Is it sooo hard for you to check the FreeSpace Wiki and take a look at FS1's inconsistencies?
About the Ancients: so, at this point, we should blame FS2 for lacking the much needed info FS1 never had? The Ancients are a canon species, and what we know about them is very poor. The Ancient monologues, with their simple setting, seemed nothing but a cheap solution to a storytelling problem. Also, I find so hard to explain the differences between FS2 and FS1's features - how is it possible to add so many things and come out with revolutionary designs after only one year? In any other series I know, important additions have always been progressive. What does that tell you? Well, I don't know... but my opinion on the matter is that :v: did not turn FS1 into the game it should have been. The game's cutscenes, just to mention an example, were not in high quality - not even for the standards of that time. And the story? FS1's ending was so predictable, but people who haven't played Colony Wars and/or other similar games will find it original. (Just to mention how each player's gaming experience affects opinions.) Also, I hard believe players could find Bosch's true plans, the second Knossos, the Sathanas fleet and the final supernova as predictable aspects of the plot. You can't say the same of FS1's plot, which was much more predictable.
And it's quite funny for me to attract all of the flak even if I'm one of the very few FS2 purists who claimed, among other things, that FS1's atmosphere was superior to that of FS2. The point is that considering the good (atmosphere) and forgetting the bad (inconsistencies, predictable ending) is not correct.