 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
How many downloads do the most popular Q1 releases get these days? Does it get to over 100? I remember even 15 years ago it might have only been a few hundred, but if it was a really popular bigger release it could break into 1000-2000. Like a top episode/mod.
I must admit, I haven't even played quake myself in probably a year. Shit just builds up in my "to play" folder and I'll get through it all sometime. But triple A games are just getting too pretty. Speaking of which Darksiders II..... So I just got finished playing Darksiders II, which was a real slog in the end, it's too long. Enough with the puzzles, enough with every battle having 1 mini-boss, then another 2 mini-bosses, then a medium-boss... all with no checkpoints. Then you step into another room and oh it's time for the proper boss boss.
But the point I wanted to make is the game is pretty, and I found myself thinking many times that if Quake was remade as a late prev-gen game ie. 2012, this is probably what it would look like. It has the dark, hellish gothic land down pretty well, huge epic structures. Only the wizard and metal themes aren't so strong. But hell, gothic, medieval, it's pretty much Quake. 7/10 The Darksiders art style just
Mapjam6 was downloaded from Quaddicted around 160 times in August+September. However, this isn't a clear indicator, since the file linked to in the original release thread is hosted on Quaketastic and should have generated far more downloads in the same time span.
I'm sure Spirit can offer more insight and better examples. Did you play the sequel too Warren? That looked even better. Maybe the first half wasn't so Quakey in the forge, that was a bit fantasy islandy, but the later levels once shit got dark, like Samael's fortress, that was wicked.
Kona - I primarily played the second one, sorry. BUt it's all basically the same art style.
There's also the new game, Battle Chasers, that was Kickstarted that has a lot of the same team and art style going for it... http://www.gog.com/game/sublevel_zero
http://store.steampowered.com/app/327880 Sublevel Zero is a a six-degrees-of-freedom shooter with roguelike elements. It is inspired by Descent in several ways. Check out a gameplay stream with a dev guest from the GOG Twitch channel at http://twitch.tv/gogcom (No direct VOD link yet, since the stream is going on at the time I post this.) already bought it. It's nice, very much like descent.
difficulty spikes pretty steep after the first level. http://www.twitch.tv/gogcom/v/19713407
It's about two hours of gameplay and chatting with the developer. That's kinda long, but you can just listen to the talk once you've seen how the game looks and plays like. I linked this here for people who are interested in the indie game development aspect. I don't know if they're going to highlight the recording and keep it for later. If not, it'll be gone after a couple of weeks. I am also playing this (about 70% done I think). As Warren says above, love the art style. Game is also decent fun but gameplay itself is nothing that special.
Just finished SOMA, 13 hours although I suspect most people will do it in less. It's a pretty captivating 13 hours though. Runs out of steam a bit at the end and the two main plotlines don't seem to relate much to each other (anyone whose played it care to elaborate on WAU vs ARK (with spoiler warnings)??) BUT aside from that it's really good throughout. Atmosphere, gfx and sound are top notch, it's very vibey especially underwater, and the story is fairly gripping.
From what I can gather the Wau was just another attempt at preserving humanity - a parallel project to the Ark. The undead scientist intended it to keep people alive, but the criteria for 'life' as seen by the Wau was stupidly open ended, resulting in the monsters you're escaping from the entire time plus all those gigery people/machine mashups on the bunks towards the end. That was what it did to healthy people to keep them alive without food, whilst the monsters were partially recovered people with only fragments of organic, or wholly machine parts to work with - or just scans it stole from the pilot seats / black boxes. Which is why the dead scientist ultimately wanted to destroy it. Although wanting to then kill you and then him getting mashed by that worm thing was hammy and pointless.
That's my interpretation anyway. I enjoyed the story but found the gameplay very patchy. Lots of level design was really poorly done; far too many case of 'wait until monster looks over there'. There was pathing that id1 has better. Also lots of dead ends without any real point to them. The infamous sunken ship sequence for example - it's almost like it wasn't playtested. The monster would teleport around when it got stuck, often glitching you to death. The way forward in one bit was a ladder you could easily walk past to hit a series of dead ends. There was a dead end beyond the reactor area for no other reason than to confuse you. If someone posted that map layout here we'd consider it a beginner's effort. BUT! Despite all my gripes I'm glad I paid full price instead of waiting for the inevitable Halloween price drop. The story and ambiance are great and I want to see them continue making games. In terms of narrative in games they made most AAA titles look idiotic. I read the top user review on Steam, which seems to spoil major plot details in the second paragraph. Serves me right I guess, but argh...
So, don't read any steam user reviews of SOMA! I watched half of Daz's stream and then bought it - kicking myself the whole time for watching so much X(
<spoilers>
I got that much about the WAU, yeah. But... Who was the dead scientist? Is he actually physically real? Why did he in particular want the WAU dead? Surely if the remains of humanity are getting ARKed into orbit, it's fair enough to leave Pathos II to the WAU? Why does the choice of killing / not killing the WAU have no effect on the remainder of the game nor the ending? (This is one of my main criticisms with the ending, yes I did play it both ways and nothing changes). Why does Simon not realise that there will be "two" of him once he transfers to the ARK? Why does Catherine not give him an option to suicide tied into the launch switch? (This is my other more minor gripe with the ending, it could have been given a bit more depth). How is the guy in Delta who went crazy tied into the WAU and stuff? </spoilers> To me it felt like there were two concurrent plots going on: Simon waking up on Pathos II, discovering Catherine and what had happened to the global world, and trying to help with the ARK, AND then the story of what had happened to the base, the disaster that befell it in particular, and the mess the WAU had created. And those two plots didn't really conjoin meaningfully at the end as I expected... Having said all that, the other 95% of the game I really enjoyed, I didn't have any problem with the sunken ship, I thought that bit was quite gripping (I like the escher-esque stairs) and actually had me shaking a bit as I finally escaped the WAU creature. I've seen people critising the slow and linear underwater sections, I thought they were a highlight of the game, beautiful and mesmerising. It is fair to say it's not really a game and there's not really much gameplay. It is an interactive movie game that I usually decry, but that's usually because it's shallow generic toss like Call Of Wankfare 18. In this case as you say the narrative and themes piss all over most other games, to me it felt like a slow, dark sci-fi film with me being in control of the protagonist. I also thought the technical aspects of the game (graphics, sound, and physical design) worked pretty flawlessly to create the atmosphere. I often get slagged off for being a GFX whore with modern games, but this is a good example of why modern GFX can make a difference. The dead scientist was the guy who led the Wau research effort, I think. It seems that when he went into the trench and saw how the Wau was mutating the creatures he decided to kill it.
The scientist being real or not... my theory is he was a ghost. Not in the traditional sense, but something more like an afterimage stored on the various base servers which can project itself into what passes for Simon's brain. This came to mind because the containment tank was physically empty and just had those Fight Club style technicolour flashes while you explore the base. I was disappointed that there wasn't a further reveal that he'd somehow latched onto to either Simon or Catherine's hardware in order to journey into the trench. As to killing the Wau or not; there are lots of other decisions which had no impact on the game - do you delete the copy of yourself? Or kill Simon2 before he wakes up to realise he's been abandoned? Even the multiple choice questions about your experience. I don't mind these so much though, they add a bit of depth to the game and make you engage with what is going on in a different way. For example - deleting your file could have affected if you'd even be able to get a copy on the Ark, and then maybe Catherine would survive (cos why not). Killing Simon2, or not, could have had you do some solo coop activity later on to unlock an area so that Simon3 could continue in an easier way or even allow you to sacrifice Simon2 so that 3 can get past a monster without having to do something more complicated. Not killing the Wau could have been a major deal on the rest of the play - if you kill it, no more monsters, but the base systems begin to die. These branches in the story could have been awesome, but would probably have delayed production another year. The main character was pretty dumb overall. His whining about the situation was constant (although to be fair, he's on the bottom of the sea and surrounded by monsters). He's so well acted and written though that I suspect that he was willfully not understanding that each time he went to a new body it was a copy. The Ark/Wau story overall I liked. Both projects were intended to save humanity, but both fail. Then through the malfunction of the Wau project, Simon is produced and the Ark project eventually succeeds. I've criticized the game a lot for its play. But if it was bad then I wouldn't bother. With a few small tweaks it could have been much more potent an experience. Then again, most people tell me I'm missing the point and it's an interactive story, not a game. But I'm still not convinced the two are mutually exclusive.
|
|
| You must be logged in to post in this thread. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2024 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |