Edit : Guess I'll be playing more Natural Selection 2 http://unknownworlds.com/ns2/

if feels much more like an AVP game than this ever will.

im really dissapointed with this - it feels like it was made along side AvP 2 about 10 years ago.

everything just feels old - almost like its a game designed for phones or something.

This comment was edited on Feb 12, 2013, 19:35.

"The game is so bad, not even the pirates want it."

I would love to see a game more in the style of the first or third movies. No badass marines armed to the teeth, no swarming enemies easy to dispatch. One enemy stalking you, you have little (or no) weapons. Evade, outsmart and escape. Amnesia with the Aliens license basically.

But that's a harder sell to all the "bro's" out there.

I think most people saw how this was going to turn out long ago.

"Iron Man Gaming" lolz.

nin wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 09:26:
In space, no one can hear their wallet being raped.

Heh, thought there was something terribly wrong with the aliens from the previews, sadly it's true... and yes I understand why the alien doesnt react to the players presence but that animation is pure shit. From the reviews of the single player story seems they hired Ed Wood to write the script and looks like COOP is an afterthought that was quickly tacked onto the game. Damn that sucks, such a great IP for a video game.

Yet another review, good one IMO.

... yes Randy some devs do milk popular franchises, like you just did. Based on what I've seen today it's no wonder he couldnt look the interviewer in the face.

Man oh man I hope my words were marked by everyone on the fence to buy this game or not.

What a piece of shit. The game isn't worth any more words. Every review should use only those 5 words to make a point.

jdreyer wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 17:29:
I think that's by design, based on the movie:

Ripley: "(This little girl) survived longer than (seventeen days) with no weapons and no training."

"Well that's great! Why don't we put her in charge!" </Bill Paxton>

netnerd85 wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 10:02:

Verno wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 09:56:
Eh I don't know why some of you take so much pleasure in this, people could lose their jobs and no one likes a crappy game. I'd much rather be proven wrong and have a cool Aliens game to play

Agreed, It's pathetic and childish. I'm sure most of these people don't give two shits what the game review media say most of the time.

For those saying "see its crap", have you played it yourself?

I am sorry but if people on forums who bought the game, friends I know that have the game and then every review says coop is unplayable due to horrible netcode, nevermind all the other problems with the game then you telling me its just media saying its bad is just crap. You like it so much keep throwing money away.

Well damn, this game really sucks.

I know it had a long, troubled development - I wasn't expecting amazing graphics or cutting edge gameplay, but I was hoping it might be a decent nostalgia shooter.
Somebody really needs to do this franchise justice.
Wondering what Gearbox was doing at the end there,
Ray

Based on high number of critic reviews on metacritic and facts that the netcode in coop is horrible beyond belief this turns out to be complete garbage by SEGA. Let's hope SEGA doesnt push Relic to turn their games into crap under them as well.

RollinThundr wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 17:37:

Go DIAF already do the world a favor.

Is this really necessary? Get a grip on yourself, it's a video game comment board.

I guess you can make a reasonable judgement on the quality of a game based on pre-release trailers, interviews and screenshots after all.

* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Feb 13, 2013, 07:57.

Beamer wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 16:22:

The clear solution is "don't make a bad game," but if it was that easy no one would ever make a bad game. Hell, plenty of time people are so close to it, having made the decisions themselves, that they're not even aware of how bad it is.

Yup, time, money, & resources. You need at least two to have a chance at success. Sounds like they were lacking in all three.

NegaDeath wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 14:06:

nin wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 13:53:
Sadly a parody account. Still made me chuckle.

And from a link in one of those comments here's a video showing a guy completing a level without firing a shot.

I think that's by design, based on the movie:

Ripley: "(This little girl) survived longer than (seventeen days) with no weapons and no training."

In space noone can hear you scream for your money back.

Beamer wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 16:47:
Seriously, what kind of person assumes that two companies worked on it, canceled it, later had the license lapse, another two companies picked up the license, started it, and used any of the prior assets or code despite using a new engine?

Matt Damon?

I'm still laughing that someone could say a PS2 game looked better than a game that came out in 2012. PS2 couldn't even compete with a PC built in the same time frame.

I have no doubt this game is bad, but those aren't PS2 era graphics, and if you think they are it's time to set the crack pipe down, and take off the nostalgia goggles.

RollinThundr wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 16:25:

Beamer wrote on Feb 12, 2013, 15:55:
It was supposed to be a PS2 game, and that game was canceled with all work destroyed half a decade before Sega or Gearbox got involved.


This is why some think you troll - you seem to try to get every fact wrong.

PS1 PS2 same fucking thing, were you there when they destroyed the work? Do you work for Sega? Why are you so defensive anytime someone even says the slightest even remotely negative thing about a publisher or developer? FFS Beamer you're like a walking shill for every publisher in the industry.

I've actually seen PS2 titles that look better than any trailer of this game now that I think of it.

Jesus, dude, I've bashed this game plenty in this thread. And Gearbox. But now I'm schilling because you're saying stupid shit?

Ok, so here's the deal: EA had the license to Aliens. They worked on Colonial Marines. They canceled it. They lost the license. A few years later Sega picks up the license. They hire Gearbox to make the game.
How do you think this works? Do you have any understanding of business or programming? For one, the content wouldn't go back to 21st Century Fox, the license holder, when EA lost it. That's not how it works. For another, it's incredibly rare for one studio to pick up where another left off, especially when it's 5 years later and for a different platform. Using a different engine.

Lastly, there are screenshots out there of the PS2 version. It doesn't even look the same.




Seriously, what kind of person assumes that two companies worked on it, canceled it, later had the license lapse, another two companies picked up the license, started it, and used any of the prior assets or code despite using a new engine? That's almost physically impossible.