Think about how the old GT cars look, and how the new ones look. How much do you think is the price difference in creating one of the old cars compared to the new cars? It used to take 4 days to model one car in the PS2, now it takes 6 weeks to model cars in the PS3. As graphics evolve, the price to tap that power increases exponentially. The fact some games are priced atonly $60 dollars is a miracle given the fact the production costs are 2 to 3 times what it used to be in last gen. If you want graphics like in the Matrix, the old price model wont cut it. The only hope is that gaming becomes mainstream enough, for the developers to actually generate money, else if the customers are not willing to pay then is back to Xbox 1 graphics for everybody...Emowii said:Before it used to always be "but the downloadable content was created after the game was finished". Now we hear "as long as they give you a nice amount of content on the game, who cares".
Eventually it will be "Who needs more than 5 tracks in Gran Turismo? If you want more, you can pay extra for them".
dfyb said:what worries me is how accepting some of you are. it makes it much more likely that things like this will catch on and become mainstream, which would be a bad thing for the gaming industry. turning "make the best game possible" into "make an acceptable amount of content included in the $60 and charge extra for anything else" is not something i want to look forward to, and i don't see how anyone could seriously think otherwise.
extra content has existed for years before xbox live came in here trying to charge for every last bit they think consumers would be suckered into. PC games like UT and CS have remained popular for so many years because the developers give users a great value, not because they try to get consumers to keep buying bits of the game. CS has been around since around 1998, and it's still the most popular online FPS (it consistantly has twice as many users as halo 2 online). additional maps, features, and updates are a big part of how that's happened. extending the life of the game and doing what's necessary to help the community grow and stay alive promote additional sales far more than large marketing budgets. charging for additional pieces of games hurts the online community and life of the game.
edit: basically, you're thinking that charging for DLC is the only way to add more content to games and the only way to make more money. there are better ways to generate more revenue and profit -- they've been in practice in the PC market for over a decade. the good PC devs know how to do it. right now these PC devs are selling engines to every other developer (unreal engine, epic) and valve has the best online distribution platform and network for games (steam). these two developers hold more power than the typical console dev, and it's because they know how to generate sales in a way that benefits both the gamers (free content, healthier online communities) and the developers pocket books (more sales).
Ok, so if suddenly WoW or Diablo 2 had animations like the ones in TH you guys would complain because they are not as good as the ones in NG or DMC? I dont get it. TH has an action RPG type of combat, thus being compared to NG and DMC is unfair, the same way that asking for RPG elements in those titles would be unfair.USD said:Isn't that exactly why they should be aiming a lot higher? It's being compared to action game heavyweights because the game is obviously trying to mimic some of the elements of that gameplay. The animation looks bad on a relative and absolute scale. That sort of animation should have been left in the dust a long time ago. Here's hoping that that video was very, very old. It just looks like a cleaned-up and beefed-up version of the E3 showing to me. Hopefully the other aspects of the gameplay deliver otherwise I won't look back at this game at all.
godhandiscen said:Ok, so if suddenly WoW or Diablo 2 had animations like the ones in TH you guys would complain because they are not as good as the ones in NG or DMC? I dont get it. TH has an action RPG type of combat, thus being compared to NG and DMC is unfair, the same way that asking for RPG elements in those titles would be unfair.
When you first turn the game on it'll take 8 months to load.GhaleonEB said:Wow. It's like they want their preview to mirror the game development.
Spend what you want. Obviously if you find the content worth the price, there is nothing wrong with you buying it. No one is telling you otherwise.godhandiscen said:So what do you recommend me to do? Not buy the DLC just because you think its unfair? What if I actually find it worth my money? What if the developer actually creates a game thats worth $80 so it cuts features and releases them as DLC for $20. Am I not supposed to buy them just because "its unfair". Or ask for the dev to release their $80 game at the price of $60, make the company lose money, and never see a sequel to what otherwise would have been a huge succes? Its my choice to support the games I want. TBH I have not bought any DLC from Market Place until now except the Lost Planet maps. I have around 30 Xbox 360 games, and I have had the console since launch day. Why I have not bought any DLC? Because I didnt like the games enough to get their DLC, meaning I dont give a damn wheter they get sequels or not. However, if I like TH the same way I like LP, and I think the DLC is priced reasonably, then you can bet I will pay for the DLC. Its a matter of choice. Development costs are rising, and only the best games will prevail. Its up to gamers to support which games stay and which games go. I dont know why you complain about this, and I could care less, but to convince me I should not be buying something I might want, is just wrong.
godhandiscen said:Because up until now everytime Too Human has been described, it has been compared to the likes of Diablo 2, WoW, and other action RPG's. Its just today that GoW and DMC where even mentioned.
Watch the video and listen to DD words carefully. They are not aiming for DMC style of combat at all. They are mixing real time combat, which is typical of eatern games with western RPG combat (emphasis in correct equipment, leveling, types of weapons, etc). Seriously, I dont know where you are getting the idea they are imitating DMC because thats clearly what they are saying they are NOT doing! Stop lying, and watch the video.BboyDubC said:Then DONT PUT THE DMC ACTION IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE! If he is going to put it in there, don't freakin doing it half-wittedly and say "well, I can only do this part right -- at least it's there though, so just enjoy that I tried". WTH kind of thinking is this? And no, stop lying to yourself. TH does NOT have an action RPG style-combat. The combat is 100 PERCENT taken from DMC. He freakin said it himself. It was copied, tweaked, and in it's current states is about 80% worse than the source material. Once again, stop trying to make Denis' game into something you want it to be instead of what he SAYS it is.
That screen feels like Oblivion.:/jett said:
:lol SK needs to hire better modelers/artists.
m0dus said:Don't be foolish. except for a couple dodgy models in the background, that scene looked pretty incredible.
and people complaining about how the 'combat is crap' we saw like 5 seconds of it, and what I saw looked fine. And people have to realize you can't judge combat by how it looks, but by how responsive it is when you PLAY it.
It sounds like you just don't want to hear any criticism of the game. Maybe some people are taking it too far, but I think there are a lot of fair criticisms as well. Particularly when it comes to the combat, which just doesn't look that good.NinSoX said:I haven't seen the video yet but judging from screenshots it looks better than Mass Effect IMO. What is wrong with this thread? There are so many negative comments allowed in here. Quit derailing the thread and talk about the game...
m0dus said:Don't be foolish. except for a couple dodgy models in the background, that scene looked pretty incredible.
and people complaining about how the 'combat is crap' we saw like 5 seconds of it, and what I saw looked fine. And people have to realize you can't judge combat by how it looks, but by how responsive it is when you PLAY it.
Emowii said:It sounds like you just don't want to hear any criticism of the game. Maybe some people are taking it too far, but I think there are a lot of fair criticisms as well. Particularly when it comes to the combat, which just doesn't look that good.
Well, Denis said that there will be a demo before release, and in the video of Too Human the build they played seemed to be a demo.Uncle said:So are we going to get some hands on experiences anytime soon?
snack said:Well, Denis said that there will be a demo before release, and in the video of Too Human the build they played seemed to be a demo.
SteveO409 said:Does anybody know how multiplayer will work? I heard Dyack mention that it will be something like Diablo 2 but more fun
It seems like it.QVT said:Which hopefully means its sooner than we want.
snack said:Well, Denis said that there will be a demo before release, and in the video of Too Human the build they played seemed to be a demo.
DenogginizerOS said:His legs are stiff and don't appear to be connected to his actions at all.
Confidence Man said:Looks like a mess. One moment the character is plodding along and suddenly he's in combat moving at light speed, teleporting around, feet jittering, and you can't tell what the hell is going on. Half the time he's just swinging his sword around at nothing going through some canned animation sequence. Hopefully the RPG stuff is really deep.
Router said:You rang?
:lol
j/k