While these are only the opinions of one gamer, I would like to share them with gamesas (and other forum members) on why I think Descent was such a huge hit, and what will make the next installment a success.

D1 and D2 were fabulous FPS games that allowed for SMOOTH and flowing controls in cramped, constricted, and sometimes claustrophobic feeling environments. If there was a need to maneuver in an emergency, it could be easily done with the controls, allowing for a quick escape - without getting hung up on some dumb piece of environment. It was this quality of smooth response and control that made Descent so much fun. Where I feel modern FPS games fail, as did D3 to a certain extent, is the focus on developing over-detailed (in my opinion) environments and surfaces. While they provide a fun "look" to the game, they typically only create hindrances and annoying places for the character (or ship in Descent's case) to get hung up on. This creates a less than realistic gameplay experience (I sometimes find myself yelling things like "Yeah - like I'd really get stuck on a DOOR!" in these newer games), which personally frustrates me as a player.

While I understand the "look" is what some developers use to market and sell games in this day and age, I personally feel that over-detailing environments can cause fluidity problems with in-game character mobility. I think it would be unfortunate to see that type of stereotypical mobility problem introduced into a new Descent sequel, especially for a game that thrives on smooth motion.

If gamesas can duplicate the smooth controls and maneuverability inside those "cramped" environments we all loved so much in the original Descent, yet WITHOUT creating excessive amounts of "catch points" for mobility... I think they will have a winner.

Just my $.02.

Well said.

The ship movement from D1-2 is perfect. There are plenty of things that I could diss about D3 but it's much easier to say that D1-2 physics is what I want than to give you a laundry list of what I don't want.

To each his own I guess. I happen to prefer D3s movement over D2 or 1. They felt too slow to me.

x2

very good post btw
Give us a D4 beta

I'd definately say Descent 1 & II had the smothest motion, but Descent 3 was probably the fastest until you went outside. It just feels incredibly slow to me whenever I fly outside for some reason. A massive thank you to EA for:
- Producing great quality games time and time again
- Providing excellent technical support
- Never destroying any highly acclaimed studios for profit
- Never ripping people off
- Never wasting people's time

Really I think descent is better served with smaller levels and slower ships. The afterburner is overused. With the slower ships dogfighting was more fun.

I'll say that. But it is a general problem in wide-open terrains. They are vast, so they need either heavy action, or details on them to make a good "arena". Either of them meant lots of memory usage, and had the D3's developers tried to do that in the conditions in 1999 era, we would have a really slow game because of the system requirements... At least this is my theory here .



I agree with you here, despite that I like detailed-looking spaces in a game (and equally enjoy building levels with them!)... I remember some "wrong" details on the D3, i.e. a door that your ship barely fits! DIVE, DIVE, DIVE, HIT YOUR BURNERS, PILOT!! (FreeSpace 2, The mission with the SF Mara fighter, Beginning...)

It ran slow on my PC when it was released, so yeah, hightening the system requirements further would've been a bad thing. A massive thank you to EA for:
- Producing great quality games time and time again
- Providing excellent technical support
- Never destroying any highly acclaimed studios for profit
- Never ripping people off
- Never wasting people's time