-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Dying Light 2 will be present at E3 2019
- Thread starter Mista
- Start date
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
Is there an official release date? Wonder if this is bound for next gen consoles as well
somerset
Member
Ah- Techland. The most unlucky of all AAA genius engine design teams. Techland should and could have been Rockstar on steroids, making all the money in the world.
Techland's engine is called *Chrome*. Why. Cos their first, long forgotten, open world game on their own open world engine, was called 'Chrome'. And it was a SF open world future space soldier shooter. And it was the first such game (done to any acceptable quality). And, thank's to Techland's terrible management incompetence, never had a sequel.
But wait a minute, the follow up was *Call of Warez* (I may misremember that title- snigger). And it was the first open-world western. And it was brilliant. And it did have sequels- which thanks to the incompetent management were increasingly linear, increasingly dumbed down, and ground the franchise into the ground. Could have been RDR big.
Look at GTA. The first I mean. Rubbish top down Brit game. When GTA went 3d with GTA 3, the engine was utterly laughable, and the amazing Mafia (first, not the lousy two sequels) was better in every regard. GTA IV was inspired by Mafia in every way. GTA IV finally had its own engine, and an excellent bit of coding it was. But the management behind the Mafia team, and their superb engine, wasn't interested in paying the talent- I mean only a 'fool' thinks excellent low level coders are worth keeping.
However, Techland has always honoured its talent. Like Avalanche (another amazing engine led company with brilliant coders), Techland's eternal problem has been game planning.
Dying Light finally picked Techland up out of its seemingly endless slump- looked like Techland had finally found its 'Witcher'. 'Dead Island' (again brilliant) was Techland's first 'Witcher' (1). A game many veteran gamers loved, but the critics mostly did not. Dying Light was Techland's Witcher 2 - now everyone was mostly agreed on Techland's brilliance. Could Techland do a worthy successor (their Witcher 3), or was it going to be Call of Warez all over again?
The signs are grim, sadly. Techland had a choice. A quick-n-dirty sequel in all new locations. A clasic well worn strategy for a popular game that doesn't upgrade the franchise in any amazing way, but can ride the popularity of the earlier title. A safe option. A sane option for a company with a long history of dropping the ball.
Techland obviously did not do this. They wanted their Witcher 3. But Dying Light ain't the Witcher IP. Characters and story the gamer cares about are missing.
There was always a problem with Dying Light- the dumb-dumb part of the audience that said they hated the zombies and home made weapons, but loved the Human vs Human combat with real weapons. The COD drunk/stoned sofa gaming crowd. And it looks like Techland has been listening to them.
Last year's reveal at the Microsoft event fell flat on its face. Dying Light 2 looked like a rip off of The Division, and few even noticed the reveal. 'Witcher 4'- by which I mean CDPR's Cyberpunk - got all the attention. Dying Light 2 got none. Techland's bosses had tried to pitch to gaming's lowest common denominator (the same strategy that utterly killed the Call of Warez franchise), and they didn't even notice.
Funny isn't it. It is all "how do you turn great code into great games". Techland and Avalanche both really wish they knew. Techland has certainly done better than Avalanche - and the Dying Light engine was mind-blowingly good. But great engines need great games, and Dying Light 2 sounds like anything but a great game.
Look at Days Gone By, for instance. I'm not saying its devs' hearts were not in the right place. And the game has *dynamic snow* (drool- that's what us Skyrim fans have always dreamed of). But good/great engine code does not equal a great game (as iD found to its cost before their many game design failures forced their sale to Bethesda).
Techland is showing us their new engine, and it is simply jaw-dropping. But the 'game' in that world- hmmm. Is it worth this wait and budget. Is Dying Light 2 going to be close to the revenue of Witcher 3, or GTA V or RDR2 or Fallout 4? Codewise, Techland is right at the top, But they do not have a game to match. The interest in what the game in Dying Light 2 represents is many tiers down.
Techland has famously brought it a 'veteran storyteller' for Dying Light 2, but the background of this guy links to all the wrong kinds of games, and a prehistoric past beloved by 'nerds' but linked to niche titles with relatively poor returns. Fallout 3:NV was his high-water mark when it comes to IP skillsets most useful to Dying Light, but I always felt the NV story worked against Beth's engine, rather than with it. I much prefered Fallout 3 because it felt 'coherent' - the clear ambition of his work in NV didn't enhance the franchise commercially. And this is what Techland needs most of all with Dying Light 2.
Anthem was a "too big to fail" project that failed. Fallout 76 was a "too big to fail" project that failed. Both felt safe cos gaming-as-a-service revenue would save them come what may. I really really really want Dying Light 2 to be great (like how we all wanted Just Cause 3 and then Just Cause 4 to be great, not the POS they proved to be). Unlike Avalanche with Just Cause, Techland has not cheaped out on Dying Light, and outsourced it to a z-team in NY. But Anthem and Fallout 76 had mega budgets and masses of 'talent' and a once great prior track-record.
With Dying Light 2 I'm just not feeling it. Please let me be wrong.
PS that vid in the OP reminds me of the reveal (snowy NY) of the Snowdrop engine that was eventually used to power The Division. When your gameplay is not good, show off your engine *without* gameplay. But when your gameplay is good, your promotional videos will always show the excellence of the engine with gameplay.
Techland's engine is called *Chrome*. Why. Cos their first, long forgotten, open world game on their own open world engine, was called 'Chrome'. And it was a SF open world future space soldier shooter. And it was the first such game (done to any acceptable quality). And, thank's to Techland's terrible management incompetence, never had a sequel.
But wait a minute, the follow up was *Call of Warez* (I may misremember that title- snigger). And it was the first open-world western. And it was brilliant. And it did have sequels- which thanks to the incompetent management were increasingly linear, increasingly dumbed down, and ground the franchise into the ground. Could have been RDR big.
Look at GTA. The first I mean. Rubbish top down Brit game. When GTA went 3d with GTA 3, the engine was utterly laughable, and the amazing Mafia (first, not the lousy two sequels) was better in every regard. GTA IV was inspired by Mafia in every way. GTA IV finally had its own engine, and an excellent bit of coding it was. But the management behind the Mafia team, and their superb engine, wasn't interested in paying the talent- I mean only a 'fool' thinks excellent low level coders are worth keeping.
However, Techland has always honoured its talent. Like Avalanche (another amazing engine led company with brilliant coders), Techland's eternal problem has been game planning.
Dying Light finally picked Techland up out of its seemingly endless slump- looked like Techland had finally found its 'Witcher'. 'Dead Island' (again brilliant) was Techland's first 'Witcher' (1). A game many veteran gamers loved, but the critics mostly did not. Dying Light was Techland's Witcher 2 - now everyone was mostly agreed on Techland's brilliance. Could Techland do a worthy successor (their Witcher 3), or was it going to be Call of Warez all over again?
The signs are grim, sadly. Techland had a choice. A quick-n-dirty sequel in all new locations. A clasic well worn strategy for a popular game that doesn't upgrade the franchise in any amazing way, but can ride the popularity of the earlier title. A safe option. A sane option for a company with a long history of dropping the ball.
Techland obviously did not do this. They wanted their Witcher 3. But Dying Light ain't the Witcher IP. Characters and story the gamer cares about are missing.
There was always a problem with Dying Light- the dumb-dumb part of the audience that said they hated the zombies and home made weapons, but loved the Human vs Human combat with real weapons. The COD drunk/stoned sofa gaming crowd. And it looks like Techland has been listening to them.
Last year's reveal at the Microsoft event fell flat on its face. Dying Light 2 looked like a rip off of The Division, and few even noticed the reveal. 'Witcher 4'- by which I mean CDPR's Cyberpunk - got all the attention. Dying Light 2 got none. Techland's bosses had tried to pitch to gaming's lowest common denominator (the same strategy that utterly killed the Call of Warez franchise), and they didn't even notice.
Funny isn't it. It is all "how do you turn great code into great games". Techland and Avalanche both really wish they knew. Techland has certainly done better than Avalanche - and the Dying Light engine was mind-blowingly good. But great engines need great games, and Dying Light 2 sounds like anything but a great game.
Look at Days Gone By, for instance. I'm not saying its devs' hearts were not in the right place. And the game has *dynamic snow* (drool- that's what us Skyrim fans have always dreamed of). But good/great engine code does not equal a great game (as iD found to its cost before their many game design failures forced their sale to Bethesda).
Techland is showing us their new engine, and it is simply jaw-dropping. But the 'game' in that world- hmmm. Is it worth this wait and budget. Is Dying Light 2 going to be close to the revenue of Witcher 3, or GTA V or RDR2 or Fallout 4? Codewise, Techland is right at the top, But they do not have a game to match. The interest in what the game in Dying Light 2 represents is many tiers down.
Techland has famously brought it a 'veteran storyteller' for Dying Light 2, but the background of this guy links to all the wrong kinds of games, and a prehistoric past beloved by 'nerds' but linked to niche titles with relatively poor returns. Fallout 3:NV was his high-water mark when it comes to IP skillsets most useful to Dying Light, but I always felt the NV story worked against Beth's engine, rather than with it. I much prefered Fallout 3 because it felt 'coherent' - the clear ambition of his work in NV didn't enhance the franchise commercially. And this is what Techland needs most of all with Dying Light 2.
Anthem was a "too big to fail" project that failed. Fallout 76 was a "too big to fail" project that failed. Both felt safe cos gaming-as-a-service revenue would save them come what may. I really really really want Dying Light 2 to be great (like how we all wanted Just Cause 3 and then Just Cause 4 to be great, not the POS they proved to be). Unlike Avalanche with Just Cause, Techland has not cheaped out on Dying Light, and outsourced it to a z-team in NY. But Anthem and Fallout 76 had mega budgets and masses of 'talent' and a once great prior track-record.
With Dying Light 2 I'm just not feeling it. Please let me be wrong.
PS that vid in the OP reminds me of the reveal (snowy NY) of the Snowdrop engine that was eventually used to power The Division. When your gameplay is not good, show off your engine *without* gameplay. But when your gameplay is good, your promotional videos will always show the excellence of the engine with gameplay.
when i saw that you will fight people more in second game not just zombies i was little worried. all i needed from dying light was getting next gen resident evil for me. kinda next gen and first person resident evil . thats how i saw it and it was just so fun craft anf upgrade all those weapons. because they where not guns. but now you will fight more people too and that could change what game is . if you will do cover and shooting now more against people thats just what all other fps open worlds do.
Dragon Lord
Member
Last year's E3 feature on this one was fascinating to me, and I can't wait to see more this year.
Mista
Banned
No official date. Most probably they’ll announce the date in E3
Slings and Arrows
Banned
Man, i hope this sells well. Techland deserve some recognitiin for their achievements. Dead island was zombie diablo
Zannegan
Member
Interesting notes on the studio's history and especially its past missteps. I wonder though...
I enjoyed Dying Light, but I also enjoy multiplayer FPSs, so I don't have a horse in this race. That said, is there a reason why human v. human gun combat can't also have a place in the series? What is it about melee v. zombies that makes it "smart-smart" compared to the possible alternatives/additions?
I get where you're coming from. I've seen favorite brands crash and burn by trying to chase popular trends at the cost of their core identity. But I'm wondering what it is about gun (or at least ranged) combat that doesn't work for the series. Is it the loss of the crafting aspect? Would handmade projectile items work better?
Funnily enough, the examples I'm thinking of ruined themselves by adding a focus on zombies or melee combat where they didn't belong rather than taking them away.
I enjoyed Dying Light, but I also enjoy multiplayer FPSs, so I don't have a horse in this race. That said, is there a reason why human v. human gun combat can't also have a place in the series? What is it about melee v. zombies that makes it "smart-smart" compared to the possible alternatives/additions?
I get where you're coming from. I've seen favorite brands crash and burn by trying to chase popular trends at the cost of their core identity. But I'm wondering what it is about gun (or at least ranged) combat that doesn't work for the series. Is it the loss of the crafting aspect? Would handmade projectile items work better?
Funnily enough, the examples I'm thinking of ruined themselves by adding a focus on zombies or melee combat where they didn't belong rather than taking them away.
Last edited:
levyjl1988
Banned
I wonder if you can play as female protagonist this time.
EDMIX
Member
Really? I thought you made one in this series like create a character. (I might be confusing it with some other game)