 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
I'm sure it will only work with the Steel Batallion controller: http://operatorchan.org/vg/arch/src/vg22196_sb%20complete%202.jpg
Remarkable. Yahtzee's opinion is exactly what I concluded from playing the demo :E
An oldschool shooter forced through a mangle of modern shooters and being at least partially compromised because of it. interesting environment art... the consistently random construction of all the buildings makes me wonder if they auto-generated the buildings from a bunch of prefab parts. Either way it's an cool style.
just started this, why is this even the same franchise? completely different game. to early to tell if its good.
Decent Zelda-like dungeon game from the Eye Maze guy. Some clever puzzles.
http://jayisgames.com/games/dwarf-complete/ Again. From Wiki:
Far Cry 2 has been officially released by Ubisoft, although it was not developed by Crytek, but by Ubisoft's Montreal studio Far Cry 2 (commonly abbreviated as FC2) is an open-ended first-person shooter developed by Ubisoft Montreal and published by Ubisoft. Crytek, the developers of the original game, were not involved in the development of Far Cry 2. Ubisoft has marketed Far Cry 2 as the true sequel to Far Cry, however the sequel has very few noticeable similarities to the original game. Instead, it features completely new characters and setting, as well as a new style of gameplay... Various factions and vehicles are featured; enemies include human mercenaries, but sci-fi creatures such as the Trigens from Far Cry are not featured.[12] Furthermore, the player's feral abilities introduced in Far Cry Instincts and its expansions do not return in Far Cry 2. Far Cry 2 abandons the science fiction aspects of its predecessor in favor of a more realistic setting. The protagonist of previous Far Cry games, Jack Carver, is not featured in this game. Ubisoft has developed a new engine specifically for Far Cry 2, called Dunia... The Dunia engine was built specifically for Far Cry 2 by Ubisoft Montreal development team. Only 2 or 3 percent of the original CryEngine code is re-used, according to Michiel Verheijdt, Senior Product Manager for Ubisoft Netherlands. So, as is blindingly obvious, it has slightly less than FUCK ALL to do with Far Cry, and just makes Ubisoft look like a bunch of dicks for trying to cash in on the franchise, whilst Crytek go ahead and make the true FC2 and do a much better job of it. Probably had a pretty nice game built, until the publishers came along and said 'scrap 50% of what you've done and slap the FC2 name on it'.
I think the gameplay looks pretty cool actually, more interesting than some random call-of-duty copy anyways. Kinda feels like Tribes a bit, what with all the jetpacking around.
It isn't such a bad game in my opinion, great fun as a sandbox where you just mess around with the AI behavior. But yeah, it's nothing like Farcry.
I really didn't like FC2, really one bit at all. There seems to be some serious streaming issues with content, and I lag noticeably bad when sprinting or driving through the world (it occurs every few seconds.) Changing settings does not help at all, and my computer specs blow consoles out of the water.
As far as the story, it's pretty damn lame. You start off with Malaria, yeah! The sprint distance seems like less than five meters. The whole system on finding diamonds is so borked, I ran around for a few minutes when trying to find the first one. I didn't understand anything in the game. What's worse is the fact it is an open ended game with no quick saving. This wouldn't be as frustrating, if the game didn't crash after about an hour of playing it. 2/10 stars for FC2. Classic example of how game studios are at least eleven times better at making games than publishers. I didn't give it just one star because I bought it in a Steam pack for $3, so I had suspicion of the quality. Crysis 2, on the other hand, seems quite promising. I'm not a big fan of invisibility being totally ruined with the addition of thermal vision. Hopefully there will be some way to hide your heat signature, at least for the most part. I liked FC2 quite a bit for what it was - I didn't have streaming problems (even on my older PC) and I thought the combat was a lot of fun if not a bit frustrating at times when I couldn't make out the shapes in dark shadows.
My main complaints were that driving everywhere got stale pretty fast, and that the voice acting was bad (as someone pointed out, I can't remember who, it was probably for compression reasons.) The weapons felt great though, some of the best feeling weapons in any game I've ever played, from the sounds to the damage to reloading, even to them breaking in the middle of a god damn fire fight - they just felt great. The diamonds thing was basically a hot/cold game, I found a bunch of them but didn't have much incentive to find all of them. The story wasn't really all that bad, it didn't have the CoD kind of crazy conspiracy spin to it, it felt much more grounded. Basically - gun smugglers are bad, mercs are bad, and both help to destroy stability and innocent lives. Felt much more grounded than CoD games, despite being an action flick style game. I thought it was ok, was pretty fun for the random AI shenanigans, and the companions could be quite silly.
It'll still be Human Head developing the game, with just Zenimax taking over publishing rights. I'd imagine it mustn't be too far from gold... the first game took 4-5yrs once Human Head took over and Prey 2 has been under development for probably 4 yrs now. Human Head has nothing else in development, so one can only assume they've been working on it since 2006. I just hope they don't put off the release with all those other shooters coming in 2011 from Bethesda.
Prey began it's long development life in 1995, a decade before it's final release. Just as they did with Duke Nukem Forever, 3D Realms stumbled around changing development teams and the game but, ultimately, weren't able to build a game engine to support the portal technology.
The idea was to have portals (ie teleporters) that can be opened and closed throughout the game. 3D Realms spent a number of years on the engine before it was finally put on hold, indefinitely, in 1999. Which was a great shame as the videos, screenshots and E3 presentations released in 1997/98 had many fans excited, including me. Prey was one of those games that I long awaited, just like Duke Nukem Forever. Unfortunately they both became vaporware. It wasn't until 2002 that the project was resumed, although not announced officially. However this time round 3D Realms retired the idea of using their own engine and started again using idTech 4, with the game actually being created by Human Head Studios, authors of the classic third-person Rune. And in 2006 Prey was finally released. Ironic that eventually outsourcing Duke Nukem Forever to Gearbox Software was the only way 3D Realms' other, more famous vaporware game would ever get released as well. Back to Prey, somehow through this mess of a development timeline, Prey turned out to be a great game. It didn't feature design that was new as both Doom 3 and Quake 4, the only two other games to have used idTech4 up to 2006, featured very similar sci-fi themes. Doom 3 was slightly darker, Quake 4 was slightly more military themed. Prey took the theme in more of an alien, surreal direction, but ultimately sci-fi is sci-fi. However it looks just as good as Doom 3 and Quake 4 ever did, so it's another great looking entry into the shooter market. The entire game takes place within a huge living sphere floating in space. But most of the level design is based around human-sized rooms and corridors. There are some much bigger open areas which you can fly around in using your little spacesuit. Unfortunately, just like every other shooter that forces the obligatory on-rails/vehicle levels, these flying levels are far too common. After the first couple of levels featuring flying I was hoping that would be the end of it. I was sadly wrong. They're not frustrating, in fact the flying mechanics were fairly solid. But I hated Descent, so I was always going to sigh when Prey takes me off my feet. Prey also features portals, as per the original idea of the game from the 1990's. However portals are nothing new come 2006. Sure they can open and close and it's a good way to insert more enemies into the action, but they're not a big selling point. What is a lot more unique is the change of gravity. Using special pathways you can literally walk vertically around the four walls of a room. You can reverse the gravity of a room just by shooting a trigger. On top of this you have spirit walk, where you can leave your body as a spirit and still interact with the environment. These are some intriguing, fresh features that form the basis for many puzzles throughout Prey. Do I like puzzles? No, not at all. So the constant gravity changes and puzzle solving didn't really have me jumping with excitement. In fact the brightly lit gravity pathways did get a little ugly and repetitive as the game wore on. The actual action in the game was all solid. The weapons are slightly different to your standard shooter stock, so it made for some interesting gameplay. The game should have been quite a difficult game, however a unique approach was made regarding dying. Instead of relying on quicksaves or checkpoints, you instead enter a short shooting game which after 20 seconds returns you to where you died with your health returned. This means you can't really die in Prey. Quicksaving is completely unnecessary and sometimes there's little point to avoid losing health. You might as well just die and get your health replenished. The boss battles in particular become a complete joke when you keep respawning and the boss still has the same health. I can understand the idea behind it; they wanted to remove replaying large sections and constant quicksaves/quickloads, but they made it far too easy to not try at all in the game. There's no incentive to not dying, other than your own ego. However with it being an easy game, it's also replayable as you can jump into any part of the game and have a blast (providing it's not a flying level!). There's no lengthy storytelling or slow parts to the gameplay. Prey is certainly not a perfect game; the flying and puzzles get old, the regenerating (no dying) system was a mistake, but the action is solid and design great throughout. Possibly the best shooter of 2006. I really enjoyed Prey but I played it through once or twice then became bored with it. It had LOADs of stuff in it which was awesome:
Portals Cool physics/gravity Shrink the player and put them on a mini-planet Boss fights!!! A plot (sortof) Spirit-walking Puzzles Reasonable (for the time) AI 'Cause it was IdTech4 it ran smooth! All of what Kona said really.
|
|
| You must be logged in to post in this thread. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2025 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |