Eternal Darkness 2 Demo May Have Scuttled X-Men: Destiny

[AzrealMaximillion]

See here's the thing with Platinum Games. They've made some great games, but to be honest I think people would have rather seen a Nintendo franchise that was mistreated cult classic given a chance as a launch title rather than a sequel to yet another Japanese spectacle action game. Bayonetta was a great game, but Eternal Darkness was a game that was one of the few great psychological horror games. Bayonetta is just another high speed action game in the vein of Devil May Cry, but smoother.

Point is, even with Silicon Knights being as incompetent as they are with licensed games, when they make their own games(as rare as that is) they're damn good. They did start the Legacy of Kain franchise( then stupidly mishandled it).

Let's get real here for a moment; Silicon Knights have never made a great game. They've written some god stories for a few games, but by far the best game they made was Blood Omen (the first and only Legacy of Kain title they had anything to do with for the record) and even that was a mess of slow down and other technical issues. And while the sanity meter mechanic in ED was a cool idea and the story was well done, the rest of the game wasn't very good even by the standards at the time. As for the idea that the only titles they've ever poorly handled are licensed titles, the very existence of Too Human blows that notion out of the water (there's also the Twin Snakes which by all accounts wasn't a complete mess, but that's no real surprise when you build it on the template of two brilliant games (the story and level design of MGS1 and the engine/game mechanics of MGS2, which is also why I'm hesitant to give them much credit for that title).

Even if the company hadn't been gutted since X-Men Destiny, they were a terrible developer that could chalk up their only real successes to their ability to write competently. That's not a developer I'd want to bet on, nor would I want them making another Eternal Darkness. And I say that as someone who owns and enjoyed the original.

I can agree to an extent but even so, there are plenty of game companies that get constant praise/ continue to be trusted with licensed games despite constantly bad releases. Bethesda and Obsidian have yet to release a game that isn't in some way prone to crashing. At least Silicon Knights games for the most part worked.

And to be real, I would rather see SK make another Eternal Darkness game than anyone else, they're the most familiar with the story material, anyone else would make a game that wouldn't feel like a true sequel. Again, any sequel Obsidian has made for a franchise kind of cements this point.

And besides, Platinum Games is on its way to ruining Metal Gear Revengeance. Taking out the 360 cut feature and turning the game into another over the top action title make them look too good to me, among other things that people under Platinum Games have done.

People can say what they want about MG: Revengeance, but honestly, the game as demoed by Kojima Productions a couple of years back looked pretty terrible. If all Platinum Games does is turn it into another over the top Platinum Games action title, at least I can count on it probably being fun (and let's be honest here, MGS has been kind of over the top since MGS2 at least, if not from the very beginning).[/quote] I can't agree to that. The removal of key features like stealth and the "360 cutting" feature was one thing, but the complete change in how combat works is a massive let down. The trailer 2 years ago showed Raiden cutting stone pillars to drop roof debris on enemies. All of that is gone, along with probably the best dismemberment engine to come to gaming since Die By The Sword.

It may be a fun action game when it comes out but it will be a very, very disappointing Metal Gear game. Hell, it doesn't even look like a great action game now. It looks like it belongs on the PS2.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

snip

Answers in bold, and the release date is set for February 19, 2013. And the Metal Gear Rising first trailed was just 10 months ago.

No actually, the first trailer for MGR was in 2009. That was 3 years ago.

A lot of the problems with the first version of the game weren't due to limitations, but rather it being completely new territory than what Hideo Kojima was used to. This I can't fault.

But the original version still looked to be more enjoyable than its current. And the QTE still bugs me as this game is going to be considered canon to the Metal Gear series. The QTE is one thing, but if the boss fights are as equally as ridiculous as they were in Bayonetta, it won't feel right. I saw the new trailer where Raiden straight up threw a Metal Gear Ray with his bare hands. Yes, he's a cyborg, but that was too much to handle, considering that in MGS4 Raiden gets severely injured fighting lesser forms of Metal Gear.

It just seems like that should have scrapped any part of this game having to do with Metal Gear in more ways than one.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

I hadn't heard about the gameplay being much different in MGR than in Bayonetta, though I know they're keeping graphics down to keep FPS in the 45-60 range, which is good. What gameplay changes did they make?

The only gameplay change anyone really knows about is the loss of the whole 360 degree cut mechanic. Frankly, I hardly consider this a loss since that was pretty much all Kojima Productions had really done with it and in the demos they showed it just looked slow and cumbersome with no real purpose to it at all. They were supposed to be making an action game, but instead seemed to be making a cutting simulation. Mind you, they've already admitted they had no idea where they wanted to go with the game and that were it not for Platinum Games taking the reigns it would have been cancelled by now. So if anything, the idea that Platinum is ruining the game is a complete load of bull considering they're the only reason it's coming out at all.

Its coming out in a worse form in terms of graphics, gameplay, interactivity, and story. That sounds like ruining it to me. Just because the game is getting picked up, doesn't mean its great that it had been. I'm pretty sure that people would have rather not seen a Red Faction game after Geurilla than have to acknowledge the fact that RF: Armageddon exists and took out 90% of what made Geurilla reputable.


I'm sorry, I can't take the argument of "if this game wasn't made it would still be cancelled" seriously. Especially when we can look back at the Phillips CDi games by Nintendo and universally say that they should have cancelled their attempt at a CD based console for now.


I'd rather see no game then an embarrassment.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

snip

Answers in bold, and the release date is set for February 19, 2013. And the Metal Gear Rising first trailed was just 10 months ago.

No actually, the first trailer for MGR was in 2009. That was 3 years ago.

A lot of the problems with the first version of the game weren't due to limitations, but rather it being completely new territory than what Hideo Kojima was used to. This I can't fault.

But the original version still looked to be more enjoyable than its current. And the QTE still bugs me as this game is going to be considered canon to the Metal Gear series. The QTE is one thing, but if the boss fights are as equally as ridiculous as they were in Bayonetta, it won't feel right. I saw the new trailer where Raiden straight up threw a Metal Gear Ray with his bare hands. Yes, he's a cyborg, but that was too much to handle, considering that in MGS4 Raiden gets severely injured fighting lesser forms of Metal Gear.

It just seems like that should have scrapped any part of this game having to do with Metal Gear in more ways than one.

I understand your pain as a Metal Gear fan. The problem is: if they were going to make it a stealthy thriller type action game... why have Raiden as the main character? That is far more of Snake's territory.

The game as it relates to the MG universe is a mess, no question. Calling it canon might be a mistake. But as long as the gameplay is Platinum's normal high standard, I'll buy it.

I'd buy it if the game looked like it was great by Platinum's standards but it looks disappointing by those standards. I can enjoy action games, hell, I want to see another God Hand game before I die. But MGR looks like it will leave a sour taste in people's mouths. Kind of like from RE:4 to RE:6.

 

[Terrible Opinions]

Point is, even with Silicon Knights being as incompetent as they are with licensed games, when they make their own games(as rare as that is) they're damn good. They did start the Legacy of Kain franchise( then stupidly mishandled it).

Legacy of Kain was 16 years ago. How did their last IP go again?

 

[Anti-American Eagle]

Point is, even with Silicon Knights being as incompetent as they are with licensed games, when they make their own games(as rare as that is) they're damn good. They did start the Legacy of Kain franchise( then stupidly mishandled it).

Legacy of Kain was 16 years ago. How did their last IP go again?

Too Human, unfortunately Badly. Which is too bad because it was a good game if you could get past the crap bits.

 

[Flight]

What a shame. I loved (and still love) Eternal Darkness; to this day, it remains one of my favorite games. Honestly, though, if it came down to a choice between a poorly-done sequel and no sequel at all, I'd pick not having a sequel. It's too bad, because my hopes were raised a bit when I saw the title.