That's why I am wondering. It is an AAA title, but the game would not be bought through Steam.

The sentence I quoted is exactly what is stated everywhere I've seen the game being sold, and it does not say that Steam is needed to play the game. Of course, it's not like game companies have never lied before.

It's really too new to buy now anyway, as it's still selling for full price and it's not worth that much really. There is apparently a cracked version though. Maybe when the price drops to something reasonable, I'll buy it and just play that. 

In my experience, if you buy or unlock a code via Steam it will need to be running when you launch the game. Have not done this in a while but every Amazon Digital game I have purchased works this way. This may have changed but I doubt it. 

AAA steam games all have no-steam cracks, if it's steam your worried about. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwNyVE1r3qU

Fuck OFF. 

I watched 3 seconds and then puked on esc.
In case of any spam markers, I'm refering to #9983 

I f quake was just absolutely the biggest piece of shit and it wasnt like quake 

 

I like how the Carmack "endorsement" quote isn't about the game itself, but about Javascript / WebGL. 

"C# is fucking awesome!"
"I played this with an amazing graphics card!"
"Some of the operating systems that support this game are great!" 

Good stuff. 

....it's fast-paced! And retro! And there's no cover-based stuff! And weapons! And movement! And......... 

Quake gave you cover against Shamblers, truly this where the downfall of FPS games started. 

Inner Chains released apparently, but nothing on metacritic? 

I know I'll be preaching to the choir here, but the problem with this stuff is that games in 1996 weren't trying to be "1996 style" games. They were trying to look as impressive and convincing as they could under technological constraints.

Part of what made Quake and Doom so successful was that they found an art style that looked good even when it was blocky. Rather than trying to be realistic (which wasn't practical) or cartoony (which wasn't appropriate), I like to think of it as going for a "comic book" style. Doom is more of a gleefully violent comic book, while Quake is a bit more of a gloomy, gritty Vertigo comic book, but it's stylised.

Thinking that the squares are the thing which make the look of mid 90s games is missing the wood for the trees. What's worse, it's then used to excuse any amount of sloppiness or laziness in the art of these pretenders. 

The JS game was pretty neat, but ofc it was just a prototype.

Is this even from the same devs or just blatant rip-off? 

Phenomenal environment art, some of the most impressive stuff I've seen in a long time. No gameplay to speak of. Desperately needs an options menu (basic things like fov and mouse sensitivity are broken).

If you liked Dear Esther or The Vanishing of Ethan Carter but felt it needed more Beksinski, you might want to pick this up after they patch in fundamental usability. 

Yeah it was obviously made by a bunch of artists who don't have a scooby-doo about gameplay design.

Watched a video of it for a bit. Looks noice at least. 

Doom is more of a gleefully violent comic book
With huge guts!

By the way, your comic book analogy as a whole is great. 

I like the analogy that someone previously said, Doom is thrash metal and Quake is industrial. 

 

What a waste of post 10K. 

Delete it and start again?! 

 

If you delete that post, would OTP's post become 10k?