"What kind of web site doesn't give yearly awards? Not ours. Actually, we weren't going to bother with it, but we heard companies pay big bucks to put stuff like "Winner of the 2000 Quarterly for Best Game" on their boxes. Since we're just in it for the money, we're going to skip the opening musical number and just get right to it."

Comments?

The best game of the year in my opinion was The Longest Journey. Just an all-out superior game. Great graphics, great story, good (except for Crow) voice acting, and just about all the puzzles made sense. It wasn't the game I played the longest last year (Diablo 2 or Heroes of M&M 3 probably took the hours-wasted crown), but it was the one that I got the greatest satisfaction from. Honorable mention to BG2, which had bulk, beasties, and beauty to boot.

I was very disappointed in Imperium Galaticum 2. The packaging was great, it came on 3 CDs, and the opening cinematics were jaw-dropping. I've shown them to guests to 'demonstrate' (re: show off) my 19" monitor. The game play? In a word, sucks. It's difficult to control the interface, an appallingly steep learning curve, and it just never seemed fun. This was a game that got me excited to play initially, and just fell flat once I started it up.

Thanks for the Quarterlies. They were funny, passionate, idiosynchratic, and absolutely worth the 20 minutes. Okay, I'm going to buy Sacrifice already.

What happened to Daikatana? Was it that bad that you forgot about it?

Heh -- Daikatana was too easy. Too many games and too few slots.

We went with disappointing, which is a bit of fine hair to split, but it meant that it was hard to pick a game like Daikatana since it didn't really disappoint us.

Glad you guys spotlighted Shadow Watch. I absolutely loved that game. A key point I don't think you guys brought up: I can play through an "entire" game in a long evening! It sounds like a drawback, but I think it's a bonus for games that are built on this model. I get a feeling of satisfaction from a relatively brief sitting.

I do feel like Shadow Watch could have been even better -- more variety of locations being the main gripe. But, overall, it's certainly the most overlooked game of the year in my mind.

Oh, I should add: I think Tom's totally wrong about Crimson Skies. I haven't had more straight-out fun with any other game this year. I should note: I bought the game after the patch came out... specifically because I had heard about the bugs. There are issues with load-times, yes, and a serious problem with framerates on the New York scenes. I wouldn't give it GotY because of these things, but I won't soon forget the game, either. Tom claims shallow gameplay... Was it shallower than Flying Heroes, really?

Yeah, I think the Crimson Skies bashing was unwarranted. If anything it was UNDER-rated, not OVER-rated. I agree with Chris, it was a lot more fun than most other games I played.

Sacrifice, on the other hand.. I was predisposed to hate because of the massive media oversaturation. It was like Tribes 2, but worse. I was relieved the game was released so I could stop hearing about it all the god damn time.

I think you have to do GOTY articles as a larger group (say, about 12 people), because no one person can play every single game. And the opinions of the group can help level the playing field.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I liked Crimson Skies more than Tom also.

As to Sacrifice, I really didn't think it got a huge push. It seemed to only get the PR ball rolling at this past E3 and then it came out 6 months later. That's rare in this industry.

---

Quote:

As to Sacrifice, I really didn't think it got a huge push. It seemed to only get the PR ball rolling at this past E3 and then it came out 6 months later. That's rare in this industry.

---

This list is for games I have purchased and actually played :

Being a sim-head my Game Of The Year would have gone to either EECH or Rowan's Battle Of Britain. Both feature dynamic real-time campaigns, have long hard drive lives, and are seriously good fun.

If I was going to go for an Action Game Of The Year it would have to be No One Lives Forever.

As for Strategy I have no idea what year it was first released but Age Of Empires II + expansion continues to draw me in no matter how many times I play it.

Wargaming would definitely go to either Steel Beasts or Combat Mission.

Role Playing goes to Baldurs Gate II - nothing else comes even remotely close to touching it.

Worst game I have played is - well - I haven't played any bad games during 2000. After my experiences with Braveheart in 99 and Star Wars : Rebellion in 98 I promised myself I would never buy another game without reading reviews first.

Best budget title I have bought in 2000 is - Dungeon Keeper 2. I don't know why I never bought this title when it first came out but it is mind-numbingly addictive and fun. I have been playing it for the last couple of weeks.

I'm a bit surprised that Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord didn't make it.
Would you care to elaborate as to the reasons why?

Sten

And now, a blast from the past. Remember this one?

Tom Chick, you owe me DM 90...

:-)

After reading Mark's write-up on Flying Heroes in the Quarterlies, I decided, "What the heck? A fool and his money are soon parted." Since I happened to be near an EB last night, I ambled in to look for FH.

I didn't think I'd have any success at first--unpopular titles don't last long on the shelves--but there was a single copy of Flying Heroes tucked away on the top shelf. It had at least three layers of price tags on it, the last one being $14.99 (Canadian dollars.) This was already below my take-a-chance-threshold, so I took the box to the register. Imagine my surprise when it came up $4.99 plus tax! I was chortling all the way home. :-)

I haven't tried the game yet, but if I don't like it, I'll be sure to start a new Usenet thread:

Mark Asher, you owe me CAD $5.74...

;-)

"Mark Asher, you owe me CAD $5.74..."

Heh heh -- yeah, I remember Chris Nahr writing that post about Tom's post. :)

All I can say is you have to stick with the game a bit. At first the controls seem a bit rough. You can't turn on dime like you can in a FPS. You gotta remember that you're flying and not running.

Also, get the upgrade that lets you do the immelmen (sp?) as soon as you can. That makes a huge difference.

Tom kicked my sorry ass in a multiplayer game. Maybe we could hook up and team up on him. I need some help. :)

I would rate New Worlds (you may recall my Christmas horror story) right down there with Force Commander in the most disappointing category. (Both games might finish in a tie if you had a "worst abuse of an entertainment license" award.)

New Worlds didn't disappoint me in the sense of failing to meet expectations. I had plenty of warning as to what was coming before I got my review copy. What was disappointing was that, once I started playing it, I realized that 14 Degrees East had the outline of a decent RTS there. They just never bothered adding any content to the outline. As Tom said, it was hard to find a game from last year that showed more disrespect for the gamer. Hard to believe it was published by the same company that published BG2.

Come to think of it, 14 Degrees East had quite a doubleheader in 2000 in the disappointment category, because StarFleet Command 2 was a huge disappointment in terms of failing to meet expectations. Dynaverse was a dynabust, and the whole first-person campaign was one of the most uninspired I've seen in quite a while. The whole thing wasn't much more than an add-on disk for the first game.

Much praise to you for this feature. Well produced, thought-out and easy to read. The Quarterlies feature is one of the best things I've read on your site so far. The only caveat is that the name implies that we can expect four of these per year. Or seven. I'm not too good at square roots.

My Best Game of the Year (am I allowed to write that, or do I have to write "MBGOTY"?) would have to be Interactive Mind Teeazzer. I can't believe you didn't mention that one.

Amanpour

Before I joined the wonderful world of game journalism, I toiled on the malformed beast known as Force Commander, and have to agree with everything you said about it. It was shot down by Designer inexperience, overwhelming programmer arrogance, weak technology and...drum roll...absolutely no level design tool to speak of. We had to hard code each and every one of those damn levels, with game suffering accordingly. It coulda' been a contender, but it up another kilometer or two of poorly conceived blacktop on the road to Phantom Menace mediocrity.

Don't blame Ronin entirely though - Lucas had more people on the project than they ever did.

I don�t have too much to say about everything else, except that I feel your Deus Ex death threat pain, Mr.Chick. I received some similar e-mail back when I wrote a review of Chrono Cross for the Daily Radar that dared to suggest that Chrono Cross was merely a good game, not a great one. There is nothing waking up to an in-box full of �I AM GOING TO KILL YOU� to start the day right.

Oh, and my game of the year, probably Lunar 2: Eternal Blue Complete on my PSX - Working Designs, I love you.

Hey all,

Glad to see the feedback on the Quarterlies! A couple of things:

* The categories we chose might be misleading. "Most Disappointing" shouldn't be confused with "Worst". Rather, it's where there was a considerable and painful split between expectation and reality. It's probably an odd category, since most sites do "Worst of the Year" awards, but I would have a hard time comparing the awfulness of, say, New Worlds to Panty Raider. How do you quantify that? I have a clear handle, however, on how disappointed I was by the time I'd played through the last ending in Deus Ex.

* Chris and wumpus mention I was too hard on Crimson Skies, but I should point out that the award didn't mean it was one of the worst games of 2000. On the contrary, I enjoyed Crimson Skies, but was disappointed that it didn't live up to Microsoft's previous levels of quality. I was also disappointed that it played very much like a shallow arcade shooter. I had much higher hopes for it. And, yes, Chris, the gameplay in Flying Heroes is much deeper than Crimson Skies!

* wumpus, I take partial credit for the Sacrfice hype. I voted it best game of E3 for All Games Networks' E3 awards (it didn't win, though) and it wildy *exceeded* my expectations when it came out. I took every opportunity I could to run through the streets and shout it out to the rooftops that Sacrifice was good.

* Sean, shut up. You're making me want BoB. And quit gloating that you haven't played any bad games in 2000. I remember when I could just play what I wanted.

* Lee, let us know what you think of Flying Heroes. I'm standing by to fork over my share of the CAD$5.74. I would gladly reinstall for MP if you or Mark wants to play. I'm a little rusty since Shoot Club didn't care for Flying Heroes.

* Jason, I agree on SFC2, but I do appreciate that there were some last-minute extenuating circumstances with sidereel.com, or whatever they were called. Interplay also squandered a lot of good will with New Worlds. The curse of Star Trek games is alive and well and living in Irvine, California.

* Amanpour, please stop doing math on Quarter to Three before you make my head hurt. Now I have to think of a new name for our awards. Threelies? Golden Eyeballs? QTs (pronounced "cuties")? Also, on the off chance my girlfriend is reading, please stop bringing up porno DVDs like Interactive Mind Teeazzer.

* Naked Expo, because of your slanderous views on Chrono Cross, I will be by your house to kill you really bad later today.

* I am,

-Tom

Shoot Club AND a girlfriend! How does he do it? ;)

LAUGH!

ALL RISE WHILE THE DISHONORABLE SCHARMERS ENTERS THE ROOM:

Best Game of 2000: Baldur's Gate 2

Best Sim: by far and away Battle of Britain. Some ugly-ass bugs and design decisions, but it is the best dogfighting sim ever created. I'm pretty much awed at its scope, and I'm jaded like a bastard

Best Action Game: No One Lives Forever. Beats the absolute tar out of every FPS since HL (including DE, but not SS2, if you count it as a FPS)

Strategy: Combat Mission (Godlike)

Biggest Disappointment: Terminus. Why do so many companies come SO CLOSE to pure Elite goodness, then fuck it up at the last second?

Best Computer Masturbation: Diablo 2. Click, click, click, kill monster, get stuff, feel endorphin high, do it too much and you go blind

Best "Too Damn Short, Dammit" Game: Majesty. The only RTS I have *truly* enjoyed

Best "You Fucking Piss ME OFF YOU FUCKING COCKSUCKER" Game: Crimson Skies. Fun, but some stupidly, ludicrously difficult moments (especially when the textures load in and make the game unbelievably choppy at some critical juncture)

Best Game that Tom Didn't Like: Deus Ex. Nearly impossible to play after NOLF, but very immersive at the time.

--scharmers

"Best "Too Damn Short, Dammit" Game: Majesty. The only RTS I have *truly* enjoyed"

Nice list.

As to Majesty, Hasbro is sitting on the expansion. It's been done since Gen Con back in August.

Tom, Mark:

I haven't had the chance to look Flying Heroes over yet, but if it's halfway decent, I'll drop a line to arrange a MP session sometime. I'm hoping I get the time to crack the box open tonight.

For my two cents, Most Disappointing game has to go to Reach for the Stars. Given how good Battlecry was, I expected RFTS to redefine the space 4x genre. Unfortunately, it's probably the buggiest and least interesting release from SSG in a long time. They seem committed to fixing it. But out of the box I was really disappointed.

Most Surprising Game was Superbike 2001 for me. Superbike 2000 was a great motorcycle racing sim. The graphics were at the top level and the physics and gameplay were right on. That they managed to put out a sequel in the same year, that is also improved a hundred-fold is incredible. You simply have to see the graphic detail on the "Ultra" setting to believe it. Add in all the updated riders and the three new circuits added to the 2000 schedule, and you have a big winner of an update.

Best Game? Wow... that's tough. It'd come down to Sacrifice, Battlecry and No One Lives Forever for me and I'd probably go with NOLF. It's very accessible for the newbie to the hardcore player. The game oozes style and great design. It has a very competent graphic engine that doesn't bring lesser PCs to their knees. Most importantly, the game puts you into an entertaining fiction and never pulls you out. Just like movies, games should take you somewhere you could never go on your own and NOLF does a great job of putting you there.

--Dave

P.S. -- Throw the Dreamcast into the mix and this list gets even tougher to put together. :)

I think NOLF is overrated. I lost interest in the game about one quarter of the way through it. Hell, the reviewer I gave my copy of NOLF to came back to me and said he didn't want to review it because he had to force himself to play it. And I hadn't said word one to him about my preferences.

I wish Jason Hall the best, and god knows the guy deserves a break, but I simply cannot agree that NOLF is "all that and a bag of chips."

In fact, I'm honestly a bit mystified why people are so effusive in their praise for the game. Good? Absolutely! FPS game of the year? Er, no. But then neither is Deus Ex in my book.

I guess there just aren't many people here who have experienced the amazing spontaneous team dynamic that is Counter-Strike. I've had more fun with that game than any FPS I've ever played, EVER. I'm talking everything from Wolf3D on up.

Oh well. Your loss.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Dave said: Superbike 2001...you know I didn't play this one, but when I saw the screens, I was really impressed with the graphics.

My nomination for a surprising game is also a motorbike game. Take 2 distributed a little title called Motocross Mania, which some think is even better than Motocross Madness.

Boy, I'm with Tom on all this talk about Battle of Britain...is it out in the US?

Tom said: Now I have to think of a new name for our awards. Threelies? Golden Eyeballs? QTs (pronounced "cuties")?

I think the QTs is a little too cute, and the Golden Eyeballs too clean...and too much like you're giving an award to a Bond game.

More to the spirit of the site and its demented founders, how about the 'All Nighters', or the 'Bloodshots'...

"In fact, I'm honestly a bit mystified why people are so effusive in their praise for the game. Good? Absolutely! FPS game of the year? Er, no. But then neither is Deus Ex in my book."

Heck, they don't stop there with their praise. It's the best shooter since Half-Life most of them say.

Right on Tom! The best game of the year was indeed Sacrifice. The next best game was BGII (read: the only two new games I've had time to play this year).I also read that column about the guy who threatened Tom. What a jerk! May he get a computer virus that gives his machine a painfully itchy rash that won't go away. I haven't played that Deux Ex game, but it didn't sell too well at my store (I sell these computer thingies for a living). I simply can't imagine anyone being quite THAT passionate about a game. Anyway, I have been reading your guys' site since day one, damn you guys are clever! I like to consider myself a witty fellow, but I am definitely learning a thing or two from you guys. I especially enjoy Shoot Club. I have the same sort of thing going at my place. You guys are the best gaming site on the net, somebody should pay you guys or something. Anyway, enough praise, I don't want your heads swelling to the point of explosion, that would probably hinder your writing abilities.

Oh, here's one I forgot, "Best Game That Left My Roomate Feeling Screwed" -- Revenant. Apparently, they forgot to put in an ending.

I was trying to come up with some award catagories of my own, but the winner just kept being Sacrifice. It is by far the best multiplayer game I've played thie year. The sides are truly balanced in a way that rivals the fully tweeked version of Starcraft. It is also the first game in a long time where I've lost a mission because I was too in awe of the spectacle to respond. Watching a flock of Pheonixes sweep in with their breath weapons cutting my forces in half after they were softened up by a tornado is just humbling. All I could do is sit back and enjoy the show.

Counterstrike is cool if you're an LPB

I'm a UT CTF multiplayer addict simply because UT is the only FPS out there that doesn't lock you out if you're using dialup and have a ping of 150-250. I can still compete, and sometimes excel in UT CTF with that ping(except in shite situations like last night, when ALL of the peeps who OwN the server showed up -- a minus 50 ping couldn't have saved me :\

And anybody who doesn't like NOLF is pretty much jaded with the single-player portion of shooters -- that's the only conjecture I can come up with. No better SP FPS was released this year.

BoB is supposed to be coming out very soon now in the U.S. -- do yourself a favor and order it from Compuexpert and get it in two days. Caveat: nobody but hardcore simmers need apply. Even if you dumb the sim down to its lowest difficult/realism settings, it will still put a beating on newbie/casual simmers (for example: you still have to trim the aircraft even on the lowest flight model settings, and if you're out of trim, the plane is hard as hell to control).

MORE LIST STUFF:

Best Amateur Game Creation Kits: A tie between Dark Basic (imagine old-school, non-event driven BASIC combined with Direct3D commands...COOL!) and Runesword (essentially a Ultramega-OK version of the old Adventure Construction Set. It's also FREE!)

Best Space Sim: X-Tension. Turns the promising but "Elite on Valium" X: Beyond the Frontier (now at your local EB for $9 or so) gameplay into something pretty special. Currently only available in the US online. Doesn't have the maniac detail Braben put into FFE, but also doesn't crash if you call it a harsh word, either.

Best Online Gaming Column: Flight-Sim Therapy at Some Other Site [tm] ;)

2nd Biggest Disappointment: Quake: Team Arena. $29 for some user-mod quality modes, losing maps, and two new models. wOOT!

--scharmers

Death threats over bad reviews? If they like the game that much why do they even read reviews? Isn't that a bit like masturbation?

---

Quote:

Counterstrike is cool if you're an LPB

---

---

Quote:

And anybody who doesn't like NOLF is pretty much jaded with the single-player portion of shooters -- that's the only conjecture I can come up with. No better SP FPS was released this year.

---

I was addicted to NOLF to the very end. It just pulls you in with that "one more play" to see what happens next.

There is nothing else like CounterStrike for online play. As long as you don't get lumped with cheaters on a particular server it's a great game.

I have played the demo of Sacrifice and it is excellent. I have simply run out of money and have been unable to purchase the full product. I think I spent all my money on BOB and NOLF. :-)

"Dunno, but NOLF didn't do it for me and for several other people I know."

That's too bad, I wonder what the tipping point is. It's the only FPS I've ever played that engaged me enough to play all the way through to the end. If you only played a quarter of the way through, you missed the best missions...

I gotta say that Tom is spot-on in his Deus Ex opinion. The non-linearity of the game is great, but the utterly dull and uninspired story, terrible writing, and pathetic voice acting all made me quit shortly after I got to Hong Kong.

Most annoying, though, was the high school "coolness" that permeated the thing: gruff, grim men in leather trenchcoats, soulless music, guns guns guns. From the unimaginative architecture to the stilted, Z-grade dialogue, it felt like it was created by a bunch of guys who never get out and take all of their creative inspiration from a steady diet of bad science fiction and late night cable. But hey, maybe that's their target audience.

(No offense to anyone who liked the game)

"Death threats over bad reviews? If they like the game that much why do they even read reviews? Isn't that a bit like masturbation?"

I dunno, but Tom had them going on Usenet, first with his Falcon 4.0 review, and then with his Deus Ex.

Did I miss something? Majesty struck me as so terrible, I deleted it off of my hard drive in less than 45 minutes, never to return. Ugly interface, terrible AI and substandard graphics (even for a genre where graphics are not the emphasis). I can understand the disappointment with Deus Ex, even if I disagree.

What I can't understand is the "you just need to play the game for a few hours to find out that it really _is_ good" philosophy. I mean, if I have to invest 4+ hours to get to the GOOD part of the game (or worse, train myself to ignore it's flaws, like the 'Flying Heroes' entry implies) then it's not really that good of a game, is it? The game may very well improve, but I shouldn't have to perform some sort of 'rite-of-passage' to get there. That implies bad design choices to me. YMMV.

Sacrifice I'm trying right now, and we'll see. It and Giants are both pretty, but seem like they're going to get dull and repetitve over time. I know the person who lent me Giants says that it really petered out in the third act, and felt like he was going through the motions when he finished it.

"I mean, if I have to invest 4+ hours to get to the GOOD part of the game (or worse, train myself to ignore it's flaws, like the 'Flying Heroes' entry implies) then it's not really that good of a game, is it? The game may very well improve, but I shouldn't have to perform some sort of 'rite-of-passage' to get there. That implies bad design choices to me. YMMV."

Well, the deal with Flying Heroes is that many expected it to play like a shooter, and it really plays like a hybrid shooter/flight sim. You have to make that leap of understanding and get that the reason why it seems a bit sluggish when you turn is because the game is enforcing a flight model. Once you get used to that, the game's quite enjoyable.

Some games you just have to spend some time with. I doubt anyone playing Civ 2 for the first time could really know what was going on for the first hour or two. A flight sim like Falcon 4.0 has a steep learning curve too.

What about Majesty's AI bothered you? That the tax collectors wouldn't try to avoid the monsters by seeking refuge? I think that was just part of the game design. It forces you to hire enough guards and heroes to ensure that some will be hanging around.

My only real fault with Majesty is that the game design is such that there's not a huge variety in the missions.

"Tom had them going on Usenet, first with his Falcon 4.0 review, and then with his Deus Ex."

Tom is the man who single-handedly killed the flight sim genre with his mighty pen. The bastard! ;)

God those threads were incredible.

I have to agree with the negative views of Majesty. The gameplay was smooth and easy, but I got bored pretty quickly; it just felt way too limited and simplistic. To make sure I wasn't missing anything, I even played through the whole campaign over the course of a few days before returning it to the store for a full refund... which says something about its lack of longevity, I think.

Has anyone played that old game Stronghold? I think it was from SSI. Same basic concept as Majesty, with a very awkward interface and outdated graphics, but I actually found it more engaging. And I didn't play it until after I had played Majesty, so it wasn't some nostalgic bias.

Part of it may be that I hate the "plop down" construction of RTS, preferring a building approach that emphasizes planning and structure interrelationships over the kind of blanket outward expansion that happens in Majesty. When you gain the means to build a new structure, you pretty much just look for a spot for the silhouette to turn green and then plop it down.

I would love to play a good "Fantasy Kingdom Simulator," but I'd want it to be more along the lines of what Tropico promises, not just an RTS where you try to influence your units. If it's a straight combat game, which Majesty is, I'd prefer to control my units directly. If cultural, political, and economic factors all come into play, however, using "influence" over direct command has a greater appeal to me.

"God those threads were incredible."

Tim: I can't remember if I sat those ones out or not there, elh4jj. I remember tweaking Tom big
time over the Deus Ex review, though :) As for the "High School Coolness" factor; gee, I wasn't even in High School when Blade Runner -- the inspiration for nearly EVERY near-future scifi game -- came out. (I was in Junior High in 1982.) DE wasn't great literature, but it *was* a good game with a team that tried to do something a little different. Most game teams don't even bother doing that any more.

Wumpus: Instakill hitscan weapons ALWAYS favor LPBs. That's why you don't see too many HPBs in UT Instagib or Q3 Railgun arena matches. I'd have to say that the major of weapons in CS *are* powerful hitscan weapons. Tactics being whatever they are, the guy who hits the fire button first in a hitscan duel and gets it registered gets the kills. Yes, I've played CS, and usually quit quickly -- I must not play on your "why can't we be friends" server. Cheaters, campers, exploiters. wooT.

Majesty: I loved this game, but on reflection, I liked it more for the potential I saw than what I actually played. A lot of the dumb A.I. I believe *was* for design reasons, but I would have LOVED to have seen a much better grouping algorithm for the heroes (maybe even cautious heroes hanging out at an inn until a healer or wizard wants to join the party!) The actual building phase/tactics weren't as brain-dead as one would think -- the above comments about the "plop down" construction are true at the beginning missions of the game, but not in the brutal final missions where placement is crucial -- one wizard's tower in the right place can save the game. I thing Tropico *will* rule, however.

Based upon the Quarterlies, I picked up, for $5, the last copy of Flying Heroes at my local Babbages. I haven't played it very much yet, but it seems like a fabulous game so far. It is a much more fun game than Quake 3, for example. It is a real shame that few gamers have tried Flying Heroes. Crimson Skies started out with a few rough edges, but it is the only other recent game that I can think of that, like Flying Heroes, was simply fun at the most basic level. Thanks for highlighting Flying Heroes! I would have missed this excellent game otherwise.

Glad you've liked it so far, Terry. For $5 you're getting a lot of gameplay there.

---

Quote:

Wumpus: Instakill hitscan weapons ALWAYS favor LPBs. That's why you don't see too many HPBs in UT Instagib or Q3 Railgun arena matches. I'd have to say that the major of weapons in CS *are* powerful hitscan weapons. Tactics being whatever they are, the guy who hits the fire button first in a hitscan duel and gets it registered gets the kills. Yes, I've played CS, and usually quit quickly -- I must not play on your "why can't we be friends" server. Cheaters, campers, exploiters. wooT.

---

---

Quote:

Tim: I can't remember if I sat those ones out or not there, elh4jj. I remember tweaking Tom big
time over the Deus Ex review, though :) As for the "High School Coolness" factor; gee, I wasn't even in High School when Blade Runner -- the inspiration for nearly EVERY near-future scifi game -- came out. (I was in Junior High in 1982.) DE wasn't great literature, but it *was* a good game with a team that tried to do something a little different. Most game teams don't even bother doing that any more.

---

---

Quote:

Tim: I can't remember if I sat those ones out or not

---

---

Quote:

Some stuff worked, some stuff didn't. This "shotgun" approach to game design should not be encouraged. Developers need to put in what works, and cut out what they can't get to work.

---

The thing that bugged me about CNET not running Tom's Deus Ex review is that they blew a perfect opportunity for a fascinating couple of articles. They should have told Tom that they disagreed with his review but would run it, but that they would also run a rebuttal and allow Tom to respond to the rebuttal. I think that would have made great reading.

---

Quote:

The thing that bugged me about CNET not running Tom's Deus Ex review is that they blew a perfect opportunity for a fascinating couple of articles.

---

"...and once again in disclosure, I do contribute to CGM/CGO and use it as an example because I'm most familiar with it. I'm sure similar things could be said about CGW and PCGamer if the right people were here. Web editors seem to have different ideas than print. Apache's pulling of damning words about Verant at Gamefan anyone...?"

I'm not familar with that one. What happened?

One of the writers at Gamefan submitted an article that took Verant to task for various things about Everquest. It wasn't particularly well-written, but most of the criticism was more than valid. It ran on the site but was pulled later because Verant told Gamefan to take it down (Apache who was in charge of PC games at the time). Apache DID JUST THAT with a feeble explanation afterward that Verant should have a chance to reply. Of course they never did.

It's just one instance I can remember of them pulling something because of pressure from a publisher. The article was put back in much more watered down form later as I recall. Of course this sort of thing seems more common at Internet sites. I can't remember the last retraction of a game review or editorial I've ever read in print. Even the infamous Brett Todd review of Vampire The Masquerade: Redemption went unapologized for in CGW if I recall correctly.

--Dave

"I can't remember the last retraction of a game review or editorial I've ever read in print. Even the infamous Brett Todd review of Vampire The Masquerade: Redemption went unapologized for in CGW if I recall correctly."

They did run a small article in Read.me later that said the patched version of Vampire was quite a bit better.

Activision sure was upset about that review, though.

The only issue I have with sites posting "controversial" reviews is that, well, if nearly everyone at CNet, for example, liked Deus Ex but they post Tom's review... well, it seems unrepresentative of the site, regardless of the validity of its points, many of which are arguable. I think the real enemy here may not be sites looking for cookie-cutter content to appease potential advertisers, but the general format of having ONE review per site. Tom's review is one of a few I've seen that have ilicited "Counter-point" reviews on the same site, but that's a pattern that generally isn't used. It's the exception.

The problem is that a site never really has one view, unless the site is really just one person.

I think CNET was within their rights to not run his review, especially if they yanked it because they didn't agree with it. All we really ask is that a site or magazine not yank a review because they're worried about offending a publisher. I could also see a site yanking a 4.5 star review for Daikatana because they thought it was too high.

I just think CNET missed an opportunity for an interesting back and forth about a game that was eliciting high feelings.

"Counterstrike is cool if you're an LPB "

I play on a 28.8 modem regularly, and I don't do half bad. Sure it's still a disadvantage, but the HL netcode along with slow moving and slowly accelerating players masks the latency big time.
I've tried playing UT over the same modem and its completely unacceptable. In fact, I think Quakeworld and CS are the only two FPS games that run halfway decent over a modem.

"because it doesn't matter how fast you are when someone has the drop on you, and single shots kill. "

It can take quite a few shots from a 9mm to kill. The TMP takes almost an entire clip in a kevlar vest. The AWP is the only gauranteed one shot kill weapon. Second is the Scout and SG1 which will kill with a single headshot. The rifles can kill with a single headshot only if the other player has no helmet, which is rare. The shotguns can take out people with a single headshot at close range, sometimes even a single body shot if it's point blank.

CS is now so newbie friendly that I've been losing interest. The guns are so inaccurate and random now... I wish I could go back to 5.2, but with the HL 1.1.0.0 netcode of course. :) The rampant cheating is also a big problem. I usually choose servers which have good admins. Check out www.mourningafter.com.

"If I am aiming at you, and your head is centered between my crosshairs when I press fire, you die. "

Well, not quite. You fire on your computer instantly when you pull the trigger, then the server backtracks in time and checks to see if the person truly was in your crosshairs. If he was, it retroactively registers the hit. It is not determined client side (imagine the hacks, or imagine just pulling your network or phone jack out, shooting a person in the head, plug it back in). Sometimes this makes it seem like you get shot after you run around a corner.

If two people with AWP's (instakill one shot weapon) are looking at each other and pull the trigger at the same time (in real time), the LPB's packet gets to the server first, thus the HPB dies. So it is still best to be an LPB, but it's just not nearly as big of an advantage as in Q3. In Q3 or UT your weapon does not fire when you pull the trigger, it fires when the server tells you it fired, which is [your ping] milliseconds later. In HL 1.1.0.0 or higher you don't have to lead your enemy. Just point and shoot.

I just played some Q3 instagib on a 60 ping, then on a 4 ping at a small lan party last weekend (on the lan, then over the internet on a cable). I could barely hit for 25% on the 60 ping, but on the null ping I can hit about 75%.

GOTY: Deus Ex. Why? I had more fun playing that game than any other game in ... Damn. Maybe since River City Ransom, or any number of Final Fastasy games. Yeah, the AI was blind deaf and dumb, but it WORKED to make the game fun. If the AI was 100% realistic the game would be completely impossible. The story line was really cool to me. I eat up that kind of X-Files Sci-Fi stuff. Right out of a Dean Koontz book. Rock.
Of note, I bought Deus Ex the day it came out because I loved the demo so much.

Hehehe. I think I'm one of the people Wumpus is referencing about NOLF. I think it's a neat game, but I just don't get some of it. Sneaking seems to be a complete crock. The first mission I tried tossing a coin to distract a gaurd. Despite being very careful and trying multiple time (save, load, load, load) I never could get it. So next time I just capped him in the head and played the rest of the game Texan rampage style. I dunno. Just brought it down to SOF level for me. I'd give the story high points, but the ending BLEW. I felt so disgusted that I even bothered paying attention to the story after it was thrown away in the ending. For those who haven't finished it yet, just skip the cinematics because they're pointless. You'll enjoy the ending more that way. :P

What the hell happened to Diablo 2?
The multiplayer may have been a bit disappointing
but it was still the best selling game of 2000.
Hmmm

I'd put Diablo 2 in my top five games for the year. It's a bit of a weird title due to the sky-high expectations. There's this vague sense of disappointment about it, even though it's obviously one of the year's best games.

I think Diablo 2 is great! it exceeded my expectation (though i didnt follow it as much as others have). Plus the complaints about the game (like the respawn of monsters after save/quit) didn't make it any less enjoyable for me. theres so much more depth to Diablo 2 then with diablo. . . i still play diablo 2 once in awhile with friends online (tcpip outside b-net). but i do think Diablo 2 is a little easier than Diablo (at least in the harder modes) . . .

anyway, the expansion should be pretty cool!

etc

In my personal list, Diablo 2 rates right up there with Counter-Strike for GOTY (read: not at all). While they did an admirable job expanding on the idea of classes and abilities, the game still desolved into "click click click, right click, pick up item, return to town to sell" lather, rinse, repeat. There is more variability in a 10 minute game of pinball than there was in my entire 2 weeks of playing Diablo 2. The creatue respawn was a programming copout. Since the zones are so much bigger than Diablo 1, they couldn't figure out how to save the position of every single creature in the current Act, so they just said "screw it" and had them respawn.

One thing though; Diablo 2 has the best FMV cut scenes I have ever seen in a game. My jaw hit the floor when I first saw them.

"One thing though; Diablo 2 has the best FMV cut scenes I have ever seen in a game. My jaw hit the floor when I first saw them."

Yeah, they're really nice. It takes them forever to do them at Blizzard, and they have a whole team who works just on them. It's easy to see why the FF movie is going to be at least $140M instead of the budgeted $70M.

"they couldn't figure out how to save the position of every single creature in the current Act, so they just said "screw it" and had them respawn. "

i think they could have programmed that in, but it might have been the fact that save games could have been huge chunk sized files. .. possibly bigger than the Deus Ex saves! just a thought. . .

the main reason i didn't complain about it was becuase i was ready to always get more xp fighting. and with respawns = more xp for me!

but i can agree that it can be seen as a copout. . .

etc

No Medal of Honor Underground? This PlayStation game had the best AI I've ever seen.

Peter

"No Medal of Honor Underground? This PlayStation game had the best AI I've ever seen."

I don't have a PS2 and I don't think Tom does either.

"One thing though; Diablo 2 has the best FMV cut scenes I have ever seen in a game. My jaw hit the floor when I first saw them."

Who cares? FMV is just a prelude to something a hell of a lot more interesing. Talking about great FMV is like talking about great masturbation. It just makes me feel dirty and bad.

At least use the in-game engine and make it somewhat interactive-- this isn't a movie. Thank god for the ESC key.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"At least use the in-game engine and make it somewhat interactive-- this isn't a movie. Thank god for the ESC key."

What? The cutscenes in Diablo 2 were a real treat and added to the enjoyment of experiencing the game. You can argue that the money Blizzard spent producing them could have been spent on some other aspect of the game, but they were great to see. After I finished the game I went back and watched them several times again.

"What? The cutscenes in Diablo 2 were a real treat and added to the enjoyment of experiencing the game. You can argue that the money Blizzard spent producing them could have been spent on some other aspect of the game, but they were great to see. After I finished the game I went back and watched them several times again. "

Would you like to place a bid on my Diablo II cutscene movie DVD? I'm not kidding.

If I want to watch a movie, I'll go to the movies, thank you very much. Games are about interaction. And yes, that money should have been spent on gameplay or the engine-- which is why I don't object to cutscenes that play out within the game engine.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

:I don't have a PS2 and I don't think Tom does
:either.

Medal of Honor Underground is for tbe PS1--which makes it all the more remarkable. :-D

PO

"Medal of Honor Underground is for tbe PS1--which makes it all the more remarkable. :-D"

Regardless, this is a PC game site, so it's unrealistic to expect the principals to know about a PSX game.

Counter-strike, on the other hand... ;)

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

:Regardless, this is a PC game site, so it's
:unrealistic to expect the principals to know
:about a PSX game.

Doh. You're right. I saw just Virta Tennis for Dreamcast on the list, and just figured they covered both.

Tom writes about consoles for other sites, though I don't think he does very much with that anymore. I've wrote one console review for Gamecenter and a Prima guide for Evolution. I'm thinking about trying to do more with console stuff, simply as a way of getting more work. Screenshots are a pain, and frankly many of the games hold little interest for me.

Mark:

:...and frankly many of the games hold little
:interest for me.

I know where you're come from. I was away from consoles for some years--I was doing a console column for Entertainment Entertainment when it started re-inventing itself back into PC Games--but came back to them once I started the column and was surprised and pleased to find there are some really remarkable games out there. (In addition to Underground, I'd recommend Alien Resurrection--a genuinely scary experience--and Driver 2. I do think it lacks some of the freedom of its predecessor, but it's got this great "feel" to it so that, though I've been stuck on the same mission for weeks, I can't put it down.)

the dreamcast has made me somewhat of a console convert (though alot of the games for the DC aren't your average console games, some even play like pc games). i think you'd be missing out on a lot of good console games. . . my faves from the DC are PSO and Skies of Arcadia most recently. . . Shenmue and Virtua Tennis are good as well. . . compared to the PSX i already have 3x more games for my DC already . .

though im pretty much a pc gamer more still. . .just been playing more console with little releases past month or so.