...since you're not interested in leaving anyone alive.

I would love to see the Soviet PK Machinegun (The ones you probably saw in action in Afganistan) in the expansion. It's the AK's big brother.

On a broader note, I wonder what kind of theme the weapons will have. With Cate, her superspy gadgets were appropriately disguised as feminine fashion acessories and the only large small arm she ever carried on her lithe frame was the briefcase RL. Naturally (As in beffiting the stereotypical female assasin image) her most effective weaponry were silent or silenced, and the sniper rifles.

Will there be any gadgets at all? And if not, how will they fill the gap in weaponry without making it appear to be another tactical FPS?

I'm thinking they'll have either A) HARM vs Other Big Evil Organization of Your Choice or B) HARM faction 1 vs HARM faction 2. That way they avoid the ethical troubles. You're a bad guy fighting other bad guys. They should have "innocent civilians" at a minimum, though. What might be interesting is having fewer nonlethal weapons like the stun gun, since you're not interested in leaving anyone alive.


The Jedi Master

"It's going to be funny the first time through, for a few levels or so, and then it will get really old really fast (imho)... "

Then it's a good thing it's only an expansion. Maybe it will be fun for just the right amount of time.

Op4 was an interesting experience for me. I really disliked it when I played through it the first time. It sat around for quite awhile until I got Blue Shift. After I played Blue Shift I tried Op4 again and thought it was great. This is similar to what I thought about Quake. I was disappointed when it first came out (too brown) but I have played it many times since I now I think it's a truly inspired game. This is mentally disturbing. How can any developer hope to please the likes of me?

I was mad when I read yesterday that they would be totally dumping the stealth in the NOLF2 expansion, but I decided I'll go ahead and get it anyway. IMO stealth done bad is way worse than no stealth at all. It could be pretty fun and I have lots of money anyway so what the hell ...

"Commercially Op4 was a success as was blue shift. as a player i hated op4 (for reasons i won't go into) and blue shit was decent i guess, if not short. "

5speed,

Now you have me interested. For me it was the other way around. I quite enjoyed Op4, but found blue shift tired and wanting (hey what's next, seeing it through the eyes of a vending machine stocker. Or maybe as a janitor!) For me, the only redeeming thing with blue shift was the graphics upgrade..

"And as for HARM... it might be the first FPS where the player fails and is constantly frustrated by his enemies. THAT would be different "

I think the difficulty is in who your enemies are and how you portray them. Almost all games try to stay clear from beating on the good guys, if only for the sake of sending the appropriate ethical message...GTA3 included. You spent most of your time working for and combating the criminal element. While you could go after humanity, there really was no point or challenge in it, so there was little reason to continue to do so. And as far as the law, the quickly escalating wanted level ensured you didn't spend most of your time beating them down.

My guess is they wouldn't let you meet Archer for the same reason you can never meet freeman....it wouldn't be prudent to allow you to kill the hero(ine)

However, that being said, i still think the game could be a lot of fun playing as HARM. Maybe it could be something where you are trying to increase your status and prestige despite the glowing ineptitude of your fellow villains (the boss sent us down here to watch the bee. AGH, the bee bit my bottom and now my bottom's big!)

I see your point. But part of the problem is a desire to increase the amount of control the player has (and the desire by the players for that greater level of control) and another factor is the growing power of computers, which make a greater level of detail possible.

And as for HARM... it might be the first FPS where the player fails and is constantly frustrated by his enemies. THAT would be different

This thread is still kicking. I guess bookmarking this was a good idea.

I don't mind playing as a HARM member. I still would like the cutscenes, dialogs, etc. It would be cool to see Cate Archer or even battle her!

Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx

I know what you're saying (regarding the micromanagement in Sim games), however, this was never necessary in ANY of the previous three SimCities. Therefore, to have SimCity 4 all of a sudden change from a City Builder into a City SIMULATOR came, I'm sure, as a very big surprise to a lot of people.

Had Maxis had the common decency to warn people about this beforehand, it would have saved them a lot of angry gamers on their forum.

As for playing a Harm operative doing really wacky stuff, it sounds fun, but how long is that angle going to hold? It's going to be funny the first time through, for a few levels or so, and then it will get really old really fast (imho)...

Creston

sharpe . . .

actually: as posted, i just meant is as a true statement (=

Commercially Op4 was a success as was blue shift. as a player i hated op4 (for reasons i won't go into) and blue shit was decent i guess, if not short.

Playing as a HARM agent could mean 2 things. . .

1) it'll be fun to see the game from 'the other side of the fencc" as you put it (kinda)
2) maybe we'll finally find out wtf the HARM letters stand for (=

Creston: "Sorry, didn't mean to change the thread topic, but it does seem these days that either games are dumbed down to appeal to the masses (Helllllooooo Freelancer!), or are made more complex in an attempt to become deeper, but are totally fucked up in the process (and welcome to you, SimCity 4!)."

Two things: 1. Poor interface (a good one takes a lot of the aggravation out of it) and, one of the great problems of real life management technique, 2. micromanagement. Unfortunately, the desire to do the latter is built into a sim game... and probably has as much to do with the players who enjoy those games as it does with the developers.

My guess is that they never WOULD have gotten to see star wars in 1999. Another example might suit you better, because menace, apart from some good special effects, was a pretty horrid movie.

They'd have still wanted to punch Jar Jar in the face.

You know, I find your comments interesting because I never played the first Thief, only Thief II. I got it with my SB Live X-Gamer, along with Deus Ex, IIRC. I figured, ah, why not? I was amazed at how good it was, although by the time I played it was quite dated graphically.
Now I think I see the AvP vs AvP2 scenario repeated. Having never played the first, the second seems amazing as we've got nothing to compare it to but other unrelated games.

What would people have thought of the Phantom Menace if it had come out in 1977 and Star Wars in 1999?


The Jedi Master

Heh heh. I'm still here too

"Not playing as cate is taking a page right out of the Valve book for expansion packs. "

Do you mean that's good or bad?

I think it's a good thing, cause I thought valve did a pretty good job with it(though Blue shift was noticably stretching it). But that aspect works for Halflife because of the nature of the story....I got chills the first time I played and saw an area that I had previously ventured in as Gordon Freeman from a different perspective(like from the other side of the rails).

For Nolf, i think it can work as well, but for different reasons. Gone are the serious, heavy-toned opportunities to develop a story, to be repleaced by the opportunity to build on the campiness and humor of the Nolf world. As Cate, you always heard and uncovered various humorous bits and pieces of HARM policies and procedures. As a HARM operative(or better yet a trainee trying to become a harm operative) there is good potential for a game built on humor...if they have the creative talent to pull it off. For some reason, i can envision a mission to fetch a duck from a park for the new director. Why? Well, murder for hire just got themselves a goose and....

Not playing as cate is taking a page right out of the Valve book for expansion packs.

"The stealth in the first two versions was unrealistic, but the simplicity made it all a hell of a lot of fun. I worry they will complicate things up too much."

SimCity 4 is a perfect example of this. Gone is the "fuck it, I'm going to build a dumbass city just for the fun of it", to be replaced by nail ripping aggravation over your budget, unexplained abandonments, etc.

Sorry, didn't mean to change the thread topic, but it does seem these days that either games are dumbed down to appeal to the masses (Helllllooooo Freelancer!), or are made more complex in an attempt to become deeper, but are totally fucked up in the process (and welcome to you, SimCity 4!).

Bah. I think Deus Ex : Invisible War is the only game I'm going to get for a long time. I'm getting pretty sick and tired of shelling out fifty bucks for the kinds of shovelware that has been released the past year or so.

Creston

While I didn't play Hitman 1, I thought the move the diversify the gameplay in Hitman 2 was half-heartedly executed. There was little reward to either going super-stealthy or guns-blazing (At least in IGI2 the maps hinted at the appropriate playstyle.) All you get is this inconsequential rating and a few unlockable weapons of questionable usefullness. IMO, at the end of each mission they should have given you a weapon suited to your playing style.

I didn't like Thief 2 as I did 1, primarily because of the story. It lacked the certain philosophical underpinnings (Clarity of Light versus the Imaginativeness of Dark) I enjoyed reflecting about in the first and had barely any more depth than a typical save-the-world-from-a-madman-and-his-doomsday-weapon movie. The ending was also a dissapointment since it had none of the finesse, suave and the foreboding sequel tie-in part of the original. I also missed the scared-as-shit moments I had in 1 (The ghosts were utterly badass), since your mostly human opponents in 2 were generally easier to defeat.

I like many have high hopes for DX2, particularly regarding the fact that they intend to completely pull-off the simulation aspect of gameplay. I didn't like the way some of the levels in 1 could only be finished using a fixed, definite set of options. Let's see if we truly can defy typical character achetypes this time around.

"Nice thread. No trolls to speak of. Maybe staying with older threads is a good idea, you can actually have intelligent discussions..."

Yknow i was here for a little bit, and it seemed like a nice place to talk about games. And then, it got all trolly and I left for some months....I keep checking back in, but mainly just to read the news bits becuase the boards became just filled with trash talk and garbage. This has been the first decent thread i've seen in a bit. Hope it starts a trend

Well, there's always me Ray Nice thread. No trolls to speak of. Maybe staying with older threads is a good idea, you can actually have intelligent discussions...