BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP !!!!!
cl...@ans.com.au
-> BLOOD 2
* * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
LIKE A DISPOSABLE DIAPER SITTING IN A LANDFILL ON A HOT DAY IN HAITI
I loved the first game - I have no idea what this piece of s**t is supposed to
be - a sequel? It's junk! Plain and simple! If I could get a refund I'd do it
right now!
DON'T BUY THIS GAME!! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON, DANGER!!!
Gone is the 1930's pulp horror comic setting, replaced by the bog-standard 3D
sci-fi "research lab gone amuck" (ZZZZZZZzzzzZ) plotline ... or lack of
one!!!!! The usual "experiments with the living dead facility"
ZZZZzzZZZZZZZZZZz ... get a clue, people. What do they think was so cool about
the first Blood? Did they even play it?
I thought the original Blood was an awesome and atmospheric game although a
bit weak in story for a shooter (better than most) but this "sequel" is an
absolutely shocker. It is not ready for commercial release AT ALL.
Somebody really managed to bugger up a great idea when they "improved" it
with a modern setting and added this crap new "enhanced" 3D engine. The 3D
looks like a very sad alpha version that has a lot of work needed before it
will make the grade.
As for the bugs - don't get me started. This game has weird strips,
malfunctioning mouse, distorted textures, cruddy resolution, crashes galore
and just plain trashy response and feel. Did they really have to go and fugg
up the unbelievably beautiful Build Engine and replace it with this hi-rez
student's polygon project??!!?!? 3D accelerator my ass, it is slow as hell on
a Pentium 233!! Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color. This game
doesn't look like it was made by the same people, it's a pass.
Total Score (1-10):
Atmosphere : 0
Graphics : 0
Stability : 0
Playability : 0
Sound : 0
Music : 0
Worth : 0
I would have given the real BLOOD at least an 8 or 9 in all these regards
above, no hesitation.
The programmers and designers need to be marched into the nearest open field
and forced to run a gauntlet of rubber truncheons. This game stinks big time.
I liked the first Blood so much I thought I'd treat myself to this game as a
Xmas present ... whatta load of garbage!! At $89.95 here in Oz this game is
nothing short of fraudulent robbery. I'd feel that way if I paid $9.95 for it
as well.
(Concludes flame post by tossing CD to dogs as a chew toy with a deep sigh of
disappointment)
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
xxyzz
> WARNING!!!!!!
>
> -> BLOOD 2
>
> * * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
I really liked Blood and played through the demo of Blood2 and hated the demo so
much, I decided not to buy the game. I agree that something in the design process
went very wrong. Rather than keep their successful formulae of an old horror
movie, the designers decided to copy half-life/quake/etc. and do something rather
boring for a sequel.
Worker Working
>
> The programmers and designers need to be marched into the nearest open field
> and forced to run a gauntlet of rubber truncheons. This game stinks big time.
> I liked the first Blood so much I thought I'd treat myself to this game as a
> Xmas present ... whatta load of garbage!! At $89.95 here in Oz this game is
> nothing short of fraudulent robbery. I'd feel that way if I paid $9.95 for it
> as well.
>
Well, if I had paid $89.95 for ANY game I'd be pissed. It seems like
ordering from out of the country would be far cheaper.
I really enjoyed the demo (except for the no-save business) and have
been looking for a nicely priced copy to pick up for myself. I saw it
for US$34.99 once and almost picked it up. And I've heard that the demo
doesn't do justice to the game, concerning atmosphere and such. I had
read in here (.action) that the game kept to a similar feel as the
original.
The graphics in the demo were top-notch, as far as I'm concerned,
running on a PII-300, V2 system.
I guess to each his own...
Destroy
cl...@ans.com.au wrote:
> WARNING!!!!!!
>
> -> BLOOD 2
>
> * * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
>
> The programmers and designers need to be marched into the nearest open field
> and forced to run a gauntlet of rubber truncheons. This game stinks big time.
> I liked the first Blood so much I thought I'd treat myself to this game as a
> Xmas present ... whatta load of garbage!! At $89.95 here in Oz this game is
> nothing short of fraudulent robbery. I'd feel that way if I paid $9.95 for it
> as well.
>
Kevin Nguyen
cl...@ans.com.au wrote in message <76ip4m$rca$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
bill
>Bring back the Build engine? Give me a break.
While it might sound crazy, I actually would have more fun playing an
"add-on" for the original Blood today than I did playing this
"improved" version of Blood.
rob
the game.
rob.
cl...@ans.com.au wrote in message <76ip4m$rca$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>WARNING!!!!!!
>
>-> BLOOD 2
>
>* * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
>
>LIKE A DISPOSABLE DIAPER SITTING IN A LANDFILL ON A HOT DAY IN HAITI
>
>I loved the first game - I have no idea what this piece of s**t is supposed
to
>be - a sequel? It's junk! Plain and simple! If I could get a refund I'd do
it
>right now!
>
>DON'T BUY THIS GAME!! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON, DANGER!!!
<snip>>
Youdon'tKnow
Folks it is a GREAT game!!!
cl...@ans.com.au heeft geschreven in bericht
<76ip4m$rca$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
:WARNING!!!!!!
:
:-> BLOOD 2
:
:* * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
:
:LIKE A DISPOSABLE DIAPER SITTING IN A LANDFILL ON A HOT DAY IN HAITI
:
:I loved the first game - I have no idea what this piece of s**t is supposed
to
:be - a sequel? It's junk! Plain and simple! If I could get a refund I'd do
it
:right now!
:
:DON'T BUY THIS GAME!! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON, DANGER!!!
:
:Gone is the 1930's pulp horror comic setting, replaced by the bog-standard
:
:(Concludes flame post by tossing CD to dogs as a chew toy with a deep sigh
MB
>The 3D looks like a very sad alpha version that has a lot of work needed
before it
>will make the grade.
>This game has weird strips, malfunctioning mouse, distorted textures,
cruddy resolution, crashes galore
>and just plain trashy response and feel.
> Did they really have to go and fugg
>up the unbelievably beautiful Build Engine and replace it with this hi-rez
>student's polygon project??!!?!? 3D accelerator my ass, it is slow as hell
on
>a Pentium 233!! Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
>debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color. This game
>doesn't look like it was made by the same people, it's a pass.
Heh.. You dont have a 3D accelerator and expect it to run nicely on a P233?
Funny how you complain about these problems but dont mention any other info
about your system. Guess you dont play many new games.
It runs great, looks pretty damn good, no "weird strips"?, havent any "mouse
malfunctions", and no crashes on my system.
I cant believe this person wants the Build engine back. Hate to break it to
ya, but the Build engine is dead.
You wont see any new games based on that old technology.
RobB
intelligent that is...NOT!! I felt the same way after playing the demo (oh
no, not Quake again, I thought). But I read one of Jay Wilson's (Blood2
level designer) plan updates where he said that levels similar to the demo
levels made up only a minor part of the full game. After playing the full
game, I'd have to agree. There are very few techie type levels in the game
at all, most of them have the same gothic feel to them as the original Blood
theme. Levels such as "The Cathedral" and "The Temple Of Poon" were
terrific examples of this. But unfortunately, you're not going to see this
as you won't buy the full game.
xxyzz wrote in message <368D0101...@idt.net>...
>cl...@ans.com.au wrote:
>
>> WARNING!!!!!!
>>
>> -> BLOOD 2
>>
>> * * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
>
RobB
generation of FPS games to run smoothly without a 3D accelerator is kidding
themselves. On my PII 300a with Riva TNT Blood 2 ran as smoothly as a
babies bottom. The graphics at high res were gorgeous and I only had two
crashes in the whole game (both in the one level). There was no mouse
malfunctions, distorted textures and I don't even know what you mean by
"wierd strips".
The only thing that the Build engine has in it's favour over the new
generation lithtech is that it's level editor is far simpler to use. And I
don't think that matters one iota in the final wash....
>cl...@ans.com.au wrote:
>
spAwn
huge multiplayer patch.
MB wrote in message <368dd...@news.mocc.net>...
cl...@ans.com.au
This is the point I was trying to make, but it was lost on some of the titans
of reason who responded.
David Gosewitz
system requirements. I just thought the designers completely ignored
the atmosphere of the first Blood. All the spookiness and the nice
little touches like the cultist language seem to be missing from the
sequel. Instead, we get Gabriel talking in a very measured voice in
perfect English. Bah. I'd sooner use the Build engine, too. Less
blocky.
I did take it back for a refund, too. I got Fallout 2 instead.
Dave
Sterno
Yes, yes, yes! And bring back PONG!!!!! <insert orgasm here>
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 02:24:56 -0700, "MB" <S...@signature.com> wrote:
>>a Pentium 233!! Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
>>debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color. This game
>>doesn't look like it was made by the same people, it's a pass.
Remove MARMOSET to reply via email
Joe
>Somebody really managed to bugger up a great idea when they "improved" it
>with a modern setting and added this crap new "enhanced" 3D engine. The 3D
>looks like a very sad alpha version that has a lot of work needed before it
>will make the grade.
What are you smokin' dude? The game looks as good as ANY 3D game.
>As for the bugs - don't get me started. This game has weird strips,
>malfunctioning mouse, distorted textures, cruddy resolution, crashes galore
>and just plain trashy response and feel.
Strange, I saw NONE of these problems. And what the heck is "cruddy
resolution"? The game has hi-res modes with very detailed quality
textures.
>3D accelerator my ass, it is slow as hell on
>a Pentium 233!!
Nonsense.
>Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
>debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color.
Dude, it's nearly the twenty-first century. Time to crawl out oif the
eighties.
>Atmosphere : 0
My score: 9
>Graphics : 0
My score: 9
>Stability : 0
My score: 10
>Playability : 0
My score: 8
>Sound : 0
My score: 9
>Music : 0
My score: 10
The other category is AI, which is unfortunately quite low, about a 3:
>Worth : 0
My score: 8
Want a good solid FPS with great graphics, great weapons, great
atmosphere and music, and good level design? Pick up Blood 2.
Joe
Baytor
wasn't bothered to much by the small slow downs--it ran 10 times better than the
Sin demo. And I'm 4 Megs short on my RAM. Worked a lot better if I dropped it
down to low or medium detail.
Joe wrote:
--
Baytor -- ICQ #21127064
Visit Caleb's Corner
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/9140/Blood.html
"Great. Another thing for me to fall off of." -- Kyle Katarn
Pedro Colman-Arrellaga
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ah jeez. It was only a matter of time. Cleve Blakemore makes his
entrance on c.s.i.p.g.a. I'm sure this will be fun.
>WARNING!!!!!!
>
>-> BLOOD 2
>
>* * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
<<snip>>
I'm sure some Canadians were involved.
P.S. When's Grimoire coming out?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Colman-Arréllaga | Believing is easier than thinking. Hence so
hiss...@cris.com | many more believers than thinkers.
hiss...@concentric.net | - Bruce Calvert
------------------------|
"The Typhoid Mary of | Do I contradict myself?
the shipping business" | Very well then, I contradict myself,
| (I am large, I contain multitudes).
AKA "Mr. NEGATIVE" | - Walt Whitman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DMacLeod
original Blood was better. Who can say that it wasn't? Not because of the
damn graphics, or fancy this and fancy that, because of it's atmosphere! Of
course, Blood II is a great game on it's own, it does have the fancy
graphics and everything else you could possibly want.....plus a taunt button
(I've always wanted to make Caleb crack his one liners manually.)
There is no reason to say that Blood II sucks unless you, yourself, have
your head so far embeded in your ass that you cannot see the light of day,
let alone your computer screen (that makes me wonder what the "distorted
textures" were....)
Then again, Blood II, like most sequels, is *not* as good as the original.
Yet, even on my ancient 200MMX/Voodoo 1 system on low rez, the game is a lot
of fun..........so if you don't like it, don't play it and stop wasting
bandwidth......you're the people who make multiplayer on the net slower for
everyone...<g>
Blood I (1-10 Scale, 10 being best)
Atmosphere : 10
Graphics : 8
Stability : 10
Playability : 10
Sound : 8
Music : 9
AI: 7
Worth : A helluvalot.
Blood II: The Chosen
Atmosphere : 8
Graphics : 10
Stability : 7
Playability : 8
Sound : 10
Music : 10 (I really love the music when you pause the game......)
AI: 5
Worth: Nearly as much as the first.......and I paid $75 bucks for it, and
damnit, I'm proud :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Jordanov
"Goddamn your righteous hand."
--Marilyn Manson/Get Your Gunn
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-> BLOOD 2
>
>* * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
>
>LIKE A DISPOSABLE DIAPER SITTING IN A LANDFILL ON A HOT DAY IN HAITI
>
>I loved the first game - I have no idea what this piece of s**t is supposed
to
>be - a sequel? It's junk! Plain and simple! If I could get a refund I'd do
it
>right now!
>
>DON'T BUY THIS GAME!! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON, DANGER!!!
>
>Gone is the 1930's pulp horror comic setting, replaced by the bog-standard
3D
>sci-fi "research lab gone amuck" (ZZZZZZZzzzzZ) plotline ... or lack of
>one!!!!! The usual "experiments with the living dead facility"
>ZZZZzzZZZZZZZZZZz ... get a clue, people. What do they think was so cool
about
>the first Blood? Did they even play it?
>
>I thought the original Blood was an awesome and atmospheric game although a
>bit weak in story for a shooter (better than most) but this "sequel" is an
>absolutely shocker. It is not ready for commercial release AT ALL.
>
>Somebody really managed to bugger up a great idea when they "improved" it
>with a modern setting and added this crap new "enhanced" 3D engine. The 3D
>looks like a very sad alpha version that has a lot of work needed before it
>will make the grade.
>
>As for the bugs - don't get me started. This game has weird strips,
>malfunctioning mouse, distorted textures, cruddy resolution, crashes galore
>and just plain trashy response and feel. Did they really have to go and
fugg
>up the unbelievably beautiful Build Engine and replace it with this hi-rez
>student's polygon project??!!?!? 3D accelerator my ass, it is slow as hell
on
>a Pentium 233!! Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
>debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color. This game
>doesn't look like it was made by the same people, it's a pass.
>
Joe
>Looked wonderful on my P233 (with Voodoo 2 card). Even on high resolution, I
>wasn't bothered to much by the small slow downs--it ran 10 times better than the
>Sin demo. And I'm 4 Megs short on my RAM. Worked a lot better if I dropped it
>down to low or medium detail.
I'm lucky enough to have a P2 300 (with a 12MB Voodoo2) and 128 MB
RAM. Everything cranked to the max (800x600) it was totally smooth at
all times. And I'm a frame-rate nut, I hate it when it gets choppy.
Joe
MB
It was someone else that said that.
Sterno wrote in message <36905aea...@news.earthlink.net>...
>
>
>Yes, yes, yes! And bring back PONG!!!!! <insert orgasm here>
>
>On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 02:24:56 -0700, "MB" <S...@signature.com> wrote:
>>>a Pentium 233!! Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
>>>debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color. This game
>>>doesn't look like it was made by the same people, it's a pass.
>
cl...@ans.com.au
"DMacLeod" <dmac...@earthling.net> wrote:
> Okay, after finishing Blood and almost done Blood II, I have to say that the
> original Blood was better. Who can say that it wasn't? Not because of the
> damn graphics, or fancy this and fancy that, because of it's atmosphere! Of
> course, Blood II is a great game on it's own, it does have the fancy
> graphics and everything else you could possibly want.....plus a taunt button
> (I've always wanted to make Caleb crack his one liners manually.)
It is a worse game. It is lacking all the exact touches that made the first
game more than just another shooter, like the cultist language and fantastic
period environment.
> There is no reason to say that Blood II sucks unless you, yourself, have
> your head so far embeded in your ass that you cannot see the light of day,
> let alone your computer screen (that makes me wonder what the "distorted
> textures" were....)
Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that money
to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a complete
moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not BORING!!!!!!!!
They are a dime a dozen, close your eyes and pick one off the shelf. At this
point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
rehab.
> Then again, Blood II, like most sequels, is *not* as good as the original.
> Yet, even on my ancient 200MMX/Voodoo 1 system on low rez, the game is a lot
> of fun..........so if you don't like it, don't play it and stop wasting
> bandwidth......you're the people who make multiplayer on the net slower for
> everyone...<g>
And then this idiot proceeds to show with his scores that the atmosphere,
playability, stability, and AI are IN FACT much WEAKER than the original,
which would seem to be substantial PROOF to anybody not STRAPPED into an
incontinence chair that my criticism was entirely accurate.
> Blood I (1-10 Scale, 10 being best)
> Atmosphere : 10
> Graphics : 8
> Stability : 10
> Playability : 10
> Sound : 8
> Music : 9
> AI: 7
> Worth : A helluvalot.
>
> Blood II: The Chosen
> Atmosphere : 8
> Graphics : 10
> Stability : 7
> Playability : 8
> Sound : 10
> Music : 10 (I really love the music when you pause the game......)
> AI: 5
> Worth: Nearly as much as the first.......and I paid $75 bucks for it, and
> damnit, I'm proud :)
>
Oh, so the game WAS unstable? Exactly! You're a rocket scientist!
DMacLeod
First of all, I said the Blood II wasn't as good as the original. No one
can deny it. If they do, they're wrong. So I'm not denying your problems
with Blood I being *much* superior. I'm pissed because you're being a
goddamn prick. You know what? MAYBE YOU SHOULD HAVE PLAYED THE GODDAMN
DEMO FIRST YOU MORON! THAT'S WHAT DEMO'S ARE FOR!
I downloaded the demo and played it, I wasn't impressed, but I still gave it
a chance and it grew on me, if it didn't on you, no one needs an opinion
from someone who can't take a little bit of dissapointment. Especially from
a blithering idiot such as yourself, I think Monolith did a very good job on
this game and I for one am happy with it the way it is. SORRY, NOTHING WILL
EVER BE PERFECT! Accept it or shut the hell up.
Hey, how did you know I suffered a head injury, funny, because I almost
died, I KNOW HOW TO LIVE AND NOT BITCH ABOUT SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T GO MY
WAY. The game is good, even on my shit computer. The reason I gave
playability and stability low scores is because I haven't played Blood II on
any other computer than my own, and I don't have the hardware to run it as
well as it was made to be run. My computer crashes all the time, I don't
blame the game. Playability was lower because it didn't work as well with
my Microsoft Sidewinder GamePad as the original Blood did.
AI in Blood II just sucks period, I have no problem with saying it's bad,
and I won't defend it either. Of course, nothing can ever compare with
human intelligence, or in your case, human stupidity.
BTW, did you read any of my previous message, or were you too busy pulling
your thumb out of your ass? Christ, I must have said 10 times that Blood 1
was better. Fuck, read the damn thing over.....your criticism was correct
up to the point where you said "BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP !!!!!"
Are you so full of shit that you just can't go: "Oh well"? Blood II does
what it does well.
You spent your money, you believe you got screwed, too bad, because the
people who enjoy the game are laughing at your pathetic, whiny ass.
Let the flaming begin.
----------------------------------------
Kyle Jordanov
----------------------------------------
MTKafka
I dont think the lithtech engine has a feeling of a Quake/Quake2 or Unreal
engine game. There is something about the new lithtech engine that doesn't
give it a 3d fps action feel. Its not a bad engine, in fact the graphics on it
are very nice. It seems that the lithtech enging is more suited for pure 3d
action games, vehicle type ones. Really, its hard to explain, but the lithtech
engine games I've played, only Blood2 and Shogo, have a laggy feeling to
them. Whereas Id's engine and Unreal's engine have a more fluid feeling to
them. Whatever. . .
Also, build engine games are some of the best out there still. I liked Duke
Nukem and Blood and Outlaws. They are all greatd 3d games and they are easily
picked up by most of my family and friends (those who don't play the new usual
3d action games). In fact, I still think the build engine games are fine
enough for the average consumer, I mean look at how much Deer hunting sold!!!
Plus you don't need bleeding edge hardware to play them either, Whatever!
Mark
MTKafka
playing time on my new home LAN. My family abd friends who don't play computer
games don't want to spend time learning controls for the Quake type control
games. In fact I think I've [played more Blood and Duke Nukem on the LAN than
any other game so far AND its been fun!!!
Mark
cl...@ans.com.au wrote:
> In article <368d407f...@news.earthlink.net>,
> bi...@here.com (bill) wrote:
> > "Kevin Nguyen" <cngu...@san.rr.com> wrote:
> > >Bring back the Build engine? Give me a break.
> >
> > While it might sound crazy, I actually would have more fun playing an
> > "add-on" for the original Blood today than I did playing this
> > "improved" version of Blood.
> >
> >
>
> This is the point I was trying to make, but it was lost on some of the titans
> of reason who responded.
>
mlwilliams
Question - How do you get the bone leeches off when they're stuck to
you?
Question - How do you use the remote bombs? When I try to set one off I
just chuck out another one!
Ta
Mark
--
Saturnalia
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5676/sat.html
I'm sorry, I can't argue unless you've paid.
Hendrik Mans
> Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that money
> to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a complete
> moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not BORING!!!!!!!!
> They are a dime a dozen, close your eyes and pick one off the shelf. At this
> point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
> have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
> rehab.
I just like collecting them. Does that count? :)
Take care,
Hendrik
--
Hendrik "Morn" Mans <mo...@planetcrap.com> <ICQ #4818318>
http://www.planetcrap.com - The Epicenter of all things BS
http://www.gameslink.net - The Gamers' Chat Network
http://www.unreal.org - Unreal Resources on the Internet
Kevin Nguyen
mlwilliams wrote in message <369099...@signal.dera.gov.uk>...
>My opinion of Blood II - it's alright.
Ditto. Not as good as the the original Blood in some way, and a lot better
in other ways.
>Question - How do you get the bone leeches off when they're stuck to
>you?
Pound the shit outta the use key.
>Question - How do you use the remote bombs? When I try to set one off I
>just chuck out another one!
Look in the option/keyboard control menu, you have to bind a key to the
detonate command.
Joe
>I dont think the lithtech engine has a feeling of a Quake/Quake2 or Unreal
>engine game.
I agree, it's far better than the Unreal engine (which has yet to be
used to produce a decent game, IMO).
Joe
Gamer Man
>Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that money
>to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a complete
>moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not BORING!!!!!!!!
>They are a dime a dozen, close your eyes and pick one off the shelf. At this
>point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
>have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
>rehab.
Um, didn't YOU buy it?????
Gamer Man
Kieron Dodds
cl...@ans.com.au wrote in message <76pied$345$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
the
>> original Blood was better. Who can say that it wasn't? Not because of
the
>> damn graphics, or fancy this and fancy that, because of it's atmosphere!
Of
>> course, Blood II is a great game on it's own, it does have the fancy
>> graphics and everything else you could possibly want.....plus a taunt
button
>> (I've always wanted to make Caleb crack his one liners manually.)
>
>It is a worse game. It is lacking all the exact touches that made the first
>game more than just another shooter, like the cultist language and
fantastic
>period environment.
Personally, while I found the premise of Blood intriguing, the actual game
and the atmosphere was severely disappointing, IMO. I didn't expect the
same atmosphere from Blood 2 that I expected from Blood, and, quite frankly,
I didn't think it would be all that good at all. That said, Blood 2 was
certainly a lot more fun than Blood, and the levels were more immersive, and
isn't that what it's about? I mean the fun level.
>> There is no reason to say that Blood II sucks unless you, yourself, have
>> your head so far embeded in your ass that you cannot see the light of
day,
>> let alone your computer screen (that makes me wonder what the "distorted
>> textures" were....)
There are many areas in Blood 2 where textures were ripped or distorted and
where brushes weren't completely "substantial", where you could slide right
into a wall and such. Additionally, the lighting on many "lighted" textures
did not display properly in perspective.
>Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that money
>to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a
complete
>moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not
BORING!!!!!!!!
To who, to you? Well, if you're sick of that type of game, I guess you're
sick of it, and your objectivity is questionable at best. Personally, I'm
sick of RPGs and especially the current crop of boring, overloaded, stale
RPGs. Yeah, my perspective would be questionable.
>They are a dime a dozen, close your eyes and pick one off the shelf. At
this
>point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
>have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
>rehab.
Hmm... I still play these games and enjoy them immensely. Heck, look at
N64, every game the same stale scrolling shooter (for the most part), but
people have fun playing them anyway. Of the 3DFPSs I've played recently,
the only one I really didn't like all that much was Unreal. Blood 2,
despite its annoying bugs, was enjoyable for me. I like the re-introduction
of limited weapons inventory, it creates another level of strategy required
to win and also allows a player to choose 10 of 15 or so weapons that they
are most comfortable with. The only thing that is really missing is the
ability to holster one of the two lower powered weapons you're carrying in
order to conserve ammo.
>> Then again, Blood II, like most sequels, is *not* as good as the
original.
>> Yet, even on my ancient 200MMX/Voodoo 1 system on low rez, the game is a
lot
>> of fun..........so if you don't like it, don't play it and stop wasting
>> bandwidth......you're the people who make multiplayer on the net slower
for
>> everyone...<g>
>
>And then this idiot proceeds to show with his scores that the atmosphere,
>playability, stability, and AI are IN FACT much WEAKER than the original,
>which would seem to be substantial PROOF to anybody not STRAPPED into an
>incontinence chair that my criticism was entirely accurate.
Atmosphere is subjective and depends highly upon the reviewer's own personal
tastes. Playability is subjective as well, although somewhat less so.
Stability I'll give you, but keep in mind that Blood was what, a third or
fourth generation game built upon the Build engine? Blood 2 is a first
generation Lith engine game. I don't know about the AI, it seems to me that
Blood 2 might get a slight up on this one if A) monsters actually responded
quicker to assaults and sound, and B) monsters actually tracked you instead
of just standing in the immediate area.
>Oh, so the game WAS unstable? Exactly! You're a rocket scientist!
Unstable is not the word for it, Blood 2 was the most bug-ridden game I ever
played through. I've played buggier games, but they got deleted and
returned. That does say something for Blood 2, tho. IMO, it would have
been a much better game if it would have used the Quake 2 or Unreal engine.
Kieron Dodds
produce a game worthy of it. Unreal itself used to many cheap AI cheats to
make the enemies incredibly difficult, perhaps because of some design
decision to produce the hardest game possible and thinking that harder is
better. Don't get me wrong, I'm not the type to whine about how hard a game
is and then wipe it or cheat, I just found the navigation and "storyline"
incredibly boring, repetitive and entirely too dark. Then, what else is
there that's out? Klingon? Puh-leaze. Now, the same can definitely not be
said for Quake 2 engine games, including Quake 2 itself. I mean, you can
not compare Blood 2 to Half-Life, no way. That aside, the engine itself is
more mature and stable and, IMO, a better display engine, especially from a
lighting perspective.
Joe wrote in message ...
MB
>
>
>Joe wrote:
>>
>> MTKafka <mcu...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>
>> >I dont think the lithtech engine has a feeling of a Quake/Quake2 or
Unreal
>> >engine game.
>>
>> I agree, it's far better than the Unreal engine (which has yet to be
>> used to produce a decent game, IMO).
>>
>> Joe
>
>Have you ever _seen_ UNREAL that you write such a nonsense ? Taht's
>ridiculous...
I have Unreal. Finished it 3 days after it was released. The game is pure
eye candy and little gameplay. But were talking about the engines here
right?
It's multiplayer code sucks. It has good graphic capability and detail but
only runs real good on Voodoo cards. Direct3D support is a joke. The game
takes a beast of a system to push out over 30fps in 800x600.
Lithtech engine has advantages over Unreal Engine. Including, but not
limited to, native Direct3D so it runs good on many cards, good multiplayer,
good graphics capability and detail. Looks almost the same right? One
major item, it runs all that real good on a slower system than Unreal needs
to even be decent. Heh, my system runs Shogo at 1152x864 faster than Unreal
runs at 800x600.
Blood2 and Shogo are good games. Unreal and Klingon Honor Gaurd are not..
Well, Unreal is OK. But KHG is crap.
Roark
says...
> Oh my. I do have to reply to this.
> I think Monolith did a very good job on
> this game and I for one am happy with it the way it is.
You have rather low standards. Blood, Blood 2, Shogo, Claw, Get Medieval
- what has Monolith ever done besides make buggy clones of better games?
They're one of the most overrated developers around.
I like 3D shooters, but Monolith are well behind id, 3DRealms and Raven
as far as quality games are concerned.
> SORRY, NOTHING WILL
> EVER BE PERFECT! Accept it or shut the hell up.
You wouldn't happen to be a member of the press, would you? Or a PR
representative? Or a message board moderator?
> The reason I gave
> playability and stability low scores is because I haven't played Blood II on
> any other computer than my own, and I don't have the hardware to run it as
> well as it was made to be run. My computer crashes all the time, I don't
> blame the game. Playability was lower because it didn't work as well with
> my Microsoft Sidewinder GamePad as the original Blood did.
Looks like the old "my computer sucks but it's the game's fault"
argument to me. My Win 95 box hasn't crashed in the two months since I
built it - PII 450 TNT/V2 with 128 megs RAM that runs bloody great, fast
and stable. I still think Blood 2 is a relatively weak game, only better
than total snooze-fests like Unreal, Sin and Klingon Honor Guard. Pretty
graphics alone just don't cut it.
I didn't think the original Blood was terrific, either, though I enjoyed
some of its humor and atmospherics. Hilarious slasher film gore in a
gothic horror setting - great, at times.
> Of course, nothing can ever compare with human intelligence
Ever been on battle.net, dood?
Kevin Nguyen
is purely through game design. There are some very solid weapon mods out
there for Unreal, but they usually screw up the so called gameplay.
Joe wrote in message ...
>Peter <ko...@ibm.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>
>> Lith-Tech better than Unreal engine ???
>
>It is. I'm not yet convinced it's possible to create decent,
>powerful-feeling weapons with the Unreal engine. Both games using this
>engine (Unreal and Klingon Honor Gaurd) have hopelessly lame puny
>weapons.
>
>Joe
>
Peter
Joe wrote:
>
> MTKafka <mcu...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> >I dont think the lithtech engine has a feeling of a Quake/Quake2 or Unreal
> >engine game.
>
> I agree, it's far better than the Unreal engine (which has yet to be
> used to produce a decent game, IMO).
>
> Joe
Lith-Tech better than Unreal engine ??? Man, what are you smoking?
Have you ever _seen_ UNREAL that you write such a nonsense ? Taht's
ridiculous...
PTR
--
"God is real, unless declared integer"
mailto:Piotr...@usa.net | UIN:9044598 | NeuroSiS @ #hardcore
SJ
>
>I have to agree here, for all of its eye candy, the Unreal engine has yet to
>produce a game worthy of it. Unreal itself used to many cheap AI cheats to
>make the enemies incredibly difficult, perhaps because of some design
>decision to produce the hardest game possible and thinking that harder is
>better. Don't get me wrong, I'm not the type to whine about how hard a game
>is and then wipe it or cheat, I just found the navigation and "storyline"
>incredibly boring, repetitive and entirely too dark. Then, what else is
>there that's out? Klingon? Puh-leaze. Now, the same can definitely not be
>said for Quake 2 engine games, including Quake 2 itself. I mean, you can
>not compare Blood 2 to Half-Life, no way. That aside, the engine itself is
>more mature and stable and, IMO, a better display engine, especially from a
>lighting perspective.
>
Another UNREAL bashing wise guy. ZZZZZZzzzzzz......
cl...@ans.com.au
"DMacLeod" <dmac...@earthling.net> wrote:
> Hey, how did you know I suffered a head injury, funny, because I almost
> died,
Wild guess! I figured you for a Robert DeNiro stand-in from the movie
AWAKENINGS! Has playing these repetitious shooters restored any of your motor
skills long enough to stop drooling and hold your wobbling head still?
> AI in Blood II just sucks period, I have no problem with saying it's bad,
> and I won't defend it either. Of course, nothing can ever compare with
> human intelligence, or in your case, human stupidity.
Well, AI is the game in my opinion - there is none to speak of in BLOOD II,
which qualifies it as a COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP!!!
> BTW, did you read any of my previous message, or were you too busy pulling
> your thumb out of your ass? Christ, I must have said 10 times that Blood 1
> was better. Fuck, read the damn thing over.....your criticism was correct
> up to the point where you said "BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP !!!!!"
> Are you so full of shit that you just can't go: "Oh well"? Blood II does
> what it does well.
It doesn't do anything well - this is the whole point. How come you keep
reaffirming my criticisms of the game and then refuting my conclusion?
> You spent your money, you believe you got screwed, too bad, because the
> people who enjoy the game are laughing at your pathetic, whiny ass.
Well, I'm laughing at them, head injuries and all. And they aren't so much
laughing as sort of going "huh-huh-huh" while a fountain of drool pours out of
the corner of their mouth.
Rocker
>
> My opinion of Blood II - it's alright.
>
not as much as Halflife
> Question - How do you get the bone leeches off when they're stuck to
> you?
>
Not sure. I kill it before it gets to me.
> Question - How do you use the remote bombs? When I try to set one off > I just chuck out another one!
there should be a detonation key. Don't remember the default since I
custom my control.
You should look at the manual, or in the control-> keyboard mapping
Joe
> Lith-Tech better than Unreal engine ???
It is. I'm not yet convinced it's possible to create decent,
DMacLeod
>>Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that
money
>>to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a
complete
>>moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not
BORING!!!!!!!!
this
>>point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
>>have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
>>rehab.
>
>
LOL!!!
Kyle Jordanov
DMacLeod
>> Hey, how did you know I suffered a head injury, funny, because I almost
>> died,
>
>Wild guess! I figured you for a Robert DeNiro stand-in from the movie
>AWAKENINGS! Has playing these repetitious shooters restored any of your
motor
>skills long enough to stop drooling and hold your wobbling head still?
Actually, since Blood 1, I haven't played any first person shooters. I
don't like them, I am *very* selective in the games I buy, the last game I
bought was Sanitarium. Finished it in 4 days. I didn't like that
game.....did anyone else need my opinion? No.
Since the only first person shooters I have played are Doom, Quake, Blood 1,
and Blood II, I never seemed to run into the problem of drooling and
wobbling my head. You seem to be stupid enough to buy every game you buy
that looks the same as everyother game you own, and then have the goddamn
nerve to complain about it! Stop being so damn stupid, learn--Humans do
have the ability. Maybe it's your mind that has been so fried by playing
whatever looks good that you've lost all your friends and the only
gratification you get is by bitching at people who don't need your fucking
opinion, because I and most of the others on this newsgroup don't give a
shit about you or your dog.
>> AI in Blood II just sucks period, I have no problem with saying it's bad,
>> and I won't defend it either. Of course, nothing can ever compare with
>> human intelligence, or in your case, human stupidity.
>
>Well, AI is the game in my opinion - there is none to speak of in BLOOD II,
>which qualifies it as a COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP!!!
Your intelligence seems pretty low. Guess you qualify! What do you win?
Well Johnny, you get to live day by day thinking that you got ripped off,
complaining and whining, until you realize that you're so pathetic and go
out and get a life. Congratulations!
>> BTW, did you read any of my previous message, or were you too busy
pulling
>> your thumb out of your ass? Christ, I must have said 10 times that Blood
1
>> was better. Fuck, read the damn thing over.....your criticism was
correct
>> up to the point where you said "BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP
!!!!!"
>> Are you so full of shit that you just can't go: "Oh well"? Blood II
does
>> what it does well.
>
>It doesn't do anything well - this is the whole point. How come you keep
>reaffirming my criticisms of the game and then refuting my conclusion?
I partially reaffirmed *SOME* of your criticisms. Can you spell it out with
me S-O-M-E. Blood II does what it does well. If you think you have a valid
argument other than you don't like it, I'd like to hear it. The engine is
not shit, the atmosphere IS good, the playability is okay, the only thing
that is bad is the AI. And if the only thing that makes a game to you is
the intelligence of your competitor, I hope you never have kids, because
when you play a game with them and they don't get it and do something
stupid--you're going to post to "alt.kids" or something about your children
being COMPLETE PIECES OF CRAP.
>> You spent your money, you believe you got screwed, too bad, because the
>> people who enjoy the game are laughing at your pathetic, whiny ass.
>
>Well, I'm laughing at them, head injuries and all. And they aren't so much
>laughing as sort of going "huh-huh-huh" while a fountain of drool pours out
of
>the corner of their mouth.
What is it with you and retarded people? Is it some kind of fetish for you
to type "drool"?
If you get this angry when a computer game doesn't live up to your
standards, I'd hate to see what you're like to others you know.
Guess what, the people who created Blood II are *Human* right? Right. We
are not perfect, we have flaws, we will pass those flaws down to everything
we make. Therefore, and this is the last message I'm going to post on this
topic, because I have a feeling you're getting off on this, THE GAME ISN'T
PERFECT, BUT IT IS FUN. If you can't find the fun in a simple computer
game--fine, don't play it, if you're going to bitch about not liking it, go
kill yourself, the world doesn't need another of your kind. Learn how to
live.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Jordanov
"I hate therefore I am."
--Marilyn Manson/Get Your Gunn
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DMacLeod
II does have a FUN FACTOR!
Am I the only one here that isn't so superficial that the games I play have
to look good to be fun?
I had a computer once, it had no hard-drive and booted up from one of those
5 and whatever inch floppies. The loading time was incredibly stupid, but
there was this one helicopter game that was just fun. No fancy graphics, no
P2IdioticSpeed Chips, No Voodoo/Banshee/Motherfu*king 904 MB Video Card,
Monochrome Monitor and the like. But you know what: IT WAS DAMN FUN!
Kyle Jordanov
Kieron Dodds wrote in message ...
>>Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that
money
>>to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a
>complete
>>moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not
>BORING!!!!!!!!
>
>To who, to you? Well, if you're sick of that type of game, I guess you're
>sick of it, and your objectivity is questionable at best. Personally, I'm
>sick of RPGs and especially the current crop of boring, overloaded, stale
>RPGs. Yeah, my perspective would be questionable.
>
>>They are a dime a dozen, close your eyes and pick one off the shelf. At
>this
>>point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
>>have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
>>rehab.
>
>
Kevin Nguyen
SJ wrote in message <76rp93$pjo$1...@news.ycc.yale.edu>...
He made some valid points, didn't sound like a wise guy to me.
Kieron Dodds
major drawbacks were the ridiculous AI and the environment. For the AI,
there are believable AIs that produce "life-like" actions. Unreal's AI did
not serve to meet this goal, it was not the touted "advanced AI" that it was
purported to be. What Unreal's AI accomplished was to make the sparse
enemies more difficult to defeat. Now, if you ask me, if I want a tough
competition of that grade, I'll play bots, or better yet, a multi-player
match. But, for a single-player game, I'ld rather have AI routines more
like Half-Life than Unreal. Then, there's the environment. First, it was
boring. Between the few (and repetitive) enemies there were, there was
little more than wandering through a ghost town going on. At times I felt
myself why I was wandering around this very pretty but empty VRML chat room.
Of course, that was when I could actually see the walls in front of me. No
game is fun when the screen is black. Those are my reasons for not liking
Unreal as much as the next guy and that's about all I have to say on the
subject.
Kieron Dodds
really is still the top of the pile (even if it is slow). Lithtech's engine
takes too many shortcuts and liberties. It fails to even approach Unreal
(or Quake 2 for that matter) in brush, texture, or light rendering. Just go
to a bright room in each game and look for detail. Granted, Lith is faster
than Unreal (dunno about Q2), but it's nowhere near as sophisticated.
MB wrote in message <36918...@news.mocc.net>...
>Peter wrote in message <36914E28...@ibm.uci.agh.edu.pl>...
>>
>>
>>Joe wrote:
>>>
>>> MTKafka <mcu...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I dont think the lithtech engine has a feeling of a Quake/Quake2 or
>Unreal
>>> >engine game.
>>>
>>> I agree, it's far better than the Unreal engine (which has yet to be
>>> used to produce a decent game, IMO).
>>>
>>> Joe
>>
>> Lith-Tech better than Unreal engine ??? Man, what are you smoking?
>>Have you ever _seen_ UNREAL that you write such a nonsense ? Taht's
>>ridiculous...
>
>
Kieron Dodds
related.
Joe wrote in message ...
>Peter <ko...@ibm.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>
>> Lith-Tech better than Unreal engine ???
>
Joe
>If you pay close attention to detail, you'll see that the Unreal engine
>really is still the top of the pile (even if it is slow).
Being slow is a majot detreiment to many users.
>Lithtech's engine
>takes too many shortcuts and liberties. It fails to even approach Unreal
>(or Quake 2 for that matter) in brush, texture, or light rendering. Just go
>to a bright room in each game and look for detail. Granted, Lith is faster
>than Unreal (dunno about Q2), but it's nowhere near as sophisticated.
The other problem with Unreal is the horrendous weapon effects, the
worst of any modern fps (a trait shared by the other Unreal-engine
game KHG). It seems those who like the Unreal engine, to no surprise,
are only interested in eye candy.
Joe
John Shiali
>
> I dont think the lithtech engine has a feeling of a Quake/Quake2 or
> Unreal engine game. There is something about the new lithtech engine
> that doesn't give it a 3d fps action feel. Its not a bad engine, in
> fact the graphics on it are very nice. It seems that the lithtech
> enging is more suited for pure 3d action games, vehicle type ones.
I think its more related to the fact that the Lithtech Engine is
designed around DirectX (though they whipped out the Direct Play to
get decent netplay). It has that slightly sparse, lower polygon look
of Direct3D games like Jedi Knight, where OpenGL or GLide games like
Unreal and Quake 2 just seem to look look richer.
> Really, its hard to explain, but the lithtech engine games I've played,
> only Blood2 and Shogo, have a laggy feeling to them. Whereas Id's
> engine and Unreal's engine have a more fluid feeling to them. Whatever.
> . .
Its something to do with the default controls - I found that fiddling
with the mouse settings in Shogo got rid of that slightly "laggy"
feeling during movement.
--
A Talent For War at http://atfw.intelligamer.com - The Space-sim Portal
John -
You made spaghetti for quaint country cottages? That's grim.
Joe
>The engine doesn't have anything to do with "powerful-feeling weapons", that
>is purely through game design.
I might have agreed before KHG came out. Now I won't believe it until
I see an Unreal engine game with good weapons. BTW, I'm referring more
to the sound, animation, and "feel" than actual damage points
(although I do also dislike games that implement "difficulty" through
enemy-armor - I think that is an incredibly lame copout).
Joe
david ralin
and found the "crypt keeper" humor vibe just plain annoying. It does run
unreasonably slow on my 200mmx/voodoo2 system, and the it is not quite beautiful
when things are standing still, either.
Dralin
DMacLeod wrote:
> Okay, after finishing Blood and almost done Blood II, I have to say that the
> original Blood was better. Who can say that it wasn't? Not because of the
> damn graphics, or fancy this and fancy that, because of it's atmosphere! Of
> course, Blood II is a great game on it's own, it does have the fancy
> graphics and everything else you could possibly want.....plus a taunt button
> (I've always wanted to make Caleb crack his one liners manually.)
>
> There is no reason to say that Blood II sucks unless you, yourself, have
> your head so far embeded in your ass that you cannot see the light of day,
> let alone your computer screen (that makes me wonder what the "distorted
> textures" were....)
> Then again, Blood II, like most sequels, is *not* as good as the original.
> Yet, even on my ancient 200MMX/Voodoo 1 system on low rez, the game is a lot
> of fun..........so if you don't like it, don't play it and stop wasting
> bandwidth......you're the people who make multiplayer on the net slower for
> everyone...<g>
>
> Blood I (1-10 Scale, 10 being best)
> Atmosphere : 10
> Graphics : 8
> Stability : 10
> Playability : 10
> Sound : 8
> Music : 9
> AI: 7
> Worth : A helluvalot.
>
> Blood II: The Chosen
> Atmosphere : 8
> Graphics : 10
> Stability : 7
> Playability : 8
> Sound : 10
> Music : 10 (I really love the music when you pause the game......)
> AI: 5
> Worth: Nearly as much as the first.......and I paid $75 bucks for it, and
> damnit, I'm proud :)
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kyle Jordanov
>
> "Goddamn your righteous hand."
> --Marilyn Manson/Get Your Gunn
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >-> BLOOD 2
> >
> >* * ---- R E E K S ---- * *
> >
> >LIKE A DISPOSABLE DIAPER SITTING IN A LANDFILL ON A HOT DAY IN HAITI
> >
> >I loved the first game - I have no idea what this piece of s**t is supposed
> to
> >be - a sequel? It's junk! Plain and simple! If I could get a refund I'd do
> it
> >right now!
> >
> >DON'T BUY THIS GAME!! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON, DANGER!!!
> >
> >Gone is the 1930's pulp horror comic setting, replaced by the bog-standard
> 3D
> >sci-fi "research lab gone amuck" (ZZZZZZZzzzzZ) plotline ... or lack of
> >one!!!!! The usual "experiments with the living dead facility"
> >ZZZZzzZZZZZZZZZZz ... get a clue, people. What do they think was so cool
> about
> >the first Blood? Did they even play it?
> >
> >I thought the original Blood was an awesome and atmospheric game although a
> >bit weak in story for a shooter (better than most) but this "sequel" is an
> >absolutely shocker. It is not ready for commercial release AT ALL.
> >
> >Somebody really managed to bugger up a great idea when they "improved" it
> >with a modern setting and added this crap new "enhanced" 3D engine. The 3D
> >looks like a very sad alpha version that has a lot of work needed before it
> >will make the grade.
> >
> >As for the bugs - don't get me started. This game has weird strips,
> >malfunctioning mouse, distorted textures, cruddy resolution, crashes galore
> >and just plain trashy response and feel. Did they really have to go and
> fugg
> >up the unbelievably beautiful Build Engine and replace it with this hi-rez
> >student's polygon project??!!?!? 3D accelerator my ass, it is slow as hell
> on
> >a Pentium 233!! Bring back the Build Engine, it was stable, very well
> >debugged and fun to explore in. All it needed was high color. This game
> >doesn't look like it was made by the same people, it's a pass.
> >
> >Total Score (1-10):
> >
> >Atmosphere : 0
> >Graphics : 0
> >Stability : 0
> >Playability : 0
> >Sound : 0
> >Music : 0
> >Worth : 0
> >
> >I would have given the real BLOOD at least an 8 or 9 in all these regards
> >above, no hesitation.
> >
> >The programmers and designers need to be marched into the nearest open
> field
> >and forced to run a gauntlet of rubber truncheons. This game stinks big
> time.
> >I liked the first Blood so much I thought I'd treat myself to this game as
> a
> >Xmas present ... whatta load of garbage!! At $89.95 here in Oz this game is
> >nothing short of fraudulent robbery. I'd feel that way if I paid $9.95 for
> it
> >as well.
Kieron Dodds
Joe wrote in message <2ftk2.1905$gB.47...@newsgate.direct.ca>...
>"Kieron Dodds" <kdo...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>>If you pay close attention to detail, you'll see that the Unreal engine
>>really is still the top of the pile (even if it is slow).
>
>Being slow is a majot detreiment to many users.
Being slow is a detriment to all users. Whether or not a user has the
hardware to run the game is besides the point. If they do not, they a)
shouldn't buy the game or b) should upgrade their machines, simple as that.
A high-end Pentium with a Voodoo card can run Unreal reasonably well. That,
I would assume, was their target market.
>>Lithtech's engine
>>takes too many shortcuts and liberties. It fails to even approach Unreal
>>(or Quake 2 for that matter) in brush, texture, or light rendering. Just
go
>>to a bright room in each game and look for detail. Granted, Lith is
faster
>>than Unreal (dunno about Q2), but it's nowhere near as sophisticated.
>
>The other problem with Unreal is the horrendous weapon effects,
Which have nothing to do with the actual engine.
the
>worst of any modern fps (a trait shared by the other Unreal-engine
>game KHG). It seems those who like the Unreal engine, to no surprise,
>are only interested in eye candy.
Huh? Well, I think the Unreal engine definitely has a lot of promise. It's
not really the engine's fault that it's only been the basis for less than
good games. Nothing wrong with a little eye candy as long as the game has
substance enough to back it up. The games you mentioned, IMO, didn't. But,
that's the fault of game design, not inherent in the engine.
>Joe
>
Kieron Dodds
the designer(s) when weapons sound impotent. Ditto for the animations, talk
to the animators and modelers responsible, the engine itself can handle it.
Joe wrote in message ...
Nolan
>In article <76neo8$ao4$1...@east43.supernews.com>,
> "DMacLeod" <dmac...@earthling.net> wrote:
>> There is no reason to say that Blood II sucks unless you, yourself, have
>> your head so far embeded in your ass that you cannot see the light of day,
>> let alone your computer screen (that makes me wonder what the "distorted
>> textures" were....)
>
>Or maybe it is YOU with your head up your ass ... I didn't spend that money
>to get just another crap SIN/HALF-LIFE/QUAKE shooter!! You must be a complete
>moron to still enjoy games like this, they are nothing if not BORING!!!!!!!!
>They are a dime a dozen, close your eyes and pick one off the shelf. At this
>point the only people left buying these kinds of crap games are people who
>have suffered head injuries in industrial accidents and need the games for
>rehab.
Do you realize that you just flamed yourself?
--
Nolan no...@catnip.org
SKEP-TI-CULT® Man in Black #68-67456-068, Cahooter #15, Peter Hood #14
http://www.catnip.org/ http://www.catnip.org/bathroom/
Joe
>Sound is sound... Unreal is capable of nice sound effects, it's the fault of
>the designer(s) when weapons sound impotent. Ditto for the animations, talk
>to the animators and modelers responsible, the engine itself can handle it.
I do admit to playing devil's advocate a bit here ... I imagine the
engine probably is capable of it. Let's just say that after the
disappointing Unreal and KHG ... I'm from Missourri. Show me. ;-)
Joe
MB
Are you sure you played the game?
david ralin wrote in message <36928397...@earthlink.net>...
Kevin Nguyen
Joe wrote in message <8MCk2.2039$gB.50...@newsgate.direct.ca>...
I think Duke Forever should do the Unreal engine justice. Muy macho guns and
pounding explosions is pretty much guaranteed when Dukie is involded.
Sierra's upcoming Navy Seal game is another one to watch out for.
Kieron Dodds
done Q1, but I don't hold out any hopes. Still, I didn't care much for the
flavor of D3D, so I probably won't like it right off the bat.
Kevin Nguyen wrote in message ...
dave mott
FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!
Blood 2 is a good mindless blast so just enjoy it without getting all hung up
on bitty details!!!(It could have been better,but so could a lot of sequels)I
just finished it and i will be playing it again.
Sin has got more bugs than a muthafucker!
Halflife is good but way too short.
Conclusion:If you like to pop a cap in the ass of anything that moves and
wield big guns,then buy blood 2.
uggy.....
Per Kristian Arntzen
MB wrote in message <3692f...@news.mocc.net>...
>What the heck are you talking about? Of course you can look up and down.
>Are you sure you played the game?
He probably forgot to turn on mouselook :)
Worker Working
>
>
> Huh? Well, I think the Unreal engine definitely has a lot of promise. It's
> not really the engine's fault that it's only been the basis for less than
> good games. Nothing wrong with a little eye candy as long as the game has
> substance enough to back it up. The games you mentioned, IMO, didn't. But,
> that's the fault of game design, not inherent in the engine.
>
Yes and No. Perhaps you're right and the Unreal engine has great
promise. Certainly I don't know of any engine that LOOKS better. But
it's not unfathomable that the designers of the engine didn't leave any
room (or abilities to add gameplay mods) for anything other than a
pretty tour through an environment.
I wouldn't write off the Unreal engine yet, especially with Duke Forever
on the horizon (however far that horizon may be) but so far, we're not
seeing to much from that engine other than incredible visuals.
Worker Working
>
>
> You have rather low standards. Blood, Blood 2, Shogo, Claw, Get Medieval
> - what has Monolith ever done besides make buggy clones of better games?
> They're one of the most overrated developers around.
>
> I like 3D shooters, but Monolith are well behind id, 3DRealms and Raven
> as far as quality games are concerned.
>
How can you compare monolith to 3DRealms and Id by saying that they just
make clones?
What the hell has iD done except make clones? Is Quake 2 a different
game than Doom? How many games has 3DRealms made?
Monolith made Shogo, an FPS with an anime style and a story that changes
as you go through the game. I'm only into Blood2 a little ways, but I'm
enjoying it more than I enjoyed single-person Quake2!
Perhaps we can just say to each his own, but Monolith has some talent,
both in their Engine development and game design. iD is great with
engine design and multiplayer but all they make is clones.
Baytor
enemies on a screen at time, without degenerating into a slide show. It is
supposed to be a game.
Newer engines, such as LithTech use an adjustable polygon count to speed things up
considerably, and improve gameplay. If you want pretty pictures, then buy Mist.
The only true 3D action games whose gameplay that I've been impressed with so far
have been Jedi Knight and the LithTech twins (not counting Thief as an action
game). Haven't tried Half-Life, but I'll be giving it a whirl before too long.
Worker Working wrote:
--
Baytor -- ICQ #21127064
Member of PlanetBlood
http://www.planetblood.com/
"Great. Another thing for me to fall off of." -- Kyle Katarn
Baytor
impressive reviews. Get Medieval was also enjoyed by critics, but wasn't hailed by
them, as it was only an updated Gaunlet. Only B2 has been a critical miss. To
paraphase almost every single review, it's a good game, but it's not great.
No, Monolith has not broken new ground yet, which could be why they are still a
small developer/publisher, but they do make pretty good games.
Roark wrote:
> In article <76pmnm$lhu$1...@east42.supernews.com>, dmac...@earthling.net
> says...
> > Oh my. I do have to reply to this.
>
> > I think Monolith did a very good job on
> > this game and I for one am happy with it the way it is.
>
> You have rather low standards. Blood, Blood 2, Shogo, Claw, Get Medieval
> - what has Monolith ever done besides make buggy clones of better games?
> They're one of the most overrated developers around.
>
> I like 3D shooters, but Monolith are well behind id, 3DRealms and Raven
> as far as quality games are concerned.
>
> > SORRY, NOTHING WILL
> > EVER BE PERFECT! Accept it or shut the hell up.
>
> You wouldn't happen to be a member of the press, would you? Or a PR
> representative? Or a message board moderator?
>
> > The reason I gave
> > playability and stability low scores is because I haven't played Blood II on
> > any other computer than my own, and I don't have the hardware to run it as
> > well as it was made to be run. My computer crashes all the time, I don't
> > blame the game. Playability was lower because it didn't work as well with
> > my Microsoft Sidewinder GamePad as the original Blood did.
>
> Looks like the old "my computer sucks but it's the game's fault"
> argument to me. My Win 95 box hasn't crashed in the two months since I
> built it - PII 450 TNT/V2 with 128 megs RAM that runs bloody great, fast
> and stable. I still think Blood 2 is a relatively weak game, only better
> than total snooze-fests like Unreal, Sin and Klingon Honor Guard. Pretty
> graphics alone just don't cut it.
>
> I didn't think the original Blood was terrific, either, though I enjoyed
> some of its humor and atmospherics. Hilarious slasher film gore in a
> gothic horror setting - great, at times.
>
> > Of course, nothing can ever compare with human intelligence
>
> Ever been on battle.net, dood?
Jonathon Wallen
like the game? What the hell is the matter with you? Just because he
doesn't agree that it's a great game doesn't mean that he has to "shut
up". After all, you posted that you enjoy playing the game. It's so
pathetic when you see someone actually swearing at someone in a
newsgroup just because they have a difference of opinion. If the guy
doesn't like it, he doesn't like it. So let him speak if he so desires.
I enjoy playing Blood 1, but in multiplayer over a network. It's a
blast! I never saw or played Blood II yet, but I would like to see what
people think about it. So stop telling people to shut up just because
you don't like what they say. He's got his right to opinion just as
much as you. I will take his opinion and yours into consideration if I
choose to buy this game.
Take care everyone.
Jonathon
>> and I won't defend it either. Of course, nothing can ever compare
with
Jonathon Wallen
-----Original Message-----
From: dave mott [mailto:ugg...@clara.net]
Posted At: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 6:33 PM
Posted To: blood
Conversation: BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP !!!!!
Subject: Re: BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP !!!!!
DMacLeod
asshole. Yelling BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP falls in the last
category.
I found problems with the game, but you know what, I didn't complain about
them because I played the demo and then decided to buy it. So it's no one's
fault but my own if I didn't like it. If you don't play the demo and then
bitch about getting ripped off--screw you, no one gives a flying fuck. If
you play the demo, buy the game and politely post concerns with the
game--all the better to you.
This guy pisses me off because all he says is that idiots play games like
Blood II. Well, it's a release, going around and opening a can of whoop-ass
on a computer game is a lot better than going and doing it in real life.
Those are the idiots. At least people like us can distinguish reality from
fantasy and take our fustrations out on the computer rather than people.
Unlike this guy, he gets pissed off and bitches about getting ripped off,
how anyone who likes the game is an idiot, and how the game sucks. Fine,
the game has problems--too bad. I don't need to be called an idiot because
of my opinion, but I sure as hell don't post messages saying BLOOD 2 KICKS
EVERYTHING ELSES ASS AND ANYONE WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME MUST HAVE A
FUCKING HEAD INJURY BECAUSE I THINK I'M SO FUCKING COOL.
That's what pisses me off. And if I wanted his opinion, I'd give it to him.
----------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Jordanov
"Oh you didn't know? Your ass better call somebody!"
--Road Dogg/Degeneration X
----------------------------------------------------------
Jonathon Wallen
he should have got the demo first-- which I plan on doing before I go
spend money on it.
-----Original Message-----
From: DMacLeod [mailto:dmac...@earthling.net]
Posted At: Thursday, January 07, 1999 11:09 PM
Posted To: blood
Conversation: BLOOD 2 IS A COMPLETE PIECE OF CRAP !!!!!
Subject: Re: Opinions
Chris Bowen
Kieron Dodds wrote:
> Joe wrote in message <2ftk2.1905$gB.47...@newsgate.direct.ca>...
> >"Kieron Dodds" <kdo...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> >
> >>If you pay close attention to detail, you'll see that the Unreal engine
> >>really is still the top of the pile (even if it is slow).
> >
> >Being slow is a majot detreiment to many users.
>
> Being slow is a detriment to all users. Whether or not a user has the
> hardware to run the game is besides the point. If they do not, they a)
> shouldn't buy the game or b) should upgrade their machines, simple as that.
> A high-end Pentium with a Voodoo card can run Unreal reasonably well. That,
> I would assume, was their target market.
>
>
Exactly. What the fuck is the point of rushing out to upgrade to sli voodoo 2's
and a P2-400 to play Unreal, get home, fire it up and say 'well...now I can run
it, but I don't REALLY want to PLAY it.
c.b.
Rutger
HALF-LIFE
mvg Rutger
Kieron Dodds wrote in message ...
>
>Joe wrote in message <2ftk2.1905$gB.47...@newsgate.direct.ca>...
>>"Kieron Dodds" <kdo...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>>If you pay close attention to detail, you'll see that the Unreal engine
>>>really is still the top of the pile (even if it is slow).
>>
>>Being slow is a majot detreiment to many users.
>
>
>Being slow is a detriment to all users. Whether or not a user has the
>hardware to run the game is besides the point. If they do not, they a)
>shouldn't buy the game or b) should upgrade their machines, simple as that.
>A high-end Pentium with a Voodoo card can run Unreal reasonably well.
That,
>I would assume, was their target market.
>
>>>Lithtech's engine
>>>takes too many shortcuts and liberties. It fails to even approach Unreal
>>>(or Quake 2 for that matter) in brush, texture, or light rendering. Just
>go
>>>to a bright room in each game and look for detail. Granted, Lith is
>faster
>>>than Unreal (dunno about Q2), but it's nowhere near as sophisticated.
>>
>>The other problem with Unreal is the horrendous weapon effects,
>
>Which have nothing to do with the actual engine.
>
>the
>>worst of any modern fps (a trait shared by the other Unreal-engine
>>game KHG). It seems those who like the Unreal engine, to no surprise,
>>are only interested in eye candy.
>
>
>Huh? Well, I think the Unreal engine definitely has a lot of promise.
It's
>not really the engine's fault that it's only been the basis for less than
>good games. Nothing wrong with a little eye candy as long as the game has
>substance enough to back it up. The games you mentioned, IMO, didn't.
But,
>that's the fault of game design, not inherent in the engine.
>
>>Joe
>>
>
>