The GORE Dream Catches On

DreamCatcher Acquires 3D PC Blast-Fest GORE by 4D Rulers is the announcement that this first-person shooter that's been an independent project until now has found a publisher, as they've signed on with DreamCatcher Interactive. The release, which lists Spring 2002 as the game's projected release date, offers the gory GORE story, their unique weapon and stamina systems, and a description of gameplay: "In GORE’s revolutionary gameplay world, players will need more than a quick trigger-finger to demolish their opponents. The game’s 8 to 10 unique player classes allow each player to choose the character with the right weapons, strengths, and abilities for them. Most of GORE’s frighteningly lethal weapons have secondary-fire modes, a feature that gives players over 30 ways to demolish their opponents. But that’s just the beginning. Almost anything you see in GORE can be destroyed: weapons, health and stamina packs, ammo boxes, gas tanks and more. Don’t want a wounded enemy to get a health pack? Shoot it right before he touches it, and watch the pack explode with lethal force. Four game modes (Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag, and Tactical warfare) make GORE challenging for any level of player."
View : : :
60 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 2.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older
40.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 18, 2002, 06:32
anon@62.30
40.
Re: No subject Jan 18, 2002, 06:32
Jan 18, 2002, 06:32
anon@62.30
 
you might not be a troll, but you are a fuckin lamer... sheesh, get a grip will ya and don't take things so bloody seriously!!! Go outside, get some fresh air, and whilst at it get a life too.

How fuckin off topic is this thread !?!
39.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 23:27
39.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 23:27
Jan 17, 2002, 23:27
 
Unfortunately for you, no evidence that I cheat nor troll these boards has been provided in your post.

You nor I can escape the fact that people have the right to rape others and commit acts of unjustly crime. That is a fact that you can not accept. Unfortunately, people have the right to commit unjustly acts. Fortunately, this society is governed, and criminals are being killed by each other and are deterred from committing these unjustly acts every day.

It is one thing to understand the existance of something. To advocate for something is an entirely different matter.
This comment was edited on Jan 18, 00:06.
38.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 23:06
anon@216.227
38.
Re: No subject Jan 17, 2002, 23:06
Jan 17, 2002, 23:06
anon@216.227
 
sorry, your a cheating troll who advocates raping as a right.
37.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:59
37.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:59
Jan 17, 2002, 21:59
 
Only a fool wants to hear the echo of his own voice.

36.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:56
36.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:56
Jan 17, 2002, 21:56
 
'"Just FYI. it didn't sound like you knew what was going on.'

Yes, your thoughts matter much here."

headcase fargone, I apologize for being an asshole with my reaction in that post of mine.

35.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:49
35.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:49
Jan 17, 2002, 21:49
 
"Guys ignore 'teh mane man' he is a TROLL (see wolfenstein busts punks)"

I'm guessing your evidence of my being a troll will follow further in your post.

"He belives that Rape is a RIGHT and cheating is a RIGHT and that we need to try to understand cheaters instead of attacking them."

Let me make that point of mine clear: everyone has ability. You can not take ability away from a free man. A free man also has rights which are being governed in the province in which he resides (country, state, city). Attacking a cheater's personal life based on their actions on an online game is not right.

"The guy is a GOOD troll, it takes a lot of skill to be a troll and not have it be too obvious."

And your evidence of my being a troll is still not evident in your post.

"However, I find it HARD to belive that anyone can go from discussion to discussion and start shit with people and cause havoc and falmes WITHOUT being a troll."

There it is. However, I am a controlversial man. A controversial poster is one who differs in opinion from most. A troll, however, starts arguments with others for the sole purpose of suffering.

I do not try to make others suffer. Some times it seem that I do, but I honestly do not.

If you find me a problem, please for my sake and yours that you do not read my posts. I do not want to cause harm like you interpret my intentions to be.
This comment was edited on Jan 17, 22:05.
34.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:43
34.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:43
Jan 17, 2002, 21:43
 
Ok, ok.

"Yes, your thoughts matter much here. I always thought a mod went beyond changing some variables."

I said that with sarcasm. An insult or an opinion regarding a game being written as a fact has no need here. This is an argument.

"Oh, and yes, Xombie and who ever else thinks Quake 3 is for unskilled players and was not well thought out as a game, your unjustly opinion matters much here."

This is what I had responded to what Xombie and others have written earlier: "Tell me... what thought out gameplay was there in Quake 3?
They put a bunch of models on a map, gave them guns, and they blast each other. there's nothing more than that. the guns don't even have alt-fire."

"Mind you, instead of stinking these boards up with what you think, try and turn this place around from Blue's Shack to Blue's News with some real evidence."

Everyone knows that The Shack is the epicenter for comments written in stupidity and what not. I suggested to try and keep Blue's News from becoming such a site.

"Gameplay and skill involved in differing games like Quake 3 and Gore is based entirely on opinion. Graphics, sound, and gameplay are all opinion."

That is right. All of the listed above are factors regarding opinion.

"So, without further ado, you may post a reply that makes remotely any sense."

This is regarding a posts sent earlier.

"I am not sure how you do not have to aim the other weapons. If you did not aim, you would hit no one except those who ran in front of you."

This is the truth. Taken into literal sense: If you did not aim at all, you would hit nothing but what runs in front of you.

"I am not sure how a shotgun has splash damage. I think you are referring to buckshot. The lightening gun has no splash damage. The melee weapon has no splash damage."

A shotgun does not have splash damage, it has buckshot. Splash damage is from a projectile in which the impact sends "waves," "energy pulses" or "an explosion" outward from the projectile in which it had originated. The other guns I listed have no splash damage.

"Actually, from my experience, there are few crowds in MP. Awards are often given to those who kill the next player quickly, and not if more than one person was killed at a time in a 'crowd.'"

This is correct. Since experience comes first, inexperience comes second.

"If there was no aiming required, let alone, skill to aim required, then I do not see how they can deem certain players "professionals." There would be an awful lot of professional players if no skill was required to aim, let alone, to aim at all."

Skill obviously has to be involved for there to be a ranking system among players determing a good player from a bad one.

"Stamping a game a "tech demo" is based on opinion. I can choose to favor your opinion in light of others, but I do not."

Calling a game a "tech demo" is based entirely on opinion. The opinion is formed from the impression of the game itself.

"The game play in other games is just as simple: You navigate a level and kill who ever you see."

Every game has you reaching for the stars for the same reason. If goals differed, it could result in a change in the genre in which the game resides.

"To say the players are not as good on one game as another is based on how good you are at a particular game. It is said that how much one enjoys a game is how good one is at it."

This is true. People who are bad at a game will eventually become good at it. If not, then that is a rare exception. People who like a game more than others will more likely play better than others (determined, also, by how long someone plays the game).

"To say the game does not require skill is based on your experience. And since it seems as though you had a tough time playing the game, you are going to choose a game over another and simply bash the one you had allegedly played. It seems as though you are no good at it."

Someone who bashes a game for not requiring any skill is more likely a player who had a bad experience with difficulty of play.

"It is not hard to recognize a good player on the Internet, nor is it to recognize a bad one. But it is hard to recognize a player at all."

Simply put: You can tell apart good and bad players and are recognized easily. People who talk about games and have not played them are difficult to uncover.

33.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:30
anon@216.227
33.
Re: No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:30
Jan 17, 2002, 21:30
anon@216.227
 
Guys ignore 'teh mane man' he is a TROLL (see wolfenstein busts punks)

He belives that Rape is a RIGHT and cheating is a RIGHT and that we need to try to understand cheaters instead of attacking them.

The guy is a GOOD troll, it takes a lot of skill to be a troll and not have it be too obvious. However, I find it HARD to belive that anyone can go from discussion to discussion and start shit with people and cause havoc and falmes WITHOUT being a troll.
32.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:29
32.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:29
Jan 17, 2002, 21:29
 
You mean you will withdraw and focus your efforts elsewhere, despite the fact you have provided no arguement?

Look, I'm not trying to hurt you or anyone else here. I want you to write to me, seriously.

31.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:26
31.
Re: No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:26
Jan 17, 2002, 21:26
 
I'm stupefied. No amount of fact is going to change your mind, as it seems you've already convinced yourself that the things you say are the truth and the facts. You can't reason with a deluded man. Thus, I withdraw, and will focus my efforts elsewhere.

30.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 21:07
30.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 21:07
Jan 17, 2002, 21:07
 
"Oh, and is the implication here that yours do? That's cute."

Yes, mine actually matter. They mean more than throwing insults.

I should have been more clear on the modification part.

"What's up with this "Your opinion matters much here" thing? And am I mistaken, or do you think that your opinion, for some reason, actually does? This is a public message board, and many faces are present here."

My post was not of an opinion. It was fact-oriented, and fact-oriented posts matter more in an argument than opinion-oriented ones.

"I find it very silly that, apparently, for reasons obvious only to you, you think your opinion carries some weight around here. What qualification for that do you think you have? If anything, your opinion matters even less to me now, because you seem to expect that because you think your word matters more, it should."

My word is the truth. The truth hurts some, and helps others. I have spoken truth only to find myself insulted by others.

"Grow up, man. You sound like you possess some shred of intelligence, I think that if you tried you could come up some kind, ANY kind of intelligent argument other than "mine's bigger than yours."

A shread of intelligence is better than a broad field of stupidity. I did not provide a 'mine's bigger than yours' argument. Instead, I'm providing fine examples from others' posts and correcting them, and telling them how it really is.

"That's funny, if anyone here is stinking up the place, it's you. You stepped in and made an unfounded claim yourself, you know, and, with me at least, you're hinging your whole argument on the assumption that your opinion should matter to me. That is a sad mistake to make, stranger."

Again, I provided no opinions, only facts. I would have stated that it was in my opinion if I have, but my argument rests on facts.

"I think you should take your own advice and find some ground to stand on rather than relying on childish bullying tactics to make your point."

You need to elaborate on your point a bit more than that.
This comment was edited on Jan 17, 21:12.
29.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 20:42
29.
Re: No subject Jan 17, 2002, 20:42
Jan 17, 2002, 20:42
 
> Yes, your thoughts matter much here.

Oh, and is the implication here that yours do? That's cute.

> I always thought a mod went beyond changing some variables.

Well, the literal definition of a modification is "The act of modifying, or the state of being modified; a modified form or condition; state as modified; a change." In that sense, any change made to a game that alters the way the game is played would deem it a mod. However, that's open to interpretation.

The point I was trying to make was that users are already latching onto the game and creating new things for it, new weapons, new gameplay options, etc, simply because it's a very simple scripting language to use. When the game comes out, and you can actually make your own models and skins for the game, the ease of customization should keep working for it. It's much easier to mod than Quake 3.

> your unjustly opinion matters much here.

What's up with this "Your opinion matters much here" thing? And am I mistaken, or do you think that your opinion, for some reason, actually does? This is a public message board, and many faces are present here.

I find it very silly that, apparently, for reasons obvious only to you, you think your opinion carries some weight around here. What qualification for that do you think you have? If anything, your opinion matters even less to me now, because you seem to expect that because you think your word matters more, it should.

Grow up, man. You sound like you possess some shred of intelligence, I think that if you tried you could come up some kind, ANY kind of intelligent argument other than "mine's bigger than yours."

>Mind you, instead of stinking these boards up with what you think, try and turn this place around from Blue's Shack to Blue's News with some real evidence.

That's funny, if anyone here is stinking up the place, it's you. You stepped in and made an unfounded claim yourself, you know, and, with me at least, you're hinging your whole argument on the assumption that your opinion should matter to me. That is a sad mistake to make, stranger.

>So, without further ado, you may post a reply that makes remotely any sense.

I think you should take your own advice and find some ground to stand on rather than relying on childish bullying tactics to make your point.

28.
 
No subject
Jan 17, 2002, 17:44
28.
No subject Jan 17, 2002, 17:44
Jan 17, 2002, 17:44
 
"Just FYI. it didn't sound like you knew what was going on."

Yes, your thoughts matter much here. I always thought a mod went beyond changing some variables.

Oh, and yes, Xombie and who ever else thinks Quake 3 is for unskilled players and was not well thought out as a game, your unjustly opinion matters much here.

Mind you, instead of stinking these boards up with what you think, try and turn this place around from Blue's Shack to Blue's News with some real evidence. Gameplay and skill involved in differing games like Quake 3 and Gore is based entirely on opinion. Graphics, sound, and gameplay are all opinion.

So, without further ado, you may post a reply that makes remotely any sense.

* * *

"ROFL!! Theres only 2 guns you have to aim with in Quake 3, Machine Gun and Rail Gun."

I am not sure how you do not have to aim the other weapons. If you did not aim, you would hit no one except those who ran in front of you.

"Everything else has splash damage"

I am not sure how a shotgun has splash damage. I think you are referring to buckshot. The lightening gun has no splash damage. The melee weapon has no splash damage.

"so you cant say the emphasis to winning is aiming at people perfectly as the higher frags tend to get taken by people who fire blindly into crowds of people with the Rocket Launcher"

Actually, from my experience, there are few crowds in MP. Awards are often given to those who kill the next player quickly, and not if more than one person was killed at a time in a "crowd."

"no aiming skill required."

If there was no aiming required, let alone, skill to aim required, then I do not see how they can deem certain players "professionals." There would be an awful lot of professional players if no skill was required to aim, let alone, to aim at all.

"Quake 3 was a tech demo like it or not"

Stamping a game a "tech demo" is based on opinion. I can choose to favor your opinion in light of others, but I do not.

"the gameplay was as simple as painting by numbers, and appealed to those who just like mindless shooting with no real skill involved."

The game play in other games is just as simple: You navigate a level and kill who ever you see.

To say the players are not as good on one game as another is based on how good you are at a particular game. It is said that how much one enjoys a game is how good one is at it. To say the game does not require skill is based on your experience. And since it seems as though you had a tough time playing the game, you are going to choose a game over another and simply bash the one you had allegedly played. It seems as though you are no good at it.

It is not hard to recognize a good player on the Internet, nor is it to recognize a bad one. But it is hard to recognize a player at all.
This comment was edited on Jan 17, 21:10.
27.
 
To #22, re: Quake 3
Jan 17, 2002, 12:03
27.
To #22, re: Quake 3 Jan 17, 2002, 12:03
Jan 17, 2002, 12:03
 
...AND YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO AIM..

ROFL!! Theres only 2 guns you have to aim with in Quake 3, Machine Gun and Rail Gun. Everything else has splash damage, so you cant say the emphasis to winning is aiming at people perfectly as the higher frags tend to get taken by people who fire blindly into crowds of people with the Rocket Launcher - no aiming skill required.

Quake 3 was a tech demo like it or not - the gameplay was as simple as painting by numbers, and appealed to those who just like mindless shooting with no real skill involved.

26.
 
Re: screw it...
Jan 17, 2002, 04:40
26.
Re: screw it... Jan 17, 2002, 04:40
Jan 17, 2002, 04:40
 
LOL Chance...

(Hows it going BTW bud?)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Avatar 10137
25.
 
Re: screw it...
Jan 17, 2002, 02:24
25.
Re: screw it... Jan 17, 2002, 02:24
Jan 17, 2002, 02:24
 
Good God man! You are going to try it for yourself? How... intelligent. Congratulations. I don't have the time right now myself (finals...) but if you should post your comments on it later I would be interested in hearing them.

24.
 
screw it...
Jan 17, 2002, 00:17
anon@64.133
24.
screw it... Jan 17, 2002, 00:17
Jan 17, 2002, 00:17
anon@64.133
 
I will judge for myself...d/ling the GORE demo now...
23.
 
No subject
Jan 16, 2002, 22:14
23.
No subject Jan 16, 2002, 22:14
Jan 16, 2002, 22:14
 
The Gore demo didnt suck. It just wasnt as pretty as quake 3. It was fast, ran great on my computer and there was harly any lag. It is sorta like a throwback to the old school days of fps, fast and fun, though only for a little while

Doin' it Big
22.
 
Re: No subject
Jan 16, 2002, 21:34
anon@24.229
22.
Re: No subject Jan 16, 2002, 21:34
Jan 16, 2002, 21:34
anon@24.229
 
Xombie,

The thought out gameplay in arena are the maps, the weapon placement, the weapons themselves. You can't dominate the game w/ any 1 weapon, even the BFG (too little ammo). Every weapon is different, and balanced. You have to work the arena if you want to dominate the server. AND YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO AIM w/out 20 versions of the same hitscan piece of crap gun like in CS.

You obviously havn't played q3 enough (or perhaps you just suck).

oh. BTW... I did enjoy the GORE demo
21.
 
pretty mucha yawner
Jan 16, 2002, 21:25
21.
pretty mucha yawner Jan 16, 2002, 21:25
Jan 16, 2002, 21:25
 
#18 yeah something like 5+ years of dev was what they had to work with

#13 "pretty good for what it was"
yeah a game with none of the features of quake. UNLIKE even doom or duke3d, there's no doors or lifts. And nevermind water, that is unless they changed a hell of a lot since that last demo. This may sound nitpicky, but think about it, these are things you pretty much take for granted anymore.

Why would i dream of spending money on a game that would be the laughing stock of the other games on my system? It's a cruel world in there.

60 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 2.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older