|
I don't understand all the hate that Gearbox is getting. Have any of you actually played Borderlands 1 or 2?
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 13:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:52 |
|
|
Longanimitas posted:I don't understand all the hate that Gearbox is getting. Have any of you actually played Borderlands 1 or 2? I've played both, and even though I wasn't a big fan of those games, I don't get the hate either. What is the best case scenario we miss out on, as a result of Gearbox buying HW?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 13:53
|
|
|
James Trickington posted:I've played both, and even though I wasn't a big fan of those games, I don't get the hate either. What is the best case scenario we miss out on, as a result of Gearbox buying HW? I'm guessing its a straight up DMC Devil May Cry scenario. That whatever game no matter how great or what have you Gearbox puts out people will still say this isn't the game we wanted because the wrong company bought it (or wheres our Dante because we can't accept change and have no concept of an evolution of a series). The thing I think most people have to understand hell the same thing goes with Devil May Cry is that sometimes games like that just don't get made anymore. I realize I'm coming off as antagonistic and I'll stop after this, I just cannot for the life of me understand the level of pure unadulterated vitriol that has been spewing forth on the internet in general over the last year. DMC, Street Fighter X Tekken (deservedly so), and now Homeworld I just can't fathom how people are getting so worked up over things that are A. Not even designed or hell even thought about yet B. Using a method available to them to alleviate problems seen in other releases (DLC characters on disk SFxT) or C. A natural Evolution of a series. It just seems that in the last 12 months the internet seems to have lost its collective loving mind over stuff like this. Also it seems that people that believe like I do are starting to wake up and post non-vitriol in the thread so I feel at least a little better in at least holding out hope that you know what, I hope the new game is good in fact I hope its great, but if it isn't they did say and I quote Gearbox posted:According to the statement, Gearbox's first priority with the series is "to preserve and assemble the purest form of the original acclaimed and beloved games, Homeworld and Homeworld 2, with the intent of making them accessible on today's leading digital platforms." Haruharuharuko fucked around with this message at 14:21 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:09
|
|
|
James Trickington posted:What is the best case scenario we miss out on, as a result of Gearbox buying HW? b) Gaben descending from the heavens like an overweight Jesus and uses his infinite money to make a Homeworld 3 that has both an awesome single player story campaign and a free multiplayer client. All the spaceships are wearing hats. Mahuum Aqoha posted:That CodeHunters/Borderlands thing is astonishing. I mean, how hard would it have been to put him on the art team (seeing as how they were already planning to work with him) or at least get his blessing and give him special thanks and/or "inspired by the short film by Ben Hibon"? I really enjoy the Borderlands games but that kind of puts a sour note on the whole thing. (Seriously watch Hidden Fortress and The Dam Busters back to back, nobody really believes it until they see it themselves.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
Most of the negative reactions stem from Gearbox's terrible attitudes towards its customers, publishers, and artists, which go back years and have accumulated all sorts of bad will. I don't blame anyone for having misgivings about handing cash over to the company for a digital re-release of the existing games. As to the quality of their games, even their best titles are formulaic. The Borderlands games were a collection of idea that had been done elsewhere, and (to me at least) they didn't excel at anything in particular. In the best case scenario we'll get a halfway decent Homeworld without any spark of creativity or originality. More likely, we'd get a Homeworld game with terrible writing and a handful of lazy mechanics to draw out the length while giving the illusion of depth. Not the worst thing in the world in either case, but I don't have any confidence in their ability to do anything special.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:19
|
|
|
If Stardock got the rights people would bitch they released a game with no story that took 5 years and 2 expansions to get good. If Paradox got the rights people would bitch that now instead of an epic sweeping game we're going to be playing Logistics: Space Supply Clerk Edition. The key take away is that gamers love to bitch. The worst case scenario is that Homeworld 3 sucks. So don't play it. Stop acting like Randy Pitchford touched your "No-Zone".
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:19
|
|
|
Corin Tucker's Stalker posted:As to the quality of their games, even their best titles are formulaic. The Borderlands games were a collection of idea that had been done elsewhere, and (to me at least) they didn't excel at anything in particular. That seems like a crazy thing to say, I don't think there is a single other game in existence in the borderlands genre of FPS RPG loot game. I mean I guess FPS games, RPGs and loot games all existed previous to it. But they are pretty much the sole player in the genre of FPS diablo clones. (maybe dead island?) Unless you are asking every game to be PS3 flower or something that seems like all a person can reasonably ask for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:28
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That seems like a crazy thing to say, I don't think there is a single other game in existence in the borderlands genre of FPS RPG loot game. I mean I guess FPS games, RPGs and loot games all existed previous to it. But they are pretty much the sole player in the genre of FPS diablo clones. (maybe dead island?) Unless you are asking every game to be PS3 flower or something that seems like all a person can reasonably ask for. It's Hellgate: London but passable, in that its movement and shooting are sort of like Halo. I'm not even opposed to formulas if there's something beyond the mechanics that make a game worthwhile. To be fair, it's fine that games like that exist and people enjoy them. I'm just not confident in Gearbox's ability to make an understated and atmospheric game. I'll be super happy to be wrong. Corin Tucker's Stalker fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
Haruharuharuko posted:
I'm fairly certain that the reason everyone is so upset is that we'd prefer in this case for homeworld to just die a small quiet death rather than us have to watch as gearbox metaphorically slams a dozen grocery carts into the old woman. (Nana.... Why....)
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:43
|
|
|
It's basically X-Com all over again, except this time The Bureau is the only thing that Gearbox has any idea how to make.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:46
|
|
|
Haruharuharuko posted:So that mean we're getting Homeworld on Digital Distribution platforms and if all I get is both games and the expansion pack on my Steam account than I call it a job well done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:49
|
|
|
Corin Tucker's Stalker posted:It's Hellgate: London but passable, in that its movement and shooting are sort of like Halo. I'm not even opposed to formulas if there's something beyond the mechanics that make a game worthwhile. What games are not formulaic by that standard? A game being in a genre with less than 5 entries seems about as much uniqueness as you could possibly ever ask for. Are the only games that are creative weird nonsense like mr mosquito?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 14:52
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What games are not formulaic by that standard? A game being in a genre with less than 5 entries seems about as much uniqueness as you could possibly ever ask for. Are the only games that are creative weird nonsense like mr mosquito? I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Yes, most games are formulaic and most of them are pretty dumb exercises in shallow addictive systems. Gearbox can do that and make money. They haven't shown an ability to do much more, which isn't inspiring in the context of something like Homeworld, which didn't reinvent many wheels but stood out because of the way it was expertly crafted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
I never played the Homeworld games, but my impression after seeing some stuff on Youtube is that a lot of its appeal comes from the fact that it's basically the Alpha Centauri of RTSes: extremely well-done atmosphere and plot that isn't the usual fare for its genre?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
They avoided many of the pitfalls most sci-fi games fall into while simultaneously having solid RTS mechanics. Little things like the ship designs being semi-realistic and utilitarian rather than gimmicky abstract art abominations or avoiding overwrought exposition made a big difference to me, personally. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 15:36 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
toasterwarrior posted:I never played the Homeworld games, but my impression after seeing some stuff on Youtube is that a lot of its appeal comes from the fact that it's basically the Alpha Centauri of RTSes: extremely well-done atmosphere and plot that isn't the usual fare for its genre? Yes, I'd say that's pretty right on. It is also somewhat unique in being the only space RTS (... that I know of) that actually takes place in full 3D, which is great ("Which way is down? Down is where the enemy is!") It was also drop-dead gorgeous for its time (SMAC was not ugly by any means, but I wouldn't say it stood out because of its visuals).
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
toasterwarrior posted:I never played the Homeworld games, but my impression after seeing some stuff on Youtube is that a lot of its appeal comes from the fact that it's basically the Alpha Centauri of RTSes: extremely well-done atmosphere and plot that isn't the usual fare for its genre? That, and the music and the art style (though I suppose this is part of atmosphere you mentioned). So you can see why I'm not at all excited at the prospect of the company behind Borderlands, DNF and ACM picking up the IP. "So what, they can outsource it to a company with experience in RTSs!" Have you read the ACM thread, hypothetical questioner? I'll turn my coat if they announce a HW3 that they've signed up Paul Ruskay* for. Then we're in business. Until then Gearbox have not earned the benefit of the doubt. * I'll take Bear McCreary too!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
Corin Tucker's Stalker posted:I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Yes, most games are formulaic and most of them are pretty dumb exercises in shallow addictive systems. Gearbox can do that and make money. They haven't shown an ability to do much more, which isn't inspiring in the context of something like Homeworld, which didn't reinvent many wheels but stood out because of the way it was expertly crafted. Yeah, but the borderlands series is almost the entirety of the genre it is. That is about as creative as videogames will ever get outside of total weirdness like flower and mr mosquito. You can complain about how much you hate gearbox, but you can't really ask for more than carving out an entire genre from a game company when asking them to be original. I mean of course the genre is a combination of diablo like loot games and FPS games, but what game isn't a combination of some other game?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
A lot of the hate towards Gearbox does come from the fact that a developer that has a handful of good games (Borderlands 2 was okay but ohsowacky and the cell shading gave me a headache, Half Life: Opposing Force was awesome, but seriously it's been over a decade since that came out...) Is going to have the rights to a direct sequal. To one of the games that had an emotional punch that games even today still can't emulate. No, I don't want meme based humor and dubstep. No, I don't want to be nickel and dimed for new units and content that should already be in the game. I don't want to have a game that is practically all about atmosphere being shovelled out by whatever 3rd party dev Gearbox chooses to do the map and mechanic design. Gearbox can prove me wrong on this one. I would love to be proven wrong. They put in all the good things that made Homeworld A Good Game and I will give Gearbox my money without thinking about it. But I don't see it happening with their recent track record. Wow. That was a massive carepost. I guess we'll just have to see. And god help me... If the word "badass" is mentioned anywhere near Homeworld... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 15:55
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Gearbox's track record is better than some people are giving them credit for, but it's still extremely spotty. Both Borderlands games are a lot of fun and are really good overall. The Brothers in Arms games were pretty good. The Half Life expansions were decent. But they also put out Duke Nukem Forever and Aliens: Colonial Marines, which are about as bad as FPS games can possibly get. And their owner, Randy Pitchford, is a huge dick who oversells everything and then throws other developers under the bus when the reception for some of their games aren't so hot. This covered just about everything I'd have to say regarding Gearbox and them coming into someone else's IP. If the right people under the Gearbox umbrella are involved it may turn out ok. If they half-rear end it like Nukem and A:CM, it won't be... ultimately we won't know until we get what they give. And the whole while, Pitchford should be diligently not listened to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
Gearbox does okay when they make the game in-house. When they farm out the development or merely executive produce an existing title, it turns to poo poo. Our expectations of this should hinge on whether or not Gearbox farms out Homeworld 3.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
5er posted:This covered just about everything I'd have to say regarding Gearbox and them coming into someone else's IP. If the right people under the Gearbox umbrella are involved it may turn out ok. If they half-rear end it like Nukem and A:CM, it won't be... ultimately we won't know until we get what they give. And the whole while, Pitchford should be diligently not listened to. What 'right' people? Not a single person at gearbox(or at the least, nobody in a position to make a difference) has the ability to make a game like Homeworld, which was a game acclaimed for the entire game not just a single aspect. People like to say it was the story but it wasn't just that, it was the whole package. It had amazing sound, graphic and art design aswell as story. Not to mention it was the first 'true' 3d RTS (and I don't mean in the graphical sense, I mean moving units on more than two planes). All these things allowed for expansive, immersive gameplay. Something that was unheard of in an RTS before it. I can't think of a single game by Gearbox that came close to have any of those things. All gearbox have ever done is made mediocre derivative games that aren't bad enough to complain about nor are good enough to talk up. They've skirted by for years, taking the 'expansion pack' jobs or stuff nobody wants. Borderlands being the only exception that, for some reason, people believe to be something utterly amazing when it's just a mishmash of popular game elements (loot, rpg mechanics) and jokes that only a 13 year old would enjoy (or someone who might aswell be 13 years old). Kerc Kasha fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
'Brothers in Arms' shows they're capable of serious titles. They have potential to do well with the Homeworld IP. And by the same merits you state, Kerc, there is risk they could gently caress it up colossally. We won't know until we see what they do. If someone wants to bitch 'b-but BL2 is just a bunch of meme jokes on top of a boring shooter', enjoy being disagreed with, along with the BiA counterpoint. They've never done an RTS. It's possible they could farm out development and Pitchford's going to try to cash in on fan loyalty to push preorders... but they tried that poo poo with A:CM. They might not have Sega around to sue them again, but the public is gun-shy of this and I think that if they tried to go that route again, gaming news sites like RPS would spot it and call it out right away. What it's looking like so far is that they're going to start out with HD updating the original two games. In the process of doing that, their developers will get their feet wet in development of the RTS that they're previously unfamiliar with. They could even bring in experienced consultants if they don't just hire them. They could be ready to make a good '3' by the time they're done with updating 1 and 2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:34
|
|
|
Klyith posted:a) Relic buying it back and making the difficult and financially ruinous decision to make a new Homeworld rather than milking warhammer fans of easy money. The difference of course being that Lucas was a always openly very respectful of Kurosawa and even fronted the money to get Kagemusha and some of his later stuff made. If you look at people's complaints regarding Gearbox here it's not that they were heavily influenced by ____ but that the only reason they even acknowledge the situation is because they were called out on it years after the fact. Kurosawa was openly like "those two robots that argue? That was me" when Star Wars was new and this was never some kind of hidden knowledge amongst movie goers. Gearbox (specifically their art director) instead chose to take all the credit for years for this last minute brilliant art design choice that made the game stand out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
5er posted:'Brothers in Arms' shows they're capable of serious titles. They have potential to do well with the Homeworld IP. And by the same merits you state, Kerc, there is risk they could gently caress it up colossally. We won't know until we see what they do. If someone wants to bitch 'b-but BL2 is just a bunch of meme jokes on top of a boring shooter', enjoy being disagreed with, along with the BiA counterpoint. At no point did I mention that I believed they weren't capable of making a 'serious' game, any joker could make a serious game it's a matter of whether they're capable of making a competent game, which I don't think they are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Kerc Kasha posted:At no point did I mention that I believed they weren't capable of making a 'serious' game, any joker could make a serious game it's a matter of whether they're capable of making a competent game, which I don't think they are. Well, I wish you all the best in enjoying the development cycle news for Gearbox and Homeworld.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 16:48
|
|
|
TBH, I really didn't think there were enough Homeworld fans left to give a drat about the IP, but I was wrong. Someone earlier asked what was so special about the first Homeworld and if I had to give a one-word answer it would be minimalism. It was a space opera, but it never felt like one. The characters were the ships, not on them, and there was a sense of wonder every time you jumped into a new mission because the universe was just so drat big. There were structures in the background that stretched for thousands of light-years just floating there and there was never any explanation given. You simply felt like you were taking baby steps into a brave new world, one that was mostly hostile toward you. In a weird way, the first Homeworld was "holy," that is, it just felt different and was on another level than a lot of games at the time and now it's in the hands of a developer that is well known to poo poo on other IPs. It's like selling the ashes of your beloved grandfather to the cat-lady next door. It just makes you a little sick to your stomach.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
I'm not going to say I wouldn't buy a Homeworld 3, but I will say I won't pre-order it. And I probably will wait until its on sale somewhere for a decent discount. As for HD remakes of the originals? Depends on what they consider "HD". If they just update the original textures to higher res, and make the games work on modern systems, I'll be happy. I don't want Tiny Tina themed missile rabbits instead of Tiidan scouts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
What is so great about the original games anyway? I never played them, I just looked up some videos and let's plays of them after hearing the uproar. They look like really boring, bland, games. Almost like the space combat sections of some games that you can usually skip or have the AI do for you. Is it one of those things you had to grow up loving, or is there some magic I'm missing by not playing them? Maybe Gearbox can do something to the series that will be some sort of war crime to the old fans but make the game fun or interesting to a wider audience. edit: Some people have already said what made them great, I think I just missed out on that awe, oh well. At least I don't have to be upset about this whole thing. Khanstant fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
Klyith posted:A bunch of RTS diehards really really hate the fact that DoW2 isn't a traditional RTS so they call it poo poo at every opportunity, despite it reviewing and selling better than DoW1. It's weird. DOW 2 had goddamned boss battles. Saying it wasn't a traditional RTS is a bit of a stretch when it felt more like it was trying its hardest to be an action-RPG. Xae posted:If Paradox got the rights people would bitch that now instead of an epic sweeping game we're going to be playing Logistics: Space Supply Clerk Edition. You're thinking Matrix Games. Paradox is actually one of the few strategy game developers out there whose interface design is actively trying to be improved to be better and not drown the player in pithy micromanagement. Khanstant posted:What is so great about the original games anyway? I never played them, I just looked up some videos and let's plays of them after hearing the uproar. They look like really boring, bland, games. Almost like the space combat sections of some games that you can usually skip or have the AI do for you. Is it one of those things you had to grow up loving, or is there some magic I'm missing by not playing them? Homeworld was great because from a mechanical POV because it had a third dimension and actively encouraged you to use it. At a time when most RTSes were cheap Command and Conquer or Starcraft clones, it was a hell of a thing for a game to defy those conventions and let you attack an enemy from above and below. Aesthetically, the game oozed style. It really gave you a sense of scale as you went from small one-man fighters to huge missile cruisers and everything in between. I don't think any other game besides Freespace has captured that same feeling. The art design was also done very well in that the game has aged gracefully. The graphics are old, but they don't feel ugly in comparison because they were designed with the limits of the day's hardware in mind. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
I don't understand. Gearbox makes two bad games, and their spokesman is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, and suddenly they are literally Hitler here to rape your childhood? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
James Trickington posted:I've played both, and even though I wasn't a big fan of those games, I don't get the hate either. What is the best case scenario we miss out on, as a result of Gearbox buying HW? The best case scenario would be an amazing sequel that further explores the storyline of the franchise, while fixing the mistakes made in HW2 and still being an amazing full 3D RTS in space that also adds new types of scenarios and environmental hazards to work around. The campaign would take on average twenty to thirty hours to complete, and the game would look fantastic. It would be a proper sequel that expands on what makes the franchise work, handled with care and with the understanding of the things that made the Homeworld games so amazing for its time. What actually will happen is that Gearbox farms the game out to three different developers that few, if any people, have ever heard of, likely without anyone knowing until after the release of the game. We're shown a preview video of the game four years from now that shows some pretty serious flaws and a basic misunderstanding of the franchise, but it looks so good some goons argue that it might still be good. Meanwhile, the marketing campaign ratchets up, and we see advertising for DLC that allows you to customize the Mothership with Monster energy drink and MTN Dew logos. IGN does a 2 hour preview live-stream of the game just before release, and while it's quite apparent that the game looks like complete dogshit, some goons argue that it might still be good, "because Borderlands!" or some poo poo. We'll be bombarded by promo-videos that show very little of the actual game, but show meaningless interviews with the developers, complete with intro titles to each person that include stylized lettering and target sights passing over their names. The lead writer is some pretentious rear end in a top hat who wears sunglasses all the time, including during the day and while indoors, and he uses "badass" approximately ten times too many during his short two minute blurb. The actual game arrives three years late after quiet cancellations and project restarts, and is complete and utter garbage that looks nothing like the preview build we saw three months before the game releases. It's discovered that Gearbox used the money from the next publisher stupid enough to bother working with them to fund the development of Borderworlds. The fans disown HW3, and the series dies even after GB does the only good thing it could possibly manage to do at that point and re-releases HW1, Cataclysm, and HW2 in one collection that also works on modern systems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:I don't understand. Gearbox makes two bad games, and their spokesman is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, and suddenly they are literally Hitler here to rape your childhood? Gearbox could have made two amazing games and this would still be raising eyebrows because those two amazing games would still NOT be real-time strategy games at the end of the day. Like someone earlier in the thread said, it's not even a case of Michael Jordan going from basketball to baseball because Michael Jordan was at least great at basketball.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:I don't understand. Gearbox makes two bad games, and their spokesman is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, and suddenly they are literally Hitler here to rape your childhood? My childhood has been raped by much better companies. There's no way this can end well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:I don't understand. Gearbox makes two bad games, and their spokesman is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, and suddenly they are literally Hitler here to rape your childhood? I don't understand. Goons say a few bad things, and they're kind of being assholes about it, and suddenly you think you have to make a post about Hitler rape? But yeah, making bad games generally sours your reputation if you're in the game development business.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:I don't understand. Gearbox makes two bad games, and their spokesman is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, and suddenly they are literally Hitler here to rape your childhood?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
There are a lot of rear end in a top hat CEOs, I'm sure, even if they're better at hiding it. What matters here is Gearbox's track record. Nothing that they've done well in the past is what's needed to make a good Homeworld game. It's not impossible that this will turn out well but I'd rather buy Bitcoins at $250 than preorder this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:I don't understand. Gearbox makes two bad games, and their spokesman is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, and suddenly they are literally Hitler here to rape your childhood? Obviously some people will always overreact on the internet and there's still the chance this will turn out well. But it shouldn't be hard to see how it might raise some red flags if a creatively (and in other ways) bankrupt FPS developer, who's mainly good at promising stuff, gets their hands on some players' favourite RTS IP. orcane fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Apr 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
ZombyDog posted:I don't recall Jesper Kyd having anything to do with the Homeworld Soundtracks, Paul Ruskay was the composer for the ambient stuff in both Homeworld and Homeworld 2. I was making a passing jab at the idiots saying they'd probably cram dubstep or something into it, when Borderlands 2's soundtrack was scored by Jesper Kyd, who specializes in doing atmospheric soundtracks the likes of which would probably go perfectly with a new Homeworld sequel. I'm really getting the impression that most of the people making GBS threads on Borderlands 2 haven't actually played it and are basing their opinion of it on maybe a trailer or gameplay video they watched once. Because complaints like "dubstep soundtrack" or "people just play it for the Diablo loot treadmill" show a huge amount of disconnect from what is actually in the game and appeals to players.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:52 |
|
|
toasterwarrior posted:I never played the Homeworld games, but my impression after seeing some stuff on Youtube is that a lot of its appeal comes from the fact that it's basically the Alpha Centauri of RTSes: extremely well-done atmosphere and plot that isn't the usual fare for its genre? One thing I think is overlooked is the ship design in Homeworld is fantastic. Probably my favorite spaceship designs out of a myriad of science fiction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2013 20:45
|
|
