Widescreen Gaming Forum

Showing gameplay elements whether using pieces of a level in a demo or the actual level itself is still showing gameplay methods that can be used, you're really splitting hairs there. What do you expect, they show you a full level of the game before it's even time to release a playable demo let alone the game itself?

As for where I got the survival horror designation it's seen in reviews of older versions, previews of this version, and customers comments from having played previous installments. Not to mention that they obviously hint at methods you can use to survive both the dark and creatures in the tech demo, if you were paying attention while scoffing at it.

I know some think using a lot of nit picking and opinionated remarks makes them somehow masterful debaters, but I think you are just digging yourself a hole here. Suffice it to say you won't like the game until you see what you consider to be proof it's worth your while. It appears most of us here can see it has something of value though, despite your not.

Showing gameplay elements whether using pieces of a level in a demo or the actual level itself is still showing gameplay methods that can be used, you're really splitting hairs there

I don't think it's splitting hairs at all. It makes a big difference to me whether you're looking at actual gameplay, or just distilled gameplay elements. The latter just doesn't shed any light at all on what it's like to play the game. Without actual gameplay footage, all you can do is *imagine* the gameplay situations in which manipulating light might be useful, rather than witness them firsthand.

What do you expect, they show you a full level of the game before it's even time to release a playable demo let alone the game itself?

They did it with Half-Life 2. Granted, HL2 was more mature (in terms of the development process) at the time of the E3 demo than AitD is now, but I think Valve did the right thing in waiting for HL2 to be in that state before showing off the technology behind it.

As for where I got the survival horror designation it's seen in reviews of older versions, previews of this version, and customers comments from having played previous installments.

I could either point out how this is fairly nonsensical, but it would be simpler to ask you to back this up. So I'll do that. Show me one person who has reviewed "older versions" of this game and called it a "survive in the dark horror game" other than yourself. If your claim is true, then this should be simple.

Not to mention that they obviously hint at methods you can use to survive both the dark and creatures in the tech demo,

That doesn't have anything to do with how "survive in the dark horror game" suddenly became an established genre.

I know some think using a lot of nit picking and opinionated remarks makes them somehow masterful debaters,

You seem to think that dismissing valid points that are contrary to your own opinions as "nitpicking" somehow puts you in the right.

Yes you are splitting hairs, nit picking, call it anything but sensible critiquing and that's what it is. Esp at this stage of the development when their only intent, and practically so, is to show elements of the game.

I really think you're jumping the gun in assuming this is all they will reveal about the game too. It could very well be they are showing us more than most devs would at the stage of development they're at.

If you're referring to HL2's Lost Coast, that was mainly hype to show off HDR, which was just starting to get used in games after devs like CryTek used it in Far Cry. It's not something commonly done and it was a buggy demo anyway.

It appears I did not have to backtrack to those reviews I was speaking of to show you that the "survival horror" designation is applied to AitD because one simple Google search reveals Wikipedia, which is pretty well known for accurate info, says AitD pioneered the genre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_horror

As for the last part, obviously you're in denial that you're nit picking and can't even grasp basic truths about what AitD is, so yes you're nit picking not critiquing really. Nothing I said there was out of place Cranky.

If you can't accept that most of us here appreciate and like what they've shown so far of this game fine, but at this point if you can't even acknowledge what the game is and why they are demoing it the way they are then I think it's best to agree to disagree and leave it at that.:wink:

Yes you are splitting hairs, nit picking, call it anything but sensible critiquing and that's what it is.

You're half wrong and half right. It isn't critiquing. I'm taking it for what it is - a tech demo, and if you re-read my first post, you'll see that I'm acknowledging that the technology is impressive. All I'm saying is that the tech demo doesn't show off actual gameplay, which isn't so much a criticism of this particular one as it is a property of tech demos in general.

I really think you're jumping the gun in assuming this is all they will reveal about the game too.

I never assumed anything of that nature. All I ever commented on was the things they presently demonstrate.

If you're referring to HL2's Lost Coast,

I'm not. I'm referring to a handful of the later E3 demos, one of which I linked to on YouTube. Lost Coast was more or less a tech demo too. It had gameplay, but the HDR lighting had little to do with the gameplay.

It appears I did not have to backtrack to those reviews I was speaking of to show you that the "survival horror" designation is applied to Ait

Exactly as I said two posts ago - you mixed up "survival horror" and "alone in the dark" and came up with the mishmash "survive in the dark horror game." Seriously, you could have spared yourself a lot of trouble if you just went "I meant to say survival horror" instead of going to extreme lengths to defend your new term.

at this point if you can't even acknowledge what the game is

Here's what the game is at this point - an engine, a small number of 3D models, some textures, and a placeholder map. If the tech demos are any indication of the project's maturity, then that's all the game consists of right now, and it's impossible to judge what the final product will be based on this. No matter how much you salivate at the prospects of being able to throw bags of blood at giant beetles.

Giant beetles, LOL, where did you conjur that from? Again, you're splitting hairs, my wording was not exact, but it basically means the same thing as survival horror, except for adding the dark part, which this game emphasizes obviously, as well as many other survival horror games.

You say you are not critiquing but you are more or less implying they've not shown anything impressive at all and that the tech demos they've shown are pretty much pointless, which they're not.

I think you're expecting far too much from a tech demo in the first place. On the one hand you acknowledge what a tech demo is, on the other it's as if you expect they throw you a free chunk of the game just to satisfy your curiosity.

I get the feeling you knew perfectly well what I meant in describing the game and are now backing out of my having proved that AitD is indeed a game about surviving horror in the dark. Let's go back and see exactly what was said before you even tried to call me out on it.

Here's what you quoted when you tried to refute what I said:

"As for where I got the survival horror designation it's seen in reviews of older versions, previews of this version, and customers comments from having played previous installments."

Now I may have worded it a bit different originally, but survive and horror are there plain as day. As mentioned the only thing I added was dark, which is merely a more descript way of saying what kind of survival horror game it is.

And your response:

"I could either point out how this is fairly nonsensical, but it would be simpler to ask you to back this up. So I'll do that. Show me one person who has reviewed "older versions" of this game and called it a "survive in the dark horror game" other than yourself. If your claim is true, then this should be simple."

What's nonsensical about this is your insistence that the mere addition of the word dark somehow makes me way off on my description of the game, yet it's used in the title and is obviouisly part of the gameplay. Why would they spend a lot of time in two tech demos talking about all the ways you can light your path and use the word dark in the title of every installment if dark had nothing to do with it?

You spend a lot of time arguing points that are pointless to argue. Yeah, that's just another way of saying you're nit picking, but I feel it's the one thing here you don't see about this conversation. Your insisting on splitting hairs makes chatting with you rather boring and pointless really. :roll:

Bored now.

Hey Paradigm, you wanna go outside and play? We could play "Horror and go Survive"...in the Dark.

Giant beetles, LOL, where did you conjur that from?

My imagination.

it basically means the same thing as survival horror,

Survival horror is just a name. The meaning isn't as important as the exact wording, which is good because "survival horror" doesn't really mean anything at all in terms of gameplay (what game *doesn't* involve survival as a part of core gameplay)? "Explosion psychotic" means basically the same thing as "Frag Maniac," but I'd still have messed up if I used that to refer to you.

I think you're expecting far too much from a tech demo in the first place.

I think you're extremely quick to jump to conclusions about what I do or do not expect.

What's nonsensical about this is your insistence that the mere addition of the word dark somehow makes me way off on my description of the game,

That wasn't even a "description" in the first place. You didn't say "This game is about surviving in the dark." You said "In a survive in the dark horror game, blah blah blah" which is the way one uses an established label. You even went on to say that the series has always been a "survive in the dark game." Again - a statement that only makes sense if you are talking about an established genre name, which it is not.

You spend a lot of time arguing points that are pointless to argue.

It takes two to argue. I don't see it as pointless - that's why I'm spending my time arguing them. What's your reason if you *do* see it as pointless? You're the one who made it an argument in the first place.

LOL, the other comments here are so true, and all this might I remind you was started by one Cranky Hermit's insistance on implying we have not seen anything impressive about this game. The name Cranky is indeed true to your personality it seems. Forever fussing over each word used as if to give a half arse english lit lecture yet missing the point in the process.

You go on to admit after ranting that you do acknowledge what a tech demo is after implying there should be gameplay shown, despite admitting you know tech demos generally don't have such elements. Which is obviously why I thought you were referring to Lost Coast earlier.

Here's just one example of your narrow minded text book way of thinking causing you to severely miss a point. You say Frag Maniac means the same thing as "explosion psychotic", yet you don't see that something as personal as a screen name has a specific implied meaning that is often not applied to the first dictionary definition found for the words used.

For that matter did it even occur to you that in the gaming world a more common dictionary definition for maniac when applied to a user name is the second one given by Webster: "a person characterized by an inordinate or ungovernable enthusiasm for something". That hardly makes them a "psychotic", but I could see how you'd view it that way.

Ironically it's my enthusiasm (as well as others) for this tech demo that seems to have for some reason struck a nerve in your cranky hermitic core. I really don't see that insisting the game is not represented well by what is merely and admittedly a tech demo is a valid point at all, more of a clever way of making a rant when you saw others here enjoying it.

I know a couple of guys with your style of nit picking, both english lit majors. Neither has done anything better with their lives than I despite their bragging on their degrees. One got evicted for schitzophrenic epiosodes due to being too stubborn to take his meds. The other basically has no friends because he's always putting people down. In the end he realized he'd lost a lot of good friends by it but it was too late.

The latter guy is a hermit too btw, as bright as he is he unwittingly made himself one and is now regretting it. Just goes to show there are more important things than nit picking, esp when it comes to tearing apart people's likes. Just let them enjoy it and maybe you'll learn to enjoy things a bit too.

Now you may think I'm jumping to conclusions alot about you being the same as these guys from the little I've seen you speak, but when someone assumes about names like you did as if to hide the fact that it was a direct flame, I tend to think you need to see some rather good examples of how it reflects on you.

this might I remind you was started by one Cranky Hermit's insistance on implying we have not seen anything impressive about this game.

If you want to trace it to that, then here's how it "started." I said that the tech demos are just tech demos and don't represent what the gameplay is like. And I also admitted the technology is impressive. That is a *far* cry from what you just said I did to "start" it.

You go on to admit after ranting that you do acknowledge what a tech demo is after implying there should be gameplay shown, despite admitting you know tech demos generally don't have such elements

I *never* implied that tech demos should show gameplay. All I said about tech demos and showing gameplay is that they don't.

Here's just one example of your narrow minded text book way of thinking causing you to severely miss a point. You say Frag Maniac means the same thing as "explosion psychotic", yet you don't see that something as personal as a screen name has a specific implied meaning that is often not applied to the first dictionary definition found for the words used.

You do realize that you just accused me of missing my own point? Because there's only one "point" you could possibly be referring to here, and it was my own.

For that matter did it even occur to you that in the gaming world a more common dictionary definition for maniac when applied to a user name is the second one given by Webster: "a person characterized by an inordinate or ungovernable enthusiasm for something".

Fine. Change "explosion psychotic" to "explosion enthusiast." I'd still have messed up if I tried to type your screen name and it came out that way.

I really don't see that insisting the game is not represented well by what is merely and admittedly a tech demo is a valid point at all

And I don't see what's invalid about explaining this. If you do, feel free to share.

Now you may think I'm jumping to conclusions alot about you

No, I think you've sank down to the level of name calling and personal attacks.

The point I was referring to you missing was the point of my screen name obviously which you severely and disrespectfully botched as I pointed out. As far as I'm concerned though you missed the entire point of the thread and turned it into a bickering fest, but I guess that's why you call yourself cranky.

Like I said before, if you don't think the demo's a good one so be it, but the rest of us liked it and saw purpose in it, despite your trying to rain on what you seem to think is an overzealous parade here.

And btw, I merely gave examples of how your nit picking was sheepishly boardering on flame, that's not the same as name calling. You were the one that dragged out the silly screen name implications. Despite your trying to sound profound with your dancing around and nit picking over the words used you have done the stooping here. Hiding behind a cleverly disguised dig at my screen name isn't exactly going to make that fact go away.

The point I was referring to you missing was the point of my screen name

A screen name is a just a name. Generally speaking, they aren't so profound as to have "points." If yours is unusually profound, then please forgive me for not recognizing it as so.

As far as I'm concerned though you missed the entire point of the thread and turned it into a bickering fest

As far as I'm concerned, you missed *my* point that I wanted to add to the thread, and you turned it into a bickering fest.

And btw, I merely gave examples of how your nit picking was sheepishly boardering on flame,

You made some extremely unflattering remarks about two guys you "know" with the none too subtle implication that you think I'm the same as them, and by proxy, the unflattering remarks are directed at me. That's sinking down to personal attacks any way you try to spin it. It has nothing to do with your original point and nothing to do with my original point. It's a personal attack.

You were the one that dragged out the silly screen name implications.

I meant nothing more than this than to point out that names need to be worded right in order to be useful - that it's not enough to get the meaning the same if the words are different. It was never my intention to "dig" at your name. Like I said in the last post, I'm more than happy to change it to "enthusiast" and my point still stands. I could even use my own name to fit the example, and my point would still stand.

ENOUGH.

I'm sceptical :/

But I'm an old git who grew up with the original game which was pretty special. So I just worry that this will cheapen all that by making it into a typical "survival horror" where it's little more than bashing zombies on the head with an iron bar, a plank of wood, a branch of a tree, a bassball bat, perhaps even a chainsaw..

The multiple ways of solving problems could go bad too. In the original, a locked door was locked for a reason. The reason being... it was meant to serve as a challenge, and the challenge was getting past. So you had to find a key, and that involved reading clues and fighting dangerous stuff, and exploring etc.. So a challenge that was actually a challenge. So I just wonder if in the modern game it will make things too simple for the player. You come across a locked door and it no longer serves a challenge because you can open it with your crowbar, your skeleton key, your shotgun can blast the locks off, your gas canister can douse it and then you can burn it down, or there is a window next to the door that you can just climb through.

I hope they prove me wrong and it's awesome though :)

ENOUGH.

You scared me. :shock: :cry: I havn't seen you yell like that before. :lol:

I think this game will go down the line of the BIOSHITE, promise all of these wakky features...free choice, choose how you proceed in every challenge (2 choices, whoopty doo, and customised ways to kill the same creatures over and over again)...and end up being a very lateral game line.

Still waiting for someone to cap DuesEx's very high bar. Well Stalker for me was close in a few aspects.

I think this game will go down the line of the BIOSH***

I thought that was rubbish too :/ The problem is, theres at least a few million people out there who think Bioshock is one of the best games ever made.

Apperently it's now gone gold.


"Atari today announced that development is complete on the highly anticipated action survival game Alone in the Dark.

The game is on track to ship 20 June in Europe and 24 June in North America for Xbox 360, PC, Wii and PlayStation 2. The Playstation 3 version is scheduled for autumn 2008.

Inspired by the story-telling twists and turns of many blockbuster TV series, Alone in the Dark innovates once again with a DVD-style chapter select menu which lets players of all abilities reach the game's dramatic, riveting climax and get the full value out of the game.

"With its genre-busting mix of gameplay, wide-screen presentation style and DVD chapter select feature putting the player in control, Alone in the Dark will thrill all gamers," said Phil Harrison, President of Infogrames Entertainment. "It's a game which will challenge the player but also reward them with a one-of-a-kind video game experience and a huge amount of fun."

In addition to the standard game, Xbox 360, PC and Wii Limited Editions will be available at launch from selected European retailers featuring exclusive items including hero figurine, art book and 'making of' documentary DVD."

So let's hope they got it right... hopefully not another Bioshock - both in widescreen method and 'ground-breaking-ed-ness.'

Apperently it's now gone gold.

Apparently, it's crap.



EDIT - Never mind the install thing. :oops: There is a little checkbox on the bottom left of the initial splash screen for a custom Installation
.


And look what I have to do to install.

http://www.tech-recipes.com/windows_tips242.html

Apperently it's now gone gold.

Apparently, it's crap.

No 'apparently' about it.

Played the 360 version in a shop yesterday. OMFG, that game is terrible.

That's sort of a shame I guess, this is how we don't get new ideas into the gaming business. All the new games that have all these cool features always have 90% of the other stuff garbage and it discourages the industry. It looked like it had some cool ideas, but they couldn't get the basics done right.