Chrome = Advanced Battlegrounds

Update: This story originally presumed this to be the Specforce expansion, but the EB Games listing for this game puts the shipping date at 12/13/04, so it looks likely that this is actually the renamed version of the original Chrome. This DreamCatcher Games Page (thanks Frans) has details and screenshots from Advanced Battlegrounds: The Future of Combat, either the new name for Techland's shooter Chrome, or the follow-up formerly known by the working title Chrome SpecForce (story) when it was to be published by Strategy First. Here's how the project is described:
Grab your choice from over 20 destructive hi-tech weapons including heavy machine guns, rocket launchers and plasma rifles as you set out to seek-and-destroy your enemy once and for all. Take control of awesome vehicles like four-wheelers, speeder bikes and giant mech-robots as you battle across gigantic landscapes, huge air masses and vast oceans.
View : : :
23 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer
1.
 
Variety.
Dec 8, 2004, 09:43
1.
Variety. Dec 8, 2004, 09:43
Dec 8, 2004, 09:43
 
Ya know, it's really great that games offer so much variety nowadays. That, if we want to go out and buy a game, there is just such a fantastic array of choices to shoot things. Heck, you can have machine guns, rocket launchers, or even futuristic concept guns. More ways to shoot, shoot, shoot, and then shoot some more.

Here's to VARIETY IN GAMING! GO, DEVELOPERS AND PUBLISHERS! TAKE THOSE INNOVATIVE CHANCES! W00T!


2.
 
Re: Variety.
Dec 8, 2004, 09:59
2.
Re: Variety. Dec 8, 2004, 09:59
Dec 8, 2004, 09:59
 
Hell yes! I am all about hybrid MP FPS games... I hope this one plays well. I love the concept... I wish Tribes:V was more like this... Don't get me wrong I love T:V but I think I dug Tribes2 more because of the variety.

I'll say it again, I hope this game plays well.

...
3.
 
Re: Variety.
Dec 8, 2004, 10:02
3.
Re: Variety. Dec 8, 2004, 10:02
Dec 8, 2004, 10:02
 
Ya know, it's really great that games offer so much variety nowadays. That, if we want to go out and buy a game, there is just such a fantastic array of choices to shoot things. Heck, you can have machine guns, rocket launchers, or even futuristic concept guns. More ways to shoot, shoot, shoot, and then shoot some more.

I like to shoot stuff...

"God isn't interested in technology. He cares nothing for the microchip or the silicon revolution. Look how he spends his time, forty-three species of parrots! Nipples for men!"
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
4.
 
No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 10:38
4.
No subject Dec 8, 2004, 10:38
Dec 8, 2004, 10:38
5.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 11:23
5.
Re: No subject Dec 8, 2004, 11:23
Dec 8, 2004, 11:23
 
Y'all are no fun...

...
6.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 11:27
6.
Re: No subject Dec 8, 2004, 11:27
Dec 8, 2004, 11:27
 
Lets hope there is a Demo 1st. I personally am getting sick of FPS games with limp weapons that you have to empty entire clips in 1 person to kill them.

7.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 11:37
7.
Re: No subject Dec 8, 2004, 11:37
Dec 8, 2004, 11:37
 
sick of FPS games with limp weapons that you have to empty entire clips in 1 person to kill them.

Red Faction 2. (Didn't help that it was a craptastic game in the first place.)

m19

Avatar 11406
8.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 12:13
8.
Re: No subject Dec 8, 2004, 12:13
Dec 8, 2004, 12:13
 
7 posts and nobody making fun of the name yet? I suggest they rename it to Super War: The Advancement of the Battleground!

That would be 10x better!

Avatar 17249
9.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 12:31
9.
Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 12:31
Dec 8, 2004, 12:31
 
. . . but wasn't Chrome supposed to be a slightly better than average FPS? IIRC, PCGamer gave it pretty good marks as did a few others. This is one of those games that easily got lost in the shuffle of other games, but I've always kept an eye out for it to pick it up once it was in the bargin bin. Anyone play this? Is this the same game that this story refers to?


This comment was edited on Dec 8, 12:33.
ZigZang
10.
 
So ...
Dec 8, 2004, 12:34
10.
So ... Dec 8, 2004, 12:34
Dec 8, 2004, 12:34
 
What's different about this game? Or is it like UT2004 did with their EC edition, you can buy the original and download new content -- if there is new content. What a marketing team they have, busiest shopping season and this is the first I've heard of this.

BTW, is the game any fun? Part of me wants to play it since the I enjoyed/hated the demo.

~~Crim~~
11.
 
No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 13:27
11.
No subject Dec 8, 2004, 13:27
Dec 8, 2004, 13:27
 
the Chrome engine ran like a epileptic hog on valium, and the netcode was worse than that... i would stay far away from this unless they did a major overhaul

______________________________________________
"They come as men, as graven images, as the White Stone, as a whirlwind and as a cloud;
it is a fire unfolding itself, the color amber; they are now in the Heavens looking over thee."
______________________________________________
"When the bomb drops it'll be a bank holiday
Everybody happy in their tents and caravans
Everybody happy in their ignorance and apathy
No one realizes until the television breaks down..."

- SUBHUMANS
12.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 8, 2004, 14:18
12.
Re: No subject Dec 8, 2004, 14:18
Dec 8, 2004, 14:18
 
wonder if they thought no one would notice its the same game?


13.
 
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 14:23
13.
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 14:23
Dec 8, 2004, 14:23
 
. . . but wasn't Chrome supposed to be a slightly better than average FPS? IIRC, PCGamer gave it pretty good marks as did a few others. This is one of those games that easily got lost in the shuffle of other games, but I've always kept an eye out for it to pick it up once it was in the bargin bin. Anyone play this? Is this the same game that this story refers to?

(UK) PC Gamer gave it a crap mark; in the 50-60% range I believe.

This comment was edited on Dec 8, 14:23.
14.
 
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 15:08
14.
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 15:08
Dec 8, 2004, 15:08
 
I played about half way through the SP of the original Chrome and it was a great. I got totally bogged down in a stealth level and then upgraded my computer and never went back to finish it. My one gripe with it was that I spent a day figuring out that it wouldn't run unless I had Zonealarm turned off. Consequently I wasn't too keen to try the multiplayer much and to be honest there just wasn't anyone playing.

Big levels that gave the impression you had freedom to roam while never really letting you get lost. I bought it shortly after Unreal 2 and by comparison was a real breath of fresh air.

If they're pushing the multiplayer aspect this time then hopefully more people will pick it up.

15.
 
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 15:53
15.
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 15:53
Dec 8, 2004, 15:53
 
I just played the 2004 Chrome MP demo & if it was toilet paper it would be the cheapest kind. YOu know. The kind that barely retains the molecules to be classified a solid & your finger always pokes through. Basically toilet paper a homeless man wouldn't even wanna use.

16.
 
this just in
Dec 8, 2004, 16:02
16.
this just in Dec 8, 2004, 16:02
Dec 8, 2004, 16:02
 
* Also Published as Chrome Gold in other territories.
nuff said.

17.
 
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 16:04
17.
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 16:04
Dec 8, 2004, 16:04
 
(UK) PC Gamer gave it a crap mark; in the 50-60% range I believe.

And this is why people hate PCGamer-- EVERYONE MISINTERPETS (sp?) THEIR SCORING SYSTEM! 50% is *average*

69% - 60%
ABOVE AVERAGE - Reasonable, above-average games. They might be worth buying, but they probably have a few significant flaws that limit their appeal.

59% - 50%
MERELY OKAY - Very ordinary games. They're not completely worthless, but there are likely numerous better places to spend your gaming dollar.

This comment was edited on Dec 8, 16:07.
18.
 
Re: this just in
Dec 8, 2004, 16:23
18.
Re: this just in Dec 8, 2004, 16:23
Dec 8, 2004, 16:23
 
this is a average game with kinda ok graphics but zero inovation, the game is kina good at the begining but turn into a shoot a thon in the middle, could have been better with more time & polish. only worth $10 to 20 max.

This comment was edited on Dec 8, 16:39.
19.
 
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 17:29
19.
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 17:29
Dec 8, 2004, 17:29
 
And this is why people hate PCGamer-- EVERYONE MISINTERPETS (sp?) THEIR SCORING SYSTEM! 50% is *average*

69% - 60%
ABOVE AVERAGE - Reasonable, above-average games. They might be worth buying, but they probably have a few significant flaws that limit their appeal.

59% - 50%
MERELY OKAY - Very ordinary games. They're not completely worthless, but there are likely numerous better places to spend your gaming dollar.

So how many 50-69% range games do you buy?

20.
 
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . .
Dec 8, 2004, 18:01
20.
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong . . Dec 8, 2004, 18:01
Dec 8, 2004, 18:01
 
Hmm, I thought Chrome was already released long time ago?

Avatar 571
23 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  2  ] Newer