Impressions don't = promises, and the previews show that. Anyone who thinks what they read in an E3 preview is a promise should avoid reading them completely.

They never said they would patch it in.
They never said it was going to be in a bonus pack.

Epic included vehicle code out of the box with UT2003 with a sample vehicle. Anyone who bought the game should have expected no less and no more.

This comment was edited on Jan 21, 11:13.

Doesn't anyone remember how vehicles were supposed to be in UT 2003 right out of the box?

The only vehicle support that was promised for UT2003 was the Bulldog. It was only intended as an example for mod authors wanting to try and implement vehicles in their work. It was never promised to be in the normal game, or any map pack, or any service pack.

Ever. Until UT2004.

I can understand some of complaints people might have, but please avoid just making stuff up.

http://www.gamespy.com/gdc2002/awards/awards_23b.jpg

Spooky, I swear that's my friend Xtian there looking down her shirt...

So many sites simply REFUSE to give anything below 80% if it comes from a Big Name developer, or has paid for advertising, or for whatever other reason they might think of.

Or maybe they just don't hold unreasonable expectations. The reactions, particularly here, seem to usually have more to do with hype than quality.

How many reviews of Deus Ex were almost totally negative, and then they still give it 80%? It's a bigger difference between the two than the number would indicate.

Only negative review of DX1 I recall was Chick's, and he didnt give it an 80%. The critics loved the game, and it was the awards and the reviews that eventually brought a Quake Fed crowd around to it (in time for the Euro market - which, to your credit, we should probably owe that there is a DX2 -at all-). So maybe it insults some people's sensibilities that DX2 wasn't exactly like DX1 with better graphics, but maybe this is more of Ion Storm learning the market rather "copping out". Sometimes highly innovative, detailed and expensive games don't keep a studio alive. Don't believe me? Go ask Black Isle.

There is a difference between "positive reviews" that rank around 80% (source, gamerankings.com, pc version averages 82% ), and getting GREAT reviews that consistently clock in well over 90%. Let's not forget that the original received over FIFTY Game Of The Year awards.

Was going to try to remain quiet. Can't.

Yeah, it's called 8%. So it's a good game and not a great game. The way people talk about it, it's the worst thing since porn hit the Atari 2600.

Let's not forget another thing. Deus Ex sold like crap here in the states until enough reviewers told people to go try it. Most people all in up in arms probably got it out of a bargain bin. And it's certainly not alone in the, "oh, that was worth my money now that it's $10" crowd of excellent games. (another one, in case you were wondering, was the first Thief).

Abandoning the PC platform? Well, if only the top 15% of games are good enough for the PC gamer crowd, one can only wonder why. Simply expected more? Yeah, no kidding.

I'd sure hope the 9700pro has the proper support, or they are looking at a very small user base.

Or you could try Riftwar, which won Epic's best gametype for Phase 1 of Make Something Unreal. 3 Teams, 9 Player Classes, a persitent war that takes place across maps the include both Deathmatch and Domination style play.

http://inkless.com/riftwar/

I just looked on ASE and there were 79 players online.Not to good.

Maybe we shouldn't judge mods based on how many players are online. The gamer community used to be a lot more active in trying to get servers started and people playing on them until everyone went to Counter-Strike...

For $13 a month, go to the bargain bin of EB and select any of many titles people have neglected. You'll get a lot more gameplay for the buck that way.

That looks most excellent. Good luck and pimp more.

Yup. Oh well. Maybe by putting any in astericks they mean, Quake 3, not really "any". Sometimes I forget the nuances.

the introduction of the first new 1v1 gametype in *any* FPS in several years.

Already been at least two UT2003 mods that are completely 1v1.

here's one:
http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~chaotic/index.php?content=infodocs/duel_ut2.php

But I think the development on sending a robot to Mars took considerably less time than the currently unfinished DNF, yes?

But does Aftermath have any of this? Nope. No destructible terrain at all!

I agree, that was a huge disappointment when I read that. Destructible terrain was an enormous part of strategy to XCom, as the that Snakeman found out when I shot the wall, tossed a proximity mine through it, and left.

Dunno how you'll take this but Baldur's Gate was realtime combat with pausing. But underneath was the classical turn based D&D

Yeah, but automating turn rules into a spacebar is hardly a substitute. Not that BG didn't introduce a good thing, the RPG market needed a boost and they very creatively made a system that did it.

While I agree that the realtime w/ UFO:A wasn't it's critical problem, I think the phobia game developers have about making a real hard core turn based game these days is what will keep us from getting a real XCom sequel. Not just that RT v TB argument, just the lack of desire the publishers apparently have to push a real old school game.

Days like this I wish I worked in the industry. Open XCom. Increase graphics. Close XCom. Sell.

Yeah, it's a noble attempt, but I wonder how long it will take to be playable.

There's also Laser Squad Nemesis and Silent Service, which come close to at least the mechanics, if not the game itself.

Someday I know my PSX version of XCom will probably die from overuse.

How it is that nobody has made a devent XCom clone in the last 5 years is beyond me. Well, I guess not entirely. Here is exactly why:

I think the vast majority of the half a million people who bought it at the time cherish a sweet memory of it, but would be surprised what the game asks them to put up with if they started playing it now. We wanted to take the gameplay elements of those games we liked and drop those we now find too cumbersome or too difficult to understand. ...

Other thing we decided to break away from was traditional turn-based combat. While this is almost a synonym for "tactical" (as apposed to "real-time clickfest"), in fact, it is very unrealistic.

Much of the beauty of XCom was at the core of it's turn based squad combat. But everyone who has come after to "remake" it insists they know better, and turn it into something completely different, something more "modern" and it ends up feeling like every other "strategy" title out there.

Another area we failed to exploit in full is the visualization of combat.

After playing the demo, this is precisely why I didn't buy the game. XCom had such a straightforward, easy to understand view of how combat should work - simple but deep, but UFO:A felt like playing a complicated Starcraft in a small room - complicated but shallow.

A noble attempt, and I hope these guys continue doing games, but this one got a strike from me (as a huge XCom nut)

Hell, I don't know anything about making games, but I could design DNF from scratch in that time by myself, and that includes the time it takes to learn coding, animation, modelling, and graphic design AND put them to use to create a finished product

I said it before, bears repeating now. I think a mod team could make a Duke sequel (barring obvious copyright issues) and have it out before DNF, and it might possibly be a better game. Use UT2k3 and it will probably look better.

At this point, DNF would have to be nothing less than epic in scale to live up to expectations.

The patch addresses the issues with character movement speed and clarifies RPG aspects of the game by providing the player with a selection of differently-upgraded characters

Thanks for that, because the demo itself portrays a very vanilla FPS gameplay with a few relatively minor twists that appear to be intended to convince the player that there's depth that doesn't actually exist.

Here's to hoping that the patch resolves that. (And hoping that companies start paying more attention to the demos they release)