don't all look alike!  I've
never played Red Baron, but I have AOTP, and really enjoy the distinctive look
of the various planes.

The three major contenders in the pre-jet air combat simulation arena
are Red Baron, AOTP, and SWOTL.  All have excellent airplane graphics.
Need I say more?  SH probably realizes that going into this market would
be playing to the OTHER guys' strengths.  That's why their sticking to
more modern stuff like the A-10 and AH-6 (GS2000 proved that you can have
great looking helicopters without using bitmaps).

Just my two cents.

Rob
ihlpy!opus@att.att.com