|
| 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 - »»| |
|
<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> |
|
I also find it interesting that in a lot of the comments people are condemning the conservative state of the industry while at the same time saying things like we'll never see, and I quote this from Through the Looking Glass: "Thief 3, System Shock 3, Underworld 3, Terra Nova 2... " Hmm... Personally, I'm not that upset we won't see those sequels, since we'll have the originals to remember. (Sequels are part of the problem with the industry... eventually, there will be live five franchises driving the entire game industry.) As good as those sequels may be, I'm upset we won't see what original games the Looking Glass people could do with the time and money of a large publisher. Or maybe we will, just not under the LG moniker... |
|
JeffD : I feel your pain. The undead freak me out too, although I've been able to avoid them thus far in Thief2. Have to see if I can maintain. ;) All : To those who bash Half-Life : come on. I played through that game twice, and OpFor 1.5 times ... I'm considering going back for more. Half-Life was awesome for creating fear, and the action was intense! I don't like listening to "hardcore" gamers who want to recite a list of old titles that are better than any of these "damn modern games that favor graphics over substance", in a lame attempt to give themselves credibility. Half-Life was a great game. A great achievement. Thief2 is right up there with it. Give great games credit where it's due ... And, hey, I've been playing games as long as you have. Don't even try it. :) |
|
[87] Steve Bauman: Thank you! My feelings exactly. [68] Chris (kanaeda): cool, glad you like it... I was but a cog. |
|
Saw this great post on Slashdot about Looking Glass' closure: <quote>Thanks to the magic of software piracy, you'll still be able to get all the games they've released, at the same price you've always paid. Remember, software piracy doesn't hurt developers, crappy and overpriced products do. Keep repeating it, maybe someday you won't feel guilty anymore. (Disclaimer: I know full well most pirates don't feel guilty anyway.) </quote> |
|
<b>#86</b> "JeffD" wrote... <QUOTE>I can confidently say that there is no developer out there who has the capability of provoking such responses in me. </QUOTE> Oh yes, the first game that actually made me *scared* (not amused, or disgusted, but genuinely scared like I was a 6 year old child left alone in a dark room with *something* scratching the door outside) - that game was System Shock 2. I could not play it at night when I was alone, even though I felt very stupid, I was simply afraid to. I have a nice sound system and a huge monitor - these are my excuses - but nevertheless, I have yet to see a game as deeply interactive as SS2 was (is!)... Genius people often, if not always, end up their days in powerty, unappreciated by the crowd. Unless you fuck pride and do something that sells :(<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Come on you guys. Ion is in no way responsible for Eidos' situation and thus is in no way responsible for LGS' shutdown. Yes Eidos dropped a ton of money into Ion, but <b>it was Eidos' decision.</b> They had the ability to say no at any time. The whole shutdown is more than just "oops, no money from Eidos." LGS had to have some mismanagement or mistakes made in their business practices in order to be in such a situation. It's ludicrous what we see people posting in this thread and what we saw them posting in the Eidos titties thread. Funny how the same people who were condeming "sexism" in games are now bitching about how Killcreek's silicone jubblies have cost LGS it's life. Come on, if you want to bitch about the ineptitude that is Ionstorm, then bitch about their skills or lack there of, not about their big boobs or long hair. (Not to mention that Johnny R. has enough money to buy boobies for his girlfriends [ if in fact he did...]. He was a part owner at id so they had to buy him out. Odds are he was pretty flush with cash, probably in the order of 5 to 10 million in personal liquidity.) |
|
[#91] guf: ... I was but a cog. 'tis true, but even the lowliest gear plays a part in the grand scheme of the machine. I just noticed the new email addy. Ya move across town? ;p |
|
And I bought Thief three days before Thief Gold was announced. For full price no less. They should've made it a download for peeps who already had the game. |
|
<b>#96</b> "Seven Tacos" wrote... <QUOTE>And I bought Thief three days before Thief Gold was announced. For full price no less. They should've made it a download for peeps who already had the game. </QUOTE> Um...they did. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
#97 loonyboi - <quote>Um...they did.</quote> Where? It's not up on their site now. All that's up there is info about a $10 rebate for purchasers of the original. And where's my t-shirt dammit! |
|
From post #60 <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? </quote> On most days I would let such a post slide. But I'm in an extra bitchie mood today. So for a change I'm going to speak my opinion about this topic even though it makes me seem like a three headed geek. Tearful confession, I just don't get Half life. I don't think it's the greatest game ever made but it is the most over rated. There is nothing siginficantly better about the game play then any other FSP. Yeah it had cinimatics. Cool scripted stuff. But all that is just candy and in my opinion it's accepting stuff like that as "Quality gaming" is a large part of the problem. I have played a good deal of Half life. I got to the place you Jump in to Xen from. The reason I stopped there was I was just not having fun any more and did not want to bother with it any longer. I understand the Xen part of the game is the worst part, so I doubt if I pressed on I would have a higher opinion about the game. Please don't read this and think I'm bashing Half life. I'm not. It's as good if not better then any other traditional "kill the monster, find the card key" First person shooter. But is it a great game? I don't think so. Is it the best game ever? No. Happy Cow<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Not to offend, but I tend to mentally file people who don't like Half-Life in the "never satisfied" folder. |
|
Re: Half Life bashing. I think the biggest problem with Half-Life was that it's more of an interactive movie than a game. It did a <b>great</b> job of keeping the tension up throughout most of the game (Xen fell apart) and the commando AI was just insidious. However, Half Life lacked a few things. 1) A truly strong plot: Half Life had a doom-clone for a plot. Portals to other world are opened up and aliens start invading, yadda yadda yadda. Not bad, just not as revolutionary as everyone claims. Half life didn't have a revolutionary plot, but it executed that plot better than any other game. In contrast, the Thief and Shock games all had revolutionary plots. The story of the City, with its Hammerites, Mechanists, Pagans, Keepers, and the Vine was a truly innovative and original plotline. The rogue AI Shodan wasn't terribly original (think Skynet), but the idea of her giving birth to the Many and them warring against one another was tremendous. Half Life had tremendous plot execution; Shock / Thief had both innovative plot *and* tremendous execution. 2) Character identification: Gordon and company don't have any personalities. Gordon himself never says a word -- what do we know about him. Is he shy? Outgoing? Cynical? Does he get laid regularly? The characters in Half Life were almost nonexistant, the focus of the game was overwhelmingly on the plot and action. Without strong characterization, the plot was less interesting. On the other hand, the LGS games all had tremendously detailed characters. Garret is a wonderful character - he's got a detailed personality. You don't even need to be told he's Garret -- you can tell because he is a detailed character. Likewise, the many characters in Shock 2 all have distinc personalities, and stories to tell. In Metal Gear Solid, part of the coolness in the game is that Snake has a personality -- he's a bit of a lech and a flirt, but that's all an external shell surrounding what is, apparently, a cold killer. 3) Gameplay: Half Life didn't offer much in the way of innovative gameplay - you went from point A to point B using violence. That's the core gameplay: Blast your way from point A to point B. Oh sure, ostensibly you had objectives, but that's rather pointless, objectives add more to the plot than gameplay. The core gameplay premise is the same as every FPS since Wolfenstein. In Thief, the focus is no longer on violence, but on stealthiness. Thief wasn't the first game to do this -- near as I can remember, the original Fallout had this feature. In fact, if you were good enough and crafted your character properly, you could go through the *entire* fallout game without causing a whit of damage to anyone. Oh, it was hard (I've only managed to get about halfway through before I bungle), but you can sneak or talk your way through the whole game. In Thief, the focus is on stealthiness, not violence. Hell, one mission in Thief II disallowed even *blackjacking*, which is one of Garret's mainstays (who else here deliberately blackjacks *everyone* they can simply for the hell of it? Furthermore, Thief and Shock 2 force you to carefully decide how your character and / or his inventory goes. In Thief, you start your missions by choosing an equipment loadout, based on what's available and the amount of money you have. Given these constraints, you have to carefully choose what you bring, as there's usually very little equipment in-game. Should I buy another 4 water-arrows, or splurge on some extra rope arrows? Decisions like this increase the depth of the game. Likewise, Shock 2, with its limited inventory, forces you to decide what weapons and equipment you really need. Sure, you can take some huge powerful weapons, but you won't have enough room in your inventory for the other equipment you need. Likewise, ammunition management becomes an issue, as there's not *nearly* enough ammo in game to blast your way through everything. Character growth is another issue -- is it better to concentrate in one discipline (weapons, tech, psi) or be a jack of all trades? More decisions are involved, and this adds to the gameplay by 1) Making the player feel he's more involved in the game and 2) giving the player a sense of satisfaction for a good decision. The point of this long rant? Half Life is a great game. Its execution of the pure FPS premise (go from point A to point B, using violence to get there) is still unmatched. However, there was no true gameplay innovation, merely the use of well crafted scripted sequences to convey a plot. The LGS games, on the other hand, pioneered some innovative gameplay. In addition, the storytelling was on par with Half-Life's with regards to the plot, and far surpasses it with regards to characterization. Finally, LGS games provide far more depth than Half Life did. Does this make HL bad? No. But it does make Thief / Shock better.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>Not to offend, but I tend to mentally file people who don't like Half-Life in the "never satisfied" folder. </quote> I'm not offended. I'm mature enough to understand people that "mentally file people" due to taste in games are not worth being offended by. Just stating an opinion that is not stated very often. I just my opinon and nobody in the world has to agree with it. Those that don't agree with me are still file free. Happy cow<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#101</b> "JeffD" wrote... <QUOTE> 3) Gameplay: Half Life didn't offer much in the way of innovative gameplay - you went from point A to point B using violence. That's the core gameplay: Blast your way from point A to point B. Oh sure, ostensibly you had objectives, but that's rather pointless, objectives add more to the plot than gameplay. The core gameplay premise is the same as every FPS since Wolfenstein. </QUOTE> Hmmph. I consider quite a few things about Half-Life innovative: the incremental level-loading, weapon selection, graffiti/logo-spraying, use of NPCs such as the "Barneys", moving lips synchronized with speech, immersive audio. How about the Training area, for those of us too impatient to RTFM? How about weapons such as the hornet gun, gauss rifle and snarks? <QUOTE> Half Life is a great game. Its execution of the pure FPS premise (go from point A to point B, using violence to get there) is still unmatched. However, there was no true gameplay innovation, merely the use of well crafted scripted sequences to convey a plot. </QUOTE> I respect your opinions, but do not agree with them. I think there is one <I>hell</I> of a difference in gameplay between HL and Wolfenstein; the level where Freeman must get the fuel and oxygen flowing to the rocket-testing silo (and repeatedly sneak past the blind but sharp-earned monster) is light-years ahead of the "get red key, open red door" motif.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
What message does this send to other companies? Good games cost too much? |
|
<b>#104</b> "RzE" wrote... <QUOTE>What message does this send to other companies? Good games cost too much? </QUOTE> Well, Daikatana cost way too much.. and from what I hear it isn't a good game. :-P<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Happy Cow <quote>I'm not offended. I'm mature enough to understand people that "mentally file people" due to taste in games are not worth being offended by. Just stating an opinion that is not stated very often. I just my opinon and nobody in the world has to agree with it. Those that don't agree with me are still file free.</quote> *sigh* OK, I'm immature, beneath you and you're a better person than me. Let's move on. *rolls eyes* |
|
<b>#103</b> "Rantage" wrote... <QUOTE> Hmmph. I consider quite a few things about Half-Life innovative: the incremental level-loading, weapon selection, graffiti/logo-spraying, use of NPCs such as the "Barneys", moving lips synchronized with speech, immersive audio. How about the Training area, for those of us too impatient to RTFM? How about weapons such as the hornet gun, gauss rifle and snarks? </QUOTE> Granted, those are some innovations.... I was referring more to pure gameplay -- I'll grant that half-life pioneered several gameplay and technological features (esp. the training area, allthough that's also a mainstay of the LGS games). These are added on features, however, and to me they don't represent anything along the way of revolutionary gameplay. <QUOTE> I respect your opinions, but do not agree with them. I think there is one hell of a difference in gameplay between HL and Wolfenstein; the level where Freeman must get the fuel and oxygen flowing to the rocket-testing silo (and repeatedly sneak past the blind but sharp-earned monster) is light-years ahead of the "get red key, open red door" motif.</QUOTE> In the interests of being understood, let me elaborate on this point: In the example you quoted, the goal is to go from point A (silo) to point B (fuel) to point C (O2) and back to point A. All you're doing is running around and pushing buttons, something that's been done since DOOM. Granted, your reasons for pushing the buttons were better (instead of just opening a door, I'm getting ready to blow the smithereens out of a monster), but as I said in my previous post, this is more of a plot feature than a gameplay feature. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#90</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote... <QUOTE>Half-Life was a great game. A great achievement... I don't like listening to "hardcore" gamers who want to recite a list of old titles that are better than any of these "damn modern games that favor graphics over substance", in a lame attempt to give themselves credibility. </QUOTE> And I think HalfLife is simply another small step in the FPS gaming ladder, not any sort of revolutionary game in general. That's an opinion that I'm entitled to, in the same way you're entitled to yours. It's <B>my</B> opinion, the opinion of one gamer, that the gameplay in many (single player) first person shooters isn't as entertaining as that of many other genre. Just because you have different tastes than I do doesn't mean that you need to take cheap shots at the rationalle behind my opinion. Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#107</b> "JeffD" wrote... <QUOTE> In the example you quoted, the goal is to go from point A (silo) to point B (fuel) to point C (O2) and back to point A. All you're doing is running around and pushing buttons, something that's been done since DOOM. </QUOTE> Perhaps -- perhaps not. In certain areas of Half-Life, stealthiness <I>is</I> key (the aforementioned area being one of them)....something that you commended <B>Thief II</B> for. Also, in Doom (and Wolfenstein), the goal was merely to make it to the end of the level. In Half-Life, this goal changes...first to get to the surface, then to escape the enemy troops, then to make it to the other end of Black Mesa, and finally to escape from Xen. By the way, I'm ashamed to admit that I've never played any of the Looking Glass games. After this thread, however, I'm determined to go out and purchase Thief II. :)<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#100</b> "Warren Marshall" wrote... <QUOTE>Not to offend, but I tend to mentally file people who don't like Half-Life in the "never satisfied" folder. </QUOTE> Oh good, let's file people! By your logic, maybe I should just mentally toss the comments of Half-Life fanboys into "file 13" then. Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#109</b> "Rantage" wrote... <QUOTE>By the way, I'm ashamed to admit that I've never played any of the Looking Glass games. After this thread, however, I'm determined to go out and purchase Thief II. :)</QUOTE> The same here. I played SS2 for a short while, until I ran into that spawn bug (which was fixed by a quick patch, but I got hit over the head with some other game that was much less frustrating and never got back to it). I also received Thief with one of my (numerous) video or sound cards. Still, I think I'll go out and buy Thief Gold and Thief 2 this weekend (hopefully TFC won't swallow me up again before I get the chance to play through them). The main point, though, is that my internet connection completely sucks right now, and a good single player game is just what I need (having already played FFVII, Fallout 1/2, etc. etc.). As far as Half-life goes, I don't really care either way what people say about it. I enjoyed the multiplayer portion (specifically TFC) a great deal, and fell asleep every time I tried to play the single player. If the single player of HL worked for you, that's great, as everything I saw pointed towards a well polished piece of work. It simply wasn't something that called to <i>me</i> to continue playing. -PainKilleR-[CE] |
|
Fallout itself wasn't an original, but rather an updated WASTELAND with a makeover. (I still have my 1sqrft by 1sqrft original copy of Wasteland for the C64 with the orange cover). That game was so remarkable and has such a warm and neigh-untouched pinnacle of gaming that it demanded a remake. Thankfully, the remakes lived up to the original. Black Isle is scaring me, though. They licensed Lithtech to do their future games. I can't imagine a well-detailed or great engrossing game based on the lithtech engine. It's like asking for a mansion being built out of tar-paper. BlackIsle may have forsaken me, that is yet to be known, but it's very unfortunate that like movies, publishers (studios) are removing creative control from the developers (filmmakers) and forsaking original and thought-provoking movies for cut-and-dried formula games/movies that have a proven payoff. Think of Thief2 as Being John Malkovich. An excellent work of art that was largely ignored due to almost-zero marketing. |
|
OK! Everything I've said in this thread, is my opinion. Just like everything you said is your opinion. I'm entitled to mine, your entitled to yours. Now bugger off. :) |
|
I used the wrong "your" again. God I suck. :) |
|
This thread has got me all fired up to go play SS2 now as well. I started it before, but didn't get very far. Being mostly a 'twitch-game' junkie, I wasn't expecting that type of game. Who knows, if this goes well, maybe I'll go pick up Thief 1 or 2. (-)Ions <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
I'm calling out to all of you readers that have not played SS2: It's a phenomenal game and it will drastically increase your empathy to the feelings expressed over the topic of this thread. |
|
<b>#112</b> "MCorleone" wrote... <QUOTE>Black Isle is scaring me, though. They licensed Lithtech to do their future games. </QUOTE> Hey, I LIKED Shogo! I don't really know much about the engine, but I thought that game felt pretty good at least. I'm kinda into the anime thing though... so maybe I'm biased there. Aside from that, I doubt anybody would recommend FO 1/2 based on show-stopping graphics. Even if they don't end up with the best looking game in the world, I have faith that Black Isle will work some of that same magic that I remember, regardless of what engine they use. Well, I'm hoping at least :) (I'm also hoping that they don't have to patch this one after I've already gotten a decent way into it, causing me to start over...) Now, I need to go buy Thief 2 and see just how brilliant LGS was... Jeremy<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Increased empathy and increased feelings... Speculation spectacles on: Why do you guys think that developers pump out sequels? I think it's mostly money. Why don't we see game makers make something fresh and new every time? Obviously the tried and true has failed a major player, despite the gracious nods from the community. Is it a lack of originality? It seems that the game makers are building a house, and just adding to it, remodelling rooms over time with each new release, rather than moving to a whole new neighborhood. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#109</b> "Rantage" wrote... <QUOTE> In certain areas of Half-Life, stealthiness is key (the aforementioned area being one of them)....something that you commended Thief II for. Also, in Doom (and Wolfenstein), the goal was merely to make it to the end of the level. In Half-Life, this goal changes...first to get to the surface, then to escape the enemy troops, then to make it to the other end of Black Mesa, and finally to escape from Xen.</QUOTE> How is this any different than Wolfenstein? Gameplay wise, the goal is the same: Go from point A to point B. It's just that point A and B are more interesting than the entrance / exit of a level. The core gameplay is the same: Progress on a fairly linear course from point A to point B. <QUOTE> By the way, I'm ashamed to admit that I've never played any of the Looking Glass games. After this thread, however, I'm determined to go out and purchase Thief II. :)</QUOTE> And you call yourself a man. ;) Seriously, all of the games -- Thief Gold, Shock II and Thief II are worth a buy. And you'll understand the difference between Half-Life "stealth" and Thief stealth. It's a whole other ballgame. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<quote>Why do you guys think that developers pump out sequels? I think it's mostly money. </quote> Well, yeah. It's mostly marketing costs. You need to spend a lot more money to make people know about, say, Half-Life than Half-Life II, because the latter already has a built-in audience. But it's also a safer investment. See, a lot of people greenlighting games have to think of their own jobs. If they fund a bunch of wildly original projects and they fail, they're fired. So they greenlight safe sequels to protect their own asses. It's a fairly typical management mindset. <quote>Is it a lack of originality? </quote> Well, there's very little originality in 3D gaming, in terms of design. Someone talked about original features in Half-Life (incremental level-loading, graffiti/logo-spraying, moving lips synchronized with speech, immersive audio), but they were mostly technological innovations (or things like logo spraying that were really made more feasible by technology). Thief has a fairly original gameplay concept, in that it is a sort of anti-shooter, a first-person sneaker. But you know what? When a lot of people talk about the game, they complain about the engine and the stiff and ugly player characters. Those same criticisms were leveled at System Shock 2 as well. So the answer is... there is no answer. Oh, and to those that would complain about keycard designs, can you think of a single conflict/resolution game encounter that couldn't be turned into a keycard analogy? Go for it. It's a fun exercise. |
|
I would offer you a reply on your exercise, but I get the feeling you guys don't lump 3D flight simulators into '3D gaming'... whatever that means. ;) <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#109</b> "Rantage" wrote... <QUOTE>Also, in Doom (and Wolfenstein), the goal was merely to make it to the end of the level. In Half-Life, this goal changes...first to get to the surface, then to escape the enemy troops, then to make it to the other end of Black Mesa, and finally to escape from Xen. </QUOTE> Nonethe less you can still just to a shit bolt to end of level and you will "beat" the game. The fact that there is some background story that barely interacts with gameplay is irrelevant<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#112</b> "MCorleone" wrote... <QUOTE>Fallout itself wasn't an original, but rather an updated WASTELAND with a makeover. (I still have my 1sqrft by 1sqrft original copy of Wasteland for the C64 with the orange cover). That game was so remarkable and has such a warm and neigh-untouched pinnacle of gaming that it demanded a remake. Thankfully, the remakes lived up to the original. Black Isle is scaring me, though. They licensed Lithtech to do their future games. I can't imagine a well-detailed or great engrossing game based on the lithtech engine. It's like asking for a mansion being built out of tar-paper.</QUOTE> Well, get ready to be disappointed, because i'm fairly sure that the game they're making with the LithTech engine is Fallout 3. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<QUOTE>Why do you guys think that developers pump out sequels? I think it's mostly money.</QUOTE> Well, I suppose the larger reason is money, but that's why they make games to begin with. Sequels are made because technology is always improving, so developers are able to do more with each game. It's an established fact that on the PC, sequels always do better than the original, so developers are always willing to take a chance on a sequel before making a wholly original game. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#32</b> "Martin" wrote... <QUOTE>(Hey Morn! When can we set a sig that stays as well?) </QUOTE> When you get Crapspy and create a draft. <b>#46</b> "Happy cow" wrote... <QUOTE>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. </QUOTE> Actually, I would prefer that he use the bullet in the manner for which it was intended and swallow the barrel instead. Romero is so full of shit that if he were to swallow just the bullet, it might never be found again. <b>#46</b> "Happy cow" wrote... <QUOTE>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. </QUOTE> I must have missed that announcement. I'm going to bet that john's next game is going to be "Ring around the Lawsuit for Breach of Fiduciary Responsibility," but that is just my opinion. <b>#65</b> "Evildude" wrote... <QUOTE>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. </QUOTE> I am guessing by the various press releases that they just ran out of time as well as money. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Snappy <quote>Why do you guys think that developers pump out sequels? I think it's mostly money. Why don't we see game makers make something fresh and new every time?</quote> This is not always desirable ... I personally would love a Half-Life 2 or a Thief 3 ... |
|
Warren, can you explain WHY you would love a half-life2 or Thief3 as opposed to say ... something BRAND new from the same people who gave you those two titles? After reading through this thread, we see that all of us have criticized current games to some extent. It's in our nature... 'This game rocked.. but..' 'This game was totally original and fun... but...' 'Yeah but it borrowed from...' etc etc... I'm just looking for something new. Despite new ground that developers tread, it seems that they can't escape that addage that 'there are no original thoughts'... I don't believe it, but look at the last 5 years of gaming. I miss the 80's if only for the games, and Moving Pictures. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#46</b> "Happy cow" wrote... <QUOTE>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.</QUOTE> Actually, I seriously doubt that. Daikatana 2 was supposed to be an Unreal engine game developed by Human Head. It was canned ages ago. I don't know what Romero's next game will be, but I doubt it'll be Daikatana 2...frankly, I think he should just stop trying to mix genres and make a full console-style RPG along the lines of Chrono Trigger or Final Fantasy. -jason<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#107</b> "JeffD" wrote... <QUOTE><QUOTE>Hmmph. I consider quite a few things about Half-Life innovative: the incremental level-loading, weapon selection, graffiti/logo-spraying, use of NPCs such as the "Barneys", moving lips synchronized with speech, immersive audio. How about the Training area, for those of us too impatient to RTFM? How about weapons such as the hornet gun, gauss rifle and snarks? </QUOTE> Granted, those are some innovations.... </QUOTE> They weren't even innovations, they were incrementions (how I wished that word existed). All logical advancements in FPP features are called 'innovations'. Were that it were true, 'innovation' is overused like the now-worthless word 'genius'. If the definition of innovation includes such gems as 'lip sync', 'immersive audio' (those terms grate), and, my goodness, 'spraying graffit', then truly first person perspective games are a league away from innovation. No wonder Thief and SS stood out so vividly from the croud. Half Life is a solidly deligned gaming environment, interface, shell, a SDK, rock solid deathmatching. The single player game started with an incredibly impressive game-engined opening and, starts brilliantly, cools pace with the (excellently done) marines, then ... peters out, if only from it's own ealier high standards, it drifts, no new 'WOW' is introduced. System Shock 2 did not peter out, I urge all to play it. Soldier of Fortune starts solidly and really keeps pace - until the boring and mediocre final-Iraq episode which should have been cut from the main game and put in as a 'secret level', it's flaws would have been over looked then as it would be just an 'easter egg' to cosume after the mai game. the hiliarously pisspoor German episode suffered from beautiful, underused, castle artwork and descended into an uninvolving slug, and finally into 'Tinsel Fetish Armour Gay God Of The 24th Century' where Dorothy (the alias any self-repecting squaddie would give 'Sabre') tries to stop you wit the RED LASERS FROM QUAKE TWO FOR ****S SAKE! And no, I am never satisfied you prat out there (you know who you are). I am a Gladiator at my keyboard, when I have vanquished this opponent give me more and better. What the hell are you driveling about, ever being satisified. More slaves to the lions! Fuck, there's a game for you <b>GLADIATOR</b>. First person in TRUE arena combat, the roaring, deafening croud, the tension, pain, death, men pissing their leather, the brutality. What were these Romans's on? LET'S FIND OUT! Another game more like the elements of pit fighting in DK2. Spend money on Gladiators, training them, paid for their performance in the ring. Eventually, own your own Colusseum? Move cities? Imagine, dropping in your Gladiators into an arena, the lions, tigers, other Gladiators, and just watch them scrap it out it real life levels of violence. COLUSSEUM MANAGER! Who could read that and not think of Airplaine? =( =| =) D By the way, my System Shock 2 CD & case are singularly lacking in naming any developer other than Looking Glass Studios. There is an EA logo, and even the bar code starts LG. Same in the readmes. No mention of Irrational at all. As a snide asside, researching the above from Loonygames I found this beautiful quote advertising issue. I preserve Loonygames formatting. <a href="http://www.loonygames.com/content/1.11/">Issue 1.11: </a> <b>Hangin' Out with John Romero!</b><i> Stevie "Killcreek" Case interviews John Romero, the man behind <b>Doom</b>, <b>Quake</b> and the upcoming <b>Daikatana</b>!"</i> Goody *claps hands* and now it's here. SOF got vehicle damage wrong, in SOF you shoot a truck, you hit diamond-coated titanium. An M16 used on a yellow Ferrari at point blank range would leave a dizzying pepering of holes and leakly contents. Have to respect those HV 5.56 rounds especially when they're comming at you 15 to the second, if the aim's right that's a <b>lot</b> body tissue trauma. Really, in all seriousness, I'd hate for JR to be shot in Dallas but it does have a certain chilling ring, no? Dear old Larry (how British families loved to boo and hiss him all those years ago) made it famous. And wasn't there some other fake JR claiming a fake JR death? Remember that planfile quip by Profiend (artist Ken Scott, then at ION) 'Who Shot JR?'. Was Ken taunting us back then??? Dallas is one of television's best known products, tragic as it seems: an experienced shared by vast amounts of the world. So whoever mimicked in real life one of Dallas's most famous moments... worldwide fame. Crimminal immortality. Oh Jesus! I hope I haven't started anyone off on the famegame. !!! John, listen mate, it can't hurt to keep an eye on strangers for a while, even if you are being blamed with conning Edios out of 25m they could have spent better elsewhere. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Snappy <quote>Warren, can you explain WHY you would love a half-life2 or Thief3 as opposed to say ... something BRAND new from the same people who gave you those two titles? </quote> Because I really liked how those games played and I'm not quite ready to abandon that and move on to something else. Change isn't always necessary. Sometimes it's good to stop and smell the roses ... Sure, I want new and innovative stuff too, but I think there's room for both. |
|
Now we're making veiled death threats against John Romero? I normally don't say this kind of thing, but maybe it's time you took a break or something and cleared your head. Yeah, it sucks that Looking Glass is gone, but death threats? Jesus... |
|
Heh. Flamey, that Gladiator game you want sounds like one of the Pokemon games. =)<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
|