 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In 2005 Remedy Entertainment announced that they were developing a new
revolutionary game named Alan Wake.
5 years have I been waiting for this game to be finished.
Then Remedy Entertainment partnered with Microsoft, and the game was
subsequently published exclusively for the Xbox360. No Windows version.
F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/29/2010 7:17 AM, Warp wrote:
> In 2005 Remedy Entertainment announced that they were developing a new
> revolutionary game named Alan Wake.
>
> 5 years have I been waiting for this game to be finished.
>
> Then Remedy Entertainment partnered with Microsoft, and the game was
> subsequently published exclusively for the Xbox360. No Windows version.
>
> F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
>
Ugh, that sucks. :(
Bummer and a half..
Just as bad as say the sim game that was supposed to be this totally
revolutionary new thing, took forever for them to develop, and when they
released it, it was pitiful.
Maybe the 360 version will be as good as promised... But yeah, that sucks.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/29/10 05:17, Warp wrote:
> In 2005 Remedy Entertainment announced that they were developing a new
> revolutionary game named Alan Wake.
>
> 5 years have I been waiting for this game to be finished.
>
> Then Remedy Entertainment partnered with Microsoft, and the game was
> subsequently published exclusively for the Xbox360. No Windows version.
>
> F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
Sure hope you were not a Duke Nukem fan...
--
Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote:
> In 2005 Remedy Entertainment announced that they were developing a new
> revolutionary game named Alan Wake.
>
> 5 years have I been waiting for this game to be finished.
>
> Then Remedy Entertainment partnered with Microsoft, and the game was
> subsequently published exclusively for the Xbox360. No Windows version.
>
> F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
shame on you, Linux dude. :)
but don't feel bad: it's not revolutionary (same old Silent Hill style and
gameplay) and it's actually quite awful according to critics. That's very
Microsoftian, living on hype alone...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
Wouldn't be the first game I bought new hardware just so I could play it.
But yeah, that sucks. Maybe after the hype dies down some it'll come out on
Windows.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
>
> Wouldn't be the first game I bought new hardware just so I could play it.
>
> But yeah, that sucks. Maybe after the hype dies down some it'll come out on
> Windows.
when your hardware to play the "revolutionary" game of 2005 will be more than
enough to play much more technically demanding games. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
> Wouldn't be the first game I bought new hardware just so I could play it.
It would be quite an expensive game then... :P
> But yeah, that sucks. Maybe after the hype dies down some it'll come out on
> Windows.
Yeah, I overreacted a bit when I read yesterday about the game and why it
was published for Xbox 360 only. Had to vent a bit. OTOH, it's just a game.
There are plenty of others, and as you say, maybe they'll publish it for
Windows after all. (And OTOH, if they do, it will probably be Vista/7 only,
which would mean the game would result to be quite expensive after all...
Windows 7 costs almost as much as the cheapest Xbox360, so if I really wanted
to play it, I would have to decide which one gives more bang for the buck...)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> It would be quite an expensive game then... :P
There is that. :-) I did buy an N64 to play Goldeneye back in the day, but
I never actually bought an entire computer other than that just for a game.
New graphics cards, tho.
>> But yeah, that sucks. Maybe after the hype dies down some it'll come out on
>> Windows.
>
> Yeah, I overreacted a bit when I read yesterday about the game and why it
> was published for Xbox 360 only. Had to vent a bit.
Perfectly reasonable. I've had games I waited for, only to find they
wouldn't run, yes. And there are several very neat looking PS3 games I'd
like to try.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Perfectly reasonable. I've had games I waited for, only to find they
> wouldn't run, yes. And there are several very neat looking PS3 games I'd
> like to try.
The most bitter I am about is that I can't play Final Fantasy games
because they are all for PlayStation or PlayStation 2. I have never got
motivated enough to buy a PS2 just to play FF games...
It has always puzzle me why some companies make their games for one
console only even when they don't have any personal interest in promoting
that specific console. (Ok, I have to admit I don't know if Square/Enix
has some dealings with Sony. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they did.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> It has always puzzle me why some companies make their games for one
> console only even when they don't have any personal interest in promoting
> that specific console.
I would guess because the console manufacturer gives them a better
exclusivity deal. I.e., kickbacks.
At least if you get a PS3, it does Blu-Ray also. XBox went with HDDVD and
failed at that too. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> At least if you get a PS3, it does Blu-Ray also. XBox went with HDDVD and
> failed at that too. :-)
I thought that the HD-DVD drive of the Xbox 360 was a peripheral, sold
separately, and that the Xbox 360 itself simply has a regular DVD drive
(unlike the PS3, where the standard drive is a Blu-Ray one).
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Perfectly reasonable. I've had games I waited for, only to find they
>> wouldn't run, yes. And there are several very neat looking PS3 games I'd
>> like to try.
>
> The most bitter I am about is that I can't play Final Fantasy games
> because they are all for PlayStation or PlayStation 2. I have never got
> motivated enough to buy a PS2 just to play FF games...
>
> It has always puzzle me why some companies make their games for one
> console only even when they don't have any personal interest in promoting
> that specific console. (Ok, I have to admit I don't know if Square/Enix
> has some dealings with Sony. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they did.)
>
One reason would be the vast differences between each of the consoles of
the past three generations, and the audience for the game. PS1 and N64
were very different in what each console could handle. The PS2, Gamecube
and Xbox were a bit more similar, technology-wise. This generation,
well, you have Cell processors in one, PowerPC and ARM combo in another,
and a PowerPC Xenon in the third. Still, each platform has vastly
different SDK and libraries available; graphic calls alone would
probably require the whole engine to be rewritten.
They pick which console to release on based on what audience already
owns that console. The 360 sells racing and sports games rather well, if
I remember correctly, but also sells rather poorly in Japan. Since they
have to pick between the PS3 and the Wii (or PS2 and Gamecube for last
generation), I guess they go with the better graphics.
Whether S/E has any dealings with Sony, not a clue here. One could look
at the demo of FF7 for the N64, and compare it to the game's FMV that
would never have worked on the cartridge format. Or look at the SNES
CD-drive, that Sony was tasked with making.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sabrina Kilian <ski### [at] vtedu> wrote:
> Still, each platform has vastly
> different SDK and libraries available; graphic calls alone would
> probably require the whole engine to be rewritten.
But take into account that in a RPG the program code is probably something
like 10-20% of the entire amount of work put into the game. There's an
enormous amount of content that could be used as-is in all versions of
the game.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> The most bitter I am about is that I can't play Final Fantasy games
> because they are all for PlayStation or PlayStation 2. I have never got
> motivated enough to buy a PS2 just to play FF games...
There are far better reasons to have a PS2 than FF games, you could very much
just love God of War 1&2, Shadow of Colossus and Metal Gear Solid 2&3 among many
others. It's still on the market and dirt cheap! :)
The last FFs worth of the name were FFVII, FFIX and FFTactics on PS1. They
since went downhill through the bizarre/emo/japanesque route... if you want a
kick ass traditional JRPG, try Dragon Quest VIII.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> It's still on the market and dirt cheap! :)
Can you connect it to a CRT? If not, it won't be cheap.
> The last FFs worth of the name were FFVII
I have never understood the hype about that one. The graphics are just
horrible (compare to other similar games for the PS1, such as Chrono Cross
or FF IX) and the story is not all that compelling.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> It has always puzzle me why some companies make their games for one
> console only even when they don't have any personal interest in promoting
> that specific console. (Ok, I have to admit I don't know if Square/Enix
> has some dealings with Sony. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they did.)
Speculation suggests that the console manufacturers offer the SDKs at a
reduced price for developers who work exclusively for one company's
consoles.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > It has always puzzle me why some companies make their games for one
> > console only even when they don't have any personal interest in promoting
> > that specific console. (Ok, I have to admit I don't know if Square/Enix
> > has some dealings with Sony. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they did.)
> Speculation suggests that the console manufacturers offer the SDKs at a
> reduced price for developers who work exclusively for one company's
> consoles.
If a game is made for a second console, and it's a popular game (like eg.
Final Fantasy games usually are), the company will probably get quite a good
chunk of money from the sales (with big games it may even be in the millions
of dollars). But instead they prefer getting the SDK slightly cheaper?
Doesn't sound like an economically sound solution to me.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Sabrina Kilian <ski### [at] vtedu> wrote:
>> Still, each platform has vastly
>> different SDK and libraries available; graphic calls alone would
>> probably require the whole engine to be rewritten.
>
> But take into account that in a RPG the program code is probably something
> like 10-20% of the entire amount of work put into the game. There's an
> enormous amount of content that could be used as-is in all versions of
> the game.
>
Figure the increased cost of the SDK on the main formerly exclusive
console. Add in the cost of the SDK for the new console. Add in cost of
new programmers, and training them on developing for the new console;
the programers used to the old console are going to be busy since you
are going to want to release both at the same time, right? Decrease your
profit per game sold, as I would guess exclusives do get a bigger chunk
of that money. And some times the developers are just one small house
under the parent company, so the cost for putting one game on multiple
platforms may not gain them anything on other games being released at
the same time. S/E has, according to wiki, 10 development divisions with
each headed by a different person.
Sure, it may be just 10-20% of the work put into the game, but it is a
huge amount of money. It apparently was enough that it kept S/E from
releasing anything prior to FFXIII on more than one console.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> At least if you get a PS3, it does Blu-Ray also. XBox went with HDDVD and
>> failed at that too. :-)
>
> I thought that the HD-DVD drive of the Xbox 360 was a peripheral, sold
> separately, and that the Xbox 360 itself simply has a regular DVD drive
> (unlike the PS3, where the standard drive is a Blu-Ray one).
That's correct. But you can't buy an external BluRay drive for the xbox,
even now.
I mean, if you buy a PS3, you can avoid buying a bluray disk player, which
costs about half what a PS3 costs in the USA at least. And I understand the
PS3 player is a very nice implementation.
If you buy an XBox, it plays games, and media, but no blu-ray. It'll play HD
netflix stuff, I think, but I'm not sure how that works in Europe.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> and the audience for the game.
I saw a great flowchart about which console to buy:
Do you have friends?
No: Buy a PS3
Yes: Real friends, or internet friends?
Real friends: Buy a Wii
Internet friends: Buy an XBox.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I mean, if you buy a PS3, you can avoid buying a bluray disk player,
> which costs about half what a PS3 costs in the USA at least. And I
> understand the PS3 player is a very nice implementation.
Interestingly, my mother now owns a Sony BluRay player, and the menu
system on it looks suspicously similar to my sister's PS3...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > It's still on the market and dirt cheap! :)
>
> Can you connect it to a CRT? If not, it won't be cheap.
we're talking about PS2, right? It is standard definition system, best viewed
on CRT's indeed.
> > The last FFs worth of the name were FFVII
>
> I have never understood the hype about that one. The graphics are just
> horrible (compare to other similar games for the PS1, such as Chrono Cross
> or FF IX) and the story is not all that compelling.
It was completely mindblowing back in early 1997. Both in audio-visual wizardry
and in the creepy, cyberpunk setting. There was simply nothing like it in game
consoles before. I personally enjoyed FFVI more, but it was still terrific.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> > and the audience for the game.
>
> I saw a great flowchart about which console to buy:
>
> Do you have friends?
> No: Buy a PS3
> Yes: Real friends, or internet friends?
> Real friends: Buy a Wii
> Internet friends: Buy an XBox.
I've seen that before. Here's a more realistic one:
Do you enjoy videogames?
Yes: Buy a PS3 or XBox 360
don't care: Buy a Wii for those fun moments with your kids or with friends
after a barbecue and some beer...
Really, I've bought a Wii because I thought my daughter would enjoy, but she's
one of those flash-games-for-lil-girls kinda gamer that doesn't enjoy game
consoles games that much, besides some sessions of Wii Sports. And indeed, Wii
Sports is teh fun in barbecues, but that's about it. Mario Galaxy 2 and all the
Metroid games are worth it, but come on! can't live on Nintendo games alone...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 30 May 2010 13:31:33 -0400, Warp wrote:
> Doesn't sound like an economically sound solution to me.
Businesses often do things that are good for short term profit at the
expense of long term profit. Doesn't make sense, no, but there it is...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 30 May 2010 11:52:51 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> And I understand
> the PS3 player is a very nice implementation.
It is, I can confirm that. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> Doesn't make sense, no, but there it is...
It makes sense if your company isn't already profitable. A dollar today at
the expense of two dollars next month is a good deal if you only have a
week's worth of money left before you go broke.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 30 May 2010 15:16:32 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Doesn't make sense, no, but there it is...
>
> It makes sense if your company isn't already profitable. A dollar today
> at the expense of two dollars next month is a good deal if you only have
> a week's worth of money left before you go broke.
True, but I've also seen it several times in profitable businesses as
well, usually where middle management positions are short-lived, so
saving money is a way to move ahead. Profits tend to be longer term, so
the way for middle managers to look good is to cut expenses regardless of
the consequences to long-term profits; the logic often is that they won't
be there to see the long-term results, so it doesn't matter, but the
short term savings does (to their personal careers).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> be there to see the long-term results, so it doesn't matter, but the
> short term savings does (to their personal careers).
Yep. It also happens ever since mutual funds became common, so there's some
small few investors that own huge amounts of stock and they don't really
care for the long-term life of the company either, because they make money
trading, not holding. But they push for short-term profits to bump up the
price.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> In 2005 Remedy Entertainment announced that they were developing a new
> revolutionary game named Alan Wake.
>
> 5 years have I been waiting for this game to be finished.
Oh, I remember reading about the cloth simulation in this game ... yes here
it is:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4383/the_secrets_of_cloth_simulation_in_.php?print=1
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> And I understand
>> the PS3 player is a very nice implementation.
>
> It is, I can confirm that. :-)
And bluetooth remote controls rock!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Oh, I remember reading about the cloth simulation in this game ... yes
> here it is:
Oh, me too. I hadn't realized it was a well-anticipated game.
>
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4383/the_secrets_of_cloth_simulation_in_.php?print=1
Damn. I was hoping to learn to do cloth simulation in PHP.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 31 May 2010 09:42:56 +0200, scott wrote:
>>> And I understand
>>> the PS3 player is a very nice implementation.
>>
>> It is, I can confirm that. :-)
>
> And bluetooth remote controls rock!
Yes, I do agree with that as well. Now if I could find an inexpensive
remote that had both Bluetooth & IR, that would be excellent (I have 5
remotes right now for the various components in the AV system).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>>> And I understand
>>> the PS3 player is a very nice implementation.
>>
>> It is, I can confirm that. :-)
>
> And bluetooth remote controls rock!
Huh. I wonder if the XBox controller is bluetooth, or something specialized.
I never really wondered if they used something standard.
I will say, the IR port on the xbox leaves much to be desired, as does using
an xbox controller as a media player control.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> scott wrote:
> >
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4383/the_secrets_of_cloth_simulation_in_.php?print=1
>
> Damn. I was hoping to learn to do cloth simulation in PHP.
LOLZ
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Huh. I wonder if the XBox controller is bluetooth, or something
> specialized. I never really wondered if they used something standard.
Oh I don't know if the PS3 ones are standard bluetooth or not (I always
assumed they were, but come to think about it I'm not sure). My point
really was that compared to IR remotes you don't have to point them at the
TV, they just seem a lot more responsive. Also the photo viewer on the PS3
is cool, using the two analogue thumbsticks to zoom/pan.
A few things that annoy me about the PS3 GUI (or hopefully I'm just dumb and
someone can tell me how to fix them):
1) Unless you prepare your memory stick/USB hard drive with certain folders,
you always have to go to the menu and choose "Show entire contents" rather
than just clicking on the drive icon. At least have the option to disable
this "feature" and show the whole drive straight away.
2) If you pause for more than a second or two while looking at the contents
of a folder (eg you are choosing a song to play or a video to watch) then
all the files apart from the one currently selected fade away to invisible!
I think this behaviour was introduced with some update, because I'm sure it
didn't always to do that.
3) I want to search for the next song to play *without* stopping the
currently playing one! How do I do that?
> I will say, the IR port on the xbox leaves much to be desired, as does
> using an xbox controller as a media player control.
Someone gave me the PS3 bluray remote control thingy for a birthday, but I
hardly used it because the gamepad works completely fine (and I know which
buttons do what). Also the gamepad I can charge by just plugging it into
the USB of the PS3, the bluray remote needs me to get out my real battery
charger every so often.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:17:24 +0100, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did
spake thusly:
> In 2005 Remedy Entertainment announced that they were developing a new
> revolutionary game named Alan Wake.
>
> 5 years have I been waiting for this game to be finished.
>
> Then Remedy Entertainment partnered with Microsoft, and the game was
> subsequently published exclusively for the Xbox360. No Windows version.
>
> F************CK you Microsoft. F*CK YOU!
On the other hand a new revolutionary game conceived in 2005 might not be
considered great shakes now. From reviews some are disappointed they
dropped the sandbox aspect for a
linear fixed storyline approach. Reading those it seems to be an updated
remastered version of Silent Hill 2.
Either way I don't think you're missing out on much.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook v2 <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> From reviews some are disappointed they dropped the sandbox aspect for a
> linear fixed storyline approach.
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was my first modern "sandbox-style" game
I played, and it was a magnificent experience.
Unfortunately after playing with it for a month or so, I got actually
immunized against the marvels of an open and realistic world, and afterwards
any sandbox-style game has been outright boring. Thus it would be such a
problem for me.
(I go to more detail here: http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/sandbox_games.html )
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was my first modern "sandbox-style" game
> I played, and it was a magnificent experience.
>
> Unfortunately after playing with it for a month or so, I got actually
> immunized against the marvels of an open and realistic world, and afterwards
> any sandbox-style game has been outright boring. Thus it would be such a
> problem for me.
>
> (I go to more detail here: http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/sandbox_games.html )
From what I've seen, some people use "it's a sandbox game" as an excuse
for not developing any actual, you know, gameplay. You can just do
whatever you want... but there's no particular point to it.
Then again, designing a game that's actually fun to play is surprisingly
hard...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> (I go to more detail here: http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/sandbox_games.html )
I find it very amusing you have an entire subdirectory named "Grrrr". I
might need to steal that idea some time.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
that the code does what you think it does, even if
it doesn't do what you wanted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was my first modern "sandbox-style" game
> I played, and it was a magnificent experience.
Actually, I'd say that Thief and Myst/Riven were both sandbox-style games.
Thief had good puzzles and combat and such, Myst and Riven had good graphics
(altho obviously limited to stills). Both were quite excellent and far from
boring.
> This isn't a problem if the game gives you clear quests which you can
complete.
I think both Thief and Myst provided these without being pushy about it.
> It's because they give you everything
I think that's a lovely, deep insight. I can totally see that.
Myst was rather sandboxy, but the whole point of the game was to unlock
additional parts of the sandbox, finding keys to get into the next place.
(Of course, it eventually got rather silly, as every combination lock had to
have the combination written down somewhere fairly obvious, etc.) Thief
would occasionally give you additional goals, or would make you
find/fight/sneak past things to get to the next part, etc.
Hmmmm... A very interesting thought indeed.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
that the code does what you think it does, even if
it doesn't do what you wanted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was my first modern "sandbox-style" game
> > I played, and it was a magnificent experience.
> Actually, I'd say that Thief and Myst/Riven were both sandbox-style games.
Not in the sense that "a sandbox game" is usually used. What is usually
meant with it is that the whole outworld (which usually should be very big)
is completely open to be explored, so you can go anywhere you want and do
whatever you want. There are no levels which are played one after another,
like in more traditional games.
Thief consists of levels, and the gameplay is pretty linear from level
to level. In Myst/Riven you are not completely free to go wherever you like,
but you are limited to predefined narrow paths (mainly due to technical
limitations).
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Not in the sense that "a sandbox game" is usually used. What is usually
> meant with it is that the whole outworld (which usually should be very big)
> is completely open to be explored, so you can go anywhere you want and do
> whatever you want. There are no levels which are played one after another,
> like in more traditional games.
Fair enough. Certainly Myst and Riven fit that mold. The later ones had
more of an interactive story, so you have to (for example) solve some
puzzles, then someone else comes along and does something, and then you have
to go solve other puzzles.
> Thief consists of levels, and the gameplay is pretty linear from level
> to level.
OK. But within each level, you could pretty do anything and everything you
wanted, even to the point of managing to get places you weren't supposed to
go by using the environment. Sure, inter-level it's linear.
> In Myst/Riven you are not completely free to go wherever you like,
> but you are limited to predefined narrow paths (mainly due to technical
> limitations).
The paths really go most everywhere. Other than being unable to swim, I
can't think of too many places you couldn't get to for reasons not obvious
in the level design. Indeed, a good amount of the fun of Riven was figuring
out how to get to places you could see and knew you needed to be there, but
you couldn't figure out where the entrance was.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
that the code does what you think it does, even if
it doesn't do what you wanted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Myst and Riven had good
> graphics (altho obviously limited to stills).
Following those: Myst III and Myst IV use 360° stills (so you can rotate the
view freely), with a lot of live video embedded (way more real video of
actors with chroma key than in Riven).
Myst V is the first in the series to use real-time 3D graphics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Myst and Riven had good
>> graphics (altho obviously limited to stills).
>
> Following those: Myst III and Myst IV use 360° stills (so you can
rotate the
> view freely), with a lot of live video embedded (way more real video of
> actors with chroma key than in Riven).
>
> Myst V is the first in the series to use real-time 3D graphics.
There's also "RealMyst", which is Myst #1 redone with a 3D FPS engine. Lo
oks
like crap, relatively speaking, because the care put into the original
textures wasn't there in the engine.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
that the code does what you think it does, even if
it doesn't do what you wanted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 19:19:15 +0100, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did
spake thusly:
> Phil Cook v2 <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>> From reviews some are disappointed they dropped the sandbox aspect for a
>> linear fixed storyline approach.
>
> The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was my first modern "sandbox-style" game
> I played, and it was a magnificent experience.
>
> Unfortunately after playing with it for a month or so, I got actually
> immunized against the marvels of an open and realistic world, and
> afterwards
> any sandbox-style game has been outright boring. Thus it would be such a
> problem for me.
>
> (I go to more detail here:
> http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/sandbox_games.html )
To my mind it's not that the sandbox gives you everything it's that your
actions seem to be inconsequential to the story or the world. They are, in
theory, open Final Fantasy games. "Oh no a giant meteor is about to hit
our planet and only you can save us by defeating the dark wizard who pulls
it closer, but first I'm having difficulty finding my sheep can you help?"
there's a level of disconnect there if you just plough through the story
you're either woefully underpowered or have a sense of unease that you've
missed out on everything the world can offer. Try to take advantage of the
'world' and as you say ennui sets in.
Okay I harp on about InFamous but it works. It's a small open world you
can just run around, but the side-quests matter; fix the satellite uplinks
and more people can contact you with jobs, sort out this problem and the
enemies won't venture into that area in such high numbers meaning you
don't have to run through then or stop to slug it out each time. It has an
effect so much so that one of the side-missions I tend to leave to last is
getting the El-Trains running; with them defunct you can use the railway
as a quick transit system, with them running you have to watch out you
don't get splattered by a train, on the plus side the trains move faster
if you can hitch a ride and they can also splat enemies on the tracks too.
All the side-missions connect to the main story and both affect the world
around you.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook v2 wrote:
> To my mind it's not that the sandbox gives you everything it's that your
> actions seem to be inconsequential to the story or the world.
In Black&White, you play a local God trying to keep your followers happy.
It's also not particularly interesting. The hype sounded great, but it was
like "Nice engine. Where's the game?"
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
that the code does what you think it does, even if
it doesn't do what you wanted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> In Black&White, you play a local God trying to keep your followers
> happy. It's also not particularly interesting. The hype sounded great,
> but it was like "Nice engine. Where's the game?"
Maybe it's just me, but given a game where you can do absolutely
anything you want, my reaction is typically "so what are you supposed to
do?"
(I had this problem with Frontier Elite II, which is supposedly the best
computer game ever written...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yotzse reviewed it.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1756-Alan-Wake
I haven't watched it yet, but there's almost undoubtably spoilers. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
that the code does what you think it does, even if
it doesn't do what you wanted.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Unfortunately after playing with it for a month or so, I got actually
> immunized against the marvels of an open and realistic world, and
> afterwards
> any sandbox-style game has been outright boring. Thus it would be such a
> problem for me.
>
> (I go to more detail here:
> http://warp.povusers.org/grrr/sandbox_games.html )
I liked the way GTA does it, whereby you only get access to a limited area
of the complete world initially, and are forced to get to some point in the
story before other parts of the world become accessible (of course you can
see the other areas on the map, which makes you want to get to them). GTA
is also very good how it has several separate storylines throughout the
missions, and then some come together towards the end of the game whilst
others remain separate. Of course to make this work you cannot truly do any
mission in any order, sometimes you get a "Complete X and come back here"
message, but IME it wasn't very often. Certainly GTA San Andreas was one of
the best games I've ever played.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Yotzse reviewed it.
>
> I haven't watched it yet, but there's almost undoubtably spoilers. :-)
Gotta love ZP! Sometimes I delude myself into thinking that I could do
stuff like this. After all, it's just a guy talking really fast, right?
Well, um... no. No I cannot do this. Sadly.
From this review, I gather that it isn't very good.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
