i know this has probably been asked before but how bad is the wii version going to be compared to the xbox/ps3 versions. i really dont want to buy another consol just to play a few games... especially when my computer could run this game better than the PS3 can but they wont put it out for PC
i heard that the wii version was going to be a lightsaber slash game
i know this has probably been asked before but how bad is the wii version going to be compared to the xbox/ps3 versions. i really dont want to buy another consol just to play a few games... especially when my computer could run this game better than the PS3 can but they wont put it out for PC
i heard that the wii version was going to be a lightsaber slash game
It’s crazy that this isn’t already in the wild, but turns out plans for a PC version of heavily-physicsed Star Wars Sith ‘em up The Force Unleashed were quietly revealed at NVIDIA’s recent NVISION 08 conference. RPS’ super-secret spy at the event has sent us an audio recording of Pixelux Entertainment (the company behind The Force Unleashed’s physics tech) COO Vik Sohal saying this in the middle of his talk about game physics:
“…Just been released last week on the internet, the Force Unleashed demo on both the PS3 and Xbox 360. We have a PC version as well.”
So there you have it. I’m pretty sure this is an exclusive, but it’s possible I’m just really bad at using Google. Big thanks to RPS’s super-secret spy for this.
He also goes on to detail that “we did rely heavily on GPU acceleration” for the game’s physics (presumably via NVIDIA’s CUDA tech), making this most likely the first high profile game to implement this new, potentially fruitful gimmick.
Unfortunately, The Force Unleashed isn’t garnering great reviews. But hey, it’s nice that the PC isn’t left in the cold.
i know this has probably been asked before but how bad is the wii version going to be compared to the xbox/ps3 versions. i really dont want to buy another consol just to play a few games... especially when my computer could run this game better than the PS3 can but they wont put it out for PC
i heard that the wii version was going to be a lightsaber slash game
It’s crazy that this isn’t already in the wild, but turns out plans for a PC version of heavily-physicsed Star Wars Sith ‘em up The Force Unleashed were quietly revealed at NVIDIA’s recent NVISION 08 conference. RPS’ super-secret spy at the event has sent us an audio recording of Pixelux Entertainment (the company behind The Force Unleashed’s physics tech) COO Vik Sohal saying this in the middle of his talk about game physics:
“…Just been released last week on the internet, the Force Unleashed demo on both the PS3 and Xbox 360. We have a PC version as well.â€
So there you have it. I’m pretty sure this is an exclusive, but it’s possible I’m just really bad at using Google. Big thanks to RPS’s super-secret spy for this.
He also goes on to detail that “we did rely heavily on GPU acceleration†for the game’s physics (presumably via NVIDIA’s CUDA tech), making this most likely the first high profile game to implement this new, potentially fruitful gimmick.
Unfortunately, The Force Unleashed isn’t garnering great reviews. But hey, it’s nice that the PC isn’t left in the cold.
i read that as there was a PC demo but not the actual game.... if there is a PC version can someone confirm? i cant browse sites categorized as "gaming" at work.
I dunno, it might mean either demo or the full game, but would you seriously bother to program a port of a demo, and not the full game? It seems very counter-intuitive.
I am spoiled for the story of this game as the trade paperback of the comics adaptation (80 pgs) was released this week.
I read it cover to cover. I am not disappointed... but I am a pretty huge Star Wars nerd.
What surprised me most was 'scope'.
Can you explain what you mean without spoilers?
Only with great difficulty...
I will say that the game takes place much much later in the Star Wars timeline then I expected. Some decisions they made also bulldoze over certain aspects of EU continuity (much of it assumed... like the Rebel Alliance's age when ANH begins.) while wholeheartedly embracing other aspects of continuity (Zahn stuff.) It's kind of a cool mix. What they take from your EU history, they give back in equal amount.
But suffice it to say the Apprentice/Starkiller (Who was implied in interviews to have a third 'real' name, but I didn't see it in the graphic novel.) is actually a surprisingly big deal in the Star Wars universe.
If anyone remembers Shadows of the Empire, this dude matters a lot more than Dash Rendar or Xizor.
EDIT - Also, either the romance subplot is downplayed considerably in the funny book, or the OXM reviewer is a douchebag, because what I read was surprisingly, touchingly understated.
Please tell me that Kyle Katarn's pre-ANH activity wasn't screwed with.
Dark Forces is 0BBY to 1ABY so I think that's still fine...
But anything older than that using the Rebel Alliance is none too canon anymore.
Sephur on
0
PunkBoyThank you! And thank you again!Registered Userregular
I am spoiled for the story of this game as the trade paperback of the comics adaptation (80 pgs) was released this week.
I read it cover to cover. I am not disappointed... but I am a pretty huge Star Wars nerd.
What surprised me most was 'scope'.
Can you explain what you mean without spoilers?
Only with great difficulty...
I will say that the game takes place much much later in the Star Wars timeline then I expected. Some decisions they made also bulldoze over certain aspects of EU continuity (much of it assumed... like the Rebel Alliance's age when ANH begins.) while wholeheartedly embracing other aspects of continuity (Zahn stuff.) It's kind of a cool mix. What they take from your EU history, they give back in equal amount.
But suffice it to say the Apprentice/Starkiller (Who was implied in interviews to have a third 'real' name, but I didn't see it in the graphic novel.) is actually a surprisingly big deal in the Star Wars universe.
If anyone remembers Shadows of the Empire, this dude matters a lot more than Dash Rendar or Xizor.
EDIT - Also, either the romance subplot is downplayed considerably in the funny book, or the OXM reviewer is a douchebag, because what I read was surprisingly, touchingly understated.
Please tell me that Kyle Katarn's pre-ANH activity wasn't screwed with.
Dark Forces is 0BBY to 1ABY so I think that's still fine...
But anything older than that using the Rebel Alliance is none too canon anymore.
I can't think of much that takes place during that time, so it shouldn't be too bad, hopefully.
PunkBoy on
Steam ID:
The Linecutters Podcast: Your weekly dose of nerd! Tune in for the live broadcast every Wednesday at 7 PM EST, only at www.non-productive.com!
I dunno, it might mean either demo or the full game, but would you seriously bother to program a port of a demo, and not the full game? It seems very counter-intuitive.
but it seems like with the game coming out in a week and a half that they would have made a real announcement if the PC game was coming out...
unless they are going to come out with it a few months later which also does nothing for me.
all in all im not getting my hopes up.
any clue about the controls or gameplay of the wii version though?
I was looking through my copy of EGM here and I noticed this game got some pretty darn mediocre reviews. Why is this good news? Because that means I will like this game! Hurray for bad reviews!
Well, the reviews and lack of funds (mainly lack of funds because review sites are usually crap anyway) mean that I will be going through Goozex to get this game. I realize it will be a while before I can actually get it on Goozex, but that's ok with me I will have Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise to carry me the extra time I will have to wait.
Bad reviews mean nothing...I still have to have this game, mainly because this one is the only demo I have ever played through more than once (I think I'm up to 15ish times).
Moorening on
It would appear there ain't no rest for the wicked...who knew?
Well, the reviews and lack of funds (mainly lack of funds because review sites are usually crap anyway) mean that I will be going through Goozex to get this game. I realize it will be a while before I can actually get it on Goozex, but that's ok with me I will have Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise to carry me the extra time I will have to wait.
Bad reviews mean nothing...I still have to have this game, mainly because this one is the only demo I have ever played through more than once (I think I'm up to 15ish times).
I'm forced to agree on the subject of reviews... At this point, I just have to give up on them and just start playing everything... Perhaps with some sort of physical Gamefly substitute (Blockbuster has a deal in-store where you pay 29.99CAD/month and can have any one game out at a time....) because I have found a LOT to like from both Too Human (5.0) and Mercenaries 2 (5.5).
Well, the reviews and lack of funds (mainly lack of funds because review sites are usually crap anyway) mean that I will be going through Goozex to get this game. I realize it will be a while before I can actually get it on Goozex, but that's ok with me I will have Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise to carry me the extra time I will have to wait.
Bad reviews mean nothing...I still have to have this game, mainly because this one is the only demo I have ever played through more than once (I think I'm up to 15ish times).
I'm forced to agree on the subject of reviews... At this point, I just have to give up on them and just start playing everything... Perhaps with some sort of physical Gamefly substitute (Blockbuster has a deal in-store where you pay 29.99CAD/month and can have any one game out at a time....) because I have found a LOT to like from both Too Human (5.0) and Mercenaries 2 (5.5).
I guess I like shit games now.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I find myself going more by word of mouth of friends or people here lately, and they haven't been too terribly wrong. In fact I don't think I've felt disappointed in playing games recommended by people here once, which is good. I'll wait to see what people here say and if I end up getting it through Goozex I won't feel like I was ripped off if the game isn't as good as I hope it is.
Edit: I have to agree with Houn. It seems the sad fact that the major review sites seem to only give out good reviews if it's paid for or it's "revolutionary", but they really don't take into account the whole "fun" thing.
Moorening on
It would appear there ain't no rest for the wicked...who knew?
The people pointing out that "olol all reviews suck" would do well to actually read the reviews and not just the cool little number or letter grade they gave it at the end.
That shit with enemies blocking all your Force powers in a game where that's your only effective weapon (and one that has to recharge at that) is a major fucking flaw.
I know you guys want to sound all cool and "fuck reviews/the establishment/etc." but seriously, Star Wars games have fucked up way more than any game journalists have.
To be honest, I find the opposite is often the case, where magazines will gush about a game as the next big thing and I'll just try it and go "Huh? What's so great about this?"
Happened to me with KotoR, and I was a big fan of Baldur's Gate, and even enjoyed Mass Effect. But KotoR just felt poorly written and dull. Just stopped playing after traipsing through the Tattooine desert.
Similar with Psychonauts, which everyone raves about, but whilst the actual setting and characters are cool, the gameplay just felt dull to me and the platforming was finicky to get down.
EDIT: Also, what Vow said. It's easy to talk down on reviews in general as being made of suck. Personally I just try to find a magazine that more often than not holds the same opinions that I do (right now it's mainly EDGE ).
The people pointing out that "olol all reviews suck" would do well to actually read the reviews and not just the cool little number or letter grade they gave it at the end.
That shit with enemies blocking all your Force powers in a game where that's your only effective weapon (and one that has to recharge at that) is a major fucking flaw.
I know you guys want to sound all cool and "fuck reviews/the establishment/etc." but seriously, Star Wars games have fucked up way more than any game journalists have.
I have read the reviews not just looking at the score. I never look at just the score because those are always misleading anyway. I don't really see the force blocking shields as a flaw, just a different way to defend against your almighty powers. A way to switch it up a bit and make things more difficult. It may not be the best way, but I can see it as a way to avoid making the game too easy and making the whole thing ridiculously repetative.
I seem to also remember the reviews mentioning that the levels are expansive and not in a good way, but I've never had a problem with expansive levels, just more there for me to enjoy. I think that may be their perspective, but until I play the game or hear from people I feel I can trust who don't get paid for their opinions, I don't really listen to the reviews except for to maybe get a general idea about a game.
We'll see though, maybe everyone else will think the game is crap as well, but without everyone being able to play it and able to form their own opinions. I still say I want to play it.
Moorening on
It would appear there ain't no rest for the wicked...who knew?
It’s crazy that this isn’t already in the wild, but turns out plans for a PC version of heavily-physicsed Star Wars Sith ‘em up The Force Unleashed were quietly revealed at NVIDIA’s recent NVISION 08 conference. RPS’ super-secret spy at the event has sent us an audio recording of Pixelux Entertainment (the company behind The Force Unleashed’s physics tech) COO Vik Sohal saying this in the middle of his talk about game physics:
“…Just been released last week on the internet, the Force Unleashed demo on both the PS3 and Xbox 360. We have a PC version as well.”
So there you have it. I’m pretty sure this is an exclusive, but it’s possible I’m just really bad at using Google. Big thanks to RPS’s super-secret spy for this.
He also goes on to detail that “we did rely heavily on GPU acceleration” for the game’s physics (presumably via NVIDIA’s CUDA tech), making this most likely the first high profile game to implement this new, potentially fruitful gimmick.
Unfortunately, The Force Unleashed isn’t garnering great reviews. But hey, it’s nice that the PC isn’t left in the cold.
UPDATE ON THE SCOOP: Not happening.
Edit - direct from LucasArts - “I can tell you definitively that there is no PC version of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed planned. I would assume Vik was talking about a PC version of Digital Molecular Matter.”
Heavy sigh. Apologies for the false alarm. I can promise you our source was absolutely convinced by what he told us, and that we’ve got a recording of the exact quote below (and can provide it to terrifying lawyers if necessary), but guess Vik Sohal just expressed it very badly. Or there’s a crazy conspiracy, which seems unlikely at this point.
So yep, misunderstanding. The game remains safe from filthy pirates (with the possible exception of the "Space Pirate" kind ).
I think game critics have largely fallen into one of two patterns:
1. They see so many games that they get over-critical; if it's not completely new and surprising, it'll naturally seem old hat, even if it's fun.
2. The game publisher didn't give them enough of a kickback, so they're forced to review it lower. It's the "buy a score" system.
This.
The first one is definitely true. Look at the Guitar Hero 3 reviews. The major complaint? "It's more of the same." That doesn't make it a bad game, it just makes it an uncreative game. This effects sports games the most, for whatever reason. Madden is the widest example used, but really, NFL football isn't going to change dramatically every year, so every Madden is NFL football and people bitch it's the same game. It doesn't make any sense to me.
The second one is a smaller issue, but a worse issue. Paying off the companies for good reviews completely ruins their credibility. I think it's worse when a reviewer decides "Well they didn't pay us money, so let's give them a bad review." What?! Now hey, it might have been going on back in the day too, but I remember GamePRO was the gaming magazine to have. Before the internet really took, it was the only major magazine out there. Games would get bad reviews, and then a couple pages later, there'd be an ad for that game. And as far as I know, no one got mad over it. It's expected to be unbiased in journalism.
That said, the fact that EGM (it was EGM right?) listed the story line as a detriment is deplorable to me. I know I'm gonna sound like Yahtzee here, since he did a rant on this, but it's true. Story is a huge part of a lot of games and can make or break some. A good story can cover up game play flaws because you're too engrossed in the story to care that your lightsaber is a bat, or that some dick has a shield that magically negates the most powerful thing in the galaxy. You let those things slide because the game has immersed you into it's world. If the story is great, then these EGM fuckwads probably spent so much time griping about combat that when actual dialogue or a cut scene came they fucking skipped it or watched enough to get the basic gist of what's going on. I mean shit, just from the demo cut scene, I can tell there's inner conflict with the character from his reaction to the orders Vader gives him. The EGM guys probably got the mission "Yeah yeah, kill everyone, kill Jedi Master" NEXT LEVEL without watching anything.
Ugh. I'm done. I gotta get back to work. I'll be getting this game on Amazon when it comes out.
I have read the reviews not just looking at the score. I never look at just the score because those are always misleading anyway. I don't really see the force blocking shields as a flaw, just a different way to defend against your almighty powers. A way to switch it up a bit and make things more difficult. It may not be the best way, but I can see it as a way to avoid making the game too easy and making the whole thing ridiculously repetative.
I seem to also remember the reviews mentioning that the levels are expansive and not in a good way, but I've never had a problem with expansive levels, just more there for me to enjoy. I think that may be their perspective, but until I play the game or hear from people I feel I can trust who don't get paid for their opinions, I don't really listen to the reviews except for to maybe get a general idea about a game.
We'll see though, maybe everyone else will think the game is crap as well, but without everyone being able to play it and able to form their own opinions. I still say I want to play it.
I have a problem with the shields from an immersion stand point, not a game play stand point. I'll enjoy watching their shields blow up when I throw a fucking lightning infused boulder at them.
Also, for the bolded part. I guran-damn-fucking-tee you none of these reviewers complained that GTAIV was too expansive or that it didn't give you enough direction. Fucking two faced assholes.
There's also much, much more to do in sandbox games. Larger worlds aren't really a problem there...San Andreas was a bit too big, and they toned it down in IV.
But yes, for pure non-sandbox action games, huge levels can be a problem if they're not filled with things to do.
I have read the reviews not just looking at the score. I never look at just the score because those are always misleading anyway. I don't really see the force blocking shields as a flaw, just a different way to defend against your almighty powers. A way to switch it up a bit and make things more difficult. It may not be the best way, but I can see it as a way to avoid making the game too easy and making the whole thing ridiculously repetative.
Exactly right. Saying that your character is this living weapon of mass destruction is neat, and it is fun decimating Storm Troopers, but that doesn't make for much of a game. There needs to be a challenge factor. After reading spoilers of the plot, I think that, at least in terms of boss battles, these power restrictions make sense.
Real fucking spoilers. You've been warned.
From what I can tell, the bosses are either Jedi, Padawans, or your trusty robot sidekick PROXY emulating a Jedi because Vader likes to randomly test his apprentice with fights to the death to keep him fresh and alert. And, of course, Vader and the Emperor at the end. The plot is somewhat decent, but I'm not sure I like the depth of the apprentice's roll in pre-ANH affairs.
It makes sense, in that context, that the bosses aren't vulnerable to the same things that the cannon fodder is. The question is whether the generic enemies will gain Force immunity, and to what degree. I mean, a force field may stop someone from being Force-grabbed directly, but will it stop a boulder from flying into them? Or a TIE-fighter from crashing down on their head? That's where my concern lies.
Nightslyr on
PSN/XBL/Nintendo/Origin/Steam: Nightslyr 3DS: 1607-1682-2948 Switch: SW-3515-0057-3813 FF XIV: Q'vehn Tia
There's also much, much more to do in sandbox games. Larger worlds aren't really a problem there...San Andreas was a bit too big, and they toned it down in IV.
But yes, for pure non-sandbox action games, huge levels can be a problem if they're not filled with things to do.
I'm pretty sure "drive around and kill people" and "run around and kill people" are similiar things.
There's also much, much more to do in sandbox games. Larger worlds aren't really a problem there...San Andreas was a bit too big, and they toned it down in IV.
But yes, for pure non-sandbox action games, huge levels can be a problem if they're not filled with things to do.
I'm pretty sure "drive around and kill people" and "run around and kill people" are similiar things.
I can tell that you either
A) Never played GTAIV
or
Are a goddamn idiot who couldn't be bothered to try any missions
There's also much, much more to do in sandbox games. Larger worlds aren't really a problem there...San Andreas was a bit too big, and they toned it down in IV.
But yes, for pure non-sandbox action games, huge levels can be a problem if they're not filled with things to do.
From what I've read in the reviews there isn't a lack of things to do, the levels just go on for a long time with lots of people/stuff to destroy.
You're right though, as long as there is something to do in the expansive environments it doesn't get boring. Hopefully the swarms of enemies in the big levels are varying enough to keeps it from being exceedingly repetative. I can see it getting boring if you've got a level that lasts an hour with wave after wave of the same basic storm trooper/rebel, but if they switch up the enemies a bit as you progress through a level I'm fine with that. Then again, like I've said before I played the demo over and over again. I'm sure that even with the same type of enemy coming at you throughout the level there are different ways you can take them out either using your own powers directly on them or on the environments around them to keep it fun.
I think this might end up being one of those games that you get what you put into it. If you end up finding a combo that works well every time and use that same combo every time it will get boring and tedious, but if you keep an open mind and find new and interesting ways to dispatch your foes it will keep the whole thing feel fresh throughout. I know in the demo it hasn't felt the same way twice through for me because I've read around here about new ways to take care of enemies and through my own experimentation.
Moorening on
It would appear there ain't no rest for the wicked...who knew?
It’s crazy that this isn’t already in the wild, but turns out plans for a PC version of heavily-physicsed Star Wars Sith ‘em up The Force Unleashed were quietly revealed at NVIDIA’s recent NVISION 08 conference. RPS’ super-secret spy at the event has sent us an audio recording of Pixelux Entertainment (the company behind The Force Unleashed’s physics tech) COO Vik Sohal saying this in the middle of his talk about game physics:
“…Just been released last week on the internet, the Force Unleashed demo on both the PS3 and Xbox 360. We have a PC version as well.â€
So there you have it. I’m pretty sure this is an exclusive, but it’s possible I’m just really bad at using Google. Big thanks to RPS’s super-secret spy for this.
He also goes on to detail that “we did rely heavily on GPU acceleration†for the game’s physics (presumably via NVIDIA’s CUDA tech), making this most likely the first high profile game to implement this new, potentially fruitful gimmick.
Unfortunately, The Force Unleashed isn’t garnering great reviews. But hey, it’s nice that the PC isn’t left in the cold.
UPDATE ON THE SCOOP: Not happening.
Edit - direct from LucasArts - “I can tell you definitively that there is no PC version of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed planned. I would assume Vik was talking about a PC version of Digital Molecular Matter.â€
Heavy sigh. Apologies for the false alarm. I can promise you our source was absolutely convinced by what he told us, and that we’ve got a recording of the exact quote below (and can provide it to terrifying lawyers if necessary), but guess Vik Sohal just expressed it very badly. Or there’s a crazy conspiracy, which seems unlikely at this point.
So yep, misunderstanding. The game remains safe from filthy pirates (with the possible exception of the "Space Pirate" kind ).
see? now does anyone have any info on the wii control set up/differences/gameplay? i really want it to be almost the same game with just worse graphics. i could deal with that.
oh and as far as the "too expansive" there are two sides really. star wars galaxy was too expansive in a bad way, large levels with low population of creatures and people or even buildings. even then the stuff in the game was repetative (anyone else macro farm correlia for crystals?) and not worth stopping to even look at.
on the other side you have Crysis kind of expansive where you can run through the plot if you want or you can spend a few hours cutting down trees with a jeep gun or throwing water bottles at guards and then stealthing and running away. i love that kind of stuff where you can litterally make up challenges and stuff to do aside from the storyline.
There's also much, much more to do in sandbox games. Larger worlds aren't really a problem there...San Andreas was a bit too big, and they toned it down in IV.
But yes, for pure non-sandbox action games, huge levels can be a problem if they're not filled with things to do.
I'm pretty sure "drive around and kill people" and "run around and kill people" are similiar things.
I can tell that you either
A) Never played GTAIV
or
Are a goddamn idiot who couldn't be bothered to try any missions
I'm pretty sure the 60+ hours I've put into GTAIV refute both of your statements. Yes, I've done most of the side missions in GTAIV, but what does it still amount to? Driving around and killing people. The only difference between that and "sandbox" style are which people to kill.
Empty levels are a problem, expansive levels are not.
As an aside, I had my favorite kill in the demo a few days ago. It was pretty simple:
I was fighting against those Troopers that come out of a doorway on the left right before you enter the huge TIE-fighter hanger/assembly area. I was hacking, slashing, and force grabbing my way through them. It was all pretty pedestrian until I killed the last guy. I grabbed him and tossed him to the left. He was embedded within the part of the wall you can rip away with the force. Simple, but it looked damn cool, as he had an arm hanging limply from his side as the wall's canisters/bricks/whatever lay broken atop of him.
It felt more badass than charging a TIE-fighter with lightning and throwing it at a horde of enemies, mainly because I could look at the aftermath up close for a few moments. It just looked brutal.
Nightslyr on
PSN/XBL/Nintendo/Origin/Steam: Nightslyr 3DS: 1607-1682-2948 Switch: SW-3515-0057-3813 FF XIV: Q'vehn Tia
I'm pretty sure the 60+ hours I've put into GTAIV refute both of your statements. Yes, I've done most of the side missions in GTAIV, but what does it still amount to? Driving around and killing people. The only difference between that and "sandbox" style are which people to kill.
And you're pretty much right. Whatever story context is draped over those events, whatever antagonists or competitors or thrown into it, you drive and then you shoot. Or you shoot and then you drive. Sometimes, you drive and shoot.
Here's what I know about Force Unleashed going into it.
I love the Force Powers. I love the character. I love the story, as presented in the graphic novel.
I loved the demo.
The EGM review does not give me the information I need for me to sympathize with the points it tries to make.
A 'shield' prevents the use of my Force powers. Something preventing use of Force powers is NOT unusual in Star Wars. Whether it be a sonic weapon that can devastate concentration or a biological entities that were written in as invisible to the Force, or actively negating it.
How it is explained can make it suck or be awesome.
I also did not encounter this complaint in the OXM review. The only consistent complaint of TFU's that I've heard are the QTE boss battle resolutions. And I have made my peace with that.
Anyway im' glad they aren't making a PC version because it bodes slightly better for the next Jedi Knight game.
Really? I took away the exact opposite. LA are pretty much avoiding the PC out of the fear of piracy, at least that's my guess. If there were to be any future JK game, I'd expect it to be more tailored towards console play in terms of gameplay mechanics and control. Which is effectively what Force Unleashed is to a large extent.
Anyway im' glad they aren't making a PC version because it bodes slightly better for the next Jedi Knight game.
Really? I took away the exact opposite. LA are pretty much avoiding the PC out of the fear of piracy, at least that's my guess. If there were to be any future JK game, I'd expect it to be more tailored towards console play in terms of gameplay mechanics and control. Which is effectively what Force Unleashed is to a large extent.
Anyway im' glad they aren't making a PC version because it bodes slightly better for the next Jedi Knight game.
Really? I took away the exact opposite. LA are pretty much avoiding the PC out of the fear of piracy, at least that's my guess. If there were to be any future JK game, I'd expect it to be more tailored towards console play in terms of gameplay mechanics and control. Which is effectively what Force Unleashed is to a large extent.
Anyway im' glad they aren't making a PC version because it bodes slightly better for the next Jedi Knight game.
Really? I took away the exact opposite. LA are pretty much avoiding the PC out of the fear of piracy, at least that's my guess. If there were to be any future JK game, I'd expect it to be more tailored towards console play in terms of gameplay mechanics and control. Which is effectively what Force Unleashed is to a large extent.
the 3rd JK game was largely a letdown anyway.
now if the did a JK game with EU characters....
......
.........
They did.
i mean jacen jaina etc...
real characters not just another no-name jedi with katarn and luke in the game...
Posts
i heard that the wii version was going to be a lightsaber slash game
i read that as there was a PC demo but not the actual game.... if there is a PC version can someone confirm? i cant browse sites categorized as "gaming" at work.
Dark Forces is 0BBY to 1ABY so I think that's still fine...
But anything older than that using the Rebel Alliance is none too canon anymore.
I can't think of much that takes place during that time, so it shouldn't be too bad, hopefully.
but it seems like with the game coming out in a week and a half that they would have made a real announcement if the PC game was coming out...
unless they are going to come out with it a few months later which also does nothing for me.
all in all im not getting my hopes up.
any clue about the controls or gameplay of the wii version though?
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
Mmm, quite.
Bad reviews mean nothing...I still have to have this game, mainly because this one is the only demo I have ever played through more than once (I think I'm up to 15ish times).
I'm forced to agree on the subject of reviews... At this point, I just have to give up on them and just start playing everything... Perhaps with some sort of physical Gamefly substitute (Blockbuster has a deal in-store where you pay 29.99CAD/month and can have any one game out at a time....) because I have found a LOT to like from both Too Human (5.0) and Mercenaries 2 (5.5).
I guess I like shit games now.
1. They see so many games that they get over-critical; if it's not completely new and surprising, it'll naturally seem old hat, even if it's fun.
2. The game publisher didn't give them enough of a kickback, so they're forced to review it lower. It's the "buy a score" system.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I find myself going more by word of mouth of friends or people here lately, and they haven't been too terribly wrong. In fact I don't think I've felt disappointed in playing games recommended by people here once, which is good. I'll wait to see what people here say and if I end up getting it through Goozex I won't feel like I was ripped off if the game isn't as good as I hope it is.
Edit: I have to agree with Houn. It seems the sad fact that the major review sites seem to only give out good reviews if it's paid for or it's "revolutionary", but they really don't take into account the whole "fun" thing.
Bad reviews, but it did what it's supposed to, and was/is a blast.
I believe FU will do the same..we will not be disappointed.
That shit with enemies blocking all your Force powers in a game where that's your only effective weapon (and one that has to recharge at that) is a major fucking flaw.
I know you guys want to sound all cool and "fuck reviews/the establishment/etc." but seriously, Star Wars games have fucked up way more than any game journalists have.
Happened to me with KotoR, and I was a big fan of Baldur's Gate, and even enjoyed Mass Effect. But KotoR just felt poorly written and dull. Just stopped playing after traipsing through the Tattooine desert.
Similar with Psychonauts, which everyone raves about, but whilst the actual setting and characters are cool, the gameplay just felt dull to me and the platforming was finicky to get down.
EDIT: Also, what Vow said. It's easy to talk down on reviews in general as being made of suck. Personally I just try to find a magazine that more often than not holds the same opinions that I do (right now it's mainly EDGE ).
Plus, I too am gay for anything Sith related.
I have read the reviews not just looking at the score. I never look at just the score because those are always misleading anyway. I don't really see the force blocking shields as a flaw, just a different way to defend against your almighty powers. A way to switch it up a bit and make things more difficult. It may not be the best way, but I can see it as a way to avoid making the game too easy and making the whole thing ridiculously repetative.
I seem to also remember the reviews mentioning that the levels are expansive and not in a good way, but I've never had a problem with expansive levels, just more there for me to enjoy. I think that may be their perspective, but until I play the game or hear from people I feel I can trust who don't get paid for their opinions, I don't really listen to the reviews except for to maybe get a general idea about a game.
We'll see though, maybe everyone else will think the game is crap as well, but without everyone being able to play it and able to form their own opinions. I still say I want to play it.
UPDATE ON THE SCOOP: Not happening.
So yep, misunderstanding. The game remains safe from filthy pirates (with the possible exception of the "Space Pirate" kind ).
This.
The first one is definitely true. Look at the Guitar Hero 3 reviews. The major complaint? "It's more of the same." That doesn't make it a bad game, it just makes it an uncreative game. This effects sports games the most, for whatever reason. Madden is the widest example used, but really, NFL football isn't going to change dramatically every year, so every Madden is NFL football and people bitch it's the same game. It doesn't make any sense to me.
The second one is a smaller issue, but a worse issue. Paying off the companies for good reviews completely ruins their credibility. I think it's worse when a reviewer decides "Well they didn't pay us money, so let's give them a bad review." What?! Now hey, it might have been going on back in the day too, but I remember GamePRO was the gaming magazine to have. Before the internet really took, it was the only major magazine out there. Games would get bad reviews, and then a couple pages later, there'd be an ad for that game. And as far as I know, no one got mad over it. It's expected to be unbiased in journalism.
That said, the fact that EGM (it was EGM right?) listed the story line as a detriment is deplorable to me. I know I'm gonna sound like Yahtzee here, since he did a rant on this, but it's true. Story is a huge part of a lot of games and can make or break some. A good story can cover up game play flaws because you're too engrossed in the story to care that your lightsaber is a bat, or that some dick has a shield that magically negates the most powerful thing in the galaxy. You let those things slide because the game has immersed you into it's world. If the story is great, then these EGM fuckwads probably spent so much time griping about combat that when actual dialogue or a cut scene came they fucking skipped it or watched enough to get the basic gist of what's going on. I mean shit, just from the demo cut scene, I can tell there's inner conflict with the character from his reaction to the orders Vader gives him. The EGM guys probably got the mission "Yeah yeah, kill everyone, kill Jedi Master" NEXT LEVEL without watching anything.
Ugh. I'm done. I gotta get back to work. I'll be getting this game on Amazon when it comes out.
I have a problem with the shields from an immersion stand point, not a game play stand point. I'll enjoy watching their shields blow up when I throw a fucking lightning infused boulder at them.
Also, for the bolded part. I guran-damn-fucking-tee you none of these reviewers complained that GTAIV was too expansive or that it didn't give you enough direction. Fucking two faced assholes.
Alright, seriously, enough ranting, back to work.
But yes, for pure non-sandbox action games, huge levels can be a problem if they're not filled with things to do.
Exactly right. Saying that your character is this living weapon of mass destruction is neat, and it is fun decimating Storm Troopers, but that doesn't make for much of a game. There needs to be a challenge factor. After reading spoilers of the plot, I think that, at least in terms of boss battles, these power restrictions make sense.
Real fucking spoilers. You've been warned.
It makes sense, in that context, that the bosses aren't vulnerable to the same things that the cannon fodder is. The question is whether the generic enemies will gain Force immunity, and to what degree. I mean, a force field may stop someone from being Force-grabbed directly, but will it stop a boulder from flying into them? Or a TIE-fighter from crashing down on their head? That's where my concern lies.
Switch: SW-3515-0057-3813 FF XIV: Q'vehn Tia
I'm pretty sure "drive around and kill people" and "run around and kill people" are similiar things.
I can tell that you either
A) Never played GTAIV
or
You're right though, as long as there is something to do in the expansive environments it doesn't get boring. Hopefully the swarms of enemies in the big levels are varying enough to keeps it from being exceedingly repetative. I can see it getting boring if you've got a level that lasts an hour with wave after wave of the same basic storm trooper/rebel, but if they switch up the enemies a bit as you progress through a level I'm fine with that. Then again, like I've said before I played the demo over and over again. I'm sure that even with the same type of enemy coming at you throughout the level there are different ways you can take them out either using your own powers directly on them or on the environments around them to keep it fun.
I think this might end up being one of those games that you get what you put into it. If you end up finding a combo that works well every time and use that same combo every time it will get boring and tedious, but if you keep an open mind and find new and interesting ways to dispatch your foes it will keep the whole thing feel fresh throughout. I know in the demo it hasn't felt the same way twice through for me because I've read around here about new ways to take care of enemies and through my own experimentation.
see? now does anyone have any info on the wii control set up/differences/gameplay? i really want it to be almost the same game with just worse graphics. i could deal with that.
oh and as far as the "too expansive" there are two sides really. star wars galaxy was too expansive in a bad way, large levels with low population of creatures and people or even buildings. even then the stuff in the game was repetative (anyone else macro farm correlia for crystals?) and not worth stopping to even look at.
on the other side you have Crysis kind of expansive where you can run through the plot if you want or you can spend a few hours cutting down trees with a jeep gun or throwing water bottles at guards and then stealthing and running away. i love that kind of stuff where you can litterally make up challenges and stuff to do aside from the storyline.
I'm pretty sure the 60+ hours I've put into GTAIV refute both of your statements. Yes, I've done most of the side missions in GTAIV, but what does it still amount to? Driving around and killing people. The only difference between that and "sandbox" style are which people to kill.
Empty levels are a problem, expansive levels are not.
I was fighting against those Troopers that come out of a doorway on the left right before you enter the huge TIE-fighter hanger/assembly area. I was hacking, slashing, and force grabbing my way through them. It was all pretty pedestrian until I killed the last guy. I grabbed him and tossed him to the left. He was embedded within the part of the wall you can rip away with the force. Simple, but it looked damn cool, as he had an arm hanging limply from his side as the wall's canisters/bricks/whatever lay broken atop of him.
It felt more badass than charging a TIE-fighter with lightning and throwing it at a horde of enemies, mainly because I could look at the aftermath up close for a few moments. It just looked brutal.
Switch: SW-3515-0057-3813 FF XIV: Q'vehn Tia
And you're pretty much right. Whatever story context is draped over those events, whatever antagonists or competitors or thrown into it, you drive and then you shoot. Or you shoot and then you drive. Sometimes, you drive and shoot.
Here's what I know about Force Unleashed going into it.
I love the Force Powers. I love the character. I love the story, as presented in the graphic novel.
I loved the demo.
The EGM review does not give me the information I need for me to sympathize with the points it tries to make.
A 'shield' prevents the use of my Force powers. Something preventing use of Force powers is NOT unusual in Star Wars. Whether it be a sonic weapon that can devastate concentration or a biological entities that were written in as invisible to the Force, or actively negating it.
How it is explained can make it suck or be awesome.
I also did not encounter this complaint in the OXM review. The only consistent complaint of TFU's that I've heard are the QTE boss battle resolutions. And I have made my peace with that.
Doesn't mean you people can't enjoy it. There are plenty of good games in the 6-8 range consistently.
Mercenaries is EXTREMELY mediocre and I enjoy it quite a bit.
Anyway im' glad they aren't making a PC version because it bodes slightly better for the next Jedi Knight game.
Really? I took away the exact opposite. LA are pretty much avoiding the PC out of the fear of piracy, at least that's my guess. If there were to be any future JK game, I'd expect it to be more tailored towards console play in terms of gameplay mechanics and control. Which is effectively what Force Unleashed is to a large extent.
the 3rd JK game was largely a letdown anyway.
now if the did a JK game with EU characters....
......
.........
They did.
Its not really a big deal--but yes I imagine the new one would be developed on 360 or something as a lead platform with a coinciding PC release.
Jedi Knight II was ported to the Xbox and Gamecube. Not sure how well they endured the transition, though.
i mean jacen jaina etc...
real characters not just another no-name jedi with katarn and luke in the game...