Kathunter's Personal Space

this is a perfect time to play some pc games. :)

and i saw you on pulse (g4 channel)...very nice!

Ah they used my interview! Cool. I wish I could have seen it.

Hey KatHunter,

I'm Brian. A friend of Willo. I wrote you a few months back. Anyway, just wanted to re-introduce myself to you. I like your new format, so I'm just going to keep this post completely game related......




.....you're hot! :)



No, seriously. I first learned about a particular game when I was browsing your previous blog incarnation. A little game called Far Cry. After I saw it mentioned on your blog, I kept it in mind and when it came out I bought it. DAMN! What a game. I was blown away by how beautiful it was. Fun story too. Not much innovation game play wise, but enjoyable nonetheless. So, thanks for the heads up.

Now Doom 3? Feh. Not that exciting. Just the original game dressed up with the latest beautimisers. Nothing innovative or trend-setting. And to top it off, it plays like shite on my reasonably powerful system (yes, it more than meets the game system requirements). Id Software really dropped the ball as far as I'm concerned. They still have that claustrophobic thing going with their level design. I will admit one thing, though. The chainsaw is da bizzomb!!

And that brings me to my final point. What little gameplay innovation we see nowadays will probably never happen on a PC game again. With all the computing power available, developers will just concentrate on all the bells and whistles like normal mapping and shit like that, letting game play suffer. Doom 3 is a prime example. But it will still sell a trillion copies. AT $60 a pop! I paid $40 for Far Cry and it was 100 times the game. Yeah, Far Cry wasn't innovative in it's game play, but it had everything else going for it.

Oh yeah, my final point: Consoles are the way to go. I am consistently more impressed with console games than I am with PC. So here's hoping you get your XBox back in one piece.

Sorry for the long post. Peace!

I actually agree with you (on the Doom thing not the hot thing). But I don't agree that PC game innovation is over. I simply see the game industry making way for "Hollywood Blockbusters". I don't mean games based on movies, but games where the production value is over the top, and the title entertaining, but not much in the way of new introductions to gameplay. I don't see a problem with that really. Every game does not have to be new and different, and some of the old formulas really work. Id is known for being old school, so I think we all knew pretty much what we were getting when we bought it.
FarCry is indeed a superior FPS; I totally agree.

OH man... you guys are entitled to your opinion (that FarCry is better than Doom3) but you are wrong (or at least your reasons for thinking FarCry is superior are wrong).

FarCry is a cheat; it uses its graphics and crap ass one-liner dialog to make it as good as it is.... It is the hollywood blockbuster that you refer to. It is full of everything except what is important in a game/movie/book -- suspension of disbelief (playing make believe).

Doom3 is an IMMERSIVE game. It doesn't use gimmicks to keep you entertained. Instead it is through and through, balls to bones, fun/scary. The game is...well... the only word I can think of is... 'Purer' than any other titles currently available. Yes, it has the same basic mechanics as the previous dooms, but that is exactly what id was trying to do.

The only gimmick is the PDA... but that is done so unbelievably well that it isn't so much a gimmick, as it is an essential tool to help immerse you in its gaming experience. Doom3 was/is a freightening game; many times I hesitated entering a room because I was scared... when your health is at 30 and you only got a pistol, it gets pretty intense. Intense is the wrong word... more like terrifying.

On the other hand, FarCry was like "Whoa, this is jack... where is daina? Let's get off this rock!" Cheese-city. The only thing immersive about that game was the location, and the incredible draw distance (which are gimmicks). Superiour...geh...more like poo-perior???

I dunno.. the only reason FarCry was great was because it was a precursor to Doom3 and HL2. Not so much a surprise hit, but a known blockbuster that wasn't highly-anticipated. When it came out gamers were like "FINALLY, something worthy enough to hold us over until Doom3 and HL2 come out." and that is all.

I can understand if you think that Doom3 didn't live up to the hype, but to say FarCry is 'superior' is just wrong.

peace,
Mike

p.s. What settings are you running the game at that it doesn't play decently on your puter? My friend played it AthlonXP 2000+ (1.533) based comp with a GF4mx440 (next to minimum requirements) and at the 'recommended settings' it ran fine (30fps).

p.p.s. Yes, you are hot...

p.p.p.s. Actually I feel like a nerd because I came to this page after watching you on Pulse... That's not why I feel like a nerd, but that is why I am here... I feel like a nerd because I am one...well.. maybe not nerd, but definitely a geek. mmmmm video games.

I have to say, I remember when that Pulse interview was done, and I find it hard to believe they even used it. None of us had slept in days due to jet lag. I love those guys tho. I might be back on Pulse soon, so I will let you know.

Yes, you are right, the story in FarCry was nothing special. I guess I enjoyed it more because I am not a horror fan. I loved the over-the-top graphics and the lush environments. There have been a few reviews that ragged on the triggers in Doom 3 as being irritating more than scary, which I agree with for the most part. Again, I am not an experienced horror flick chick. Silent Hill lost me since it is so dark, and my TV is crap. It is simply not my thing and I admit it. Where as FarCry was immersive "for me". And yes, it was the first sexy FPS to come this year, BUT some developers working with Crytek's SDK argue it is a more advanced title than the soon-to-see Half-Life 2. I am only repeating what I have heard (albeit from Cord who was the Product Manager for the title) but that kid knew his shooters, and I have to consider it very seriously.

p.s. - embrace your inner nerd. goodness knows I do.

i just have to double, triple, quadruple the hot comment ;)

sorry to hear about your baby xbox shugs. hope you get everything back & then some!!!

>and my TV is crap

i'm worried that the lack of a good tv might impair your judgement of future games (and shows and movies). go buy the most expensive tv out there that wont require more than two people to help move it and make it a business expense when tax time comes.

ditto for a sound system and a nice comfortable couch.

despite the TV, I can say silent hill is not my thing.

Regarding Doom 3: The best comment came from a friend who said: "What are those guys doing in the closets all day? And why are there only hallways, never any real rooms in that base?"

Yes Roland,

That's what I felt. Too many goddamned hallways and not enough SPACE. While I agree with anonymous that the overall feel was forboding, it wasn't scary or even intense for that matter. But my way of playing is sort of "play by attrition" whereby I kill a few monsters and then save. It makes for slow going, but I never have to go back very far if I get fragged.

And the only reason the game was tough for me at all was the frickin' shite frame rate I was getting. The Hell section is so lumbering and slow I swear I was getting 15 frames a second or so. Not acceptable at all in my book.

And the reasons anonymous came up with to discount my asertion that FC is far superior to Doom3 sound like purely back end technical reasons which are ridiculous reasons. I don't care how many hacks or gimmicks the programmers have to do to get the look and feel, the frame rate etc. All I care about is the final experience. Which to me is far superior in FC than Doom.

And suspension of disbelief? Please. Far Cry and Doom are cartoons. But if you want to talk s-o-b fine. There is absolutely nothing realistic about Doom, save for the way your POV gets shaken when you get shot. I like that. I wish FC had it. In Doom 3 every-goddamned-thing is super greebled and detailed. The only relief your eyes get is from the dark areas. Otherwise, your eyes would go buggy from detail. The elevators are a prime example. What the fuck is the point of all that detail in a damn elevator?

Far Cry is food for the eyes. I gobbled it up like a POW released from prison. It was so beautiful. And the story was so much more fun than Doom's. Who cares what the programmers had to do to make it happen. As a standard FPS it will stand the test of time. Doom3 will go the way of the buffalo......or should I say really bad 80's band. People will be embarrassed to say they played and thought it a superior game.

I have said enough about that.



Oh yeah, what willo said.

Hey Kat, who do you write for? Mainly websites or do you write for some of the rags as well? Just curious.

Peace!

I wasn't talking technical at all when I was talking about draw-distance and location... what I was saying was that the game needed good graphics and gimmicks for it to be entertaining. That is the type of 'gimmick' I was referring to. That isn't to say the game sucked ass, just that it wasn't entertaining at its core... Take away the glitz and clam and you just have a crap ass run and gun.

Doom3 could have been done with lesser graphics and it still would have been great because of its terror tactics and better story. FarCry, on the other hand, would have been dust if it wasn't so much of a feast for the eyes. To me, it sounds like the only reason you liked FarCry was because it looked so good... and that is horseshit.

I am not going to tell you that you have to love doom3 more than FarCry, but if you think FarCry is a 'superior' game you'd be wrong... and I am talking about both its technology and entertainment value.

If you don't like scary games (I don't like the silent hill series either... I find them boring) it is understandable that you wouldn't like the immersiveness or scariness of doom3. But to say that FarCry is going to age better than Doom3 is borderline idiotic...nay, it is damn near insanely stupid.

peace,
Mike.

p.s. Got Black Arrow yesterday and I still haven't played it.

p.p.s. In any case, I think/hope HL2 will be better than both FarCry and Doom3... combined.

Doom 3's alright for me. Nothing life-changing but not exactly boring either. Of course, I'm chugging along into it and not rushing through the game like a maniac.

And, hey, I'd rather have over-detail than under-detail any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Can't stand collision detection or missing sprites due to piss-poor programming.

How goes awaiting the Xbox, Kat? Any luck seeing it yet?

who plays an id game for the story? i play for either atmosphere or for the social aspects of multiplayer. i sure miss the college days when quakeworld deathmatch/ctf/teamfortress was the game to play.

the other anon is who arguing for doom3, the way you describe far cry sounds exactly like duke nukem 3d, but with better graphics.

people are arguing which one is better, but arent really saying why. both arent innovative (hard to do without having an intriguing plot). doom3 takes the dark close quarters route whereas farcry takes the look how vast and pretty i am approach (not that imps arent pretty). the only thing i can come up with is expectations. doom was overhyped and farcry sorta came out of no where. maybe half-life2 (singly player) will follow doom3/Deus Ex 2's footsteps?

maybe publishers should cut back on the heavy promotion of their A+ titles. limit the exposure a game gets before release and let the game sell it self by word of mouth. gamer expectations wont be as high so the money-spent-satisfaction level, i would imagine, would be high. as a side effect, i'd imagine future games might have a longer shelf life and the publisher can hold off on slashing prices sooner.

yeah, i went off there...havent played FC and only a few levels of Doom3. i refuse to play anymore until i get a faster cpu. all the benchmarks out there are very misleading. give me a benchmark where it counts (when i'm fighting multiple baddies). i dont need a high frame rate when i'm walking about with no creature big or small near me.

Anon #1 & #7 (i refuse to register...)

Cranky??

Anon 1, 7 etc.: It's going to be interesting to see how other gaming companies are going to use the Doom 3 engine. And how many slick characters on screen at the same time we will see in their games. Doom 3 as the most scary game of all ... dunno. My recipe of getting scared always was playing Final Fantasy VII late at night and entering a random encounter while slightly falling asleep. The sudden arrival of the fighting theme does scare you, believe me. ;)