 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
What kind of game reviews do you prefer:
- one that summarizes the game, and goes through it's pros and cons - one that gives a fair review throughout the game - one that goes in depth, maybe adding up to 5 or more pages I've got some reviews to write, and since I'm lazy I'm contemplating on writing them more concisely and shorter, but I don't want to leave pertinent info out either. Don't summarize the story or anything, nobody wants to hear that ahead of time - we're buying the game to find out.
Otherwise, uh, I don't know what you expect us to say to the other points. Yes, of course I want the review to be fair. What else would I want? As for length - make it sufficient to say everything you have to say about the game. Five pages, unless they're short pages, is probably too much unless the game comes with new hardware. Also, saying "I'm lazy" doesn't give you an excuse for being lazy. :P There's one thing I expect from a review.
I want to be able to make an informed decision on whether or not to buy the game after reading the review. That's it. I don't want you to tell me to buy the game. I want to know if I'm going to like it. I want enough information in the review about the game itself, not its background, not its makers, not how your review is universally exclusive. Of course, if, at the same time, it's entertaining, well-written and coherent, I have nothing to complain. I would just like to announce that there is a monster in World of Warcraft called Deviate Shambler.
How did Blizzard know? http://img239.exs.cx/img239/5803/dmdepotrc2previewtitle7uz.jpg
If anyone is still playing HL2DM, check this map out. It's pure class. I just had a nice 12FFA on a French server, and I had no problems with lag at all. The map is quite stunning to set foot in -- not because of any specific design or set piece, but because the sense of place is so flawlessly realized. Not that it is devoid of fancy setpieces though. (it even has a very nicely done moving train) It's very large, so you'd probably want to find a server with at least 6-7 people on it. The only knock on the map I have is that more areas should have been clipped off -- you can jam yourself in some tiny/awkward places (though you won't get stuck, it just sucks moving around in it) Anyway, yeah, this map is pure fun. Go find a server! [screenshot]
At first that really impressed me, but the whole shot is just blocks and a cylinder or two. I must learn this ninja art of impressive boxes. If only someone had suggested disabling anonymous posts like seven years ago. Random fuckhats posting nonsense and reviving threads was bad enough but now the board's being used as a target for bombing Google.
At first that really impressed me, but the whole shot is just blocks and a cylinder or two.
er... aren't most maps blocks and cylinders? At first that really impressed me, but the whole shot is just blocks and a cylinder or two.
Exactly. This is why most "Real World�" maps generally fail to impress me. Real life architecture is usually pretty ugly (and from a mapping perspective, as the Lunmeister said himself, just a few blocks and the odd cylinder or two). er... aren't most maps blocks and cylinders?
Yes, combined/clipped/skewed to produce more complex and interesting shapes. That shot is JUST blocks and a cylinder or two. There is some secret in the textures and lighting interplay that makes it look so realistic in that particular picture. It doesn't look plasticy.
I guess I could move on from quake 1 now that the new technology actually seems to give some real improvements. :) I'm gonna disagree with Lun...the HL2DM map I'm working on arguably has more interesting architecture, but sometimes just lighting & texture selection can go a long way to make a map look good on even the most basic geometry.
Like I said, see if you can find a server running it and give it a round or two. Have mastered the art of making boxy maps look spiffy.
And, what Vondur did in some of his early, right angled oriented maps still makes me envious. I've played it before, and the gameplay is pure wank. It's basicly a fucking huge boxmap filled with pretty and hard-to-navigate details.
Oh, and those screenshots are photoshopped to give it that HDRI-ish effect too. The author admitted this himself when they first were posted. LOLZ I HAET HL2DM LORF well the composition of said blocks and cylinders in the screenshot is fairly decent, regardless of the technical proficiency of the brushwork.
Nice lighting and texturing too. All maps will be Boxmaps. That's what I think, anyway. That's what Far Cry basically is, and it seems to simulate believable, interesting environments better than any other recent FPS.
Obviously, I *hated* doom 3's level design. When will id learn that any believable/cool world, regardless of how fantastic it is, is made up of terrain and structures, not boxy rooms and hallways. I realize that Far Cry is built on prefabs a fairly large amount. The day that someone combines id-style "build your own structures" level design with far-cry style "Let's not base our levels on Wolfenstein 1, but prettier," truly awesome potential will be unlocked. well, i didn't think Allied Assault was the greatest game, but they did do pretty much what you're talking about -- big terrains and outdoor areas combined with brush-based architecture.
I don't ordinarily defend Doom3's design, because I was as disappointed as you, but
When will id learn that any believable/cool world, regardless of how fantastic it is, is made up of terrain and structures, not boxy rooms and hallways. in their defense, I've found that producing wierd, interesting, massive rooms for Doom3 like we get away with in Quake is really tough when it comes time to light them. Since you can't throw light sources everywhere, you've gotta try and maximize their size/shape to light the room the most efficiently, and make it look good. That becomes ten times harder when you're putting rectilinear light volumes in curvy/angled rooms. Not that I'm not trying, of course :)
|
|
| You must be logged in to post in this thread. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2024 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |