You Can Do Eeet
You Can Do Eeet
do you think that EA will do it justice?
babies need fresh meat, somehow system shock 2 was less demented because to me it was sci-fi. like event horizon (the movie) although its very scary and tense, there is a time barrier and a tech barrier in the way of belief. i dunno the many lacked the charisma and strange attraction of the splicers. its almost like i relate to the splicers, and of course, because im splicing plasmids, but because they are doing what i would have done down there if i lived in rapture... too many drugs! haha
i think bioshock is one of the greatest games ive played as well, but i am a casual gamer. i hear the cries of the hardcore, and i respect them. i hope there is a patch for the issues that bother people because this game is so close to pleasing everyone that they could live up to the 100 ratings they have received.
the nice thing about AIs is there is no real killing them (haHA, made a backup! take that!) ala shodan, so maybe shodan and xerxes will make sweet AI love and seed their child into the net, the little bastard. enter you.
or maybe they will merge into a superAI, like a gestalt but um wierder, and do strange and demented things... like experiment with genetics
or maybe ken levine will think of something smarter than my ideas.
As for me, I used to be a very hardcore gamer, but most games just don't interest me anymore. I'm very picky and I tend to get bored quite easily. However, there are some more current games that I play and enjoy, but most of those are different from the majority.
I was bored of First-Person Shooters until Half-Life came out and renewed my interest. I also enjoyed the sequel quite a bit, too.
Origin published Shock 1, but it was written by Looking Glass. Shock 2 was co-wrote by Irrational and Looking Glass, and I'm sure you all know there's lots of ex-LG people at Irrational and Irrational was founded by people who left LG.
EA in-house could not do the game justice. Nothing to stop them getting a good studio to make it, but it won't be Irraitonal since they are now owned by 2K/Take Two, and I can't think of anyone else who could do as good a job with it.
i do know that the only other video game i really play on any regular basis is made by ea. which means absolutely nothing about anything because fifa 07 has about as much to do with what made system shock great as jack has with the pope.
i bet they'll muck it up, have they done any drama games, much less horror games? all i even know is they make the best sports games in many eyes? if i had to predict, i bet they'll regurgitate the stuff that made 1 and 2 great, have you finally beat shodan, and hype it to the max as unpredictable.
It's a real shame that EA holds the rights to System Shock, but it's fantastic that the guiding force behind SS2 can create another game, under another name, and have it received by the community as a spiritual successor.
nice avatar btw
laughing man rawks
hah, asking if EA will do the system shock series justice is like asking if fish can live in radioactive slime. it just doesnt work. sry if this is contrary to someones views but if you look at how ea has mangled the command and conquer games (and almost every other game that they bought up because it was selling good) then you will see the true reason the CnC communtiy has died down.
If the team that made Godfather are making it, we are in for a treat of the doggie variety
I could keep going, I haven't even touched their wii support.
I hope EA never release something with the name System Shock on it. They will not do the series justice.
many good golden titles have fallen in the hands of EA ..... the thief title is under their belt now aswell :-( and that was a really good game
Ugh EA developing System shock 3 (not just publishing?). I would be against it if it were anyone but Irrational Games to be honest. You see evidence of System shock 2's gameplay all over the place in Bioshock. I might have had high expectations for System shock 3 if it was made by Irrational (now enveloped by another mega publisher 2k), its now pretty much a write off in my mind.
man, i just was thinkin and i realized that with only a few true mega publishers of games thesed corporations are getting pretty close to having a monopoly on these products... if only ea would screw up and put themselves in a position to get taken down by the corporate monopoly laws that are in place... it seems to me that these laws let the corporations buy up eachother to the point where there is only a couple of them... or i might just be stupid as hell, one of the two.
repost from another thread
SS2 was and still is my all time fav game. You can imagine my "shock " to find that XPwindows wouldnt play SS2.
SS2 was not a mindless point and shoot. it was fascinating and scariest game i have ever played.
Personally, I viewed Doom 3 as a knock off of system shock 2. i found the graphics confusing and cluttered. it took away from the sher horror element. the creatures were mindless and mechanical.
Although, i really like Bioshock, I prefer the spare and spartan graphics of System shock 2. the screaming monkey along the carpeted corridor was very frightening and it kept the mind focused on the horror and the idea. I know that game developers pride them selves in detailed and compilcated graphics complete with shadow play. It is over done if it distracts from basic elements of horror. Keep it simple!
definitely man, ive told my friends a million times i dont care if it looks good when the story is a pile of crap that would make a dung beatle commit suicide. i would rather be playing games with graphics about the same as sytem shock 2's and amazingly intricate and involving storylines than something that would fool jesus into thinking it was real yet doesnt tell any story or make me want to keep playing. i just wish devs could see that. the technology is as advanced as it needs to be, let it be for a while work on the plot not the engine just because you can do something doesnt mean you should.
An SS3 would be awesome, but I hope it's for console players to.
its easy enough to blame someone else. but i suggest (just as a fellow human being) to stop it, take accountability for your own consumer voice, stop buying crap, stop supporting companies that you don't like, and live a conscious lifestyle. thats an actual solution, instead of just complaining about the problem.
sorry for the rant.
i have, i expected much better when i purchased bioshock. i appreciate you taking the devils advocate role here man. i wasnt trying to say that because the companies are big they make crap games i was tryiung to point out a possible way of eliminating what many view as a threat to game series everywhere. just think of a world without ea heh. i dunno, maybe its just the gremlins in my head grabbing random thoughts and typing them.
todays random thought: expectations are the cause of disappointment.
and i didnt take you as saying that because companies are big, they make crap. even if its true, its not because they are big. i wasn't saying that.
the nicest thing about big companies is that you dont Have to buy their product. its a choice. i like that.
ea has a lot of expectations built up about crysis. when i first saw the promo vids i thought 'hmm predictably military' but i will be examining this game for plot style and content, because i know it contains rpg elements. or maybe i should just say 'theres a story'.
being that system shock is military in nature, crysis might be an indication of what to expect. i personally haven't written ea off as being able to pull it off. someone else mentioned that while looking glass/irrational had a hand in both games, they were indeed developed by different people. who knows...
FIFA used to be an arcade soccer sim, and that was fine. It was fun. Then Pro Evo came around with its realistic and varied gameplay and it blew FIFA away. Since Pro Evo gained a heap of rave reviews and fan support, FIFA has been playing catch-up in terms of realistic play, so its not as fun as it was and it feels like a poor version of Pro Evo. All its got going for it is its graphics and management capabilities. But on that front Football Manager is by far a better game.
If FIFA spent more time on getting the gameplay mechanics right and less time on implementing more and more features most people will never use, I'll go back to it. Until then the gameplay of Pro Evolution is just too dynamic, realistic and complete for any other "simulator" to compare.