PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Serious contender?
December 19th 2000, 20:52 CET by MaverickUK

With all the realistic Counter-Strike clones around today, there is enough demand for the Doom style of yesterday to be brought back out of the cupboard. Doom 3 is a testament to this fact, but don't expect that title to hit the shelves for a few years...

Serious Sam has given all action lovers a chance to mow down wave after wave of 'cannon fodder' with big, powerful weapons -- just like Doom. But is Serious Sam a Doom 3 beater? It definitely features many next-generation engine features. T&L is in place, there's bump mapping on the models, and huge outside sections are placed in absolutely HUGE levels.

Does the world need Doom 3 with this game due for release in March 2001?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Serious contender?

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "Therac"
2000-12-19 20:53:31
zenfnord@hotmail.com
This topic looks familiar....
#2 by "Helios"
2000-12-19 21:01:32
nick@noblehost.com
Well, I think that there will definitly be enough space on the market for both, especially if Doom III is years away.  Besides, how many games out there right now are just rehashes of others and not worth the CD they are on?  Game clones will continue to be made.  The quality is not always important, just the quantity and/or speed of production.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#3 by "Densun"
2000-12-19 21:08:55
densun@hotmail.com
I'm not going to buy only one because they're similar in game play or have the same techonological features. The story and the setting are very different in both.
#4 by "WarrenMarshall"
2000-12-19 21:13:44
warren@epicgames.com
I was looking at CroTeams page the other day ... the engine looks really cool.  They have every feature under the sun in there.  Hehe...  The demo is sort of losing it's appeal since I've played it too much (would have been nice if they included a new SP level in the latest demo).

One thing that does bother me about Serious Sam is hearing about their amazingly large outdoor areas.  Well ... yeah.  It's a huge flat space with a few cubes/cones thrown in.  This can't be done with UT or Q3?  ;)

---

Warren Marshall
Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#5 by "szcx"
2000-12-19 21:15:48
nedocze@hotmail.com
geeze.  you'd think people would have learned they're lesson about predicting "Doom" or "Quake" killers after the Unreal fiasco.  if Doom 3 is "years" away, how can you seriously pit it against a game that'll be out in March?
#6 by "szcx"
2000-12-19 21:17:44
nedocze@hotmail.com
... by "fiasco", i'm referring to the press calling it a Quake killer every year since the Nixon administration until it was finally released.  i didn't mean to infer that Unreal is a bad game.
#7 by "WarrenMarshall"
2000-12-19 21:22:12
warren@epicgames.com
szcx (#6):
... by "fiasco", i'm referring to the press calling it a Quake killer every year since the Nixon administration until it was finally released. i didn't mean to infer that Unreal is a bad game.

It was Quake killer in many ways ... graphics for one.  It took id until Quake3 to catch up to the Unreal engine in terms of graphics capabilities ...

---

Warren Marshall
Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#8 by "SteveBauman"
2000-12-19 21:36:07
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
With all the realistic Counter-Strike clones around today, there is enough demand for the Doom style of yesterday to be brought back out of the cupboard.

Based on what? The stunning success of games like Daikatana and KISS Psycho Circus? Seems people complained those games were sorta... simplistic (aside from other problems).

Doom 3 is a testament to this fact, but don't expect that title to hit the shelves for a few years...

No one even knows if DOOM III will be DOOM-like.

But is Serious Sam a Doom 3 beater?

Good lord, and people say the press hypes stuff... since all of about five people have seen DOOM III, this isn't even an issue. A game can't "beat" one that's not out yet, except to market. Quake-killers emerged AFTER Quake, not before it.

It definitely features many next-generation engine features. T&L is in place, there's bump mapping on the models, and huge outside sections are placed in absolutely HUGE levels.

Yeah, we all know a game is judged primarily on the feature-set of its engine.
#9 by "Kallisti"
2000-12-19 21:57:39
kallisti@uswest.net
<b>MaverickUK</b> (#0):
<quote>Does the world need Doom 3 </quote>

Think about that for a second. Hell, give it a minute.

<quote>with this game due for release in March 2001?</quote>

No, not even then. :)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#10 by "Linguica"
2000-12-19 22:14:58
linguica@doomworld.com
Um, considering the probably huge time different between the games' releases, wouldn't Doom 3 be a Serious Sam beater and not the other way around?
#11 by "Sgt_Hulka"
2000-12-19 22:22:21
rwaring@ameritech.net
They're making Doom III ???  Damn, next thing you know we'll have Wolfenstien 3D too!
#12 by "the_reformed_pianist"
2000-12-19 22:35:04
pianist@canada.com
Fuck not again! 12th post! :(
#13 by "the_reformed_pianist"
2000-12-19 22:37:14
pianist@canada.com
I hope..... that Doom 3....... has a lot...... of red monsters.
#14 by "enyak"
2000-12-19 23:39:21
enyak@planetcrap.com
The world needs System Shock III. Throw in a spin-off (story-wise) too.

-enyak
#15 by "GeorgeBroussard"
2000-12-19 23:46:17
georgeb@3drealms.com
I'm sorry, but does anyone really see SS as anything other than a novelty game?  Will you really spend $30 on it?  I don't think so, in the end.

Serious Sam is a great little game from a small team that's worked very hard.  If this game had come from a known developer, people would be ignoring it.  But I think a bit of the unknown/underdog syndrome has taken over.

It's fun for a bit, but the guns/enemies aren't up to par with anything out there really.  It's not scaory and doesn't have any mood to it.  The levels are less complex than Doom 1/2 (basically all just big squares with some brushes added).  There is no geometry that Unreal can't do right now.

So I guess I just don't get it.  I suspect people are nostalgic for Doom and that's why SS gets a little buzz.  Go back and play the shareware version of Doom in 320x200 (or better yet get ZDoom), then replay SS, and compare.  You can't.
#16 by "PainKilleR"
2000-12-19 23:53:07
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>GeorgeBroussard</b> (#15):
<quote>It's fun for a bit, but the guns/enemies aren't up to par with anything out there really. It's not scaory and doesn't have any mood to it. The levels are less complex than Doom 1/2 (basically all just big squares with some brushes added). There is no geometry that Unreal can't do right now.

So I guess I just don't get it. I suspect people are nostalgic for Doom and that's why SS gets a little buzz. Go back and play the shareware version of Doom in 320x200 (or better yet get ZDoom), then replay SS, and compare. You can't.</quote>

I'll just file this in with that other comment from another member of 3dr about the Evil Dead game. Personally, it doesn't really matter who releases a game, as long as it's worth playing. Will Serious Sam be worth playing? No clue, because the game isn't done yet. At least, though, there's something to look at for the time being to help make that decision.

Then again, every time I sit down to install another game (I have quite a few that I've bought in the last few months that I've spent little or no time playing), I just say 'screw it' and load up [insert favorite server browser name here] to find a decent TFC server to play on.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#17 by "1"
2000-12-20 00:03:28
primer55@g33k.net
George Broussard #15
Go back and play the shareware version of Doom in 320x200 (or better yet get ZDoom), then replay SS, and compare. You can't.


You're right on that one, as only an idiot would compare a game as old as shareware Doom, to a current game like SS. Generation gap...

_1!
#18 by "the_reformed_pianist"
2000-12-20 00:11:49
pianist@canada.com
Hey George, in my opinion it's more fun than Duke Nukem 3D, and to think, I bet you probably worked really hard on that. More of a novelty item, really. Cops who are literally pigs. Holy fuck. Excellent.
Serious Sam also has an edge over Duke4Ever in that it's probably going to come out this eon.

Stop badmouthing other people's work and get back to your own fucking game, for the last time. Didn't anyone tell you it was late?
#19 by "AmbushBug"
2000-12-20 00:17:00
ambushbug@portalofevil.com
<quote>The world needs System Shock III. Throw in a spin-off (story-wise) too.</quote>

How about this, a RTS where you and a friend pit the Mutant Howler Monkeys from SS II against the Mechanical Bugs and Rodents from Daikatana.  The trick would be having to repair your constantly breaking down mechanical rodents quicker than the Mutant Howler Monkeys can respawn.

Oops, that should have been Mutant <b><i>Psionic</b></i> Howler Monkeys.
#20 by "undule"
2000-12-20 01:01:46
undule@tampabay.rr.com
I would have to say iD on thier worst day will be able to create something far superior to Serious Sam - which is not to say SS isn't amusing or fun, etc, but it's basically straight up Doom / Quake cloning. I have to agree with the sentiment presented here that states if SS were coming from a big developer, it would be accumulating ire. It seems only a few months ago here that folks were accusing/bashing/flaming UT on how much it ripped off iD etc, and yet Croteam's similar motions are somehow charming.

And yes, System Shock 3! I'd leap hurdles play it -- more so now that it obviously wouldn't be using the Dark Engine . . .
#21 by "Ergo"
2000-12-20 01:02:09
stu@dsl-only.net
Origin's Crusader games were spinoffs of SS1, I believe.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#22 by "CharlieWiederhold"
2000-12-20 01:23:27
charliew@3drealms.com
You're right on that one, as only an idiot would compare a game as old as shareware Doom, to a current game like SS. Generation gap...


You've got the generation gap, and yet Doom is still better and I'm not even a Doom fan since I came around to playing games after Doom had exploded. At least in Doom I don't have to read the most idiotic thing I've ever seen in a game that I thought died with Daikatana and should have died with Quake: "One more to go...".

Hey reformed_pianist... does that chip on your shoulder ever get heavy? :)

Charlie Wiederhold
#23 by "the_reformed_pianist"
2000-12-20 01:27:40
pianist@canada.com
My post on #18 was intentionally irrational and extreme because I was trying to blend in with the general Planetcrap populous, since nobody likes the old pianist.

Just clearing that up.
#24 by "Kelster"
2000-12-20 01:40:17
kelster@planetstarsiege.com
I enjoyed the Serious Sam tests. I will buy the game when it comes out not because it's a novelty or because Cro-team is an underdog, but becuase SS is fun! I enjoyed dodging the bull creatures and skeleton things. I enjoyed firing rockets into huge swarms of those birds. I enjoyed chaingunning guys by the group in a matter of seconds. I can't think of anything I didn't enjoy without straining the brain.

IMHO, I believe some developers are kicking themselves for not deciding on a fun rampage game. Ever since R6 and HL, folks have been focused on strategy-FPS and tactical/realistic FPS. Ever since TRIBES, Q3A, EQ and UT, every company and their dog seem to be moving to something heavily MP based. Serious Sam offers me, and gamers like me, something I crave --  a fast paced break from overdone genres.

-Kel
#25 by "cidhubie"
2000-12-20 01:43:34
swinemars@ns.sympatico.ca
I'm wondering how it is that George Broussard, or anyone for that matter, can make any comments about what the final product from Croteam will be like?  You wanna comment on the tests that were released fine, but don't tell me i'm not gonna spend my money on a product that god only knows will be like in its final form.

Hey Warren, its not just the huge levels, its how they look: bright, colorful, with a bright glowing orb in the pretty blue sky.  What the fuck is that?  A FUCKING SON IN A FPS?  Who the christ knew that was possible?   Croteam may not be doing anything revoluntionary to the genre but they're  not feeding us the same box filled, cramped, colorless shit over and over again.  A huge outdoor area with QIII or unreal may be possible, I wouldn't know, I've never seen it before.
#26 by "GeorgeBroussard"
2000-12-20 01:47:37
georgeb@3drealms.com
Kelster,

<quote>IMHO, I believe some developers are kicking themselves for not deciding on a fun rampage game</quote>

Kiss: Psycho Circus plays like SS with TONS of enemies and just shooting/switches.  It sold very poorly.

I don't think a mow-down game will appeal to many people in the end anymore.  Maybe we're all wrong though and we'll have to wait for the sales to see.

I do think SS would sell 5X better if they did the following:

- Have better/scary monsters/demons (like in Doom)
- Better/scarier setting like a moonbase (in Doom)
- Ditch the mish mash characters and the Egyptian setting

Hey, just remake Doom 1-2 in the SS engine.  Guaranteed 500K seller baby.
#27 by "velo"
2000-12-20 01:58:06
velcro@gte.net
Another Rise of the Triad is all the world needs.
#28 by "Andy"
2000-12-20 01:59:24
andy@meejahor.com
<b>GeorgeBroussard</b> (#15):
<quote>
I'm sorry, but does anyone really see SS as anything other than a novelty game? Will you really spend $30 on it? I don't think so, in the end.
</quote>
Well for a start it's $20, but I still think you're right. It's just not going to sell. I said that months ago and I'm saying it again now, and I'll be proved right.

Admittedly, when I first said it wouldn't sell, I didn't know how cheap it was going to be. At $20 it will sell better than I thought it would, but it's still going to bomb.

Why?

<b>THE NAME</b>

I find this subject incredibly frustrating. It's painfully obvious that a game called "Serious Sam" won't sell. But the guys at Croteam insist it's a great name, and they keep pushing on, probably doing 12+ hours of work each per day, and it will all go to waste. Because they refuse to give it a decent name.

And where is this going to lead? Their first (major) game will be a failure, and they'll be associated with 3000AD's next game, which history suggests will be a failure too. Croteam are building themselves a bad reputation. Not by doing anything wrong, just by NOT doing things right.

It's a real shame. So much potential... just thrown away.
#29 by "superion"
2000-12-20 02:16:33
superion@spacemoose.com
#28, they'll probably license the engine to one Eidos/Activision/God studio and make enough croation dollars to retire, so i doubt they're throwing anything really away.
#30 by "dsmart"
2000-12-20 02:18:12
dsmart@3000ad.com
<quote>
I was looking at CroTeams page the other day ... the engine looks really cool. They have every feature under the sun in there.</quote>

Yeah, its a pretty good engine, which is why I licensed it for my next project

<quote>One thing that does bother me about Serious Sam is hearing about their amazingly large outdoor areas. Well ... yeah. It's a huge flat space with a few cubes/cones thrown in. This can't be done with UT or Q3? ;)</quote>

You're right, but neither of them are large enough. I think so far I have the largest playable terrain in any game. Period. And it <a href="http://www.3000ad.com/shots/bcmshots16.shtml">looks cool</a> too ;)





<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#31 by "dsmart"
2000-12-20 02:19:56
dsmart@3000ad.com
<quote>Yeah, we all know a game is judged primarily on the feature-set of its engine.</quote>

.....beat me to it

/me chuckling

<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#32 by "Barneyque"
2000-12-20 02:24:22
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#30</b> "dsmart" wrote...
<quote><quote>
I was looking at CroTeams page the other day ... the engine looks really cool. They have every feature under the sun in there.</quote>

Yeah, its a pretty good engine, which is why I licensed it for my next project


<quote>One thing that does bother me about Serious Sam is hearing about their amazingly large outdoor areas. Well ... yeah. It's a huge flat space with a few cubes/cones thrown in. This can't be done with UT or Q3? ;)</quote>

You're right, but neither of them are large enough. I think so far I have the largest playable terrain in any game. Period. And it <A href="http://www.3000ad.com/shots/bcmshots16.shtml">looks cool</A> too ;)

</quote>

Wow, impressive.  When did this happen?  Last time I looked the terrain looked like shit.  Looks like you have a flight sim in the making here.  :)
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#33 by "the_reformed_pianist"
2000-12-20 02:34:39
pianist@canada.com
"Last time I looked the terrain looked like shit."

And it still does. Looks like a terrain engine a college student would make in his/her spare time.

Derek Smart, you need to calm the fuck down. Your terrain may span the area of the actual earth or something stupid, but it looks fucking gay. So just chillax.
#34 by "dsmart"
2000-12-20 02:39:29
dsmart@3000ad.com
<quote>And where is this going to lead? Their first (major) game will be a failure, and they'll be associated with 3000AD's next game, which history suggests will be a failure too. Croteam are building themselves a bad reputation. Not by doing anything wrong, just by NOT doing things right.</quote>

hey, jackass, what have _you_ done lately? This game is developed by a bunch of guys who just want to do a game that _they_ want to do, not follow some invisible industry garbage. But, of course, you can't wrap your head around that.

As for dragging me into this, thats just typical isn't it? Do you have ANY idea just how many MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR FLOPS have been been released, based on the Quake, Unreal and Lithtech engines? I guess that makes the developers of those engines, by your definition, adversely associated, right?

As for my next game. It just goes to show just how much you DON'T know. My next game is <a href="http://www.3000ad.com/products/bcm.shtml">Battlecruiser Millennium</a>, asshole. Nothing to do with the Serious Sam engine. And you are probably the only one who doesn't realize that with the sales of my previous title, I don't have to sell a SINGLE copy of BCM to ANYONE outside my fan base, to be profitable.

And if the press previews at <a href="http://www.ga-sim.com/preview_info.cfm?preview_id=5">GA-SIM</a> and <a href="http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreview/zones/previews/dec00/bcm.html">GAMES DOMAIN</a> and the buzz from the 500+ gamers in the Beta pattern, coupled with the publisher feedback are anything to go by, I'd say I've got my fanbase covered and am developing a game that *I* want to develop and one which *THEY* want to play. Am not following anyone's formula for what a game should be, as I consider myself to be one of the best damn designer/developer there is out there. I make my own decisions and as such, succeed or fail by them. My world. My product. My fanbase. My rules.

I know you just can't help yourself sometimes, but try being more than just a waste of space and air. There are others who could benefit from those resources.

<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#35 by "dsmart"
2000-12-20 02:47:19
dsmart@3000ad.com
<quote>Wow, impressive. When did this happen? Last time I looked the terrain looked like shit. Looks like you have a flight sim in the making here. :)</quote>

hehe, didn't you catch that PC thread in which I was saying that I was going to bite the bullet and do a completely new terrain. Well, thats it. Puts Tribes2 to shame. Guaranteed. The prev terrain in BCM was the one from BC3K v2.0x used as a placeholder.

Imagine standing in snow and actually sinking into the terrain depending on how heavy you or the vehicle you are driving, is (same as water). Or diving for cover as a meteor shower from space, rains asteroids onto the terrain, deforming it in realtime - wind - rain - snow - thunder - lighting - accurate time of day - alien worlds - seamless high altitude support (for fighters and crafts from space), low-altitude flight (for gunships), ground-zero (for first person and vehicles) - planets the size of real-world Jupiter - space view right from the planet surface (yes, if some bastard is parked in orbit, you'll be able to see a glint of his craft - multiple cloud layers - gas giants support.

Yep, thats the terrain engine for BCM, my XBox project and GCO (the massively multiplayer version of BCM, which will also have naval and submarine units too boot).

And its already progressed beyond what you see in those shots. In fact, I forgot to enable detail texturing in some of those shots. The experts among us, would probably notice :-)

2001 is going to be an interesting year. God help Infogrames if they release I-War2 against me in the same qtr. They won't do that again ;)

As for Freelancer? R.I.P is all I say at this point - even if it is released.

<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#36 by "dsmart"
2000-12-20 02:48:07
dsmart@3000ad.com
<quote>And it still does. Looks like a terrain engine a college student would make in his/her spare time.

Derek Smart, you need to calm the fuck down. Your terrain may span the area of the actual earth or something stupid, but it looks fucking gay. So just chillax</quote>

Shutup, fool

*plonk*

<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#37 by "Vengeance"
2000-12-20 02:51:02
rhiggi@home.com
<b>#28</b> "Andy" wrote...
<quote><B>GeorgeBroussard</B> (#15):

<quote>
I'm sorry, but does anyone really see SS as anything other than a novelty game? Will you really spend $30 on it? I don't think so, in the end.
</quote>
Well for a start it's $20, but I still think you're right. It's just not going to sell. I said that months ago and I'm saying it again now, and I'll be proved right.

Admittedly, when I first said it wouldn't sell, I didn't know how cheap it was going to be. At $20 it will sell better than I thought it would, but it's still going to bomb.

Why?

<B>THE NAME</B>
</quote>

Normally, I'd agree with you and George.  I thought SS was fun, but given the other games that are out there, I'd probably just download a Doom "remake" and wait for Tribes 2 to through away all my free time.

Yea, the name is a little silly, but I wonder if your both forgetting about the Deer Hunter crowd.  Its cheap, not overly complex.  The name is makes it sound like its for younger kids, maybe that what their targeting.  Causual gamers.  Never underestimate the power of Wallmart...  or cheese..  mmmmm..  cheeeeese.

V<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#38 by "Kelster"
2000-12-20 02:57:30
kelster@planetstarsiege.com
#28 Andy
I find this subject incredibly frustrating. It's painfully obvious that a game called "Serious Sam" won't sell. But the guys at Croteam insist it's a great name, and they keep pushing on, probably doing 12+ hours of work each per day, and it will all go to waste. Because they refuse to give it a decent name.

"There's still time Cro-team! Change your name to something cool (like a natural disaster or descriptive word) while there's still time!! People are shallow! Don't waste your potential!!"

The name is strange enough to stick in people's minds. Could any of us think of something cooler are darker? Sure. But does Roman's EgyptMasterKiller 2000 really suit the product? :o

#26 GeorgeBroussard
Kiss: Psycho Circus plays like SS with TONS of enemies and just shooting/switches. It sold very poorly.

I don't think a mow-down game will appeal to many people in the end anymore. Maybe we're all wrong though and we'll have to wait for the sales to see.

I think Serious Sam will be a hit. The underdog/wartime developer factor, new engine and media raves (assuming they're as positive as the test feedback) will convince hardcore gamers to try the demo and/or buy the game. The low price will grab the mainstream populous. If a game like DeerHunter can oversell most hardcore games at $10-20 a pop, then I'm more than willing to bet that Serious Sam (which is a cool game IMHO based on the tests) will do just as well or better.

Kiss didn't appeal to me because it was based on a band -- wasn't my bag so I didn't try it (cheesy concept). Serious Sam on the other hand does appeal to me. The media raved enough about it to convince me to D/L the tests.

I had a blast! I didn't know what to expect! When the suicide bomb guys attacked, when the bulls charged, when the skeletons dove and when the birds gathered into packs, I was giddy! Waves of quirky enemies to mow down, powerful/fun to use weapons and old school play. Both the retro and eye-candy-loving gamer in me got it's fix. I was entertained. For $20 I'm sold.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy deep games (Tribes, Deus Ex and Balder's Gate II are great examples) but Serious Sam seems to fill a void that the current FPS genre doesn't appeal to anymore. I've grown weary of the R6/CS clones.

-Kel
#39 by "Andy"
2000-12-20 02:58:18
andy@meejahor.com
<b>Vengeance</b> (#37):
<quote>
Yea, the name is a little silly, but I wonder if your both forgetting about the Deer Hunter crowd. Its cheap, not overly complex. The name is makes it sound like its for younger kids, maybe that what their targeting. Causual gamers. Never underestimate the power of Wallmart... or cheese.. mmmmm.. cheeeeese.
</quote>
It's not so much that it's silly, it's that it doesn't fit the style. It's an action game. Consider a different media, movies -- how many people would go to see an action film called "Serious Sam"?

Just for once, it would be good for the marketing people to jump in and force Croteam to change the name.

As for the target audience, it's been a while since I played the Sam test but it was pretty gory, wasn't it? (Not SOF gore, but body bits and blood flying around.) So it's probably going to get an M rating in the States, a 15 in the UK, and similar mid-teen ratings in other territories. So it's going to be sold as a teen/adult game, not a kids game.

Nope, not going to sell. Sad, but true.

Come on marketing slugs! This is your chance to do something good!
#40 by "Barneyque"
2000-12-20 02:58:41
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#35</b> "dsmart" wrote...
<quote><quote>Wow, impressive. When did this happen? Last time I looked the terrain looked like shit. Looks like you have a flight sim in the making here. :)</quote>

hehe, didn't you catch that PC thread in which I was saying that I was going to bite the bullet and do a completely new terrain. Well, thats it. Puts Tribes2 to shame. Guaranteed. The prev terrain in BCM was the one from BC3K v2.0x used as a placeholder.

Imagine standing in snow and actually sinking into the terrain depending on how heavy you or the vehicle you are driving, is (same as water). Or diving for cover as a meteor shower from space, rains asteroids onto the terrain, deforming it in realtime - wind - rain - snow - thunder - lighting - accurate time of day - alien worlds - seamless high altitude support (for fighters and crafts from space), low-altitude flight (for gunships), ground-zero (for first person and vehicles) - planets the size of real-world Jupiter - space view right from the planet surface (yes, if some bastard is parked in orbit, you'll be able to see a glint of his craft - multiple cloud layers - gas giants support.

Yep, thats the terrain engine for BCM, my XBox project and GCO (the massively multiplayer version of BCM, which will also have naval and submarine units too boot).

And its already progressed beyond what you see in those shots. In fact, I forgot to enable detail texturing in some of those shots. The experts among us, would probably notice :-)

2001 is going to be an interesting year. God help Infogrames if they release I-War2 against me in the same qtr. They won't do that again ;)

As for Freelancer? R.I.P is all I say at this point - even if it is released.

</quote>

I'm curious, is your engine completly boundless?  For example, if there was a door on the bastards ship that I see glinting on the sky, could a guy jump out, and without a giant context switch, fall all the way to the surface?

I realize you probably haven't added anything like that, but is it seemless, one giant massive open space?

All things considered, that's a serious difference from the last time I saw it. <i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#41 by "the_reformed_pianist"
2000-12-20 03:09:30
pianist@canada.com
"Puts Tribes2 to shame. Guaranteed."

Oh fuck..... you're not serious are you? Puts Tribes 2 to shame in what way?
#42 by "GeorgeBroussard"
2000-12-20 03:10:13
georgeb@3drealms.com
Kelster,

<quote>I had a blast! I didn't know what to expect! When the suicide bomb guys attacked, when the bulls charged, when the skeletons dove and when the birds gathered into packs, I was giddy! Waves of quirky enemies to mow down, powerful/fun to use weapons and old school play. Both the retro and eye-candy-loving gamer in me got it's fix. I was entertained. For $20 I'm sold.</quote>

Well put.

I can see a market where you make two games.  Half-Life or Serious Sam.  One a multi-million dollar, multi-year game that will raise the bar, and one that's cheap and fast to make, but a lot of "fun".   Publishers aren't interested much anymore in funding 2 million dollar FPS games that sell 80-100K.

Hell, in the end Serious Sam may be more profitable than games like Voyager, NOLF, Soldier of Fortune...and if that happens, then things will change :)
#43 by "cidhubie"
2000-12-20 03:22:00
swinemars@ns.sympatico.ca
Serious Sam is going to sell.  Sell a lot too.  Not because of a cool name, not because of marketing hype, but because it'll be cheap,  because of word of mouth.  Since the release of test#2, on forums all over the net all I see is people telling other people to "download this game!"  "you won't fuckin believe your eyes!"  "it's an absolute blast to play" " I haven't had this much fun in years"  

As long as the final product isn't a total fuck up, Regardless of goofy name, this game will sell.
#44 by "dsmart"
2000-12-20 03:26:17
dsmart@3000ad.com
<quote>I'm curious, is your engine completly boundless? </quote>

Yes. No limits. Seamless space/planetary worlds. One HUGE galaxy

<quote>For example, if there was a door on the bastards ship that I see glinting on the sky, could a guy jump out, and without a giant context switch, fall all the way to the surface?</quote>

Yes. But he would die during the planetfall entry. Even in the Beta (<i>and I know that some press folks here in PC know this from playing the Beta</i>), you can exit your space craft in first person in space and <a href="http://www.3000ad.com/bcmshots15.shtml">fly using a jetpack to the planet</a>, but you will die.

However, you could just fly your ship to the planet, land it and climb out. Run around and cause mayhem (<i>perhaps grab a vehicle</i>, get back in the ship and take off. So, in multiplayer, you could just go from planet to planet, wreaking havoc on the server. There is a galaxy of 75 planets, 145 moons and 100+ space regions to choose from. Take your pick.

<quote>I realize you probably haven't added anything like that,</quote>

Yes I have, and thats been working for several months now.

<quote> but is it seemless, one giant massive open space?</quote>

Yes. And regions are connected by jump points, wormholes, fluxfields. Here is the <a href="http://www.3000ad.com/fleets/db/maps/galaxy_map.gif">galaxy map</a>.

<quote>All things considered, that's a serious difference from the last time I saw it. </quote>

Wait till you actually play on it. Am probably going to release a demo in January
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#45 by "Kelster"
2000-12-20 03:29:20
kelster@planetstarsiege.com
#42 GeorgeBroussard
Well put.

I can see a market where you make two games. Half-Life or Serious Sam. One a multi-million dollar, multi-year game that will raise the bar, and one that's cheap and fast to make, but a lot of "fun". Publishers aren't interested much anymore in funding 2 million dollar FPS games that sell 80-100K.

Hell, in the end Serious Sam may be more profitable than games like Voyager, NOLF, Soldier of Fortune...and if that happens, then things will change :)

To be totally honest, I felt slightly ashamed to say that I enjoyed Serious Sam that much! (me, an uber-hardcore gamer liking a cheap thriller?!!)

The last thing I want to see are brutal and cheap games pushed by publishers. I thrive on innovative games! But by supporting SS I don't think I'm supporting the bargain bin or mainstream crap like 'eXtreme Paintbrawl' or 'Deerhunter.' Contrary to most of the cheap titles out there, I don't believe Croteam's primary motive is cash -- they seem to have a passion for games and love what they're doing. It shows in both their interviews and in the tests they've released. There is a cheesy flavor (name, baddies, gameplay, etc.) but it's a good cheesy. It has redeeming factors and when put under the rational microscope, I enjoy what they're doing.
:)

-Kel
#46 by "Barneyque"
2000-12-20 03:48:21
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#44</b> "dsmart" wrote...
<quote><quote>I'm curious, is your engine completly boundless? </quote>

Yes. No limits. Seamless space/planetary worlds. One HUGE galaxy

</quote>
Impressive.
<quote>

<quote>For example, if there was a door on the bastards ship that I see glinting on the sky, could a guy jump out, and without a giant context switch, fall all the way to the surface?</quote>

Yes. But he would die during the planetfall entry. Even in the Beta (<I>and I know that some press folks here in PC know this from playing the Beta</I>), you can exit your space craft in first person in space and <A href="http://www.3000ad.com/bcmshots15.shtml">fly using a jetpack to the planet</A>, but you will die.

However, you could just fly your ship to the planet, land it and climb out. Run around and cause mayhem (<I>perhaps grab a vehicle</I>, get back in the ship and take off. So, in multiplayer, you could just go from planet to planet, wreaking havoc on the server. There is a galaxy of 75 planets, 145 moons and 100+ space regions to choose from. Take your pick.


<quote>I realize you probably haven't added anything like that,</quote>

Yes I have, and thats been working for several months now.

</quote>
My mistake.  Should have known.  This game has <b>everything</b>.  :)
<quote>
<quote>but is it seemless, one giant massive open space?</quote>

Yes. And regions are connected by jump points, wormholes, fluxfields. Here is the <A href="http://www.3000ad.com/fleets/db/maps/galaxy_map.gif">

galaxy map</A>.


<quote>All things considered, that's a serious difference from the last time I saw it. </quote>

Wait till you actually play on it. Am probably going to release a demo in January
</quote>

Sounds good. I'll take it for a spin when it's ready.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#47 by "Barneyque"
2000-12-20 03:49:08
barneyque@hotmail.com
Whoops.  My mistake. Forgive me for not doing a bit of snippage on that reply.

<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#48 by "Desiato"
2000-12-20 04:09:54
desiato_hotblack@hotmail.com
Serious Sam won't sell because of the name.....my god, someone has *got* to be kidding. That's the pretext for the croteam bashing? It really boggles the mind. What do you think of when you hear "Quake"? I don't know - but assume you've never played ANY of the series, you'd think - "What the fuck is this, some cheesy 70's horror earth-gone-amok game?".....really, it is too much to accept other games with unusual names and not give Serious Sam a chance on the same grounds.

Ah - I forget, I'm more fair than most. Ooops, my mistake.

One thing I did like was in the demo -- I ran backwards for about 5 minutes, looking at both demo temples and waiting to see when I hit the "edge" of the world......I never hit it. Now THAT'S some area.....

Oh -- the Derek Smart bashing about the terrain is really unfounded. The screenshots remind me of some fractal stuff I've seen before....and I like it...but hey, like I said before - I'm fair.

Have a good one...

Desiato...
#49 by "mcgrew"
2000-12-20 04:31:41
mcgrew@famvid.com
There is a serious flaw here... why should doom 3 be "years" away? We're not talking 3d realms or monolith here, this is id, the folks that put out a new doom (even if it's called quake) every two or three years. And it's been a year since q3a.

[4] WarrenMarshall "One thing that does bother me about Serious Sam is hearing about their amazingly large outdoor areas. Well ... yeah. It's a huge flat space with a few cubes/cones thrown in. This can't be done with UT?"

LOL, that's why I love the crap!

"Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill"

Hey, they fired you from your position as professional nuisance?

[22] CharlieWiederhold "Hey reformed_pianist... does that chip on your shoulder ever get heavy? :)"

Give him a break, he's still a virgin... yes, there is a huge generation gap. All I have to say to pianist is... space invaders!!!

"[24] Kelster "I enjoyed the Serious Sam tests. I will buy the game..."

Sam has a chance because the big houses are after the cash... disney's biography chronicles having a hard time selling mickey mouse, and then when he wanted to do "flowers and trees" the studios screamed "more mice!"

George and warren are (i hope) today's disneys who can pretty much ignore mgm... er, activision. Some thiongs never change.

Speaking of which, the mouse is now considered art... something for "no it's not" art broussard to think about. Screw the mouse, give me the flowers and trees!
 
[26] GeorgeBroussard "Kiss: Psycho Circus plays like SS with TONS of enemies and just shooting/switches. It sold very poorly."

I was looking forward to buying it... until I played the demo and couldn't get out of the damned first room, and didn't see one single enemy. I hate switch hunts/puzzles, dammit i wanta kill somethin'.

I hope we can blow up buildings in forever, thet was really cool in 3

[28] Andy "...THE NAME..."

Can't argue with that. I hope you're wrong but think you're right.

[44] dsmart "Wait till you actually play on it. Am probably going to release a demo in January"

Well I'll be, I'll be updasting again in January. I'm looking forward to the demo. It sounds like I'll be impressed, and I hope I am.

-steve
theFragfest.com
(email temporarily broken)
#50 by "SteveBauman"
2000-12-20 04:33:03
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
Yea, the name is a little silly, but I wonder if your both forgetting about the Deer Hunter crowd. Its cheap, not overly complex. The name is makes it sound like its for younger kids, maybe that what their targeting. Causual gamers. Never underestimate the power of Wallmart... or cheese.. mmmmm.. cheeeeese.

Deer Hunter doesn't require a hot-rod PC and a 3D accelerator. And Wal*Mart won't carry it because it'll probably have an "M" rating... a budget "M" game. Not a good idea.

I'm with the people that think it's "DOOMed" (no pun intended) in part because of a silly name. Names are REALLY important, guys. It has to convey something about the game. DOOM, Quake... perfect. They convey power, mood, they're short and look and sound good.

Serious Sam... is it a comedy? A spy game? A quiz/puzzle game? Great names aren't everything, otherwise No One Lives Forever would be one of the year's best-selling game, but popular budget games are obvious: Deer Hunter, RollerCoaster Tycoon, Dirt Track Racing... see a trend there?  Unless you plan on marketing a game to death (which you typically don't do with budget games), you need to make sure there aren't any questions about what type of game they are, what their topic is.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Serious contender?

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]