Elite Force 2 Q&A

There's a Star Trek Elite Force 2 Q&A on Computer and Video Games (thanks HomeLan Fed) talking about the upcoming Trekkie shooter sequel in the works at Ritual Entertainment with Doug Pearson, publisher Activision's producer on the project. The conversation covers an introduction to the project, missions, the challenges of introducing "away" missions to the game, enhancements being made to the Quake III engine, multiplayer support, improvements over the original game, and more.
View : : :
21 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer
1.
 
Quake3 engine?
Jan 3, 2003, 14:04
Rigs
 
1.
Quake3 engine? Jan 3, 2003, 14:04
Jan 3, 2003, 14:04
 Rigs
 
I coulda sworn that Quake4 and Elite Force2 were using the DooM3 engine? I could be wrong, now that I think about it, but that would be pretty cool!

=-Rigs-=

"Now, we gave you a promise and we are bound by that promise and damn you for asking for it! And damn me for agreeing to it! And damn all of us to hell, because that is exactly where we're going! We talked about peace. You didn't want peace. We talked about cooperation. You didn't want cooperation. You want war! Is that it? You want a war? Well you've got a WAR!"
- John Sheridan, Babylon 5
'Sorry, we thought you were dead.'
'I was. I'm better now.'
Avatar 14292
2.
 
The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 14:12
2.
The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 14:12
Jan 3, 2003, 14:12
 
It sucked bad. I'm really glad Ritual is doing this one. They've already addressed 3 of the biggest complaints: length, planet surface levels, boring bosses. Now I hope they add a little non-linear gameplay, some more interesting character interactions and subplots, maybe a little stealth thrown in here and there (but GOOD stealth, not crappy Raven stealth), and I'm all over this game.

3.
 
Re: Quake3 engine?
Jan 3, 2003, 14:13
indiv
 
3.
Re: Quake3 engine? Jan 3, 2003, 14:13
Jan 3, 2003, 14:13
 indiv
 
Nope. Elite Force 2 has always been the Q3 engine, while Quake 4 will be the Doom 3 engine. But I'm sure Activision won't mind handing out the rights to another Star Trek game to a Doom 3-engine development house in the future.

4.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 15:38
4.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 15:38
Jan 3, 2003, 15:38
 
I did enjoy the first one, but it did have it's problems. The length was way to short, and at times the gameplay consisted of mowing down wave after wave of mindless enemies. Hopefully the sequel will be much more polished and quite a bit longer.

Now what I'd really like to see is a Trek game based on Deep Space Nine's Section 31. It woulb be awesome to have a Star Trek game that focused on covert missions involving spying, sabotage, and assasination.

If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do they all drown? -- Bucky B. Katt
5.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 16:34
5.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 16:34
Jan 3, 2003, 16:34
 
Yep... It sure sucked.

That's why the original is called the "Best Star Trek Game Ever" by pretty much every major games magazine and gaming news source.

6.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 16:42
me
6.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 16:42
Jan 3, 2003, 16:42
me
 
So #5, are you being sarcastic oorrrr.....?

I thought the origional game was really good at times, and pretty standard during others. Like one of the ships had non stop robots or something i dont remember, but it was just endless, mindless shooting. Now the part where they came on your ship, and they were chasing you throught the hallways, THAT FUCKING ROCKED!!! I beat that part the first time around, but i was on the edge of my seat the entire time. I felt like i was really being chased down! The NPCs on my side were usually pretty boring and useles, just had to listen to them to get past a cutscene. Overall it was alright.

I hope the second one is better. Seems like most game sequels now are total crap! Just using the same name to make more money.

7.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 17:16
7.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 17:16
Jan 3, 2003, 17:16
 
Sarcastic or not, #5 has it right. It *was* the best ST game ever, which is pretty sad.

#4, that's a great idea. A Star Trek game based on Section 31. I was never much into DS9 but that's just *loaded* with cool possibilities! Who do we write to?

8.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 17:53
8.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 17:53
Jan 3, 2003, 17:53
 
Yep... It sure sucked.

That's why the original is called the "Best Star Trek Game Ever" by pretty much every major games magazine and gaming news source

thats not saying much about star trek games. it was the first star trek game that didnt suck.

Doin' it Big
9.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 17:54
9.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 17:54
Jan 3, 2003, 17:54
 
Sorry, but there will never be a Star Trek game with assasination or sabotage.

It's in Paramount's big Star Trek bible, the protagonists have to be altruists

10.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 18:00
10.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 18:00
Jan 3, 2003, 18:00
 
thats not saying much about star trek games. it was the first star trek game that didnt suck.

Naaah. Star Trek: A Final Unity was a really great game. Granted, it's old, but saying that there haven't been good ST games before Elite Force is just wrong.

Fully automatic backups with Ocster Backup Pro 3
http://www.ocster.com
11.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 18:08
11.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 18:08
Jan 3, 2003, 18:08
 
#4, that's a great idea. A Star Trek game based on Section 31. I was never much into DS9 but that's just *loaded* with cool possibilities! Who do we write to?

Hmmm. That idea has definitely a cool ring to it.

How about playing part of the story of the original episodes from the perspective of Section 31? You could sabotage DS9, spy on and manipulate crew members and of course also "help" them from time to time when there is some great threat.

Lots of possibilities, especially since the TV show left so many questions unanswered about Section 31. There's enough room to spin a new story thread that's connected to the DS9 story in places but is nevertheless not limited by it.

Methinks it's time to start another one of those completely useless petitions :).

Fully automatic backups with Ocster Backup Pro 3
http://www.ocster.com
12.
 
Re: The first one sucked
Jan 3, 2003, 18:40
12.
Re: The first one sucked Jan 3, 2003, 18:40
Jan 3, 2003, 18:40
 
You could start out as a Section 31 operative, uncover corruption and conspiracy then defect to the good guys. No, wait, somebody already did something like that.

Since DS9 is no more there wouldn't be so many of those nasty continuity restrictions that come with Paramount licenses. But # 9 is probably right. Paramount wouldn't let anybody make anything fun like that.

I'll sign your completely worthless petition

13.
 
No subject
Jan 3, 2003, 18:42
13.
No subject Jan 3, 2003, 18:42
Jan 3, 2003, 18:42
 
"That's why the original is called the "Best Star Trek Game Ever" by pretty much every major games magazine and gaming news source."

Have you even looked at the Star Trek games? "Best Star Trek Game Ever" isn't much of a praise.

14.
 
Hmmmm
Jan 3, 2003, 18:59
14.
Hmmmm Jan 3, 2003, 18:59
Jan 3, 2003, 18:59
 
Well if anyone noticed who #5 is, it's one of them Raven Guys PLEASE GIVE US A JK2 EXPANSION!!!!

The game at the time was a very good/solid title under the ST belt, but now I'm thinking of 1 part sin (you know when you got to use computers and what not) and 1 part EF/Exp Pack, I'm thinking of playing a quite enjoyable ST game that actually uses the tricorder more then any other trek game to date except DS9: The Fallen.

All in all, with all the diffrent genres that Raven Software has dealth with (Star Trek, Star Wars, SOF 1&2, Hexen, Heretic etc etc etc) I really would love for them to do a Jedi Knight3 (or Dark Forces 4 for those of you keeping score at home) with the Doom3 engine.

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 19:03.
Avatar 12670
15.
 
oh well
Jan 3, 2003, 20:19
15.
oh well Jan 3, 2003, 20:19
Jan 3, 2003, 20:19
 
I have nothing but good memories of Elite Force 1. MP could've been a bit more fun but otherwise The graphics, animations and storyline were fine (IMHO anyway). Matter of fact, the character models and animations are still as good or better than any of the other Q3 engine games that have come out since. Never got to try the expansion pak though.

BTW, I never found it to be too short. *shrugs*

Elite Force 2: I' can't comment on the game itself but it looks like Ritual is doing some amazing things with the Q3 engine....it looks gorgeous.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"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
16.
 
Re: oh well
Jan 3, 2003, 20:37
16.
Re: oh well Jan 3, 2003, 20:37
Jan 3, 2003, 20:37
 
Two day's of play is far too short. I mean, it was a pretty good game, but it more or less an advanced variation of DooM with a hellacious fire fight mode revolving around Starfleet arsenal. And I am very sorry if Mr. Hoekstra will not agree with my analysis of his fine product, but the saying goes: "To each their own."

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 20:37.
17.
 
No subject
Jan 4, 2003, 00:02
17.
No subject Jan 4, 2003, 00:02
Jan 4, 2003, 00:02
 
'Elite Force' was a good game, but I found it to be way too short and very easy; I beat it in about 7 hours.

If you're looking for another enjoyable Trek action game, 'The Fallen' is a pretty good one.

And #5 is supposed to say things like that. It's his job.

Avatar 13955
18.
 
Re: oh well
Jan 4, 2003, 01:01
18.
Re: oh well Jan 4, 2003, 01:01
Jan 4, 2003, 01:01
 
Honestly I have never understood this talk of EF (or Heavy Metal) being short. I played it in a few days time... and loved every minute of the game. I ended up playing through it like 4 times. Now I got my time out of that game. But come on, I also played through Quake in a few days time. There are just not many FPS ACTION games that take 2 weeks to play through (bring on 89 examples). Too short? What do you expect when you blaze through a designer’s month of work in 10 minutes and don't stop to look around?

But, OK. I DO look forward to more interactive environments in games to alleviate this constant nag by some gamers.

Edit: Oh.. and I would have played The Fallen, but I never got that crappy demo of the game to play on my wonderful computer. And I don't say it was crappy because of gameplay (I have no idea if was any good), but because of the horror of texture problems I had even with my NVidia card and latest drivers.

This comment was edited on Jan 4, 01:03.
19.
 
Re: oh well
Jan 4, 2003, 10:31
19.
Re: oh well Jan 4, 2003, 10:31
Jan 4, 2003, 10:31
 
Shoot I thought that Elite Force was one of the funnest shooters I've ever played, (single-player portion). Multiplayer was a drag.

I remember when it came out all the magazines and internet sites were giving it rave reviews and they all said only complaint was that it was too short.

I agree with them totally, but even if it was twice as long it still would have been too short. Great games are never long enough.

Laffmannnnnnnnnnnn

20.
 
Re: oh well
Jan 4, 2003, 14:01
20.
Re: oh well Jan 4, 2003, 14:01
Jan 4, 2003, 14:01
 
I thought Elite Force was a good game as well, I haven't played a Raven game that I didn't like, they have all been worth playing, especially the HeXen series, I would love to see a HeXen 3 using the Q3 or even DooM3 eninge. I also loved JKII...
-----------------------------------------------
I like pie.
21 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer