Star Wars Squadrons

[Palanan]

I'd never heard of this, but the trailer just dropped. Looks gorgeous, and they outdid themselves with the environments.



No idea about actual gameplay, though.

Spoiler: Familiar Faces

Show

Hera Syndulla appears in one scene, and I'm pretty sure that was Wedge in another.

Seems to be early New Republic, with remnants of the Empire not taking no for an answer.

[The Glyphstone]

Gameplay trailer is supposed to drop tomorrow, from what I read.

[Aotrs Commander]

TIE Fighter is one of my top three best games of all time, I find it a crying travesty there was never a TIE Fighter 2.



But this? It's EA, so I don't trust them as far as I can throw them anymore.

Hell, I find it hard to even believe this will be a flight sim (because niche, and as Games Workshop's clearly failed approach shows, you never make a successful game by doing anythig other than appealing to the widest (and thus shallowest) customer base possible...) like TIE Fighter or X-Wing Alliance and not something more like Rogue Squadron (wiki's "action" in the description doesn't encourage me).



MAYBE, if it's absolutely perfect (and an actual flight sim), then I might look at it one day, in two or three years when it's dirt cheap in a sale (and not on the Epic store).

Which I expect about as much as I expect Disney to make an announcement that they are going regulate the sequel movies and associated nucanon to Legends 2 and plan to make a nunucanon, starting with the Thrawn trilogy movie-fied starring with the OT movie cast who they have resurrected from the dead and magically de-aged as appropriate and convinced to be willing to do so.

I.e. Not Chuffing likely.

[MCerberus]

But my good Lich, there were two sequels to TIE Fighter, X-Wing Alliance and X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, the later being quietly one of the most important games of the era.


If you look really closely at parts of the cinematic you can see them referencing visual elements and the UI from the old games, like the Engine-Weapons-Shield balance. Which means that someone on the team cares, which means there's more than me that will be hurt by the inevitable results.

edit - and the only thing wrong with Legends canon is that the only media that still uses it is SW:TOR. There's just nobody wanting to use The Cool Star Wars as their settings.

[Keltest]

Im with the lich. EA seems to be allergic to making a good star wars game. Theyll need to earn my trust before i even allow that this could possibly be something worth buying.

[DeTess]

It's apparently a 5v5 multiplayer-focussed game, which killed most of my interest. If this had been more 'Ace Combat but star wars' I'd have been following it closely, but I'm not really interested in another team-based multiplayer shooter thingy.

[Peelee]

I'm with DeTess. Someone wake me when they make a non-multiplayer-based Star Wars game. I'll probably be retired by then, if not dead.

I may buy it used. Not giving EA any money directly.

[Palanan]

I'm far enough out of the gaming loop that the multiplayer aspect never even occurred to me. I was assuming the other four members of each squadron would be backup, the way Hobbes was in Wing Commander.

And yes, that reference pretty much dates my gaming experience.

[Peelee]

I'm far enough out of the gaming loop that the multiplayer aspect never even occurred to me. I was assuming the other four members of each squadron would be backup, the way Hobbes was in Wing Commander.

And yes, that reference pretty much dates my gaming experience.

I'm sure they will be backup in the tacked-on 4-hour campaign.

[Zevox]

I'm with DeTess. Someone wake me when they make a non-multiplayer-based Star Wars game.

Uh, they did, just last year. Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order. Pretty darn good game, would recommend it. Even manages some good story moments.

As far as Squadrons goes, I need to see gameplay. A cinematic trailer does nothing for me for a game like this.

[Peelee]

Uh, they did, just last year. Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order. Pretty darn good game, would recommend it. Even manages some good story moments.

Fair, I'm surprised I forgot about that. Don't I feel foolish now.

[Palanan]

And what is the tacked-on 4-hour campaign?

Is that an intro session or something like?

[Peelee]

And what is the tacked-on 4-hour campaign?

Is that an intro session or something like?

I'm being tongue-in-cheek with regards to Battlefront II (the second one).

[Aotrs Commander]

But my good Lich, there were two sequels to TIE Fighter, X-Wing Alliance and X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, the later being quietly one of the most important games of the era.

The allegiance matters, not just the fact is was a SW flight sim. One of the things that made TIE great was is that the protagnists were all loyalist Imperials. (I think that also makes it unique in the annuls of SW games.)

(And the music, which was far superior toi the later games even when XWA used dynamic music taken from the movies. I own the joint X-W/TIE/X-WvrsTIE CD set, but when I want to play TIE, I use the 95 CD version, because while the later release might have better graphics, it used CD music instead of mimi IMUSE and it sucked hard.)

X-Wing Alliance was more of a sequal to X-Wing and X vs TIE was just... Not very good, sorry, as far as I'm concerned. Notably the one of the three (four if you count X-W, which I didn't play a lot of) I barely spent any time with and have never bothered picking up again with after the first time I installed it (they couldn't even be bothered to do voice acting for the missions; I never made it through the campaign). It might have been great for mutliplayer, but as I have never given a rat's arse for multiplayer personally, so I wouldn't know, nor would it factor in my equation.

XWA was very good (and XvT's superior in every regard in every other aspect), but it was rebel-focussed.

I'm with DeTess. Someone wake me when they make a non-multiplayer-based Star Wars game.

They can wake me when they make a non-multiplayer-based Star Wars game that is not an action game; when they do something like KotR 1 and 2 or Empire at War (or the aforementioned TIE Fighter) and do a PROPER job of it like Lucasarts/old Bioware used to (and a little bit better than they made Obsidian do); then I might give EA a chance to talk.

[MCerberus]

Ah yes, the Star Wars fandom, where defining a sequel is complicated. I will admit XvT is mostly noted because it helped pioneer the multiplayer space instead of its actual mechanics.

One of the potential good pieces we're talking about here is that we may be getting a SW game that goes full in on the promise of dynamic music themes. Even the recent battlefronts began production before well, the DOOM model where sound tracks don't exactly exist but the gameplay assembles them. Combine this with access to the TOR sound team, who knows how to make SW music and we can get something special.

As far as tonally, if the single player is actually substantial, they Republic side is clearly modeled after the Rogues. That means many some me of us can take down our ritual shrine and stop sacrificing innocent Jawas to try and resurrect Pandemic. Hopefully EA will give us a more "the galaxy is in chaos we need to save it" feel from the remnant, instead of pulling yet another "we switched sides now we're-" could not make it through that sentence. The remnant are clearly going to switch sides half way through and we're all going to be disappoint in it.

[Peelee]

many some me of us can take down our ritual shrine and stop sacrificing innocent Jawas

Whoah, let's not be hasty here.

[Aeson]

Fair, I'm surprised I forgot about that. Don't I feel foolish now.

I felt it was kind of forgettable, myself. Not a bad game, but also not one that particularly stands out in any way.

Whoah, let's not be hasty here.

Yeah, really; everyone knows there's no such thing as an innocent Jawa.

[Zevox]

They can wake me when they make a non-multiplayer-based Star Wars game that is not an action game; when they do something like KotR 1 and 2 or Empire at War (or the aforementioned TIE Fighter) and do a PROPER job of it like Lucasarts/old Bioware used to (and a little bit better than they made Obsidian do); then I might give EA a chance to talk.

Eh, given the backlash to that Battlefront game seems to have scared them into abandoning their usual BS with Fallen Order, and the fact that they've said this game will have no microtransactions as well so it seems to be applying here too, I could maybe see them doing another Star Wars RPG at some point. Especially if they ever decide they need to try something like that to get Bioware out of their rut. I wouldn't hold my breath on a strategy game like Empire at War though, that's sadly probably a genre that's too niche for EA to be willing to bother with.

[MCerberus]

Whoah, let's not be hasty here.

You're both right, they know what they did

I wouldn't hold my breath on a strategy game like Empire at War though, that's sadly probably a genre that's too niche for EA to be willing to bother with.

Yup, that's EA for you. It would be too niche for them even after Sega discovered an infinite money printing machine by applying a license to a strategy game.

[Zevox]

Gameplay trailer is up. It does have some things that look like they were taken from the X-Wing/TIE Fighter series of games - it does appear to be entirely first-person and viewed from your fighter's cockpit like those games were, and the HUD in the cockpit resembles them. Doesn't show if you have the wide variety of controls for the ship those games had, though, so don't get your hopes up that it's heavily based on them just yet.

Strange thing to me is they say that the multiplayer modes require you to play through (at least part of, they weren't clear on how much) the single player mode to get to. That's just an odd design decision to my mind.

Anyway, still not enthused myself. Maybe if I hear great things after it comes out, but as it stands, I'm not holding my breath. Granted they surprised me with Fallen Order actually being pretty good, but I'm more inclined to think that's a one-off fluke at the moment.

[Zombimode]

Wow, that "gameplay trailer" actually contained about 30% gameplay footage.

Otherwise, it surely looks great but I remain skeptical.

This whole multiplayer deal is what worries me. While you can say "well, you don't have to use the multiplayer mode" the crux is that multiplayer informs design decisions as a whole. An in my experience multiplayer and singleplayer simply do not run on the same paradigms. Take for instance balance: for a competative faction based multiplayer game each choice of starcraft needs to be balanced against the opposite faction. But by lore a Tie Fighter simply is not balanced against a X-Wing by a one-by-one comparison!

Also, not a fan of using newly made-up starcraft types over the more established types.

[DeTess]

Also, not a fan of using newly made-up starcraft types over the more established types.

I think the only newly made-up ship I saw where the support fighters? Everything else either existed in the original trilogy, or got introduced shortly afterwards in the original expanded universe.

But by lore a Tie Fighter simply is not balanced against a X-Wing by a one-by-one comparison!

This is actually a difficult comparison to make. Going by the lore form the expanded universe, X-wings had twice the fire-power of a tie-fighter, and the tie fighter lacked a shield generator. However, tie-fighters where quicker and more maneuverable in a vacuum than the heavier x-wing. You could definitely dial that to the point that it's semi-balanced, I think, without really breaking the established lore.

[Vinyadan]

Squadrons could be a reference to Rogue Squadron. I'd like to play a new one.

[Aotrs Commander]

This is actually a difficult comparison to make. Going by the lore form the expanded universe, X-wings had twice the fire-power of a tie-fighter, and the tie fighter lacked a shield generator. However, tie-fighters where quicker and more maneuverable in a vacuum than the heavier x-wing. You could definitely dial that to the point that it's semi-balanced, I think, without really breaking the established lore.

X-Wing pilots were (canonically, as I recall) expected and able to take on TIE Fighters at 1:3 odds, though, lore-wise.

Though part of that is likely the RELLY big game changer that all the rebel starfighters (and the pirate starfighters and...) had warheads and the only TIE that did was the bomber (technically a TIE gt varient did) aside from (EU) Avenger, Defender and Assault Gunboat (which never seemed to make it out of the games aside as mention that an ISD carried five gunboats) and I can virtually garentee we're not going to see the missile boat.

Warheads are a MASSIVE force multiplier.

[druid91]

TIE Fighter is one of my top three best games of all time, I find it a crying travesty there was never a TIE Fighter 2.



But this? It's EA, so I don't trust them as far as I can throw them anymore.

Hell, I find it hard to even believe this will be a flight sim (because niche, and as Games Workshop's clearly failed approach shows, you never make a successful game by doing anythig other than appealing to the widest (and thus shallowest) customer base possible...) like TIE Fighter or X-Wing Alliance and not something more like Rogue Squadron (wiki's "action" in the description doesn't encourage me).



MAYBE, if it's absolutely perfect (and an actual flight sim), then I might look at it one day, in two or three years when it's dirt cheap in a sale (and not on the Epic store).

Which I expect about as much as I expect Disney to make an announcement that they are going regulate the sequel movies and associated nucanon to Legends 2 and plan to make a nunucanon, starting with the Thrawn trilogy movie-fied starring with the OT movie cast who they have resurrected from the dead and magically de-aged as appropriate and convinced to be willing to do so.

I.e. Not Chuffing likely.

I mean. They resurrected and de-aged Peter Cushing, and Carrie Fisher once already.

[Keltest]

I mean. They resurrected and de-aged Peter Cushing, and Carrie Fisher once already.

I'd prefer they leave Carrie Fisher alone, tyvm. Having a side character or guest star be digitally added is one thing, but a main character? Even if i didnt have qualms about the appropriateness of hijacking a dead person's appearance and legacy for entertainment purposes, the technology simply isnt good enough to pull that out of the uncanny valley yet.

[Aeson]

X-Wing pilots were (canonically, as I recall) expected and able to take on TIE Fighters at 1:3 odds, though, lore-wise.

That part of the EU always felt ill-justified, to me; if you look at the movies - especially Star Wars / A New Hope - X-Wings do not appear to be significantly more resilient against TIE weapons than TIEs are against X-Wing weapons. This, despite visual indicators suggesting that X-Wing laser cannons ought to be more powerful than TIE laser cannons, seeing as X-Wing cannons are physically significantly larger and have lower rates of fire than TIE cannons.

Though part of that is likely the RELLY big game changer that all the rebel starfighters (and the pirate starfighters and...) had warheads and the only TIE that did was the bomber (technically a TIE gt varient did) aside from (EU) Avenger, Defender and Assault Gunboat (which never seemed to make it out of the games aside as mention that an ISD carried five gunboats) and I can virtually garentee we're not going to see the missile boat.

Warheads are a MASSIVE force multiplier.

The problem with that argument for X-Wings (and other Rebel / New Republic fighters) being better than TIE-series fighters is that missiles do not appear to be the weapon of choice for engaging starfighters and do not appear to have the range advantage that makes them such a big deal in the real world. There are no instances of missiles being used against fighters in the Original Trilogy, Jango Fett only launched a missile at Obi-Wan's starfighter after having already damaged it with his laser cannons, the buzz droid missiles used against Obi-Wan and Anakin are a weird design for an anti-fighter weapon (really, for pretty much any weapon, unless maybe it's meant for use against things that normal fighter weapons would be ineffective against anyways so unleashing a bunch of screwdriver- and circular saw-armed saboteur droids on the target makes more sense - somehow - than hitting the target with a bomb, or perhaps more reasonably for use against things you want to capture relatively intact), and only in the Sequel Trilogy do we see a major warship use a missile against a starfighter - but then only once that I can recall - and I don't think we see any missiles used in fighter-to-fighter combat.

Also, explosives aren't nearly as good in a vacuum as they are in atmosphere, especially if fighter shields or hulls are tough enough to render shrapnel from a near miss essentially irrelevant.

[DeTess]

X-Wing pilots were (canonically, as I recall) expected and able to take on TIE Fighters at 1:3 odds, though, lore-wise.

I suspect part of that is also form a difference in doctrine (X-wings cost a lot more than Tie-fighters, and the rebellion had a lot less, so they'd train their pilots far better*), as well as the fact that X-wings were more survivable, even if they got knocked out, which meant pilots would get more experience, and therefore become better than their imperial counterparts.

*except that one time they threw an untrained youth into the cockpit of one when a death-star was trying to blow up their base, I suppose.

[Keltest]

That part of the EU always felt ill-justified, to me; if you look at the movies - especially Star Wars / A New Hope - X-Wings do not appear to be significantly more resilient against TIE weapons than TIEs are against X-Wing weapons. This, despite visual indicators suggesting that X-Wing laser cannons ought to be more powerful than TIE laser cannons, seeing as X-Wing cannons are physically significantly larger and have lower rates of fire than TIE cannons.


The problem with that argument for X-Wings (and other Rebel / New Republic fighters) being better than TIE-series fighters is that missiles do not appear to be the weapon of choice for engaging starfighters and do not appear to have the range advantage that makes them such a big deal in the real world. There are no instances of missiles being used against fighters in the Original Trilogy, Jango Fett only launched a missile at Obi-Wan's starfighter after having already damaged it with his laser cannons, the buzz droid missiles used against Obi-Wan and Anakin are a weird design for an anti-fighter weapon (really, for pretty much any weapon, unless maybe it's meant for use against things that normal fighter weapons would be ineffective against anyways so unleashing a bunch of screwdriver- and circular saw-armed saboteur droids on the target makes more sense - somehow - than hitting the target with a bomb, or perhaps more reasonably for use against things you want to capture relatively intact), and only in the Sequel Trilogy do we see a major warship use a missile against a starfighter - but then only once that I can recall - and I don't think we see any missiles used in fighter-to-fighter combat.

Also, explosives aren't nearly as good in a vacuum as they are in atmosphere, especially if fighter shields or hulls are tough enough to render shrapnel from a near miss essentially irrelevant.

Luke and, i think Wedge? both take hits from TIE fighters in the trench run without getting blasted into shreds. This after it being mentioned that during the trench run their shields are being pumped to the front to keep them safe from the turrets in the trench.

In fact, i dont think we ever see an ordinary TIE fighter get a kill on an X-wing in the OT.

[Aeson]

In fact, i dont think we ever see an ordinary TIE fighter get a kill on an X-wing in the OT.

An X-Wing is unambiguously shot down by a standard TIE Fighter in the opening moments of the dogfighting over the Death Star sequence in A New Hope.

One of Red Leader's wingmen is, if not quite unambiguously shown to be, then at least very heavily implied to have been shot down by a standard TIE Fighter during Red Leader's trench run.

There is also that only three of twenty to thirty Rebel fighters - of which X-Wings appear to make up the majority, with about two X-Wings being visible for every Y-Wing in the establishing shots of the attack group - can be confirmed to have survived the attack. Dialogue and visuals indicate that the Death Star turbolasers were relatively ineffective against the Rebel fighters (if I recall correctly, the Death Star turbolasers have no kills which can be confirmed from what's shown on screen, though Porkins' death sequence is intercut with fire from the Death Star turbolasers implying that they were at least a contributory factor), and a minimum of six TIE Fighters engaged the Rebel fighter group in the general dogfight; Vader's group, meanwhile, launched specifically to go after the Rebel fighters making trench runs, includes the only Imperial fighter which can both be confirmed to be present and is not a standard TIE Fighter, and can only be confirmed to have engaged nine fighters (three Y-Wings and six X-Wings) from scenes in the movie. This leaves around ten to twenty Rebel fighters unaccounted for and presumed lost based on what's shown in the movie; the implied ineffectiveness of the Death Star's turbolasers and the implied lack of opportunity for Vader's flight to engage fighters involved in the general dogfight make it likely that most if not all of these were downed by standard TIE Fighters.

In Return of the Jedi, we also see what appears to be a standard TIE Fighter (based on the lack of Interceptor-type wingtips visible from and the apparent origin of the paired blasts being below the cockpit as well as that only TIE Fighters and TIE Interceptors were shown following the Rebel strike group into the Death Star) down an X-Wing during the run on the Second Death Star's main reactor.