Func_Msgboard: FPS Battle 2004/5: Q4 Vs FEAR Vs D3 Vs HL2 Vs Far Cry ?

News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Register | Log in

|  | FPS Battle 2004/5: Q4 Vs FEAR Vs D3 Vs HL2 Vs Far Cry ?

Posted by Shambler [82.38.192.54] on 2005/11/05 04:29:58

Okay, so the last two years have seen some pretty phat current generation FPS games released. Most of the big names and a couple of smaller ones have dropped something impressive on us gamers.
The above 5 I reckon are the biggest contenders, and all have similar aspects: Impressive technology, story-driven, sci-fi or near future, some horror elements, some military-esque gameplay, often some vehicles and other interaction.
So what do people think - can we vote on one particular winner? Are they showing a general raising of the bar in general? Is there a wide spectrum of quality there or just a general good range of sci-fi FPSes to feast on?
Votes please...

Why?
#1 posted by megaman [84.63.13.220] on 2005/11/05 04:58:56
is this really necessary?
Which Is Better...
#2 posted by Mike Woodham [86.139.191.23] on 2005/11/05 05:37:11
...chalk or cheese. Mmmm... now let me think?
Indeed
#3 posted by Speedhome [84.204.123.232] on 2005/11/05 06:04:27
everyone can like whatever game, who cares what's more popular (it's Sims2! anyway)
I Vote For...
#4 posted by therealthan [210.142.230.148] on 2005/11/05 06:37:14
CHEESE!
HL2 and Far Cry were excellent. Doom 3 was decent enough I suppose. Haven't played FEAR or Q4 yet.
None of the three games I have played really REALLY pushed boundaries, though the each introduces one or two nice features. In HL2 it was the gravity gun, in Far Cry it was huge expansive environments and vehicles in a standard story based FPS, and in Doom 3 it was dynamic 'unified my ass why the fuck do the shadows cast by objects lit with the flashlight not look quite right?' lighting.
Q4 and FEAR don't look like they do anything new at all, but I haven't played them. I guess FEAR has that slow motion combat thing going on. That looks really shit. Uhm, they also have the whole Japanese horror film ripoff thing going on (seriously, just look at the fucking girl in it, then watch Ring if you haven't already). Hmm.
Ok Dudes
#5 posted by [80.42.194.110] on 2005/11/05 07:24:56
Far Cry - This was out 1st, and so it got all my gasps and spooging about the graphics, it does everything hl2, d3 etc can do plus more, in fact I would say it was the most graphicly stunning game out so far fps wise. Gameplay was fun with a mix of stealth and balls to the wall action. vehicles were fun but could ahve been implemented better. And I wanted to ride in a helicopter :)
Doom 3 - less graphical Oos and Arr's as FC stole them, but general spooge at the artwork and polish of the game. Gameplay was fun but I was expecting more. I didnt mind changing weapon to the torch all the time (omg controversial!) and it wasnt scarey, just very tense, closet monsters were cheap.
HL2 - Functional graphics engine put to very good use to create some stunning levels, best use of physics in any game so far, and best implementation of physics into an engine also, everything just feels so right. Brilliant gameplay too with evolving choices and new toys all the way (boat, car, squads, pods, turrets, gravgun, more...) Was annoyed that valve removed the more daring enemies and weapons (tentacle, alien weaponry, experimental weaponry etc)
FEAR - Just finished this a few days ago. Graphics are hard to describe, the levels are all quite dull and boring and VERY boxy, and yet the game still runs slower than D3, but when combat erupts and EVERYTHING gets blown up / shattered /set on fire / scorched it truly is a sight to behold, absolutely stunning. Remeber the dude with the shotgun in the hospital in the film hard boiled? When he shoots down the corridor and all hell erupts? :) This game has scenes like that all the way through, utterly fantastic. Also this game gets my coveted "holy shit the enemies are CLEVER" award. They are truly impressive and do everything you would expect and more. They blind fire over the top of desks, throw grenades everywhere to flush u out, hide behind the big armoured dudes, dive through windows, kick objects over for cover, everything = 0wn.
Q4 - Haven't played as theres no pissing demo yet. RAVEN WTF!
Errr
#6 posted by DaZ [80.42.194.110] on 2005/11/05 07:33:59
above post was me...
Why?
#7 posted by Shambler [82.38.192.54] on 2005/11/05 08:00:49
It's not necessary. Just a bit of fun, in the spirit of chatting about FPS games, eh.
I Vote Far Cry
#8 posted by Tronyn [24.66.94.144] on 2005/11/05 12:36:10
D3 was lame, Q4 probably more of the same, not really interested in FEAR, HL2 meh...
Far Cry represents an ACTUAL advancement of FPS. What an awesome game. Those monkey things in dark indoor environments were about as scary as D3 ever got to be for me too.
Now if they'd only release STALKER
From Those 4
#9 posted by necros [70.31.50.57] on 2005/11/05 13:12:52
i've only played 2. have yet to get a copy of fear or q4.
between farcry and d3 though, i'd have to go with d3. ffs, evil ugly demonic monsters? how can you go wrong? ;)
seriously though, it not that FC isn't good looking or isn't fun to play or whatever, but that that's just not the type of gameplay, theme and enemies i like.
also, mapping for FC is annoying because you don't build anything in the editor, just put together prefab meshes... I know that's supposed to be the way of the future etc etc, but it's not fun for me, and i don't like having to fire up a 3d app all the time just to make a new room.
yes the maps in d3 were boring, and lighting (or lack thereof) meant a lot of the times you couldn't really see the monster models, but once you get them in maps with proper lighting, they look totally awesome.
FC And Q4
#10 posted by jsHcK [69.198.128.221] on 2005/11/05 14:50:39
The combination of Far Cry's maps, objectives and AI offer a fresh and innovative singleplayer experience. Far Cry is a showcase of excellent design and new ideas.
Quake 4 crushes all competition in the multiplayer arena. Speed and simplicity make this the premiere title for serious DM players.
Well
#11 posted by Zwiffle [64.108.134.144] on 2005/11/05 15:56:01
Out of them all, I would say...
QUOTH IS THE BESTEST!!!!
Long live Kell/Necros... Kelcros...
Seriously
#12 posted by bambuz [213.169.24.20] on 2005/11/05 16:56:21
is q4 anywhere near qw in speed / brutality / skill reward?
No
#13 posted by shooters [84.204.120.141] on 2005/11/05 17:41:50
#12: q2>qw>q3>q4
untill they fix gay movement
HL2 sucks cause it has seriously boring combat
fear sucks cause its slow and looks ass
D3 sucks for cramped maps and rediculous dmg feedback
Area51 is so pathetic its a shame to call it a shooter
Pariah is really bad and retarded I couldnt play it
Q4 is ok except crap sound and mostly boring monsters
SW commando is the best action this year with the innovative squad combat gameplay
BIA is not bad too (addon sucks tho, avoid it)
Call of Duty 2 should be good too, if its atleast ad fun as the first one was.
what else I dont know
WoW is the best game hands down
Who Cares Which Game Is The Better ?
#14 posted by JPL [82.234.166.130] on 2005/11/06 00:44:55
Different people will give so many different reasons to find a game either good or bad, that the answer is not objective, so when you say a game is good/bad: it's only your personnal taste... though... :P... there are standards in FPS that needs to be there ingame to make it good... doh !
In anyway, in my "short" life, I only played Doom, Doom2, Ultimate Doom, Final Doom, Doom3, Q1, Q2, Q3, HL, HL2, and Medal Of Honor ("In Front Line", and "Rising sun")... and each time I found all these games enjoyable... they all have good and bad points, cause nothing can be perfect in all domains...
For example, and IMHO, Doom3 is the most immersive game ever due to its ambiance, when its gameplay is not very good compared to others FPS.. HL2 have a very impressive gameplay, and visually it was awesome, when it is not so immersive.. Medal Of honor "In Front Line" first level on the beach reminds me a lot the Spielberg film about Soldier Ryan (I don't know the english title of the movie ;P..) and it is very immersive there, when the rest of the game is very (too much) linear.. Q2 sucks (I,didn't like it at all...), etc.. etc..
I guess other people will disagree with me on many points...
Hmm.
#15 posted by Text_Fish [194.72.70.124] on 2005/11/06 06:23:55
Far Cry gets my vote. It's the only one in the list which actually felt 'new' when I played it. There are a few dull moments in terms of level design, but considering what they had to work with ['tree's on an island'] I think they did pretty damn well in that respect. All the weapons felt meaty and the enemy AI was genuinely intelligent. The last level was kind of rediculous though.
HL2 felt like 70% FPS and 30% driving, which irked me as it made the overall experience feel disjointed. The AI was absolutely shite. Sometimes enemies would literally just come out of a building one by one, taking turns to stand perfectly still and fire at you. Rubbish.
Q4 -- sheer brilliance in the FPS bits, but again let down by the vehicles which were pretty damn poor and tbh felt like 'economic' level design. I'd have prefered the simple teleport trick for covering large distances.
D3 was a great change of pace but had large areas of tedium. Still, probably one of the most fun end bosses I've played in some time. Very few people get bosses right.
Fear is pants. Level design, combat and graphics are all just bland and monotonous. Everybody harps on about the AI, but it only works on a small scale. Nothing like as impressive as Far Cry.
Than:
#16 posted by cyBeAr [80.217.112.208] on 2005/11/06 12:10:00
what you said about fear's horror elements sounded almost exactly like what one of the developers said in an interview with both general jap-horror influences and the ring as main inspiration.
Hmmmn.
#17 posted by pjw [66.188.121.83] on 2005/11/06 19:40:22
I honestly can't remember a whole lot about Far Cry at this point--at least not enough to comment with any degree of detail. I remember I liked it, and remember being impressed by the tropical island environments. I also remember absolutely hating the end of it--I *think* because it was ridiculously hard?
I thought HL2 was excellent, in part because they were able to try a few new things and pull them off reasonably well (e.g. vehicles, gravity gun). It looks gorgeous as well. The thing that probably impresses me the most is the cohesive feel of the game as a whole. For me, there were no seriously wrong notes in HL2. I even enjoyed replaying it, and I had no real desire to replay (for instance) Far Cry.
Q4...well...I'm obviously biased, but I think it kicks ass. If I would have been making the game all by myself (rather than just helping out) it probably would have lacked vehicles, and had water/liquids and bots. I'm looking forward to making more stuff for it...
D3 just didn't do it for me. I enjoyed the first few levels, but then got really put off by the combination of LOL-D3-is-dark and flashlight-switching and one monster closet after another. I finished it, but it kinda felt like a chore. I know a lot of people really enjoyed it, and I was surprised when I didn't, so maybe I just had sand in my vagina or something.
Fear I'm currently about 2/3 of the way through and I'm REALLY enjoying it. It's an elegent game. There's nothing that hasn't been seen before, and when you boil it down it's nothing more than "kill guys in boxes connected by other boxes", but I'll be damned if they didn't nail the fun factor--at least for me. There's nothing all that aesthetically amazing in the environments, and there are a few warts (sparklies and visual glitches, tons of floating items, and various illogical gameplay elements), but the level layouts are very well done, with lots of level-over-level, interesting tactical areas, and many instances of revisiting areas in cool ways (i.e. seeing a balcony you can't reach, and then finding yourself on it looking down 20 minutes later). Most FPS games are a multi-course meal with pros and cons to each dish, and a couple dishes that are guaranteed to make you throw up in your mouth a little, depending on your personal tastes. Fear is like a single simple serving of something, excellently prepared, without all the side dishes.
O.0
#18 posted by necros [70.31.50.57] on 2005/11/06 20:23:56
and had water/liquids
you gotta be kidding me. q4 doesn't have liquids either? what's with the d3 engine not having liquids ffs.
there's so much tomfoolery involved to get an 'approximation' of liquid into the d3 engine atm. simply suckage. :\
Well
#19 posted by VoreLord [203.51.233.36] on 2005/11/06 22:52:52
I have to pick Doom3 and Quake4, I did enjoy Halflife2, but when I tried to play it again, I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I have played Doom3 through 4 times thus far, (and ROE 3 times), Quake4 I'm on my 3rd run through. Far Cry, well I couldn't be bothered finishing it, probably never even got a quarter of the way through it, uninstalled it and through it in the bin. F.E.A.R, well I haven't played it, and probably won't.
I can't pick between Doom3 and Quake4, and I can hear the 'fan boi' cries, but I like the simple brutal gameplay of the Q's and D's, and I always get so much enjoyment out of them, and id's games always seem to give me what I want, and I'm happy with that. So yeah, for me Doom3 and Quake4 both Rock, I only wish there were more of a custom mapping/moding scene for Doom3
Bear
#20 posted by therealthan [210.142.230.156] on 2005/11/06 23:28:52
I realise that it IS inspired by Japanese horror, and did read the interview myself. However, the girl is pretty much a direct rip of Sadako from Ring. Maybe if they had just tried to capture the feel of Japanese horror, rather than just take the scary girl directly from the most famous Japanese horror film and use her in their game.
Also, from what I saw in the vids, the combination of slo-mo EXTREME action and plagiarised horror elements didn't gel together to well. Of course, since I haven't bothered to play it, I don't know if that is the case.
Liquids
#21 posted by bambuz [130.233.243.228] on 2005/11/07 07:21:38
let's face it, quake's handling of water is cartoony at best. And lava I won't even start mentioning. It would probably take a lot of gameplay tweaking to get those things work right.
Although yeah, stupid movies also have that "hero swims 500m under ice in full body armor with a minigun while fighting sharks".
Than
#22 posted by cyBeAr [80.217.112.208] on 2005/11/07 17:10:55
I didn't read any interview but saw one on tv actually... haven't played the game either but at least there's no trying to hide the influences although by the sound of it it's so evident that there would be no point in hiding it.
#23 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/08 01:04:12
Liquids are only cool for reflection/refraction
And For, You Know, Swimming In
#24 posted by BlackDog [220.235.152.131] on 2005/11/08 06:21:18
But hey, what possible use could that be to a level designer.
Well
#25 posted by necros [70.31.50.57] on 2005/11/08 22:13:51
they may have limited use to you, but i find it mildly irritating that iD didn't even have a working liquid system. i mean, you can't even properly swim, or have a breath meter. that's kind of sad for an engine that does everything else so well. hl2 and farcry both got nice water looks and movement physics. i dunno, i just feel d3 deserved to at least have it in there, even though the maps never use it.
I Concur
#26 posted by Tronyn [24.66.94.144] on 2005/11/09 00:42:40
that it is fairly prepostorous to not have LIQUIDS in your ENGINE
I'd even call that "pulling a stunt."
I mean wow, they are lacking something in Doom3 that was in Doom 1 - and I'm not talking about good monster design - yes, folks, its WATER, LAVA, AND SLIME!
I'd also add that I'm amazed that they didn't even add that for Q4.
Is it just me, or is every Doom3 engine game going to take place in a lame "futuristic-tech-alien-planet... setting? And if that's the case, then isn't that fucking stupid?
Maybe the Doom 3 engine does have potential, but though I'm no programmer I think id, in its efforts to keep ahead of everyone else, focused on too narrow a range of effects (bump mapping, real time lighting) and ended up actually *behind* everyone (ahem, FAR CRY), and yes that means engine too. Of course there's the issue of what's engine limitation and what's design choices, but it's a bit odd that the designers of Q4 and Prey seem to be making the same retarded "design choices" as id did with Doom3.
Even if they want to keep the same gameplay as they've always had, surely it doesn't interfere with their game to.. you know... be able to.. uhh... swim, you know, or maybe see more than 10 feet in any direction before you hit a wall, or be outside for more than 10 seconds, or knock tiny little tables over with say a rocket launcher...
Maybe one day, their outdoor areas could be more than just pretty hallways with sky instead of ceiling!!
No one's demanding that they add a gravity gun and make their game based on new gameplay gimmicks instead of tried and true Quakin' (they could even keep out vehicles if they want), but just that they make a game where you have more freedom of movement than in WOLFENSTEIN 3D (and in Doom3, aside from jumping, you really don't). Even the levels are mostly just horizontal hallways.
Oh wait, they did add a gravity gun didn't they. Gimmicks 1, physics, AI, liquids, outdoor areas, diversity 0.
Maybe I didn't need to word that so strongly, but whatever.
#27 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/09 00:57:58
How about you say "setting I personaly dont like" instead, huh?
And you obviously didnt play or even read about q4
#28 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/09 00:58:55
How about you say "setting I personaly dont like" instead, huh?
And you obviously didnt play or even read about q4
Tronyn
#29 posted by Jago [194.137.185.222] on 2005/11/09 01:05:34
If you want to see wide open outdoor areas on the Doom 3 engine, look no further than the upcoming Enemy Territory: Quake Wars game. It's being made by the same folks who did the original ET, so I personally have high hopes for that game.
Re:
#30 posted by Tronyn [24.66.94.144] on 2005/11/09 11:59:46
Speedy: Yeah I've read about Q4, lots of reviewers complaining that the vehicle sections are just like being on a railway with a gun (Quake2 had that secret subway level, remember - apparently Q4's vehicles are more similar to that than to Far Cry's vehicles).
Saying "I personally don't like D3/Q4" would be true, however, it would neglect my above points about how id really have limited the scope of their new games, so that they are even more limited than their older ones. Though I've always been an id fanboy/defender and usually love their art style, I am beginning to agree with people who have been saying all along that they are all engine and no game. Maybe their new game with new intellectual property (first time in about ten years too) will break this trend.
I am hoping they manage to do something with Enemy Territory QW, but the only screenshot I've seen of that just looks like Doom3 models (which are great, of course) on heightmaps. I'm skeptical, but maybe they'll prove me wrong.
Aww Come On
#31 posted by bambuz [213.169.2.200] on 2005/11/09 12:52:00
they have zombie making et:qw! I wonder if he already flew over. Nah, in december only he says.
I Forgot
#32 posted by DaZ [80.42.192.138] on 2005/11/09 15:49:23
Extra points to F.E.A.R for including special features on the dvd version of the game, much like on a film DVD, theres a huge "making of" feature that is pretty cool and an interresting "developer commentry" as you watch a movie of the game being played. It might not interest everyone, but I really wise more developers would do this... Valve have added it in their "lost coast" addon map it is very cool there too (and interactive :D ).
Gimme Stalker.
Eh, It's A Possibility
#33 posted by Bank [68.225.201.69] on 2005/11/09 17:57:32
(Kept as short as possible)
Far Cry: Probably my favourite of the bunch, a nice game with some good play.
Doom 3: Not a good game by itself, but it's engine spawned quite a few others. The expansion was quite good.
Half-Life 2: No.
Quake 4: Great graphics, good engine, terrible gameplay (for today's standards). While I dont give a rat's ass about today's standards, and think it's kickass, most folks think that it's just Quake 2 with better graphics and Borg. I'd have to agree.
F.E.A.R.: For all I can say, it's a decent game, but I'm too stubborn to buy anything made after 1997...
Tronyn
#34 posted by Blitz [24.218.85.216] on 2005/11/09 23:36:28
You hit it on the head really...
Carmack rolled the dice and tried to guess the industry would move towards real time, dynamic light, bump and specular on every texture, and in reality, we're just not at the point with graphics cards were we can have those things without serious sacrifices.
For example, the shadows in the D3 engine look absolutely fucking unrealistic and shitty. It's like they flipped an on/off switch for the range of shadows, ignoring every value between 1 and 0, and it looks terrible as a result.
Until coders and graphics card people can get together and figure out a way to do a real time lighting engine that actually looks good and doesn't kill your system when more than 5 monsters come on screen, they should shift their focus like Far Cry and HL2 did.
Far Cry said, "ok, we're going to do outdoor environments the likes of which have never been seen before in an FPS" and they executed that perfectly, while also keeping up with other technologies (bump mapping, specular, etc.)
Obviously, because of this, Far Cry does have some issues on indoor/structural rendering (e.g. sunlight shining through solid walls, etc.)
But, overall, the graphics risks that Far Cry took all made the game better, unique, and groundbreaking.
Half-Life 2 said "ok we're going to focus on doing a very solid, cinematic single player game that has a wide array of areas, and a solid physics implementation to really sell the immersion, so it's probably not realistic to mess with real time lighting, bump maps on everything, etc."
And Half-Life 2 was brilliant at doing that. It's not a nightmare to try and pull of a wide range of styles, as evidenced by the varied mods that are in the works.
People are going to look back at the D3 engine in 10 years and say "what the hell", for these reasons:
1) It's absolutely not suitable for anything other than indoor, starkly lit areas. We'll see what Splash Damage can do with it for ET:QW though.
2) Its total lack of support out of the box for simple things like lightmaps and water, which have been staples of pretty much every FPS for quite some time. Granted, they couldn't see scenarios where you'd come in contact with a lot of water on Mars, but if there were humans there, they need water for some things id!
3) Carmack's attempt to set the standard for good looking, realistic realtime lighting in games, which we realize now, is not currently a possibility.
It's really too bad John Romero didn't want to stick it out at id for the long haul, because Q3 and D3 probably could have been 10x better than they were. It's obvious how Carmack is a technical genius who needs equally talented designers to focus his expertise into a fun game, rather than letting him and the rest of the out-of-touch slopheads at id run amok.
No offense to the designers at id, but you need another Romero. You make fucking games, not masturbatory tech demos.
Half Life 2 and Far Cry are games that are fun to play.
(PS I can't comment on F.E.A.R because I haven't played it, but it looks like it could be cool)
(PPS Congratulations for making it through this post somehow. I hope I made sense, but if I didn't here is a candy bar for you to ease the pain. *gives you the candy*)
Eh.
#35 posted by Shambler [82.38.192.54] on 2005/11/10 02:44:21
(Quake2 had that secret subway level, remember - apparently Q4's vehicles are more similar to that than to Far Cry's vehicles).
You'd be lucky. Q2's train system at least allowed you free access on and off the train, normal gameplay, the opportunity for exploration, and in general fitted into the game.
Q4's vehicles are more like the train at the start of HL1, with weapons o_O
..
#36 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/10 03:01:29
Tronyn`s complaints are only valid in the case of doom3. That was 2 yers ago.
Dont be bitching on the game you didnt play, in case of q4. really.
D3 tech is hold back mostly by hardware. You cant have too many lights, or it will crawl on obsolete cards (like gf 3/4). That, and for convincing outdoors you really need sort of radiocity (even if faked) = lightmaps (which is very possible, but rather awkward to do in d3)
There is swim-able reflecting water mod for D3.
So its juts ID not giving a crap about including such thing in game (not that average joe reviewer noticed it, so its not much of a flaw)
Carmack's attempt to set the standard for good looking, realistic real-time lighting in games, which we realize now, is not currently a possibility.
Well, that’s the way of the pioneer. Quake was slow and looking worse (running at pathetic 320x200) than Duke Nukem (smooth at 1024x768 even) But it was real 3d with proper lighting, setting the standards for years.
Btw Far Cry indoors lighting is terrible mix of lightmaps and real-time, but 10x worse looking than source and 7.6x worse than d3 (well, I don't like how FC looks at all to the point I didnt even bother playing it, I just seen coworkers play it)
... what’s terrible about q4 gameplay?
its pretty much like COD, only better and prolly less scripted/linear and not as massive
(and everyone was raving about cod gameplay).
Hl2 is cool and innovative with its good use of physics for gameplay, but less of a shooter and thus less fun for my taste (not wanting to finish it even). Other games don't have to be like HL2.
Romero had a good chance to make a game of his dream... (let's not even mention its name!) So your suggestion that he could have radically improved ID` games just looks like a joke Blitz.
Dazz : Stalker is delayed till autumn 06... yeah D.N.F.A.L.K.E.R.
Q4 Transport Parts (minor Spoiler?)
#37 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/10 03:12:25
there are 2 sorts of Q4's vehicles:
1) you are locked on gun and the train/car moves on its own, you just shoot (cod style)
2) you are locked in tank (with horrible controll) or mech. You can drive around in whatever fashion and shoot stuff. The levels are like a long road or a canyon ...
Speedy
#38 posted by Jago [194.137.185.222] on 2005/11/10 04:16:57
ID needs a proper game designer whilst Romero's ION Storm needed proper management. ION had good gameplay ideas, developers who were worth more than their combined weight in gold but all the effort went flushed down the toilet because ION managers were completely unsuitable for the job.
Good Gameplay Ideas
#39 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/10 07:18:14
"cant leave without my buddy supafly!"
(who got mauled by frogs)
sorry, I dont buy it
other ION's games were good tho (DeuseX)
Speedy
#40 posted by Jago [85.76.178.187] on 2005/11/10 07:38:34
"cant leave without my buddy supafly!"
(who got mauled by frogs)
sorry, I dont buy it
That doesn't refute my point in any way. They had good gameplay ideas, but the execution was a mess.
Jago...
#41 posted by Shambler [82.38.192.54] on 2005/11/10 09:40:17
...I think is right about this. I've said it before, and I will say it again, if Romero had stayed at Id, and combined his design ideas and ambition with Id's engines and execution, the result would have been the best FPS game at the time.
DKT had variety, richness of content, and a bold design, but was marred by inconsistency, a weak engine, and a lot of roughness.
Q3A had a great engine, was smoothly put together, and had overall high design quality, but was marred by a shallow and limited game.
Combine the best bits of both, and...
Also, speeds, for someone who doesn't care what's popular, you are certainly joining in the spirit of the discussion :)
#42 posted by speeds [193.69.116.41] on 2005/11/10 15:04:40
dont u see those 2 are examples of bad game design - useless annoying sidekicks u cant continue without (and they easily die in fights ) and irratating small monsters . Whos to blame for DKT game design ? sham i love to discuss games qualities not popularity lists. Q3 rox btw. typing from phone. bleh
Ahh But...
#43 posted by Text_Fish [194.72.70.124] on 2005/11/10 17:42:53
...if it had been released on time it probably would have been the first shooter with anything you could really call a sidekick! Sure they were shite sidekicks, but the quality of a games AI is generally a result of the technology available at the time.
The small creatures were indeed shite, but shooters are still falling in to that trap today. HL2's Manhacks were quite infuriating.
Overall I think Romero is a great designer, but due to some very bad decisions from all of the Ion Storm execs [such as forking out millions on a glass penthouse with personal developer 'pods' and the like] Daikatana fell foul of delays. Had it been released when originally planned, I think people would have considered it a great title and we might all be mapping for it now. C'est la vie.
Romero
#44 posted by Bank [68.225.201.69] on 2005/11/10 18:29:48
Yeah, I agree, Romero is a fantastic designer, and I hold him as one of my heros. His only flaw is his inability to work in a team, of which in today's world, is required. It's dissapointing actually, Romero has all of these good ideas, but no company can stick around him long enough for them to be put out. But, who knows, maybe one day he will make us all his bitch.
How Can You Say Things Like That?
#45 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/11 03:04:17
Do you personaly know Romero or have been working with him
Well, Certainly One Could Make Broad Statements Of That Kind About
#46 posted by Tronyn [24.66.94.144] on 2005/11/11 04:14:54
Carmack, and it wouldn't require having worked alongside him. Presumably Bank is either a) John Romero ("what a great guy that Romero is!" lol), oorrrrrrrr he's basing his statements on knowledge of Romero through the gaming press, what's public about his career, and of course, his work in games.
DKT I think is a classic example of too much ambition. I think Carmack and Romero kind of balanced each other out. One wanted too much gameplay, the other too little.
Carmack
#47 posted by gone [213.170.89.98] on 2005/11/11 05:53:20
just wants rockets
Romero
#48 posted by Bank [68.225.201.69] on 2005/11/11 13:31:23
Yes, I've spoken with him on a few occasions. For more information on Romero's work ethic, check out Masters of Doom by Kushner.
Grumble
#49 posted by Xoltan [207.14.160.173] on 2005/11/12 20:05:34
id employees aside...
I didn't care for Far Cry. I might go find the disk and finish it some day, but it felt fairly weak. The expansive outdoors wasn't anything new to me - Novalogic has nearly a dozen games with that. Those don't have a decent visceral feel either.
I played through just the FEAR demo. I do appreciate the fire fights, but I really find the environments to be dull. And the, uh, horror too. You can get through the demo in ten minutes though, so hopefully there is more to the full package.
Q4 - I exclaimed to myself many times "What a well polished game" when looking around. Then I shot things. Again and again and again. No complaints there, I sorta recall a few predecessors that were kinda the same way, if not more so. It was too linear (all of these games are though) and I think the vehicles just really underscored that. If people complain about being on rails, then at least don't literally stick them on rails. Also, for some reason I didn't like the same monsters as well as I did in Q2 - I could tell all the different kinds, but they just didn't seem that differentiated for the most part. Gladiators were an exception - I love a cool monster. Where were the tanks?
I like D3. Darkness wasn't an issue once my machine was configured right, and I like the arsenal and menagerie quite a bit. There is just a great variety to the monsters you could run into. I suppose I appreciate a game that lets people make great maps for it - I enjoyed Once Upon a Time by ThomasC (I got that right?) for example more than most original D3 levels. User made maps from this scene are always pretty much the top of my PC gaming enjoyment, and of these recent games D3 is delivering a little bit.
HL2. Grr. Steam did a few bad things to me, but let's skip that. I don't think the physics did a damn thing for me. Here's a new phrase - Puzzle Physics: Physics in a simulation that only affect things in a little sandbox the designer deigned to give you. Ever get pissed at a guard in City 17 right at the beginning and build a trap for them so you could drop something heavy on his head? Every time I tried to be clever I found I was better off ignoring the facade the game threw up and just act like the Doom Guy - run fast, aim good. Hmm. I never once was annoyed by the physics in Doom. There's lots of stuff I could say about HL2, and by no means is it all negative - I was just responding to a few previous points.
Well.
#50 posted by Shambler [82.38.192.54] on 2005/11/13 08:17:52
So far, I reckon:
Far Cry > HL2 > Q4 = D3 > FEAR.
Far Cry was great. Really good use out of the engine for gameplay effect. Fresh and different feel to the game, plus impressive scenes and stuff, and good vehicle integration. Must have been good as I didn't get b0red fighting humans...
HL2 was good. Everything HL1 should have been, actually worth the hype. Technology used really effectively e.g. faces, water, general realism. Gameplay good, but not as interesting as FC - still more fighting humans in normal map styles.
Q4 and D3 I put together really, not very far behind HL2, because they have strong atmosphere and great graphics, good sci-fi settings and proper monsters (important, really). But at the end of they day they are more of one trick horses than HL2, and a bit less interesting overall. But still, Q4 has good fun gameplay and D3 has great scary atmosphere.
FEAR I haven't played, there are reasons from that, seems less inspiring with time.
Edit:
#51 posted by Shambler [82.38.192.54] on 2005/11/13 08:19:27
Would like to point out I did have the \save_game option in Far Cry, well it's a bugfix really, should have had it as a normal F6 quicksave really, WTF. Otherwise it might have been too boring later on to finish it.
Thoughts
#52 posted by . [70.225.15.55] on 2005/11/13 11:56:18
I wasn't sure what to say cause I haven't played Q4, and won't, or FEAR (might). But...
As for D3, HL2, FC -- they all had their moments but none of them are keepers for me. I predict Hitman 4 will be a keeper - although I'm aware that game isn't contending with any FPS on the horizon, surely...

Post A Reply:

Name: |
Title: |
Body: |

Website copyright © 2002-2013 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.