Re: So... About that Duke Nukem Remake/Reload/Remastered/Reanything
Indeed, Half-Life was an incredible game, but how many times did you replay it? I didn't replay it at all. I was a cool run, nice story and (most importantly) was something different and new.
I hardly ever replay a shooter these days, do you know which shooters I replay? Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, quake, Hexen, Duke Nukem 3D, Jedi Knight... those are the kinda games I replay, even today.
Wolfenstein: the new order, was (suprisingly) a decent shooter. I loved every minute of it, despite the poor 'explorability'. But...I didn't replay it. I know the story now, there's nothing new to see anymore. It just disappeared on top of a pile of games.
I don't have that with those older shooters: there's still something new to explore. You can never find all the rooms, secrets,... and you can jump into action immediately. I love that about a game.
I'm the type of gamer that loves games like 'Boiling point', which was poor according to some reviews. Not too much story, just drop me in an open world and let me find my way. I hate games that, even remotely, hold my hand.
How many times do you get stuck in modern shooters? Hardly ever... In some classic shooters you will get stuck, and not because of the maze-like levels. Jedi Knight is a great example: at some points you will encounter puzzles, you'll have to think you're way out. Again: that's what I miss with modern shooters.
SW2013 was a good game, I loved it. But again: it became very predictable. At some point, you knew from a mile away that a door would slam shut behind you and opponents came spawning in front of you. You were stuck, you had to defeat them all untill another door opened. What was wrong with enemies patrolling an area? A good balance makes for a good game. But with SH2013, it wasn't balanced at all. In combination with the lineair levels (allthough less linear than many other modern shooters), it became boring after a while.
Last edited by BadRix; 10-26-2014 at 04:16 AM.
|