Zero Punctuation: Serious Sam 3: BFE

Alphakirby

New member
May 22, 2009
1,255
0
0
agoran said:
I was really looking forward for Yahtzee to do a Zero Punctuation on our game. I was also terrified it will make me cry.

I didn't cry, so I guess that went rather well :)
Wait, what? Did you say what I just heard you say....
 

ResonanceSD

Guild Warrior
Legacy
Apr 11, 2020
4,535
3
43
Country
Australia
Is top 5/bottom 5 next week then? I need to validate my purchase of Driver: SF. Which was based off his review.
 

Char-Nobyl

New member
May 8, 2009
784
0
0
Plinglebob said:
Great review for a great game. So glad to hear the gray guys get phased out a bit because when I was playing it I couldn't help think they were out of place a bit. I've just had to assume that the crappy "running through buildings with people like enemies" section is supposed to be some sort of reference to modern shooters, but its more frustrating then anything and almost made me give up at one point. Then I got to the open section with unlimited rockets and a massive spacecraft beaming down waves of enemies and I gleefully remembered why I liked the 1st game.
And therein lies the potential problem. I can understand references to other games of the same genre, but when it entails putting an exaggerated version of them into your own game to emphasize how different they are...it becomes an issue. Especially since it's the exact opposite of the sort of game that people buying 'Serious Sam' would want.

DoomBlackDragon said:
While Yahtzee may have found this game to be between ok to good. I know it is so much better then Jurassic Park : The Hard raid want a be..... I mean Jurassic Park : The game.
Not sure why you're comparing the two. They're hardly competing titles. And even then, 'Hard Rain' wasn't the first game to use quasi-QTEs as a means to carry a story-based game. 'Indigo Prophecy' comes to mind.

Then again, while 'Heavy Rain' started slow and got great, 'Indigo Prophecy' started amazingly and then spent the second half of the game shitting the bed.

DoomBlackDragon said:
While I really do not mind it just being a remake of Serious Sam 1 with a new engine and graphics.
And that's fine...if it's marketed as that. This wasn't marketed as an HD rerelease, and frankly, Yahtzee had a point when he said that the stuff they clearly added since the original were mediocre at their highest points. I'd love an HD version of Serious Sam 1, but I don't want to buy it at full price because it shouldn't need to be full price.

DoomBlackDragon said:
I still like the old fashine kill spree games. So sick of all the Battlefield style of games. I so want them to go back to Doom Style.
Here's the thing: 'First Person Shooter' is not a single genre. 'Battlefield' and 'Serious Sam' are both FPSs, true, but they're as far apart within that category as 'Superman' is from 'Irredeemable.' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irredeemable] The fans of both might have overlap, and they probably do, but if someone just says that they got into superhero comics and liked one of them, you shouldn't assume that the other is also their cup of tea.

DoomBlackDragon said:
While war games here and there a nice. I think they are best published few here and there.

It is no fun sitting around letting me arm regrow while I suck on my thumb. I just want to run around shooting things with a BIG FUCK GUN. If I need help. Run as super sonic speeds to the nearest health pack.
Really?

Alright. You've made it clear that you don't like the style of what one might call 'mainstream' first person shooters. And I think that they are by no means a replacement for the Painkiller-style shooters, but I also think the same thing vise versa. You're essentially saying, "I don't like X, and I don't play X, either. I prefer Y. Therefore, I want there to be fewer Xs made." With that line of logic, you're not trying to bring back older-FPS models: you're just trying to dickishly take away the ones that you don't like but millions of others do like. You're demanding the destruction of all your town's vegetable gardens because a steakhouse you liked got closed.

DoomBlackDragon said:
I blame Multiplayer for killing the FPS gaming.
And what you described above? "Run[ning] around shooting things with a BIG FUCK GUN. If I need help. Run as super sonic speeds to the nearest health pack"? Aside from the fact that I hope to God you're an ESL speaker, if you want one-man-army-versus-unending-hordes gameplay, don't blame multiplayer, because multiplayer goes with that like sodium and water.

If you want more of those games, then get the Duke Nukem team to stop dicking around and make a Duke Nukem game.
 

Plinglebob

Team Stupid-Face
Nov 11, 2008
1,815
0
0
Char-Nobyl said:
DoomBlackDragon said:
I blame Multiplayer for killing the FPS gaming.
And what you described above? "Run[ning] around shooting things with a BIG FUCK GUN. If I need help. Run as super sonic speeds to the nearest health pack"? Aside from the fact that I hope to God you're an ESL speaker, if you want one-man-army-versus-unending-hordes gameplay, don't blame multiplayer, because multiplayer goes with that like sodium and water.

If you want more of those games, then get the Duke Nukem team to stop dicking around and make a Duke Nukem game.
I have to disagree with you here as Quake and Doom both had great multiplayer along with a great single player of "one-man-army-versus-unending-hordes gameplay" I think (personal viewpoint not back up by any facts at all) the problem came about with the popularity of a modern setting (meaning bigger, more fancifal guns went by the wayside) combined with a "2 weapons only" system limiting your options at any one point and cemented with the percieved need for balance in weapons so no one stratagy is overpowered.
 

redisforever

New member
Oct 5, 2009
2,158
0
0
Well, as long as it's fun. I own all of the rest of the games, even Serious Sam 2, because I didn't bother to research it. Now, I do. I will buy this.
 

108Stitches

New member
Mar 24, 2010
33
0
0
Plinglebob said:
Char-Nobyl said:
DoomBlackDragon said:
I blame Multiplayer for killing the FPS gaming.
And what you described above? "Run[ning] around shooting things with a BIG FUCK GUN. If I need help. Run as super sonic speeds to the nearest health pack"? Aside from the fact that I hope to God you're an ESL speaker, if you want one-man-army-versus-unending-hordes gameplay, don't blame multiplayer, because multiplayer goes with that like sodium and water.

If you want more of those games, then get the Duke Nukem team to stop dicking around and make a Duke Nukem game.
I have to disagree with you here as Quake and Doom both had great multiplayer along with a great single player of "one-man-army-versus-unending-hordes gameplay" I think (personal viewpoint not back up by any facts at all) the problem came about with the popularity of a modern setting (meaning bigger, more fancifal guns went by the wayside) combined with a "2 weapons only" system limiting your options at any one point and cemented with the percieved need for balance in weapons so no one stratagy is overpowered.
Let's not forget Unreal Tournament, which was designed solely for multiplayer and has been by far the most enjoyed FPS played in my house ever...

I would much rather prefer the 1 weapon only system with each weapon actually having a different use. Ah...the good old days of the shock rifle...
 

Tony2077

New member
Dec 19, 2007
2,984
0
0
well i'd try it but not sure about new shooters even if there trying to be a throw back to the "good old days"
 

r_Chance

New member
Dec 13, 2008
141
0
0
It's Serious Sam after that first part. Which in my book means "good". For those of you wondering about price it's $39 USD. Not $59 like some recent games. Steam had it on sale for $19.99 USD.
 

Doc Cannon

I hate custom titles.
Feb 3, 2010
247
0
0
I love both Serious Sam and Painkiller, but I really don't get how Painkiller innovated the genre of running and shooting hordes of enemies. My PK experience has always been run dodging stuff while blasting their faces away (same thing I did when playing Serious Sam).

In fact, I'm not sure the genre needs any innovations... and if it does, I think Hard Reset was more innovative than Painkiller.
 

sgtshock

New member
Feb 11, 2009
1,103
0
0
The brief Half-Life Opposing Force reference made me happier than it really should have. Now I want to go back and play that game.
 

sneeky033

dAT cAPSLOCK
Dec 1, 2009
119
0
0
Ah balls, now I'm gonna have to go back to that game. I'm a huge fan of the First and Second Encounters, so I was really hyped for this one. But the opening is just as bad as Yahtzee says and worse. I couldn't get out of the city before I lost interest. I wrote it off as a misguided attempt to paint over a modern game with Serious Sam themed paint. But apparently all the cool stuff is hidden in the middle of the game. Time to go reinstall, I guess.

While I'm hoping that this will be worth it, I still believe that The Second Encounter is the best game in the series. That one opened with a ludicrously entertaining series of physics bending rooms and arena fights. If you buy this one, be warned: the beginning is one of the most soulless stretches of gaming I've ever had.
 

Magmarock

New member
Sep 1, 2011
479
0
0
I really liked Serious Sam 3 BFE. Although it didn't have the same oomph as Serious Sam the first and second encounter I did think it was better then painkiller which while is good I feel was a little overrated by Yahtzee. While the weapons were awesome I felt that the enemies were pretty forgetful.
 

Furrama

New member
Jul 24, 2008
295
0
0
I didn't even know this game had come out, but I do know one thing:

I read the title as: Serious Sam 3: Best Friends Ever.
 

XSin

New member
Jul 21, 2009
101
0
0
Big. Fucking. Explosions.

I refuse to believe it stands for anything else.
 

uguito-93

This space for rent
Jul 16, 2009
359
0
0
I dont think Serious Sam is the kind of game you can "lazily plow through" seeing as half the time you're frantically running away from headless suicide bombers.