Shadow on 26/11/2003 at 01:24
As long as I don't hear any DX2 X-Box fanboys.
"...those dudes in black suits in level 34 of VersaLift (note the misspelling) are really hard, how do you beat them...?"
"Oh you need to get the Zakuu crystal from the Laboratories in the Shadow Dynasty of Zakinn and then insert it in the Powerizer950"*
*Note: Any and all similarities to any real stupid X-Box games is purely coincidential
Tej on 26/11/2003 at 07:58
Quote:
Originally posted by Uncia OY! Don't be pulling no Nedan on us now. Large quotage baaaaaad. ;)
Sorry, you wrote a lot of stuff, so there was much to quote ;)
Quote:
Originally posted by Uncia So basically, you only used one weapon that actually had secondary ammo, and even there you only used one type of ammo. How does losing ammo types hurt your gameplay, pray? :)
Well, yeah, that was my primary set of weapons. Of course, I'd also switch to ordinary darts, and with an assault gun I'd also use two different bullets, depending on a situation. But if you want your guns to be more versatile, having to carry around more guns in a limited space might hurt your gameplay. I suppose, though, some people will like having an instant choice for the secondary fire, as they don't have to crawl behind a pillar to unload the weapon and stuff it with something else.
Exodus_dk on 28/11/2003 at 02:15
Quite impressive - they're up to 4259 signatures now...
I'm wondering how many have faked or double signed!
ESpark on 28/11/2003 at 02:36
Quote:
Quite impressive - they're up to 4259 signatures now...
I'm wondering how many have faked or double signed!
3 to 3.5k of em.
Blackjack on 28/11/2003 at 09:24
Quote:
Originally posted by Uncia I'm not happy with all the changes, but I for one prefer a poor design choice over no change at all, so fuck it, at least it's not the first game with a prettier engine [which is what I was worrying about].
Hmm ... you'd prefer them to balls up a classic than create a slightly improved one? I never thought I'd say this, but right now, given a market with all too few intelligent games, I would take a straight sequel with prettier graphics over this baloney. They could have done all their funky stuff (wherever it is) and kept the 'fat' (as they're calling it). The entire notion of streamlining could have been tick-boxes in the options menu:
- Remove useful and immersive leaning
- Enable annoyingly intrusive HUD
- Remove character, health, and skills immersion
- Remove ammo-related gameplay
- Enable mindless constant use of same weapon
- Enable accellerated loss of all ammo
- Enable remedial settings for all ATMs, lockpicks and hacking
- Enable stupid AI (default)
- Enable laughable mo-cap (default)
- Enable perpetual memory failure
- Enable lowest-common-denominator standards
- Remove quality control
- Enable self-indulgent attempt at new game design awards
- Remove multiple award-winning formula
- Enable crap performance and basic design faults
- Remove passionate fanbase
OK, so I got carried away, but seriously,
all of the streamlining should have been, and could have been, optional.
Uncia on 28/11/2003 at 14:35
Quote:
Originally posted by Blackjack Hmm ... you'd prefer them to balls up a classic than create a slightly improved one?
Not sure how to break this to you, but "classics" cannot be "slightly improved". Something is classic because it was different and ballsy and it worked; taking the same concept and doing it all over again isn't classic, it's generic [Thief 1 was classic, Thief 2 much less so. Improved overall, but not nearly the breakthrough the first game was]. SS2 was completely different from SS1 in everything but storytelling and universe; and guess what, it worked pretty fucking well. THAT is why it's a classic, because it was trying to be different and was damn good about it.
PS- how come all the things that were removed from DE1 are suddenly " immersive" and everything that was changed is "annoying"? Immersive and useful leaning? And the AI is /worse/ now? WTF mate.
Blackjack on 28/11/2003 at 15:13
Quote:
Originally posted by Uncia Not sure how to break this to you, but "classics" cannot be "slightly improved". Something is classic because it was different and ballsy and it worked; taking the same concept and doing it all over again isn't classic, it's generic [Thief 1 was classic, Thief 2 much less so. Improved overall, but not nearly the breakthrough the first game was].
My point was that, right now, I'd prefer an improvement on a classic than a failed attempt. Yes, I realise that if every game dev was like that the whole industry would be crap, and DX wouldn't have happened in the first place. However, there are too few games like DX out there. Why not leave the franchise in an evolutionary (and presumably profitable) state whilst attempting revolutionary things with a completely new title? And yes, I know SS2 wouldn't have happened that way either. I was just saying I'd gladly take the boring DX2 mission pack right now, if that's all the same to you. No, I didn't think I'd be saying that, either.
Quote:
PS- how come all the things that were removed from DE1 are suddenly " immersive" and everything that was changed is "annoying"?
Don't ask me how they did it 'mate', ask Harvey and Warren.
Quote:
Immersive and useful leaning?
Yes, though I'd hoped they'd improve it, not remove it.
Quote:
And the AI is /worse/ now? WTF mate.
Hence the 'default' in my options list, huh?
Edit: It probably would have made more business sense, too. I do respect ISA for taking the risk, but personally I'd sooner be awaiting a plain Jane version of DX:IW on import, which I'm not. Sad but true.
ataricom on 4/12/2003 at 04:24
Man, how did you get so many sigs? Who did you get ahold of? Eidos?:wot:
Javert4186 on 4/12/2003 at 20:59
I think Blackjack's idea about making the "dumb down" otions user preferences is the most brilliant thing I've heard in a long time. If you want a console-esque game - have at it. If you like to be challenged, flip on the complexities. Shit man, even the Atari 2600 had the "difficulty" toggle.
I am completely serious though, one could absolutely build that stuff in to a game if they were a little bit clever with their logic and programming. Let's hope someone at EIDOS reads this before DX3 or Thief 3
"And if evil be the fruit of genius, there aren't many demons around" - Adam Ant
Aegeri on 5/12/2003 at 02:44
Quote:
Originally posted by JonahFalcon OH! So you've seen a real mechanical nanite? They're not talking about a biological organism -- and by the way, nice try, but nanites refer to nanometer machines.
Which of course, describes things like a flagella, ATP synthetase and many other kinds of biological structure. In fact, most 'nanite' or 'nanotech' work in fact USES proteins as their 'machines' to begin with. Any of these things on their own are not biological organisms, but structural elements that make up a biological organism.
As for the petition though, I don't see the point in signing it. I think that they have learnt their lesson really from this game, and tbh from what I've played it isn't really that bad. You'd get the impression that it is some sort of train wreck or something.
