Prey..... worth 5 bucks?

Angel Dust on 24/6/2010 at 02:37

Quote Posted by lost_soul

I really am quite surprised this game doesn't have a larger following. It was in development for 10+ years, and I remember reading about it having "awesome 16-bit textures!" lol.

The version of Prey that was eventually released was not the same one that 3D Realms started. Human Head Studios started from scratch and pretty much only took the concept of the Native American protagonist, portals and an alien invasion.

Quote:

Another game I am interested in is Quake 4. I heard it's multiplayer isn't popular either though.

I would rate Prey and Quake 4 about equal. They are both highly polished, straight-up shooters with Prey having the more memorable high-points/gimmicks and Quake 4 having the more consistent campaign overall. Story-wise neither are anything to get too excited about but both are better than the usual FPS fare in that regard. Prey's narrative gets embarrassingly melodramatic at times but has a stronger ending than Quake 4's, which is limp even by Raven's usual anti-climatic standards, which left me with an overall more favourable impression of the narrative.
They both have terrible, totally unnecessary vehicle sections but the thing that really holds both back is the solid but unspectacular gun-play. There is no real gore, rag-dolling, environmental damage etc here, so while the shooting is never really boring it's never particularly exciting either. Still both are absolutely worth $5 because sometimes B-grade entertainment with AAA production values just hits the spot.

CCCToad on 24/6/2010 at 03:02

Solid, but unspectacular. It is a fairly enjoyable FPS. In my case, I rented it from a mail service, and I feel it was worth the time. Even back then, though, multiplayer was dead. Its a decently well put together shooter with some gimmicks that affect gameplay enough to make it different in some ways. Above poster is correct, however: its basically a quake style and quality shooter.

Koki on 24/6/2010 at 05:01

I guess, though it's mostly as a techdemo - walking on walls, portals, gravity puzzles.

nicked on 24/6/2010 at 05:51

I had fun with Prey. The concepts and art design make it worth playing at the very least, but yeah it gets a bit tedious towards the end, and that end comes pretty quickly. I got it for £1.50 though so I can't complain. :cool:

Quake 4 is a fantastic game - it's equal parts Doom 3, Halo and Half-Life 2. Took the awesome idea of evil human-farming cyborg aliens from Quake 2 and updated the gameplay to modern standards. Plus it has some pretty shocking moments in the body horror department. Anyone else curious to see what David Cronenberg could do with a Quake movie?

Koki on 24/6/2010 at 07:56

Incidentally, Quake 4 failed at everything. Even the stroggification was disappointing. I haven't played such a boring FPS since... Requiem Avenging Angel I think.

Briareos H on 24/6/2010 at 09:06

in before koki bashing

Agreed, Quake 4 was the epitome of boring.
There's no accounting for taste, of course, but I really do like to question myself and others when it comes to what we enjoy in games. Everything in Q4 had been done before and done better, there was no tension and it didn't even rely on cheap but functional scares like Doom 3 did. Also, idTech4 doesn't really shine during daylight scenes with little contrast.

Re. Prey, the portal & fucked-up gravity shenanigans are still fresh, and the game is worth playing for that alone. It's not a very good FPS, but I enjoyed it.

nicked on 24/6/2010 at 12:27

Quote Posted by Briareos H

Everything in Q4 had been done before and done better, there was no tension and it didn't even rely on cheap but functional scares like Doom 3 did.

Yes it did what had been done before, but I still think it did it exceptionally well. It wasn't trying to be a tense, horror game like Doom 3 - it was designed as a much more straight-forward action experience. I think a lot of the atmospheric horror really hinges on how much you find the idea of "stroggification" horrifying. If you don't buy into the horror of being painfully turned into an unwilling cyborg monster then the game will seem pretty flat I guess.

WingedKagouti on 24/6/2010 at 12:40

Quote Posted by nicked

The idea could have been executed in a way that would have made it horrifying, but they never try to actually touch upon the change (after it's over) other than a few brief quips among all the shooting. It just turns into something unimportant happening in the background, instead of being a major change in how the game plays.

Sulphur on 24/6/2010 at 15:37

I know some people enjoyed Q4 for being a straight-up shooter (hi, dethy! :D) but I found it phenomenally boring and, to use nicked's word, flat. As WingedKagouti says, the stroggification played an incredibly minor role in the game - right after that sequence, it just ended up going through the motions again like nothing much had ever happened.

ZymeAddict on 24/6/2010 at 19:31

Yes. Incidentally, that's exactly how much I paid for it when I bought it off of Steam a while back.

It's too short, and there are some definite eye-rolling moments, but I thought it had some of the more imaginative and memorable levels and situations I've encountered in a game.

As for Quake 4, I can understand why people would find it "boring" and "uninspired" (there certainly was nothing special about the gameplay or story), but I couldn't help really liking the game despite it all. Maybe it was the setting and the sense of scale which I got from the levels (even with the admittedly terrible sky-box textures).