E?!

ReNo said:
Yak, according to my big Fallout fan flatmates, the third game got cancelled but has since be reannounced just a few weeks ago.

EDIT: Here's the scoop...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/04/15/news_6093628.html

RPG games have one drawback IMO, its their repetitive nature, early in any campaign.. kill, collect,sell,kill,collect,go up level,kill,collect,sell...

fallout lessened it in such a way, that it was less tedious.. leagues above diablo, and baulders gate.

i would be one happy camper if fallout 3 followed fallout 2.. the last release of fallout:tactics... sucked poopoo.

thanx for the heads up duncan.

I quite liked fallout tactics to be honest, I felt it took the fallout combat system further quite nicely. Its the latest fallout game - brotherhood of steel - that is the bad use of the license in my opinion.

ReNo said:
Yak, according to my big Fallout fan flatmates, the third game got cancelled but has since be reannounced just a few weeks ago.

EDIT: Here's the scoop...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/04/15/news_6093628.html

Well hey, there's some good news for some people. :smile:

I figure it makes sense to bring this thread back since E3 is now underway. What games have people been taken by so far, if any?

For me, I was really hoping for a sequel to Phantom Crash (cool mech xbox game) to be announced, and lo and behold it has been!

Pity its on the bloody PS2!

I have a PS2, so its not that I can't get the game, its just the limitations that using the PS2 puts on the game. The screenshots that have been shown put it several steps behind the original in terms of graphical appeal :sad: Thankfully they have added what most Phantom Crash fans seem to want - online multiplayer - but of course since PC was originally an xbox game, a lot of those fans might not be able to play the sequel.

Otherwise, I guess Halo 2 is shaping up nicely, though I never had any doubts that it would. Fable is looking like fun, and the new Gamecube Zelda game is looking excellent (though I DID love the cel-shaded style). I'm looking forward to hearing more from Square Enix about FFXII, FFVII:Before Crisis (even if it is a bloody modile phone game!), and FFVII: Advent Children.

This looks to be pretty satisfying graphically.

http://media.pc.gamespy.com/media/681/681912/imgs_1.html

Except for the bullet holes in this screenshot!!!

http://media.pc.gamespy.com/media/681/681912/img_2119658.html?fromint=1

I read about it though, sounds quite promising, though there are plenty of FPS's out there as is, I'm normally more excited by something a little different. A Jet Set Radio sequel would be nice :smile:

Leperous said:
AC had some cool features to it, like underwater bases and using terrain more. Always fun building a huge mountain to piss off the neighbours And have to agree about Civ3 being silly, especially with the land-grabbing. The resource system was also annoying, especially with how the AI dealth with it...

That's why you get out there and take the resource and land grabbing to them :razz: Also, cultural flips shouldn't be a problem if you manage to have a good core of cities with the Temple/Acqueduct/Colloseum/Marketplace improvements and at least a few luxury resources to share amongst the people. Topped off with your defending garrison, at least for "border cities" you cant fail to stay secure :razz: Meh, anyway :razz: aslo you only have yourself to blame if the AI refuses to trade anything with you :razz:

ReNo - it got moved to the PS2, i'd wager because the xbox is about as popular as syphillis :smile:

GTA San Andreas is being pimped as well, yummy :smile: Hopefully it splices Vice Cities endless additions with the original GTA3's solid single player/plot

And one more for you - teh psp !http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2004/news/05/11/psp/psp_screen009.jpg

They seem to be lacking a few of the "flagship" titles of the PS series of consoles though, which could let it down.. although a metal gear game and GT4 should be plenty to draw people in. It looks shockingly like something old and crap, like a gamegear for instance :razz:

Edit.. heh - Taken from e3insider.com

Finally, in a show-stealing moment, a breathtaking trailer for The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker 2 was played. It featured a grown-up Link and a more edgy 3D environment and the sudden entrance of Shigeru Miyamoto complete with Link's shield and sword.

Looks like Nintendo are managing to steal the show, although i'm not surprised the DS looks fantastic, and they are still the original de-facto games company :smile: (and the best :razz: !)

LOL Gwil Seriously though, the fact it will sell better on the PS2 is almost certainly the reason they chose to use that platform. I can't imagine that the development team were too happy about the change however, I know I'd be pretty pissed off about having to make a sequel that is significantly less technically impressive than the original - its rare for such a thing to happen but this is the SECOND game do so in a short time span, as Koei recently announced that the xbox action game "Crimson Sea" would be getting a sequel, but on the PS2 :sad:

As for the Zelda game, despite what the article says, its clearly NOT the Wind Waker 2. Its more akin to a sequel to Ocarina of Time, given the fact Epona (or some other horse) is in it and its grown up Link (not the unnamed hero of the wind waker) that you play. Nintendo did say they were making a sequel to the Wind Waker though - could that mean another Zelda game is yet to be announced?

Heh, it'd be nice :smile: I've not played Wind Waker myself, although there is a copy in the house - but if the new game is Ocarina Of Time, only further on in time, I will be excited.. that game was mind bogglingly good.

I wonder if there will be anything about EQ2 in e3....

Korndawg -

http://www.tothegame.com/screenshot.asp?screens=10269

and apparently everquest2.com has just been revamped majorly :smile:

Gwil said:
Korndawg -

http://www.tothegame.com/screenshot.asp?screens=10269

and apparently everquest2.com has just been revamped majorly :smile:

:biggrin: ta m8.

did anyone here go to this E3 thing?

how did it fare?

/me drools

i really want civ 4 and fallout 3, why did you have to tell me they could come out :razz:

now i will be waiting, and the wait will be longer

Who cares about Civ, when the Pirates! series is receiving a fresh update :biggrin:

http://www.firaxis.com/company_showrelease.cfm?releasenum=42

If you haven't heard of it/played it before (its rather old), you need know only one thing - 'tis swashbuckingly fantastic! :biggrin:

I thought Civ3 was disappointing. All my games were uneventful and unbalanced.

E3 isn't over yet Orph, and unfortunately its for industry members only. Somehow others can manage to get in through contacts and such (like Juim said he had managed in the past) but for the most part you have to be in the game development / journalism industry.

Can I just cage what difficulties y'all were playing on, for Civ 3? It seems illogical to not like it... ideally Regent/Emperor or above is the only way to play and get a decent game

Also, with the Conquests pack adding a plethora of funkiness, I'm still convinced it's one of the best yet :smile:

Gwil said:
Can I just cage what difficulties y'all were playing on, for Civ 3? It seems illogical to not like it... ideally Regent/Emperor or above is the only way to play and get a decent game

Also, with the Conquests pack adding a plethora of funkiness, I'm still convinced it's one of the best yet :smile:

the addon's truly add something to this ailing game..

civ 3 sucked, by itself anyways, for all the aforementioned reasons.. the comp already cheats, i don't see how setting it on its most difficult level will remedy that..

How does it cheat? :razz: As long as you dont waste money researching science (buy it instead), and dont attack the enemy in 1/2 unit stacks, you will always have an upper hand on the enemy :smile:

Gwil said:
How does it cheat? :razz: As long as you dont waste money researching science (buy it instead), and dont attack the enemy in 1/2 unit stacks, you will always have an upper hand on the enemy :smile:

/me wonders, what version of civ 3 you own..

i lost a new battleship, a steel one to an elite wooden sailing galleon (or whatever civ has in wooden military vessels)

that scenario cannot happen..

i lost marines (yup new ones again) to an elite force of musketeers.. again, impossible scenario.

the battle encounters, were out of sync gwil.. and i for one play mostly from the peace standpoint.. i never start wars.. i usually get attacked cause of my lead position.. i am usually years in front of anyone else..

strength of numbers and experience make a lot of difference - also remember, Marines are normal infantry with the ability to attack cities via transports, nothing more :smile:

steel battleship? or steel Ironclad? ironclads are crapola is so, but i can see what you mean if it was a destroyer/battleship/aegis cruiser :smile:

Gwil said:
strength of numbers and experience make a lot of difference - also remember, Marines are normal infantry with the ability to attack cities via transports, nothing more :smile:

steel battleship? or steel Ironclad? ironclads are crapola is so, but i can see what you mean if it was a destroyer/battleship/aegis cruiser :smile:

reminds gwil

i said years ahead.. it was a battleship vs. wooden something.

sighs.. gwil i played civ II for much longer than HL (actual hours invested, not total time owned) i know the in's/outs of the game.. i almost never lost at civ.. till version 3.

Theres your answer right away :razz: there is massive changes in Civ 3 - playing it as civ2 will get you nowhere (no offence), but that is the general concensus in the community..

Wonders arent as important, the combat system has had an overhaul (and i will add that in civ 2/civ 2 ToT there were massive problems with jet fighters/tanks etc being lost to spearmen - the combat system is still a little off , but a lot better than it has been. im not doubting your ability at the game Orph, i'm just pointing out some of the most common hurdles people face with this game...

hmm, never heard of the spearman thing, but honestly, i played civ long before i had net access..

ok.. i will give it another try..

thanx gwil

Always annoyed me how privateers could rarely, even on the easiest settings, defeat a pesky trireme. They should make certain techs be undefeatable unless faced with numbers, e.g. a tank should never lose against spears/arrows, unless perhaps there are hundreds of them. Such foolishness.

Anyway, the whole Civ concept is a bit flawed and silly really- something like Alpha Centauri, where it's set in an unbreathable atmosphere and you have to build colonies, makes sense. I hope that they radically overhaul the gameplay of the next because, as fun as the earlier Civs were, I'm tired of 15 years worth of simple "factory building". There should be more of a 'sprawl' rather than discrete population centres, and the factory/movement systems should be changed, along with the military- proper armies would kick ass :biggrin:

i agree, but would be content to have real sized worlds.. one where you take days to stumble upon another civ, and one that kills the unprepared more easily..

there was a reason it took so long to discover America.

also, i don't think 1000 spearmen could harm a tank.. reality would be a must..

even in the future, you will need to build the basics, i can live with being forced to do the tedious stuff civ is noted for..

i am a fan i guess.. maybe those things would bother me if i were less of one.. :/

Well, maybe not a tank- the tank wouldn't be able to kill 1000 spearmen anyway- but 1000 spearmen could probably knock down a few infantry... oh and future Civ games need more futuristic technology. I'm pissed off with there being pollution still when I'm on future tech 154980, and the lack of decent units. Civ CTP had it right with mechs and hypersonic planes...

Privateers, pfft - widely accepted as being useless and in the wrong age to even become useful :razz:

Navy isn't even an important element in Civilization - as long as you have a small, stacked fleet to defend your invasion transports, you shouldnt be wasting your shields producing worthless units ^_^ IMO, anyhow

TBH, it smacks of (no offence again) of casual unstructured play being applied to a Civ game. The Civ3 engine encourages people to take a path as a Civ, not just become a "factory builder" (Lep TM) to win an essentially worthless histographic victory.

No offence (x3) but it seems a lot of people havent read the intro piece on the Civ3 manual, and are playing Civ3 as a game - which it is, and can be played as such - but they are misinterpreting the changes, and ideas within the game as such..

well. since you were so inoffensive and all :heee:

unless i failed to say, i played civ 3. i win.. i almost always win. i just found the balance annoying.. the combat balance that is... if i am mis-interpreting this.. so be it.. but being ex-military, i don't see how.

the game was only OK.. i so hope for either..

1) a re-institution of the civ 2 value system, with civ 3 graphics, or

2) a total revamp, ignoring 2 or 3 completely..

The resuorce distribution sucked too.

Alien_Sniper said:
The resuorce distribution sucked too.

you have DSL now dave, find the expansion.. it does add some interesting stuff..

Well the new STALKER video is rubbish - doesn't exactly show this to be the "HL2 beater" Myrk seems to think it will be...

http://www.gametrailers.com/gt_vault/t_stalker_e3_2k4_gp.html

Wow, what "innovative" gameplay this has when compared to the standard boring HL2 gameplay shown in their new video eh :razz:

A few games that ARE looking cool however - monster hunter, silent hill 4, and killer 7...

http://www.gametrailers.com

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/670/670144/vids_1.html - I didnt expect them to have a trailer already. looks so good.

The following games look really neat:
Guildwars (PC, http://www.guildwars.com/ ) - By the three guys who recently left Blizzard after making Diablo II, Warcraft, etc. It looks to be a big Diablo-like game, but 3d and really neat. Until Friday (today?) I guess they're doing a free beta test for anyone who wants to download the small (1 meg) client and try it out.
Metroid Prime 2 (GC) - looks really neat, I'm hoping the single player will be as fun as the first, but I think the multiplayer looks too lame to see much play.
Legend of Zelda (GC) - Damn, I'm not much of a Zelda fan myself, but if it looks as good as these screenshots I'll be buying it!
Paper Mario 2 (GC) - I loved the style and setup of the first one. Hopefully this will be even cooler.
Fire Emblem (GC) - Tactical strategy games. For Gamecube. Mmmmmm.
Advance Wars (GC) - I don't quite understand this game, and the videos weren't too clear on what was going on, but it looked really fun and interesting.
WarioWare DS (DS) - Hahaha, WarioWare is great. Check it out for GBA or especially GC if you haven't played it - basically a whole lot of five second long minigames played in rapid succession.

In fact, holy s**t, the Nintendo DS looks TOTALLY FRIGGIN' AWESOME. Wireless multiplayer, a stylus and microphone, GBA compatability, two screens, Nintendo 64 (and more) quality graphics... ANIMAL CROSSING... in your hands. Wow. I'll most likely buy this system.

If the PSP gets hacked then it will be amazing... seems like it could be a portable divx/mp3 player for what.. ?150? Assuming somebody breaks the DRM on it, which they of course will :smile:

Gwil, although I agree that it is about building a civilisation, you might notice that, er, so were the other 2 games that came before it, except this one has annoyingly handled resources, cheating bastard enemies, no post 1980-technology in the game, and poorly handled concepts of corruption and pollution, amongst other things.

I did actually like this game though, just it could/should have been better, and I hope the next version is at least an evolution (if not a revolution) where Civ3 wasn't.

Pollution, is teh carp really - and I think the corruption system works fairly decently as well, at least as far as possible. It's quite a hard thing to represent by the very nature of it :razz:

Make sure you space out the forbidden palace and the palace, and build with corruption in mind.. :razz:

lol I did... I have been playing these games for 12 years, you know :wink: It's foolishness how there's more corruption the further away you are, that's like saying Cornwall and Scotland must be the most evil, corrupt places in the UK, while London is a shining example to us all! Plus I can't imagine in a civilised society there is much corruption which siphons off government resources...

I can only conclude that "yuo r all teh mongz!", TBH :razz:

i wouldn't say corruption doesnt siphon resources, more like "misuses" them :razz: i think the idea is good, but hard to implement effectively or realistically. shrugs
here's an "article" or two on corruption, in Civ - if youre interested :razz:

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_corruption_c3c.shtml
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_wltkd.shtml
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_rank_corruption.shtml

The communication system was a bit of a balls too, I expected the computer to be far more interactive. I wanted to join forces amass armies and conquer enemy cites... but I just got ripped off trading for iron and other essential resources. Renewing the trade pacts every 20 years was riveting too.

I still enjoyed the games I had, but I wanted more after playing alpha centurai and civ2 excessively.

whispers to lep

i am beginning to believe, gwil doesn't support the glitches, but... was able to incorporate them better than we did..

i always attempted to play civ in an orderly, civilized fashion. in fact, i had in hundreds of instances, computer people just appear on my map, as mine.. city after city would be dazzled by my reputation as a world leader.. it got to be expensive, cause they were always in the middle of enemy occupied territory, and i had to dump massive amounts of cash into them to upgrade them.. else i would suffer theft of technology..

anywho's.. it is my considered opinion, that gwil used the glitches to his advantage.. where i could not.

/me bows to a true civ master :smile:

thanks Orph :smile:

I'm yet to win by UN vote... probably my early ages annexation policy of smaller neighbours :razz: Therefore I never hold elections!

The next Settlers game looks really good too-
http://games.bigpond.com/pc/features/e3-2004/settlershot.php
Hopefully it's like the 1st/2nd versions rather than the crummy later ones :smile:

:eek: That = win, simple as :biggrin: The whole look and feel, particuarly the trees reminds me a lot of Black and Whites engine, which was tres beautiful :smile: And this is better :biggrin:

RTS is good, but i think i prefer TBS myself..

i always feel i am the computers equal in TBS.. when i play RTS, i always feel cheated, even when the game assures you its not :/

The batllefield 2 videos look way awesome, as does the UT3 engine demo. You oughtta check em out. I must say I am dissappointed with the Xbox version of Doom3. If in fact, this game is the graphics behemoth they intend, then one must wonder how much they needed to "turn off" with regaurd to graphics performance. Keeping in mind the Xbox is basically a P3 700 or so I'm told. My comp can barely hold it's own on the very high settings in Far Cry, I have to turn off AA and ASF or keep it to their lowest settings. I think I will wait for the PC versions on all the "next Gen" type games.

You'll "wait"? Surely D3 and HL2 would get their PC releases at the same time or earlier than the Xbox versions? ID/Valve have never been console developers, I can't imagine they would let their console versions come out first.

Bill Gates has powers the normal human can never hope to achieve!!!!!!

On another note, This PSP thing. Nothing more than a glorified gameboy. I don't get it. Pph!.... kids and their toys.

The batllefield 2 videos look way awesome, as does the UT3 engine demo. You oughtta check em out. I must say I am dissappointed with the Xbox version of Doom3. If in fact, this game is the graphics behemoth they intend, then one must wonder how much they needed to "turn off" with regaurd to graphics performance. Keeping in mind the Xbox is basically a P3 700 or so I'm told. My comp can barely hold it's own on the very high settings in Far Cry, I have to turn off AA and ASF or keep it to their lowest settings. I think I will wait for the PC versions on all the "next Gen" type games.

Carmack getting the Doom3 engine to work on a console is generally considered a sign that he has made a deal with the devil. It outpowers the XBox by far, and it has been scaled back by quite a bit. That said, for an XBox game, it still looks great.

I'll probably end up getting the XBox version to try coop, though I'll need to find a friend with another XBox to do it - damned not being able to render split-screen. :razz:

But yeah, Doom3 for PC wasn't shown at E3 because it's being finished, and now has been slated for this summer. Doom3 for XBox is still slated for fall. The major PC titles will not hit consoles first, as the major console titles will not hit PC first.

well, with my financial status on very shaky ground, i have to be very picky about which games i purchase glares quit staring, i buy each game i am truly interested in guys :rolleyes:

anywho's, with each penny the price of fuel goes up, the likelihood of my being able to buy many games goes down.. all my hopes rest on an early release for HL2, cause... 3 months from now, i prolly won't even be able to have internet..

sighs

/ rant