>First law of consumerism.....don't buy anything based on an
>as-yet-to-be-delivered promise. The game was fabulous on its
>own.....even without multiplayer options.
>MW.
Your first statement hit the nail right between the eyes. Can
anyone say "Netmech"? Game is awesome, but complete lack of new
missions is not good. And I won't even mention the Instant
Action battles. Well, I will. Come on!!! ateast let us place
the enemies, not just get thrown into the middle of a bunch of
MINDLESS idiots. If we could place them ourselves, then we could
atleast set them up to come at us in waves and not singlely or in
one big knot that has MISSLE LAUNCHER written all over it.
James
James
John
>Terra Nova is the most overlooked, under-appreciated game in PC history.
>
>John
>
Totally agree. Few games gave me the thrill and fun of Terra Nova.
(even though the cut-scenes where about the worst ever! What about
that stupid ending!)
The game engine was great, so was the mix of squad-based strategy and
1st person shooter. Best PC game yet in my opinion.
Too bad the canned it. I mailed TLG a couple of months ago about an
expansion-pack. But they replied that, although they regretted it, TN
was dead. No multy-player. No extra levels. No editor. Too bad.
-----------------
It's a bird
It's a plane
No it's... Gadget?
http://www.haha.demon.nl
Sign up for the free Gadget Report Mailinglist!
To send E-mail: remove SPAMBLOCK from adress.
John> Terra Nova is the most overlooked, under-appreciated game in PC history.
John> John
Agreed! An updated, 3d-accelerated multiplayer Terra Nova is on my
wish list. Heavy Gear II might provide that, but it might not. Oh
well...
But yes, Terra Nova was totally addictive, and the "atmosphere" of the
various missions was great. It's still on my hard drive, and I still
return to playing it now and then.
//Petri
>
>Too bad the canned it. I mailed TLG a couple of months ago about an
>expansion-pack. But they replied that, although they regretted it, TN
>was dead. No multy-player. No extra levels. No editor. Too bad.
Maybe they are willing to release the TN source code so that people
can start to work on their own new missions. AFAIR TN is the only game
where Looking Glass has the full rights. Since the game basically is
dead anyway I don't see any reason for them not to do it.
Werner
-----
Memory Dragon
we...@my-dejanews.com
>gad...@SPAMBLOCKhaha.demon.nl (Gadget) wrote:
I asked that too. They replied: "Terra Nova is dead. Sorry, but we
have neither the time or the recources to do anything with TN in the
future."
While i loved the concept of powered battle armoured troops.
The game was too fast for me.
I hate the twitch games where the faster you press fire the better you
are.
The game had huge potential, but if they ever make a sequal, they
should slow the action down slightly or put less but stronger
opponents. The last miossion was really frustrating as it was TOO
hard. ( im sure there are people out there who finished it 1st time ,
but i had to play it like 12 times and still i didnt complete it).
So wish list for Terra Nova 2
1. Slow the game down, have time to think and plan your tactics
2. Better 3-d graphics
3. Dont make it yet another "giant robot game"
4. I HATE WINGMEN, you have too much to do as it is. You dont have
time to bugger about telling them to go there.
5. Dont even think about making it anything like that hugly lame
starship trooper MOVIE, sure have it exactly like the BOOK, but NO to
the movie.
I heard so much complaints about LG not supporting multiplayer for
TN...I really don't care. When the singleplayer gameplay is THAT
good, I can careless about multiplayer (and I'm a Quake-dm/ctf addict
who still play Quake1 almost daily).
On Sun, 20 Dec 1998 17:41:30 -0600, Destroy <d...@duh.com> wrote:
>I almost bought that game but the graphics turned me off too much.
>
>John Reynolds wrote:
>
If you'd take out the squad-based gameplay, it would be just another
big robot game. The mx between Real time strategy and 1st person
shooter was what made it special. Better then Battelzone, by the way,
which was more a C&C clone. TN was special because it was more
realistic and scaled to human proportions.
And by the way: I don't agree that fast shooting wins the game.
Especially in the latter missions, use of your mates is essential. And
strategy wins the battle.
>On Mon, 21 Dec 1998 20:55:44 +1030, we...@my-dejanews.com (Werner)
>wrote:
>
>While i loved the concept of powered battle armoured troops.
>The game was too fast for me.
>I hate the twitch games where the faster you press fire the better you
>are.
>The game had huge potential, but if they ever make a sequal, they
>should slow the action down slightly or put less but stronger
>opponents. The last miossion was really frustrating as it was TOO
>hard. ( im sure there are people out there who finished it 1st time ,
>but i had to play it like 12 times and still i didnt complete it).
>
>So wish list for Terra Nova 2
>
>1. Slow the game down, have time to think and plan your tactics
This a definite must. I know that one could run faster and
farther in such armor, but not that fast. I don't know the
actual speed, but it must be atleast twice as fast as the fastest
olympic sprinters. everthing needs to walk slower. this would
slow the pace and make it more realistic. This would add to
walking time between waypoints, but that would null your senses
and make the next ambush even cooler, or they oculd add a time
acclelerator. slowing down speed would also make jump jets more
effective and the ideas of a hit a run attack would be more than
an idea.
>2. Better 3-d graphics
a given, SpecOps looks beutiful on my voodoo1 card, w/ voodoo2s
and Riva TnTs abound, graphics should be no problem.
>3. Dont make it yet another "giant robot game"
yes, giant robot games resemble tank sims. TerraNova2 should
resemve EA's SealTeam
>4. I HATE WINGMEN, you have too much to do as it is. You dont have
>time to bugger about telling them to go there.
this should be helped by slowing down speed of units thus slowing
pace thus making it easier to command units. Another must have
is a mission planner. A good example would be Rainbow 6's with
less detail and more flexibility.
James
>>1. Slow the game down, have time to think and plan your tactics
>
>This a definite must. I know that one could run faster and
>farther in such armor, but not that fast. I don't know the
>actual speed, but it must be atleast twice as fast as the fastest
>olympic sprinters.
That would be around 55 - 60 mph. Actually, at their highest speeds, the
PBAs are "on the bound". They are not walking or running, but taking big
hops off each foot.
>>2. Better 3-d graphics
>a given, SpecOps looks beutiful on my voodoo1 card, w/ voodoo2s
>and Riva TnTs abound, graphics should be no problem.
Maybe not. Do you remember the rendering distance used in the game? The
only 3d accelerated game with that ability that I've seen is JSF, a flight
sim. Delta Force had to resort to using voxels.
>Another must have
>is a mission planner. A good example would be Rainbow 6's with
>less detail and more flexibility.
Agreed, a mission planner would be very nice.
--
Ajaipal Tanwar, University of Texas at Austin
Actually, one of the TN programmers leaked the mission file format a while
ago, and there are now mission-editing utilities developed by a fan on
TTLG (www.ttlg.com).
And while it is true that any game which had (full-price) sales as poor
as TN is going to be hard to sell a sequel for, it does have the advantage
of being one of the few intellectual properties LG owns outright, and it
won't be true that we'll never do anything with it until never has actually
arrived. Which of course it never will. 8-)
Anyway, it does come up from time to time when products are being planned.
But it would definitely be a long shot, and possibly not marketed as
"Terra Nova 2" even if it shared fiction and/or gameplay style.
-Tim Stellmach
TN designer
Guys, if you liked Terra Nova, RUN out and buy TRIBES right now. It is THE
EXACT SAME GAME, but fully multiplayer (32 people at a time), Glide
graphics, flying craft, and tons more. It is fabulous. You've got
basically the exact same armors...light, medium, and heavy. Very similar
weapons. Jump jets. It is very, very close, and yet WAY better, with the
multiplayer and the sheer size of the maps, which, like Terra Nova, had both
interior and exterior settings on the same map.
>I hate the twitch games where the faster you press fire the better you
>are.
TN was definitely NOT a twitch game. It was tough, but you had to plan your
strategy and tactics and then pull them off to do well in this one.
>The game had huge potential, but if they ever make a sequal, they
>should slow the action down slightly or put less but stronger
>opponents. The last miossion was really frustrating as it was TOO
>hard. ( im sure there are people out there who finished it 1st time ,
>but i had to play it like 12 times and still i didnt complete it).
That mission was a nightmare. It was one of the few wingman-reliant missions
where you couldn't just take out the enemy before having your man go in and do
his thing, because the enemy was constantly respawning. At most, you try to
take out the turrets before leading your troops in... and even that could have
you receiving too much damage to last. This is also one of those missions
where you had to plan your weapons loadout (for both you and your wingmen)
VERY carefully. But, ultimately, you had to go in (over the back wall) with
guns blazing and just hope that it was enough to keep your man alive until he
planted his charges. Probably one of the worst missions in the game as far as
playability goes.
>So wish list for Terra Nova 2
>
>1. Slow the game down, have time to think and plan your tactics
I dunno about this. In some instances, the fast action was great... but there
were plenty of missions where I seemingly had all the time in the world to
plan tactics. I found the mix to be pretty good.
>2. Better 3-d graphics
Make the enemy units and structures 3D-accelerated polygons at resolutions of
at least 640x480 and it would be wonderful.
>3. Dont make it yet another "giant robot game"
I'd hope not since the suits are supposed to be only a little bigger than
man-sized.
>4. I HATE WINGMEN, you have too much to do as it is. You dont have
>time to bugger about telling them to go there.
I liked the wingmen... sometimes. In a furball, wingmen could really take the
pressure off... then there were some missions when I just left them behind
(ordered them to "STAY!") and went off on my own... usually the kind that
required scouting and long-ranged sniping. Also, there is something to be
said for having team members whose skills and expertise were different, but
invaluable, to you and the mission.
>5. Dont even think about making it anything like that hugly lame
>starship trooper MOVIE, sure have it exactly like the BOOK, but NO to
>the movie.
I think any FP-game based on the book would be VERY boring.
The book was hardly action-packed... more philosophical than anything.
Just as an aside, the last time I played TN (about a year ago...I think
it's time to re-install it) I noticed something...
There were a couple of command-line parameters you could add when you
ran the game if your video card was having trouble with the graphics
modes used by TN. If the 320x200 resolution was giving you problems,
you'd use _BADLORES. If the 320x240 was problemsome, you'd use
_BADMEDRES. It seems to me that implies that there originally was a
higher resolution planned for Terra Nova (which seems probable, since
320x240 seems a rather odd video mode to pick as the "high resolution".
I wonder if they left the high-resolution textures in the game but just
disabled it... maybe a hack would free them... (hey, I can dream, can't
I? :)
To my knowledge the highest resolution possible in TN was 320x400.
TheAvatar <ava...@idt.net> writes:
| Just as an aside, the last time I played TN (about a year ago...I think
| it's time to re-install it) I noticed something...
|
| There were a couple of command-line parameters you could add when you
| ran the game if your video card was having trouble with the graphics
| modes used by TN. If the 320x200 resolution was giving you problems,
| you'd use _BADLORES. If the 320x240 was problemsome, you'd use
| _BADMEDRES. It seems to me that implies that there originally was a
| higher resolution planned for Terra Nova (which seems probable, since
| 320x240 seems a rather odd video mode to pick as the "high resolution".
|
| I wonder if they left the high-resolution textures in the game but just
| disabled it... maybe a hack would free them... (hey, I can dream, can't
| I? :)
I forget just what the highest resolution we played with was. I know
that our map editor was 640x480 or something, but we never did high-res
graphics for the helmet, so the game itself couldn't handle more than
320x400 or whatever.
The problems with doing higher-resolution graphics in Terra Nova were:
1. It would be slow. Of course, machines now are a lot faster than
they were then...
2. The rendering method we used was explicitly developed with the
premise that the screen resolution was low. As you may have
noticed, we 'texture mapped' all the way out to the horizon,
without any fogging (we called it BullFog after seeing Magic
Carpet, ha ha) to reduce the viewing radius. The reason we could
do that is that far enough out, map elements were a small enough
number of pixels that we could do a 'fake texture map' instead of
a real one, and it would look pretty much the same.
Once you get to a high resolution mode, the fake texture mapping
gets more obvious, since there are more pixels, and thus our whole
rendering technique doesn't really work any more. (You can delay
the fake texture mapping until further out, but since you're doing
n-squared work with respect to the viewing radius, that hurts.)
In retrospect, it was probably a stupid idea to develop a renderer
that was specifically designed for 320x200. On the other hand, the
renderer was developed in 1993. If we had been faster in getting
the game out, it might not have been such a big deal, but by the
time it came out in 1996, people were expecting better. That part
is my fault, sorry.
Dan (Terra Nova project leader)
--
Dan Schmidt -> df...@harmonixmusic.com, df...@alum.mit.edu
Honest Bob & the http://www2.thecia.net/users/dfan/
Factory-to-Dealer Incentives -> http://www2.thecia.net/users/dfan/hbob/
Gamelan Galak Tika -> http://web.mit.edu/galak-tika/www/
Dan Schmidt wrote in message ...
I definitely agree; for its time the graphics of TN were great. Heck,
even nowadays, I'm impressed by how large the maps. I was just
commenting on how the _BADLORES and _BADMEDRES parameters seemed to
imply that -at one time- there had been a high-resolution mode planned.
But alas, I guess not.
Even Tribes, despite its better graphics, doesn't manage the FEEL of
alien worlds like TN did. The total emptiness of the Tribes worlds has
something to do with that, I think... Tribes has terrain similar to
Terra Nova (albeit in higher resolution) but it doesn't have the trees,
bushes and rocks, which makes the world look very flat and fake. And the
terrain in Tribes doesn't vary enough either; in TN you could bound from
a lake in a valley up to the peak of a mountain and you'd SEE the
difference. In tribes the ground is pretty much all one color.
And here's another vote for TN2 (it worked for getting us system shock
2, after all :)
TheAvatar wrote:
> <snip>