A few quick questions/comments to put out there.
1) Has anybody heard if Gore (when it reaches full-fledged demo status, as opposed to Test1, Test2, etc.) will be put onto a game magazine CD for people to test out? Some of us don't have the kewl cable/DSl/T-Whatever connection and would like to give it a spin but don't want to wait 6 hours for the download.
2) Sounds like a lot of the slagging that is going on is because it seems unpolished, unimagintaive, etc. Well, this *is* a FPS game, and killing things has always been the goal of a FPS game. No originality there, that's for sure. Q3A wasn't original, but it does deliver a fine game, so who cares if we've seen that particular cow before? The game is the important thing, and if people are having fun, why not let them?
3) Oh, also, this is a *test* game. I posted something similar like this for the Wolf test thread as well. People, you can't expect a TEST to fully measure up to established games like CS, UT and Q3A. Until it's gone gold and in the stores, be constructive with the criticism.
4) I have to admit, it doesn't look that impressive in the screenshots. Then again, I wasn't particularly impressed by my first visual evidence of Quake back in 1996. When I got my paws on it, boy was I wrong about that game. Not saying Gore will be Quake Redux, but I'm willing to give it a chance, at least on the full-fledged demo version.
5) All of this is being written by somebody who has never played the game. I'll wait for the finished demo, no tests for me, thanks. Tests have this way of crashing systems. . . let the downloader beware!
VicarThis comment was edited on Nov 1, 00:16.
"Irony is good for the blood." -- S.E.K.