[QUOTE=cdr248;45082251]God dammit it actually has a good trailer[/QUOTE]
So did Dead Island 1
I'll probably disable random players. That's the worst shit. Maybe if they made more Zombies spawn the more players there are but else they are kind of disstracting.
people are saying they have high hopes because it's the same developer as spec ops: the line.
even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. the same goes for it's story, because apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh.
my hopes are about the same as if it had the original developers. only instead of very fun gameplay and a shitty b-grade story, we might get terrible gameplay and a story that tries way too hard.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]people are saying they have high hopes because it's the same developer as spec ops: the line.
even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. the same goes for it's story, because apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh.
my hopes are about the same as if it had the original developers. only instead of very fun gameplay and a shitty b-grade story, we might get terrible gameplay and a story that tries way too hard.[/QUOTE]
From the trailer I have confidence that their story will not be as serious as Spec Ops, and it only means that they know how to write a good story.
I think you're right in fearing the gameplay, though- I never liked Dead Island's gameplay, and Spec Ops was not too good with it either. I have better hopes than I did for Riptide, at least.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh. [/QUOTE]
I've read lots of books on the subject matter and spec ops' story would go into the better written ones.
Why is it when a game produces a story thats well enough to compete with films and books of the same subject matter the majority of gamers dub it as "tries way too hard" or "they have never read a book" cuz there are books and movies that try way too harder and are shittier than whatever spec ops did.
externally we say it will be a huge disappointment anyway
dem third person animations tho
[video=youtube;hXmZX8iz2SE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXmZX8iz2SE[/video]
That kind of stuff was in mirror's edge tho
[video=youtube;LeA-386t38Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeA-386t38Q[/video]
not as bad though.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;45082827]That kind of stuff was in mirror's edge tho
[video=youtube;LeA-386t38Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeA-386t38Q[/video]
not as bad though.[/QUOTE]
Except if you look at your own shadow in Dead Island you can see the wonky animations without having to use any sort of developer command to get into 3rd person.
[QUOTE=booster;45082417]So did Dead Island 1[/QUOTE]
Yes but at least this time they aren't completely lying about the tone and atmosphere of the game. Or maybe they ARE, and we're finally getting the strong emotional game that the first Dead Island trailer promised! :tinfoil:
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]people are saying they have high hopes because it's the same developer as spec ops: the line.
even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. the same goes for it's story, because apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh.
my hopes are about the same as if it had the original developers. only instead of very fun gameplay and a shitty b-grade story, we might get terrible gameplay and a story that tries way too hard.[/QUOTE]
The mediocre gameplay was actually part of the point they were trying to make, it was trying to emulate the mundane and rehashed gameplay we have gotten in tons of modern military shooters.
Still, it doesnt show they know how to make good gameplay so I am cautious about this one, especially because of the first Dead Island.
I liked dead island 1 for what it was
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay.[/QUOTE]
In fact, the gameplay was very solid and mostly polished. It only felt shitty because it was [b]exactly like any other[/b], but on its own it wasn't objectively horrible and as boring.
However, there's absolutely no indication that they would somehow alter the gameplay in DI2, they'll most likely just take it from previous games and go from there. There's not much you can fuck up, the idea behind that was simple and it worked for the most part. Story? If the trailer is of any indication, there won't be any seriousness in there. Yes, everyone remembers the thing with first game's trailer, but that's different devteam.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]people are saying they have high hopes because it's the same developer as spec ops: the line.
even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. the same goes for it's story, because apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh.
my hopes are about the same as if it had the original developers. only instead of very fun gameplay and a shitty b-grade story, we might get terrible gameplay and a story that tries way too hard.[/QUOTE]
Explain to me why the gameplay in SO:TL was bad. Bonus points if you can do so without using the word generic.
Gunplay was solid, controls were tight, sound design was far above average, level design was interesting with the sandstorms. Yeah the guns were lacking a bit of heft, but other than that it was more than competent. The AA-12 with slugs is probably one of my favorite shotguns in any game because it's a gibbing machine.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]people are saying they have high hopes because it's the same developer as spec ops: the line.
even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. the same goes for it's story, because apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh.
my hopes are about the same as if it had the original developers. only instead of very fun gameplay and a shitty b-grade story, we might get terrible gameplay and a story that tries way too hard.[/QUOTE]
I thought the reason people have high hopes is simply because it's not the same devs as DI1.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]people are saying they have high hopes because it's the same developer as spec ops: the line.
even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay? personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. the same goes for it's story, because apparently people who play war video games have never seen another piece of war media and thought the 'war is hell and you have to make hard choices' thing was fresh.
my hopes are about the same as if it had the original developers. only instead of very fun gameplay and a shitty b-grade story, we might get terrible gameplay and a story that tries way too hard.[/QUOTE]
Apart from the fact that you never like anything, you have to appreciate Spec Ops' way of telling you the story, which is pretty damn unique. Personally I liked the gameplay, but it wasn't anything incredibly special if you ignore the way it connected with the story.
[editline]12th June 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;45084054]The mediocre gameplay was actually part of the point they were trying to make, it was trying to emulate the mundane and rehashed gameplay we have gotten in tons of modern military shooters.
[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure that was completely by accident.
[QUOTE=Maxjes;45086637]Explain to me why the gameplay in SO:TL was bad. Bonus points if you can do so without using the word generic.
Gunplay was solid, controls were tight, sound design was far above average, level design was interesting with the sandstorms. Yeah the guns were lacking a bit of heft, but other than that it was more than competent. The AA-12 with slugs is probably one of my favorite shotguns in any game because it's a gibbing machine.[/QUOTE]
Well, being a generic cover-based TPS is a valid criticism imo. But other than that there's the fact that your squad AI is frustratingly retarded, as they keep getting out of cover and getting shot which forces you to run out of cover and heal them to avoid a game over.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;45082827]That kind of stuff was in mirror's edge tho
[video=youtube;LeA-386t38Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeA-386t38Q[/video]
not as bad though.[/QUOTE]
Except Dead Island had multiplayer, so everyone could see your retarded animations. Mirror's Edge did not.
[editline]12th June 2014[/editline]
Don't get why everyone thinks Yager only makes super serious modern war games when the first two games they made were sci fi flight simulators.
[QUOTE=lonefirewarrior;45087183]Except Dead Island had multiplayer, so everyone could see your retarded animations. Mirror's Edge did not.
[editline]12th June 2014[/editline]
[/QUOTE]
Actually, no you couldn't. DIs multiplayer, gave all other players a different world model (instead of a wonky view model) with the correct animations, the whole purpose of your wonky local view model was to look good in first person which is fine since no one can actually see your view model because its client side, you look fine to them.
[QUOTE=silentjubjub;45085621]I liked dead island 1 for what it was[/QUOTE]
I think people got overhyped again, and people are still holding a grudge. It had a shit story but it was pretty good zombie killin'.
[QUOTE=Maxjes;45086637]Explain to me why the gameplay in SO:TL was bad. Bonus points if you can do so without using the word generic.
Gunplay was solid, controls were tight, sound design was far above average, level design was interesting with the sandstorms. Yeah the guns were lacking a bit of heft, but other than that it was more than competent. The AA-12 with slugs is probably one of my favorite shotguns in any game because it's a gibbing machine.[/QUOTE]
Honestly I loved it's gameplay and gunplay, but it was ruined by the retarded "can only carry 3 magazines for every weapon" bull crap
I also loved the art style of the levels, how it's mostly city ruins almost buried in sand, it actually had a great atmosphere
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;45084054]The mediocre gameplay was actually part of the point they were trying to make, it was trying to emulate the mundane and rehashed gameplay we have gotten in tons of modern military shooters.
Still, it doesnt show they know how to make good gameplay so I am cautious about this one, especially because of the first Dead Island.[/QUOTE]
haha are you serious
'they made the game suck on purpose'
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45082459]... [B]even if you LIKED it's terrible hamfisted commentary on war, didn't everyone agree that it faltered in gameplay?[/B] personally i thought the line had horrible, generic and boring gameplay. ...[/QUOTE]
Jesus, talk about a loaded question.
[editline]12th June 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45090249]haha are you serious
'they made the game suck on purpose'[/QUOTE]
Also, why don't you use capital letters or question marks?
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45090249]haha are you serious
'they made the game suck on purpose'[/QUOTE]
they intentionally made it like that to get the attention of cod/gow fanboys.
[QUOTE=lonefirewarrior;45087183]Except Dead Island had multiplayer, so everyone could see your retarded animations.[/QUOTE]
maybe you should play the game first so you actually have some idea of what you're talking about lol
[QUOTE=Rusty100;45090249]haha are you serious
'they made the game suck on purpose'[/QUOTE]
Yes and no.
To you and others, the gameplay sucked. To me and others, it was just fine. To the developers, they wanted to make it like the war shooters everyone else is playing. They wanted to get the attention of the people who play call of duty and gears of war and all that stuff so they can see what it'd be like for a bit more of a realistic character to be put in a situation like that. Or at least that's what I think.
Hopefully they won't make guns useless in this one
Itt, the authority tries to ram his opinion down the people's throats like he's some sort of Catholic priest.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
