Wolfenstein is terrible.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
So, in summary, you didn't like the graphics or AI.
I skimmed through your post and all I have to say is this. You're a graphics whore. ;)fudgeblood
So, in summary, you didn't like the graphics or AI.LegendaryscmtOrrr the multiplayer, which was a big cornerstone for RTCW.
[QUOTE="fudgeblood"]I skimmed through your post and all I have to say is this. You're a graphics whore. ;)zomglolcats
So, in summary, you didn't like the graphics or AI.LegendaryscmtOrrr the multiplayer, which was a big cornerstone for RTCW. Yes, but isn't the new Wolfenstein a singleplayer oriented game anyway? If so it seems quite odd to complain about that.
I loved RTCW and thought the multiplayer was amazing and the single player was great with some scary levels and amazing graphics for their day. I played Wolfenstein and frigging it has to be one of the most generic depressing games I've ever played. It looks like I'm playing a game from 2003 and the gameplay is like FPS hasn't evolved since the 90's lol. I mean the AI is so bad it feels like they merged System Shock 2 with Doom or something. The character models are bad and the guns all look really bad I just don't get what the hell Id were thinking when they let that other developer create this **** I'd forgive them id they made a good Multiplayer but it's not even has good as RTCW's and the graphics are the worst thing I've ever seen in them, even worse than the single player. It feels like they dumbed down the graphics for the consoles so they could handle it and forgot to do a good port to PC. First Quake 4 and now this... when are Id gonna treat their IPs with some respect and stop handing them to ****ty developers?Varny
While I don't think the new Wolfenstein is a ground breaking hallmark in FPS's certainly don't think it's a terrible game.
The graphics are not top tier for a PC shooter, but to compare them to 10 year old games is silly. You rant about the awful AI.. what's wrong with it? Seems to work pretty well for me. It takes cover when I start shooting, soldiers in the window do a fair job of sticking their head out of a couple of shots while staying in cover. The 'magic' Nazi's do a good job of shielding other mobs, dodging your bullets if you don't take them by surprise and generally supporting 'his' side. No, the AI won't win any chess competition but it's still as good or better than most shooters out there. Given that the mobs exists just to get shot.. they do their job just fine.
As for the multiplayers, I haven't played it and don't plan on playing it. It might be awful, if so, sorry to hear that.
My main annoyance with the game is that it borrows so heavily from CoD4/5. It's the same shooter system, same 'no health meter' system, same grenade insta-kill. At least they don't have the never ending enemy spawns of CoD.
I think the graphics are fine. Sure, they're not Crysis, but on Max settings at 1600x1200 the game looks nice. But then again, I'm not a graphics whore so I wouldn't really care, even if they were horrible.
The weapons feel and sound powerful and are great fun to shoot, and so are the Nazis. The upgrade system is cool, and non-completionists finally have a reason to collect as much of the gold (and intelligence) as we can. The missions I've played so far are fun, including the hospital and the farm. I also think the veil works well, and is integrated nicely (even if you can find veil regeneration pools in just about every room).
Overall, it doesn't do anything groundbreaking, but I didn't expect it to. I expected it to be a fun shooter, where I can unload some lead into the Nazis and their supernatural counterparts. I am happy with the game I got.
I have played almost all fps game out there for PC and original RTCW was one of my top 3 game on list and i played online to death on that game.But to me this new game is a bit shallow.I am not a graphics whore but appreciate good graphics but its not the decider factor for me.I will tell you that it looks ok graphics wise but a bit dated.The main problem is it reminds me too much of COD gameplay wise and i hates it.Why the hell all FPS game going into COD/Halo style gameplay?We need some innovation on fps game people.
It's developer cash whoring at its finest. He's complaining that the game doesn't do any form of justice to Wolfenstein - which is completely legitimate. Wolfenstein and Return to Castle Wolfenstein were both excellent, games at the top of their genre at each game's release. But this new Wolfenstein is half-assed and soulless. It should have been a bigger project, but it looks like they didn't even try with this one.KHAndAnimeAgreed 100%.
id and Raven have relased a game with dated graphics! Prep the gallows, mate!
*sigh*
And, for your info, laddie, RTCW too, was not developed by id Software. And lord have mercy upon my soul, I thought Quake IV was an excellent, excellent game.
Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
[QUOTE="zomglolcats"][QUOTE="fudgeblood"]I skimmed through your post and all I have to say is this. You're a graphics whore. ;)fudgeblood
So, in summary, you didn't like the graphics or AI.LegendaryscmtOrrr the multiplayer, which was a big cornerstone for RTCW. Yes, but isn't the new Wolfenstein a singleplayer oriented game anyway? If so it seems quite odd to complain about that.
Yes. They just pretty much threw in the multiplayer to try and please the masses.
Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
mimic-Denmark
[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
KHAndAnime
Yeah. There are a lot of series that do that.
[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
KHAndAnime
Then why didnt they release a new wolfenstein game each new year after return?
This is not cash whoring.
Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"][QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
mimic-Denmark
Then why didnt they release a new wolfenstein game each new year after return?
This is not cash whoring.
Because back when RTCW came out, whoring out games wasn't a big trend. These days though - it's the norm. Wolfenstein is just jumping on the band wagon.[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
KHAndAnime
Uh.. With the exception of mods and small scale indie games, What title's are NOT about raking in cash?
Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"][QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
Mazoch
Uh.. With the exception of mods and small scale indie games, What title's are NOT about raking in cash?
Do you know the definition of sole? Look it up. Implying that the only reason this game was made was to cash in on the Wolfenstein name. I know this may come to you as a surprise, but some developers actually *gasp* try to make innovative and fun games in addition to the goal of making cash. Crazy eh? I suggest you check out Half-life, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex...man, there's a lot of games out there that brought something to the table. Wolfenstein isn't one of these games.[QUOTE="Mazoch"]
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"] Since when is cash whoring exclusive to one game? I could name a multitude of games that are soley about raking in the cash. This is one of them.KHAndAnime
Uh.. With the exception of mods and small scale indie games, What title's are NOT about raking in cash?
Do you know the definition of sole? Look it up. Implying that the only reason this game was made was to cash in on the Wolfenstein name. I know this may come to you as a surprise, but some developers actually *gasp* try to make innovative and fun games in addition to the goal of making cash. Crazy eh? I suggest you check out Half-life, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex...man, there's a lot of games out there that brought something to the table. Wolfenstein isn't one of these games.EVERY high end title released in the last decade (including the titles mentioned) are first and formost developed after the one big question has been answered.. will it make us a profit.
Yes, the developers do care about the games they work on. But they dont have a say in whether the game gets funding. Claiming that the developers didnt care about wolfenstein but claiming that they did care about the titles you happend to admire is kinda stupid.
So you dont think Wolfenstein brought anything new to the table, thats fine, but that has nothing to do with whether the game was developed specifically to generate a profit.
Do you know the definition of sole? Look it up. Implying that the only reason this game was made was to cash in on the Wolfenstein name. I know this may come to you as a surprise, but some developers actually *gasp* try to make innovative and fun games in addition to the goal of making cash. Crazy eh? I suggest you check out Half-life, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex...man, there's a lot of games out there that brought something to the table. Wolfenstein isn't one of these games.[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]
[QUOTE="Mazoch"]
Uh.. With the exception of mods and small scale indie games, What title's are NOT about raking in cash?
Mazoch
EVERY high end title released in the last decade (including the titles mentioned) are first and formost developed after the one big question has been answered.. will it make us a profit.
Yes, the developers do care about the games they work on. But they dont have a say in whether the game gets funding. Claiming that the developers didnt care about wolfenstein but claiming that they did care about the titles you happend to admire is kinda stupid.
So you dont think Wolfenstein brought anything new to the table, thats fine, but that has nothing to do with whether the game was developed specifically to generate a profit.
Captain Obvious to the rescue. Businesses want to make money? Really? Thanks for the tip. I wouldn't have known if you didn't tell me ;). My point remains - and if you don't see it, then there's no use further explaining it to you after this. The game was a lazy attempt at cashing in on the Wolfenstein name. They simply got together, decided to make an average singleplayer - hired some inexperienced company to develop the multiplayer, and called it a day. People walk into the store, see "Wolfenstein", think "Hey! I loved Return to Castle Wolfenstein! I have to play this...", and the rest is history. How long did they even develop this game for? 8 months? If even that?I think that it is quite good
Do you know the definition of sole? Look it up.KHAndAnimeThe bottom of a shoe? :P
[QUOTE="Mazoch"][QUOTE="KHAndAnime"] Do you know the definition of sole? Look it up. Implying that the only reason this game was made was to cash in on the Wolfenstein name. I know this may come to you as a surprise, but some developers actually *gasp* try to make innovative and fun games in addition to the goal of making cash. Crazy eh? I suggest you check out Half-life, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex...man, there's a lot of games out there that brought something to the table. Wolfenstein isn't one of these games.
KHAndAnime
EVERY high end title released in the last decade (including the titles mentioned) are first and formost developed after the one big question has been answered.. will it make us a profit.
Yes, the developers do care about the games they work on. But they dont have a say in whether the game gets funding. Claiming that the developers didnt care about wolfenstein but claiming that they did care about the titles you happend to admire is kinda stupid.
So you dont think Wolfenstein brought anything new to the table, thats fine, but that has nothing to do with whether the game was developed specifically to generate a profit.
Captain Obvious to the rescue. Businesses want to make money? Really? Thanks for the tip. I wouldn't have known if you didn't tell me ;). My point remains - and if you don't see it, then there's no use further explaining it to you after this. The game was a lazy attempt at cashing in on the Wolfenstein name. They simply got together, decided to make an average singleplayer - hired some inexperienced company to develop the multiplayer, and called it a day. People walk into the store, see "Wolfenstein", think "Hey! I loved Return to Castle Wolfenstein! I have to play this...", and the rest is history. How long did they even develop this game for? 8 months? If even that? I say I have to agree. Just because they haven't pumped out sequels like Madden doesn't mean it wasn't a cash in on the name. It's been years since RTCW was released. You'd think they would have been able to come up with something a bit better. It might not be terrible, but certainly average.Temporary funding for Rage? Who knows :P
ahem The new wolfenstein is a COD gameCash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
mimic-Denmark
[QUOTE="Mazoch"][QUOTE="KHAndAnime"] Do you know the definition of sole? Look it up. Implying that the only reason this game was made was to cash in on the Wolfenstein name. I know this may come to you as a surprise, but some developers actually *gasp* try to make innovative and fun games in addition to the goal of making cash. Crazy eh? I suggest you check out Half-life, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex...man, there's a lot of games out there that brought something to the table. Wolfenstein isn't one of these games.
KHAndAnime
EVERY high end title released in the last decade (including the titles mentioned) are first and formost developed after the one big question has been answered.. will it make us a profit.
Yes, the developers do care about the games they work on. But they dont have a say in whether the game gets funding. Claiming that the developers didnt care about wolfenstein but claiming that they did care about the titles you happend to admire is kinda stupid.
So you dont think Wolfenstein brought anything new to the table, thats fine, but that has nothing to do with whether the game was developed specifically to generate a profit.
Captain Obvious to the rescue. Businesses want to make money? Really? Thanks for the tip. I wouldn't have known if you didn't tell me ;). My point remains - and if you don't see it, then there's no use further explaining it to you after this. The game was a lazy attempt at cashing in on the Wolfenstein name. They simply got together, decided to make an average singleplayer - hired some inexperienced company to develop the multiplayer, and called it a day. People walk into the store, see "Wolfenstein", think "Hey! I loved Return to Castle Wolfenstein! I have to play this...", and the rest is history. How long did they even develop this game for? 8 months? If even that?And thus my point.. You're confusing the motivation of the developers with your personal opinion of whether it's a good game or not.
If you really wanna talk about a generic run of the mill shooter with no innovation Return to Castle Wolfenstein would be a much better fit for your rant. That games single player brought nothing new to the genre that hadn't been done already by Half-Life. At least the latest Wolfenstein tries to mix it up a bit with the upgradable weapons, using a mission hub map with different optional missions as opposed to a strictly linear mission structure.
Your claim that "The game was a lazy attempt at cashing in on the Wolfenstein name." Geez wiz!! Say it isn't so! Next you'll tell me that Fallout 2 tried to build on the success of Fallout 1?! You might even accuse Monkey Island 2 of simply reusing the formula of Monkey Island 1 to earn more money.. the HORROR!!! And you call me Captain Obvious :?
So, you think the game is uninspired and doesn't go far enough in innovation.. eh that's your opinion and I can certainly see some merit in that. Calling the developers lazy and attempting to assign some kind of moral or ethical motivation for some developers while claiming that others lack this mystical benevolent spirit is stupid.
EDIT: Corrected Half-Life 2, as KHAndAnime pointed out, HL2 was released after RTCW
Captain Obvious to the rescue. Businesses want to make money? Really? Thanks for the tip. I wouldn't have known if you didn't tell me ;). My point remains - and if you don't see it, then there's no use further explaining it to you after this. The game was a lazy attempt at cashing in on the Wolfenstein name. They simply got together, decided to make an average singleplayer - hired some inexperienced company to develop the multiplayer, and called it a day. People walk into the store, see "Wolfenstein", think "Hey! I loved Return to Castle Wolfenstein! I have to play this...", and the rest is history. How long did they even develop this game for? 8 months? If even that?[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"][QUOTE="Mazoch"]
EVERY high end title released in the last decade (including the titles mentioned) are first and formost developed after the one big question has been answered.. will it make us a profit.
Yes, the developers do care about the games they work on. But they dont have a say in whether the game gets funding. Claiming that the developers didnt care about wolfenstein but claiming that they did care about the titles you happend to admire is kinda stupid.
So you dont think Wolfenstein brought anything new to the table, thats fine, but that has nothing to do with whether the game was developed specifically to generate a profit.
Mazoch
And thus my point.. You're confusing the motivation of the developers with your personal opinion of whether it's a good game or not.
If you really wanna talk about a generic run of the mill shooter with no innovation Return to Castle Wolfenstein would be a much better fit for your rant. That games single player brought nothing new to the genre that hadn't been done already by Half-Life 2. At least the latest Wolfenstein tries to mix it up a bit with the upgradable weapons, using a mission hub map with different optional missions as opposed to a strictly linear mission structure.
Your claim that "The game was a lazy attempt at cashing in on the Wolfenstein name." Geez wiz!! Say it isn't so! Next you'll tell me that Fallout 2 tried to build on the success of Fallout 1?! You might even accuse Monkey Island 2 of simply reusing the formula of Monkey Island 1 to earn more money.. the HORROR!!! And you call me Captain Obvious :?
So, you think the game is uninspired and doesn't go far enough in innovation.. eh that's your opinion and I can certainly see some merit in that. Calling the developers lazy and attempting to assign some kind of moral or ethical motivation for some developers while claiming that others lack this mystical benevolent spirit is stupid.
I don't think anyone hates the single player game. I'm sure its great. Those of us that think a multiplayer game for $50 that carries the name of the best online FPS game ever created (RTCW) should be an amazing multiplayer experience are pissed right now. They hired some no name company to make their multiplayer and did no oversight. They let the game be released with the crappiest multiplayer ever created. RTCW was a game with the worst single player, and best multiplayer. I was expecting meh single player that I wouldn't ever launch and a good 5+ years of nonstop online enjoyment. What I got was a flop. An online game thats gonna die out in a couple months, with no servers available. No one enjoying it enough to create mods (like shrub). Don't even have console or people raving about their pride and joy config files. This is just a single player game. It was advertised as a bad ass multiplayer game when it took on the name wolfenstein and they did not deliver.Mazoch, I'm not going to argue with you, because you're attempting to disagree just for the sake. You know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.
RTCW came out 3 years before Half-Life 2. I don't know if you're trolling, or if you just haven't been PC gaming long, or what, but you don't even know what you're talking about any more. You think every developer's goal is only to make money with no regards to quality? Cool.
But have you ever heard of a game called "Wolfenstein : Enemy Territory"? Guess what: The developers at the were going to release an expansion to RTCW called "Enemy Territory" - but since it wasn't living up to their expectations of what they figured was a full game. They released it for FREE. Yes, FREE. They couldn't figure out how to make an excellent singleplayer component to back up the multiplayer, so they released their work for free.
Where's the profit in that? And on top of that: Enemy Territory is a much better multiplayer game than what Wolfenstein has to offer. Especially for the time it was released.
I skimmed through your post and all I have to say is this. You're a graphics whore. ;)fudgebloodI agree... Although the graphics could be better....the game is still fun (Single Player).
I don't think anyone hates the single player game. I'm sure its great. Those of us that think a multiplayer game for $50 that carries the name of the best online FPS game ever created (RTCW) should be an amazing multiplayer experience are pissed right now. They hired some no name company to make their multiplayer and did no oversight. They let the game be released with the crappiest multiplayer ever created. RTCW was a game with the worst single player, and best multiplayer. I was expecting meh single player that I wouldn't ever launch and a good 5+ years of nonstop online enjoyment. What I got was a flop. An online game thats gonna die out in a couple months, with no servers available. No one enjoying it enough to create mods (like shrub). Don't even have console or people raving about their pride and joy config files. This is just a single player game. It was advertised as a bad ass multiplayer game when it took on the name wolfenstein and they did not deliver.generatedname
Ok, I can certainly appreciate the disappointment there. For me Wolfenstein is associated with one of the oldest (or arguably the oldest), single player FPS out there. Why one studio was selected to make the different parts of the different games I couldn't say. But the same model was actually used for both games. When RTCW was developed, ID 'outsourced' the development of the single players game to Gray Matter (which apparently later became / merged with Treyarch) and the multiplayer was developed separately by Nerve Software.
In the latest Wolfenstein, the single player was developed by Raven Software and the multiplayer was developed by Enderant Studios. I think it's really a case of RTCW having ended up with a single player developer who did an 'ok' job (much like they did little more than an 'ok' job with world at war), and a different studio who managed to knock the multiplayer out of the park.
For this time around they bet their money on two other studios. Raven produced a pretty decent single player rump while Enderant apparently dropped the ball. I don't think it's a matter of someone being lazy, but rather the risk that comes with picking a different studio for the job... especially a studio that's from all appearances a new company with little to no experience. Seems like an odd choice but then I don't know why ID would pick them.
[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]ahem The new wolfenstein is a COD gameCash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
generatedname
Oki. Ill just boot up COD 4 and take out my particle cannon and decimate some nazis!
Oh wait...
Every game is a business.
A COD every year or a sports game, or nfs game every year is cashing in.
A new sequel with so much time between like wolfenstein, is not cashing in and just making it for the profit.
And In case you havent noticed, then the fps genre havent evolved much outside graphicsin a long, LOOONG time.
Half life 2 was a great game, but it wasnt anything new. Other then its physics, which was even intruduced in games before hl2, like Painkiller.
ahem The new wolfenstein is a COD game[QUOTE="generatedname"][QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
Cash Whoring??? I think you meant to write that in a thread regarding the CoD games!
mimic-Denmark
Oki. Ill just boot up COD 4 and take out my particle cannon and decimate some nazis!
Oh wait...
Every game is a business.
A COD every year or a sports game, or nfs game every year is cashing in.
A new sequel with so much time between like wolfenstein, is not cashing in and just making it for the profit.
And In case you havent noticed, then the fps genre havent evolved much outside graphicsin a long, LOOONG time.
Half life 2 was a great game, but it wasnt anything new. Other then its physics, which was even intruduced in games before hl2, like Painkiller.
What does the amount of time between games have to do with anything? It's not like they spent that entire time after RTCW working on Wolfenstein. Modern Warfare 2 had a longer development cycle than Wolfenstein did. Whoever was holding the Wolfenstein license at the time probably just figured "Well, since we have rights to make the game, might as well just not sit around with it".[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"][QUOTE="generatedname"] ahem The new wolfenstein is a COD gameKHAndAnime
Oki. Ill just boot up COD 4 and take out my particle cannon and decimate some nazis!
Oh wait...
Every game is a business.
A COD every year or a sports game, or nfs game every year is cashing in.
A new sequel with so much time between like wolfenstein, is not cashing in and just making it for the profit.
And In case you havent noticed, then the fps genre havent evolved much outside graphicsin a long, LOOONG time.
Half life 2 was a great game, but it wasnt anything new. Other then its physics, which was even intruduced in games before hl2, like Painkiller.
What does the amount of time between games have to do with anything? It's not like they spent that entire time after RTCW working on Wolfenstein. Modern Warfare 2 had a longer development cycle than Wolfenstein did. Whoever was holding the Wolfenstein license at the time probably just figured "Well, since we have rights to make the game, might as well just not sit around with it".Well, for starters, they didnt sit around thinking, we got a big brand name here, lets roll out as many games as possible.
And no, Modern Warefare 2 didnt have a longer development time. Wolfenstein has been in and out of development since 2005. The first COD was released around that time.
What does the amount of time between games have to do with anything? It's not like they spent that entire time after RTCW working on Wolfenstein. Modern Warfare 2 had a longer development cycle than Wolfenstein did. Whoever was holding the Wolfenstein license at the time probably just figured "Well, since we have rights to make the game, might as well just not sit around with it".[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"][QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
Oki. Ill just boot up COD 4 and take out my particle cannon and decimate some nazis!
Oh wait...
Every game is a business.
A COD every year or a sports game, or nfs game every year is cashing in.
A new sequel with so much time between like wolfenstein, is not cashing in and just making it for the profit.
And In case you havent noticed, then the fps genre havent evolved much outside graphicsin a long, LOOONG time.
Half life 2 was a great game, but it wasnt anything new. Other then its physics, which was even intruduced in games before hl2, like Painkiller.
mimic-Denmark
Well, for starters, they didnt sit around thinking, we got a big brand name here, lets roll out as many games as possible.
And no, Modern Warefare 2 didnt have a longer development time. Wolfenstein has been in and out of development since 2005. The first COD was released around that time.
Hmm, I suppose you're right. I had no knowledge of this game until later last year. Regardless, Infinity Ward - despite not bringing anything new to the FPS genre, is consistently pumping out decent games. In no way would I say they are abusing their fan base. I have no idea what went wrong with Wolfenstein, but the final product feels cheap and half-assed. It doesn't even feel like a Wolfenstein game. Maybe Infinity Ward uses their time more efficiently? After all, there are a lot of games out there with long development times that failed to deliver.[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"] What does the amount of time between games have to do with anything? It's not like they spent that entire time after RTCW working on Wolfenstein. Modern Warfare 2 had a longer development cycle than Wolfenstein did. Whoever was holding the Wolfenstein license at the time probably just figured "Well, since we have rights to make the game, might as well just not sit around with it". KHAndAnime
Well, for starters, they didnt sit around thinking, we got a big brand name here, lets roll out as many games as possible.
And no, Modern Warefare 2 didnt have a longer development time. Wolfenstein has been in and out of development since 2005. The first COD was released around that time.
Hmm, I suppose you're right. I had no knowledge of this game until later last year. Regardless, Infinity Ward - despite not bringing anything new to the FPS genre, is consistently pumping out decent games. In no way would I say they are abusing their fan base. I have no idea what went wrong with Wolfenstein, but the final product feels cheap and half-assed. It doesn't even feel like a Wolfenstein game. Maybe Infinity Ward uses their time more efficiently? After all, there are a lot of games out there with long development times that failed to deliver.Well, each to their own ;)
Personally, I thought Wolfys single was superb! And well worth the wait, and was completely in line with previous single player wolfenstein games.
Didnt care much for the multiplayer in the new or the old one. I was always in it for the campaign. World War 2 theme and the occult was always something very cool and unique to the wolfenstein franchise.
Mazoch, I'm not going to argue with you, because you're attempting to disagree just for the sake. You know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.
RTCW came out 3 years before Half-Life 2. I don't know if you're trolling, or if you just haven't been PC gaming long, or what, but you don't even know what you're talking about any more. You think every developer's goal is only to make money with no regards to quality? Cool.
But have you ever heard of a game called "Wolfenstein : Enemy Territory"? Guess what: The developers at the were going to release an expansion to RTCW called "Enemy Territory" - but since it wasn't living up to their expectations of what they figured was a full game. They released it for FREE. Yes, FREE. They couldn't figure out how to make an excellent singleplayer component to back up the multiplayer, so they released their work for free.
Where's the profit in that? And on top of that: Enemy Territory is a much better multiplayer game than what Wolfenstein has to offer. Especially for the time it was released.
KHAndAnime
First, Your correct about HL2, I had the dates mixed up.
My issue is still with your notion of good and bad guy developers. It's about money, it's always about money. Take your own example.. Splash Damage who worked Wolfenstein:ET. Their next project was the multiplayer component on Doom 3, they went from the outstanding, free W:ET to doing a mediocre job of the multiplayer component. They developed and released a multiplayer component that only supported four people at a time. The community had to mod the game to increase the player limit. Why? Because they had started working on the multiplayer game, Quake Wars.
I'm not saying that Wolfensteins Multiplayer is good, or that it doesn't suck that a franchise disappoints. But once professional studios are involved.. it's always about money.
[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"] What does the amount of time between games have to do with anything? It's not like they spent that entire time after RTCW working on Wolfenstein. Modern Warfare 2 had a longer development cycle than Wolfenstein did. Whoever was holding the Wolfenstein license at the time probably just figured "Well, since we have rights to make the game, might as well just not sit around with it". KHAndAnime
Well, for starters, they didnt sit around thinking, we got a big brand name here, lets roll out as many games as possible.
And no, Modern Warefare 2 didnt have a longer development time. Wolfenstein has been in and out of development since 2005. The first COD was released around that time.
Hmm, I suppose you're right. I had no knowledge of this game until later last year. Regardless, Infinity Ward - despite not bringing anything new to the FPS genre, is consistently pumping out decent games. In no way would I say they are abusing their fan base. I have no idea what went wrong with Wolfenstein, but the final product feels cheap and half-assed. It doesn't even feel like a Wolfenstein game. Maybe Infinity Ward uses their time more efficiently? After all, there are a lot of games out there with long development times that failed to deliver.I think what went wrong with wolfenstein was a bad gamble from ID, it looks like they signed a first time studio to do the multiplayer. No idea why.. seems like an odd choice. While Raven Software (who did the single player) have been doing FPS's for years, tasking 'Endrant Studios' with the multiplayer seems odd. The company was founded last year and have no other titles to their credit.
Hmm, I suppose you're right. I had no knowledge of this game until later last year. Regardless, Infinity Ward - despite not bringing anything new to the FPS genre, is consistently pumping out decent games. In no way would I say they are abusing their fan base. I have no idea what went wrong with Wolfenstein, but the final product feels cheap and half-assed. It doesn't even feel like a Wolfenstein game. Maybe Infinity Ward uses their time more efficiently? After all, there are a lot of games out there with long development times that failed to deliver.[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]
[QUOTE="mimic-Denmark"]
Well, for starters, they didnt sit around thinking, we got a big brand name here, lets roll out as many games as possible.
And no, Modern Warefare 2 didnt have a longer development time. Wolfenstein has been in and out of development since 2005. The first COD was released around that time.
Mazoch
I think what went wrong with wolfenstein was a bad gamble from ID, it looks like they signed a first time studio to do the multiplayer. No idea why.. seems like an odd choice. While Raven Software (who did the single player) have been doing FPS's for years, tasking 'Endrant Studios' with the multiplayer seems odd. The company was founded last year and have no other titles to their credit.
I don't think anyone was really holding their breath for the multiplayer component, it seemed like there was definitely a SP focus on this one. Although it was still an odd choice.
What's even more odd is that Raven Software, a pretty darn good company (they made a fun game out of X-Men: Origins. a MOVIE LICENSE! That takes skill) dropped the ball on the SP.
Overall, it's a solid/generic title, and while it provides some mild amusement, there's just so many generic FPSs these days that you've either got to be innovative and genuine (Crysis/ArmA2), or have a coat of polish that makes the final product SHINE like the sun (COD4, for instance. generic, but very well polished)
It's developer cash whoring at its finest. He's complaining that the game doesn't do any form of justice to Wolfenstein - which is completely legitimate. Wolfenstein and Return to Castle Wolfenstein were both excellent, games at the top of their genre at each game's release. But this new Wolfenstein is half-assed and soulless. It should have been a bigger project, but it looks like they didn't even try with this one.KHAndAnimeThis coming from a guy who said and I quote "Couldn't really push myself past an hour into the game without getting bored. Just not for me I guess." A single hour of gaming doesn't really give you the solid ground to complain about a game being half-assed and soulless when it basically means you've only played the beginning of the game.
[QUOTE="KHAndAnime"]It's developer cash whoring at its finest. He's complaining that the game doesn't do any form of justice to Wolfenstein - which is completely legitimate. Wolfenstein and Return to Castle Wolfenstein were both excellent, games at the top of their genre at each game's release. But this new Wolfenstein is half-assed and soulless. It should have been a bigger project, but it looks like they didn't even try with this one.TreflisThis coming from a guy who said and I quote "Couldn't really push myself past an hour into the game without getting bored. Just not for me I guess." A single hour of gaming doesn't really give you the solid ground to complain about a game being half-assed and soulless when it basically means you've only played the beginning of the game. I'd like to agree with you on that one. There are not a few games that got off to a rough start but got much, much better, one of them being Raven's own Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast. Damn, those first three missions filled with grey corridors and bad shooting sure gave me the wrong impression, but then I got the lightsaber and things changed dramatically. Suddenly from a drab, disappointing game it got an extra-strong injection of awesome and became one of my favorite games from that year.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment