|
|
 |
| [Dec 08, 2005, 10:50 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
A post to the
RuneGame.com Forums called 'So, If We Did Do Rune 2...' (thanks
RuneGame and Frans) is written by
Tim Gerritsen, who offers a timeline history of Human Head Studios while
addressing the possibility of a sequel to RUNE, their third-person Unreal-engine
melee combat game. While he stresses that the possibilities for a RUNE 2 hinge
on the success of Prey, he does also hint that a little grassroots support is in
order, and towards that end, a
Create Rune 2
Petition is online. Here's a bit: At the moment we are really
concentrating on Prey. We are well aware that if we mess this one up, any hope
of a Rune 2 ever will be pretty much be a pipe dream. Therefore we're doing our
best to make sure we get it right. We have our fingers crossed that the playing
audience will find that our efforts were well worth it. So far so good. Hell, we
got to go through the hell of learning next generation content long before
anyone else had to, and that alone gives us a huge leg up.
If you really want a Rune 2, though, you need to tell it to the publishers. We
want a Rune 2 some day. We've always said that. It is the pubs you need to
convince. They see a game with a so so meta critic score and a devoted, but
smallish audience and sales that were good but not great. Of course you and we
know different. Rune was a major labor of love, and I believe firmly that anyone
who actually plays the game for more than an hour can see that (after the water
level and all those crabs in caves, of course...) ![=]](/miscimages/smiley4.gif)
Seriously, though. Make your voices known to the publishers. If we say, 'Rune
has a truly fantastic following, even now, five years on' they just look at us
like "Sure, five people, right?" If we show them forums, they just shrug. If
this wonderful group of hard core, dedicated fans were to all shout at the
publishers, however, that speaks volumens. If they know that people are stoked,
that Rune really was an overlooked gem, and, most importantly, wallets would
open at the sound of Rune II on a shelf, then they would listen.
 |
| 50. |
Re: No subject |
Dec 8, 2005, 19:57 |
theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
TT was remade. Ok graphics werent overhauled much if at all, but the game is called Chris Sawyer's Locomotion. Its got inflation factored in, a "Transport Index" and a very realistic fluctuating economy. Well worth a look. I don't class that as a remake... there's a reason it's not called Transport Tycoon 2 and that is Sawyer knows it's awful. Every review of it was negative. The graphics are actually worse because it feels more cluttered. A true remake would be amazing - one with a Civ4 style update of graphics; not amazing but perfect for the gameplay. There was talk of a sequel, must have been a year or two back, but it was either never developed or it somehow turned into Locomotion.
Still, there's always OpenTTD (http://www.openttd.org/), which is an open source version of the game - they are currently trying to update the graphics and it looks quite interesting, though I have no idea how long it is going to take: http://wiki.openttd.org/index.php/Enhanced_GFX_replacement
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Emotinomicon: Emoticons of the Dead This comment was edited on Dec 8, 19:59. |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Core i7 2600-K (4.6GHz) | 12GB DDR3 | GTX680 SLI (1215/1605) | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD | Windows 8 Pro Hazro HZ30Wie 30" | Saffire PRO 40 | Razer Mamba | Coolermaster RP1000W SteamID: theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
 |
|
| |
| |
|
Date |
Subject |
Author |
| |
1. |
Dec 8, 09:59 |
No subject |
nin |
| |
5. |
Dec 8, 12:58 |
Re: No subject |
Hump |
| |
6. |
Dec 8, 13:02 |
Re: No subject |
Elf Shot The Food |
| |
20. |
Dec 8, 14:47 |
Re: No subject |
Hump |
| |
24. |
Dec 8, 15:21 |
Re: No subject |
LOL@U |
| |
7. |
Dec 8, 13:02 |
Re: No subject |
nin |
| |
8. |
Dec 8, 13:19 |
Re: No subject |
asrof |
| |
9. |
Dec 8, 13:31 |
Re: No subject |
Mostly_Harmless |
| |
10. |
Dec 8, 13:38 |
Re: No subject |
nin |
| |
11. |
Dec 8, 13:48 |
Re: No subject |
MeatForce |
| |
12. |
Dec 8, 13:57 |
Re: No subject |
MMORPGHoD |
| |
13. |
Dec 8, 14:01 |
Re: No subject |
Mostly_Harmless |
| |
15. |
Dec 8, 14:40 |
Re: No subject |
TheBitterJoe |
| |
19. |
Dec 8, 14:45 |
Re: No subject |
BicycleRepairMan |
| |
42. |
Dec 8, 17:00 |
Re: No subject |
diRty roBot |
| |
30. |
Dec 8, 16:19 |
Re: No subject |
Fartacus |
| |
31. |
Dec 8, 16:28 |
I'll raise |
ColoradoHoudini |
| |
52. |
Dec 8, 20:29 |
Re: I'll raise |
MeatForce |
| |
32. |
Dec 8, 16:30 |
Re: No subject |
nin |
| |
16. |
Dec 8, 14:41 |
Re: No subject |
Halsy |
| |
23. |
Dec 8, 15:17 |
Re: No subject |
Krovven |
| |
25. |
Dec 8, 15:22 |
Re: No subject |
Hezekiah |
| |
27. |
Dec 8, 15:33 |
Re: No subject |
Fantaz |
| |
53. |
Dec 8, 20:33 |
Re: No subject |
Parallax Abstraction |
| |
54. |
Dec 8, 21:03 |
Re: No subject |
The Half Elf |
| |
55. |
Dec 8, 21:19 |
Re: No subject |
jm0ris0n |
| |
36. |
Dec 8, 16:39 |
Re: No subject |
Semantics |
| |
18. |
Dec 8, 14:42 |
Re: No subject |
MindTrigger |
| |
21. |
Dec 8, 14:50 |
Re: No subject |
random.thought |
| |
22. |
Dec 8, 15:01 |
Re: No subject |
MeatForce |
| |
26. |
Dec 8, 15:28 |
Re: No subject |
Scud |
| |
28. |
Dec 8, 15:48 |
Re: No subject |
random.thought |
| |
29. |
Dec 8, 16:10 |
Re: No subject |
trashcan |
| |
2. |
Dec 8, 10:01 |
No subject |
Optimaximal |
| |
3. |
Dec 8, 12:43 |
No subject |
Rosco |
| |
4. |
Dec 8, 12:57 |
I WANT RUNE 2 |
Kajetan |
| |
14. |
Dec 8, 14:27 |
No subject |
theyarecomingforyou |
| |
17. |
Dec 8, 14:42 |
Re: No subject |
Elf Shot The Food |
| |
33. |
Dec 8, 16:30 |
Re: No subject |
Malakai |
| |
34. |
Dec 8, 16:34 |
Re: No subject |
Sixis |
| |
35. |
Dec 8, 16:38 |
Re: No subject |
Prez |
| |
37. |
Dec 8, 16:40 |
Re: No subject |
Semantics |
| |
38. |
Dec 8, 16:41 |
Re: No subject |
nin |
| |
39. |
Dec 8, 16:42 |
Re: No subject |
Prez |
| |
40. |
Dec 8, 16:46 |
Re: No subject |
ColoradoHoudini |
| |
41. |
Dec 8, 16:59 |
Re: No subject |
Scud |
| |
58. |
Dec 8, 22:28 |
Re: No subject |
Zephalephelah |
| |
43. |
Dec 8, 17:06 |
Re: No subject |
MMORPGHoD |
| >> |
50. |
Dec 8, 19:57 |
Re: No subject |
theyarecomingforyou |
| |
64. |
Dec 9, 03:11 |
Re: No subject |
Tango |
| |
65. |
Dec 9, 04:50 |
Re: No subject |
The Half Elf |
| |
66. |
Dec 9, 08:59 |
Re: No subject |
Animals for Crackers |
| |
67. |
Dec 9, 09:36 |
Re: No subject |
ColoradoHoudini |
| |
68. |
Dec 9, 09:36 |
Re: No subject |
ColoradoHoudini |
| |
70. |
Dec 9, 10:06 |
Re: No subject |
Panick |
| |
44. |
Dec 8, 17:42 |
Yo MMORPGHOD in the place to be sup!!!! |
Cheese |
| |
45. |
Dec 8, 18:02 |
Re: Yo MMORPGHOD in the place to be sup! |
Kosumo |
| |
46. |
Dec 8, 18:14 |
Why not STEAM it? |
G-Man |
| |
47. |
Dec 8, 18:21 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
Kevlar |
| |
48. |
Dec 8, 18:40 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
cappy |
| |
49. |
Dec 8, 18:49 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
D3lirious |
| |
51. |
Dec 8, 20:08 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
Hunterzyph |
| |
60. |
Dec 8, 23:22 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
cappy |
| |
56. |
Dec 8, 21:39 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
Masa |
| |
61. |
Dec 8, 23:27 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
cappy |
| |
62. |
Dec 8, 23:46 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
jm0ris0n |
| |
69. |
Dec 9, 09:40 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
Masa |
| |
57. |
Dec 8, 22:25 |
Re: Why not STEAM it? |
Fantaz |
| |
59. |
Dec 8, 22:33 |
RedEyed |
Cheese |
| |
63. |
Dec 9, 00:21 |
Jetpacks Done Right |
Camaro76 |
| |
71. |
Dec 9, 17:48 |
No subject |
Dreagon |
| |
72. |
Dec 9, 22:00 |
I think Tim Geritsen |
Creston |
| |
73. |
Dec 12, 10:21 |
Re: I think Tim Geritsen |
Masa |
|
|
|