Quake3World

It's finally here. Based on the review of AW, I am much more interested in playing Red Dead Revolver.
I mistakenly figured there would be a of sandbox gameplay, and that it would be a long game. Apparently neither is true.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/108/1087706p1.html

Max Payne meets Left 4 Dead.

I'm not sure that I'm interested in another zombie killer.

wheres odumb

YourGrandpa wrote:I'm not sure that I'm interested in another zombie killer.

That is the single dumbest statement in the history of the universe. Who doesn't like killin zombies? And since when was L4D ever boring?

Fag.

L4D was great. I own it. But since it's been out the market has been swamped with zomibe killers. I guess I'm just board with the concept.

Well...considering you're seemingly arming yourself for the potential of a zombie invasion I'd have guessed you'd be the first one to wanna shoot a zombie in the face with a tac-out shotgun. Come on man...a zombie plague is a gun-nut's wetdream as this would allow boomstick jockeys to practice their head shots with impunity...sorta like mailbox baseball but with more blood. YEEHAWW!!!

Perhaps if the zombies were made of target paper you'd be more interested?

I'm glad you really like the game.

YourGrandpa wrote:Max Payne meets Left 4 Dead.

I'm not sure that I'm interested in another zombie killer.

What the hell is wrong with that? :P

tnf wrote: I mistakenly figured there would be a of sandbox gameplay, and that it would be a long game. Apparently neither is true.

Not so strange, because initially they wanted to make it an open world sandbox game, but during development decided against it because it didn't work all that well. When the game was first announced, for quite a while they were talking about it as a sandbox game.

Looks amazing, day one for me.

yeah that does look pretty good.

They've got a review up at gametrailers as well:
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/revie ... wake/65250

It is linear as hell, but has a lot of atmosphere. Puzzles (if you can call them that) are literally just a case of pressing a button. Starting generators requires a timed press of said button.

I've only completed chapter 1 so far, but it was quite enjoyable in a totally brainless way. It's fun, but nowhere near as good as games like Uncharted 2. The gameplay mechanics do feel dated as hell, actually but the graphics are quite beautiful.

according to reviews, it picks up very slowly. ergo judging it after playing chapter 1 hardly seems fair.

i dont mind linearity - silent hill 2 is very linear but one of the best adventure games out there. I wonder if this game uses the same mechanic though, giving you the illusion that you explred stuff on your own instead of being railroaded into encounters.

imo it looks awesome and I shall be getting it. I just wont be expecting a SH killer.

Eh, it's out already?

Yeah, i'll definitely reserve final judgement to the end, but the beginning chapter was about 1.5 hours worth of gameplay for me and it's a shame it didn't completely grip me during that time. As I say, the story wasn't the problem (even though its nothing special either) rather the linear, rather dated gameplay.

Eraser: it leaked a few days ago.

Ooh, bad boy.

Might get...

Meh...

Given the lengthy development time, 10-15 hours of game play is really disappointing. $60 for 12 hours? Definitely a rental or wait it out til it's $20 or $30.

Sounds like someone's publisher cracked the whip before it turned into Duke Nukem Forever 2. From that review it sounds and looks like with a solid script and three acts the game would have been a masterpiece.

On the subject of horror, the true masters of horror gaming are doing a preorder special on Amnesia this week. It's more than worth $20 but if you pass this game up for $10 you're some kind of moron. Their first game series had great story, pants-peeing horror, and a lot of really fun/tricky physics based puzzles.

http://amnesiagame.com

morguen87 wrote:Given the lengthy development time, 10-15 hours of game play is really disappointing. $60 for 12 hours? Definitely a rental or wait it out til it's $20 or $30.

Naah, it's perfect IMO. Games really don't need to be longer than 12 hours of non-stop gameplay.
Besides, you're easily paying $15 for a 2 hour movie. Then $60 for 12 hours seems like a fair price, no?

ZING!

Eraser wrote:

morguen87 wrote:Given the lengthy development time, 10-15 hours of game play is really disappointing. $60 for 12 hours? Definitely a rental or wait it out til it's $20 or $30.

Naah, it's perfect IMO. Games really don't need to be longer than 12 hours of non-stop gameplay.
Besides, you're easily paying $15 for a 2 hour movie. Then $60 for 12 hours seems like a fair price, no?

Eh, that argument has never held much water in my opinion. A movie and a video game are two different beasts. 12 hours just seems skimpy for a game that has been in development for so long, a game that at one point was hyped to be a sand box game, a game with no multiplayer, and a game - from what I've read, is going to be very linear and probably doesn't have much replay value if the linear game play holds true. Just reads like a solid rental and another over priced game out the door. Kinda meh overall

I guess it's just that I don't have the time to sit through 50 hours of gameplay in a a single game anymore. By the time I'm halfway through two other games have already caught my attention, so to speak.
I like it if I can play through a game in a month or so, considering that I get about 3 to 5 hours of gameplay time a week at most.