force unleashed demo!!!

[Admiral Antilles]

Originally Posted by S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

Its coming out on the Wii and PS2..... don't give me the "not enough power" bullshit

Each version of the game, where specifically altered int here design to be able to unleash the full potential of the system, The PC they must have figured just wasant worth it.

I played the demo.

Im so fucking getting this.....

[Serio]

Originally Posted by Admiral_Antilles

Each version of the game, where specifically altered int here design to be able to unleash the full potential of the system, The PC they must have figured just wasant worth it.

I played the demo.

Im so fucking getting this.....

Just what i was thinking! I remember in an interview or FAQ, they were asked why they didn't create it for PC, and one of the other reasons was that on consoles, they only have to make it for one kind of spec, while on PC they need to adjust it properly.

Originally Posted by S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

Its coming out on the Wii and PS2..... don't give me the "not enough power" bullshit

The Xbox and PS3 are the only systems to get both the DMM and Euphoria. Don't forget those two are the most advanced and best physics engines. Not even the CryEngine can do what they do. Each item is generated on the run, so it requires quite some CPU. I'm amazed they can actually make it run on the consoles at all.

But is it me, or does it have that Jedi Knight genre feel over it? The way you handle the controls and the like?

[n0e]

Originally Posted by Sa Anupuw

Try a week for silver.

either way the Demo was good, played threw it 10 times, it didn't get old.

oh n0ez, not a week.

I'll wait a week over spending money on something that I'll never use for both practical and moral reasons. They should NOT charge you for simply wanting to play online.

[Mikouen]

The game strikes me as being generally in the same vein as the Devil May Cry series. It's slick, it's stylish, it's action-packed.... but it doesn't have too much depth to it.

While that's not inherently bad, games in general are becoming much deeper than they used to be, and shifting away from the shallow 'arcade' end of the market, even managing to make arcadey action-based games have deeper dimensions to them. By not moving with the times, LucasArts may have made an unwise tactical decision as far as marketing goes.

But then again, LucasArts could probably sell a Daikatana clone just by slapping the Star Wars label on it, so I digress.


Played the demo for half an hour on the demo machines at work.

It's fun, sure, but I'm not sure it'll end up being worth the full retail price because I'm really not sure how much replay value it'll have. That's my main concern, and I think it might be a common concern amongst gamers these days since most titles include incentives for replayability by giving an alternate or adjusted gaming experience each time.

LucasArts would be wise to address that concern before it pops up.

Had fun playing with the physics system, but can't really say much about the game other than that. The demo felt like one big tech demo, screaming "Hey! Look! I give you this really really really interactive world you can manipulate however you like! Play me!".

LucasArts are focused too much on the gimmick, IMO, and not enough on the game itself, so I'm not entirely interested in TFU based on the demo alone. Not enough to get it off my "rent it before you buy it" list, at any rate.

Originally Posted by sideshow_Bob

but many rigs now are better than consoles

But again, applications and background processes also are becoming far more intensive. Proportional scaling, and all.

While today's CPUs are twice as powerful as what was out during the Windows XP era, Windows Vista is typically twice as intensive. As is Microsoft Office 2007 when compared to Office 2003, etc. As applications gain more capabilities, their resource consumption increases in tandem.

So when you buy - for example - a 2.4GHz processor, you're not actually getting anywhere near the full 2.4GHz to use; because your operating system, firewall, antivirus, web browser, system processes, instant messengers, media player, and whatever else you may have.... they all take a slice of it.

Whereas with the 360, there's nothing else to take a slice of the power pie, so you get three cores of 3.2GHz power, completely at your disposal

LucasArts are probably right in saying that a PC with equal or greater specs compared to a 360/PS3 would be incapable of running TFU.

Originally Posted by STALKER

Its coming out on the Wii and PS2..... don't give me the "not enough power" bullshit

The PS2 can dedicate all of it's resources to one task - running the game.

A PC only has a fraction of it's resources with which to run the game.

Also remember that the PS2 uses 128-bit processors, a whole generation of processors ahead of what PCs have.

In practice, the PS2 would win by default, since the PC has used up almost all of it's resources before it can even think of games.

Originally Posted by n0e

I'll wait a week over spending money on something that I'll never use for both practical and moral reasons. They should NOT charge you for simply wanting to play online.

Sorry, but I have a tradition where any time I see someone who has no problems with MMO subscription fees play that card regarding XBL, I have to say the following:

"LOL"

No hard feelings?

Hey, I'd love XBL Gold to be free, too, but it is far better value for money than an MMORPG.... I think we can at least agree on that point.

[Serio]

Originally Posted by n0e

oh n0ez, not a week.

I'll wait a week over spending money on something that I'll never use for both practical and moral reasons. They should NOT charge you for simply wanting to play online.

You don't pay to play online, you play for protection against hackers and alot of the time, the game servers stay up for as long as needed because they're located on microsofts... Well, servers. I have yet to experience a server crash on a Microsoft Dedicated Server!

Sony and Nintendo knows this, and makes their service free to gain an advantage though.

Originally Posted by Mikouen

The game strikes me as being generally in the same vein as the Devil May Cry series. It's slick, it's stylish, it's action-packed.... but it doesn't have too much depth to it.

While that's not inherently bad, games in general are becoming much deeper than they used to be, and shifting away from the shallow 'arcade' end of the market, even managing to make arcadey action-based games have deeper dimensions to them. By not moving with the times, LucasArts may have made an unwise tactical decision as far as marketing goes.

But then again, LucasArts could probably sell a Daikatana clone just by slapping the Star Wars label on it, so I digress.


Played the demo for half an hour on the demo machines at work.

It's fun, sure, but I'm not sure it'll end up being worth the full retail price because I'm really not sure how much replay value it'll have. That's my main concern, and I think it might be a common concern amongst gamers these days since most titles include incentives for replayability by giving an alternate or adjusted gaming experience each time.

LucasArts would be wise to address that concern before it pops up.

Had fun playing with the physics system, but can't really say much about the game other than that. The demo felt like one big tech demo, screaming "Hey! Look! I give you this really really really interactive world you can manipulate however you like! Play me!".

LucasArts are focused too much on the gimmick, IMO, and not enough on the game itself, so I'm not entirely interested in TFU based on the demo alone. Not enough to get it off my "rent it before you buy it" list, at any rate.


But again, applications and background processes also are becoming far more intensive. Proportional scaling, and all.

While today's CPUs are twice as powerful as what was out during the Windows XP era, Windows Vista is typically twice as intensive. As is Microsoft Office 2007 when compared to Office 2003, etc. As applications gain more capabilities, their resource consumption increases in tandem.

So when you buy - for example - a 2.4GHz processor, you're not actually getting anywhere near the full 2.4GHz to use; because your operating system, firewall, antivirus, web browser, system processes, instant messengers, media player, and whatever else you may have.... they all take a slice of it.

Whereas with the 360, there's nothing else to take a slice of the power pie, so you get three cores of 3.2GHz power, completely at your disposal

LucasArts are probably right in saying that a PC with equal or greater specs compared to a 360/PS3 would be incapable of running TFU.

The PS2 can dedicate all of it's resources to one task - running the game.

A PC only has a fraction of it's resources with which to run the game.

Also remember that the PS2 uses 128-bit processors, a whole generation of processors ahead of what PCs have.

In practice, the PS2 would win by default, since the PC has used up almost all of it's resources before it can even think of games.

Sorry, but I have a tradition where any time I see someone who has no problems with MMO subscription fees play that card regarding XBL, I have to say the following:

"LOL"

No hard feelings?

Hey, I'd love XBL Gold to be free, too, but it is far better value for money than an MMORPG.... I think we can at least agree on that point.

I totally agree with you!

I have now played the demo through 8 times. Going for a 9th soon!

[n0e]

Originally Posted by Mikouen

Sorry, but I have a tradition where any time I see someone who has no problems with MMO subscription fees play that card regarding XBL, I have to say the following:

"LOL"

No hard feelings?

Hey, I'd love XBL Gold to be free, too, but it is far better value for money than an MMORPG.... I think we can at least agree on that point.

The problem with that analogy is that you can simply play a different game without a monthly fee. Basically Microsoft is nickel and diming you with it's gold level subscription. Those who play MMO's have free alternatives, they can choose to pay for a monthly fee if they want to play certain games. Forking over $400 for a system then another $15/month is pushing it. I also said it was my choice and opinion. They're trying to retain a profit on their xbox system to finally get their gaming division out of the red. It's been there for quite a while if you didn't know. I have yet to see anything 'extra' that merits me forking over my hard earned money to them. All they're offering for that price is online play (which my opinion [see opinion, not stating fact] is that it should be free) and first dibs on demos. Whoopity doo on the demos. I can wait a week. I was a little frustrated that I couldn't get the force unleashed demo yesterday, but cest la vie. I'm not paying for a friggin demo. Now, if they added more to gold subscriptions, like perhaps discounts on purchases of games or something (just an example, not exclusive to this) that would have this montly fee mean something, then sure, I'll pay.

You don't pay to play online, you play for protection against hackers and alot of the time, the game servers stay up for as long as needed because they're located on microsofts... Well, servers. I have yet to experience a server crash on a Microsoft Dedicated Server!

I've already encountered a few times where I was unable to sign in because the servers were down.

I'm not an anti-xbox person. I have an xbox, however I feel that microsoft is pulling some shady stuff with their console is all. And if you want to play cards, I'll pull out the card that it's not any different then how people view Microsoft's Windows OS.

[Dursk]

This game is quite increible...
I've never seen anything like it.

[Serio]

Originally Posted by n0e

The problem with that analogy is that you can simply play a different game without a monthly fee. Basically Microsoft is nickel and diming you with it's gold level subscription. Those who play MMO's have free alternatives, they can choose to pay for a monthly fee if they want to play certain games. Forking over $400 for a system then another $15/month is pushing it. I also said it was my choice and opinion. They're trying to retain a profit on their xbox system to finally get their gaming division out of the red. It's been there for quite a while if you didn't know. I have yet to see anything 'extra' that merits me forking over my hard earned money to them. All they're offering for that price is online play (which my opinion [see opinion, not stating fact] is that it should be free) and first dibs on demos. Whoopity doo on the demos. I can wait a week. I was a little frustrated that I couldn't get the force unleashed demo yesterday, but cest la vie. I'm not paying for a friggin demo. Now, if they added more to gold subscriptions, like perhaps discounts on purchases of games or something (just an example, not exclusive to this) that would have this montly fee mean something, then sure, I'll pay.

I've already encountered a few times where I was unable to sign in because the servers were down.

I'm not an anti-xbox person. I have an xbox, however I feel that microsoft is pulling some shady stuff with their console is all. And if you want to play cards, I'll pull out the card that it's not any different then how people view Microsoft's Windows OS.

I'm probably the same then. I've had problems with the console, and Microsoft support, but it still seems to have turned out good in the end. Their system is sometimes far too complicated though(A tiny space typo removed my 3 months subscription and i had to contact their support to get it fixed).

Originally Posted by Dursk

This game is quite increible...
I've never seen anything like it.

It seems like releasing a demo was the right thing to do...

[Mikouen]

Dammit n0e, I was hoping you were going to call out my NGE Jedi days. Then we'd get into a semi-semantical debate which gets split into a different thread on the topic of subscription fees in general, resulting in an overall well-informed (thus, relatively fun) grey-matter duel.

Wow, things must really be bad if you have to search for an opportunity to engineer a debate....

Well, I never said the tradition worked on anyone with more than three braincells to rub together. I usually just use it on Gamespot twerps who claim subscription fees in games are wrong altogether, only to have an Xfire profile in their sig that shows them actively playing six pay-to-play MMOs as well as countless Cash Shop ones. It's amusing to observe, because everyone seems to have a twitchy reaction to getting called on that.

Word on Microsoft expanding XBL. They're moving in the right direction, but not quite quickly enough. You Americans are lucky, you get Netflix in the next update which would be something quite useful to have over here. Guess MS couldn't find any vendors to participate.

MS Games is in the red, eh? Perhaps they should start looking at the games people want, and work on developing them. Can't count the number of times people have clamoured for a Freelancer 2 or a modern remake of the first AoE. s, MechWarrior, Rise of Nations, all untapped goldmines.

But anyway, that's off-topic rambling. Sorry.


Back to TFU....

The demo really should have showcased how the technology lends itself to evolving the game experience, rather than showing it off, I think. Combat was all too easy without utilising the Force, and actually, attempting to use the game's physics to take down enemies just felt uncomfortable. Control system needs revising, perhaps?

Wouldn't say "I've never seen anything like it" though, not yet anyway. Ignoring the Force stuff, the actual fighting element is much like Dynasty Warriors, and to a lesser extent, Devil May Cry.

LucasArts were right to put out a demo, it's something all devs should do when possible. But I don't think they showcased the game as well as they could. LucasArts seem unwilling to show the game's full potential. Something which showcased the unique elements of TFU and the truest potential of the physics engine would have been a better choice than a generic beat-'em-up level. It's not bad, it just doesn't showcase TFU in the best possible light it could've, and therein lies an inherent issue. LucasArts are relying too much on brand power, and on occasion I think it makes them sloppy in their decisions whether they're acting as developer or publisher (see: KotOR2 fiasco, Jedi Outcast/Academy).

Ignoring the technology and focusing strictly on the game itself, I can't yet see too much in TFU that other games haven't already done in the past. And if it's going to turn out to be another generic action-adventure beat-'em-up that relies solely on one gimmick to differentiate itself from other games.... well, guess I'll see how it goes when I rent it.

Hoping it's not all 'style over substance', because style is available elsewhere with substance accompanying it. And there's just so much damn potential for real substance in TFU. As much as I'm loathe to admit it, because the Jedi/Sith thing is so overdone to the point where it ceased to be cool five years ago whereas the titular "Stars" and "Wars" are completely ignored despite being the more interesting stuff, there's a lot of potential for substance.


Serio, just be glad Microsoft's customer support are (mostly) useful. Typically it's the complex systems that are the secure ones, and that's the trade-off we have to pay, because no one has yet managed to strike the balance between safe and simple.

Look on the bright side, it could be much worse. You could have a complex system and crappy tech support. Oh, I'm just so glad PSN never had any issues I couldn't fix myself for the duration when I had access to it - every time I've had to talk to anyone at any branch of Sony in the past, they've given me an aneurysm.

(And I still want to know which twat told SOE it was smart to build an entire website out of Javascript. Fool needs firing. Entire site.... Javascript.... Read a web design textbook or something, SOE Web Site Guy/Gal!)

[Serio]

Originally Posted by Mikouen

Wouldn't say "I've never seen anything like it" though, not yet anyway. Ignoring the Force stuff, the actual fighting element is much like Dynasty Warriors, and to a lesser extent, Devil May Cry.

LucasArts were right to put out a demo, it's something all devs should do when possible. But I don't think they showcased the game as well as they could. LucasArts seem unwilling to show the game's full potential. Something which showcased the unique elements of TFU and the truest potential of the physics engine would have been a better choice than a generic beat-'em-up level. It's not bad, it just doesn't showcase TFU in the best possible light it could've, and therein lies an inherent issue. LucasArts are relying too much on brand power, and on occasion I think it makes them sloppy in their decisions whether they're acting as developer or publisher (see: KotOR2 fiasco, Jedi Outcast/Academy).

Ignoring the technology and focusing strictly on the game itself, I can't yet see too much in TFU that other games haven't already done in the past. And if it's going to turn out to be another generic action-adventure beat-'em-up that relies solely on one gimmick to differentiate itself from other games.... well, guess I'll see how it goes when I rent it.

Hoping it's not all 'style over substance', because style is available elsewhere with substance accompanying it. And there's just so much damn potential for real substance in TFU. As much as I'm loathe to admit it, because the Jedi/Sith thing is so overdone to the point where it ceased to be cool five years ago whereas the titular "Stars" and "Wars" are completely ignored despite being the more interesting stuff, there's a lot of potential for substance.


Serio, just be glad Microsoft's customer support are (mostly) useful. Typically it's the complex systems that are the secure ones, and that's the trade-off we have to pay, because no one has yet managed to strike the balance between safe and simple.

Look on the bright side, it could be much worse. You could have a complex system and crappy tech support. Oh, I'm just so glad PSN never had any issues I couldn't fix myself for the duration when I had access to it - every time I've had to talk to anyone at any branch of Sony in the past, they've given me an aneurysm.

(And I still want to know which twat told SOE it was smart to build an entire website out of Javascript. Fool needs firing. Entire site.... Javascript.... Read a web design textbook or something, SOE Web Site Guy/Gal!)

I cut out the things i didn't have an opinion on.

Anyways, the thing about TFU isn't the physics engine. It's the way they execute it. Alot of engines(PhysX engines, for example) tries to overdo it and look the best. However, DMM and TFU seem so... smooth and fluid. You never seem to notice anything when you use force push, because it blends in so naturally.

"Star wars" is about several Wars(The "Wars"?) in the Stars. And the fighting element is HEAVILY inspired by the Jedi Knight series i believe. I have 1500 hours in JKA, and it feels so much like it. Down to the way the saber is swung, to the force push.

I believe each level in the full TFU game will showcase other parts of the engine. We know there's a Kashyyyk level that shows how you can cut down trees, and the Felucia level will show the physical properties.