Even though it's quite obvious you're not interested, it still bears clarifying that online is free for PC to PC. Only cross platform requires Live Gold.
Yes, I know, I phrased that postscript to get a post like this. ;-)
Because let's be honest. MANY more people are going to be playing this on the Xbox, rather than upgrading their video card, OS, and buying the game. And because it's multiplayer only, the playerbase will be much higher on the Xbox side of the fence. Thus, Live Gold is almost required. That cross-platform playability is the whole point of the game's existence, if you recall.
Aoi, serious question, are you beta'ing the Xbox or the PC version? If it's the PC, is the KBAM/Gamepad compensation mechanic still in the game?
Even though it's quite obvious you're not interested, it still bears clarifying that online is free for PC to PC. Only cross platform requires Live Gold.
Yes, I know, I phrased that postscript to get a post like this. ;-)
Because let's be honest. MANY more people are going to be playing this on the Xbox, rather than upgrading their video card, OS, and buying the game. And because it's multiplayer only, the playerbase will be much higher on the Xbox side of the fence. Thus, Live Gold is almost required. That cross-platform playability is the whole point of the game's existence, if you recall.
Aoi, serious question, are you beta'ing the Xbox or the PC version? If it's the PC, is the KBAM/Gamepad compensation mechanic still in the game?
I actually think the PC playerbase is the one that's more likely to stay. Xbox Live players have a tendancy to abandon a game after two or three months. Once Halo 3 hits, this game is a ghost except for the PC players.
Even though it's quite obvious you're not interested, it still bears clarifying that online is free for PC to PC. Only cross platform requires Live Gold.
Yes, I know, I phrased that postscript to get a post like this. ;-)
Because let's be honest. MANY more people are going to be playing this on the Xbox, rather than upgrading their video card, OS, and buying the game. And because it's multiplayer only, the playerbase will be much higher on the Xbox side of the fence. Thus, Live Gold is almost required. That cross-platform playability is the whole point of the game's existence, if you recall.
Aoi, serious question, are you beta'ing the Xbox or the PC version? If it's the PC, is the KBAM/Gamepad compensation mechanic still in the game?
Xbox. As far as I know, there's no public/closed beta going on for the PC version at the moment. What I know of it has been picked from posts made by internal testers and recent magazine/website previews about the PC version and the cross play, so should be taken with a grain of salt. I would honestly rather have both platforms separated, but at the same time if they have leveled the playing field while at the same time not noticeably crippling the PC side of things, more power to them. I'm going with the 360 side of things since I have no interest in Vista, and PC Live makes me very :? (as shown in my blog post about it elsewhere).
As for your previous reply, don't take anything I say as putting down your opinion or being argumentative at all. I like this kind of conversation as long as it stays under control, and you've been very cool and logical with your arguments. I can totally understand the irritation with Fasa Interactive. I still have my Mechwarrior 2/Mercs/3/4 and Mechcommander 1 and 2 on my PC shelf, in addition to the Genesis and 1st/2nd edition PnP versions of Shadowrun. My heart fell like everyone elses after seeing the original E3 presentation following the excitement of those initial pictures of the Shadowrun banners. At the same time, I do think they've put together a good game that does what it does very well, and have hope with more recent comments that they do intend an RPG with the license next. Might all be moot though, since I also feel that right now, it's probably not going to hit their wanted numbers any more than Crimson Skies did on the Xbox.
Even though it's quite obvious you're not interested, it still bears clarifying that online is free for PC to PC. Only cross platform requires Live Gold.
Yes, I know, I phrased that postscript to get a post like this. ;-)
Because let's be honest. MANY more people are going to be playing this on the Xbox, rather than upgrading their video card, OS, and buying the game. And because it's multiplayer only, the playerbase will be much higher on the Xbox side of the fence. Thus, Live Gold is almost required. That cross-platform playability is the whole point of the game's existence, if you recall.
Aoi, serious question, are you beta'ing the Xbox or the PC version? If it's the PC, is the KBAM/Gamepad compensation mechanic still in the game?
I actually think the PC playerbase is the one that's more likely to stay. Xbox Live players have a tendancy to abandon a game after two or three months. Once Halo 3 hits, this game is a ghost except for the PC players.
If there are any.
Eh, you're not going to see the huge numbers after a few months, but there are always nice sized groups of players playing a good majority of the games on Live at any given time. It just depends on whether or not you're willing to play with randoms. There are also communities like us over at the Arcadians that go out of their way to make sure these games stay active within the community for long after the "mainstream gamers" move away. Case in point, until recently there have been very regular groups playing Test Drive weekly or more. This game will have a consistant and long term community of players for a long time if the rather dedicated group that have been testing this game for a couple months now are any indication.
Aoi on
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited March 2007
*nods* Cool. Although the difference is that Crimson Skies is technically MSFT's property (look at the copyrights, Weisman developed it for MSFT first, then adapted a board game to it for FASA, the PC game got delayed a year, so things look out of order), and Shadowrun.. well.. isn't a MSFT property, they just hold the rights to make games.
I hope.. I greatly hope.. that if they make any future SR games, they'll consult with FanPro first. I know they don't have to, but knowing some of the stuff going on in the SR world that isn't overtly in the lorebooks (granted, my knowledge is 3 years old, before the 5 year jump), there's plenty of opportunity to make a video game that helps enhance the official lore.
This whole, "no one ever plays a 360 game after a couple of months" is blown out of proportion. Yes, some people do that, but there will always be a community left behind.
Man, where have you been the last twelve months? We've all been bitching and moaning this whole time. You totally missed out.
Some things I glossed over. This was one of them. I thought people were just whining because it was a FPS, not because it was a Shadowrun theme for Team Fortress or some such nonsense. I'm sure it will be pleasant enough, but I know I sure as hell don't want to bother.
What a retarded thing to waste a franchise on.
I don't know... The game sounds like Counterstrike crossed with Sacrifice (i.e. 3rd person Magic the Gathering) which sounds like a digital orgasm.
This whole, "no one ever plays a 360 game after a couple of months" is blown out of proportion. Yes, some people do that, but there will always be a community left behind.
That happens with PC games too guys!
I know, crazy.
Yeah, but it always seems to be a larger population. I mean right now I can look on my friends list and out of 100 I'll see almost everyone playing Symphony of the Night. I see maybe 1 person playing Gears commonly.
But yeah, I understand that it's going to happen with any system / game combo.
*nods* Cool. Although the difference is that Crimson Skies is technically MSFT's property (look at the copyrights, Weisman developed it for MSFT first, then adapted a board game to it for FASA, the PC game got delayed a year, so things look out of order), and Shadowrun.. well.. isn't a MSFT property, they just hold the rights to make games.
I hope.. I greatly hope.. that if they make any future SR games, they'll consult with FanPro first. I know they don't have to, but knowing some of the stuff going on in the SR world that isn't overtly in the lorebooks (granted, my knowledge is 3 years old, before the 5 year jump), there's plenty of opportunity to make a video game that helps enhance the official lore.
As far as Crimson Skies, really? I had no idea. I actually had a couple friends back in the day, when it originally got released for the PC who ranted about how much they screwed it up, and how they were hoping for a digital version of the board game. I loved the PC game, and honestly kind of disliked they way they cut out all the little extras that made it so special (I loved the scrapbook stuff) when they brought it over to the Xbox.
I really would love to see them work with FanPro too. It's funny, at one point we kind of had an "in" with Fasa and had several questions passed on to the dev team to have answered, several of which were questions I posed with regards to any kind of input the original or current team working on the PNP game may have had as far as the background and racial changes in the video game. They... er... never wrote us back after stating the questions were passed along.
And Gimpy, you need some new friends. I'm always seeing people playing gears on mine (and all but maybe 5 of the people came from here/arcadians), as well as a smattering of Battlestations, Test Drive, Worms, etc.
Aoi on
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited March 2007
Yeah. Jordan Weisman (co founder of FASA, one of the lead devs at Microsoft Games Studio, founder of Wizkids, creator/developer of The Beast, I Love Bees, Shadowrun, Battletech, and Crimson Skies) worked for FASA interactive at the time they got bought by Microsoft. He developed Crimson Skies for them, then negotiated to have it licenced to FASA (P&P). Things just worked out that the wargame came out before the PC game.
Weisman is one of the most influental men in game development in the United States, and too few people have heard of him. Unfortunately, he tends to take a tact of developing a game, engine, or whatever, working with it, and then letting others take control. My hope was that his being at Microsoft would temper the Battletech and Shadowrun games, but nothing doing.
Yeah. Jordan Weisman (co founder of FASA, one of the lead devs at Microsoft Games Studio, founder of Wizkids, creator/developer of The Beast, I Love Bees, Shadowrun, Battletech, and Crimson Skies) worked for FASA interactive at the time they got bought by Microsoft. He developed Crimson Skies for them, then negotiated to have it licenced to FASA (P&P). Things just worked out that the wargame came out before the PC game.
Weisman is one of the most influental men in game development in the United States, and too few people have heard of him. Unfortunately, he tends to take a tact of developing a game, engine, or whatever, working with it, and then letting others take control. My hope was that his being at Microsoft would temper the Battletech and Shadowrun games, but nothing doing.
Fair enough I have always understood the first Mech Assault. They were probably flat out told to make a quick, easy fun stompy game for the launch of the original live. Something that looked cool, and played fast to draw people into the game/service and showcase what live could do (which at the time was pretty god damned sparse). They have no excuse whatsoever for 2 though. They did so little new with it, and completey wasted any real opportunity they had with the franchise. I really hope their dumb asses learned a lesson. :?
I also don't think MS really dislikes the RPG genre either. I mean they're backing Lionhead and Fable, they're practically bankrolling Sakaguchi/Mystwalker. Bethesda seems to be BFF's with them too. Honestly I think this was a flat out Fasa Interactive decision, and in the long run I hope it doesn't bit them in the ass, because after Crimson Skies went teets up, then Mech Assault, what WILL MS do if Shadowrun doesn't deliver either.
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
Dartboy on
0
Options
SixCaches Tweets in the mainframe cyberhexRegistered Userregular
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
I think the hope is that it does well enough that in addition to Shadowrun 2 we'd also get Shadowrun: The RPG. You're right that a sequel seems much more likely than an RPG as a next game.
Six on
can you feel the struggle within?
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
I think the hope is that it does well enough that in addition to Shadowrun 2 we'd also get Shadowrun: The RPG. You're right that a sequel seems much more likely than an RPG as a next game.
Screw sequel. Keep in mind that Mechwarrior 4 had 4(?!?!!) $10 expansions released for it. It was the future of Microtransactions.. and I'm sure that if SR is successful, they'll just pump out "pay to play" levels, characters, maybe even races... expansions basically.
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
The hope for an RPG is coming from the statements from Fasa that it's their plan to do just that. As far as I know, they never talked about going the sim route with Mechwarrior despite sales. I don't think they would pass on a sequel to the shooter if it does well, no, but they keep stating in interviews that they want to do an RPG next if this game does well.
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
I think the hope is that it does well enough that in addition to Shadowrun 2 we'd also get Shadowrun: The RPG. You're right that a sequel seems much more likely than an RPG as a next game.
Screw sequel. Keep in mind that Mechwarrior 4 had 4(?!?!!) $10 expansions released for it. It was the future of Microtransactions.. and I'm sure that if SR is successful, they'll just pump out "pay to play" levels, characters, maybe even races... expansions basically.
Yeah, they've talked about "content packs" on the forums. They were pretty doubtful about new races going in through DLC, but they were talking about new maps/weapons/tech/spells in content packs released farther down the line.
Aoi on
0
Options
AxenMy avatar is Excalibur.Yes, the sword.Registered Userregular
edited March 2007
Anyone know how much like Dystopia this game going to be?
Axen on
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Uhh, probably because Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis was viewed as a gross departure from the normal gameplay as well? Also, from what I recall it kind of sucked balls gameplay wise.
I don't mind that Mech Assault came out. In fact I view it as a pretty fun game. What I mind is that the actual Mechwarrior series appears to have been supplanted by it which, at least to me, is a gigantic leap backwards.
I always found it interesting that people saw Mechassault as such a radical departure from the normal gameplay, when it's in fact almost identical gameplay-wise to Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis. That game had the whole 3rd person shootyness, 3 weapon setup, charging-ball PPCs, and 360 degree torsos for all mechs.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
I think the hope is that it does well enough that in addition to Shadowrun 2 we'd also get Shadowrun: The RPG. You're right that a sequel seems much more likely than an RPG as a next game.
Screw sequel. Keep in mind that Mechwarrior 4 had 4(?!?!!) $10 expansions released for it. It was the future of Microtransactions.. and I'm sure that if SR is successful, they'll just pump out "pay to play" levels, characters, maybe even races... expansions basically.
MW4 had 2 ~$10 'Mech packs (which also had maps and weapons), and a ~$25 expansion (new 'Mechs, new weapons, a new campaign). Then it also had one $40-50 follow-up, MW4: Mercenaries, a standalone game.
Orogogus on
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited March 2007
Forgive me. The original plan, when it was announced, was 2 packs each for clan and inner sphere. That may be my fuzzy memory, or it may be me being completely wrong, but either way I apologize for being incorrect. I can't remember if the MW4 pack i bought from Wal-mart contained the booster packs -- I know it contained MW4, Mercs, and Black Knight.
Last I saw, no, the collection doesn't contain the Mech Paks. The Mech Paks are pretty limited in their usefulness though. They can only be used in skirmish or multiplayer, not in any of the campaigns.
And Kevar, it sounds like you're against it no matter what is said, so there's not too terribly much I can say, but I will address at least a couple things you have said. I've not tried it myself, but from what has been said by testers thus far, there is no discernable change in how the game feels when you're playing it on the PC, yet at the same time, the little things they have done underneath seemed to level the playing field just fine. The game isn't dependent on cross platform play, and PC to PC is still completely free, and since console to PC play has never been terribly important before, I can't see some dedicated PC player not being able to play against console players without paying being a big reason for people not purchasing the game. They're still going to get the normal PC experience for the normal PC price.
Well, yeah, I am against it no matter what is said. Not because of the misuse of the license, though. That alone isn't enough to kill it for me, it's the other stuff that piles on top. Lack of content, no local multiplayer (this is the big one), no splitscreen online multiplayer (going online with a friend - this is the other big one), and a $60 price tag on top of it all. Essentially, it's not for me. If it had stuck to the license more to differentiate itself from other shooters, or at least covered those basic features, I might have been interested.
Yes, they might get the normal PC to PC experience, but that's not what I care about. When I let my PC specifications deteriorate, I left behind a group of friends that I don't get to play online games with anymore because they don't have a 360. The concept of playing with them again without upgrading my PC is a nice one, but I know none of them are going to pay $50 a year for a service that isn't worth it right now unless you also have a 360. I know that you're responding to my claim the game won't sell well, though, and, well, I still stick by that. I just don't see it happening, and even if it does, I don't see it selling well enough to revive Shadowrun as a franchise. It's too much of a niche title.
And Kevar, it sounds like you're against it no matter what is said, so there's not too terribly much I can say, but I will address at least a couple things you have said. I've not tried it myself, but from what has been said by testers thus far, there is no discernable change in how the game feels when you're playing it on the PC, yet at the same time, the little things they have done underneath seemed to level the playing field just fine. The game isn't dependent on cross platform play, and PC to PC is still completely free, and since console to PC play has never been terribly important before, I can't see some dedicated PC player not being able to play against console players without paying being a big reason for people not purchasing the game. They're still going to get the normal PC experience for the normal PC price.
Well, yeah, I am against it no matter what is said. Not because of the misuse of the license, though. That alone isn't enough to kill it for me, it's the other stuff that piles on top. Lack of content, no local multiplayer (this is the big one), no splitscreen online multiplayer (going online with a friend - this is the other big one), and a $60 price tag on top of it all. Essentially, it's not for me. If it had stuck to the license more to differentiate itself from other shooters, or at least covered those basic features, I might have been interested.
Yes, they might get the normal PC to PC experience, but that's not what I care about. When I let my PC specifications deteriorate, I left behind a group of friends that I don't get to play online games with anymore because they don't have a 360. The concept of playing with them again without upgrading my PC is a nice one, but I know none of them are going to pay $50 a year for a service that isn't worth it right now unless you also have a 360. I know that you're responding to my claim the game won't sell well, though, and, well, I still stick by that. I just don't see it happening, and even if it does, I don't see it selling well enough to revive Shadowrun as a franchise. It's too much of a niche title.
Not entirely sure what you mean by lack of content to be honest with you. There are a good number of races, and a pretty nice mix of spells and tech that give you one hell of a mix of "classes" you could essentially build for yourself. There's been no mention at all of the number of maps included in the game in any preview or comment in the beta forums. The no split screen thing is a shame I guess, but I don't use it, and don't terribly enjoy playing with people online who DO do that, especially when they like to be on different teams :P Just a personal opinion of course, but I also play a great deal of my games with randoms (yes, I actually play in public games, *GASP*) and I very very rarely see people playing split screen online anyway. I do see why you wouldn't like that personally, but I don't see it being a deal breaker for most gamers. As for that last comment in your first paragraph, I personally, after actually having played the game with the full span of powers, weapons, and tech, can say that they most definitely have stuck with the license enough to differentiate themselves from other FPS games. What you've read might not match up with that, but what I've played does.
As for the last paragraph, it really sounds like you have a problem differentiating between your own disappointment and what will effect the public at large. Will it bum out some that you have to pay to play with consoles? Possibly. Will most pc gamers care? Ask around here sometime exactly how many PC specific gamers actually want to play with console gamers. It's not something I see mattering for the most part at all. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am on this one.
As for the last paragraph, it really sounds like you have a problem differentiating between your own disappointment and what will effect the public at large. Will it bum out some that you have to pay to play with consoles? Possibly. Will most pc gamers care? Ask around here sometime exactly how many PC specific gamers actually want to play with console gamers. It's not something I see mattering for the most part at all. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am on this one.
I think you're overestimating my disappointment here. I don't really care that much. :P It's just an "Oh well" thing to me, with a little bit of bitterness. I didn't say the payment required for PC-to-console play would hinder it much (although I did imply it as a factor in my original post), I just don't think it will do well on account of the game's nature, and definitely not well enough to revive the franchise. The payment for PC-to-console play is just a personal disappointment to me.
The amount of maps and gametypes hasn't been announced? I remember reading numbers at some point. Were those fake?
Kevar on
0
Options
NocrenLt Futz, Back in ActionNorth CarolinaRegistered Userregular
edited March 2007
Ok Aoi, I have a question regurading the game. Are there generic character models for each race or is there a bit of customization in that you can tell a teched out elf from a mage from looking at them?
Ok Aoi, I have a question regurading the game. Are there generic character models for each race or is there a bit of customization in that you can tell a teched out elf from a mage from looking at them?
We don't have the full game with regards to graphics (lower res textures), and there's only one character model per race right now (though there have been more shown in trailers). Some of the tech does show on your character, slight smoke for the inactive smoke spell, a red glow to one eye for smartlink, a backpack for the glider, stuff like that. Some show, some, like wired reflexes, don't for obvious reasons. Though again, we don't have everything as far as the character models are concerned, and they've already changed some things graphically with the last patch they put out, and have said it'll change more with release. But yeah, some of the stuff does show/effect your model. Oh, and as the trolls toughen when being attacked, they grow spikes along their shoulders, head, arms and back. Kind of neat.
As for the last paragraph, it really sounds like you have a problem differentiating between your own disappointment and what will effect the public at large. Will it bum out some that you have to pay to play with consoles? Possibly. Will most pc gamers care? Ask around here sometime exactly how many PC specific gamers actually want to play with console gamers. It's not something I see mattering for the most part at all. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am on this one.
I think you're overestimating my disappointment here. I don't really care that much. :P It's just an "Oh well" thing to me, with a little bit of bitterness. I didn't say the payment required for PC-to-console play would hinder it much (although I did imply it as a factor in my original post), I just don't think it will do well on account of the game's nature, and definitely not well enough to revive the franchise. The payment for PC-to-console play is just a personal disappointment to me.
The amount of maps and gametypes hasn't been announced? I remember reading numbers at some point. Were those fake?
Gametypes, yes. Maps, nope.
Aoi on
0
Options
NocrenLt Futz, Back in ActionNorth CarolinaRegistered Userregular
edited March 2007
Thanks Aoi. Nice to see that they did that. Also thanks for leting me know about the bots. Means I can actually play it now.
Athenor's position right about describes mine as well. I MIGHT rent or demo it though, as I was a bit of a counterstrike fan a while back, because it does actually seem pretty neat SR liscense notwithstanding, but I also don't see myself paying even $40 for how long it seems the game will last.
IonMage on
0
Options
Der Waffle MousBlame this on the misfortune of your birth.New Yark, New Yark.Registered Userregular
edited March 2007
I'm just going to look at it the same way I do "Constantine" or Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance.
Nowhere near true to the source material, but still rather entertaining.
As for that last comment in your first paragraph, I personally, after actually having played the game with the full span of powers, weapons, and tech, can say that they most definitely have stuck with the license enough to differentiate themselves from other FPS games.
Not trying to derail or anything, but FYI: The powers, wepons and tech are not from the license. In fact, much of it blatantly contradicts the license.
Not entirely sure what you mean by lack of content to be honest with you.
What? Are you kidding? It sounds like a multiplayer game mode that lost its single player campaign. Very few games can do this and pull it off - Unreal Tournament pretty much has the market sewn up in a neat little bow.
Only the hardest of hardcore are even going to blink twice at this release, and the Live for PC is an utterly un-viable proposition until it matures significantly
Not entirely sure what you mean by lack of content to be honest with you.
What? Are you kidding? It sounds like a multiplayer game mode that lost its single player campaign. Very few games can do this and pull it off - Unreal Tournament pretty much has the market sewn up in a neat little bow.
Only the hardest of hardcore are even going to blink twice at this release, and the Live for PC is an utterly un-viable proposition until it matures significantly
I don't think you've yet to see the combinations that come from Race, tech, magic, and weapons. The number of possible active combinations is just ridiculous. The strategies, just for the two simple maps that there are, are immense. This isn't like CS, where you decide to go tunnel or bridge on De_dust and have it out the same way round after round. It's nowhere near that simple. With teleportation and gliders, attack vectors truly become three dimensional. That is why the game reminds me of UT. You aren't committed to a specific plan of attack, even less so than you were/are in UT with the freedom of the unlimited translocator.
There are going to be three gametypes, not two, and they're more sufficient than what Gears threw out, and look at how that's prospered as an MP game. One is DM-ish, called Attrition, which isn't in the beta. Bodies can't be cleared or something, its an interesting spin. The other two modes are the team CTF, and they strongly vary. When one team is put specifically as a defensive team, they take totally different strategies and skills than if they're in a situation where they can end up being in either offensive or defensive mode. UT came out as an MP or bots game and only had what, 4 gametypes(DM and TDM count as one, CTF, DOM, AS... and dom sucked, and AS was over once you learned the maps and rocket boosting)? They did have a shit ton of maps and map packs and 3rd party support, though. If they get a high map count for Shadowrun, like 15-20ish for release, they'll at least have a leg to stand on.
Still, this game has a great deal to overcome due to the carrying the Shadowrun name and a potential lack of proper marketing. They aren't going to win over anyone who even remotely likes the Shadowrun IP, and they have to get it into PC players minds that this is a game to play. Right now, it isn't even a blip on the radar. It's too bad, too, because it has everything going for it in the gameplay department. It's easily one of the most strategically challenging shooters I've ever played. Teamplay is involved, but this isn't your Rainbow Six or Battlefield, strength-in-numbers/methodical style teamplay, and it isnt your Gears style, machismo-driven/twitch teamplay either. Its a hybrid, kinda like Tribes and kinda like UT. You can excel as a solo player to an extent, but you will truly excel as a great solo player who also functions as a part of a team.
BladeOfSanjuro on
0
Options
NocrenLt Futz, Back in ActionNorth CarolinaRegistered Userregular
edited March 2007
I take this as a good sign.
People who have played the game are supporting it despite the flaws to the license.
However the comparisons to other games in the genre are valid.
Hopefully when this is released I'll have a better connection and be able to play online.
Doubtful, but I'm a damn good heavy support guy.
As for that last comment in your first paragraph, I personally, after actually having played the game with the full span of powers, weapons, and tech, can say that they most definitely have stuck with the license enough to differentiate themselves from other FPS games.
Not trying to derail or anything, but FYI: The powers, wepons and tech are not from the license. In fact, much of it blatantly contradicts the license.
Some are taken from the license, some are new, some are changed. We've kinda gone over this.
As for that last comment in your first paragraph, I personally, after actually having played the game with the full span of powers, weapons, and tech, can say that they most definitely have stuck with the license enough to differentiate themselves from other FPS games.
Not trying to derail or anything, but FYI: The powers, wepons and tech are not from the license. In fact, much of it blatantly contradicts the license.
Some are taken from the license, some are new, some are changed. We've kinda gone over this.
Over it at least a few times, yeah. His point still stands though. At best the game sorta follows the PnP version on those things, and that's giving a lot of leeway to the word "sorta".
Okay, I just watched the latest 1Up show where they feature Shadowrun. They really rail on the game hard. But what I want to ask, Aoi, is that if you know if they'll be forcing that "radial menu" horseshit on PC gamers in order to keep it balanced, instead of letting them select all of the abilities with keyboard hotkeys? Because if so, it completely reinforces my earlier claims that this game will not do well on PC. That, along with the other "console" restrictions pointed out like the jumping and aiming, is terribly clunky. Invisible War irritated people for basically being a console game ported to PC without the appropriate changes, and this looks a thousand times worse in that regard.
Posts
Yes, I know, I phrased that postscript to get a post like this. ;-)
Because let's be honest. MANY more people are going to be playing this on the Xbox, rather than upgrading their video card, OS, and buying the game. And because it's multiplayer only, the playerbase will be much higher on the Xbox side of the fence. Thus, Live Gold is almost required. That cross-platform playability is the whole point of the game's existence, if you recall.
Aoi, serious question, are you beta'ing the Xbox or the PC version? If it's the PC, is the KBAM/Gamepad compensation mechanic still in the game?
I actually think the PC playerbase is the one that's more likely to stay. Xbox Live players have a tendancy to abandon a game after two or three months. Once Halo 3 hits, this game is a ghost except for the PC players.
If there are any.
Xbox. As far as I know, there's no public/closed beta going on for the PC version at the moment. What I know of it has been picked from posts made by internal testers and recent magazine/website previews about the PC version and the cross play, so should be taken with a grain of salt. I would honestly rather have both platforms separated, but at the same time if they have leveled the playing field while at the same time not noticeably crippling the PC side of things, more power to them. I'm going with the 360 side of things since I have no interest in Vista, and PC Live makes me very :? (as shown in my blog post about it elsewhere
As for your previous reply, don't take anything I say as putting down your opinion or being argumentative at all. I like this kind of conversation as long as it stays under control, and you've been very cool and logical with your arguments. I can totally understand the irritation with Fasa Interactive. I still have my Mechwarrior 2/Mercs/3/4 and Mechcommander 1 and 2 on my PC shelf, in addition to the Genesis and 1st/2nd edition PnP versions of Shadowrun. My heart fell like everyone elses after seeing the original E3 presentation following the excitement of those initial pictures of the Shadowrun banners. At the same time, I do think they've put together a good game that does what it does very well, and have hope with more recent comments that they do intend an RPG with the license next. Might all be moot though, since I also feel that right now, it's probably not going to hit their wanted numbers any more than Crimson Skies did on the Xbox.
Eh, you're not going to see the huge numbers after a few months, but there are always nice sized groups of players playing a good majority of the games on Live at any given time. It just depends on whether or not you're willing to play with randoms. There are also communities like us over at the Arcadians that go out of their way to make sure these games stay active within the community for long after the "mainstream gamers" move away. Case in point, until recently there have been very regular groups playing Test Drive weekly or more. This game will have a consistant and long term community of players for a long time if the rather dedicated group that have been testing this game for a couple months now are any indication.
I hope.. I greatly hope.. that if they make any future SR games, they'll consult with FanPro first. I know they don't have to, but knowing some of the stuff going on in the SR world that isn't overtly in the lorebooks (granted, my knowledge is 3 years old, before the 5 year jump), there's plenty of opportunity to make a video game that helps enhance the official lore.
That happens with PC games too guys!
I know, crazy.
That is a terrible price for this game.
Yeah, but it always seems to be a larger population. I mean right now I can look on my friends list and out of 100 I'll see almost everyone playing Symphony of the Night. I see maybe 1 person playing Gears commonly.
But yeah, I understand that it's going to happen with any system / game combo.
As far as Crimson Skies, really? I had no idea. I actually had a couple friends back in the day, when it originally got released for the PC who ranted about how much they screwed it up, and how they were hoping for a digital version of the board game.
I really would love to see them work with FanPro too. It's funny, at one point we kind of had an "in" with Fasa and had several questions passed on to the dev team to have answered, several of which were questions I posed with regards to any kind of input the original or current team working on the PNP game may have had as far as the background and racial changes in the video game. They... er... never wrote us back after stating the questions were passed along.
And Gimpy, you need some new friends. I'm always seeing people playing gears on mine (and all but maybe 5 of the people came from here/arcadians), as well as a smattering of Battlestations, Test Drive, Worms, etc.
Weisman is one of the most influental men in game development in the United States, and too few people have heard of him. Unfortunately, he tends to take a tact of developing a game, engine, or whatever, working with it, and then letting others take control. My hope was that his being at Microsoft would temper the Battletech and Shadowrun games, but nothing doing.
Fair enough
I also don't think MS really dislikes the RPG genre either. I mean they're backing Lionhead and Fable, they're practically bankrolling Sakaguchi/Mystwalker. Bethesda seems to be BFF's with them too. Honestly I think this was a flat out Fasa Interactive decision, and in the long run I hope it doesn't bit them in the ass, because after Crimson Skies went teets up, then Mech Assault, what WILL MS do if Shadowrun doesn't deliver either.
Although speaking of Mechassault, it brings up the the fear that Shadowrun people have in regards to future RPGs: Mechassault 1 did just well enough to suggest to MS/FASA that 3rd person action was the direction people wanted Mechwarrior to go, hence MA2 and no hint of a new sim. If Shadowrun does well, there's a good chance that the people signing the checks will look at that and say they want Shadowrun2 rather than Shadowrun: the RPG.
I think the hope is that it does well enough that in addition to Shadowrun 2 we'd also get Shadowrun: The RPG. You're right that a sequel seems much more likely than an RPG as a next game.
Screw sequel. Keep in mind that Mechwarrior 4 had 4(?!?!!) $10 expansions released for it. It was the future of Microtransactions.. and I'm sure that if SR is successful, they'll just pump out "pay to play" levels, characters, maybe even races... expansions basically.
The hope for an RPG is coming from the statements from Fasa that it's their plan to do just that. As far as I know, they never talked about going the sim route with Mechwarrior despite sales. I don't think they would pass on a sequel to the shooter if it does well, no, but they keep stating in interviews that they want to do an RPG next if this game does well.
Yeah, they've talked about "content packs" on the forums. They were pretty doubtful about new races going in through DLC, but they were talking about new maps/weapons/tech/spells in content packs released farther down the line.
Uhh, probably because Battletech 3050 for the SNES/Genesis was viewed as a gross departure from the normal gameplay as well? Also, from what I recall it kind of sucked balls gameplay wise.
I don't mind that Mech Assault came out. In fact I view it as a pretty fun game. What I mind is that the actual Mechwarrior series appears to have been supplanted by it which, at least to me, is a gigantic leap backwards.
Also, still sad I can't find my Mercenaries disc
Yes, they might get the normal PC to PC experience, but that's not what I care about. When I let my PC specifications deteriorate, I left behind a group of friends that I don't get to play online games with anymore because they don't have a 360. The concept of playing with them again without upgrading my PC is a nice one, but I know none of them are going to pay $50 a year for a service that isn't worth it right now unless you also have a 360. I know that you're responding to my claim the game won't sell well, though, and, well, I still stick by that. I just don't see it happening, and even if it does, I don't see it selling well enough to revive Shadowrun as a franchise. It's too much of a niche title.
Not entirely sure what you mean by lack of content to be honest with you. There are a good number of races, and a pretty nice mix of spells and tech that give you one hell of a mix of "classes" you could essentially build for yourself. There's been no mention at all of the number of maps included in the game in any preview or comment in the beta forums. The no split screen thing is a shame I guess, but I don't use it, and don't terribly enjoy playing with people online who DO do that, especially when they like to be on different teams :P Just a personal opinion of course, but I also play a great deal of my games with randoms (yes, I actually play in public games, *GASP*) and I very very rarely see people playing split screen online anyway. I do see why you wouldn't like that personally, but I don't see it being a deal breaker for most gamers. As for that last comment in your first paragraph, I personally, after actually having played the game with the full span of powers, weapons, and tech, can say that they most definitely have stuck with the license enough to differentiate themselves from other FPS games. What you've read might not match up with that, but what I've played does.
As for the last paragraph, it really sounds like you have a problem differentiating between your own disappointment and what will effect the public at large. Will it bum out some that you have to pay to play with consoles? Possibly. Will most pc gamers care? Ask around here sometime exactly how many PC specific gamers actually want to play with console gamers. It's not something I see mattering for the most part at all. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am on this one.
The amount of maps and gametypes hasn't been announced? I remember reading numbers at some point. Were those fake?
We don't have the full game with regards to graphics (lower res textures), and there's only one character model per race right now (though there have been more shown in trailers). Some of the tech does show on your character, slight smoke for the inactive smoke spell, a red glow to one eye for smartlink, a backpack for the glider, stuff like that. Some show, some, like wired reflexes, don't for obvious reasons. Though again, we don't have everything as far as the character models are concerned, and they've already changed some things graphically with the last patch they put out, and have said it'll change more with release. But yeah, some of the stuff does show/effect your model. Oh, and as the trolls toughen when being attacked, they grow spikes along their shoulders, head, arms and back. Kind of neat.
Gametypes, yes. Maps, nope.
Not a problem. Any other questions, just feel free to ask.
Nowhere near true to the source material, but still rather entertaining.
Not trying to derail or anything, but FYI: The powers, wepons and tech are not from the license. In fact, much of it blatantly contradicts the license.
Perhaps he means the fact that there's only two game types, and they're both team capture the flag.
What? Are you kidding? It sounds like a multiplayer game mode that lost its single player campaign. Very few games can do this and pull it off - Unreal Tournament pretty much has the market sewn up in a neat little bow.
Only the hardest of hardcore are even going to blink twice at this release, and the Live for PC is an utterly un-viable proposition until it matures significantly
猿も木から落ちる
I don't think you've yet to see the combinations that come from Race, tech, magic, and weapons. The number of possible active combinations is just ridiculous. The strategies, just for the two simple maps that there are, are immense. This isn't like CS, where you decide to go tunnel or bridge on De_dust and have it out the same way round after round. It's nowhere near that simple. With teleportation and gliders, attack vectors truly become three dimensional. That is why the game reminds me of UT. You aren't committed to a specific plan of attack, even less so than you were/are in UT with the freedom of the unlimited translocator.
There are going to be three gametypes, not two, and they're more sufficient than what Gears threw out, and look at how that's prospered as an MP game. One is DM-ish, called Attrition, which isn't in the beta. Bodies can't be cleared or something, its an interesting spin. The other two modes are the team CTF, and they strongly vary. When one team is put specifically as a defensive team, they take totally different strategies and skills than if they're in a situation where they can end up being in either offensive or defensive mode. UT came out as an MP or bots game and only had what, 4 gametypes(DM and TDM count as one, CTF, DOM, AS... and dom sucked, and AS was over once you learned the maps and rocket boosting)? They did have a shit ton of maps and map packs and 3rd party support, though. If they get a high map count for Shadowrun, like 15-20ish for release, they'll at least have a leg to stand on.
Still, this game has a great deal to overcome due to the carrying the Shadowrun name and a potential lack of proper marketing. They aren't going to win over anyone who even remotely likes the Shadowrun IP, and they have to get it into PC players minds that this is a game to play. Right now, it isn't even a blip on the radar. It's too bad, too, because it has everything going for it in the gameplay department. It's easily one of the most strategically challenging shooters I've ever played. Teamplay is involved, but this isn't your Rainbow Six or Battlefield, strength-in-numbers/methodical style teamplay, and it isnt your Gears style, machismo-driven/twitch teamplay either. Its a hybrid, kinda like Tribes and kinda like UT. You can excel as a solo player to an extent, but you will truly excel as a great solo player who also functions as a part of a team.
People who have played the game are supporting it despite the flaws to the license.
However the comparisons to other games in the genre are valid.
Hopefully when this is released I'll have a better connection and be able to play online.
Doubtful, but I'm a damn good heavy support guy.
Some are taken from the license, some are new, some are changed. We've kinda gone over this.
Over it at least a few times, yeah. His point still stands though. At best the game sorta follows the PnP version on those things, and that's giving a lot of leeway to the word "sorta".