drummand

Think it's too soon to say it's just coming to XBL Arcade. Kotaku's carefully wording it "exclusive summer launch," and the Playdead announcement says "LIMBO is launching on consoles this year with a summer launch on XBLA!" Note "consoles" plural. Who knows what that really means. And can a PC release really be that far behind?

Hey all. Sorry to dredge, but I just got word (via email list) that this thing is actually a game now and not just a beautifully melancholy teaser video. It's coming to consoles (I guess starting w/ XBL Arcade) this summer. I guess there's info of some kind on IGN but I'm so not linking there.

Nice ep., as usual. As an aside, but the talk about self-advancing slides on a 5 minute presentation reminded me of the Ignite. Stumbled across that a couple weeks back, thought it kind of interesting; the system itself makes some of the presentations interesting, even if the topic isn't necessarily (though clearly some are better than others).

Awesome, awesome. Think I may need to get a gamepad for my pc though. I played Exoddus on PC years ago (disc got stolen, so sad), and I vaguely remember the keyboard controls being much less satisfying ...

It's way too early to say anything -- I haven't even read the article or anything -- but my initial response to the 'headline' was skepticism. Big Daddies were a such a big part of the atmosphere of the first game: their whale-moans and thumping footsteps echoing through drippy halls ... their pathetic knocking on the wall, trying to lure out a little sister you knew wasn't coming (you cruel bastard you) .... Their presence was as much what made Rapture an interesting (sometimes nervewracking) place to visit as the seabottom locale. Playing as that sad creature effectively removes it from the ecosystem (at the very least, it softens its place). I fear the whole game will be poorer for it. Maybe they've got something else up their sleeve that'll contribute to the games environment. Presumably they do ... just dealing with splicers, splicers, and more splicers sounds rather dull. The Big Sister thing ... whatever. Smells a bit gimmicky. Maybe it'll be cool, maybe the genuinely interesting stuff doesn't make good News!. I'll keep an eye out for news, but I'm not holding my breath.

Did you get this sorted? You buy guns from the computer on the table there, not from any guy. I was stuck on this for a bit myself. Just buy a gun from the computer, and you should be straight (you may have to pluck it from the wall in the building next door, I can't remember). I just got this Friday, and I'm really enjoying the atmosphere of it. The respawning thing bothered me for a bit -- and I do still wish the spawn timer was a bit longer -- but I kind of got over it. I frequently sneak past the checkpoints if I'm not in the mood to fight. I wouldn't disagree with any of the gripes others have pointed to. At the same time, I've so many satisfying moments playing, whether they be attacks well executed or ones gone horribly, entertainingly sideways ... enough to say it's one of the better games I've played in a while. We're still in our "honeymoon" phase, so I may regret that statement in a week or so, but for now I say :tup:

Been meaning to do this for quite some time ....

Isn't the anti-science thread just a part of this kind of post-apocalyptic genre? A "science (or science run amok) has brought us to this" type thing? I'm nowhere near done with the game, though I have put in a fair few hours -- largely exploring and running the occasional errand -- so I don't know if it's spoilery exactly (cuz I'm thinking about the genre more generally), but I haven't read the above spoilers to avoid spoiling myself, so maybe that's redundant, or I might add I'm quite enjoying the game, almost in spite of myself. I don't know if Beth's writers are potboilerish so much as they're crap. Ok, that's harsh. I'd say they're decent enough at plotting, but terrible at characterization. Which I guess is a characteristic of the potboiler. So I retract that statement. But I do wish they'd get some decent animators to populate their pretty environments.

Rubbish indeed. I've been through this a couple times (and am actually going through it now). Your friend should call XBL support (it's technically not hardware) and give them the business. They'll make him jump through some hoops (try deleting a game, then re-download it, etc). When none of that works (perhaps emphasizing that the problem is with how they license games, and the repair is what produced this issue), they should escalate it to MS Support. Then he'll have to wait another 20-30 business days for a resolution (they'll call with codes that can be redeemed for the MSpoints so he can 're-buy' his games). Theoretically, the embiggened HD comes with some kind of transfer-mabobble that will preserve your downloads' usability on your console. The scary is that it also *deletes* all content from your smaller HD. So if it doesn't work, there's no going back ....

I've been enjoying the boardgames as well. Desperately hoping the trend continues. I'd definitely be down with some Battletech (did MS pick up the rights with FASA? I'm unclear on how that biz worked). Only managed to connive a game or two of that before my friends realized it was an ordeal they were less than interested in ... I've seen comments elsewhere that folks on Catan have been more civil ... I suppose that may be true. Though I've yet to play online (cuz I suck so absolutely), my wife's been obsessed with it (and now seems to be developing a similar obsession with Carcassonne) and has moved to playing nothing but online (she's actually playing right now, go fig). I've noticed there seems to be less chatting in Catan than in other games, thus less opportunity for brute incivility. She's still encountered a fair share of asshats, but the nature of the game seems to tone the asshattery down a bit. Emoticon abuse relatively common but fairly ignorable. A handful of folks seemed to like selecting and unselecting and reselecting settlement/city locations ad infinitum, which is super obnoxious (I gather there's been some talk of that artificially inflating this or that stat to bump one's gamerscore, and it's died down as the weeks have passed). Also, the player pool seems to be much smaller. I see lots of the same names coming up when she plays, which also reduces the opportunity for encountering random idiots. What particularly pleases me about Carcass (and Band of Bugs (which I've found pretty appealing)), is offline multiplayer. I tire of being relegated to the computer while my lovely wife gets her Catan on. I can only hope there are more games that provide this option. Well. Games I'm interested in (which drastically reduces the likelihood)

More detailed info on the project in an interview on Gamespot. Not going to be in the Oddworld universe. Sadly, seems this story will take place on Earth in the nearish future.

I've had mixed experiences with the ladies and games ... ferinstance, my wife is gaming at the moment (thus banishing me from the console). Her best girlfriend saw our 360 and said it seemed very cool, but she wanted to try a game where she wouldn't be killing (things/ppl/etc). If you follow the developmental psychology business that I got smacked with in my women's studies courses back in the day, you'll be of the opinion that womens would rather play together than compete. Along these lines, I think of how we introduced my friend's wife to our little Halo multiplayer club, back in the day. And frankly, how about every non-Xboxer got engaged: Co-op Play. I'd say we need more of that, as a general rule. Not just cuz I'd rather be playing with my wife right now rather than jabbering at youall (awesome tho you may be). Playing *with* someone rather than against them is an excellent way to get nongamers engaged, at least by us gamers. That's the next inlet. Like edwierd said, guys started gaming cuz of technology. On one level or another, I'd say the gadget-factor is what got us (mens) into gaming (please, tell me if I'm utterly wrong in this presumption). If we want to get nongamers onto the scene, it'll start with us getting them to play with us. Along these lines, I think the online-console thing has a huge potential for getting womens (and other nongamers) to start playing. I say *console* here, because the hookup factor is so much lower (get console, plug in tv, plug in internets, drop disc on platter, done). I really think the key to getting women into our game isn't in simplicity of controls. I think the cute factor will help, I think theme will help. But the real key will be in reproducing a web 2.0 (I hate that term, but you surely gather my meaning) experience in a game environment. Shared experiences that don't revolve around slaughtering teh Horders or whatev. Something that's creative, and that allows players to create, share, and compete together against a common enemy. Yeah, the mans in me still wants some kinda competition. After all, isn't that what makes a game a game (isn't it?)? No, not really. That's the predisposition talking.

All so harsh. Sure, Moly frequently talks bigger than anyone can deliver, but I at least appreciate the sentiment. And I appreciate it being articulated by someone who's apparently respected in the field. Not saying it's an entirely new idea. Or even a little bit new, for that matter. And yeah, "love" is pretty doggone hyperbolic (and abstract enough that you can winnow it down to something more attainable). But I'm all for anybod who's willing to spotlight their attempt to create an attachment between the player (not just the player's character) and the game's AI characters. So that GI blip was a chockablock of hyperbole. I at least thought it interesting; made me wonder what's really going on in the guy's head, where he'd go had he unlimited resources and no worries about sales. He's enthusiastic; is that really so wrong? I'm kinda bummed he got so beaten over Fable's lack of delivery; the ideas there were interesting, even if they couldn't be implemented (for whatever reason). And I miss that part of the scene; the conceptual game that exists in my head, based on the ravings of overly-vocal designers. Maybe my fault is mine. I do so dig ideas and respect attempts (even if their execution is imperfect). And I enjoy the game conceptualized sometimes as much (and sometimes even more) than the game played. Thus, I returns to teh lurk

While I totally agree that a character-driven game would need to be more focused on NPCs (at the same time pushing the player to interact with them), I don't think the fact that games are designed to be experiences precludes a character-driven storytelling style. It seems to me an RPG *should* be more character driven, that I should feel as though my decisions (and my character's actions) are having a significant effect on the gameworld and the characters in the gameworld (rather than the current scheme of following a series of linear or narrowly branching scripts) ... While I think this is certainly true of certain types of games (RPGs, for example), I don't think it's necessarily true of all or even most games (action games & shooters, for example). The current scheme of gameplay/cutscene (or a variation thereon) would certainly work for a character-based game.

I think the real reason decent characters (ambiguous or otherwise) are rare in video games is because of the type of stories we generally get. You can pretty much divide all fiction into three general categories: character-driven, plot-driven, and theme-driven. Most games fall into one of the latter two categories (as a sidenote, I think 'sandbox' style games fall into the 'theme-driven' category). As a result, the characters (including the PC) tend to be servants of plot, rather than vice-versa (as you'd get in a character-driven story). They function less as true three-dimensional characters, more as catalysts for moving the plot. Thus we tend to get archetypes who don't develop much over the course of the game. Factor in this 'immersion'-thing, that devs want the players to feel as though they are their game characters, and you lose a great deal of the ability to have a character grow over time (unless you can somehow get the player to grow as they play). Along these lines, I think that the recent Prince of Persia trilogy might qualify as character-driven, though each individual episode/game is really plot driven.

nsps: Heh. Don't know whether Ken K got that memo; I was just cracking wise. You know, the whole "also: it's not expensive enough" bit. For the record, I'd like to see Sony do well without dominating this gen ... Competition is good for everyone. But with all the posturing they've been up to of late, you must admit they're making it hard not to be cynical. I suppose some PR grandstanding is to be expected, but their current attitude leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I am interested in how this will shake out in the end .... I'm not getting the impression that they're letting royalties go entirely; just that they aren't making it the sole focus of their revenue stream. They're still selling the console at a loss, so they've got to make that money back somewhere. The money they'll see from BluRay disc sales (especially if it becomes the HD standard) will help, but would it be enough? I think, really, Sony and MS want their console to be your living room's media hub. Both are using gaming as a trojan horse to get their gear hooked to your telly (and attendant soundset), both are looking for that Applesque 'ecosystem'. MS seems to be taking more of a network approach to the hub with their console positioned as a sort of 'living room gateway' for media stored on your (Windows) PC. Sony seems to be positioning their hub as more of an everymachine with some sort of potential to link into other hardwares ... I've heard that Cell-based machines can somehow be Voltroned together into a multi-Celled organism, but (obviously) I'm hazy on what exactly this means, if it's still in, and why it's a good thing. Now, I suppose if I can install my desktop OS on my PS3, I get network access that way whether my desktop's OSX or XP or Linux (presuming I can install my OS on the PS3; I'm not a Mac person, but I was of the understanding that OSX isn't friendly to non-Mac machines) . I'm getting the feeling that we won't really know anything til the PS3 is finally released. All this recent talk about PC replacement smacks of the usual PR hyperbole, and its timing (following the MS announcement of Live Anywhere) only makes it more suspicious. But I suppose that's just me being cynical.

More news from Kenny Kutagari on the PC replacement front. There's a decent summary at Gamespot: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6152519.html Kinda funny, in one quote he sez, "Steve Jobs could slap an Apple logo on the PS3 and sell them for $2,000 each." Then later he's quoted as saying Sony wants to be like Apple, not MS. Which I guess means they want to be able to charge $2000 for the PS4? The point of particular interest to this conversation: Wonder if this preinstalled general purpose 'Cell OS' is a Linux-based variant? Must admit, I am a bit curious about where this all is heading ....

Thanks for the welcome guys. Tho I don't doubt this is at least in part true, also consider that they painted themselves into a corner in terms of story. They really couldn't just pretend that the last game didn't happen and make the prince's character the same as it was in SOT ... that would be cheap. Actually, that they managed to ressurrect the SOT prince through narrative was one of the things I liked about the story. Gameplay-wise, you must admit the fighting in SOT was pretty crap, so keeping the improved fighting from WW makes sense. One of the things that made WW rubbish, imho, was that it *focused* on fighting; TT tunes back that emphasis, and in many places makes big fights the punishment for blowing a speedkill. The other thing that made WW rubbish was the *attitude* that seeped from its every pore; from the prince's lame grunts and awkward cursing to the generic adolescent-jock-metal soundtrack. The overall tone of TT is different; it's not quite the soft-focus-fantasy that was SOT, but it's not out there in its backturned baseball hat and korn tee shouting 'look how effing hard I am' either. (Slight TT story spoiler follows ....)

Apologies in advance for further derailing this thread, but ... Made me think of this 2002 GDC presentation on the Illusion of Intelligence by a couple of the Bungie guys. Its focus is on Halo, natch; pretty non-technical (but technical enough to be interesting), mostly about the techniques they employed to make their AI *seem* smart.

Funny, I actually thought of that before posting .... I tend to lurk more than anything, as I frequently have nothing worthwhile to add -- as this post no doubt proves.

WW was indeed pretty crap, but I liked Two Thrones a lot. The story there is almost as good as SOT (tho perhaps not as interestingly executed); really binds the games together nicely. It almost (*almost*) justifies the rubbish that was WW, or at least seems to apologize for it .... Gameplay-wise, the speedkill system (which lets you avoid a great deal of the combat with some platform-puzzling and rhythm minigames) is an excellent addition. While TT may be more fighty than SOT, it's not as fighty as WW; it's better balanced, with more of an emphasis on the platforming side. There are a couple of annoying spots, natch, but overall I'd say it concludes the trilogy on a good up-note. You could prolly even skip WW. There are just a couple things you'd need to know, story-wise. I'd post them, but being a total newb here, I can't figure how you guys post spoilers, and I don't want to flub it.