[Forge]

X-Vector, on 14 March 2014 - 12:44 AM, said:

These are all old and obscure games that only ring a bell for a handful of people.
Considering they are also all side-scollers I don't see any point in reviving these titles, unless the new 3D Realms is intent on gunning for a tiny niche market.

what wonderful insight and such vast encompassing wisdom

let me remind you of certain side-scroller predecessors: duke nukem (nukum) and duke nukem II

bonus: there's not twelve+ years of hype to live up to

[Damien_Azreal]

necroslut, on 14 March 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

I think both Damien and Jimmy were talking about 1997 Shadow Warrior. Though ('97) Shadow Warrior is probably one of the few games to ever improve on Duke 3D in any aspect.

No.
I was talking about the new Shadow Warrior from Flying Wild Hog.
I found the level design in it fine. Much better then the majority of other games out there, and without falling back to the "it has to be a maze to be good" idea. There's enough backtracking to make the levels feel open, without them feeling redundant.

Hard Reset felt more like Serious Sam to me. Shadow Warrior showed improvement in pretty much every area, level design, gameplay, combat... story and character.
And sorry, saying it's "like Serious Sam"... that's not a negative. It's a huge positive.
And seeing how Flying Wild Hog is made up of mostly former Painkiller developers, it's not surprising that the gameplay is similar in some ways.

But, I'll gladly take a linear game with some side areas over the CoD design. And I know some may see it as blasphemy, I don't want games to back to the red key, blue key, back and forth... back and forth level design. Those levels felt like what they were, boxed in areas that kept you going back and forth to find the keys and doors they went with. Most people hold that design up to such praise due in part to nostalgia.

[xMobilemux]

That's how annoying it is when they name the reboot exactly the same as the original, whoever came up with that idea needs to be shot in the head.

Like Serious Sam isn't really a positive in Shadow Warriors case, just like it wouldn't be in Dukes case, I don't want all the classic shooters to be rebooted into Serious Sam clones, although I would take that over the way Tomb Raider, DmC and Thief went, but going back to the keycard route is something that can work and be something new in this day and age, I like to think that whatever modern gamers consider to be dated can be unique in this day and age, hell pretty much anything that isn't dark, gritty and serious is unique, the SW reboot had something like key cards where you go find these blue, red and green vase things and destroy them with your sword, if that was put in well done maze like level design it could have been way better, finding those vase things didn't feel as rewarding as I wanted them to be, they just felt like a chore.

[Hank]

Damien_Azreal, on 14 March 2014 - 05:39 PM, said:

No.
I was talking about the new Shadow Warrior from Flying Wild Hog.
I found the level design in it fine. Much better then the majority of other games out there, and without falling back to the "it has to be a maze to be good" idea. There's enough backtracking to make the levels feel open, without them feeling redundant.

Hard Reset felt more like Serious Sam to me. Shadow Warrior showed improvement in pretty much every area, level design, gameplay, combat... story and character.
And sorry, saying it's "like Serious Sam"... that's not a negative. It's a huge positive.
And seeing how Flying Wild Hog is made up of mostly former Painkiller developers, it's not surprising that the gameplay is similar in some ways.

But, I'll gladly take a linear game with some side areas over the CoD design. And I know some may see it as blasphemy, I don't want games to back to the red key, blue key, back and forth... back and forth level design. Those levels felt like what they were, boxed in areas that kept you going back and forth to find the keys and doors they went with. Most people hold that design up to such praise due in part to nostalgia.

Perhaps. Playing those old games at expert/nighmare, and I think this was the intent of those game designs, you knew by then, how to get the keys, but now the enemies came back alive. I remember one guy in my office, he was so much into Doom, he literally jumped out of his chair trying to avoid another hit. This game had some magic, it's now nostalgic perhaps. I am no better bt.w. I still love my Quake II, I can draw the maps in my sleep. I liked the atmosphere, it got me away in a far away place.

As for new Shadow Warrior, it too has magic. You (well I) simply want to play it again. I like the levels, and the atmosphere.

[Damien_Azreal]

xMobilemux, on 14 March 2014 - 07:11 PM, said:

That's how annoying it is when they name the reboot exactly the same as the original, whoever came up with that idea needs to be shot in the head.

Like Serious Sam isn't really a positive in Shadow Warriors case, just like it wouldn't be in Dukes case, I don't want all the classic shooters to be rebooted into Serious Sam clones

And I'm not saying all shooters need to be Serious Sam.
I love Serious Sam and Painkiller, but they are not old school... they are twitch shooters. Hard Reset almost falls into this catagory, but it doesn't take the enemy encounters to the extreme that Sam and Painkiller did.
Shadow Warrior straddles a line. It takes elements of Painkiller and modern and older shooters and mixes them together.
It is, in a way, it's own style because it embraces so many different styles. And that's a good thing. It's not trying to recreate anything, nor is it blindly falling in line with other games.

And, I'm not against other games. I LOVE Singularity, Wolfenstein 2009, BioShock: Infinite... FarCry 3. They are all different from each other.
There are so many great shooters out there that are worth playing, it's not they don't exist... it's that they get overshadowed by crap like Call of Duty. Call of Juarez; Gunslinger was one of the funnest shooters I played in recent years, but it hardly got any attention last year.
I love Doom, Blood... Heretic/Hexen... and tons of other older shooters. But, I don't want new games to try and be them.

Quote

although I would take that over the way Tomb Raider, DmC and Thief went

As someone how has no nostalgic love for Tomb Raider, I really liked the new one. I tried several times, but really disliked the original Tomb Raider games. Bored the hell out of me. The new one, I enjoyed.
Same with Thief. I liked the first 2 Thief games, but didn't have the love that others seem to. Thief: Deadly Shadows I really loved, but won't deny it was flawed.
The new Thief, I've put over 20 hours in and I'm really having a lot of fun with it. Yes, it isn't the older Thief games. But, that's not a negative.

Quote

the SW reboot had something like key cards where you go find these blue, red and green vase things and destroy them with your sword, if that was put in well done maze like level design it could have been way better, finding those vase things didn't feel as rewarding as I wanted them to be, they just felt like a chore.

That's how I feel about finding the colored keycards. It's not rewarding... but a chore.

[Kathy]

Damien_Azreal, on 14 March 2014 - 08:48 PM, said:

As someone how has no nostalgic love for Tomb Raider, I really liked the new one. I tried several times, but really disliked the original Tomb Raider games. Bored the hell out of me. The new one, I enjoyed.

Because it's a shooter?

[xMobilemux]

Damien_Azreal, on 14 March 2014 - 08:48 PM, said:

And I'm not saying all shooters need to be Serious Sam.
I love Serious Sam and Painkiller, but they are not old school... they are twitch shooters. Hard Reset almost falls into this catagory, but it doesn't take the enemy encounters to the extreme that Sam and Painkiller did.
Shadow Warrior straddles a line. It takes elements of Painkiller and modern and older shooters and mixes them together.
It is, in a way, it's own style because it embraces so many different styles. And that's a good thing. It's not trying to recreate anything, nor is it blindly falling in line with other games.
And, I'm not against other games. I LOVE Singularity, Wolfenstein 2009, BioShock: Infinite... FarCry 3. They are all different from each other.
There are so many great shooters out there that are worth playing, it's not they don't exist... it's that they get overshadowed by crap like Call of Duty. Call of Juarez; Gunslinger was one of the funnest shooters I played in recent years, but it hardly got any attention last year.
I love Doom, Blood... Heretic/Hexen... and tons of other older shooters. But, I don't want new games to try and be them.

Shadow Warrior did very well, did a lot right, I still consider it the best reboot of all, but still there's a lot of room for progression and new ideas, I wanna see it get a lot better, what I'd like to see combat wise is for FWH to somehow implement the Blade Mode from Metal Gear Rising into the combat as well as the cut anything feature, Shadow Warrior 2 has a lot of potential, but I still feel like FWH will just pull a Serious Sam Second Encounter and just add a new story, few new weapons and some new enemies while copy and pasting everything else, SW2 should be a step up in everything, step up in swordplay, story, firearms, upgrade system and most importantly level design, FWH can do it.

I'm currently playing through Wolfenstein 2009 and enjoying it a lot, didn't like Far Cry 3, but loved Blood Dragon. I thought Bioshock Infinite was mediocre, but then again I never really cared for the story and I was focusing more on the gameplay, which wasn't that fun.

Quote

As someone how has no nostalgic love for Tomb Raider, I really liked the new one. I tried several times, but really disliked the original Tomb Raider games. Bored the hell out of me. The new one, I enjoyed.
Same with Thief. I liked the first 2 Thief games, but didn't have the love that others seem to. Thief: Deadly Shadows I really loved, but won't deny it was flawed.
The new Thief, I've put over 20 hours in and I'm really having a lot of fun with it. Yes, it isn't the older Thief games. But, that's not a negative.

It's all good that you enjoy them, but you can't deny that gameplay wise, those reboots are massive steps down for the franchises, all potential those franchises had at being good and original are now gone, they're just streamlined show and tells now.
For me the original Tomb Raiders were challenging, rewarding and fun, it was all about exploration and challenges, they were video games, trial and error until you get good, conquer the brutal games and feel like a badass when the credits roll, Legend, Anniversary and Underworld were just fine IMO but weren't as good, the reboot however is not Tomb Raider at all, no exploration, no challenges, no nothing, the game holds your hand the entire time and basically plays itself, like all modern games, hell the damn game is based on a survival setting yet doesn't even have any survival features while the original Tomb Raiders had limited med packs to find, how can anyone feel accomplished after playing something so easy like that? Same thing with DmC Devil May Cry and yeah I'll even guess the same thing for Thief, I heard that dash move alone was basically a win button.
I even have a strong feeling that the Doom reboot named "Doom" will be no different from them.

This is NOT what I want for a future Shadow Warrior sequel or future reboot of another franchise from my childhood, especially Duke Nukem, I want them to raise the bar, not lower it, games are never going to get better if they just keep going in the streamlined direction.

If 3D Realms is still taking feedback from this forum, then they better write that down.

[MrFlibble]

Guys, you could help bring the classic Apogee titles to GOG.com's catalogue by upvoting them on the GOG.com game wishlist:

Alien Carnage
Arctic Adventure
Arctic Adventure
Bio Menace
Boppin
Crystal Caves
Dark Ages
Death Rally
Halloween Harry
Jumpman Lives!
Kingdom of Kroz series
Major Stryker
Math Rescure
Monster Bash
Monuments of Mars
Mystic Towers
Paganitzu
Pharaoh's Tomb
Supernova
Word Rescue
Word Whiz
Wacky Wheels
Xenophage

Yeah I know most of them have negligible numbers of votes for now, but sure we can change that

[Damien_Azreal]

Kathy, on 15 March 2014 - 12:03 AM, said:

Because it's a shooter?

Because the character of Lara felt more human. And looks more human.
I could never get into the older games because her character put me off, something about how she was portrayed just... meh. That and she looked like some horny 13 year old's idea of what a "hot" woman should be.

The new one felt more human in her reactions. How she dealt with what has happening to her.

Quote

It's all good that you enjoy them, but you can't deny that gameplay wise, those reboots are massive steps down for the franchises, all potential those franchises had at being good and original are now gone, they're just streamlined show and tells now.
For me the original Tomb Raiders were challenging, rewarding and fun, it was all about exploration and challenges, they were video games, trial and error until you get good, conquer the brutal games and feel like a badass when the credits roll, Legend, Anniversary and Underworld were just fine IMO but weren't as good, the reboot however is not Tomb Raider at all, no exploration, no challenges, no nothing, the game holds your hand the entire time and basically plays itself, like all modern games, hell the damn game is based on a survival setting yet doesn't even have any survival features while the original Tomb Raiders had limited med packs to find, how can anyone feel accomplished after playing something so easy like that? Same thing with DmC Devil May Cry and yeah I'll even guess the same thing for Thief, I heard that dash move alone was basically a win button.

Sorry, but I can deny it.
I didn't like the original Tomb Raider games. From story, character to the gameplay which to me... felt clunky. The games were not engaging to me.

The new DmC I also liked. And I'm a huge DMC fan, 1 and 3 are some of my favorite games of all time. 2 is a steaming pile. 4 is good, but the lack of Dante in it definitely hurts it as Nero isn't that interesting.
The new one isn't DMC. It wasn't trying to be like the original series. And, the main reason people don't like it... is because the gameplay isn't incredibly hard just for the hell of it. The story is interesting, and it's incredibly well told.

Thief... well, people are going to assume all sorts of things simply because it "isn't like the originals". The "dash" move isn't a win button. If you do it next to an enemy to get away, they will hear it and began looking for you. On the easier difficulties yeah, it could make the game really easy. But, on the harder settings, dashing at the wrong time will completely screw you over.

[Hank]

MrFlibble, on 15 March 2014 - 04:02 AM, said:

Guys, you could help bring the classic Apogee titles to GOG.com's catalogue by upvoting them on the GOG.com game wishlist:

Wacky Wheels

Yeah I know most of them have negligible numbers of votes for now, but sure we can change that

OK - Wacky Wheels for my grandkids nah, for me

[xMobilemux]

Damien_Azreal, on 15 March 2014 - 05:14 AM, said:

Because the character of Lara felt more human. And looks more human.
I could never get into the older games because her character put me off, something about how she was portrayed just... meh. That and she looked like some horny 13 year old's idea of what a "hot" woman should be.

The new one felt more human in her reactions. How she dealt with what has happening to her.

That's the same reply every single person that likes the new Tomb Raider has used, I'm not bullshitting, no one else has said anything different, if you recall I even asked you back on the GBX forum to tell me why TR2013 was so good without mentioning anything story related and you couldn't.
Everyone focuses on the character and calls Tomb Raider a 10/10 without looking at the game itself.
The problem with new Lara and the mistake everyone makes with old Lara is, Classic Lara was basically a female Duke Nukem, she took on dinos, dragons, armies of mercs and even killed a god. Lara was a women who could handle herself against anything. The walking boobs reply was just the easy way out.
New Lara can't go 5 minutes without getting her ass handed to her and can't shut the hell up, her moaning and whining was some of the most annoying sounds I've ever heard in gaming, plus "oh my god I killed someone!" *2 minutes later* starts popping headshots with no emotional effect, A+ Character development right there!

Quote

Sorry, but I can deny it.
I didn't like the original Tomb Raider games. From story, character to the gameplay which to me... felt clunky. The games were not engaging to me.

You can deny it subjectively but not objectively, the new Tomb Raider has a shitload less gameplay features and less variety, it was all traded in for story and character development, the game is filled with every modern gameplay cliche in the book, cover shooting, linear set pieces, non existent survival features, useless XP crap, QTEs, scripted events, cutscenes, regen health, hand holding, tacked on multiplayer and the same mistake that Alien Colonial Marines made, generic human enemies.
The thing is, Tomb Raider 2013 was inspired by the games that were inspired by Classic Tomb Raider and that's a real problem, Tomb Raider 2013 threw all originality out the window and just became an Uncharted clone.
The original Tomb Raiders had exploration, puzzle solving, enemy variety, level design and even survival, you had to actually play the game, not let it play itself.

Quote

The new DmC I also liked. And I'm a huge DMC fan, 1 and 3 are some of my favorite games of all time. 2 is a steaming pile. 4 is good, but the lack of Dante in it definitely hurts it as Nero isn't that interesting.
The new one isn't DMC. It wasn't trying to be like the original series. And, the main reason people don't like it... is because the gameplay isn't incredibly hard just for the hell of it. The story is interesting, and it's incredibly well told.

The story is just a rip off of They Live, I'd rather watch the movie again, there's no originality in the writing, plus the dialog is TERRIBLE, "Me, a god, vs you, a piece of shit!", if DmC isn't trying to be like past titles then it shouldn't be named Devil May Cry, the Devil May Cry franchise is iconic for bringing the Hack n Slash genre to greatness, DMC was all about skill, the story was secondary, gameplay is the number 1 priority in Devil May Cry and DmC didn't deliver, that's why DMC is likely dead now and all those DMC fans went to Metal Gear Rising and Bayonetta, both of those games are what DmC should have been.

Quote

Thief... well, people are going to assume all sorts of things simply because it "isn't like the originals". The "dash" move isn't a win button. If you do it next to an enemy to get away, they will hear it and began looking for you. On the easier difficulties yeah, it could make the game really easy. But, on the harder settings, dashing at the wrong time will completely screw you over.

I can't really go into detail about the Thief games because I never played them, but I knew the reboot was going to suck for Thief fans, I called it back on the GBX forums, based on the fan reactions and even the reviews, I was right. Again if it isn't like the originals then it shouldn't be named after the original, the Doom reboot is going to be compared to the original for sure and if it doesn't live up to it, it's going to be rip and teared apart.

[Damien_Azreal]

Really digs at you that people have different opinions, doesn't it?

Firstly, who are you at GBX? Sorry, but if it's the same name... I don't remember.
I remember "discussing" Tomb Raider a bit... but gave up on the conversation because it was clear that no matter what I said, I was "wrong" in the eyes of the other poster.

So, yes, I went with character and story for my explanation here.
But, yes, I enjoyed the platforming and the combat felt solid. No, it's nothing unique or genre defining. But, it's solid and works extremely well. Yes, the game is not about exploration and puzzle solving with a little bit of combat here and there.
It's a third person platformer/shooter. But, it handles both those gameplay attributes very well and as a result, I didn't feel that I needed puzzles to keep me entertained.

But, in the end, I like the game and you don't. So... seems, I'm wrong. Congrats.
Subjectively, objectively... the only thing that it comes down to is I like something you don't. My opinion differs from yours and in your eyes, I'm wrong.


And, yes, you can't go into detail on Thief as you said... you haven't played them.
I have. I've played all the games, spent countless hours with the original trilogy. Really liked all of them. And, I've put 24 hours into the new one (still haven't finished) and I love it.
It's different from the originals. But it's still a great game.
And, despite the die hard Thief fans that can't get the blinding nostalgia out of their eyes, a lot of people really like the new one. But, yes, reviews. Because... they are never wrong.

[xMobilemux]

My username is still Wesker500 on the GBX forums, I haven't bothered asking for it to be changed yet.

I never said you were wrong to like the games, that's not the point, it's fine that you like TR2013, DmC and Thief, but the purpose of this discussion was the future of Shadow Warrior and even the possibility of future reboots of beloved childhood franchises, the Tomb Raider, DmC and Thief reboots were brought up as examples of how NOT to do reboots, Shadow Warrior IS how you do one, it's not nostalgia that's stopping us from liking those reboots, it's the fact that the reboots did not live up to the originals standards, but Shadow Warrior 2013 did live up to the original.

The majority of Devil May Cry fans wanted DMC5 and for it to take the next big step in the genre, but we got a streamlined show and tell that ruined the main character, Thief fans wanted a stealth game that surpassed or lived up to the originals, they got a streamlined show and tell too, Tomb Raider however just managed to get lucky, I bet that was because Tomb Raider didn't have much of a fanbase left anyway, but that doesn't change the fact that it streamlined and removed a lot of features.

The point of this discussion was, if Shadow Warrior gets a sequel or other franchises get rebooted, they need to get better and continuing raising the bar, not streamlining and falling back on the name.

I'm not going to let the Doom reboot sucker in with good story alone, Doom is legendary for a reason and I'm going to expect it to live up to the legend or surpass it, I'm not going to settle for a mediocre shooter that shares the same name as Doom and I know the fanbase isn't either, I've seen them saying what they want.

[Damien_Azreal]

xMobilemux, on 15 March 2014 - 03:45 PM, said:

Thief fans wanted a stealth game that surpassed or lived up to the originals, they got a streamlined show and tell too

Play the game before trying to talk about it.
It is a stealth game that lives up to the original. And personally, it's better in a lot of ways.
I like Thief 1 and 2, but I love the new one.

And really, Tomb Raider has a much larger fanbase then Thief does. Thief has a very small devoted fanbase that are annoying to talk with because of how close minded they are when it comes to the games.
God, you'd think you killed their mothers because Thief: Deadly Shadows has a third person view in it.

[xMobilemux]

Damien_Azreal, on 15 March 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

Play the game before trying to talk about it.
It is a stealth game that lives up to the original. And personally, it's better in a lot of ways.
I like Thief 1 and 2, but I love the new one.

I don't need to to see that it's a lacking reboot and let down for fans, I was watching the trailers and read some interviews leading up to the release, I know the game is streamlined and not what most fans wanted, I saw the blind AI, heard the awful voice acting etc, I may play the game in the future, but I'm not spending my money on it, not supporting those reboots.

Quote

And really, Tomb Raider has a much larger fanbase then Thief does. Thief has a very small devoted fanbase that are annoying to talk with because of how close minded they are when it comes to the games.
God, you'd think you killed their mothers because Thief: Deadly Shadows has a third person view in it.

True, but it baffles me how hardly anyone noticed how much of a downgrade TR2013 was, although I'm not alone, there are people out there who saw the game for what it really was and from I've seen, more people are coming to their senses, too late though as Tomb Raider is already doomed to be a show and tell forever now, everyone was just praising it in excitement.
I don't know a lot about the Thief series, other than it's praised as the best stealth series ever. Personally I never wanted to try it because I don't really like the old time setting. I won't go into full detail about how lacking the reboot is until I play it, but I can tell from what I've seen that it is a lacking reboot.

[Damien_Azreal]

And sorry, it's completely impossible to take you seriously because you are dead set on the new Thief already being bad because it's a reboot.
"I saw a trailer... I heard some voice acting... I read an interview".... ugh.

Yeah, it's so streamlined. That's why I've been wondering around the city hub looking for stuff to steal, people to pickpocket and places to sneak into.
This is why I stopped discussing Tomb Raider with you at GBX. It's a Reboot, it's different from the originals... so it sucks. Bleh.


EDIT: I would also like to say, this is not the topic on hand. And we've dragged this on long enough.

[Daedolon]

Damien_Azreal, on 16 March 2014 - 06:23 AM, said:

"I read an interview".... ugh.

Not necesasrily related to gaming (music moreso), but stuff like this can make or break something very easily. If the artist doesn't believe in what he makes, there's no reason for you to take it as anything more than a circlejerk of whatever the artist is making.

Dedication and believing in what you do can be important at least in the music business (at least when covering certain genres).

[Yause]

xMobilemux, on 15 March 2014 - 06:15 PM, said:

True, but it baffles me how hardly anyone noticed how much of a downgrade TR2013 was, although I'm not alone, there are people out there who saw the game for what it really was and from I've seen, more people are coming to their senses, too late though as Tomb Raider is already doomed to be a show and tell forever now, everyone was just praising it in excitement.

You're arguing design focus rather than quality of execution. The TR reboot may lose the exploration/puzzle emphasis of the originals, but it's a superlative product in terms of camera and control systems, responsiveness, map sense (pacing, enemy and platform placement), and balance. These are the subtleties that elevate many Nintendo games to greatness, not to mention John Romero's levels in Doom/Quake.

That's what we call raising the bar.

The originals are almost a polar opposite since they have clunky controls, a terrible camera, and messy, unrefined layouts. They're lacklustre to anyone sensitive to the above (which is why they've aged particularly poorly now that the 3D environments no longer impress), although it can certainly be argued that more thought is required on the part of players.

Edit: At the end of the day, it's just a different type of game, and there are many ways to gauge excellence. Furthermore, it's a reboot and not a remake/sequel, so the entire point is to engage a new audience. No one trashed Wolfenstein 3D for being such a "downgrade" from Castle Wolfenstein.

[Kathy]

Yause, on 16 March 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

No one trashed Wolfenstein 3D for being such a "downgrade" from Castle Wolfenstein.

Because Wolf3d set the standard, not merely followed the trend, just like the original Tomb Raider did. That's the problem with many AAA games these days - they could be polished in execution, but have nothing outside of the general scope they're being.

[Yause]

Kathy, on 16 March 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

Because Wolf3d set the standard, not merely followed the trend, just like the original Tomb Raider did. That's the problem with many AAA games these days - they could be polished in execution, but have nothing outside of the general scope they're being.

My inclination is to judge each product on its own merits. One lacking in innovation can compensate with polish, and vice versa.

There's value in a wide spectrum of games (and I've never bought into the console vs PC war either), so the real problem with the AAA market is the overprioritization of a narrow set of product types.

[Damien_Azreal]

Yause, on 16 March 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

My inclination is to judge each product on its own merits. One lacking in innovation can compensate with polish, and vice versa.

There's value in a wide spectrum of games (and I've never bought into the console vs PC war either), so the real problem with the AAA market is the overprioritization of a narrow set of product types.

Agreed.
Specially on the console VS PC thing.
I'm a PC gamer. But, that doesn't stop me from owning a 360 and PS3 and loving The Last of Us or Shadows of the Damned.

But, that's an issue with some "fans". That can't remove opinion enough to realize they aren't judging a new take on a series for it's own merits. They are going into it with skewed opinions that it will suck, simply because it's not made by the same people, it changes stuff... on and on.

[Mr.Deviance]

Jimmy, on 11 March 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

Just for reference, they said they would love to release Duke Nukem 3D: Reloaded too.

Where did they say that? What?


So let me get this bullshit straight. Fresch is allowed to remake Duke Nukem Time to Kill but he is? or isn't allowed to remake Duke 3d: Reloaded?
What kind of bullshit is this?
And I thought the duke rights were sold to that fucking magician over at gearbox...

Does gearbox only have the right to make Duke Nukem sequels while 3drealms aka interceptor only have the right to make remakes of the old duke nukem games?
What the fuck is it? Is this it or not?
If this is it, then why aren't they picking up Duke 3d reloaded to resume work at it instead of remaking those shitty duke nukem console games.
I am pretty sure it didn't age that much since they canceled it..
Also, last time they talked about Duke 3d reloaded, I thought gearbox denied their rights to make it, so how the fuck do they own the rights now?

If gearbox denied them the right to remake duke 3d, doesn't this obviously mean that gearbox has the rights to that?

[Engel220]

Mr.Deviance, on 16 March 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

Where did they say that? What?


So let me get this bullshit straight. Fresch is allowed to remake Duke Nukem Time to Kill but he is? or isn't allowed to remake Duke 3d: Reloaded?
What kind of bullshit is this?
And I thought the duke rights were sold to that fucking magician over at gearbox...

Does gearbox only have the right to make Duke Nukem sequels while 3drealms aka interceptor only have the right to make remakes of the old duke nukem games?
What the fuck is it? Is this it or not?
If this is it, then why aren't they picking up Duke 3d reloaded to resume work at it instead of remaking those shitty duke nukem console games.
I am pretty sure it didn't age that much since they canceled it..
Also, last time they talked about Duke 3d reloaded, I thought gearbox denied their rights to make it, so how the fuck do they own the rights now?

If gearbox denied them the right to remake duke 3d, doesn't this obviously mean that gearbox has the rights to that?

Gearbox owns the rights to Duke Nukem Forever and the rights to make new games. 3D Realms owns the rights of all previously released games in the series and can re-release them on any platform they choose.

However, remaking games seems to be some kind of gray area that Gearbox believes to be breaking the rules of their deal. I think that remakes are technically classified as new games, something which GBX has used to block stuff lke DN:3D Reloaded from happening.

[xMobilemux]

Yause, on 16 March 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

You're arguing design focus rather than quality of execution. The TR reboot may lose the exploration/puzzle emphasis of the originals, but it's a superlative product in terms of camera and control systems, responsiveness, map sense (pacing, enemy and platform placement), and balance. These are the subtleties that elevate many Nintendo games to greatness, not to mention John Romero's levels in Doom/Quake.

That's what we call raising the bar.

The originals are almost a polar opposite since they have clunky controls, a terrible camera, and messy, unrefined layouts. They're lacklustre to anyone sensitive to the above (which is why they've aged particularly poorly now that the 3D environments no longer impress), although it can certainly be argued that more thought is required on the part of players.

Edit: At the end of the day, it's just a different type of game, and there are many ways to gauge excellence. Furthermore, it's a reboot and not a remake/sequel, so the entire point is to engage a new audience. No one trashed Wolfenstein 3D for being such a "downgrade" from Castle Wolfenstein.

Let me explain what I mean in a different way.

"Less is not more, MORE is more"

Reworking the controls for a reboot is not progressing, that's called streamlining. The first TR reboot (Legend) was pretty decent because it retained the identity of Tomb Raider and kept quite a lot of features from past games, it just didn't really take any steps forward and did take some steps back, like QTEs and so on, but the enemy variety was still there, the puzzles, explorations and so on, TR2013 took dozens of steps back and took no steps forward, didn't add anything, didn't do anything unique and lost the identity. Tomb Raider isn't Tomb Raider anymore, it's just a generic cover shooter, with a story and the story is the only thing everyone is praising.
If that's the kind of progression that's good in gaming then something is very very wrong.

In Devil May Cry's case I'll just leave this here.


I won't go into Thief because I haven't played it yet, but it's obvious that it didn't go up from the source material, like TR2014, Thief 2014 was inspired by the games that were inspired by Thief.

Now Shadow Warrior is how it's done, look back at the original, the prime point that most loved about Shadow Warrior was the swordplay, also everything else like the weapons, the action, the level design and of course Lo Wang himself were all things that made the game great, including the political incorrectness.
The reboot removed the political incorrectness, but it looked back at the original and went up from there, it added a story and it added character development, didn't replace, plus it added shitloads more to the swordplay, added an upgrade system, had ok level design, amazing graphics and made Lo Wang a better character while keeping him similar to the original.

What I'm saying is when the Shadow Warrior sequel comes a long or a reboot of another franchise happens, they need to take the source material and add MORE, not less, make the sequel surpass the 1st game, make the reboot surpass or live up to the originals, taking an iconic exploration and platformer franchise, replacing it with a generic show and tell cover shooter is not adding more, taking the most iconic, challenging and arguably fasted hack n slasher in history and replacing it with a slowed down, streamlined show and tell is not adding more.

Taking an old school shooter with simple swordplay and lots of action while massively upgrading the swordplay, adding a good story, adding more character, adding more action etc is adding more.

That's all I want reboots and sequels to do is to do fucking MORE, not less, you can't objectively deny that the Tomb Raider and DmC reboots have far less than their originals.

Do we want GBXs Duke Nukem 5/reboot to be inspired by the games that were inspired by Duke Nukem or do we want Duke Nukem to look back at legendary Duke3D and go up from there?

[Kathy]

xMobilemux, on 17 March 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

That's all I want reboots and sequels to do is to do fucking MORE, not less, you can't objectively deny that the Tomb Raider and DmC reboots have far less than their originals.

But the so-called quality of the game(subjective of course) could still be better than that of the original even if stuff was indeed removed. And maybe stuff that was removed wouldn't work in what made remake good in the first place.

[Jimmy]

Mr.Deviance, on 16 March 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

Where did they say that? What?

In the past. I was mocking them.

Mr.Deviance, on 16 March 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

So let me get this bullshit straight. Fresch is allowed to remake Duke Nukem Time to Kill but he is? or isn't allowed to remake Duke 3d: Reloaded?
What kind of bullshit is this?
And I thought the duke rights were sold to that fucking magician over at gearbox...

Does gearbox only have the right to make Duke Nukem sequels while 3drealms aka interceptor only have the right to make remakes of the old duke nukem games?
What the fuck is it? Is this it or not?
If this is it, then why aren't they picking up Duke 3d reloaded to resume work at it instead of remaking those shitty duke nukem console games.
I am pretty sure it didn't age that much since they canceled it..
Also, last time they talked about Duke 3d reloaded, I thought gearbox denied their rights to make it, so how the fuck do they own the rights now?

If gearbox denied them the right to remake duke 3d, doesn't this obviously mean that gearbox has the rights to that?

I don't think they're remaking Time to Kill. That would be a waste of fucking time. I think they're just trying to port it to PC.

Which, frankly, is also a waste of time.

[xMobilemux]

Kathy, on 17 March 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

But the so-called quality of the game(subjective of course) could still be better than that of the original even if stuff was indeed removed.

Even if it does end up being good for other people, like there are people who like the new Tomb Raider, DmC etc, but it would obviously be A LOT better if more was added to them.
If the Duke reboot was rebooted the way Tomb Raider was, loads of features removed and full focus put on story and character development, some, maybe a lot would like it, but would it really be good or better than past Duke games?

Quote

And maybe stuff that was removed wouldn't work in what made remake good in the first place.

That's where said remake/reboot needs to do something to make up for that removal, Shadow Warrior made up for the removal of the political incorrectness with all those added features and upgraded swordplay. Tomb Raider & DmC didn't do anything to make up for the removal of the franchises most loved features.

[Lunick]

Jimmy, on 17 March 2014 - 07:40 PM, said:

I don't think they're remaking Time to Kill. That would be a waste of fucking time. I think they're just trying to port it to PC.

Which, frankly, is also a waste of time.

But I love Time to Kill, it is my favourite Duke console title

I'm not quite sure it would bring in the $$$ either though.

[Kathy]

xMobilemux, on 17 March 2014 - 08:34 PM, said:

Even if it does end up being good for other people, like there are people who like the new Tomb Raider, DmC etc, but it would obviously be A LOT better if more was added to them.

Not necessary. You can't just add things for the sake of it. There should be some balance.

Quote

If the Duke reboot was rebooted the way Tomb Raider was, loads of features removed and full focus put on story and character development, some, maybe a lot would like it, but would it really be good or better than past Duke games?

That's a matter of taste really. I don't necessary see the problem with having Duke Nukem game ala, for example, Call Of Duty's gameplay and presentation. Sure, I won't like that kind of game, but the main problem would be in following a CoD's trend and not being different in style/gameplay/etc.

[Jimmy]

Lunick, on 17 March 2014 - 09:14 PM, said:

But I love Time to Kill, it is my favourite Duke console title

I'm not quite sure it would bring in the $$$ either though.

TTK is okay, but it's no where near as good as Zero Hour.