|
| T O P I C | |
|
The stone that the builder refused...
May 25th 2000, 08:58 CEST by Seth Looking Glass technologies has shut down. Looking Glass, developers of a large portion of the most epic and atmospheric games the world has ever known, is gone. Is Romero to blame? Should I have used some quippy title like "Romero makes Looking Glass his bitch"? If you were to read the following story, I know it would lead at least some of you to thinking that I should have. Click here for the article at the Avault. The story made this curiouser and curiouser point. A source at the studio indicated the company is in dire financial straights despite robust sales of Thief II. In a message received from the source moments following the conclusion of a company meeting, the Adrenaline Vault was told, “LGS no longer exists. We are done. Everyone is out of a job tomorrow.” Eidos was slated to be LGS’s senior partner, but it is speculated at this time that the deal fell through due to their own financial problems. Eidos had not commented on the situation prior to this news brief going to press. I'd like to see a picture of what those words just did to ION Storm's reputation. |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: The stone that the builder refused...
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
|
I doubt they'll be reborn phoenix like as another company. From what I've heard they're all scrambling for jobs right now. Shame one of the bigger developers isn't after a second development group to buy out or something stupidly unlikely like that. I believe one of the developers put down the possibility of them joining Ion Storm like some other ex-LG guys (fair enough in the light of recent happenings) and I doubt anyone else would stump up the cash, great as LG were. :(<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<Quote> I'm suprised that ION is still alive. After the rubbish that was Dominion and Daikatana, who would have guessed they would still have a publisher, let alone still be functioning. Lucky for them, Deus Ex and Anacrhnox (ok gotta learn how to spell it soon) look to be pretty amazing. </quote> I think you answered your own question. While Eidos has faultered in its trust in Romero himself, they still stand firm in their beliefs that Tom Hall and the Great Warren Spector will bring the company to the fore-front. Just think of Romero as the paper anchor of the Ion Storm. :) |
|
The end of quality games is upon us. Here we have Eidos, who pumps millions into Romero's Daikasquatta, and all they end up with is a second-rate POS game with faulty sidekicks. Then, Looking Glass, whose games have always supplied their audience with elaborate quality and imagination, has to fold because Eidos itself is in financial straights for supporting ION!! Yeah..it makes one want to PUKE. Hope Romero's happy - I'll bet Eidos rues the day they took Ion under their wing. |
|
I think the real blame lies in the fact that LGS made games which simply didn't sell very well... but why didn't they? The industry is at a point where it's all about how flashy your engine is and how spiffy your multiplayer is; especially with FPS games. Companies aren't looking for "a thinking man's Quake" as somebody earlier referred to SS2... they're looking for a pretty game with good multiplayer. It's so much HARDER to find an interesting single player these days; because uncreative companies know their cookie-cutter multiplayer FPS will sell, they don't have to waste time working on single player. Hell, Quake3 didn't even HAVE a single player game (no, I do not count those truly pathetic bots). I bet if LGS's next product was "Thief3:Arena" somebody out there would have poured some cash into it. In todays market, single player is meaningless. Well, at least Black Isle is still out there... I guess I'll be holding my breath a while for FO3... Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
I concur. In any article I have ever seen about ION Storm and Diakatana progress reports, the journalist always describes walking into the ION offices. It's all stuff like, "An arcade room over here.... a million Coke machines over there..... the replica Dikatana sword, very expensive..........a deathmatch lounge on one room, with a viewing area in the other room, complete with massive wall-mounted monitors and a kick-ass P.A. system........oh, and a few workstations in the corner" What the holy fuck were Eidos thinking giving a little boy all this money?!?!? They may have well have opened up a cybercafe - at least they'd get a return on that. Instead they've basically agreed to give Johnnyboy a blank cheque for 'leisure purposes'. I think everyone deserves to play just as hard as they work, but you need to do the work first!! Damn these fools |
|
"Ya know, I've been sitting here for around 10 minutes now hitting refresh over and over again." -- by: deadboat God, I love the quote of the nanosecond.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
It might also be worth pointing out that the last Tomb Raider sold 300,000 copies despite a massive marketing campaign. Just another of Eidos' recent cock ups that put them in financial trouble. And what was the given reason for Eidos not becoming a senior partner in LG?<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Single player dead? God I hope not. Today has been bad enough. Why do I feel like someone has died? It's really just a game company. But in many ways it's symptomatic of the way things are now. The industry is run by total morons. They don't have a clue. I don't know how many times I have seen them pimp the living snot out of a crappy game while letting a classic die on the vine. I still remember how Activison made a big push behind SiN while ignoring the brilliant Heretic II. I wonder if Garret was pictured on the side of buses if Looking glass would still be around. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe games like Thief and System shock have no appeal to the average Jackanape game buyer. The world embraces crap like Q3 and passes by masterworks like System shock. I'm just about sick of slick shinny games that lack even the most cursory understanding of game craft. The future of games is going to be all about acronyms. FPS, RTS, RPG, MMOLG, etc... Seems there is not longer room for games you can't sum up with a few letters. What the heck was Thief (take your pick 1 or 2) It did not fit the acronym rule. Nor did System shock 2. While some said it was and action/ RPG/ adventure game I was more then just a hybrid. Games like these will be no more. And while John ( I have really long hair like a rock star) Romero threw a hissy and said he was not going to talk about his next project. We already know it's going to be Diakatana 2. The sad fact is as things lay now I'm sure 8 years from now at a development cost rivaling the national debt, it will be on store shelves. And just because Irony is so Ironic it will be twice as bad. I know you might find all this hard to buy, but it will happen. The industry is run by dullards. They do all they can to make the worst games possible, and then bitch the computer game market is dying. I'm sorry if my venting seems somewhat bitter today. But I just feel really bad about this. If John Romero had an ounce of decency he would swallow a bullet for us all. Not so Happy Cow (see the tear stains on this post)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
From ttlg.com: "On these pages, and in the hearts and minds of the thousands of people who are members of the community we have built - Looking Glass Studios shall never truly die." Yanno, that almost makes me want to cry... Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#46</b> "Happy cow" wrote... <QUOTE>But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe games like Thief and System shock have no appeal to the average Jackanape game buyer. The world embraces crap like Q3 and passes by masterworks like System shock.</QUOTE> I digress. I have no facts or figures, but i would imagine that the 'average gamer' would go after quality single player games. Not everyone can/will/wants to play online. But alas, i must be wrong since the games did poorly? I dunno. I know heaps of people that dont play online. Its a phenonemun (fark dont know how to spell.) Well, either that or my headache from spending the last 5 hrs working on a Java app have clouded my judgement. ;) (java = god damn case-senstive hunk 'o crap..doh)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
If I had to guess why it did not do well , I would imagine it's because it's a literary game in a cinema culture. System shock 2 demanded you become involved with the story. It was choked full of detail. Just like a great book. I have played the game front to back about 10 times and I just keep finding more in more in it. But the current culture does not want detail. They want a cinematic experience. They want the game to sit there and shove pretty pictures in there eyes so their simple brain stems can get a jolt. Maybe LGS was not main stream. But I loved the games they made. To me they were high art. Not because they looked pretty, but because no one even comes close to the level of game craft they displayed. Call me a fan boy (?) if you want. I really enjoyed those games. The sad and bitter truth is" Looking glass studios, they don't make games like that anymore". Not so Happy cow<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Looking glass made some quality games, they will be missed. I'm not a great fan of online myself really, because - how did a old quote of the day here at PC say " The net is full of wankers with about as much self control as a fart in a whirlwind" That was one hell of a good quote. Of course my blazing 56K dosen't help. |
|
This is some of the saddest news this industry has ever heard... Some quick thoughts in response to the other posts in this thread: Both Thief games were not bombs by any means. Thief 1 surfaced in the top ten and was a decent seller, and while I don't believe Thief 2 cracked the top ten it sold moderately well. System Shock 2 wasn't a smashing success, but it was a critical and mildly commercial success. They never did make a game that would qualify as a runaway hit...I suppose the Ultima Underworld games are probably their biggest sellers, and that's due mostly to the Ultima name. I'm fairly confident that we will see a System Shock 3 some day. The rights to the franchise are owned by Electronic Arts, not Looking Glass, so if after Irrational's current game they decide to make a sequel it's still very possible. Although from what I understand LG was very involved in the production of SS2, so it won't be the same. Thief III will probably never happen, and this is the worst news ever. After reading the description of what they had planned, I think I would have preferred that to Thief 2, good thought that game might be. I hope some of those guys (especially Doug Church) stick together instead of joining other companies. With a little luck, they'll start a new development studio and work on a completely new project. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Funny isn't it ION's future rest on Dues Ex, a game the had so far been developed around the same play system as System Shock 2, and a Final Fantasy clone (Anohter one of Romero's baby type of projects). As for why Eidos would keep ION and let a great developer go, simple ION is in the gaming rags even month non stop. Sure it's almost never good news but at lest people know who they are. And let me say this had Edio had some brans (not likly after all we've got way to damn many tomb raider games) ION could have been cut and Dues Ex could have still been finished (Just absorbe the Ex team into Edios or offer a great deal on helping out to create a startup, while leaving the rest of those prema donna's out of a job).<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#49</b> "Happy cow" wrote... <QUOTE>Maybe LGS was not main stream.</QUOTE> And that is the problem in these days of the super-mass market (to use a term favoured by Edge magazine) - the suits want their product to shift units comparable to a Star Wars movie, and the easiest way to do that is to work with lowest common denominator symbols. <i>Star Wars: Force Commander. FIFA 40,000. Fast Cars go Vrooom. Nipple Bouncer.</i> A game as literary, deep, and involving as System Shock 2, or Thief 2 will never push 2 million units in a society where adverts are more commonly discussed in workplaces rather than books. Yes, there are those of us who appreciate refined quality, but we can't be expected to buy five copies of a game each, and the money-men in charge will always choose a shit game that sells millions over a great game that does well. Pah.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
System Shock 2 and Thief II must be hands down the two best single-player games I have ever experienced (and please don't talk to me about Half-Life and those over-scripted sequences that work only the first time and get only tedious with time, I'm talking about real atmosphere and immersion). On the other hand Daikatana seems (I haven't played the final version yet) to be a fun-SOF-kind-of-a-game with plenty of action and rythm -- or so I hope. I like both type of games, yet the LG (and Irrational, since SS2 is mostly their creation) games tend to "stay" longer : more depth, amazing atmosphere and background story, indredible use of sounds & music, top notch voice acting, great replay value, etc. That's to me what is going to be missed with the "death" of LG, since I can't find too many games today that have so much personality -- again, the name Black Isle Studios comes to mind. I would give all the Quake III in the world for one level of Thief II... |
|
<b>#53</b> "ynohtnA" wrote... <QUOTE>Star Wars: Force Commander. FIFA 40,000. Fast Cars go Vrooom. Nipple Bouncer</QUOTE> Acctauly hunting sims and who want's to be a millionare (which has been dumbed down even from the US version of the show) games sell much better then any of those games would, and at a higher profit. One day we might just see game stores filled with these crapy games (we're getting there) with real games being developed and distributed out of people homes on CD-R's with manuals printed at the local inst-a-copy (simmaler to they way most good war games are done now). I guess that is hope though, the X-Box is bascily a stiped down PC used as a home gaming system. And games with great single player sections sell a lot better on these system then on a PC. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
I'm confused... how is this Eidos' fault? LGS were negotiating a deal and it fell through. Nothing was "cut" AFAIK... the company was already in dire financial straits before negotiations with Eidos. And blaiming Ion is even more ridiculous. Why was LGS in financial trouble? No idea... but when businesses fail, it's often because the business was poorly run. |
|
<b>#56</b> "guf" wrote... <QUOTE>I'm confused... how is this Eidos' fault? LGS were negotiating a deal and it fell through. Nothing was "cut" AFAIK... the company was already in dire financial straits before negotiations with Eidos. And blaiming Ion is even more ridiculous. Why was LGS in financial trouble? No idea... but when businesses fail, it's often because the business was poorly run. </QUOTE> How is it there fault, because the publisher funds the games development and promotion. Rahter the promoting Thief and system shock Eido's has been funneling monney into the pit known as ION Storm (Hell SS2 and Thief 2 never even showed up in the most of the retailers around here). AS for ION storm, bad boy Romero has been begging for that money for some time now, by setting up in a penthouse, installing a game room, and doing just about every thing they could to eat cash, while releasing only two very poor games along the way. The common idea is that had ION been set up in say an low rent industral park, and had more development system then ones for playing other games Eidos would have had enough to better promote the LGS games. It's a view I tend to agree with. Frankly I wonder if LGS could sue Eidos for not holding up on there end of the publishing deal by not promoting the game? <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>but when businesses fail, it's often because the business was poorly run. </quote> Remeber this when Eidos and Ion storm are gone. You'll find the difference between them and LGS is LGS left a legacy of great games behind. And for those of you in remedial "why things suck" class let me explain it to you. Eidos could not bail out Looking glass because they were in a fix due the their current bad business decision. Bottom line, because Johnny thought Killcreek would look better with HUGE boobs. Eidos has no money. So they can't bail out a great and deserving group of game artist (please note there is no one else in this category) and are shackled to the icarian Ion storm. Now feel free to do all the should of, could of would of, you care to. No matter how you cut it this just sucks. The soul of gaming is diminished if not destroyed out right. Use to be Happy Cow<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#51</b> "loonyboi" wrote... <QUOTE>This is some of the saddest news this industry has ever heard... Some quick thoughts in response to the other posts in this thread: Both Thief games were not bombs by any means. Thief 1 surfaced in the top ten and was a decent seller, and while I don't believe Thief 2 cracked the top ten it sold moderately well. System Shock 2 wasn't a smashing success, but it was a critical and mildly commercial success. -jason</QUOTE> IIRC, System Shock II hung around in the top 20 for quite a while. Not necessarily "smash hit", but it was consistantly there for a few weeks in a row. It wouldn't suprise me to hear about this coming up in the board meeting that decided this "they didn't even develop SSII"... <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#54</b> "Prodigy" wrote... <QUOTE>(and please don't talk to me about Half-Life and those over-scripted sequences that work only the first time and get only tedious with time, I'm talking about real atmosphere and immersion)</QUOTE> What is up with all The Half-Life bashing? In a thread where we're talking about some of the greatest games ever made, why do you feel it's neccesary to bash yet another one of these select few? As far as real atmosphere and immersion, Half-Life had that in spades. To thumb your nose up at the game simply because it didn't have "hacking" or "Logs" is rediculous. HL also had intense action, genuine tension, and a heigtened sense of fear. But HL's major revolution was bringing a bunch of above-average elements together and making it all coalesce into a truly magnificent game. System Shock 2 and the Thief series were games of a different sort, which did some things superbly, others not so well. But that doesn't diminish the impact or power of these games, and their greatness in the grand scheme. Let's bash the games that deserve to be bashed, and not resort to hyperbole when we're upset about something completely different.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#56</b> "guf" wrote... <QUOTE>I'm confused... how is this Eidos' fault? LGS were negotiating a deal and it fell through. Nothing was "cut" AFAIK... the company was already in dire financial straits before negotiations with Eidos. And blaiming Ion is even more ridiculous. Why was LGS in financial trouble? No idea... but when businesses fail, it's often because the business was poorly run. </QUOTE> It fell through because Eidos were in their own financial troubles. Ion Storm has sucked up 26 million, and their 4th Tomb Raider game which they were heavily relying on was a flop.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<QUOTE> Let's bash the games that deserve to be bashed, and not resort to hyperbole when we're upset about something completely different.</QUOTE> Did I say Half-Life was crap ? Did I ever say it was not good ? No, I just talked about the use of scripted sequence instead of a real atmosphere/background like in the Thief games. That's all. I'm not bashing Half-Life, I just think that, like in Dark Forces, for example (a fantastic game in its time), the fact that everything in the game is scripted and depends so much on the script/following of events tend to make things rather tedious and boring after you've finished the game once. I can still play Thief today withouth getting that awful feeling of deja-vu I get in Half-Life now that I've beaten the game. Half-Life is also one of the greatest single-player game ever made (it right up here in my top 5 with Jedi Knight, the Thief, Doom & SS2), but it lacks the troubled & spooky atmosphere of the LG games...<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>over the past few years that they couldn't put half as much into promoting the Thief series and System Shock II. </quote> By the way, it should be noted that Looking Glass self-published System Shock 2, with Electronic Arts handling distribution. Eidos wasn't involved with that game at all; they only handled the Thief series and the last Flight Unlimited game. So to point the finger entirely at Eidos, while an easy target, is actually wrong. Even if Eidos was flush with zillions in cash, there's a chance that Looking Glass wasn't an attractive takeover... if they were, someone like Havas or Infogrames would have stepped in. They've been teetering on the brink for years, going back to the days of games like Terra Nova. They tried to be a publisher as opposed to just a developer and that didn't work. I'm guessing they had a massive debt load and couldn't secure any more financing, hence the shutdown. |
|
At risk of starting another sub-thread, (by accident of course) I've always thought that some sort of Markov chain or something would be interesting to implement in games so you don't have just "scripts" or even "variations on scripts" but a truly dynamic event driven process. Somewhat like the initial break in pool. You can line up the cue ball as precisely as you want, but the other tiny factors will always prevent the balls from dispersing in the same manner. Just rambing -- back to our current thread. Desiato.. |
|
I don't get it! As I understand, LG lost publisher. Now, why would they want to break up? Lot of devolpers have lost publishers before this but they stayed together. Imagine Activision dropped id software, there will be countless publishers at id's door. Also, LG was bigger than all three of ION's devolepment teams combined and yet they only worked on one game at a time. |
|
This from Fatbabies: Well, Eidos is having cash troubles, and pulled out of funding them. Essentially Daikatana canned LGS. :-( Mumbly Just one more reason to hate John Romero and his POS game Daikatana. GJ from ex-LGSer (not me): Well, gee, I guess not all of us can be as hugely successful as some people around here. And, I'm happy to know we have such industry luminaries who know so much about the inner workings and sales numbers of LG writing our epitaph. To make things clear: 0) Underworld 1/2, System Shock, Flight Unlimited 1 all sold very well, and were not money losers. Terra Nova, BOCG, and FUIII sold poorly, and were. Viacom killed the torturous hell of ST:V. FUII was break-even. BOCG and TN left the company with a pretty big hole. 1) Thief sold *much, much* better than has been portrayed in this thread, and at a very high average per-copy price. The average retail price didn't drop below $30 until nine months after we shipped. Including OEM deals it made millions for LG. 2) SS2 didn't sell as well as hoped, but it was produced for only a small margin over advances. It didn't sink us. 3) [The wood] One project was grossly undersold to publisher A, and we mismanaged it to make the effect even worse. This incurred unexpected costs. 4) [The coffin] After the team signed up to do a game signed with publisher B bailed (unexpectedly and uncooly), publisher B had grounds to pull out, did, and subtracted millions from the LG FY2000/2001 budget. This was a disaster. 5) [The nails] Publisher C had stock, cash, other product schedule slips, and banking issues that killed the acquisition of LG that had been under LOI. So there we were. Plenty of long-term income potential in the briskly selling Thief 2, and signed deals. No short term operating capital. Can't pay the bills, can't pay salaries? Can't keep the doors open. -Anonymous Ex-LG |
|
#65 - I was just going to post something about that myself! Why couldn't Looking Glass have got funding from elsewhere? Does anyone know if they tried? Perhaps there's more to the story that we haven't been told yet? People are marking assumptions about the closure, and although they seem plausible, that's all they are - assumptions. |
|
guf: wasn't sure if you were checking out qmap or not, so i'll say it here and hope you catch it. Tell everyone at work 'thanks' for me. I'm really enjoying the game so far. :o) |
|
<b>#62</b> "Prodigy" wrote... <QUOTE>Half-Life is also one of the greatest single-player game ever made (it right up here in my top 5 with Jedi Knight, the Thief, Doom & SS2), </QUOTE> Eh??? I'm assuming here you mean your top 5 FPS games, not all around games... They certainly don't compare, in my mind, to games like the Final Fantasy series, the Ultima series (yes, there WAS Ultima before UO), the Fallout series, the Sim games, Actraiser, Chrono Trigger, even going back to the old NES with games like Zelda and countless others which I'm not going to bore you with... Not many of those games I mentioned were about flashy graphics, and in this day and age many would totally look like crap compared to what we have; but I honestly think most of them are more FUN than any current single-player 3D engine game that I've played. While I've heard nothing but good things about LGS games, I've NEVER bought them; I regret that now, because everything I've read from or about them tells me they really were something different in this industry where almost everything seems the same. As for Half-Life... I just couldn't get into it. Go kill aliens, come back, go kill humans, kill kill kill kill kill. There wasn't really an interesting story, there were no interesting characters, just scripted sequences to try to get you to kill more stuff without giving up out of total boredom. That's not really a criticism of Half-Life, mind; just a criticism of the genre in general. For what it's worth, I think Half-Life implemented the "go kill stuff to get the reward of a scripted sequence" concept better than most others; but in general that's NOT what I'm looking for in a game. FPS may be the big thing in gaming right now, but I honestly think they are marketing almost exclusively to the multiplayer market. If I want to kill somebody online, I play one of the myriad Quake clones; if I want an interesting, unique game I usually look to other genre. The sad thing is, I think there are many creative single-player possibilities within Quake-type engines; it just seems that very few companies are willing to try, and the few that do usually fail. Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#17</b> "PiRaMidA" wrote... <QUOTE> Iikka was working for LG? Wouch, last I heard of him he was doing Anachronox levels. Yes, this guy is one of the most talented mod authors I have ever seen; AirQuake, which you might be familiar with, was done in about two months by him with almost no external help. His maps are nothing short of brilliant. Too bad money are not always following talented people :(</QUOTE> Yeah, Iikka was at LG (at least I'm pretty sure he was, I didn't hear about him moving on from LG, anyway), so was Rich Carlson, another level designing 'master'. The title of this article "The stone that the builder refused" is finished with "shall be the head cornerstone", it's a verse from the bible actually. Sure, Looking Glass ain't the Son of God, but I'm finding it unbelievable they couldn't secure funding for Thief 3. Which probably means Eidos had exclusivity rights. /me wishes there was something more we could do. Pretty much all we see here at PC is social commentary and negative opinions, with minor doses of constructive criticism. Anyone have ideas? I know these guys won't have trouble finding work, but the sum of their collective efforts are worth far more than each individual accomplishment to us hardcore guys. Eidos is now officially on my list. :P<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Games LG have been involved in Ultima Underworld Terra Nova System Shock 1 & 2 Thief 1 & 2 Flight Unlimited 1 & 2 common themes a) perfectionist b) good games c) no multiplayer For years, game sites and paper magazines have been bitching about criminally poor sales for these outstanding games. Terra Nova was waaaaaaaaay ahead of its time, as was system shock. They sold fuck all squared. Low key advertising, despite awards, little sales push despite scoring extremely favourable marks in reviews. I dont get it, why does dross like Daikatana, Star Wars Supremacy, Gunship 2000 get released and sell hugely, yet the good stuff is largely ignored. guess the boob box really does dominate the average user. System shock scared the crap out of me, I wish I still had my copy (lent it out :(), the updated cd based one with audio emails. Emotive gameplay, you got sucked into it, you cared about things going on in logs, discovered things with a growing sense of horror or sickness, you got upset when you didnt make it to the docking bay in time, you began to hate Diego... Adventure games.... even in the first person seem to be dying.. if not already dead. Seems that the unwashed masses want football sims or shoot em ups, if it doesnt fall into those fields, its not worth it. Wild speculation, imagine what id or Epic could do with Looking Glasses development team(s). Hell John Carmack could fund them out of his pocket change and system shock 2 would work quite nicely in the snowcrash 'virtuality' if you catch my drift. Ds<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#69</b> "Jeremy" wrote... <QUOTE>#62 "Prodigy" wrote... They certainly don't compare, in my mind, to games like the Final Fantasy series, the Ultima series (yes, there WAS Ultima before UO), the Fallout series, the Sim games, Actraiser, Chrono Trigger... As for Half-Life... I just couldn't get into it. Go kill aliens, come back, go kill humans, kill kill kill kill kill. There wasn't really an interesting story, there were no interesting characters, just scripted sequences to try to get you to kill more stuff without giving up out of total boredom. </QUOTE> Hmm, let me point out that in all but ONE of those games you mentioned, your primary focus is kill, kill, kill, kill, kill. Just because it's not a first person shooter doesn't mean you're not killing things when you have Cloud Strife use his megaslash technique on a dragon. And, if you were paying attention, there was a *very* intersting story behind it all - perhaps it wasn't fully explained what was going on, but that was part of the game's charm. It may not have been as complex as a Final Fantasy game, but hell, neither was System Shock 2's story. It didn't have to be.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#29</b> "Desiato" wrote... <QUOTE>I think I'll go shop my newest game idea to Eidos, it will be called -- "Touch The Titties" a sexy-action packed romp with a CTF twist!! I have a full press release describing the number of polys in each nipple, etc. Why the hell not, obviously precedent shows Eidos is an easy target. </QUOTE> My gosh, I had to litterally hold my mouth shut to keep from laughing out loud on that one. In my opinion, this has far, FAR, FAARRRR more to do with Eidos than ION Storm. People are forgetting, those checks that ION cashed and deposited were written out by Eidos. Ok, I'm not good at analogies. Joe Gamer has 2 kids, one is his own, the other is adopted (or a half brother/sister). Come allowance time, the dad gave both of their shares to kid a: who had a broken bicycle, so he could fix it. So kid a: runs off to the bikeshop to have it fixed, and the other kid b: is left standing there with his dad, asking his dad, "I suppose that was my share you gave to him?" "yep" replied the dad. End of analogy. Geh, typing while on Sonata is tough. I take too many prescription drugs. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
BTW, Eidos didn't publish SS2, it was EA. |
|
I'd like to compliment <a href="http://www.ttlg.com">Through The Looking Glass</a> on their dedication and the decision that they've decided to stay open for business. Thanks for sticken around, guys. You have a really nice site.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>It fell through because Eidos were in their own financial troubles. Ion Storm has sucked up 26 million, and their 4th Tomb Raider game which they were heavily relying on was a flop.</quote> And Eidos is the only publisher around? They could have made a deal with other publisher. |
|
<b>#70</b> "Seth Krieg" wrote... <QUOTE>Yeah, Iikka was at LG (at least I'm pretty sure he was, I didn't hear about him moving on from LG, anyway), so was Rich Carlson, another level designing 'master'. </QUOTE> Rich Carlson has been with Rogue for some time now, not with Looking Glass. Although I understand he parted on good terms with them. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#66</b> "MCorleone" wrote... <QUOTE>So there we were. Plenty of long-term income potential in the briskly selling Thief 2, and signed deals. No short term operating capital. Can't pay the bills, can't pay salaries? Can't keep the doors open. </QUOTE> That's the killer right there. Most of the time when one of these developers shuts their doors, its because they can't afford to keep paying their employees. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#76</b> "Evildude" wrote - <QUOTE>It fell through because Eidos were in their own financial troubles. Ion Storm has sucked up 26 million, and their 4th Tomb Raider game which they were heavily relying on was a flop. And Eidos is the only publisher around? They could have made a deal with other publisher. </QUOTE> But it doesn't mean jack if; Eidos has exclusivity rights or, bought the name quite a while ago (Like GT did with Unreal). Which appears to be the case, because in that open letter Randy Smith said something to the effect of 'if you see Thief 3, probably none of us will be involved with it.' There you go.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#78</b> "loonyboi" wrote - <QUOTE>#66 "MCorleone" wrote... So there we were. Plenty of long-term income potential in the briskly selling Thief 2, and signed deals. No short term operating capital. Can't pay the bills, can't pay salaries? Can't keep the doors open. That's the killer right there. Most of the time when one of these developers shuts their doors, its because they can't afford to keep paying their employees. -jason</QUOTE> D'oh, sorry about that, didn't remember hearing. Which is another good thing, I suppose. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>Seems that the unwashed masses want football sims or shoot em ups, if it doesnt fall into those fields, its not worth it. </quote> No, they want RollerCoaster Tycoon, SimCity 3000 and The Sims... all fabulous games, by the way, and the three best-selling games in the last couple of years. |
|
<b>#72</b> "asspennies" wrote... <QUOTE>Hmm, let me point out that in all but ONE of those games you mentioned, your primary focus is kill, kill, kill, kill, kill. </QUOTE> It's PART of most of those games, and it's part of almost all games. I'm not going to dispute that; but there are OTHER parts to most of those games as well, and those are the parts I find more interesting. You honestly think Fallout2 is about just killing? There is a LOT to that game, a bunch of things you can (or cannot, depending on what you want) do, interaction with the NPCs... Chrono Trigger was, simply, different. It wasn't like typical console RPGs, it was open ended to a degree, with multiple endings, interesting characters. Final Fantasy is much the same way, albeit more restricted in how you can progress. There is some pretty common stuff to almost all RPGs: you do your share of killing, but you are in a world that you can explore, and the scripted sequences/movies reveal things about the characters and the world; which is what makes them interesting. ActRaiser, I liked because it was different; kill kill kill sidescroller, but then after that there is a rudimentary sim game on top of it. Any Maxis sim is well... a totally different beast. I'm assuming that's the one exception you refer to. I've got no problem with killing in games, and most games just don't work on any level without it; but if that's basically all there is to a game (which is how I see most FPS games), I'm just left thinking that there could have been a lot more done. Sure there IS a plot to Half-Life; but there are no people to get to know, no characters, no real sense of exploration, no alternate gameplay. In my view, a game like that is best played online against other players, instead of alone trudging through AI controlled monsters. Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>Why couldn't Looking Glass have got funding from elsewhere? Does anyone know if they tried? Perhaps there's more to the story that we haven't been told yet? </quote> Well, Looking Glass made critically acclaimed games that were often late and didn't exactly burn up the sales chart. I did an interview with Doug Church a few months ago, and this was one Q/A" <b>Why haven’t the games from Looking Glass been huge sellers?<b> Who knows? I’m sure some people at Looking Glass would be happy to hear some simple answers. Most have sold well or better, but not huge numbers. It’s probably a combination of complexity, accessibility, marketing, timing and luck. Some people have pointed out that the games often require a fair amount of investment from the player to get maximal enjoyment, and are hard to just pick up and start playing. In Thief we specifically worked on that, though obviously I’m not the one to say how well we did on it…. But I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished. Better sales would mean more money, with which we could experiment more and be less beholden to publishers, which would be awesome. If our only goal was sales (or profit) we would probably do different games. But we are here and releasing titles we are proud of. Given that we write games for a living, it’s hard to complain too much. |
|
I think loonyboi mentioned it somehwere in this thread, but LGS <i>didn't make</i> System Shock 2. Irrational games did. And they're still together. I feel kind of bad about LGS myself, but the team that made System Shock 2 is still around. So rejoice, I guess. Erik |
|
<b>#84</b> "erik" wrote... <QUOTE>I feel kind of bad about LGS myself, but the team that made System Shock 2 is still around.</QUOTE> I've never played through System Shock 2, and all this talk about how great it is makes me want to finally sit down with it. I'm going to pick it up tonight more than likely so I can bask in its glory everyone talks about. -- Dethstryk Damage Gaming |
|
Memories: I was playing Thief II a month or so ago. It was about eight PM or so, I was alone in my apartment, waiting for a few friends to show up -- we were doing movie night on the DVD player. It was the spying mission, the one where you need to spy on a conversation between Truart and the Mechanist leader. I had damned near completed the mission -- I had listened to the conversation, found the key, made a mold of the key, and returned the damned thing. All that was left was to acquire 1200 in loot. I had about 1100. I scoured the entire cathedral, and my heart was *really* starting to sink with dread -- the only unexplored area of the cathedral was the catacombs, in which I knew lurked terrible undead Hammer warriors. I had seen one earlier and ran like the coward I was. Swallowing my bile, I finally descended into the catacombs. A few winding passageways took me to a dead end, dominated by a sarcophagus. I opened it, and voila! 200 loot, putting me well over my goal. As I turned, I heard in my ears (it was actually in my 5.1 surround speaker setup) a terrible moaning. From the corner of my vision I glimpsed red, the tattered rags of one of the hammerite death-knights. I ducked his fearsome hammer swing, which rebounded off of the sarcophagus behind me (the clanging sound nearly made me scream). Swiftly I ducked past the monster and begin my escape. The winding corridors had me lost for a few moments, and I could hear the moaning and howling of the thing as it gave chase. Finally I came to a door, I was saved. Spinning, I began to close it, but it was too late! The thing had gotten through the doorway and was winding up for a swing. I burst into motion again, running across the cathedral toward the main antechamber, the thing still hot on my heels. Another door, and the results were the same. Genuinely panicked now, truly afraid I was about to be destroyed, I dashed through the brightly lit cathedral, vaguely hoping that no patrolling guards were nearby. Up the stairs I ran, and I saw my salvation: In the chamber ahead was a ladder, surely the monstrosity could not climb it. With the death-knight still hot on my heels, I made a mad dash for the ladder and leapt.... and missed! My vision went read and from far away I heard myself moan as the things hammer slammed into my side, surely breaking a few of my ribs. My gaze going black around the edges, I leapt once more for the ladder, heart pounding in my ears, breath held behind clenched teeth.... and I made it! I heard the clanging of the thing's hammer rebounding off the wall beneath me! I scrambled up the ladder and looked down, watching as the monster impotently raged at being deprived of its prey. Scurrying down the rope arrow I had left on the balcony, I finally exhaled. I was safe. This whole episode lasted maybe thirty seconds, a minute at most. Yet those thirty seconds got more of an emotional reaction out of me than all of Half Life and Baldur's Gate combined. I was genuinely afraid. Not afraid because I'd have to reload, but afraid because there was an undead on *my* ass! Not Garret's ass, mine. My memories of Thief I/II and Shock II are filled with such anecdotes -- The revulsion I felt upon reading the log of the first Cyborg Midwife's creation, the terrible awe I felt at my first view of one of the Mechanist automatons, the triumph I felt upon escaping Truart's fortress without any difficulty... the tension of sneaking into my house, surrounded by the local guards. I can honestly say that no game company has ever so consistently provoked an emotional response from me -- when I heard of the two lovers escaping the doomed Von Braun, I was genuinely happy. Even Half Life, with its amazing AI and wonderful design never came close to the kind of tension that Thief and Shock created. The closest anything has ever come is Metal Gear Solid, and even that pales by comparison. I can confidently say that there is no developer out there who has the capability of provoking such responses in me. I know id and Epic can't, nor can Raven for all their talent. Black Isle and Bioware are good, but not that good. Blizzard isn't that good. Maybe one of the newcomers -- Nihilistic, or perhaps Troika. The PC gaming industry and scene is, a day later, a pale shadow of what it once was. Melodrama? Perhaps. But for me, it's quite true.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
As much as people want to blame ION Storm or Eidos for Looking Glass' closure, and as much as everyone needs a scapegoat, let's not forget the simple truth that had things been managed better, Looking Glass probably shouldn't have needed Eidos (or anyone) to bail them out in the first place.... |
|
<b>#87</b> "Steve Bauman" wrote... <QUOTE>As much as people want to blame ION Storm or Eidos for Looking Glass' closure, and as much as everyone needs a scapegoat, let's not forget the simple truth that had things been managed better, Looking Glass probably shouldn't have needed Eidos (or anyone) to bail them out in the first place.... </QUOTE> Acctauly most of the smaller developers I've talked with run so far on the edge short term capital comes strate from the publisher. On a side note any one know any place selling used copies of System Shock 1?<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: The stone that the builder refused...
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
| P O S T A C O M M E N T |
|
|
| C R A P T A G S | ||||||||
|
|
| There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details] |
Powered by blah 0.9.1-dev •
PlanetCrap is © 1997-2035 Hendrik "Morn" Mans
|