Wait, only Japanese games take tutorials and hand holding too far? Am I living in the same universe as these guys? Stuck up twits. 

FEZ II is cancelled.
i am done.
i take the money and i run.
this is as much as i can stomach.
this is isn�t the result of any one thing, but the end of a long, bloody campaign.
you win. 

http://vectorpoem.com/news/?p=74 

http://i.minus.com/iUgVCKwjISSke.gif 

It says things that are true, but it feels also quite a bit like he is proclaiming about the superiority of every Doom mechanic over everything else.

Read the 83th comment, even though that person is in rage, he says interesting things. 

This is Marcus Beer's rant which caused Phil Fish to throw his little tantrum and cancel Fez 2:

http://youtu.be/Lm5Lnei4S6M

Although both Blow and Fish are extremely arrogant and annoying individuals, it takes a special kind of immaturity and unprofessionalism to ragequit on a game development because of some mean words some random dick said on the internet.

Beer, Blow and Fish. Sounds like a decent night out. 

Not like anybody even knew who Marcus Beer was before this happened.

Oh well, Fish will be back, unfortunately. 

Don't get the hate for Blow. 

I think Blow has mellowed a bit in recent years, but I remember back in the Braid days he was extremely smug and pretentious and the success of Braid only fuelled his ego. 

Nice read.

I agree with a lot that is said. Typically modern games designers can't stomach only having the 'basic' mechanics in a game. There always need to be RPG elements or a recharging shield or whatever.

Not that these mechanics when taken individually are invalid, but when the design becomes a mess of conflicting ones it usually results in a game I can't be arsed to play, let alone finish.

The kind of pared down gameplay we see in games from yesteryear is hard to find nowadays, but also the most interesting to me personally.

83rd comment - the guy seems stuck on the idea that realism = better games. The article itself generalises a lot and talks about Doom as the core because, well, that's what was under discussion.

Fish/Blow/Beer - who gives a toss? 

Fish/Blow/Beer - who gives a toss?

The sizeable chunk of people who were looking forward to Fez II probably.

Also: those of us who like to get the popcorn out, sit back, and enjoy the BEEF. 

Fair point. But I doubt this comment will have any affect on the production, or not, of Fez2.

I'm grumpy on Mondays.

To be fair, despite the bad press, I'd err on the side of 'the blowfish' in this little shitstorm.

While it's true that their games are paid for by their fans, it's not true that they're paid for by the self-entitled gaming press and it's debatable that even having them 'on your side' is worth a mousefart.

Having genuine word of mouth among people who like your game and evangelize it for love not money is different though. 

in action -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV8LodQ0rG0 

I'm surprised at how you found that kind of information in the 83rd comment of the doom article.
In that huge mass of paragraphs that guy wrote in that rage attack, there is only one that can be related to what you say, and only very superficially.
He mainly talks about a very different issue, even though his affirmations aren't directly related to the theme of the article, it is about a problem this article has in the reasons he has about valuing Doom, and in my opinion many more articles by other people, considering that a few games where the ones that made everything, even though it is more like they were the ones that popularized all those aspects and innovations, they only innovated in part of them. 

The bit was most coherent for me. He's not really justified in being angry at other FPSs being glossed over because the name of the article says 'Doom' in it.

Criticizing someone for a lack of knowledge should be done in a helpful way IMHO.

On the other hand, maybe I'm reading your response to my response wrong :) 

Does anyone know of a site that presents you with a fake dos console upon entering?
I thought about putting some easter egg in a site like that, where you need to 'hack' your way in. 

Talk about a bad temper, haha. 

http://hackertyper.com/ 

I just noticed a peculiar behavior of the Quake engine regarding the Chthon monster. For some reason its brightness differs depending on the side he's facing - basically normally lit in the direction he starts from, and considerably brighter when he turns around. It's noticable in all engines regardless of overbright support, and in some cases looks pretty bizarre.

Anyone know what's going on there? Is it a "feature" and why? 

That's part of the gouraud shading/surface normals. You can also notice it by watching the viewmodel while you spin round in a circle - at different angles it will be brighter or dimmer. The effect is probably most noticeable on a large model. I think that for this kind of directional shading the quake engine renders as if there is one fixed light source, coming from above at a particular bearing. I've never found which bit of the renderer does it though. 

i think there's a lookup table the game uses to generate light value based on vertex normal.... anormdots.h or something. 

 

czg: cool, it's certainly got the visuals down.

negke: iirc in stock quake light direction always faces north and overall brightness gets modulated by the lightmap texel the player is standing on.

of course some engines decided to do it less hacky. I think FTE even generates a light grid upon runtime.

source: http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014236/Quake-A-Post-Mortem-and 

Waiting for the UPS truck to come and deliver Oculus Rift today.

Guess it might be interesting to visit some old familiar places with it.