I'm sure this'll make it's way to the front page sooner or later, but:

It was revealed in a financial statement from Interplay today that Microsoft has loaned them $5 million to make The Matrix game. It'll be paid back to them by June 2003 in the form of a $20 royalty on each copy sold (until the $5 mil is sold back, when the royalty reverts to the standard $5-7 per sale).

But Microsoft isn't giving them a big interest-free loan just to be nice...duh. Interplay can't release the game or any other Matrix games for any other platform for 6 months following the Xbox release. What's more, they're not allowed to put internet play in any other version.

The statement also mentioned that Interplay is gonna spend $500,000 on internet features for the game, and that the Xbox version will have more other stuff than other versions. More motion capture, more music from the movie score, more voice from the actual actors, more characters, etc.

My $.02 : I'm sure Microsoft wasn't the only one willing to pay for an exclusive on this movie. Some will say "oh, Microsoft can't get developer support, so they're buying it." I say, "right ON man!" Isn't this what you WANT your console manufacturer to do, as a consumer? You don't want them to use their financial muscle just to lose money on each console sold, you want exclusives, right? Why shouldn't the console manufacturer rack up support with their wallet? It's not like it's costing the consumer more that way...and it might keep some of our favorite publishers/developers out of financial straits.

Imagine if Looking Glass had a hot title in the works which Microsoft (or Sony, or whoever) paid $2 million to make exclusive for six months. Maybe they wouldn't have folded. Not to draw parallels between Shiny and LG--no way no how--just saying I don't think buying exclusives for your console is a Bad Thing.

Interesting. Seems like a good deal for Interplay and Microsoft. It doesn't matter to me as long as the game comes out on the PC eventually. Of course if it's geared to be a console game -- a third person game -- I'll be less inclined to like it anyway.

Pretty nice deal for Microsoft. They lose the interest they might have made from the $5 mil, but get a nice exclusive. I wonder who approached whom?

>Of course if it's geared to be a console game -- a third person game -- I'll be less inclined to like it anyway.

I don't necessarily see the relationship between first/third person and PC/console, except that console developers haven't yet learned how to really make a first-person game shine with a gamepad, by and large (though I'm convinced it can be done, it just takes some rethinking). I think there have been, and will be, plenty of good third-person games for the PC that are made to be played on the PC. There are plenty of examples--Nocturne, Drakan, Alice, Max Payne, FAKK2, Ultima 9...lots of 3rd person games concieved and intended to be PC games from the get-go.

Though the overall point is well taken--the game might be designed primarily to be played 6' in front of your TV with a gamepad. And if you're not a console gamer (I am), I can see how you'd shrug it off anyway.

And though there's no mention of it, I would guess that the visual style of The Matrix would come off much better in a third-person over-the-shoulder type action game ala Max Payne/Alice/FAKK2/MGS. I would also guess that it'll eventually show up on every platform capable of playing it--handhelds, PCs, cell phones, you name it.

You know, Matrix 2 stands a good chance of beating Titanic's box office records. It was a movie that was not only extremely good and well-recieved by sci-fi fans, but even regular Joe people saw it and loved it (some of them through rentals). It crossed cultures, races, and ages really amazingly well. Some of my mother's teacher friends have seen it and love it (think 50-somethings). All those folks who eventually saw it on video/DVD could show up for the sequel in theaters.

"plenty of good third-person games for the PC that are made to be played on the PC. There are plenty of examples--Nocturne, Drakan, Alice, Max Payne, FAKK2, Ultima 9..."

Whew!
Ok, which of those was "good" exactly?
Nocturne - blah
Drakan - Urg
Alice - Pretty
Max Payne - Vaporware for now
FAKK2 - Blah
Ultima 9 - ULTIMA 9????

My list of good 3rd person games would be Tomb Raider, Oni, Rayman 2... now I'm stumped and yes, none of those are PC only.

Oh wait! Die by the Sword! That was a good 3rd person PC only game.

;-)
-Andrew

Heretic 2 is still my favorite 3rd person action game, though it plays more like a 1st person game.

I actually liked Ultima IX (never finished it) just that the bugs got in the way ... ALOT.

Ill have to pick up DBTS at some bargain bin somewhere.

etc

That Bruce Lee fighting game (yes, they have secured the license) looks brilliant as well. If you're going to have a fighting game, you can't do much better than The Dragon himself.

http://xbox.ign.com/news/33972.html

Well, damn, after researching it a bit further, the fighting game (Kakuto X) won't be Bruce Lee. What's up with that? Some other game will be. Seems like a slam dunk to me, but who knows.

Also, that chariot race game, Circus Maximus, looks intriguing. Great concept! I'd love to play that sequence from Gladiator, or maybe Spartacus. Drool.

http://www.dailyradar.com/previews/game_preview_1449.html

I'd even be interested in this goofy Outlaws Golf title. If you're going to do a goofy golf game, I'd say strippers beats superdeformed japanese golfers any old day. ;) Seriously, check out the screenshots.

http://www.dailyradar.com/previews/game_preview_1474.html

XBox is looking better and better every day. I'm really getting excited now!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Damn, I forgot to add this.

Another cool feature of XBox-- being able to rip your own music CDs to the built-in hard drive, and have your tracks play back during the gameplay.

Both Tony Hawk 2X and Amped will have this ability, according to what I've read. Fairly innovative, and not something you can do with other consoles because they lack the storage space. I suppose if the entire game fits in memory you could eject the game CD and put in an audio CD, but I doubt this would be possible with 16mb or 32mb respectively.. most games spool off the game CD continuously.

I hope a lot more info emerges at E3, but it's looking damn good as of right now, if you add in the Matrix + Bruce Lee + some of the other innovative titles on the burners.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Days like this make me want to buy a PS2 and a mac and tell Microsoft to go swim..

I read the avault article. The part about "must come out within 3 months of the Matrix sequel" smells bad. Kids, can you say "forced premature release" - I knew you could. Me thinks about 29 games this year would've been good, simply with 3 months more polish and bug fixing (contrary to popular belief, a lot of console games come out with bugs and clipping errors - I've suffered through several).

Can you say, "nobody, not even G.O.D., learned anything from the miserable Blair Witch games?" - I knew you could, again.

Would you be my,
could you be my,
X-box neighbors?

Whoa there, Bub. I never said a 3rd person game on the PC made it automatically GOOD. Not any more than making it first-person makes it good, or making it a mouse-driven real-time strategy game makes it good.

I'm just saying that I don't agree with Mark's statement that it would be designed for a console if it were third person, because there have been plenty of PC games that were designed for the PC that were 3rd person.

I do think that, ultimately, Matrix is being designed for consoles because with three or four console versions and one PC version, the console versions are going to make up the lion's share of the sales, easily.

I don't know about the forced-release thing. They've been working on the game for like five or six months now (since a month or two before they announced the deal, I hear) and they have until three months after the movie's release next summer. So it's not like they're dealing with a one-year development time (Harry Potter) or learning that, all of a sudden, they've got just 6 months left to finish the game where they thought they had a year.

Remember, closed-system development goes more quickly, and with an extra $5 mil they're probably going to get the assets made pretty quickly.

Yeah, it's a forced release date, but they've got time to make the game and not have it be a rush-job.

Jason:

"Whoa there, Bub. I never said a 3rd person game on the PC made it automatically GOOD. Not any more than making it first-person makes it good, or making it a mouse-driven real-time strategy game makes it good."

Yes you did. ;)

"plenty of good third-person games for the PC that are made to be played on the PC. There are plenty of examples--Nocturne, Drakan, Alice, Max Payne, FAKK2, Ultima 9..."

But I knew what you meant and was mainly just messing with you. It is ironic both of us missed the best 3rd Person PC game though (MTKafka caught it)

Heretic 2.

-Andrew

Oh yeah, I did have that "good" in there. What I meant was "big" or "AAA" games. Not good like, they were fun. But like, normal big-production high-interest games.

And Drakan was pretty good. So was FAKK2, really, though it really needed the other 1/3 of the game they had planned. Neither were stellar or "great" games, but good reasonable solid titles. Drakan moreso than FAKK2.

"Listen to what I MEAN..."

Sure, there are third-person PC games, but in general they are not as satisfying on the PC as they are on the consoles, and vice versa for first-person games.

Why would anyone want to play a shooter from a third-person perspective? Aiming is screwy and why do you continually want to see the back of your avatar? The only advantage is that you see more of the level at once due to the different perspective.

I have just been dissatisfied with nearly all third-person games on the PC. Even when they're well done, I keep think it they would be more fun if played from a first-person perspective.

>I have just been dissatisfied with nearly all third-person games on the PC. Even when they're well done, I keep think it they would be more fun if played from a first-person perspective.

Fair enough, but that's a matter of opinion. I've had a few problems with most of the 3rd person games on the PC, but not because of the perspective, and I personally don't feel Drakan, Rune, or FAKK2 would have been better as 1st person games. With all Max Payne's attention to rolling, diving, etc., it probably wouldn't work as well 1st person either.

But I think it's a bit of a leap of logic to say "I haven't liked the 3rd person PC games, so if the Matrix is 3rd person it's being designed for consoles." When there have been PC-only 3rd person games, good or not, obviously being 3rd person doesn't NECESSITATE a design intended for consoles. Just as the fact that there are console-only first-person games means that being first-person doesn't mean you're designing for the PC. I'm sure the Goldeneye developers weren't designing it "for the PC."

I see what you're saying - first person is better on PC and third person is better on consoles. And maybe if Matrix is third-person it will be "better" on consoles, as a matter of taste. But that doesn't mean the designers aren't making the game "for consoles" any more than it means Remedy has been making Max Payne "for consoles" for the last four years or Human Head made Rune "for consoles."

Now, five million smackers from Microsoft, that probably DOES mean they're making the game "for consoles." =)

I find it a bit strange that they'd pigeonhole a movie based property on one console. Kinda stupid to do that given the broad sales base they could be reaching with ports across the board right at initial release. I really wonder how the studio and the film rights figured into this. Did they have any say in the 5 million smackers?

If they didn't, there might be some pissed off studio execs that are seeing a large possible payoff delayed an extra six months through royalties...

--Dave

That's a good point.

Although I really don't think those other Matrix games will sell any worse for being delayed.

After all, Matrix 3 is supposed to come out the following summer. Assuming that the Matrix game for Xbox comes out as late as possible--3 months after next summer's movie and that's a pretty safe bet in game development these days--then they've got 6 months before releasing for other platforms.

If they release those as soon as possible, the other Matrix games will only be a month or two old at the time when Matrix 3 movie marketing kicks up.

At the end of the day they'll probably sell just as much (or more, because it's likely that doing just one console would make the game better, and the delay will let them work on the other ports more and thus make IT better, relative to doing them all at once). But the movie studio might not be looking that long-term.

Or, maybe they couldn't care less. Maybe all they care about is the up-front money Interplay payed for the license and that they don't do anything to hurt the value of the Matrix brand.

>>I have just been dissatisfied with nearly all third-person games on the PC. Even when they're well done, I keep think it they would be more fun if played from a first-person perspective.

There's no way Oni would have worked as a first-person game, and I think it's weapon combat was pretty satisfying. Die by the Sword also wouldn't work in first-person mode.

Most close quarter combat games need to be third-person because because of the lack of peripheral vision. You'd just lose track of your opponent all the time. And if you have one with acrobatic moves (like the rolls and flips in Oni), those would just disorient the player in first-person mode.

---

Quote:

Why would anyone want to play a shooter from a third-person perspective? Aiming is screwy and why do you continually want to see the back of your avatar? The only advantage is that you see more of the level at once due to the different perspective.

---

RPGs seem to work better in third person, too. A few I've played - U9 is the only one to spring to mind, but I'm pretty sure there have been some others - let you toggle in/out of 1st person, if only for a little bit, and I just can't imagine playing the whole game like that. And any game like Baldur's Gate where you're controlling NPCs, not just your character, need to be in 3rd person.

"Most close quarter combat games need to be third-person because because of the lack of peripheral vision."

I agree with this. Games that are primarily melee combat probably are better as third-person games. It's the ones where you have guns that irritate me. I don't like the auto-aiming, but manual aiming is really tough.

X-COM Enforcer isn't too bad because the action's so frantic and gun and ammo powerups so plentiful that you don't really aim -- just run and blast. Still, playing that game makes me think it would be more fun as a FPS with a little less action and a little more creeping around.

---

Quote:

Still, playing that game makes me think it would be more fun as a FPS with a little less action and a little more creeping around.

---

Murph said:

---

Quote:

RPGs seem to work better in third person, too. A few I've played - U9 is the only one to spring to mind, but I'm pretty sure there have been some others - let you toggle in/out of 1st person, if only for a little bit, and I just can't imagine playing the whole game like that. And any game like Baldur's Gate where you're controlling NPCs, not just your character, need to be in 3rd person.

---

You're right, I suppose. I think Origin always called that isometric 3rd person, or maybe it was isometric 3/4 over-head. You're right. It is different.

"But then it would be a completely different game and basically be like every other first person shooter on the market. Who wants that?!"

Well, since it's the X-COM setting, I do. If it wasn't X-COM, I wouldn't care.

"There's no way Oni would have worked as a first-person game, and I think it's weapon combat was pretty satisfying."

You know, I almost completely forgot that ONI was in the third person. That's the way it should be. Oni is rather unique in that it _also_ does hitscan weapons (guns) and does them quite well. I vote for ONI as my favorite third person game (purely based on mechanics), with Tomb Raider and Rune as runners up.

I felt Rune got a raw deal from a lot of reviewers. For example, I disagree with the Rune review at cdmag. Far from being monotonous, I found the sheer carnage was its own reward. Plus, guns are easy. I don't think people appreciate how hard it is to do a melee combat game, which brings me to..

"Die by the Sword also wouldn't work in first-person mode."

DBTS didn't work, period. Say what you will about Rune, but thank your lucky stars it didn't turn into this. I appreciate what they were trying to do, but that's like trying to fold a statistics-based wargame into the Quake engine. Or a modern update of Bilestoad on the Apple // if you remember that.

I had my second Romero run-in based on The Bilestoad. Kind of an odd story. For some reason in 1997 I had been researching old Apple // games on the 'net and I found the homepage of the Bilestoad author (one of my favorite old Apple games). Romero posted somewhere that he was looking for the guy, I think in the Apple newsgroups which I just happened to be looking at back then. So I fired off an e-mail, and John replied with profuse thanks. I think he was looking for the guy to include him in the e-book "Halcyon Days".

http://www.classicgaming.com/features/hdays/

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I agree about Oni, I loved Oni in spite of it's many flaws. In fact, the game is so much more than it's flaws.

But I vehemently disagree with you about Die by the Sword. Especially using the mouse. It requires timing, dexterity (hmmm, much like casting spells with gestures ;>) and instinct. I thoroughly loved it and I say that as a former stage combat fighter/trainer (trained under Christopher Villa)...

There were flaws. There was no deflection against solid objects for example, but the system was/is the pinnacle of physics based combat.
Other flaws were the length of the game (the Arena helped) and, of course, the sad fact that it just didn't work as an online game.

Wumpus, DBTS was awesome.
Rune... sigh,
Rune was just plain dull, uninspired and boring throughout.

-Andrew

"There were flaws. There was no deflection against solid objects for example, but the system was/is the pinnacle of physics based combat."

I gave it a fair shot, and I came away frustrated. It ends up being a frustrating sword simulator rather than an actual game. There has to be a better way! I don't know exactly what that way is, but the simplicity of Rune's attack methods (plus weapon throwing and shield blocking) were infinitely preferable to the unwieldy complexity of VSIM.

Unlike B&W (since you brought it up), the VSIM control scheme was essential to gameplay-- not a "hey look how clever we can be" device that turns into a giant pain in the ass, like the gestures were in B&W. So I don't have a problem with it from a developer vanity perspective. It was a noble effort.

Like I said, melee combat is incredibly difficult to do well. Either you bail and end up with something not unlike Williams' Joust by default, or else you enter the realm of the "sword sim" which is about as much fun as a root canal.

Oni did a fabulous job of modelling hand-to-hand and gunplay, though. Too bad it wasn't fleshed out into more of a game. The developers simply didn't give this game enough TLC. It feels rushed, and unfinished, but again-- such potential for innovation.

"Rune was just plain dull, uninspired and boring throughout."

Shrug. I had exactly the opposite impression. Long, yes. But as a skilled gamer you move through it fairly quickly, and I found the different areas remarkably well thought out and each had a unique feel. I'd rather have that than the cursory 6 hours of Elite Force or SOF.

Plus, I practically had an orgasm when I beheaded three enemies at the same time. The sheer unbridled carnage! I never got bored fighting the skeletons. Kill all you want, we'll make more, is a fine philosophy in my book. Not to mention the berserk meter (two levels!), and the subtle differences in the axe/sword/club weapon classes.

Hell, if you want to talk about repetitive, just try the last 1/4 of Serious Sam. Gee, another room with 50 angry baddies. (stifles yawn)

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"I don't think people appreciate how hard it is to do a melee combat game"

Certainly not any of the 5 gazillion developers who've made third person console fighting games, all having combat systems *much* more complex and rewarding than Rune's. Though, once again, since you enjoyed Rune, there isn't much point in me trying to convince you that you didn't. Here; My arms are stretched forward and I'm wiggling my fingertips - yooooo didn't liiike Ruuuune. Yoooooo won't like Halls of Valhaaaaalla.

WUMPIS on Die by the Sword

"I gave it a fair shot, and I came away frustrated."

Fair shot? I beg to differ... (see below)

"It ends up being a frustrating sword simulator rather than an actual game."

Longbow is a frustrating helicoptor simulator AND it's an actual game.

"Unlike B&W (since you brought it up), the VSIM control scheme was essential to gameplay--"

Are you nuts? DBTS had a built in arcade style combat mode. It worked just like freaking Street Fighter AND you could create your own combos. In other words, had you given it more than a cursory glance you could have abandoned VSIM entirely and played it (follow me here)

Just... Like... Rune.

Erik's right and Oni proves it, actually Blade of Darkness (as weak of a total package that game is) proves it as well. Rune had a boringly simplistic combat system.

Add to that the boring monsters, boring levels, boring story and the fact that it really, really failed to take full advantage of the wonderfully rich Viking backdrop and you have a failed game with a pretty graphics engine and, admittedly, good multiplayer.

Really, they should have incorporated UT's Assault mode in Rune. THAT would have been great!
-Andrew

Well, I haven't played Rune, so obviously I can't comment on it, but I thought DBTS was pretty fantastic! The idea that you could cut off a kobold's arm and pick it up and beat him with it was cool. And while the VSIM took some getting used to, I loved it.

Yeah, I think I need to buy that game...

Compuexpert had it for $9.99 not too long ago

Oh, also, sorry, WumpUS not WumpIS... doh!

Don't forget the Limb from Limb expansion. It really adds some nice stuff. Ogre Hockey. Mmmm. King of the Hill. Woo-hoo.

Die by the Sword was fairly popular at a few Shoot Clubs. It's great fun on a LAN, even if you only have two computers.

I do have to admit, though, that it's butt ugly these days.

-Tom

Yeah Tom,
but for the LANless amoung us Oger Hockey and King of the Hill are wasted space....
Sadly.

Maybe someday I'll sneak into your home and we'll see if mouse VSIM beats keyboard VSIM.

We can do that Y-Wing vs X-Wing too if you like.

-Andrew

"We can do that Y-Wing vs X-Wing too if you like."

Hey, I forgot about that one!

Can anyone here vouch for Bub's claim that a Y-Wing will beat an X-Wing in a 1v1 dogfight? I always thought it sounded kind of wacky, but he's said he can demonstrate it.

-Tom

Ion Cannons on the first pass. A mix of Ions and Blasters will crumple your sheild in just 3-4 hits. Then one ion disables you and I have almost a full minute to taunt you before atomizing your craft.

The key is... um... that first pass. But I can do it. Ironically, TIEs, despite being weaker are much harder. Can't hit the bastards as easily!

I'll keep my eyes out for DBTS and the expansion. I'm sure it won't look as good now as it did way back when, but I believe that we could have a blast with it over the LAN!

Murph said: "I'll keep my eyes out for DBTS and the expansion. "

You know, I missed out on DBTS too, but we're both in luck. There are a few folks selling their copies on eBay. Better yet, Interplay's web store is taking pre-orders for a $9.95 combo pack of DBTS and the add-on. For an extra $3.95, you can download the Cuss pack too :)

For that matter, there's a lot of classic game stuff at the site.

Thanks for letting me know! You just can't pass that up for ten bucks!

"Certainly not any of the 5 gazillion developers who've made third person console fighting games, all having combat systems *much* more complex and rewarding than Rune's."

You mean Street Fighter XVIII turbo alpha hyper platinum? I don't really consider beat-em-ups in the same league as what DBTS was trying to do. Totally different games.. but maybe I'm missing something here. What titles are you referring to?

"In other words, had you given it more than a cursory glance you could have abandoned VSIM entirely and played it (follow me here)"

I really disliked the arcade mode in that game. I tried that too. It felt completely random. The illusion of control was nonexistant in that mode. At least in VSIM I could relate my mouse movements to the character, albeit poorly.

VSIM was clunky as hell. There HAS to be a better way.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"You mean Street Fighter XVIII turbo alpha hyper platinum? I don't really consider beat-em-ups in the same league as what DBTS was trying to do. "

Now hold on just a gal-dern minute there, pardner. Are we talking about Rune or DBTS? Because I don't have a problem with DBTS.

"At least in VSIM I could relate my mouse movements to the character, albeit poorly.
VSIM was clunky as hell. There HAS to be a better way."

Given this and his problems with B&W's easy to master gesture magic this is the lesson learned: "Wumpus hates mouse practice"
Really, once mastered it's the most wonderful control scheme I've ever used.

-Andrew

"Really, once mastered it's the most wonderful control scheme I've ever used."

I'm sure in a renfaire sort of way, it worked for you and your merry band of compatriots. But for most people (I'm including myself here, since I didn't buy one of the 28,603 copies that sold at retail based on my experience with the demo).. it was utter hell. Again, a noble effort-- but most importantly, a *FAILED* effort.

I ended up picking up an eBay copy to get the soundtrack.

THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY. DBTS was a nice experiment, but to benefit from experience we have to judge what works and what doesn't. This didn't work.

Good call on Blade: Severance btw, I still have a copy on my desk unplayed.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

* from an archived gamecenter page off google (is it possible to get to the old gamecenter content? I really liked GC a hell of a lot more than GameSlop)

---

Quote:

For years, hard-core PC gamers asked for an action game with more depth. They wanted greater control of their characters, realistic movement, interactive environments, and combat with plenty of gore. Therefore, it's understandable that Interplay thought it had a hit on its hands with Die by the Sword. Moreover, the game's many previews were causing a buzz online, as were the Usenet reactions to the playable demo and controversial magazine advertisements.

For the first time in a PC game, the proprietary VSIM engine allowed gamers to control the character's body and sword independently from one another.

In this action/adventure, gamers played as Enric, a mighty warrior off to rescue his beloved from the clutches of Kobolds, Orcs, and the like. For the first time in a PC game, the proprietary VSIM engine allowed gamers to control the character's body and sword independently of one another with unparalleled precision. And hey, what other game could allow you to slice off an enemy's body part and whack him over the head with it?

Die by the Sword went on to sell only 28,603 units at retail. Alan Pavlish, head of the Tantrum division at Interplay, speaks candidly about the unsatisfactory sales figures: "What we learned is that the controls may have been frustrating for some gamers, and that the learning curve [was] one of the biggest factors. Since we introduced a new style of controlling the main character, you're going to run the risk if people are going to like it or not," says Pavlish. He admits it was frustrating trying to create something unique that backfired. "People say there are no new games...no new innovation...and then they pawned it off."

Pavlish also believes other factors, such as timing, came into play with Die by the Sword before and after the game was released. "Gamers talked about it a lot before it came out and then there was a delay, a dark period when it slipped nine months, so it lost momentum. The demo got a good response, but it was likely released too soon before the game," says Pavlish. "Then," he continues, "if I remember correctly, it was also released near the same date as StarCraft."

At the 1999 E3 show, developers Treyarch Invention announced a partnership with Crave Entertainment to release an unofficial follow-up to Die by the Sword for the Sega Dreamcast.

---

VSIM was cool, Die by the Sword was cool, Limb from Limb was cool, and the cuss pack was really funny. "DIE FUCKER!" you'd shout as you lopped off a kobold's arm. It made a certain degree of insane sense...

I played it with the keyboard exclusively, no mouse. I felt the game gave you the best ever sense of connection with the on-screen character. You also had to take into account momentum and other factors... swinging your body along with moving your arm in a slashing motion... it was hard as hell, but really rewarding. And there's nothing more viscerally entertaining as a close-quarter combat game like this in multiplayer... lopping your buddy's head off is so much more... satisfying then shooting them from a distance with a rocket.

And that unofficial Dreamcast follow up turned out to be the mediocre review receiving Draconus: Cult of the Wyrm, also heavily delayed. I haven't played it but I don't think it had anwhere near the VSIM design. Treyarch is also responsible for the ports of Tony Hawk to DC and Spider-Man too if I recall correctly. Their only other original game which is built on the DBTS/Draconus engine is Max Steel based on the computer animated cartoon show.

--Dave

By the way, since Rune didn't sell huge numbers it too was a failure, hence anyone defending it as being a good game is wrong. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

The illusion here is this: everyone who has ever wanted to hop in a jet fighter as a kid, really subconsciously wants to play Falcon 4.0.

Um, no.

Similarly, just because we haven't seen melee combat (that is, with swords and shields, renfair stylee) done well, doesn't mean we all want more clones of DBTS and its noble failure of a control scheme.

Erik, I am intrigued by your console reference. I heard Bushido Blade did this fairly well on the PSX, but I'm not aware of any other melee combat simulators. Maybe Tobal? This is something I don't have a lot of experience with.

I don't consider the traditional beat-em-ups like Tekken, Street Fighter, DOA, Virtua Fighter, et al much more than combo move generators. Plus, they're all in enclosed arenas and completely linear fighting, typically 1-on-1, whereas Rune and DBTS are completely open levels where you can rotate freely around one or more opponents. I'm open to hearing you guys' thoughts on this though.

I know in Oni fighting multiple opponents was tough. I more or less ran away like a wussy each time I encountered more than one.. this way I could get some distance between my enemies and line them up in a more linear fashion.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

p.s. Hey Steve, y'know what I'm listening to right now? Rick Springfield's greatest hits.

"Erik, I am intrigued by your console reference. I heard Bushido Blade did this fairly well on the PSX, but I'm not aware of any other melee combat simulators. Maybe Tobal? This is something I don't have a lot of experience with."

Yeah, the Bushido Blades featured a much deeper weapon combat system. The Tobals (especially 2) had a great, weaponless fighting system, plus a mode where you explored dungeon-like environments while battling enemies. Soul Caliber is another great example of a weapons-based melee simulator.

I'm not really sure why you're making the distinction between modern 3D fighting games and Rune. The Falcon 4 analogy doesn't work for me, because these are all straight up arcade games. In fact, they're often derided for being *too* simplistic. True, they're typically 1-on-1 (though there are examples that aren't that I can't think of right now). I don't know why the fact that they're in enclosed arenas means anything. Rune takes place in a somewhat bigger enclosed arena. I don't know about you, but my fights generally didn't take advantage of the entire level. And I don't know what you mean by "completely linear fighting". If you mean "taking place on a 2D plane", then that's simply not true - most modern 3D fighting games permit free movement within the arena.

Would the Rune developers need to do some careful thinking in order to translpant a good, arcadey melee combat system into Rune's larger environments? Sure. That's their job. The decision they made was to strip the combat system to the barest - and I mean barest - essentials. Given the fact that there are hundreds of melee combat simulators on the market, it's disappointing that they chose to create one less involved than the combat engine in Final Fight. In my opinion, that's a cheap way out.

Rune isn't about tricky exploration, it isn't about puzzle solving, it isn't about item collection, and it isn't about raising your stats. It's about unarmed combat. To succeed, it needed a decent, nuanced fighting system. And if you simply think this wasn't the developer's intention, here's a quote from an interview on Evil Avatar with Human Head's Tim Gerritsen:

"its the 3PS equivelent to a fighting game like Tekken or Soul Caliber"

It really seems like something happened on the way to the market with Rune. I get the feeling GOD needed some releases and they decided they could get away with releasing Rune before it was entirely put together because I had read similar comments about the game from the developers that Erik notes here. They really didn't even come close to the level of Soul Calibur. Hell, nothing really does yet.

Maybe it's just something they were saying to sound cool though. If you want to put a visual of what to expect in someone's head, claim to emulate the best I guess.

--Dave

A lot of the GOD games have been on tight schedules. The KISS and Heavy Metal 2 games weren't in development all that long. I don't know if Rune was pushed a bit either.

I played Rune demo, and like those superb Blair Witch games and their undying support of the Darkstone "Franchise," (as their marketing head once said in an interview) and the classy catholic school girls they're surrounded by, it illustrates how GOD equals superbly crafted games and class........

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I KILL ME! AHAHAHAHAHA!

Serious Sam and, especially, Tropico are making GOD look good... even if the cheap skin crap makes them obnoxious.

-Andrew

Ah, every dog has its day. Even EIDOS has published good games. ;-)))

That's what's so weird about GOD. I would understand the T&A corporate image if that's what the bulk of their games were. But they haven't been. KISS was a hardcore shooter, but decidedly low on the juvenile "boobies factor." Railroad Tycoon 2? Tropico? Pretty low testosterone.

Sure they've got Max Payne, FAKK2, and DNF, which are sorta teenage male testosterone games, but what's the rest of their lineup? 4x4 evolution, the Blair Witch games, Age of Wonders, the Fly! series, Kingdom Under Fire, Myth 3, Tropico, Stronghold, Railroad Tycoon 2... the corporate image, which is marketed more heavily than the games themselves, doesn't jibe with the software lineup. I just don't get it.

I think it's kind of funny to note that with all those high profile first person shooter developers under the GOD roof, the only truly successful game to come from the publisher is Railroad Tycoon II which is about as far from that genre as you could possibly get. Tropico will also likely outsell Rune, Kiss: Psycho Circus, et. al. Even Serious Sam seems to be in large supply everywhere and going nowhere right now...

Maybe if 3D Realms had actually made something for the GOD label since it was formed, or Remedy for that matter, they wouldn't have ended up selling out to Take2? As it stands, GOD published one hit game before becoming "just another subsidiary" and it was a railroad/stock market strategy game. Nutty.

--Dave

"the corporate image, which is marketed more heavily than the games themselves, doesn't jibe with the software lineup. I just don't get it."

Because promoting the corporate image is promoting Mike Wilson. Wilson was behind the Ion Storm ads that promoted the people in the company instead of the games, including the Romero wants to make you his bitch ad. It's the whole rockstar mentality, which probably explains why he was taken with the KISS license and why GOD goes to Sundance. Game people should be like rockstars and movie stars as far as he's concerned.

>Soul Caliber is another great example of a weapons-based melee simulator.

Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, compares to Soul Calibur. I'm even sick of fighting games, and I love it. LOVE it. Perfect control and balance, just the right amount of depth to the fighting system...

But mostly, it's got this really great single-player game. That's what's lacking from every damn console figthing game. I never ever want to just fight my way through a ladder of increasingly difficult single opponents anymore.

>Game people should be like rockstars and movie stars as far as he's concerned.

I guess what's disjointed there is that game developers are more like movie directors, producers, key grips, lighting and costume experts, and special effects studios. The "movie stars" are the game characters, not their creators.

With the exception of a handful of directors and producers, the general public doesn't know who they are. And doesn't care. They're not the ones on screen. My mom knows Speilburg, but she has no idea who Jerry Bruckheimer is. She knows who Bruce Willis is.

>I get the feeling GOD needed some releases and they decided they could get away with releasing Rune before it was entirely put together

I've spoken with Tim Garretson about that, and that's pretty much exactly what happened. Not that they're unhappy with Rune or felt slighted by GOD - they understand why it had to be finished when it was scheduled to be and they're cool enough with that - but the plan was to spend another several months improving the game. It was done, start to finish, but hadn't really gone through the "play the game, find out where it needs some polish, and fix it up" loop. Which is why there are too may lever puzzles, big stretches where you do nothing but lop off zombie heads in corridors (5000 times), not quite enough enemy variety, etc.

Like so many other "almost great" titles, the developers "just needed a few more months."

---

Quote:

But mostly, it's got this really great single-player game. That's what's lacking from every damn console figthing game. I never ever want to just fight my way through a ladder of increasingly difficult single opponents anymore.

---

Yes, Street Fighter Alpha 3 on the PSX or Dreamcast is an absolute must have if you crave balance and replayability in your fighting games.

Mr. Cross's Son? You've convinced me to get Soul Caliber now.

-Andrew

Hmm...I'm sick of 2D and 3D fighters equally (or basically all 1 on 1 fighters) but SFA3 sounds intriguing. I'm gonna have to find out what exactly is in this World Tour mode and see if that's a deep enough single-player game to make it worthwhile.

Cammy's nice and all that, but I was the Fei Long MASTER back in the day. First I mastered Guile, then when CE came out I mastered Vega, then when Super came out I mastered Fei Long.

I'm sure it's still no Soul Calibur. Who's your favorite/best SC character, Dave?

Fei Long is in Alpha 3 as are Vega and Guile. As I noted above, the character list is fantastic for SFA3. Just about anyone can find a favorite among this batch. The -ism system is cool too. Basically you get the choice of any of the combo systems from previous games and the corresponding meters. World Tour is a stat building exercise where you travel from place to place fighting different challenges similar in a lot of ways to Soul Calibur's Mission Battle mode.

As for my favorite SC character. I still gravitate toward the cheap Kilik. He's still fun for me to play. He's also overpowered in the game which is nice for quick plays and getting through mission battle. I have taken a strong liking to Maxi as well just for his all out attack playstyle. With him, you just don't ever stop attacking. Stopping the swing of his nunchaku or standing still means defeat. He's a great character for button mashing fans.

Beyond those, Hwang is probably my favorite. I like that he's not weapon focused. You can do a ton with his kicks. I do play a lot of random character selection games though when I have others to play with. I'm pretty good with any character in the game so it's almost unfair to allow me to pick one myself anymore. :)

That's one of the coolest things about SC though. You can have all sorts of favorite things in the game and then later you'll change your mind because there's so much there of super high quality. My favorite character to look at and watch move is Mitsurugi, my favorite stage is Venice, my favorite move is when Kilik spreads the feet of the other guy and then whacks them down. It goes on and on... it's one of my "top 10 games of all time"...or something. :)

BTW, remember when we had so much fun with Samba de Amigo when I was up there? A friend brought over a second set of maracas about two months ago. If you think one player Samba is a blast with a room of people...getting two in front of the TV is pure ecstasy. I was rolling on the floor laughing the entire time! This was after we had a blast and a half with four player Virtua Tennis. That game can make anyone a gamer. I swear...

--Dave

Er Dave, since SC is in your top 10 aren't you supposed to bash it at every turn? ;)

-- Xaroc

Ahh... Kilik is a bastard. Ben's very good with him. I'm a master with Mitsurugi, and I have to admit it must be really damn annoying to fight me when I've got my groove on with him. But Ben and his Kilik can go toe-to-toe no problem.

When Bill Abner was up here, we had a great time passing around the controller in SC matches. We were just going to play for "a few mintues" and ended up going for like three hours. When you start to get going with a group of people, you get some amazing things happening--split-second blocks and counter-attacks, beautifully timed side-steps and throws, you name it.

Soul Calibur is not only the only traditional fighting game I've played with a satisfying single-player game, it's so refined that you really get some downright stunning fighting in there. The only other fighting game that I feel gives players the ability to demonstrate skill and strategy as much as SC is the Virtua Fighter series (especially 2).

What SC really needs is the slow-mo replay from VF. Some of the shit in that game you just WANT to watch over again in slow motion.

---

Quote:

What SC really needs is the slow-mo replay from VF. Some of the shit in that game you just WANT to watch over again in slow motion.

---

The hell with the in-crowd, I'm just glad I was talked into getting a Dreamcast. I was convinced consoles were for kids and utterly ignored them for the longest time. Someone turned me on to Shenmue (which was a bit overrated but still fascinating) and I took the plunge.

If I was forced to rid my library of all DC titles but one, that one would be Soul Calibur. No contest. I'll just echo the comments above. Mitsurigi is my main man too but each one has so much depth and so many moves they're all fun to play. It could take years to really master all the characters. Then again, I never thought I'd ever like playing a fighter title so I have little to compare it with but other titles I picked up later, which really were awful in comparision.

I'm never going to sell my DC, there are just too many titles that feel 'right' which might never be entirely exceeded or duplicated again.

As it is now, the dreamcast is a great deal even if they never made any more games for it...

I kill all my friends in Soul Calibur with Sophitia. She has a short reach, like the lizard guy, but can pack a punch with a few cheesy uppercuts! anyway, damn, soul calibur, best character models ever!

etc

All this talk about fighter games is making me think of another favorite of mine, which is for the N64. (And, to apply this to another thread, it's NOT for kids!) It's called Mace: The Dark Ages, and is one of the most fantastic fighters I've ever played. God only knows how many hundreds of dollars my best friend and I pumped into that game at the arcades, and then finally found it for N64. Ahh...