I agree that the "sonic wave" explosions look really weak. What also gets me is how boring everything seems. I understand this might be early levels, but it seems you're just going through the motions trotting into a room, take out 2-3 enemies behind a box, and move on to the next area. There's no rush or sense of urgency. I had this problem with MadFingerGame's Samurai games, where they looked pretty but the gameplay was just so plain I got bored and deleted it from my device. Unless the single player ramps up significantly in later levels, any fun I have from this will have to come from multiplayer.
A game should be judged on its own merits as a game, and not have shortcomings overlooked just because the team was small or the sale price low (Bastion, for example, meets both of those conditions, and beats the pants off many full-price, big-budget competitors in the PC arena). If a team overestimates their vision, ability, or resources and tries to accomplish something they ultimately cannot, they should be called on that, not simply given a pass for trying their best. Note that I'm speaking in the abstract: I'm not saying that Shadowgun is necessarily a bad game, or that I'm even assuming it will be; I honestly hope it isn't. At this point I haven't played it and can only speak with regard to the media that has been provided, which you have already stated isn't fully representative of the complete variety of gameplay on offer. As I've also said, it's not fair to expect the Gears of War experience from Shadowgun, but I'm also not going to make excuses for bland gameplay if it does rear its head. There are a lot of fun, lower-budget action games in the app store, and if it turns out that Shadowgun ultimately plays more like a tech demo than a finished game, I'm not going to pretend its flaws don't exist. This may not turn out to be the case, and the game will hopefully be fantastic, but I'd certainly also hope people won't be attacked if - after actually playing the game - they express the (potentially unpopular) opinion that the game just isn't as spectacular as they expected it to be, or everyone else is saying it is. Comparing one of the iOS's more anticipated, "big-ticket" games to a PC bargain-bin offering is rather damning it with faint praise, don't you think? I wouldn't pick up most of those specifically because they are awful: not just low-budget, but also badly-designed and badly-coded copies of better games. Conversely, you have Bastion again which, while a budget title, managed to be recognised as superior in both presentation and gameplay to many full-price offerings from major studios; its "budget" nature wasn't something that held it back from brilliance, and wasn't used as an excuse for missing features or bog-standard gameplay. (And no, I'm not comparing Shadowgun to Bastion, just commenting on the occasional polar opposite in terms of the perception and implementation of budget titles in general.) In terms of movies, Uwe Boll has had budgets as big or bigger than many other directors, and could easily have made pretty good films with the resources available to him, but he's a gods-awful director with an absurd lack of vision, who consistently produces dreck. I don't think anybody would ever rate Boll's work as highly as any other, equivalently-funded work. We shouldn't give a pass to bad design when more limited artists have demonstrated that they can create better or more inspired works with fewer resources. Look at Memento, for example, or the original Saw film, which had an absurdly tiny budget. I should mention again here that this is still largely an abstract commentary; I honestly don't want the above statements to be construed as a foregone conclusion about Shadowgun's quality. Well, that's a subjective call that people will hopefully be allowed to make for themselves without feeling pressured. I'm hoping the game proves to match that description, though. I didn't suggest it would kill the game, but if the action in Shadowgun is primarily the same construction barrier combat for five hours, I know I would certainly find it less appealing than if the types of "cover" and related environments were more varied. For me, issues that would irritate or bother me in other games of the same type wouldn't suddenly become acceptable simply because this game is on iOS and there's no real equivalent currently available. Well, apart from what has already been shown about the game around the net, many of the statements in this thread, including comments like the one above, have created certain expectations for this game. ^_^
Wasn't that video just a demo of what is to come? If that was the final gameplay video then I would imagine it to be lame. Also I don't see any sort of rush move like Gears of War. Which kinda sucks because it looks like the guy is galloping around all slow and frolicked.
@arta: Any game will sound boring if it's described in a boring way. @appletini: You seemed to have missed my point entirely. I'm not making excuses for Shadowgun because it's made a by small team. What I'm saying is that they set smaller goals and achieved them really well. As a result they made a game that plays better (and looks better) than any shooter I've played on the PSP. They clearly used their resources very, very well. As you say, all of this discussion will remain very abstract until more people start playing the game. If there's any take-away from all my posts on this thread, it is this: We all knew that Shadowgun would look good from the videos and the screenshots; from my experience with the preview built, the game is also very polished and plays surprisingly well. I'll let people do what they will with that impression.
@squarezero i think @arta described the video pretty well IMO, but i haven't played it, so i won't jump into anything (except the game as soon as it comes out XD) to me it looked kinda plane, but i don't mind that, it's still looking fun to play.
explosions looks weak wheres the big flames the flying debris and all the other stuff that make me say WHOOOOOO YEAH B**CH TAKE IT!
You were directly contrasting the smaller Shadowgun team and sale price against the larger teams and sale prices of the Gears of War and Assassin's Creed games, implying that the former couldn't necessarily be expected to have the quality or content of the latter because of these factors, which is logical enough. You stated that Madfinger set smaller goals for themselves accordingly, which they then achieved, but my response is that if those "smaller goals" ultimately translate as "blander gameplay", that's not necessarily something to be commended, and a smaller team isn't a legitimate excuse if this does happen, specifically because that final gameplay must have been a conscious design chosen out of all the alternatives, with full awareness of the team's limitations. If, for example, one of their intentions was to achieve half of what a bigger studio might pull off with regard to particular game elements (e.g. level design, weapons), that's a worthy enough in-house goal to strive for, but in practical terms achieving that goal still means the player is only getting half of what they're used to, and/or expecting. The graphics are without a doubt some of the best on the platform, so people are expecting the rest of the game to live up to the high standards set by those first impressions. Arta's recounting of the preview video might be interpreted as "boring", but just watching the video reveals that it's a pretty accurate description of its content, and other people evidently agree, so simply dismissing that feedback out of hand isn't quite fair. Personally, I'm not expecting to see anything on the level of Gears of War, but I am hoping for something a little more engaging than the gameplay in the video appears to be. Yes, it might be frustrating having to deal with responses that don't gel with your own personal experiences with the game, but you're going to be stuck running into these for the next ten days until the rest of us get to try it.
Like some of you have been saying,yes the gameplay video looked repetitive. When I say repetitive, it's because I was expecting the character to atleast dive when he goes for cover or slide. Maybe it's not in the video and hope for the best. The absence of explosion was also little concern. It's beautiful graphics alone however will make this game an instant buy for me!!
Again, you are missing my point. "Smaller goals" doesn't mean "blander gameplay." It means aiming to make a fun, polished game, and not a grand epic (like Gear of War or Assassins Creed). Back in the days of Old Hollywood, Cesar B. DeMille would hire superstars and build humongous sets that cost millions of dollars in order to film epics about Babylon. The lesser known directors (guys with names like John Ford) would dress up a few guys like cowboys and indians head out to Death Valley. Their movies didn't have superstars and million dollar sets, but they were well paced, decently acted, and tons of fun. They set themselves smaller goals and delivered on them beautifully. Of course, if all you're looking for in a film is superstars and million dollar sets, you wouldn't really enjoy them. Frankly, this is all getting more than a little pointless. What I'm saying is very simple: I think the game looks great. I really enjoy playing it, even on my second play through with a revised build. Folks should make of that what they will.
Suggestion! How about, instead of actively seeking things to "hate" (for lack of a better term) on, why don't you come to terms with it and accept the game for what it's done so well. I mean, those visuals are a pure spectacle to look at and I find it hard to believe this will run so great on my 4g touch. But if it does, then... Wow. To take away from the teams credit (as some [not to mention names] of you are doing here) is just ridiculous. I find it hard to believe you guys are that fussed over such minute details ('i want flame in my explosion' - 'i can't run like Gears, what?!' - 'the gameplay doesn't drastically change throughout the video' - 'I want varied cover obstacles, damnit! Thin desks will do!'). That right there is all the fuss in one parenthesized rant. Now, for the good stuff.. Graphics, holy shit, is this a console port..? He'll no! Handheld exclusive. Wtf did you see that boss?! How many more of those things are there. What other types of evil-doing enemies can I expect. 5 hours of campaign you say? Nice. How about that surprise that was mentioned some days back, I wonder! Hey, smooth gameplay, where can you go wrong. Oh and did you see the bid of the player getting his ass handed to him for being reckless, what a N00b Have I mentioned the console quality graphics and smooth gameplay..? Hell yes I did. I know I've missed many points, but yeah, you get the point. Put simply, THIS GAME LOOKS AWESOME! IMO of course
Even if the gameplay is a bit repetetive this is a day 1 purchase for me. Developers that are willing to put in the effort to produce console level games for iOS devces should be supported. Otherwise we'll only have 0.99$ casual games. Casual is fine but bigger games are needed too and they can't be sold at ridiculously low prices...I hope Shadowgun sells well.
I agree, that feels weird. Some blood splatter of some kind would make weapon impacts feel like its actually happening (even green colored if red is an issue) I will obviously instantly buy this, but is there any plan for multiplayer support in the game ? That would be a nice touch, even if it's only local multiplayer ^^
How about you come to terms with the fact that people are allowed to discuss every aspect of a game here, both positive and negative. If you can't handle that, and can't address a person's points without simply trying to claim they're invalid, maybe you should avoid the thread entirely, because you're likely to come across many comments that don't gel with your point of view. Repetitive gameplay, for example, is hardly a "minute detail" to be handwaved away as if we were talking about the colour of about the main character's clothes.
"Repetite gameplay"' is also a detail that you can't really speak about until, well, you play the game . You are welcome to speculate, of course. But you do have access to people who have played the game. Rather than make uninformed pronouncements, you could simply ask: "Hey ImNoSuperman, the game looks repetitive. What do you think?" That would require a bit of humility, though, something gamers and forum posters (me included) are not known for.
