Slashdot Mirror


Prey Review

Built with the Doom 3 engine and touting numerous innovations on the First Person Shooter genre, Prey is a study in contradictions. While it delivers on many interesting twists and environmental elements, the low difficulty and hackneyed character design drains some of the novelty from the experience. Despite frustratingly similar corridors and brain-dead enemies, the quality of the innovation somehow combines with the touchstones of retro-gaming to create that ephemeral quality: fun. Much better than Doom 3, and with the new-car smell that Quake 4 was lacking, Prey is a fully functional refit of the corridor-shooter genre. Read on for my impressions of Human Head's latest.
  • Title: Prey
  • Publisher: 2K Games
  • Developer: Human Head Studios
  • System: PC (360)
A reader of 2003's Masters of Doom would already know that id software was based, briefly, out of Madison, Wisconsin. The inclement weather sent Carmack and co. packing for balmier climes, but there are still fingerprints on the city from that brief period. Raven Software is probably the best-known developer in town, with hits like Jedi Knight II to their name. Human Head is a smaller developer, but no less talented. They are a combination table-top gaming and computer gaming studio, and their completion of Prey some nine years after it was first shown to the gaming press is nothing short of extraordinary. While staying true to the thin gameplay elements shown those many years ago, Prey carries an obvious vision from its new handlers.

Prey promises a lot in the way of unique experiences and subtle tweaks on classic genre tropes. It's a shooter where you kill aliens - but instead of a tough-as-nails marine you're a young ex-army guy from a Native American reservation. Snatched from a bar with your grandfather and girlfriend, you don't care about saving the world; you just want to free her and go home. You haven't undergone genetic engineering or cybernetic enhancement to gain your special powers: you tap into the spiritual reservoir your grandfather reveals to you. 'Portal' technology moves you seamlessly from place to place, and the laws of gravity are subject to negotiation.

Instead of the protagonist's racial background being a footnote, or something you only find in the manual, Human Head brings a version of Native American spirituality to the fore by tying it directly into gameplay elements. Tough-guy Tommy doesn't believe in 'that crap' when the game starts, but soon enough he's leaving his body to walk about as a being of pure spirit (which comes in mighty handy around auto-turrets). This 'out of body' experience means that, for all intents and purposes, Tommy can't die. When you do deplete your health bar, instead of reloading the game you're taken to a grim-looking plateau and given the chance to fight for your life. Your spirit-bow is quite adept at taking out the bad spirits surrounding the place, and every one you destroy returns a little health or spirit energy. After a set time span, you're sucked back down and out into the living world to face your foes again. It was great not having to worry about saving and reloading, but after the third or fourth time the simple shoot-the-spirits game got a little old. It would have been great if the spirit world had become a tougher place further into the game. And while the occasional chat with your dead grandfather was enjoyable from a plot perspective, the lack of gameyness to your trips into ancient New Mexico disappointed. The designers took us on an in-game spiritual journey, but there was very little to actually 'do' as that journey progressed.

While there are spirits in the game, most of the shiny comes from alien technology. Portals are a great tweak to time and space, and already look like they're going to be a permanent fixture in FPS gaming. Opponents and some simple switches can throw open oval passageways to 'someplace else'. Not just a loading gimmick or gag, the portals physically link areas that are otherwise inaccessible. Early in the game they do a bit of showing off by walking you past a glass box with a small rock in it. You're left wondering what exactly it is, as it has no obvious purpose. Just a few moments later, though, you're stepping through a portal onto a rocky spheroid inside a glassy enclosure. It's a cheap trick, but effective at getting across the technology's potential. The gravity flipping trick is a more straightforward puzzle element, requiring you to alternate the orientation of 'down' in order to gain access to various surfaces in a room. In most cases it's fairly simple to see what's going on, but there are several great Escher-esque moments that require you to exercise your three dimensional thinking skills. The 'undying protagonist', gravity-flipping, and already adopted-portals are all great gimmicks, and I find myself actually hoping that I'll be seeing copycat game mechanics in future FPS titles.

Unfortunately, the overall vision of the game falls somewhat short of the greatness it was striving for. The techno-organic (read: drawn on a trapper-keeper) motif that your surroundings and enemies display begins to look exactly like every other game made with the Doom 3 engine after you've killed your tenth identical bad guy. So far, every game we've seen made with this technology have been visually arresting, but more or less artistically bankrupt. Prey, at least, takes the gooey look to its fullest; many of your weapons are actually alive, and some were formerly pieces of enemies. As you're walking along, your weapon might hiss at you menacingly. This little touch is so clever and appreciated that it makes the boring sameness of the enemies and corridors that much more drab.

Even more frustrating is the ease with which most veteran FPS players will complete this title on 'Regular' mode. There's a solid fifteen hours or so of gameplay here, but for the first half of the game you're probably going to find yourself trying to remember what the spirit world looks like. The second half is more challenging, but only at a level the first half should have ramped up to. That said, I would far and away rather games be too easy than too hard; it's a lot of fun to finish a game and I think a lot of modern titles don't keep that in mind when gauging difficulty. The challenge level felt as though they were purposefully teaching you as you went; the integration of new elements into your knowledge of the game world was accomplished at a brisk but digestible pace. Just the same, once the game really got rocking I found myself hoping for more intelligent baddies to fight; not every bad guy can be from F.E.A.R., I guess.

Visually, Prey acquits itself well against its contemporaries. The Doom 3 engine is still a solid platform to wrap a game around, and the dark-n-moody atmosphere it fosters was fairly appropriate considering the setting. The 'generic alien squishiness' did get old after a while, though. Even more annoyingly, the alien designs felt uninspired on first brush and just kept hanging around throughout the game. There just aren't that many types of baddies to face in this title. While I'm not looking for a menagerie to start hunting me down, I would have liked a little more variety; the ground-level grunt was particularly boring. The spiritual children, at least, were interesting from a background standpoint. Encountered in a few choice areas, their creepy appearance and haunting laughter was one of the few genuine chill-inducing elements of the game. Aurally, there wasn't much beyond those laughing children to look forward to. Forgettable music and fairly standard moans and groans from your enemies dog your steps through the game. Weapons sounds were serviceable; while not anything amazing, they did lend a passable feeling of weight and power to your arsenal. My favorite audio element was actually the occasionally overheard snippets of radio broadcasts from Earth. Quiet moments could be spent preparing for your next run by listening to (real-life radio host) Art Bell receive calls from bewildered humans experiencing the alien invasion on the ground. The only real humour in the game, the vignettes were well written and produced, and well worth the time it took to listen.

Prey, with its retro-inspired corridor shooting and tired alien antagonists, could have fallen victim to retread gameplay and genre boredom. Instead, Human Head has managed to lift the simple shooter out of mundanity by give us some new things to see and do while we're mowing down generic baddies. A serviceable plot and a spiritual twist, on top of new-tech portals and gravity flipping, is just enough to make everything old seem somehow a little bit new. The 'classic' shooter is something I'm starting to get tired of, but with Prey at least one more title has made aiming and shooting fun enough to recommend. If you're a fan of the FPS genre, especially the early work of id software, you're going to have fun with the new toys given to us by Human Head Studios.

277 comments

  1. Too Much Serious Violence by neonprimetime · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I personally prefer humorous violence. For example : WORMS!!!

    1. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

      This game is rated E, because I'm not shooting people, I'm weeding my lawn.

      Violence is in The Eye of the Beholder.

      KFG

    2. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
      > I personally prefer humorous violence. For example : WORMS!!!

      All violence is funny. You can't spell slaughter without laughter!

    3. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by nuggz · · Score: 1

      Eye of the Beholder wasn't that violent was it?

    4. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by kfg · · Score: 1

      Eye of the Beholder wasn't that violent was it?

      That depends an awful lot on whether you're the beholder or not, doesn't it?

      KFG

    5. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by s_p_oneil · · Score: 1

      If it weren't, shows like the Three Stooges, Tom & Jerry, and Looney Tunes would never have become so popular.

    6. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Nothing beats the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch. :)

    7. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I personally prefer humorous violence. For example : WORMS!!!

      or SNAKES!!! on a mutha-f'ing plane!

    8. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      In case anyone thinks this is off topic, take a look at this.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Although one should point out that for every alternate universe in which the beholder died a violent death, there are anywhere from ten to ten thousand alternate ones where the players died a violent death.

      So, statistically, the beholder is doing quite well, thank you very much.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    10. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by kfg · · Score: 1

      for every alternate universe in which the beholder died a violent death, there are anywhere from ten to ten thousand alternate ones where the players died a violent death.

      And some of those players are. . . wait for it, wait for it . . .

      Children!

      KFG

    11. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 1

      Maybe the old worms, like Armageddon. It just went downhill after 3D, and hasn't picked back up.

    12. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Feyr · · Score: 1

      i don't know about that. the donkey was pretty damn funny too. and the nuclear strike with the US anthem

    13. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      The last time I played WORMS, it was on the Playstation. The Holy Hand Grenade was da bomb (no pun intended). Although I'm sure that donkey carry a nuclear bomb would be funny as heck. :)

    14. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Feyr · · Score: 1

      those two attacks were cheats actually. the donkey comes down from the top and bounces down (it's about 200 feet wide) "erasing" the terrain and bouncing the worms around.

      the nuclear strike makes the world sink a little at a time, so the worms drown

    15. Re:Too Much Serious Violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then give a try to "Micro Machines V4": much more fun with the same weapons as UT or Quake !

  2. Dear Lord, by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 0

    I prey that there's a lot of funny Doom 3 cracks in this thread.

    Amen.

    1. Re:Dear Lord, by Tx · · Score: 1

      I quake at the very thought!

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    2. Re:Dear Lord, by stupidfoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is one or two Doom 3 jokes in the game. You enter a dark hallway and your character says "It's so dark in here... I'm doomed!"

      One of my favorite parts of this game is towards the end when your character actually gets pissed off and he starts yelling "Die you mother f@cker!" and other expletives as you're killing aliens.

    3. Re:Dear Lord, by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Dude, this isn't Taco Hell.

    4. Re:Dear Lord, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At one point (in the xbox demo anyway) you walk into one of the weird gravity areas. As I was playing, my friend and I both said "That's fucked up" about a second before the character said the same thing. That was a nice touch.

  3. Does it run linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But does it run linux?

    1. Re:Does it run linux? by Total_Wimp · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does it run Linux?

      Yes, yes, the game has a full version of Linux in a virtual machine and on that version they've taken the liberty of preinstalling Tux Racer. You'll have just scads of fun as you pause the game to play TR whenever you want. But why stop there? You can pause the game and balance your checkbook on Linux, use OO.o to write a letter, or even develope your own high-end video game with all the included development tools.

      Yes, it runs Linux, and after installing the 8th DVD you too can enjoy this beautiful operating system and just ignore this game as long as you'd like.

      TW

    2. Re:Does it run linux? by pshuke · · Score: 2, Informative

      >> But does it run linux?

      No. It seems that many believed/hoped it would, since it uses the doom3 engine. However, apparently ``There just really isn't any big demand for it" - see this post in this thread.
      There isn't supposed to be a mac port either, so save your time if you're not a windows/xbox user.

  4. No Linux port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Without a Linux port I will not be buying a copy.

    1. Re:No Linux port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is to say you'll just filch a windows xp version on emule?

    2. Re:No Linux port by l_bratch · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is worth noting that this game runs fantastically in Wine, I do so myself.

    3. Re:No Linux port by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Without a Linux port I will not be buying a copy."

      Why do Linux gamers conjure up the word 'masochistic' in my mind?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    4. Re:No Linux port by montyzooooma · · Score: 1
      "Why do Linux gamers conjure up the word 'masochistic' in my mind?"

      Because you're kinky?

    5. Re:No Linux port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You alone represent about 20% of the market for games ported to Linux.

  5. All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by gasmonso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What ever happened to Co-op mode? That available back in the days of Quake and DN3 and was hugely popular. It was fun battling the computer with a buddy. Then for some reason it just vanished from most titles. I say bring back co-op mode and breathe a little life back in this tired genre.

    http://religiousfreaks.com/
    1. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a rather moot point for PC games, but Halo on Xbox has co-op mode...on split screen, tho. anyone know if the PC version has been hacked to allow co-op over LAN or teh intarwebs?

    2. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 1

      Serious Sam 2 had COOP. But it wasn't as fun as the COOP for Serious Sam 1 (first and second encounter).

    3. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Retron · · Score: 5, Insightful
      What ever happened to Co-op mode?
      Scripting killed it. Back in the day when the most dynamic thing happening was a door opening somewhere or a block falling down to reveal a passage, having multiple players crawling around blasting things was easy enough to support.

      That said, even in the Doom days there were plenty of levels that would break if one player did something when the others were in the wrong area, such as sealing off the starting area so that when you died you faced a brick wall rather than empty corridors.

      As things became ever more complicated it seemed to become harder and harder for the developers to ensure that there were no catch-22 type setups and after Hexen II and (IIRC) Quake II it pretty much seemed to vanish from games, Serious Sam excepted.

    4. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 1

      Well, not entirely gone... Half-Life 2:Episode I offers a sort of Co-op. Even if the co-operator is a computer, its an good attempt at a life life computer.

      I wouldn't mind seeing more of both human and computer co-op fps. One guy taking on the evil hordes isn't very convincing, but a second player/computer can help sell it.

      --
      Demented But Determined.
    5. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by VendingMenace · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Man, it seems like there should be a fairly easy fix for that. Every time you respawn, you respawn next to your team-mate (pretty standard) and the game should have a mechanic where you can press a key and warp to the position of your team-mate at any time. It seems like this would be decently easy to introduce -- especially in a sci-fi universe -- without losing much credibility.

    6. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teleporting would be awesome. I remember all too many co-op games becoming impromptu griefing friendly-fire death matches. :)

    7. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While co-op mode in corridor shooters is indeed dead as 8-track tape, the co-op multiplayer is now getting some kind of return to fashion in family oriented games. "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" and "Narnia" are good examples of games with EXCELLENT co-op multiplayer (it's developed to a level in which single player can be annoying in some levels - you can just see that they were designed with two or more human players in mind).

      I feel you pain because I was always a co-op multiplayer fan. We just feel the squeeze of the invisible hand of the market on our cojones (to quote Stephenson's "Confusion"). The market has decided that "Quake 3"-like multiplayer games are what the public wants, so there's no more common exploration of dark corridors.

    8. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by hudsonhawk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perfect Dark Zero offers an excellent online coop mode. It's probably the most innovative part of the game, but didn't get a lot of fanfare.

      In a lot of ways it's much better than the flawed single-player mode.

    9. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by StarvingSE · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or even easier, make it an actual challenge and once a team mate dies, they are gone until the next stage. That would make it all the more important for the players to work as a team instead of running for powerups all the time.

      If unlimited respawns were introduced, the game would be way to easy.

      --
      I got nothin'
    10. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by patmfitz · · Score: 5, Informative
      Scripting killed it.
      Halo has a great co-op mode. When you get to a "scripted" point it just warps the other player up to you. Also, if one player dies he will respawn only if the second player is not in combat. This leads to a certain amount of cheese, because in a rough part of the game you can send one player out to thin out the enemy ranks, keeping the second player in a safe spot. Then when the first player dies, he respawns back by the second player. Lather, rinse, repeat until you make it through. For casual gamers this is a great feature!
    11. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by evil_Tak · · Score: 1

      There's a well-done third-party Co-op mod for Doom 3 that really does breathe new life into the game. Additionally, it may very well get ported to other games on the same engine; there's already a live demo for Quake 4.

      http://www.d3opencoop.com/

    12. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by vux984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then when the first player dies, he respawns back by the second player. Lather, rinse, repeat until you make it through. For casual gamers this is a great feature!

      A "great feature" like that would only be appreciated by idiotic players not casual players.

      I don't know what kind of player you are, but suggesting that -any- sort of player would consider a game that encourages them to perform tedious borderline exploit tactics to beat the game a "great feature" isn't thinking straight.

      A "great feature" for casual players is multiple difficulty levels so they can play the game at a challenge level that matches their skill. A "great feature" for casual players is the ability to pause and save anywhere so they can leave and go do something else without losing their progress.

      Its true that games that allow unlimited saves anywhere DO allow players to respawn crawl through levels, but players rarely ENJOY playing like that, and I can't think of a single person I've ever met who, when they felt "compelled" to respawn crawl, thought it was a "great feature". Every single one of them thought it was a STUPID and UN-FUN way to play the game, and the only reason they did it was that restarting the level over from the beginning over and over and over was deemed even STUPIDER and more UN-FUN.

      A game that allows save-anywhere should be designed to discourage the "respawn crawl" playstyle. Seriously, what sort of idiot would WANT to play games like that?

      One way of discouraging it is to limit saves per level per session so that you can save if you need to go, but can't save after every room unless you want to quit and re-open the game every couple deaths. Another way is to put a time limit between saves... you can save anytime, anywhere, but once you've saved, you can't save again until either 10 minutes have passed or you cross an auto-save checkpoint. Yet another way is to allow the player to change the difficulty between deaths -- if he's 10 hours into a 15 hour game on "Hard", and he was doing fine, but as he got deeper the game got harder to the point that he's now dying every other room - give him the option to drop the difficulty a notch.

      Adding this choice gives the player a more attractive option than the three he's currently faced with: a) restarting the game at a lower difficulty which would be exceedingly boring - to play through the 10 hours you already beat on an -easier- setting (yawn), or b) continue forward banging your head on the wall because you can make virtually no progress at all and you have to keep playing the same part of the same level over and over and over again (double yawn), or using respawn-crawl to inch through, which is both boring AND lame.

    13. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by despisethesun · · Score: 1

      I haven't tried Halo's co-op because split-screen FPS gaming sucks balls. They should have included LAN co-op on the XBox version, that would have made it worthwhile to play through.

      --
      This poo is cold.
    14. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by despisethesun · · Score: 1

      The XBox version of Doom 3 has co-op over the LAN out of the box. I can't remember if it works with Live or not (though I don't think it does), but you should be able to do it over the Internet with XLink or anything similar.

      --
      This poo is cold.
    15. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by misleb · · Score: 1

      Wow, you mean you coudl actually cooperate with your friends without temptation to blow them away? I couldn't do it. Maybe I just didn't llike them as much as I thought I did. ;-)

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    16. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by patmfitz · · Score: 1

      Wow, I seem to have touched off some RAGE judging by your POST and the amount of CAPS used.

      I guess I'm an idiotic player, because I loved that feature in co-op. I'm playing to have some fun with a friend, and if I accidently bounce a grenade into my face, better to say "I'm dead - run for cover and respawn me" than "I'm dead - you keep playing while I sit here twiddling my thumbs" or "I'm dead - kill yourself so we can replay the last ten minutes of the game".

      Your suggestion for lowering the difficulty mid-game is a good one, and for the record my friend and I played through Halo in all the difficulties and generally used the cheesy tactic just to get through the roughest parts of legendary mode.

    17. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by patmfitz · · Score: 1
      split-screen FPS gaming sucks balls

      Granted, but Halo co-op was still fun

      I'm dying for a Halo co-op experience via Internet - that's when I'll plop down my next-gen dollars.

    18. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. Although it has to be stated that Perfect Dark Zero has co-op both locally and over Live. I would have gotten about a third of the fun out of PDZ if there was no co-op.

    19. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Wow, I seem to have touched off some RAGE judging by your POST and the amount of CAPS used.

      Not really. I capped around 7 words over 7 paragraphs to emphasise them. That said, I -am- frustrated when I see "hardcore" players point at tedious or lame play styles as being "great features" for casuals. It happens in a lot of games, most particularly mmorpgs, where the "hardcore raid guild" player frequently asserts that the dull, repetitive, lame, and relatively unrewarding content that is available for solo or casual play is a "great feature" for the casual players.

      I guess I'm an idiotic player, because I loved that feature in co-op.

      Why did you love that feature again?

      In your most recent post you claim you loved the feature because it it let you play. It was much better than sitting twiddling your thumbs after dying and/or making your friend commit suicide so you didn't have to sit there bored. From -that- perspective I'd agree its a great feature.

      On the other hand, you originally claimed it was a great feature because it could be exploited, where you could just mindlessly do suicide runs to thin the opponents, respawn by your friend, and "lather rinse and repeat". From that perspective I think its an extremely lame feature, for all players, not just "casuals".

      So which is it? :)

      For my part, I think the former aspect of the feature is excellent, while the latter consequence is regrettable -- perhaps an even better feature would have been to have a percentage of the opponents heal and respawn when you re-spawned after death. This would mostly eliminate "mindless suicide runs" as a viable tactic because it wouldn't actually be very effective at "thinning the opponents", but it still allows both of you to play without long periods of bored thumb-twiddling, or of nagging your friend to hurry up and die...

      -cheers,

    20. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, so a feature that you agree is "great" is only for "idiotic players" ... so that makes you... King of the Asshats?

    21. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      Halo introduced this very concept; using 2 player co-op on a single player map is excellent, and avoids catch-22s by having the dead player respawn by his compadre once the live player was no longer being shot at. Corridor sessions were fun ^^

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    22. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by WiPEOUT · · Score: 1

      What ever happened to Co-op mode? That available back in the days of Quake and DN3 and was hugely popular.

      I call BS. If you stopped looking at the world through rose-tinted glasses you'd recall practically nobody played co-op on the PC save maybe once out of curiosity. That's the reason it was dropped. No point spending the time to implement the feature if it's only used by a minute percentage of gamers -- that time was better spent on optimising performance or adding an extra level or something the vast majority would benefit from.

    23. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Capt_Napalm · · Score: 1

      The best game that I've played recently that included a co-op component was Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory.

      You had to work together because the maps were specifically designed for co-op play. You couldn't necessarily go Rambo. Certain areas were inaccessible without working as a team.

      Plus, like the single player portion, the best part about the game was figuring out how to incapacitate your foes. But being co-op, you had to coordinate in order to have the best outcome. Nothing like grabbing two guys simultaneously and using them on a pair of retinal scanners. Or throwing your partner over a chasm to allow him to knock a few bad guys out and open a path for you.

      The only thing that sucked about the game was there just wasn't enough co-op levels (even after they added a few in a patch). My friend and I wrapped most the levels after a few evenings of gaming.

    24. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by werelnon · · Score: 1

      SWAT 4. One of the best co-op modes out there.

    25. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Zantetsuken · · Score: 1

      personally, I liked the coop mode of BF1942 with Desert Combat mod on - I spent a great many months completely ignoring the rest of the game in favor of servers with about 5 or 10 humans on one side, blowing the crap outta bots (even if the bots were some of the dumbest you'd ever seen, it was still fun). Nothing could beat joining such a server running Berlin (I think), join the Iraqi side, and lay down in the middle of the street and pound the crap outta bots with a pkm...

    26. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Chibi-Hikaru · · Score: 1

      I casually play Halo (1 & 2) at my friend's house. I like this feature because I am by no means the world's greatest FPS player. Short of Halo, Goldeneye and Doom I've basically played no other FPSes. So yeah, I like being able to be auto-caught-up when I'm straggling behind. One thing the OP didn't mention was that if you both die you get respawned back at your last check point. At any rate, the cheese method of sending in someone to die is a choice. If you want to play the game that way, go ahead. The only person you're affecting is your friend. When we play it we generally choose not to do this. I end up doing it when we've been playing for hours and I'm falling asleep and my skil has dropped from marginal to generally shitty and I want to make the point I'm done playing. =P

      --
      http://www.cafepress.com/hikarudesigns/ http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=hikaru
    27. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      It's not completely gone. Serious Sam II has coop mode.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    28. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Wait, so a feature that you agree is "great" is only for "idiotic players"

      When praising its use in a lame/idiotic manner yes.

      I also think parking brakes are great feature; they help keep a car from moving when parked, especially on an incline. If somone was spouting about how great they were for getting into skids in school zones and "impressing chicks" I call that idiotic.

      I think highbeams are a great feature too. They make driving at night in the rural areas without streetlights safer. However if someone proclaimed how highbeams were cool because you could use them to blind the guy in front of you if they pissed you off I'd call that idiotic too.

      I'm really quite surprised anyone would have trouble with this concept.

    29. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Cheapy · · Score: 1

      Halo 1 and 2 had it, and it was a blast on both of them.

      Can't quite say it's dead yet.

      --
      Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
    30. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would make it very boring for the player who died. They'd have to wait for the next level, which could take two seconds or two hours, depending on how fast the other player beats it (assuming they win)

    31. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Wheat · · Score: 1

      Co-op mode is making a bit of a come back with the new round of consoles all supporting internet play. Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo on the XBox 360 all have a co-op mode.

    32. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by cyclomedia · · Score: 1

      i have 3 brothers, doom had 4 player coop. it was a perfect match and so was doom2,duke nukem 3d, quake, quake2 and unreal (original not tournament). When half life came out and we fired up "multiplayer" we were left wandering emtpy facilities for quite some time, picking up weapons and trying to figure out why there weren't any baddies. Really. We'd never ever played deathmatch in about 4/5 years of FPS gaming.

      --
      If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
    33. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      The windows version of Ghost Recon AW also has a coop mode (as did the previous versions).

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    34. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 1

      I think possibly he was unclear in what he said originally and you misinterpreted it. I think he was saying that the feature of spawning on a friend when out of battle is good and only suggesting that you could respawn creep, not that it is a good feature because of respawn creep.
      then to clarify he says that it keeps people playing longer, which coincides with the original argument. Anyway, I think the worst part of respawn creeping is the infinite ammo thing. . . I remember a few times my buddy and I would just kill each other for a few minutes making a stockpile of dropped weapons, then proceed with the level. well those are my words in someone else's mouth, but its all in good fun.

      --
      disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
    35. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by 14CharUsername · · Score: 1

      probably be better to have a squad of dudes, some human controlled, some AI controlled. When you die you just take over an AI player. When you run out of AI players you have to start over / reload.

    36. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by patmfitz · · Score: 1

      vux984: I see your point, and in my original post I admitted that this method is cheesy. But I'll stick by my guns - I like having this cheese available in a co-op game, not for common use, but for those one or two sticky situations where you've tried and died, and just want to get through it and on to the next part of the game.

    37. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by DeeDob · · Score: 1

      It's because most are corridor shooters and would play badly in coop. 2 characters in the same corridor would keep firing on each other.

      I actually blame the original Half-Life for creating the corridor shooter. The genre of FPS where when you enter a corridor with 10 doors closed, you already knew that 9 of them were gonna be closed and "unopenable". Shooter BEFORE Half-Life were more fun. It's "innovations" that it brought (friendly AIs and digitized speech) were a natural evolution that came late to FPS. Any other company would have come with the same things a few months after Half-Life's release.
      It's "praised" storyline never got to me. In the beginning it's good, then at about 1/4 of the game in, it's a storyline wasteland until the very end of the game.
      Lack of level innovation plagued it: grey corridors, occasional brown/yellow desert and pink/purple alien dimension at the end. That was it.
      The original Unreal had more storyline and different environments to it and came before Half-Life. Granted it was told with text "datapads" you found here and there, but it's story was continuous.

      So as i said, i blame Half-Life for the "stagnation" of most modern FPS. FPS now only replicates the original Half-Life formula and never try to actually improve on it. Prey tried, but they truned-up as mere gimmicks rather than true innovations.

      Some of more recent games that had coop were Halo and Halo 2, which may be one of the big reason they are popular.

    38. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      The "innovations" were indeed a natural evolution of the FPS. I also agree that other companies would have come up with the same ideas months afterwards. So why would stagnation be Half-Life's fault?

      I don't think you can pin blame for industry failure on any one game. But you can pin success, since competitors would want to flee failure and follow success.

      Really, half-life was just a good FPS, it didn't make dramatic changes. Only new thing it did was try to push story-line without stealing control of the player. Halo was just a good FPS, it didn't make dramatic changes. The difference was that it appeared on a console(whereas the other console FPSes were terrible). And it had the recharging shields that appeared in other games afterward.

      No pioneering in either of them, just natural progression.

    39. Re:All new 3D Shooters are missing one thing... by DeeDob · · Score: 1

      "No pioneering in either of them, just natural progression."

      That was kindof my point, but totally the reverse.

      I think Half-Life was responsible for a "natural" progression in some elements (storytelling techniques mainly).

      But it was responsible for "regression" in regards to level linearity. Level linearity still plagues FPS such as Prey even today.

  6. Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Compared to the pc version, the 360 version is a joke.

    ATI really botched things up or Microsoft messed things up for ATI or whatever. Regardless, my mid-range pc makes the 360 look like a wimp.

    It took at least a year for high end pcs to even touch the first Xbox.

    1. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll agree that it's not very good, but that's not the hardware's fault. You can't take a pretty-much-single-threaded application that has tons of CPU ops in there (shadow volume calculations) and just run it on the 360 hardware.

      Just wait for id's next engine (developed on the 360), I have every hope that we'll be blown away yet again.

    2. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Total_Wimp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Compared to the pc version, the 360 version is a joke.

      I was actually quite interested in how this game compares to games available on the 360 and games that will be available for the PS3. Without regard to whether the port is any good, the grapics on the PC version look great compared to screen shots I've seen of other games on next gen consoles. Being a long time PC gamer, I remember when the PS2 came out how jealous I was of how good it looked. But comparing these screen shots to shots I've seen of 360 games, it doesn't look like the 360 has much of an edge, if any.

      Slashdotters have been happy to point out that for the cost of a PS3 you can get an Xbox 360 and a Wii. Consider for a moment that everyone who has a console will also have a PC. Looking on the Dell site right quick I was able to outfit an XPS 400 with a 2.8Ghz Pentium D, 1GB RAM and an nVidia 7300LE video card for $720 (Free shipping). The lowest end entry level PC on the site, the Dimension B110 goes for $299. That means that the cost of a reasonable, mainstream gaming PC, more than capable of running this game, is cheaper than the cost of either the Xbox 360 or the PS3, plus a cheapy PC (360@$400 plus PC@$299 equals $799. PS3 is $200 more). The Wii is the exception, but it's particular market and gimick make it an apples to oranges comparison.

      Without going into whether the types of games you'll find on a console are better, are you getting better equipment out of them? Are you getting better looking games? Is this the generation of consoles that the PC ends up winning? I don't know, but it looks to me like the PC is both a more powerful gaming machine and a better value.

      TW

    3. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by gzunk · · Score: 1

      Somehow I don't think the PC screenshots were done with a 7300LE video card.

      You're not going to get a good experience with Prey on a "reasonable, mainstream gaming PC". You'll get a "reasonable" experience. If you honestly believe that the PC you specced is "more than capable of running this game" then fair enough, but I disagree.

      A good experience would be with something like SLI 7900GTX, which is going to set you back $900 just for the cards, and with a decent processor (AMD X2-4600) you're adding another $400. (You have to admit that the 2.8 Pentium D is at the slower end of the dual core spectrum)

      Sure the PC is a more powerful gaming machine, but better value?

    4. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by rmdir+-r+* · · Score: 1
      The lowest end entry level PC on the site, the Dimension B110 goes for $299. That means that the cost of a reasonable, mainstream gaming PC, more than capable of running this game,

      You either don't know what you're talking about or you're lying. Are you really saying that Prey will run on that? From the Prey website:

      Minimum

      CPU Speed: Intel Pentium 4 2.0Ghz / AMD Athlon XP 2000+ processor
      RAM: 512MB system RAM
      Video Card: 100% DirectX 9.0c compatible 64MB video card with latest manufacturer drivers (see supported chipsets below)

      From Dell's Website, I found that the Dimension B110 comes with 256 megs of RAM (half the minimum) and an Intel Integrated card. If you think you can run any Doom III engine game on that card, with a vaguely playable framerate, the world would love to know.

      So no, you can't get a $300 dollar PC and compete with an XBox360. Get over it, your manhood does not depend upon the superiority of the PC platform.

    5. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a grotesque exaggeration. The Prey demo runs very well on my machine at 1024x768, medium textures, all effects on maximum apart from antialiasing and anisotropic filtering (which are off). This is an AthlonXP 2600+, i.e. considerably worse than that Pentium D you think is inadequate, and a GF6600, which costs about $800 less than your fantasyland SLI cards. I think choosing that comparison shows you up as a fanboy very clearly.

    6. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by JL-b8 · · Score: 1

      Umm.. I've played both the PC and the 360 version. It's pretty similar and concidering I've invested well over $700 into my PC, let alone a monitor. I don't see how the 360 is a worse buy. I just think you're pissed because kids dropping $400 on a 360 can play something you dropped $2000 on your 1337 rig to play the same game. That and your penis is small and you're trying to over compensate.

    7. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by hob42 · · Score: 1

      No, I think he was saying that for the cost of a 360 and the $300 lame PC (since most people are gonna have a PC at home too), you could instead buy an $800 PC that was first of all a better PC, and second, better at games than the 360. And that either option was still $200 cheaper than the PS3.

      At least that was my interpretation.

    8. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Puh-lease. If you're touting the GF6600 as adequate for aesthetic high performance gaming in anything but Quake-3-Arena era programs, you should pipe down because you are way out of touch with modern gaming hardware.

    9. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The game ran very smoothly on my 2.66ghz P4 and 128mb Geforce 6800 with all settings on high (except aniso and anti-aliasing).

    10. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hyperbolic bullshit. Q3A was 1999. A GF6600 can run UT2004 at absolute maximum settings and 1280x1024 perfectly smoothly. Sure, it can't max out Prey or BF2, but it runs them pretty well. It's last year's midrange hardware and adequate today, it's not a Voodoo 3 from 1999.

      If you debate from a position of fact people won't think you're an idiot.

    11. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Makarakalax · · Score: 1

      Check out gears of war screenshots for examples of what the 360 can do when people program for all 3 cores and the gpu.

    12. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Total_Wimp · · Score: 1

      Hob42 was correct, I was not intending to say that you can get great PC gaming performance for $300. I was intending to point out that if you add the cost of the computer you need plus the Xbox 360, that you could then take that money and buy a much nicer computer that would play great games rather well. The PC then ends up being the more economical solution for playing the latest generation of games.

      Don't get me wrong, there might be plenty of other reasons why you might want the Xbox 360. You might want a game that's only available on that platform. Go for it if that's what you want. However, it appears to me that it would be a mistake to claim that 360 games look better or that it's cheaper to game on the 360. Even more so for the PS3.

      TW

    13. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Total_Wimp · · Score: 1

      Are those real intereactive screnshots or cutscreens and static shots? I looked at the IGN site and they are, indeed, very impressive. I would have to say that I've never personally seen a PC game that looks quite that good.

      Is a midrange PC and video card capable of that quality? I don't know. I guess it doesn't matter what you're capable of, but rather what you accually do.

      TW

    14. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by rmdir+-r+* · · Score: 1
      I still don't agree with your reasoning, I think in general it doesn't matter because most people who are in the market for a new computer to be used for `serious' gaming are probably already invested in PC gaming, and everyone else is sort of generally frustrated with PCs (including gamers).


      But that's just my impression, based on anecdotal evidence. And in any case, I was an ass about it. I'd like to apologize.

    15. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version by Makarakalax · · Score: 1

      There are a number of videos on google video that suggest it will indeed look that good. But google video is hard to judge since it looks pretty blurry.

      Notably the trailer looks as good as the screens you tend to see, but in a few sections of the trailer, it looks average, suggesting that the trailer is in engine, and looks that good.

      It uses the unreal engine, so I'm fairly sure it'll look just as good on PC, if you have the write bits and pieces.

  7. Timetable by IflyRC · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From the summary: They are a combination table-top gaming and computer gaming studio, and their completion of Prey some nine years after it was first shown to the gaming press is nothing short of extraordinary.

    SWG was developed in that time frame...granted, it sucked - but still, it was a persistent, complex MMORPG. It takes 9 years to develop a first person shooter? Really??

    1. Re:Timetable by ArmyOfFun · · Score: 1

      3D Realms (think Duke Nukem Forever) was behind its development for most of that 9 years. It's amazing to me that Prey was ever released.

    2. Re:Timetable by stupidfoo · · Score: 1

      No. The original Prey title shares very little with the one that got released. The major thing it shared was the portal technology which in the Quake 1 timeframe was really impressive.

      The original game was supposed to put you in levels that contained just a couple of very intelligent and difficult AI characters. You were their prey if I recall correctly.

    3. Re:Timetable by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Have you never had something ongoing for 10+ years?
      I have 4 or 5 BIG projects which are just simmering away inside my mind and have been since my late teens (even earlier, but I didn't have the tools to describe them)
      I've tweaked and twiddled with them at various points in my life, they have followed me across different computers and languages and each time I create a version I know its closer and closer to what I expect it to be.
      I will release at least some of these projects because they are as relivent today as they were on the day I thought of them.

      9 years is nothing.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    4. Re:Timetable by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It takes 9 years to develop a first person shooter? Really??

      No, not really. Prey was (wisely) shelved after the developers couldn't work the kinks out of the Portal Engine. The concept was revived years later, but running on a commecial engine (Doom 3) rather than on the original Portal Engine. What's amazing is that:

      1. The game came out at all. (This just doesn't happen in this genre; DNF not withstanding.)

      2. They managed to maintain a lot of the portal effects without using a Portal Engine.
    5. Re:Timetable by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      It had the native american storyline from the beginning, though.

    6. Re:Timetable by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I will release at least some of these projects because they are as relivent today as they were on the day I thought of them.

      Yeah. That's what I keep thinking about all the novels I been meaning to write for the last 20 years.

    7. Re:Timetable by Ant+P. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They do use a portal engine. Pretty much everything since Quake 1 uses portal rendering, even some Doom sourceports have it now. This is just the first time drawing it "wrong" has been made part of the gameplay.

    8. Re:Timetable by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I think the Serious engine 1.0 (that ran the first Serious Sam game) was probably capable of the portal effects they needed, or very close to it. Some of the Serious engine demo components involved very very similar portals and gravity-bending effects. And that came out in, what, 2001?

      I think 3DRealms just finally decided to stop slacking and get some real work done for once.

    9. Re:Timetable by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Informative
      They do use a portal engine. Pretty much everything since Quake 1 uses portal rendering, even some Doom sourceports have it now.

      Portal effects and Portal Engine are not the same concept. Portal Effects are merely the ability to render through a warp in space. (e.g. Create a jumpgate that shows through to the other side.) A Portal Engine, on the other hand, is built with Portal Space (4 walls and two ceilings, even if there's no physical object at that location) at its core. Portal Engines allow for things like modifiable/destructable terrain and zero-cost for invisible polygons.

      Everything from Quake to Doom 3, however, is still based on the concept of pre-generating level information inside a BSP tree. If you try to modify or destroy the terrain in real-time, you run the risk of rendering objects incorrectly. Worst case, you could slow the engine to a crawl.

      There's a good article on building a Portal Engine here. I think you'll find that it's stupidly easy to grasp once you understand the basics, but very difficult to build a complex engine on top of.
    10. Re:Timetable by TEMMiNK · · Score: 1

      There was a link on Evil Avatar that showed what the game looked like in 1998... hmmm where was that link

      ah there http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7844987544 204140976&q=interview+prey

      My verdict, if it had come out in 1998 people would be talking about Prey 2 Episode 1 not HL2 because this game looked amazing for its time and does things that are only now being done in NEW games, such a shame that it fell into dev hell and only just crawled out... The unfortunate truth being what would have been an amazing genre buster with completely novel gameplay is now run of the mill, thats what happens in 8 years.

      --
      "The stupider people think you are, the more surprised they will be when you kill them..."
    11. Re:Timetable by SlayerDave · · Score: 1
      Let me summarize:

      1) The original Portal Engine sucked; thank god they canned it.

      2) It's amazing the game works at all without the Portal Engine.

      Am I missing something here?

    12. Re:Timetable by Scipher · · Score: 1

      Pfft. The previous poster was correct. Have you even read the article you linked? You cannot magically cull polygons. The original Prey began life using Ken Silverman's Build engine, and that had portals too. The whole "Portal Technology" gimmick has been discussed to death.

  8. Summary by N8F8 · · Score: 1

    Prey is so bad it's good?

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Summary:

      Prey is weak but what the hell else is there to play on the pc other than Civ4/WoW or ? on the 360?

      Thumbs up!

    2. Re:Summary by ZTiger · · Score: 1

      I enjoyed, it. It's fun for the reasons as listed. It's kind of a flashback to the old FPS with better graphics days. The spirit walk thing was an interesting twist but made some encounters very trivial (Turret guns for instance). I need to go back through on the harder mode and see if it's really harder.

    3. Re:Summary by Razzendacuben · · Score: 1

      That's the feeling I get from the article - the writer ends with how good it is but the majority of the article seems to be complaints... At any rate, if you're curious, try the demo. Easy enough to get at www.gamershell.com, or any other big game site. From what I saw, it was a lot of fun with some cool ideas, but past the beginning didn't really have much to keep you going, the demo was enough.

  9. The Most Important Question by Cornflake917 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do you have spiritual powers that allow you to see in the dark. Or do we have to download a duct-tape mod?

    1. Re:The Most Important Question by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

      Another interesting thing they forgot to mention is that you don't get a flash light. Instead, you get a lighter that provides ambient lighting as opposed to beam lighting. A very nice touch, but rarely needed.

    2. Re:The Most Important Question by JGuru42 · · Score: 0

      Yes you do get the lighter but in those few areas where even Tommy comments on how dark it is the lighter is almost completely useless. The ambient lighting doesn't go far enough to be useful those times.

    3. Re:The Most Important Question by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Does the ERSB rating include the dangers of second-hand smoking and/or playing with fire? :)

    4. Re:The Most Important Question by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Actually, he has a Zippo for light. In fact, the only decent line of monologue is when the narrator says, "Man it's dark in here.. I'm doomed." The rest of the dialog is basically just a compilation of the 7 words you can't say on TV. Not that there's anything wrong with that; it just gets monotonous.

  10. *spoiler comment from the game* by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 3, Funny

    I loved the "It's so dark, I feel like I'm doomed." :)

    1. Re:*spoiler comment from the game* by despisethesun · · Score: 1

      Heh, reminds me of Duke3D. When you come across a dead marine, Duke says "That is one doomed space marine."

      --
      This poo is cold.
  11. Doom III Engine Doom II the Game by Enselic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much better than Doom 3, [...]

    Off course. Carmacks' strength lies in designing game engines and renderers, not games. Most of ID's profits are made up of licencing engine technology to companies that know how to make games rather than the engines.

  12. Single Player Demo by Trouvist · · Score: 1

    I played the freely available single-player demo; for the hour or so of gameplay it gave it was amazingly interesting. The portal technology (gimmick) really makes me want to play Valve's Portal to see what kind of player-made content (read: puzzles) we can get out of it. I agree 100% with everything said about this game in the review; the rock discussed was even in the demo. Go check it out.

    1. Re:Single Player Demo by stupidfoo · · Score: 1

      Half Life 2: Episode 2 looks like it's going to be well worth the $20. Another 6-8 hours of Half Life 2 (the the new teaser looks amazing), Team Fortress 2, and Portal (which looks very original and unique).

    2. Re:Single Player Demo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If you didn't hear it when the Portal game was announced, you may want to go search for "Narbacular Drop." It's a standalone game made by the Portal programmers and it's the reason they got hired by Valve. It's very similar in gameplay and a lot of fun... at least until my computer crashes. (But I blame that on a ganked XP installation and not the game.)

  13. Lack fo variation by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Prey was fun to play. It would have been much much better if there was some variation. Those aliens visited various planets to harvest, but nothing of the alien planets were encountered in the games. It's was the same bio-tech space ship every level.
    Another things that was to bad was the lack of the indian trials, it was about to become interested to perform those trials. But it never happened.

    1. Re:Lack fo variation by Brothernone · · Score: 1

      Those are reserved to the numerous sequals i'm sure we'll see. It would make a nice story extenstion by having to pass a new trail every game.. they could really drag this out, but i hope they don't. The spiritual aspect of the game was very neat.

      --
      He whom you called four-eyes yesterday, you call Sir tomorrow.
  14. Madison by hansamurai · · Score: 1

    Being developed from one of the few game developers in the midwest and being from Madison, WI myself, I will be checking out this game just for the sheer purpose of helping out the locals. Though it does look actually look fun while trying a few new things for the tired genre.

    1. Re:Madison by Xtravar · · Score: 1

      I was lucky enough to be invited to the release party at the Orpheum. It was amazing. The game was pretty fun to play, too.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    2. Re:Madison by MrFreak · · Score: 1

      There are actually several developers in the midwest. Before being bought by Microsoft, Bungie was based (and founded) in Chicago. Midway is based out of Chicago. Volition (Descent, Red Faction I & II, Saint's Row) is based out of Champaign, Illinois... etc.

  15. What's the copy protection like? by _xeno_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I kinda wish game reviewers would start including this information in the review. It sounds like a neat game, but I have one very simple requirement before I'll buy another PC game:

    It must run without the CD in the drive.

    I wish reviewers would include information on how the copy protection is on these games. If I had known that WarCraft III would find a way to kill my CD drivers, I'd never have bought it. (Seriously, I had to reinstall Windows to regain access to my CD drives.) I'm sick of putting up with video games that require the CD for no good reason, and am simply furious at the games that attempt to install driver-level code.

    Can Slashdot reviews please start containing information on how the game handles copy protection? I'm willing to put up with registration keys and online activation. I'm not willing to put up with having to have the CD in the drive just to run the game.

    Prey sounds like it's a game I might be interested in playing - assuming that the copy protection isn't too severe.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    1. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 1

      You know, I've noticed a simple work around for most games that require the CD be in the drive (Rise of Legends, C&C:Generals, others.) After the game is loaded to main menu, I eject the CD. Runs fine without the CD.

      --
      Demented But Determined.
    2. Re:What's the copy protection like? by rodgster · · Score: 1

      Just get the latest NoCD or NoDVD hack from gamecopyworld.com

      It's what I have been doing since the first UT (well not from gamecopyworld back then) decided it didn't like my CD drive and I got no response from epic (I think).

      --
      Who will guard the guards?
    3. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weird. I would much rather put up with putting discs in the drive rather than requiring the software to phone home and ask for permission to work. I have this tendancy to reinstall my operating system every so often and would hate for a copy of some game refuse to work anymore because I installed it too many times. Or worse yet, if the game company would go under for some reason and the activation servers disappeared, then my games are completely worthless.

    4. Re:What's the copy protection like? by sholden · · Score: 1

      Whereas other people would rather not screw around with disks and even play it with the extra battery instead of the DVD drive in their laptop...

      Of course most people would prefer both, no required CD and no phoning home.

    5. Re:What's the copy protection like? by SoupGuru · · Score: 1

      It actually refused to run at first for me because it detected and drive emulator (daemon tools). The no-cd patch from gamecopyworld solved that issue, however.

      --
      What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
    6. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Rellik66 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can take solace in the fact that 3DR will remove the CD protection in a future patch. No word when the plan on doing that though.

      or you could download Prey via Triton, and have no need for a CD whatsoever

      --

      Too many zeros, not enough ones

    7. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Danga · · Score: 1

      You know, I've noticed a simple work around for most games that require the CD be in the drive (Rise of Legends, C&C:Generals, others.) After the game is loaded to main menu, I eject the CD. Runs fine without the CD.

      That is not a work around since you still initially need the CD. Of course if you do a full install it won't need to access the CD except for the initial validation.

      --
      Hey, there is only one Return and it's not of the King, it's of the Jedi.
    8. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not nearly that simple for starforce.

    9. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Danse · · Score: 1
      You know, I've noticed a simple work around for most games that require the CD be in the drive (Rise of Legends, C&C:Generals, others.) After the game is loaded to main menu, I eject the CD. Runs fine without the CD.

      That's not really an improvement. I still have to dig up the disc to start the game in the first place.
      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    10. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prey (c) 3D Realms
      07/2006 :..... RELEASE.DATE .. PROTECTION .......: Securom
      1 :.......... DISC(S) .. GAME.TYPE ........: FPS


      This is the number 1 reason why I'll download cracks for any game and usually the full ISO, even when I've purchased it. What these groups provide is a better value with more information than you can get from a disc in a box. The only thing copy protection ever stopped was someone from buying a game (as the parent helpfully pointed out).

    11. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do a little research using your favourite search engine. I check up on every game I have an interest in buying. If a game uses Starforce, I will not buy it. I missed out on Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory for this reason, yet I have no regrets whatsoever.

      You just need to be vigilant and do some research on what you're buying.

    12. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the nocd exists then it isn't starforce then is it?

    13. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      The Xbox 360 version requires the DVD in the drive to play. ;)

    14. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Eskarel · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who still wonders why they do this crap? No copy protection(I don't count things like WoW which work by associating a key with an account and are on-line only) ever developed has ever stopped the game from being pirated, usually before official release. So why do they bother. The best form I ever saw was the old way of having symbols in the manual, less effective now that we have access to really nice scanners and printers, but at least as effective as securerom and whatnot, and I'm sure there's a way to do it which makes scanning harder as opposed to this silly crap. Of course that would involve writing manuals again, but still.

    15. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

      Strange, because i'm running Daemon tools on my machine, and the game ran exactly as it should, without complaining about Daemon tools...

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    16. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Zan+Lynx · · Score: 1

      I hate digging out the DVD / CD as well. I like to just click on the icon and play.

      But using the laptop battery as a reason for not requiring the DVD? No laptop I know of can play a game like Prey and run longer than an hour and a half on battery anyway. Probably less.

    17. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Which is why the OP's argument is complete bullshit.

      Everyone who's ever used a console doesn't mind having to change disks/cartiridges/cards/whatever to change the game they're playing.

      No one has ever cared about requiring the disk in the drive. The only people who do are the people who want publishers to remove their rights protection measures. Which is total bullshit.

      Do you hear anyone telling stores to remove inventory control tags? Does anyone complain about video cameras in stores? Nope.

      So why do people demand that software publishers make their software easy to pirate?

      Gamers should be glad publishers place copy protection on their titles, because it keeps prices down. Without the copy protection, prices would be even higher.

      There's a reason console gaming is outstripping PC gaming, and it's because it's harder to pirate console games than PC games. So console games are cheaper.

      No one complains about having to swap disks in their XBox or swap game cards on their Nintendo DS. The OP is a fucking moron and should be modded down.

    18. Re:What's the copy protection like? by BillyBlaze · · Score: 1

      Nobody complains about needing discs for consoles because in most cases, that's a technical requirement, not an artificial one. On the PC, people have to pay for insane amounts of storage, so they're righteously pissed off when this storage doesn't gain them any convenience (except less-horrible load times).

    19. Re:What's the copy protection like? by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Since I have plenty of storage on my main computer (and enough for at least a few games on my laptop), I usually just grab images of the game CDs with CloneCD or dd or whatever and mount them with Daemon Tools when I want to play something. CloneCD hasn't let me down yet when trying to make an image file of a copy protected game.

      Another good thing about this apart from saving my game CDs from getting scratched is that I can do the minimal installation and still have the same performance as with a full install. This works particularly great with Fallout 1 and 2 where the minimal installation is 6MB and the "HUMONGOUS INSTALLATION" is nearly 700MB.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    20. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Seriously, this information is already there in every review !!
      That's simple, but you need to know how games are usualy distributed:

      Every single game sold on a CD will REQUIRE you to put the CD in the drive to play !!!!


      If a game doesn't follow this "rule", it'll be such an important distinction that it'll be reported in the review, that's for sure.
      You can also bet that this fact will trigger a slashdot article !

      Now I can hear you saying "But I've never heard of such a game....", don't wander why, those games are really rare.

      Anyway, for me it's the number one justification for the game cracking scene: a game that needs the CD in order to play when it's 100% installed on the hard-drive is just defective; but you can get a "fix" from unoffical sources ;)

      Still I think it's important to note that some games that are controlled online have there CD protection removed after some updates (like doom 3 or UT 2003...)
    21. Re:What's the copy protection like? by 14CharUsername · · Score: 1

      Also copy protection is completely retarded. You can download a priated version of any popular game. The Pirated version has no copy protection. The version you buy from the store does. Copy protection is only an inconvenience for paying users, people who pirate the game don't have to deal with it.

    22. Re:What's the copy protection like? by Makarakalax · · Score: 1

      Buy an Xbox 360, use your computer for work only. That's what I've done.

      360 is actually very impressive, it feels like PC gaming done better. Although I miss the mouse for FPS stuff, most console games are going 3rd person shooter, like RE4, and this works very well with a gamepad.

    23. Re:What's the copy protection like? by WinDoze · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately crap like this is the main reason I rarely play PC games anymore. You can't fuck up my XBox with copy protection, nor can you root it. And if you do root it I don't really care, as my personal finances aren't kept on my XBox!

  16. Excellent voice acting and characters by spyrochaete · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The voice acting and characterization are really strong in this game, and these elements really help to bring credibility and immersiveness to the experience. In a genre of famously mute protagonists it's really nice to BE such an expressive guy for once.

    Play the demo and you'll see what I mean. You'll agree with me 110% when you hear him say "Nasty!" near the beginning!

    1. Re:Excellent voice acting and characters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever heard of Duke Nukem? Duke3D (and the platform originals for that matter) were awesome in that regard.

      Too bad Duke Nukem Forever coming out is as likely as me remembering my login.

    2. Re:Excellent voice acting and characters by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      did they keep the KMFDM soundtrack?

      --
      -mkb
    3. Re:Excellent voice acting and characters by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      Was KMFDM originally going to do the soundtrack? That would have been way better than Jeremey Soule's soundtrack (he also did Guild Wars, Oblivion, and pretty much every fantasy game out there today), although he did some nice quiet flutey pieces for the spiritual native areas.

      For some reason they licensed about 10 commercial songs (Heart, Blue Oyster Cult, MXPX) which you only have the option to hear in the opening sequence of the game. It added some immersion but it feels like they could have spent that money on improving the game or raising the pay of everyone who made this already excellent game.

    4. Re:Excellent voice acting and characters by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      yep, and it was supposedly completed.

      --
      -mkb
    5. Re:Excellent voice acting and characters by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      "KMFDM's music, a truly unique blend of energy, intensity and attitude, dovetails perfectly with the goals of Prey."

      In the end this isn't really so true. I wish their music was in Doom 3, though the minimalism of that game would be spoiled by interesting music. Maybe Quake 4? Good music would certainly have made that game far less of a suck fest.

      Didn't KMFDM break up anyway? And get back together? And break up again? Regardless, Drug Against War rules!!

  17. too hard is bad? by crabpeople · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "That said, I would far and away rather games be too easy than too hard;"

    Um where I'm from, the harder a game is the *better* it is. I read that line and the one about 15 hours of gameplay and thought, wow.. this is why i dont play offline games. I was going to download this game even, on account of the trailers, but now im not so sure. What kind of game reviewer thinks that a game being easy is a positive point? Easy to understand, easy to get the hang of sure, but easy puzzles? easy fighting? sounds lame to me. Easy is for n00bs.

    --
    I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    1. Re:too hard is bad? by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reason a game like this appeals to some people is that they don't have to sink 100+ hours into it. Not all of us have unlimited time to fine tune our 'skills'.

    2. Re:too hard is bad? by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      You must have LOVED playing Battletoads.

    3. Re:too hard is bad? by StarvingSE · · Score: 1

      the PaIN!!!! Its comInG bacK!!!! Make it stop!!!

      I almost busted the glass on my tv throwing my controller at it because of that game!!

      --
      I got nothin'
    4. Re:too hard is bad? by gknoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. I'd mod you up, but I want to reply with an example.

      Halo for PC. I played it through on normal (or was it easy?) difficulty. Awesome game, excellent story. As I played, I got better, and decided to play it again on Legendary.

      Wow. Big difference; lots and LOTS of reloads. It became more a game of "survive this checkpoint and reload till you get the next". I eventually got to the point where it was TOO HARD. I could NOT beat the initial fight on the Truth and Reconciliation ship (after taking the elevator up from the landing zone).

      I lost count of the reloads. A large portion was luck (which doors were opened first? could I get an initial sticky grenade on the first guy? Were my teammates a bunch of retards?), but the fact is, I was unable to progress past that point in the game at that level of difficulty. In this case, harder was not completely "better". If that had been the only difficulty level, that would have been poor game design.

      I don't mind 30 hours of game play. I do object when 5-10 hours are spent on the same checkpoint with no progress. (I might have reattempted it, but after patching the game, my savegames got toasted and I did not feel like slogging through that level again. *shrugs*.

      Had I co-op mode available, this might have been more do-able. As is ... screw it. I have better ways to waste my time.

    5. Re:too hard is bad? by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Um where I'm from, the harder a game is the *better* it is.

      I trust you're a big fan of NetHack, because by that standard it is possibly the perfect game. *

      Harder is not in and of itself better. As Zonk notes it's not that easy is better than hard, it's that too easy is better than too hard. "Too hard" means "I have no hope of finishing it," or maybe "I've got better things to do than replaying the same 5 minutes of game for the next month until I'm good enough to move on." That's not fun, it's just frustrating. At least with the too easy option I can see the story play out and look at the pretty graphics if I'm into it. Depending on the game, I may be able to add my own limitations that make the game harder ("No grabbing health packs," "Only use the pistol," "No building tanks.") If the game is too hard, I'm just done.

      Of course, ideally the game is Just Right, hard enough that I feel challenged, but easy enough that I beat it before I get pissed off and give up. Of course how difficut that is varies from person to person, making it a tough balancing act.

      (* NetHack is a brilliant game, but is because of the depth of gameplay, not because it's so brutal that it's self selected to a very small community.)

    6. Re:too hard is bad? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Consider QuakeII. Stupidly easy, yet really fun to play (especially in coop mode!). Run through the game in like an hour with your friends... lots of fun! (who cares for challenges?, it's entertainment!)

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    7. Re:too hard is bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what she said.

    8. Re:too hard is bad? by MrWhitefolkz · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point. Take a look at Half Life 2: Episode 1 stats. Click on the question mark next to the "Games Completed" as well.
      When only half of the people playing the game reach the last map, something seems to be wrong. While all games are for entertainment purposes, games like Half-life 1 & 2 are telling a story. If you don't finish the game, you're missing out on the story. It would make more sense than to make it a little easier to finish the game so the story gets told, than to make it harder so less people get to finish the game.
      You also need to realize the indented audience. Some games are very heavy on the story, and some are run and gun based. Just like some comedies are slapsticks and some are based off of dark humor. Different audiences. It sounds like this game wasn't designed with you in mind, which is perfectly okay. You will never find a game that is designed for everyone. I can't stand counter-strike, yet most people I know love the game. Prey is perfect to me at this age. I work 12 hour days and when I play a game, I want to be able to do a little at a time, have some story (but nothing I have to be too focused on), and be easy to learn and fun to play. I'm only 25. I'm sure your desires for games are much different.
      Just something to keep in mind before reminding the Slashdot community how your views are the best...

    9. Re:too hard is bad? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Indeed - there are always ways to make a "too easy game" fun! I played Quake 4 through, and thought "too easy, gameplay too simple". Played it again on the hardest difficulty, and the gameplay was far more interesting, as you had to use the environment and protect your teammates, but still sort of easy. So I played it again using only the peashooter - *that* was a *blast*.

      FarCry on the other hand I played on some high difficulty setting and it just sucked. Played it again recently on the default difficulty and really enjoyed it. Nothing sucks more than a checkpoit game where you can't progress!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    10. Re:too hard is bad? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Halo for PC.

      Halo for X-Box. Same result. I managed to work my way through on Legendary, but because of my stupid hard-headedness. The game wasn't fun, it was just hard. Though, after so many hours on it (often multiple hours to get to the next 5 minute checkpoint), I could run through the entire game on easy in about an hour. I tried legendary with two people on cooperative, but it's even harder. There are a couple scenes we never got past. It sucks when both players run out of ammo and the enemy still keeps coming. And it wasn't poor planning. Did I mention that in legendary, both respawn at the last save if either dies? Sorta forces you to look after your buddy. Oh, and on Legendary, there were many places where we couldn't get past without the use of grenades when we rarely used them before. So it was good for us to try, making us better overall players, but playing for fun and playing for skill-honing aren't the same thing.

    11. Re:too hard is bad? by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      Halo isn't the best example because the 'Legendary' AI in Halo is pretty obviously, for anyone thats played it who doesn't kneel at the altar of Halo, primarily a wallhacking, aimbotting, rate-of-fire increasing mod for the enemies. If you're out in the open for more than a few seconds, you're dead, because they just don't miss, and they lead perfectly.

      SOF2 did EXACTLY the same thing; it totally raped you with it's cheating AI, and yet everyone panned that game for being too hard. Halo does it, and it's the best thing ever and you have to try it on Legendary cause it's just so smart. I agree with you though, it's simply not fun. I want a challenge, not a 'with luck I wont have to reload' fest.

      It's funny how Halo was obviously a pretty rushed effort for the Xbox release; terrible level design that is boring and cut and paste in the majority of areas, lame enemy design in places, and all round a pretty done-quick generic game that only succeeded because all the console-only gamers had never experienced deathmatch before, yet people still believe they had time to code in this all-conquering deep-blue AI that is as smart as hell.

      A good FPS would be one where the game is hard because the enemies are smart, not because they lead perfectly and are effectively aimbots, but I'm not convinced that many games actually do have impressive AI. Smart AI for the most part in current FPS seems to be enemies that don't fire on sight regardless of distance and obstacles, but that actually attempt to get in as close as possible without making their presence known, so they can hit you hard and at close range. It's a good start, but still has loopholes that can be worked around. FEAR and Far Cry do this to an extent, but on the flipside their AIs can be quite easy to get into stupid situations where they don't seem so smart, so overall they have the reputation of being stupid. It's disappointing that people expect an all or nothing affair, and if a decent AI does one thing stupidly then the whole AI routine is frowned upon as being retarded. Although maybe this is the best we can expect, because Far Cry and FEAR are older games now, and the newer crop of games, Prey included, don't have anything approaching decent AI.

    12. Re:too hard is bad? by rabbot · · Score: 1

      You seem to be arguing by using extremes. I'd simply just like to have to use my head a little, and not fall asleep while gunning down mindless enemies for 15 hours.

    13. Re:too hard is bad? by gknoy · · Score: 1

      I agree -- omniscient / super-aiming enemies are very annoying.

      One game that did a pretty good job with enemy AI is FEAR, IMO. THey still have super senses (can shoot at me from far far away), but the nice thing is, they DO miss (but don't give them time to snipe ;)). Even more importanly, they often try to work as a team, and the levels often give them good opportunities to flank you. Finding and using choke points becomes even more important. What I liked was, they were good enough at flanking that I could expect it, and made planning engagements a bit richer.

      Enemies in Rainbow Six games tend to have better than average ai, too, but I really hate that they're freakin' aimbots. :-( I mean ... come on. Headshots with an uzi at 80 yards? Wish my guys could shoot that well...

  18. Main character?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...ex-army guy from a Native American reservation. Snatched from a bar with your grandfather and girlfriend ...

    Stereotype much?

    1. Re:Main character?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...gory aliens trying to eat us

      Stereotype much?

      I bet galaxies away some mutant alien is crying because of all the stereotyping it's the target of.

    2. Re:Main character?? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      This isn't that bad compared to say, the Lo Wang character in Shadow Warrior - http://www.3drealms.com/sw/

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    3. Re:Main character?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who goes to a bar with their girlfriend and takes their grandfather along?

    4. Re:Main character?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indians, apparently.

    5. Re:Main character?? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      The girlfriend owns said bar.

      Main Char and his slow-speaking, traditionalist grandfather are there visiting girlfriend.

      The first fight in the game is against two drunk rednecks trying to grope her at last call.

      Then aliens come and abduct all of the above for food purposes.

      Then the NA main character (oh so cleverly named "Tommy Hawk") learns how to spirit walk.

      I think it's clear they were going for just about every cliche they could shove into the game.

      And somehow, it's still REALLY fun to play?!

    6. Re:Main character?? by Reapy · · Score: 1

      Of coarse, prey was developed back in a time when stereotyping in games was cool :) Now we don't do it at all anymore *cough*gta*cough*. :)

    7. Re:Main character?? by mink · · Score: 1

      Did you accidentially tuen the harvester back on? They dont let you turn it back off.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  19. My impressions by mobby_6kl · · Score: 4, Informative

    I played Prey on my PC (P4 2.6 @ 2.8, a gig of ram, and a 6600 @ GT speeds). Very smooth at max details and 4xAS in 1024x. From a technical POV, everything's fine, except for savegames. Thankfully they let you save any time you want, but the files take up quite a bit of space (about 300 megs from autosaves only) so enable the NTFS compression if you need/want. The other problem occurred when I ran out of space and it crashed while writing a quicksave. I wasn't able to load it, of course, but after deleting it even the previous saves refused to work for some reason. Maybe it is/will be fixed in the latest patch. Anyway, I'm not gonna write a whole review now, but just go over a few key points.

    Maybe calling it revolutionary is a little too much, so I won't, but the game featured a huge amount of refreshing ideas (portals, gravity tricks, immortality, and somewhat the weapons, and some minor stuff) but, as Zonk said, had its weaknesses in enemy variety and behavior. So, after finishing the game, I didn't immediately want to play again through the whole thing, but I did to take a few screenshots and found it hard to stop when I got to the place I wanted.

    BTW, did anyone notice the aliens changing the jukebox to JP when you return to the bar? Now a less rhetorical question: under what conditions does the Blue öyster Cult appear on the jukebox? I didn't think it was special when I took the screenshot, but it wasn't there the second time I tried.

    1. Re:My impressions by MBraynard · · Score: 1

      I very much appreciated the BOC tune during the abduction (Xbox 360 Demo version here). Suggested to me that the devs were pretty cool folks who know that we appreciate a nice touch like that. It really added to the moment.

    2. Re:My impressions by Gamefreak99 · · Score: 1

      *SPOILERS* * * * * BOC started playing "Don't Fear the Reaper" just as the UFOs starting sucking me into their mothership :) Quite a funny moment! * * * * *

  20. Does it use STARFORCE? I'm not buying/playing it. by SpecialAgentXXX · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I just want to make sure Prey is NOT using StarForce. I absolutely refuse to buy or play any game that uses that malware. Can anyone confirm this? Thx.

  21. SecuROM v7 by emarkp · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's at least how it's reported.

  22. Re:This game has nothing for it.. by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I rather enjoyed the multiplayer. It's rather fun to go into spirit mode and score some cheap shots against someone before they manage to knock you back into the real world... but you gotta hide your body, because it's easy for others to hear it when you're in spirit mode (I seemed to have a knack for finding my opponent trying to hide this way).

    The sunbeam weapon (read: the weapon that sucks in those balls of the walls, with the "light" balls) is fun to wield, but also sucks to be killed with (it's equivalent to that gun in Half-Life 1 that uses the nuclear energy packs and goes WHIIIIIR... forgot what it's called :( oh well).

    Portals are fun too, especially since you can wedge yourself BEHIND some (others can still figure out you're there because the portal is open) and fire through where the portal is with most weapons. Hehehe.

  23. Yet another FPS by aersixb9 · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's another wolf3d clone! Wow! Where's the entropia reviews? 15 hours is pretty short, and there's no mining, crafting, or pet raising...entropia's a first person shooter, it's got co-op (team hunts), pve, pvp, looting pvp, building, mining, cars, 3D graphics and environments, maps that take more than 15 hours to run across, hundreds of different guns, knives, mortars and other heavy weapons, and brawling weapons, clothing that appears on the player, made by other players, and much more. Why would a POS like this game 'prey' get a big slashdot coverage, when entropia never gets mentioned anywhere???

    1. Re:Yet another FPS by niteice · · Score: 1

      Because it isn't an FPS.

      --
      ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
    2. Re:Yet another FPS by aersixb9 · · Score: 1

      How is it not a FPS? Because it has an option for a third person camera? It's first person, there's guns, there's hostiles to shoot in a variety of open and mission settings...it's first person with shooting? How is that not an FPS?

    3. Re:Yet another FPS by niteice · · Score: 1

      Not an FPS like Prey/HL2/Doom 3/Far Cry/etc. It's closer to an RPG than an FPS.

      --
      ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
  24. Just A Variation On A Theme by WombatControl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Prey is one of the better FPS games to come out recently. Unfortunately that's like saying someone is the best ukelele player in Fargo.

    We've seen just about every possible variation there is to the FPS theme, and the portal bit helps make Prey different, but what we don't really have is a game that really draws people in. The original Half Life did that. HL2 also did well in that regard. The problem is with the real lack of innovation in the genre - at the core the difference between Prey and every other alien shoot-em-up is a few tweaks in gameplay mechanics.

    The FPS genre is starting to get played out, and while Prey is a noble effort, it just isn't enough. The AI just isn't challenging enough, and the portals and other gameplay additions keep the game from being a failure, but they're not enough to make it memorable.

    I wish I had some magic solution for what would renovate the FPS genre, but I really don't. Better AI would certainly help, and more interesting art direction would also differentiate games from each other (why does every game that uses the Doom 3 engine look the same?). FPS titles seem to be losing their "spark" and maybe some creative title will create a new wave of innovation in the genre, and while Prey makes an admirable attempt to bring some new life into the genre, what makes it innovative tends to get overwhelmed by what makes it look and play like every other title in the genre.

    1. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude, *I'm* from Fargo and I really resent ... well ... never mind, you're right. >sigh

    2. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      I noticed that in the screen shots of Prey - "hey look Doom 3 corridors".

      Apart from Decent style play here and there, what I'm wanting is something akin to Return to Castle Wolfenstein which make the Quake III engine sing, and put in some nice mechanics. I was never into team-based shooters before RTCW, it's balance is really nice. Whenever the Doom3 engine RTCW varient comes out, I'll be drooling up a storm, but between member and weapon balance, there's plenty of spark left that hasn't been done yet.

    3. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by Astin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The argument could be made that every book or movie that comes out is just a variation on a theme. Heck, they have names for these themes - action, mystery, thriller, horror, romance, pr0n....

      FPS was revolutionary when it first came out (Wolfenstein 3D, Ken's Labrynth, etc.), and it's definitely mature now. What it takes to make it engrossing is a strong sense of what's being aimed for. Half Life had a strong story (heck, you don't play for the first 2 or 3 levels, you just walk through the events), Serious Sam is an unapologetic shoot-em-up. Doom 3 was pretty much "look at our new engine!", so it got great reviews on its look, but poor ones on gameplay (outside of the tension).

      Half Life does SO well because it combines the "Wow!" factor of engine upgrades with an engrossing plot. But a plot isn't necessary for fun, as long as you're honest about what it is. It's the halfway efforts that fall flat. All the new tricks in the world can only attract people, they won't stick around if they don't enjoy it.

      --
      - In hell, treason is the work of angels.
    4. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I wish I had some magic solution for what would renovate the FPS genre, but I really don't

      Getting rid of the "FP" part might be a help. Seriously, it's a terrible constraint in so many ways -- your character has no physical expression when interacting with other characters or the environment, and barely so much as bobs when running flat-out, never stumbling or skidding or even kicking up dust. Your field of view is nothing so much as wearing blinders.

      3PS's demand a different interface, and might even need a "zoom to first person" for many situations (firing at a sharp upward angle for example), but there's certainly room for freshness and innovation there.

    5. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by Psych0_Jack · · Score: 1

      I am really looking forward to the game Portal by Valve. It doesn't appear to have very much shooting, but it looks like a total blast to play. And SO different from any other puzzle/FPS game I have ever played. Portal Trailer on Steam

    6. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, i always thought you was kinda funny looking, you know...

    7. Re:Just A Variation On A Theme by Suddenly_Dead · · Score: 1

      Starsiege: Tribes

  25. Don't Bother With The 360 Version? by wtfman · · Score: 1
    ..wow
    Compared to the pc version, the 360 version is a joke. ATI really botched things up or Microsoft messed things up for ATI or whatever. Regardless, my mid-range pc makes the 360 look like a wimp. It took at least a year for high end pcs to even touch the first Xbox
    lol, please tell me you are not serious...preposterous statement brother, nuh uh... Yeah, I had a mid range PC that made the original Xbox look like crap at the time- AA,AF 4x went a long way too ...consoles will always lag behind the enthusiast market; unless they become one. Which may be on the horizon in a few years; Bill only knows...
    1. Re:Don't Bother With The 360 Version? by wtfman · · Score: 1

      ..wow I pooped a bad HTML tag, here goes again

      ---by anon cow---"""Compared to the pc version, the 360 version is a joke. ATI really botched things up or Microsoft messed things up for ATI or whatever. Regardless, my mid-range pc makes the 360 look like a wimp. It took at least a year for high end pcs to even touch the first Xbox ---end anon cow---

      lol, please tell me you are not serious...preposterous statement brother, nuh uh... Yeah, I had a mid range PC that made the original Xbox look like crap at the time- AA,AF 4x went a long way too ...consoles will always lag behind the enthusiast market; unless they become one. Which may be on the horizon in a few years; Bill only knows...

  26. Where are the innovations ? by MickDownUnder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was one of the first internet gamers, playing in the first Australian national competition contested by 12 teams, each game played 4-8 a side. I then went on to be a part of the first Australian quake team playing Japan.

    Since then I have found very little in online gaming that could possibly compare with that experience. Since then clone after clone of the original quake game with no innovations other than a little tweak of the graphics here and there has been released. Team fortress was probably the first and last (very obvious) true innovation for this genre. Every title that has been released since then has really only done one thing and that is splinter the online gaming community into smaller and smaller inconsequential parties, the differences between each party only being measured by the bank accounts of the distributors of these overly rehashed games.

    There has been far too much emphasis on single player gameplay, I find playing single player is a little like getting out the playboy magazines and locking yourself in your room in favour of meeting up with your girlfriend and then there's the same leap in excitement going from adhoc multiplayer games to organised team play (ie where each game you're representing a team with the same team mates).

    Whats more exciting throwing a football about in the park with a random selection of friends ? Or playing in a team in a large competion ? Anyone who has done both will tell you the thrill of playing with serious intent in an organised competition is far more exciting.

    Personally I really don't care about graphics or whether I'm a genetically modified army doink, or an indian. Once you're immersed in a real competition such subtlties are really of no consequence, it's a bit like the quality of the turf at a football field, it really doesn't impact on the intensity of the game play.

    What it comes down to is basically people in the industry know there's no need to really create anything new, they can just schlopp up the same old swill into the trough year after year and people will keep buying it. It's a cheap and easy buck and a shore fire way to make money, but it totally lacks vision.

    1. Re:Where are the innovations ? by feepness · · Score: 1

      Whats more exciting throwing a football about in the park with a random selection of friends ? Or playing in a team in a large competion ? Anyone who has done both will tell you the thrill of playing with serious intent in an organised competition is far more exciting.

      And which takes less of a time committment on my part? I LOVE single player because I can get in, out, and back to the demands of the rest of my life. Similarly, I'm not really interested in devoting weeks of time in getting REALLY REALLY good at reviving people in Battlefield 2. I'm also not particularly interested in playing against people who roam in packs with a couple of those people mixed in.

      I'm sure that's fun for people... but not what I want.

    2. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Ryan+C. · · Score: 1

      I find playing single player is a little like getting out the playboy magazines and locking yourself in your room in favour of meeting up with your girlfriend

      Yes, but I find multi-player games to be playing video games in favor of meeting up with your girlfriend.

      Single-player games are easier to fit into cracks in the schedule. They also fill a need for introversion. If I feel like playing multi-player, I go outside and play non-virtual. True, that may change as the body ages and becomes less able to get fragged for real. Let's just hope that the industry doesn't neglect multi in favor of single or vice versa. They both have their merits.

      --
      -Ryan C.
    3. Re:Where are the innovations ? by rabiddeity · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, I'd say there hasn't been enough emphasis on single-player gameplay.

      I'll tell you the main reason why I stopped playing games online, why I tried CS and WoW and dropped them: a lot of people online are complete dicks. Maybe it's the anonymity. I'm not so sure. But I don't want to waste my time with these retards. Here's the difference: even in a pickup game of hoops or football with a group of strangers, they tend to be people who live in your area. You've seen their faces. These are most likely local people you could see again and recognize, maybe in the supermarket or the seven eleven; there's a bit of social pressure for them not to be total pricks. Not so on the net, where I see the juvenile "omg IR sooo 133t ur pwnt!!!!1eleven" attitude all over the place.

      On a related note, at my current job I teach elementary and junior high kids English. The kids are fantastic, and my other coworkers are fun to talk to as well; even my boss is a pretty cool guy. It's an extremely rewarding job; but for me, being around other people all day is mentally exhausting. The last thing I want to do is come home and deal with more people, especially annoying idiots online. I'd rather curl up with a good book or a good game, and recuperate.

      So give me Darwinia and Planescape: Torment and Deus Ex. Give me Half-Life and Far Cry and Thief. Give me Grim Fandango and The Longest Journey and Morrowind. Hell, give me Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Bros, Katamari and Dark Cloud 2. I have fun with my friends sometimes, but give me games designed for me to play on my own.

    4. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fag.

    5. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Sierra+Charlie · · Score: 1

      I was one of the first internet gamers, playing in the first Australian national competition contested by 12 teams, each game played 4-8 a side. I then went on to be a part of the first Australian quake team playing Japan.


      For the record, Quake wasn't released until 1996, which means you weren't even close to being one of the first Internet gamers.

      By the time I went to university in 1990, games like netrek, mtrek and Bolo were in full swing. And even I know that I wasn't one of the first online gamers.

      Sadly, there have been very few commercial games since that can match up well with Netrek. It offered 8v8 (or 16v16) online play and was an impressive blend of action and deep, coordinated, strategy. It usually took people a few years of continuous play before they were good enough to join an organized team. Unfortunately, it's hard to mass-market games with that kind of learning curve, which is probably why we don't see them anymore.


      It's also interesting to note that the technology of those early games was quite sophisticated. This is probably because the online playerbase was made up of engineering students, who were the only ones with access to ethernet-connected workstations, and they refined the games over the course of years. The networking model of Netrek really wasn't matched by commercial games until the late 90's.

      Oh well, enough reminiscing. Any PLATO/Empire players here to claim the title of "one of the first internet gamers?"

    6. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

      Or maybe people are all different and that's what YOU want.

      I used to be pretty damn good at TFC and would play on a server for hours daily. We had friendly rivalries and stuff, but the most fun I ever had out of it was just a bunch of us pissing around and having a giggle. Or using Chicken mod on maps like Rock2. There was just so many cool things to do rather than play it as a twitch fest.

      Also I'd rather put hours into a good single player game and enjoy "The world" and universe it's set in than play the same maps over and over. The same reason I enjoy MMORPGs and RPGs applies to HL2. I enjoyed exploring City 17 and the world around it, getting to do little things like throw cans at combine, not running around killing the same modeled characters on the same maps over and over.

      Just because you enjoy ultra competive blood sports style games doesn't mean there isn't a market for people who just want to wander around and kickass when the plot requires it.

      --
      I like muppets.
    7. Re:Where are the innovations ? by badmammajamma · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, being in an international competition is exciting but it really has nothing whatsoever to do with the game itself. It has to do with the high and the pressure of a competition of that nature. None of this has anything to do with the innovation level of FPSs. Halo is a huge innovative leap from quake. There's simply no conparison between the two. Halo is brilliant. I loved every minute of it whether I played single or multiplayer and I've played every FPS game worth mentioning since Wolfenstein.

      You need to learn to separate the *feeling* of the good ol' days when you were doing international competitions and now (which is probably jack shit). Seriously, you need deep psycological counceling if you really think there's been no innovation in the FPS genre.

      --
      Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
    8. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comparing single player and multiplayer to masturbating and actual intercourse seems a bit off. Some people (like myself) enjoy single player games for the puzzle aspect. I also enjoy multiplayer fragging but consider that much more masturbatory than actually...you know...using your brain as opposed to reflexes. I think a more appropriate analogy would be that some people enjoy watching Jeopardy while others enjoy watching arena football. Obviously you know what catagory you fall into.

    9. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear.

      Whenever I read a book or see a movie these days, all I'm thinking is "Where are the innovations?"

    10. Re:Where are the innovations ? by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      On a related note, at my current job I teach elementary and junior high kids English. The kids are fantastic, and my other coworkers are fun to talk to as well;

      You know it's possible that when they go home, those junior high kids play online games and behave like complete dicks? :-)

    11. Re:Where are the innovations ? by SorryTomato · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Anyone who has done both will tell you the thrill of playing with serious intent in an organised competition is far more exciting.


      From your post it comes across that what you enjoy is not the game (football or a computer one) but the competition. While that is as valid a way of enjoying oneself as any; it is not necessarily one that all people will enjoy. A large number of people enjoy games only in a non competitive settings.

    12. Re:Where are the innovations ? by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      I find playing single player is a little like getting out the playboy magazines and locking yourself in your room in favour of meeting up with your girlfriend
      You lost 95% of the /. audience with the clause starting "in favour of..."

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  27. Brilliant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet galaxies away some mutant alien is crying because of all the stereotyping it's the target of

    Countering my post about stereotyping real people in a generally negative (maybe being in a bar is not a negative stereotype for all, but obviously is so for NA's) by trying to relate it to a necessary survival function (eating) of some potentially made up beings. I'm glad to see that my tax dollars for education are not going to waste.

  28. The demo was very good. by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1

    I really liked the demo: It gave me a very good impression of the game (both single player, as multiplayer), and immedeately bought the game.

    The innovative gravity-shifting is great, and the other extra options make a great base for some fun mods/maps.
    Also funny to note is that the main weapon in Valve's Portal, has been recreated in Prey; Still a few bugs, but the basic idea (shooting an entrance-portal, then shooting the exit-portal) seems to be working.

    Also, last night I found out that Portal has been based on Narbacular Drop (afaik the Digipen students got either hired, or at least compensated for their initial idea), which you can download from here.

    Ok, back on topic: I've bought Prey, and am very happy with it; This has partly to do that I create maps myself, and there are alot of options that these new gamemechanics bring.
    The single player (think I am halfway through at the moment) is great, and gives me enough diversion to not bore me: The multiplayer is also quite good, definitely considering I never quite liked DM other than Quake 1; But the wall-walking definitely adds some groovy... sometimes nausiating... new gameplay.
    Only lacking thing, as always with single player shooters, is the AI; Which isn't too complicated, and has some flaws where enemies don't quite react the right way, or are stuck in their loop of walking from one spot to the other.

    1. Re:The demo was very good. by hobot · · Score: 0

      Are you an idiot? Prey was thought of 9 YEARS AGO, it did not steal the idea from Valve's portal game.
      Also, you can not shoot portals in Prey. WHAT GAME ARE YOU PLAYING YOU RETARD?

    2. Re:The demo was very good. by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      I think the OP meant that someone has made a mod for Prey using the Prey portals to re-create the portal weapon seen in Valve's Portal. At least, that's how I read it.

      (I assume Prey supports mods as it uses the Doom 3 engine.)

    3. Re:The demo was very good. by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1

      Ahyes, after re-reading it's a bit unclear: It's indeed a little mod, made by a third party.

  29. FPS icon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lemme post this AC, since it's off topic --and maybe I'm just ignorant.

    Can somebody tell us what the icon for FPS games is supposed to be?
    http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicgamesfps.gi f

    Is it a gun? Is it some strange type of straight razor? Appliance from an infomercial?

    There's gotta be a better icon for FPS.

    1. Re:FPS icon by doti · · Score: 1

      It's the best weapon (rocket launcher) of the best multiplayer FPS ever (Quake III Arena).

      --
      factor 966971: 966971
    2. Re:FPS icon by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 1

      its the rocket launcher from quake 3 ....NOOB ;-)

      -d

      --
      "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    3. Re:FPS icon by friedmud · · Score: 1

      It's a good thing you posted anonymous.... otherwise the geek police would be breaking down your door as we speak and confiscating all geeky paraphernalia...

      As others pointed out it is the greatest weapon from the greatest game ever: The rocket launcher from Quake3 Arena.

      Friedmud

  30. Re: please make him STOP the self promotion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Enough with the shameless self promoting link.
    Please make this guy stop.

    C'mon guys. He won't stop til you start modding him down for it.

  31. portals are being used a gimmick by dosboot · · Score: 0, Troll

    15 hours of gameplay is assuming you play the game twice. This game is far too short and far too easy. Every review of 'Prey' reminds me of a small child being entertained by jingling keys. We understand portals are new and shiny but that isn't an excuse to give the game a passing grade.

  32. ut2004 invasion mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ut2004's invasion mode was a really nice twist on coop mode. good for lan parties.

  33. Portals by joemawlma · · Score: 1

    I believe this was the first game to come up with the concept of "portals" in FPS. It was originally a student's project.

    http://www.nuclearmonkeysoftware.com/narbaculardro p.html

    1. Re:Portals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The creators of ND are now employees of Valve. Portal is a take off on ND.

    2. Re:Portals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Portals have been around since at least the first Unreal engine.

    3. Re:Portals by getnate · · Score: 1

      My earliest memory of portals in a FPS was Quake. There was collection of MODs called "Killer Quake Pack" that included a portal gun mod.

      You would shoot a wall and a black circle would appear that you could walk into. There was some semi-inteligence involved because the placement of the exit portal was automatic, usually on the other side of the wall. This made the mod buggy in certain conditions but it worked. This was around 1997.

      Killer Quake Pack - http://kqp.horoy.com/

  34. omg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that game was boring !

  35. Very good but the AI was lacking. by JGuru42 · · Score: 1, Informative

    I've been waiting for this game to come out ever since I read the first reviews of it three or four years ago and now that I got my hands on it I'm certainly not disappointed.

    This game certainly turns the way you have to think during a FPS game on it's head. You'll hear the sound of an alien grunt shouting at you and start to get hit but to begin with you'll have trouble remembering to look right above you for the gunfire. When you do find them and blast them off the ceiling they drop down to the floor (or if you are on the ceiling they stay down there). It's very easy to get disoriented and not know which way was up. I've gotten to the point where I build up a mental map of areas as I play them but I lost my direction quite a few times when the floor suddenly becomes the ceiling.

    The spiritual children referenced in the article are pretty freaky to being with as they make childish comments while constantly coming after you. Between the freaky children, the mind-warping gravity effects and the very crazy violent ways the aliens act towards the humans I actually had to take a break and left my save game named "I can't take this anymore" which is quite an accomplishment. Unfortunately, after I took my first break I never found myself getting that off-balance again, even if my mouth was hanging open time and time again.

    The spirit mode was interesting and was used very well in a couple of puzzles but most of the time what you needed was right next to where you would use it. I also found that you could use the spirit mode to explore areas and fight the enemies and most enemies wouldn't see you until you attacked them. However, this made the easy enemies even easier so it was a catch-22. I was glad to see that the transition from regular to spirit mode was instantaneous.

    The weapons in the game were very different from each other and quite well designed but even so you'll likely end up using your first gun throughout most of the game anyways until you start to pick up which weapons work best on which guys. My favorite weapon was the Leech gun that you had to recharge by drawing power out of terminals on your way through the game.

    The place that sorely disappointed me was the AI as the last FPS game I had purchased was F.E.A.R. and these enemies mostly just stand and shoot at you. There are a few that do things a little differently such as ducking into outlets on the wall to pop out elsewhere. I read that the AI does get better during the harder difficulty but I haven't decided to replay yet. However, that brings me to the next problem I had.

    When you die in the game you can see your body fall as your spirit steps outside and you end up in another world. Your body starts up way high in the sky and slowly works it's way back down through a hole in the center back to your body. It's a nice touch that if you look down the hole you'll see the exact place your body fell in the real world. You do play this little minigame where you fight spirits to regain spiritual energy and health. While it is a nice break from having to constantly save in the crazier areas it leaves you with very little reason to play well. The game designers do use this well in that you end up fighting larger and crazier battles than you would in a game where death means reloading a game, but it also means your main motivation for not dying is because you don't want to play the minigame again. Then again, when was the last time you played an FPS where you can have full ammo on all weapons yet still run out during a big battle? If you were feeling really crazy you could run through the game and use only the melee weapon for most of the game.

    The portals are nice and can end up with strange effects (such as croutching to enter a box only to see you crouching to enter a box) but they end up mainly being a doorway you can't pass back through. Most of the time it's pretty obvious where you need to go at each area as you just keep going through portals. I think they could have come up w

  36. oblivious by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    I've been enjoying oblivion so much I hadn't noticed anything good was out. A friend had even mentioned it to me. Though, I thought he was joking. I went to the web site and dl'd the demo. Very nice graphics, mind blowing portal+gravity physics, easy to deal with weapons, and a good taste of the story pushed me out to get it. Oblivion can wait a week, and maybe a couple of LAN parties.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  37. Where's the innovation in FPS? by Matz0r · · Score: 1

    IMHO the FPS genre hasn't come far since Half-Live in other areas than graphics. After seeing the first sign of intelligence in my opponents with that title I was hoping to see more title with something else but the standard event driven, scripted stories. But nothing has happened! I want to see clever aliens and monsters - cooperating, sneaking up on you, chasing you, responding to your actions. These games just get repetetive too fast nowadays.

    1. Re:Where's the innovation in FPS? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      IMHO the FPS genre hasn't come far since Half-Live in other areas than graphics.

      I have a long list of things I would like to see. For one, cooperative modes suck or are non-existant. Why can't I play with my friends against the computer? If I want to play with them, I have to find another group of people to fight against. But your complaints on AI are right on, but applicable in other genres as well. Why can't I set up my strategy game to automatically have my villagers/civilians/gatherers start working on the weakest resource, if within X distance of the spawning area? No, I have to click each and every one to set them to work, or in some cases I can have them all work, as long as it's on the same resource and that one graphic doesn't get exhausted. The computer does it, so why can't I? Halo had minor cooperation with mobs. They cooperated by having different AIs for different monsters, and having them near each other. But there wasn't a "hide until they are past and sneak up" or "snipe" AI. I think that in some cases, too much AI will make it too hard. You are already outnumbered 10,000 to one (sometimes 2), so if they were pretty smart, you'd be dead quick or blocked from ever finishing the game. But maybe there is a happy medium. Lower the number of enemies to 100, and have each of them much smarter than now. It would be more like the Max Payne than Halo feel, though. One man walking through with only a few people to kill per level. Well, Max Payne might not be the right example, but it does have many fewer opponents than something like Resident Evil or Halo.

    2. Re:Where's the innovation in FPS? by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      Have you played FarCry? The AI behaviour in that game was a little more complex than your average FPS.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
  38. ***SPOILER ALERT*** by wolfemi1 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Actually, the game is pretty much light enough to see everything, except for one area.

    In the area, the protagonist makes the comment "Wow, it's really dark. I guess I'm doomed."

    Good to see the Duke Nukem humor is still alive in FPSes :)

  39. Fun little history 1998 Prey. by kinglink · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.3drealms.com/history2.html

    Yes, Prey was due out in 1998. This is 3d realms, and they finally released Prey, now imagine if Duke Nukem comes out this year. They'll have nothing to work on :(

    The funniest thing is that they tout portal technology. Portal is due out with Episode 2 of HL2, producing a more interesting a better version of dynamic portals made by the player.

    Feel free to laugh at meantions of DNF also on that history page.

  40. Well *duh* ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > "Wow, it's really dark. I guess I'm doomed."

    Well, of course he is! That's where all the grues hang out.

  41. Why didn't Zonk mention multplayer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prey makes basic deathmatch fun again (at least for a few weeks, I guess). I love standing on the ceiling and having to deal with several different gravity fields when I'm aiming grenades. The spirit walking adds classic risk/reward stuff - shall I abandon my body to go through the forcefield and get ammo? It's also a great way to deal with standoffs or being chased. The combination of portals and variable gravity really helps dispell the linearity common in level design - did he go left or right? becomes left-right-up-down-behindtheportal-throughtheporta l.

    We finally have a deathmatch game MC Escher would be proud of.

    1. Re:Why didn't Zonk mention multplayer? by GFree · · Score: 0

      Aye, multiplayer is rather fun. It's just a pity there aren't enough people playing online to make it worthwhile.

  42. Re:Doom III Engine Doom II the Game by apathyruiner · · Score: 2, Informative

    Uhm, that's pretty much all Carmack does. He hands over a new or revamped engine to the team and they do the rest, from design to implementation. I'm sure he has plenty of input into the process, but if you'll check .plan archives, interviews and the like you'll see that he's well into researching and implementing new engines and techniques before whatever id's current game is complete, or he's off in the desert trying to launch someone into space.

    --
    -= I can't think of anything witty, creative, or insightful for my sig, so deal with this. =-
  43. FPS? by BumpyCarrot · · Score: 1

    Prey is a great game. It finally gave me a way of categorising games that're just like Half-Life:

    First Person Spanner .

    --
    Do you see what I did there?
  44. carsick by MagicM · · Score: 1

    I just finished playing the demo, and I can honestly say that I feel ill. All the portals and gravity-craziness made me carsick.

    Awesome!

  45. "Hard" Is Realitive by EXTomar · · Score: 1

    From where I'm fun, "hard" is realitive and not an indicator of quality play. For the legions who play The Sims, hard isn't even in the equation and yet a fun game. Reguardless, the key for games is to present a challenge a player can readily feel is difficult and yet conquerable. Game designers actually want players to feel good that they accomplished something, not punish by throwing them at a brick wall to slam against for hours on end. You can make a challenging and fun game that is 5-10 hours long. I'm pretty sure it doesn't look like Prey though.

    My feeling is that Prey isn't that it is too short but it doesn't have enough challenges. It feels (and smells) like they held back for the expansion especially given the ending. Just pumping up the number of monsters or lengthing the game isn't going to help fix it. I'm just not satified with the game because it felt I didn't accomplish enough.

    ps. Anyone else wondering what is up with the spiking machine? Hello completely unnecessary deaths. Why not just kill the grandfather right away instead of watching him being impaled?

  46. My review: by RoffleTheWaffle · · Score: 1

    "I liked this game better when it was called Turok 2."

    1. Re:My review: by beckerist · · Score: 1

      You have to be kidding me. This is the first game I've ever received from Gamefly, and in having it for a mere week I can already say this is one of my favorite games outside the Halo series as far as FPS goes. There's no BFG200000, which sucks. It DOES have a feel of Quake 4 BUT it's easy, fun, and when you die you come right back. I play games to have fun, not for competition (ok maybe a few Wik: Fable of Souls nights were but only because I'm good at it). I bought my XBOX 360 to play games, to have FUN. I hate it how games nowadays seem so much like a chore. The graphics make my girlfriend and roomate squeal, the monsters sometimes even scare the crap out of me when they jump out of random portals. More often than not I'll walk into a room thinking "oh shit, what do I have to face now?" The puzzles generated by changing the local gravity pose for some thinkers, and there have been a few times that I've been in a room going "what the hell? where do I go now?" but outside of the Legend of Zelda: Links Awakening for Gameboy, I've never had a game where you get to pick up where you died. To make a long story short, if you like playing games for fun, this is perfect. It's easy and short enough for someone like me with a severe case of ADHD and even worse case of stupidity to finish in a week and actually enjoy it. Though I haven't yet experienced the Multiplayer aspect (Time Warner Road Runner sucks), I certainly can't wait because I know I'm good at Halo 2, and this game adds a different twist by having to look around an entire room as opposed to the ground. I really think people should stop bitching about what a game ISN'T and enjoy it for what it is.

  47. Re:Doom III Engine Doom II the Game by nine-times · · Score: 1

    I've been saying it for years: id is not a video game company, it's a video game engine company. That's what they really produce and make money from. The actual games they produce are usually not very good as games, but they're excellent tech demos for really good engines.

  48. Valve and Portals and Prey by excyl · · Score: 1
    The portal idea is attractive one. I haven't been keeping up with the games industry enough to hear much about Prey and its use of the technology before this review, but I had seen the trailer for Valve's Portal technology (also available on Steam):

    http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=13

    The trailer shows the use of a portal gun that seems to be an evolution on Valve's Gravity Gun from HL2, so you can pick up objects and such while traveling through portals. Watching the trailer made me really want to play with that technology, and after reading the review, I might have to try Prey when it's a little cheap.

    Does Prey have multiplayer? I'm thinking that almost any of the multiplayer games based on Steam would be insane with the portal gun thrown in.

    --
    --Excyl
    1. Re:Valve and Portals and Prey by kahanamoku · · Score: 1

      It does have multiplayer... or as they call it Multiprey, however the maps arent that large (being constantly inside and tunnel based.

      The biggest issue with Prey is that there is no challenge to the game, with about 4 hours of playing, you'll have finished it. Reason being is that you dont die. you simply return to the spirit realm temporarily to refill your health and then return to the play area and continue fighting. Sounds good until you realise that the boss that you've half killed is still half killed. so, you are struck with about 3 or so inconveniences where you enter the spirit realm and suddenly you've passed the boss you were killing and are back on your way to completing the game. Theres more a puzzel aspect than a dodge-kill type play to the game, so I suggest, dont wait till it gets cheaper... just hire it for a night and you'll be over it by the morning.

      --
      ----- Concentrate on promoting more than demoting.
  49. OpenGL by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Being based on the OpenGL Doom3 engine, has anyone tried the demo with Wine or Cedega?

    How does it run?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:OpenGL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      it runs fine with Wine 0.9.17 on ubuntu. I had installer issues with the previous versions of wine.

    2. Re:OpenGL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Works fine on the latest cedega as well... No surprise, since it is, as you say an opengl game...

      Wish they'd port the client to linux, but I doubt they will.

  50. so then Prey = Serious Sam for 2006? by logicassasin · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember some of the same comments being made about Serious Sam, that it was a lot of mindless blasting fun and not some overly complex find-the-switch-and-kill fest.

    --
    Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
  51. Other good co-op non-FPS by prionic6 · · Score: 1

    I recommend Lego Star Wars (EP 1-3 with EP4 bonus level), a hack'n'slash with some puzzles. LSW 2 upcoming (EP4-6). Has a really nice 2 player co-op.

    Also quite nice is X-Men Legends (1+2), a WoW/Diablo-style RPG. Nice in 4 Player co-op. Although you could argue that co-op in a RPG is pretty standard, looking at the MMORPGs.

  52. Just A Variation On A Theme-Music. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We've seen just about every possible variation there is to the FPS theme..."

    Well let's see. Tron 2.0 is a FPS with some RTS, and puzzle elements. Max Payne was a FPS with a nice back-story, and some stealth elements. F.E.A.R was a FPS with some mind-games, and stealth elements. Painkiller was just plain FPS. Farcry was a FPS with lots of stealth.

  53. Re: Bought it and crashed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read the review, decided to go buy it. Came back, installed it, and it crashes. Doesn't load up or anything. Just changes the screen resolution and then dies. How did this get to be a retail release version?

  54. Prey was another Duke 4 Ever for a long time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This game was in development back in the late 90s..... under Epic I believe.

  55. More third rate Giger. Yip-friggin-ay by Finkbug · · Score: 1

    You've pegged Carmack but Prey (at least the demo) has the same id/Carmack failings. Giger love ought to be banned as an influence. How much more interesting would the game have been using even the equally touchstones as Escher or Bosch to inspire the level and art design? Did we really need _more_ Quake demons + Alien?

    An aside: don't brag about how much fake money you made using the bar slot machine. You've done the same thing your grandma does on games.com except you don't have points toward a discounted subscription to Scrapbooking Monthly.

    --
    Feeling so good natured I could drool
    1. Re:More third rate Giger. Yip-friggin-ay by aztektum · · Score: 1
      I did a quick Google Image search for Bosch since I wasn't directly familiar with his stuff. This is one I found

      Can you imagine how fuckin' nuts the politicians would go if a guy with what looks like a flute coming out of his ass were running around in Half-Life 2? That would be so awesome.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
  56. I Liked It by Silvrmane · · Score: 3, Informative

    I disagree with some elements of the review - I thought the music was well composed, and suited the mood of the game perfectly. I found the character I was playing to be a likeable guy, with some funny comments to make as he makes his way around. Picking up the leech weapon early on in the game makes him comment, "This should rock some shit!"

    I found spirit mode to be a very interesting addition to the game play and strategy. Sometimes the gravity stuff seemed gratuitiously used - used for the sake of doing it - but in other places in the game it was downright brilliant, as were some of the portal based puzzles.

    Not one of the weapons is a "classic" FPS retread - no pistol, no shotgun, no chainsaw, no "nail gun". There's a rocket launcher of sorts, but interestingly it's only usable on a handful of enemies.

    I did find the game to be a tad on the brief side - it definitely left me wanting more. I replayed the game immediately in "Cherokee" mode. The primary difference between "Regular" mode and "Cherokee" mode is there are no health packs or health rechargers - anywhere. This difference forced me to play far more aggressively.

    Something else not mentioned in the review is that the game has a dynamic difficulty level - how well you play, and what weapons you favor has an effect on what enemies show up, how many show up, and what kind of ammo you are going to find in the ammo closets and lying around. If you think you are a tough guy, play like it, and the game will ramp up the difficulty for you. Something else that's off in the review is that the spirit world - where you fight for physical and spiritual strength when you die - does change in difficulty throughout the game, with more obstacles blocking your shots, and a tendency to not give you enough of the "kind" of spirits you need. The spirits will also attack you more frequently and rob you of strength.

    I never once got lost in the game - its very linear, which is odd given is decidedly non-linear architecture and level design. You will never have to guess where to go, or what to do. Some people might not like this, and enjoy a real brain buster. This game isn't for that. I solve quite enough puzzles at work thank you - I play games to have fun. This game is fun from start to finish, and I really recommend it to people who also look for fun from their games.

    [*spoiler warning*]


    Maybe I am a softy, but I really felt terrible having to kill off the one person I had been fighting to protect for the first half of the game. There was an emotional intensity both to the character's devotion, and his reaction to that event that made playing the second half of the game even more fun - I was on a trail of vengeance, leaving a wake of death behind me. Having the character yelling at the aliens as he slaughters them was a great addition. Kudos to the designers for making me give a crap about what was going on in the game.

    1. Re:I Liked It by nsxdavid · · Score: 1

      ** spoiler alert **

      I sorta of like the fact you had to cap her out of her missery... but then they really wused out in the ending. It made no sense that your character was still alive ("It's not your time yet") even though he hurtled himself into the sun... and then the chick will just be hanging out in the spirit world waiting for you when you want to bang her. Yeah.....whatever.

      --
      David Whatley
  57. Some people want a story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to wtfpwnz0r people online after turning playing into this mechanical process you constantly tweak to win.

  58. Re: Bought it and crashed by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

    Although the game worked fine the first time I launched it, it later refused to start after a crash. Deleting the config files (in the game folder, IIRC) helped, since the problem was somewhere with the hardware settings.

  59. Where are the innovations?-Mike has them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "What it comes down to is basically people in the industry know there's no need to really create anything new, they can just schlopp up the same old swill into the trough year after year and people will keep buying it. It's a cheap and easy buck and a shore fire way to make money, but it totally lacks vision."

    *looks around*

    Nope. Looks like Mikedownunder doesn't appear to be part of the game industry (certainly not a consumer, you "non-swill" looker you). Just another slashdotter commenting on the state of the restaurant industry with his face pressed against the glass, looking in. We'd all be more impressed if you had produced the best "swill" that no one bought.

  60. Re: please make him STOP the self promotion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the one hand, I agree he is spamming his link when he could just put it in his sig.

    On the other... I REALLY hate religious people.

    So, I'm going to let it slide :)

  61. My 3 word review by schroet · · Score: 1

    Turok, with Portals.

    Ok the Asteroids are kick-ass too.

  62. You misunderstand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of laptops allow you to insert a second battery into the slot normally occupied by the CD/DVD drive. You take out the drive, and put the battery in its place. This gives you a lot more battery time. It's especially useful for making games like Prey run for longer than an hour and a half. Of course, if you have to have the CD in for the game to work, you need to have a CD drive, so you can't use the extra battery.

  63. New Ideas For FPS Thread by walnutmon · · Score: 1

    I just would like to see some discussion about new ideas for FPS Genres. We all have realized that there really hasn't been much new stuff to the genre since, maybe half-life... And if you want to be real hard on the industry, maybe even Duke Nukem 3D.

    That isn't to say that they are no fun anymore, it just means that maybe we could use some fresh new ideas. But what are they?

    I have a couple.

    1. Give the character your playing a little bit of realistic physics - Have you noticed that when a rocket hits 3 feet to your left, you have a certain percentage of damage done to you, based on the damage it does at ground zero? How about it also knocks you off your feet and slams you into the wall, or whatever is in your way. You would need to balance the game a bit so you are not hit so frequently with projectiles, or you would never recover, but having getting hit by some kind of powerful enemy fire knocking you around the level a bit might add a little bit of realism and fun to the game. You will feel like you are actually in the battle taking the damage yourself!

    2. Unique monsters shouldn't be just for bosses anymore - Too many FPS have the same fricken monsters. How many bi-pedal monsters carrying a shotgun do I have to fight in my life. There is nothing that says that all monsters need to be pretty much like humans that fight using human tactics with uglier faces. I want monsters that effortlessly jump from the floor to the wall, they get in close and explode. Big monsters, this doesn't mean big as in tall human like monsters, but inovative designs that take up a lot of space. How about when a monster has a gun grafted to it's arm, you can blow that part off, but it will still keep coming.

    Other Ideas? Hate mine?

    --
    You take it, I don't want it...
    1. Re:New Ideas For FPS Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah I agree; I love playing FPS' but they have got to stop using the same *exact* ideas over and over and over and over again - it's being going on since Half-Life was released in '98 which is almost 9 years ago. And what was that games innovation? Endless pre-scripted events wholph-dee-fucking-do. Enough already!

      Anyway here are my ideas for the pile:

      Why not have a FPS adventure game with the focus not on killing things: By which I mean you just drop the guns. Maybe have the emphasis on getting from A to B. Add a genially interesting story line and you have a winner - Your journey style of RPG. The original Des Ex was like this but Warren Spector decided to dumb the whole thing down to appeal to the console market and basically killed the franchise. An alternative would be to have you as an investigator where you have to solve some kind of mystery with the game clock advancing every time you uncover a piece of the puzzle I.E., new areas of the the game opening up. And, there are always the great all alone in space themes of System Shock and the earlier Infestation which could be expanded upon.

      Another idea: Why not have the co-op style transfered over to on-line play. At the start of the level you start out with a team of 12 or so guys who have to fulfill a certain number of objectives along the lines of what you have to do in Enemy Territories with all the levels based out on a certain theme, E.G., A Siege theme, A Mega boss theme or a Destroy theme. If you die then you could respawn as an enemy until either you come back up in the reinforcement queue or every one on your team dies. You could argue that this kills the competitive style of on-line play but isn't what I just described a variation of WOW's instance raiding, With out the leveling grind or being regulated to having to play useless buffing characters? It seems like something that could transfer over from the RPG world quite easily IMHO. You could also nick the "secret objective" idea out of the Crystal Chronicles of where you might get given the task of having to only use melee based weapons with you receiving a bonus at the end of the level.

      In your post you mention that the mechanics of FPS' are completely whacked: this is true. Why is it that in these games you always hold your gun totally straight and level all the time? You couldn't possibly do this in real life! Couldn't someone take five minutes to strap a camcorder to the side of there head's then video tape themselves playing paint ball or something - matching the resulting movement back to the game? Simple tricks like having a momentary lag to your weapon as you swing around, Lowering your gun to sprint or if you are targeting a hostage, seeing your hand tap a video console with your finger following the cursor, looking down and seeing your body or feet - seem like simple tricks that would help general immersion much better then the next physics patch or graphic effect. Any thing that kills that invisible shield which surrounds you and actually puts you in the game is desperately needed.

      Further more. Why can't you actually use cover? Why can't you lean into a wall. Why can't you swing your arm around a corner and let loose a couple of rounds of suppression fire (being the whole point of having light automatic weapons IMHO). Why can't you throw a grenade by swinging the mouse around. It's scary if kids are learning how fight a modern war by playing these game because if you go into a fight with no concept of using indirect fire then you are going to get your head blown off.

      And what the hell is it with all the fucking crates? Has anyone actually ever seen these things in real life? And why is it that I see all these crates but there are never any pallets? or forklifts? how the hell do they move them around? Lame.

      I like playing these games but after a while questions like these always end up running through my mind and it just kills the experience for me. That there has been zero innovation for the ten years' since the original Quake came out is pa

    2. Re:New Ideas For FPS Thread by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      And what the hell is it with all the fucking crates?
      Because Gordon Frohman ordered 100000 of them.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  64. Re:Doom III Engine Doom II the Game by GreggBz · · Score: 1

    The actual games they produce are usually not very good as games

    I'd never heard this until Doom 3, which is a very good game, just a slight disappointment. I remember reading the PCG review, and most others, they pretty much raved about it. Then Half Life 2 became the darling of the media. Half Life 2 is undeniably a great game, but saying that ID does not produce quality games is wholly inaccurate.

    Quake, Quake II, Quake III (which is a masterpiece of simple, chaotic gameplay) were all critically acclaimed, smash hits. Return to Castle Wolfenstein (the Q3 engine version, to say nothing of the original) was quite good. As were Doom (obviously) and most every other game they produced. Even Hexen II was good. It seems gamers have a short memory and are quite subseptable to that heard mentality. Perhaps Doom 3 was a disappointment because people's expectations were sky high.

    Now Quake 4 is mostly rubbish. It's OK, but not really good. But Quake 4 was developed with the Doom 3 engine by Raven Software.

  65. KMFDM? by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 1

    What about the music from KMFDM? They made some music that was licensed exclusively for Prey, and thus they haven't been permitted to release it to the world.

    I'm not a KMFDM fan (anymore), but I was always curious to hear what they made for an FPS...

    1. Re:KMFDM? by Massacrifice · · Score: 1

      If you find about it, let me know. I was wondering too... Maybe they'll release it as an album now that the game is done.

      --
      -- Home is where you eat your heart out.
  66. Some (very old) prey screenshots by binkzz · · Score: 1

    I found these on an old Duke Nukem CDROM I had bought.

    http://xieke.com/prey.php

    --
    'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7
  67. "Innovative" weapons by dcam · · Score: 1

    Prey, at least, takes the gooey look to its fullest; many of your weapons are actually alive, and some were formerly pieces of enemies. As you're walking along, your weapon might hiss at you menacingly. This little touch is so clever and appreciated that it makes the boring sameness of the enemies and corridors that much more drab.

    Ah, so like Half Life and Opposing Force then? Nice to see cutting edge ideas.

    --
    meh
  68. False Dilemma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would much rather software TRUSTED ME.

  69. Only intercation is shooting. That's dumb. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I liked those little lightbulbflowers in HL endgame, Zen. They were just pretty decorative addition but it still was touching to see them react when player came close, not by attacking in blind berserk mode like all the other monsters, but by hiding.

    Dumb FPS = you can see your weapon at all times, it is pointed forward at all times, magical levitating crosshair in the middle of FOV, you can't see your legs when looking down, all enemies attack, no wall breaks unless scripted, you can't steal enemies' equipment; they only "drop" something random, but there's lots of equipment in crates and barrels which you can only open by... that's right, by SHOOTING them. Dumb FPS means also that: violence is good, sex is bad.

    (could we please start killing already those pro-violence, anti-sex people? I mean if they think it's good maybe they won't object to being killed.)

  70. Co-op oldies but goodies by Onuma · · Score: 1

    Though they may be old, mods for Half-Life like Sven Co-op (obvious from the title) and Brainbread are still fun. They look like crap compared to anything on the Doom 3 or HL2 engine, but if it's gameplay you want, this is a great way to go. By now half life is CHEAP and can run on nearly any computer still operating - I used to play it on my Pentium 120 that had no 3D card (1MB 2D Video, winner).

    Brainbread also lets you become a zombie if you get infected, and you have to kill your buddies or the computer allies (Marines) to earn enough points to play as a gunner again. It's fun to throw a wrench in your buddies' gears :D Repetetive? Yes...but if you play any game enough it'll get repetetive.

    Dark Alliance 1 and 2 are decent console co-ops, though they're not FPS. They're fun if you just like to hack and slash with a buddy and have ample time to burn up.

    --
    What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
  71. Re:Doom III Engine Doom II the Game by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

    Personally, I found Quake 4 to be better than Doom 3 in most parts. Especially since it didn't have nearly as many monster closets. Also, I found the enemy design in D3 to be a bit bland, although it got somewhat better in the expansion (the Brawler is a wonderfully crazy creation). I really like the design of the Stream Protector (robot spider thing) and the Gladiator (dude with shield and railgun) in Q4.

    Both games did really good with flashing images quickly on ingame monitors, for instance with the giant tower guard in Q4 when you enter the hangar control room.

    --
    Eat the rich.
  72. Natural Selection by JWhitlock · · Score: 1
    Have you tried Natural Selection? The theme is Marines vs. Aliens with two gameplay styles. Classic is a real-time strategy/first person shooter hybrid, where there are real differences between the teams. Combat is an action-oriented RPG-style game with shorter rounds. It's based on the Half-Life 1 engine, with a Source version to be released (hopefully this year). Still, if you have fond memories of Quake, then you probably don't mind 5 year-old technology. The company formed by the mod authors (Unknown Worlds) is trying to make money now, and I wish them luck.

    Sure, not everyone is playing the same game anymore, but the market is much bigger as well. The important thing is the community, and if you have 3 friends willing to play with you, that may be all the community you need.

  73. Bid for Power by Wingfat · · Score: 1

    Has any one played this before? it is a Mod for Quake 3 built on the quake 3 engine they have made a very very nice Dragon Ball Z type of fighting game. Although they had to drop all DBZ refferaces the feel is still there. the team capture the dragon ball (flag) is great. the level desgines are up to par with other mods on Quake. plus you can use any quake toon mod to make your player look different. Or you can revert back to Quake and have a Goku toon to play with and in stead of holding a gun the builts or what not comes out of the palm of your hand. pretty sweet.

  74. Re:Doom III Engine Doom II the Game by nine-times · · Score: 1
    Really? I know people raved about the Quake games for their engines' graphics and multiplayer capabilities, but I never thought I was in the minority for considering the games themselves sub-par. The character models are pretty ugly, the level design, weapons, and gameplay are uninspired. They're the epitome of the FPS rehash-- a soldier with a choice of pistol, shotgun, machine gun, and rocket launcher runs through a maze and fights demons-- and that's it. No story, no innovation (except in the engine itself), nothing interesting whatsoever.

    I actually thought Doom3 was fairly solid, but again, didn't really break any new ground or do anything very interesting. It took the classic FPS rehash formula and added in some of the old Half Life innovations, which have pretty much become part of the standard FPS rehash anyway.

    Now, I understand some people around here are really about the multiplayer, in which case it's mostly about the engine and weapon balance. On that score, id may be a fine company. But even in multiplayer, I haven't thought id was exceptional in any way, and definitely lacked in level design.

  75. OT by rabiddeity · · Score: 1

    Hehe, nah, they're all too busy with clubs. These kids NEVER go home; they're even at school for summer break. It's kinda scary, actually.