greenlight is really the reason why shitty gimmicks are becoming so common
when "Generic" and "Retro" and poor graphics are actually a selling point something is wrong. its not even about gameplay when graphics are bad to the point of MSpaint
I mean, I love hotline miami, but it actually sells the style, and doesn't sell because of it being "Retro"
[QUOTE]ColCol says:
A note should be made that the game has around a hundreds levels and no save feature in any form.[/QUOTE]
"The roguelike-like spirit has meandered across video games history for a few years now, turning old things new with a little roguelike RPG kick"
yeah this game isn't the only one, only they didn't add "Roguelike"
[t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RTkqm_F5U74/UkOkEyvLU4I/AAAAAAAAEeU/fNSnpzrQbvM/s1600/Shadow-Warrior-Box-Art.png[/t][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/Serious_Sam_3_cover.jpg[/t][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Hard_Reset_cover.jpg[/t]
that's just one studio(s)
[QUOTE=J!NX;44667071]"The roguelike-like spirit has meandered across video games history for a few years now, turning old things new with a little roguelike RPG kick"
yeah this game isn't the only one, only they didn't add "Roguelike"
[t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RTkqm_F5U74/UkOkEyvLU4I/AAAAAAAAEeU/fNSnpzrQbvM/s1600/Shadow-Warrior-Box-Art.png[/t][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/Serious_Sam_3_cover.jpg[/t][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Hard_Reset_cover.jpg[/t]
that's just one studio(s)[/QUOTE]
Those games didn't actually try to emulate the classic feel at all, in fact the only game in those 3 that have classic gameplay is Serious Sam 3 and that's only in the later levels.
I think the point of this one was to make a game as they were back then (and failing), instead of [i]only kinda[/i] taking classic FPS gameplay and putting a new fresh coat of graphics on it.
I have been waiting for indie games to start doing FPS for a while, I miss old 90s shooters in all of their 2.5D glory.
Though this looks ugly as fuck. Doom, Duke and ROTT were 2.5D but weren't piss poor.
[QUOTE=TheCombine;44667428]Those games didn't actually try to emulate the classic feel at all, in fact the only game in those 3 that have classic gameplay is Serious Sam 3 and that's only in the later levels.
I think the point of this one was to make a game as they were back then (and failing), instead of [i]only kinda[/i] taking classic FPS gameplay and putting a new fresh coat of graphics on it.
I have been waiting for indie games to start doing FPS for a while, I miss old 90s shooters in all of their 2.5D glory.
Though this looks ugly as fuck. Doom, Duke and ROTT were 2.5D but weren't piss poor.[/QUOTE]
they're very much classic, albeit a little modern. but SS3 felt very much like a real SS1 sequel. I mean, you can still be fast paced shooter like doom and not try and emulate the 'style' like this "Rogue shooter" shit does 100% strictly, that's mainly where this game becomes redundant
doom actually looks good. It's hyper outdated yet oddly that gives it a really good looking style to it. Retro however wasn't an artsyle, but a technological limitation and shouldn't really be used name maybe a few exceptions that wear it well. This games trying to be roguelike doomlike, it should have at [I]least [/I]had sprites that were very close to doom/shadowwarrior/duke but had a modern level of detail rather than shitty mspaint grafix
you could probably use a texture mod on this but I doubt its worth it
I tried the demo and it is absolutely horrible. You can't even aim up or down and the controls are horrible and floaty.
Also, it doesn't even support 1080p! This is 2014 for fucks sake. Retro or not, a 3D game has no reason not to support normal resolutions.
[QUOTE=Robber;44668454]I tried the demo and it is absolutely horrible. You can't even aim up or down and the controls are horrible and floaty.
Also, it doesn't even support 1080p! This is 2014 for fucks sake. Retro or not, a 3D game has no reason not to support normal resolutions.[/QUOTE]
Retro is becoming the word devs use to excuse being lazy
"What, its not poorly made, its just [I]retro[/I], man!"
The graphics look pretty ugly even for a "retro" styled game, but looking at the demo, the actual mechanics look pretty interesting.
You can't even save.
All the roguelikes I've played and Wolfenstein 3D let me save.
They also didn't look like shit drawn in MSPaint.
This looks so poorly made and i'm not even sure if the trailer is meant to be 'cool' and terribad as a joke or if it's actually a shit game.
Can we stop using the term "roguelike-like"? We have better ways to describe these games now (not immensely better but at least it's not clumsy sounding).
[QUOTE=J!NX;44668259]but SS3 felt very much like a real SS1 sequel[/QUOTE]
Only on the second half. The earlier levels felt like a satire of modern FPS games rather than a Serious Sam game.
What with being stuck with garden-variety handguns and rifles (with ironsights, something that, if I recall correctly, was never in an SS game), shooting at slow hitscan enemies.
[editline]28th April 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;44668259]doom actually looks good. It's hyper outdated yet oddly that gives it a really good looking style to it.[/QUOTE]
Never said Doom had bad graphics, I quite enjoy them and still play the game today.
After playing it, the game has potential with some great item variety and progression, decent writing, and some catchy music, but it's not even worth $5 with the horrible graphics even by "retro" standards, boring level generation, and lack of saving.
That trailer has some of the shittiest voice acting I've ever heard
[QUOTE=TheCombine;44672252]Only on the second half. The earlier levels felt like a satire of modern FPS games rather than a Serious Sam game.
What with being stuck with garden-variety handguns and rifles (with ironsights, something that, if I recall correctly, was never in an SS game), shooting at slow hitscan enemies.
[editline]28th April 2014[/editline]
Never said Doom had bad graphics, I quite enjoy them and still play the game today.[/QUOTE]
guess I just worded it wrong but meant to agree
doom-age games actually look really good, its pretty odd too, but its simplistic 'style' and nature compliments the simple yet unforgiving combat
hell, even SNES games look good oddly pretty good
its sad too, because games that try and be "retro" don't even look good, they just do it really terribly.
I'd argue most (good) 90's games look far better than the retarded grey-scale/brown/blue shit we have today in the AAA scene.
Also this game seems like something shat out of a gamemaker newbie or something.
Would probably have faired better if it simply paused the game when no you weren't moving (gimmicky but closer to a true roguelike instead of a shitty doom clone)
'
[QUOTE=Aredbomb;44669895]Can we stop using the term "roguelike-like"? We have better ways to describe these games now (not immensely better but at least it's not clumsy sounding).[/QUOTE]
A lot of games that throw around the "roguelike" term aren't roguelikes. They might have random generation, but that doesn't make it a roguelike. They might be a "stop and go" turn based RPG, but that doesn't make it a roguelike. It's a combination of a lot of things. Dungeons of Dredmor [I]is[/I] a roguelike, Tales of Maj'Eyal [I]is[/I] a roguelike (and one of the "big four" classics) just to name two on Steam.
[QUOTE=JohnnyOnFlame;44672547]I'd argue most (good) 90's games look far better than the retarded grey-scale/brown/blue shit we have today in the AAA scene.
Also this game seems like something shat out of a gamemaker newbie or something.[/QUOTE]
It's because in the 90s and before they were trying. These indie games with these kinds of graphics are just doing ugly small graphics cause "look it's retro!".
Actually it's probably budget constraints / lazyness / arrogance, one or more.
[QUOTE=Garb;44672337]That trailer has some of the shittiest voice acting I've ever heard[/QUOTE]
you die in reeel life
[QUOTE=Aredbomb;44669895]Can we stop using the term "roguelike-like"? We have better ways to describe these games now (not immensely better but at least it's not clumsy sounding).[/QUOTE]
rouge-lite is a cute term that i think works pretty well. it's not a genre in and of itself, though. like, you wouldn't classify, say, spelunky as a rogue-lite, but rather as a rogue-lite platformer or something.
I prefer if people say roguelike elements which is not really wrong in this case.
[QUOTE=junker154;44678065]I prefer if people say roguelike elements which is not really wrong in this case.[/QUOTE]
yeah i mean that's fine too. i don't really care how roguelikes are referenced so long as you don't call something that's not a roguelike a roguelike. that's just confusing and misleading.
[editline]29th April 2014[/editline]
also i'm like super embarrassed to admit this, but this game actually isn't so bad. it looks awful, there's no sense of cohesion to the aesthetic, there are literally no resolution options, etc. but honestly it's actually quite fun in a doom-esque way. plus the developers clearly have a good understanding of what makes randomization fun, since each playthrough you find different weapons and fight different enemies and it works quite well.
probably the biggest problems are that the game is WAYYY too long (even with saves, 100 floors would be several hours which is absurd. 15 to 20 floors would make a lot more sense.) and there are just a few too many draining resources. (typically with roguelike-inspired games there's a food/hunger system to keep players on the move, but in this game you not only have to deal with hunger, but with depleting ammo reserves, degrading weapons and armor, and occasionally even level time limits. it's just too much.)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
