Thread: Oh Screw This!
View Single Post
Old 09-26-2005, 11:26 AM   #20
MaximumMayhem
Rookie
 
MaximumMayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
2 things, you shouldn't cry so loud about a game, I mean, in a war where millions of people die over fuel resources, or the lack of them, where terrorism is judged by the colour of the victim's skin and where a blind eye is turned to the rape of natural resources, it seems a bit "off" to start moaning about a game so violently. The thing is, get some balance, go out, do something useful. You hate the game, do not play it. It's why I wouldn't play Splinter Cell 1.

Oh how incredibly righteous of you. Just because I dont have the absolute power to halt all global wars, racism and destruction of the habitable Earth; doesnt mean i am ranked high enough to start discussing what is now in comparison, a non existant problem when compared to 'real' wordly issues. If that were the case, why even bother creating forums over such trivial things as mere games? Wouldnt any kind of non positive post immediately cease to be productive?

Well ill tell you something, if it wasnt for people like you (your being appalled by certain negative aspects of the world) and me, who voice their concern about everyday things that dont sit well however large or small they may appear (eg. be it the issue of pathetically narrowminded 'racial superiority', to the lacking service at your local shopping centre, to how the mechanic screwed you over because you dont know squat about your car); we'd be living the lives of happy, ignorantly blissful capitalist - 'hand your money over ' saps. If something doesnt smell right, by hell kick up a stink about it. Because in most cases, it keeps the bastards honest.

Someone in this thread stated that they will buy Battlefront because it has the STAR WARS title on it. Doesnt that sadden you? This sort of thing is at the forefront of my argument here. LucasArts have obviously grown a tad complacent towards the consumer and arent willing to focus behind a product 100%, because all they are interested in is revenue. On a much smaller scale, its no different to PG & E screwing over local townspeople and their very health, to make bucks. Like I said, its on an incredibly smaller scale, but appalling nonetheless. So while this may seem like crying over something irrelevant to complain about here; i beg to differ.


This message board is comprised of members that enjoy LucasArts games in general; the major percentage being those that enjoy Star Wars; and, ill take a wild assumption here in guessing they also enjoy Star Wars themed games too. So dont you (as someone who in some way, has the same sort of inclination to Star Wars as many others here do) feel somewhat insulted that a company is expecting you to pay money for something that is sub par? All the while, seeing other similarly themed titles which undoubtably prove it can be better granted technology in this current age? I mean, dont tell me its hard for a company who creates games (all they solely do for a business) to; on the amazing monetary budgets they have, create something more than a mediocre teambased FPS? We all know Lucas is one financially well endowed mammal and im sure that LucasArts themselves dont just get the $$ scraps, so it seems that this lack of quality is becoming a worry.

You go on to state the strenghts of different game developing houses. Whats stopping LucasArts from creating an engine as fantastic as Unreal or Source? Money restrictions? Hiring the top minds in the business? Microsoft seems to have stepped into the gaming market at a far later date than LucasArts and they are taking this business seriously with no problems. Hell, they acquired Rare and Bungie; whats stopping LucasArts from following suit in scooping up industry greats? You say ID and Epic have the experience. Its the people behind the name that add to this regard, not vice versa. Everyone has their price and it seems that LA isnt willing to pay for it, which is inpart; thanks to individuals that state they'll buy said product merely because it has 'Star Wars' on it. They (LA and othersuch A-holes concerned) need to know its about time to change this shallow tactic because it wont be putting the food on the table for much longer.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
I know for a fact that the games that have diverted away from Lucasarts control probably work better. X-Wing Vs Tie Fighter has EU ships and most people would argue it's one of the best space shooters around to date and still being sold to this day. Also Knights of the Old Republic stands by its own merits and does better because of it. Because Battlefront is closer linked to the films then certain "pressures" are implied. Also, consider that the average fan can not really tell clone armour apart, I don't see it as a big deal, especially when it's uncertain what armour patterns were worn on planets like Bespin or Kamino for that matter, would they be wearning the new uniforms or what?
As far as control goes; there's 'control' and then there's 'blatant disregard for a license that puts off people who expect to see what they pay for'. Ie. Thought behind placement. It may sound extreme that some people are complaining about Luke Skywalker's lightsaber being green in Hoth; but Star Wars has become more of a familiar institution. Lightsaber colour sound farfetched? Maybe, but my 6 year old nephew can tell you that "pilot Luke" has a blue lightsaber and "jedi Luke" has a green one. Gaming and fiction is an illusion. Star Wars is a memorable illusion. Screw with it and people just wont buy it. You're right, Battlefront is much more closer linked to the films in that its meant to play them out; it seems that not enough pressure is being applied to make it a homage to them. Average fans may not be able to tell clone armour apart as the prequels have grown far more complex when it comes to visuals. Why not cater to ALL audiences by keeping basic elements of the game such as armour colour etc.. as they were in the films. Its a simply case of copycat. Doesnt sound that difficult does it? Then you'd be doing a larger % of people justice and bottom line is you make more money aswell as fulfill people's expectations. Smiles all around.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
Why tell me? It's obvious, I'm very picky about my games as a "poor" student, so I need to get stuff that comes from trusted sources and developers who I know deliver consistantly.
Because if you're on the "same team" as you've stated, let alone picky due to your budget then why not intervene and have your say about the issue at hand here? Its either that, or let the 'Vote #1 Star Wars Branders' screw your gaming options to the ground by giving dishonest companies the room to drop the quality bar. Evil unchecked spreads, however small.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
You're arguing agains someone not interested in the argument. We're on the same side, I just hate people getting wound up so heavily and personally over something, that as you said, you will not buy. There are MANY games that are pure garbage compared to their source, heck Constantine comes across as a crap film AND game compared to the comics. Star Wars is unique in that the crap/decent ratio is surprisingly high just by the number of games produced (unless you liked Super Bombad racing).
You must be, seeing as you posted a lengthy reply. Dont get me wrong, this isnt something I lose sleep over. As you say, its a game and games arent really meant to be taken on a serious level. Ive just had enough of game companies losing their respect for quality and working horizontally instead of working to a higher standard, raising the benchmark. Battlefront 2; for a sequel, hasnt provided any answers to the problems we've seen in the first; only more features with the same dated engine. You release patches to make up for your mistakes and not the same game with a GB or so of extras in it in repacked form. As a student, you'd understand this more than anyone. The bottom line is, LA has the resources to ensure that the 'crap/decent' ratio of games should be 1 in 10 atleast. They arent pushing the bar up, just forward.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
It's a game, as in a CONSOLE game, that's why when I play it on PC it sucks so bad.
Then it has no business being on PC until it's done properly. Otherwise, why port something that "sucks so bad"? Its still being done though. Do you know the answer yet? Hence my post's purpsose is to alert the shi.. ahh unsavoury types that i wont stand for it, and that its about time they woke up or they'll be left behind in their pile of beta titles to keep them company while game houses that exist to make quality titles thrive. You want to talk about film? Why do you think Stealth bombed in the US when it was released? Ill tell you why, its because the public is fed up with all the action packed, brainless Bruckheimer sh*t released today. LA hasnt reached that rejection pinnacle yet, but theyre climbing the mountain well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
No really, I can wipe bots on a Playstation 2 thanks to auto-aim and optomisation for the PS2 controller, but on PC where although you are near enough 100% accurate with a mouse +/-10%, the projectiles are so slow it really lags that you can't hit jack without leading your target as if you're launching "mini-rockets" with the beserk mode in UT2003/4. Heck, you can't rocket jump without turning friendly fire off. It's hard to create consistant realism when the source itself is full of inconsistances.
Refer to last para. Exactly. So where or who does the problem begin with? Looks like you answered your own statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
I take the movies as being Canon but details to be mucked around in slightly, because their physics is not going to work with ours. That's why Pandemic wont license the Havok engine (for example), because that simulates Earth Physics, but an AT-AT wouldn't be able to walk, (too heavy) hover vehicles would have trouble with momentum (no friction, NO BRAKES!) and you'd spend more effort modding it to take into account what is unreal, than what it is, although Bungie did a good job with Halo 2, despite it's inaccuracies with physics, so maybe that would have been something to see.
News flash: 90% of video games are based on pure fantasy. Somehow engines used thus far have been lenient when it comes to tackling the lack of reality issue. I dont see that as an excuse for a lack of a decent engine affecting gameplay physics. If that response were to come from the mouth of an LA PR, they'd need to go back to wording school. I admire your trying to come up with valid points, but they do nothing to cover for LA's lack of gaming engine quality.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
You shouldn't really cuss a game that isn't out yet. Check the reviews when it's out and make your final decision.
No I shouldnt, but to merit that, ive read or seen very little to make me hold SWBF 2 in any sort of higher esteem. Perhaps you can prove me wrong in showing proof that Pandemic are really trying to dispel the screw ups that brought the original down. No, i dont count a server browser, buddy list and clan recognition as evidence. We ask for uncapped FPS and stable netcode and they give us a sprint button and space 'battles' - the story of Pandemic's life...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
Anyway, you're oversimplifying BF2 and overgloryifying Lucas.
Quite the contrary as thats basically how simple BF2 appears to be, and theres little present glory when it come to re-enacting a basic Lucas vision in a game. If people who are mere fans of Star Wars are complaining, then obviously important parts of the SW theme have been lost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
I am not a fanboy and IMHO, Lucas "lost-it" when script writing Ep1-3. Heck, Republic Commando convinces me that Ep2/3 should have been that gritty and murky and that war is unpleasant, not "Yippee Kay Yay I just killed 100!" Oh well, it is a kids film with rediculous amounts of violence, but I'll let that pass or I'll begin quoting Maddox.
'Fanboy' is such a convoluted generalisation. I have much distaste for the ill conceived word. Republic Commando, despite its few misgivings, was designed to show another side to Star Wars. It strayed to a central theme not shown in the films and did that well, hence you didnt see that aspect in the movies; which depict seemingly invincible heroes you recognise and care about, who's lives are glossed over in action and romance and adventure. Instead we saw the other side of the spectrum, of unsing disposable heroes who saw less glory but equally as much action, all for what we knew was a doomed cause yet we; as the player fought for it as the clones did. A true tragic irony, but ill stop right there or ill start quoting myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
For space maps, ever considered that if you let people land on your cap ship, you'll loose, so as a fighter, you can kill transports, or disable the guns by shooting them off, or just dogfight for hours. One of the controversies was whether the space maps would be too Rogue Squadron-ish.
..And here i thought there would finally be some decent battle strategy and instead we're cut short to something that resembles distant CPs you can fly to, oh and guess what kids; now there's more space to have aerial fights in, just like the movies! Thats all the immovable / planned flight path capital ships space scenario tells me thus far. To answer your question, ever considered that if you let people land on your Bespin platforms CP, you'll also lose? So as a fighter, you can kill other ships in a limited dogfight airspace, or disable the guns by shooting them off the platforms? Oh.. or just dogfight aimlessly for hours while players who capture CPs are actually helping your side win battles rather than pilots? The controversy i see here is nothing new apart from larger dogfight space which is hardly worth shelling out for seeing as dogfights are about as integral to a CP game as bananas are for termites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
Find the thread which has the gamespy chatlog of the developers with some fans, it's quite interesting to see the claims they're making for the stuff they're adding. I'll leave it to your own judgement what you think of it.
Claims are just that and can be incrdibly biased. I remember Joe Johnston once claiming that the new logo for Jurassic Park /// was chosen merely "because it looked cool". Oh yeah! Such claims always resound the same in everyone's mind. Talk is cheap Red, and like i said.. there's little there to merit confidence in this expan.. sequel.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
Battlefield 2 has a rubbish single player though
Thats funny, wasnt Battlefront meant to be designed primarily as a multiplayer title? Last time i checked, this was 80% of Battlefield2's core emphasis, Battlefront's seem to be 50/50 and now with Battlefront 2, more like 60/40.. with this 501st Legion crap. What does this tell you about the supposed effort put towards multiplayer which is meant to be the game's selling point? Especially seeing as its obvious MP was a lacklustre experience ( to put nicely) in the original Battlefront.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
Yeah, Valve rule though. Pandemic IMHO did better with Mercaneries, I haven't played it properly, but you get things like hijackable vehicles, OTT destroyable scenary and even little things like seeing your weapons visibly holstered. It kicks BF1's corpse around the floor.
If you clearly know that Pandemic can and have done better, then you see where im coming from.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redtech
Anyway, ultimately, I'll be hard pushed to buy BF2, mainly because the PS2 ain't mine! But I would have to be "stunned to submission" to get it for my Laptop, heck would it even run? But I have a feeling that PC users may be dissapointed and that console users will get a better benefit (except online).
Yeah, you're almost right... although I wish you werent and things were different. I personally dont see the fad in console FPS titles (as where's the fun or challenge in having auto aim play half the title for you?), but failiure to make a decent PC version is only a secondary concern compared to the immense lack of quality put into this costly, over glorified expansion; regardless of platform.

When i heard it was also headed for the PSP i didnt know whether to laugh or vomit. If there were ever a pamphlet handed out to prospective gaming studios, one section would read: "Multiplatform Gaming: The only way to whore half completed software to money throwing franchise loyal consumers!"

Last edited by MaximumMayhem; 09-26-2005 at 11:56 AM.
MaximumMayhem is offline   you may: quote & reply,