Trespasser: wow, this is great stuff
"Reb" Ruster
wrote:
>Don't know how many of you have ever tried this game beyond the demo of a
>couple years ago, but I just bought it used and am very impressed.
I was always impressed by this game, and never held the opinion of
it's critics. True, part of the dilusionment was due to it's radical
technology, but may games made today are using this same idea.
Nice thing about it is, it's unpredicable.
I too hope a sequel is in the works, or at least an SDK to make custom
levels.
"Reb" Ruster
System Administrator
Rebulon Communications Network
Email: rebr...@angelfire.com
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Big Daddy
when it runs like crap on the best system.
Hey did you hear about the car with radical technology that runs on a Texans IQ?
Ahead of its time.
--
Jim
""Reb" Ruster" <rebr...@angelfire.com> wrote in message
news:jdkcvsohducki8hvq...@4ax.com...
Roger Squires
couple years ago, but I just bought it used and am very impressed.
I'm not treating it all as a shooter, but as an exploration/adventure game
like tombraider1, and so far it succeeds in that genre beautifully. The
puzzles are simple enough, but so what, that first view of two brontosaurs
in the distance, with the ground shaking and Richard Attenborough's voice
commenting on them, is priceless.
All the complaints about "The Arm" interface just fade away after the first
10 minutes, as soon as you triumphantly pick up the first pistol after
struggling with moving boxes and finding something long enough to poke at it
with. The physics really add another dimension of enjoyment: the way an
iron pole has more inertia and is harder to handle than a 2x4; noticing as a
box you stacked starts sliding off and rushing to the other side to push it
back in position; shooting a paint can and watching it bounce around;
wonderful. And the sounds are superb. The 'foley' sound engine with every
surface having its own quality; the dinosaur roars, the excellent music
track and voice clips, all flawless.
It seems to me the real problem with this game way back when was simply the
unrealizable system requirements. I remember trying the demo on a k6-2 and
voodoo1 (or whatever I had back then), getting about 1 frame per second, and
just shrugging my shoulders, unplayable. Now on a K7-700 + voodoo3 I get
anywhere from 15fps viewing the brontos to 40+ for most of the scenery in
800x600 with everything maxed out, still quite low by todays Q3a framerate
standards. In a few months a k7-1ghz and the new video cards coming out
should run this game at 80+ fps, smooth as glass but 2 years too late.
One could wish for more, chiefly reduced scene detail loss with increasing
distance, but this game does not deserve its reputation and I highly
recommend it for anyone sick unto death of mindless FPS's (
http://www.spun.com has $10 used copies, and it shows up on ebay as well).
It truly was a game ahead of its time, I hope a sequel gets made. (The
X-isle project at www.crytek.com offers some hope, but looks more of a
Turok style game to me than a real sequel).
Roger Squires
"Big Daddy" <no...@nohow.net> wrote in message
news:oFsJ5.2017$PY3.3...@news.uswest.net...
> The 'radical technology' was crap code and there is no game 'ahead of its
time'
> when it runs like crap on the best system.
Heh, guess you haven't heard of Grand Prix Legends. Ran like molasses in
'98, was a complete commercial failure. And you know what? It has and had
the best physics model of any driving sim ever made, all driving sims are
compared to it, the developers of World Sports Cars are hoping to equal it,
and it runs great on today's hardware.
The point is it is very possible to write a game that doesn't run well on
current hardware, but has a great concept and innovative features that still
make it worthwhile. I think that qualifies such a game for the 'ahead of
its time' tag. What makes Trespasser tragic is that its failure sunk the
development of what would have been a hugely successful and enjoyable
sequel.
Jeff Jones
Roger Squires <rsqu...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:czqJ5.8613$NP.6...@news.flash.net...
> Don't know how many of you have ever tried this game beyond the demo of a
> couple years ago, but I just bought it used and am very impressed.
I had trouble getting past your character holding, and aiming, a
high-powered rifle with one arm. Technology aside, the game is rife with
some pretty god-awful design decisions.
Eep²
Roger Squires wrote:
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
hermy...@my-deja.com
> It truly was a game ahead of its time, I hope a sequel gets made.
(The
> X-isle project at www.crytek.com offers some hope, but looks more of
a
> Turok style game to me than a real sequel).
>
> rms
> rsqu...@flash.net
>
>
I read a review at the time that made me laugh so hard I captured the
post. Allow me to reintroduce one of the best Trespasser reviews ever
to hit Usenet, so that you may be educated. Lets call this
review "Hovertits", and I will let the review say the rest about what a
great great game Trespasser was and still is to this day.
Roger Gonzalez wrote in message ...
>
>I've been taking all these TRESPASSER SUX posts from the WAREZ D00DZZ
>with a grain of salt. After all, I -loved- Unreal. I was really
>looking forward to this game.
>
>I hate to say this, but... (ahem)... "TRESPASSER SUX!!"
>
>I have a 450Mhz P-II with dual Voodoo2 boards. Sure enough,
>Trespasser is "playable", if you emphasize the double-quotes
>sufficiently.
>
>Since its always hard to picture how a game will play before you buy
>it, let me describe it for you.
>
>You start out in what is essentially a training area. Your job is to
>walk around and marvel at packing crates. Don't look at the graphics.
>I said DON'T LOOK! Yeesh. Great, now you've done it. You noticed
>the trees sprouting near you. Oops, don't look right. *Ulp* That's
>nauseating to watch.. that rock ledge is twitching. Yes, its polygons
>just subdivided and sprouted a unsightly bulge while you were
>watching. Oh wait, back up a nanometer. It absorbed that bulge.
>Forward.. BOING!.. big chunk of rock appears. Back up. SHLORP!
>sucked back into the boulder. This game wouldn't want to hide its
>level-of-detail management out near the far clipping plane where its
>less obvious. That would be boring. This game does it in PLAIN VIEW
>ON THINGS 5 FEET AWAY! For your enjoyment! Yay!
>
>Did you see _Men in Black_? Okay, remember when the alien ripped the
>guy open and wore him as a ill-fitting suit, lurching around clumsily?
>That's the UI. You are controlling a lifeless corpse like a clumsy
>puppet. Wave that dead arm around! Watch it whack things with its
>knuckles! Too bad that you lost your other arm when the alien ripped
>you open. Its a good thing that your remaining arm is really strong.
>Fully extended, your corpse's arm can lift stuff that a mere mortal
>would ordinarily need two hands and some grunting to lift.
>Unfortunately, since you only have one hand, stuff tends to rotate and
be
>incredibly awkward to manipulate. Oh, and it also is good at quantum
>tunneling. If you are having a hard time picking something up, stick
>your hand underground, and move it through the fabric of spacetime
>until you bump into the object you desire. Much better! This really
>demonstrates the realism of having a quantum tunneling corpse arm!
>
>Hmm. How about the realistic body motion. Hard to describe, but I'll
>try. Close your eyes. Imagine a hovercraft. Except... replace the
>hovercraft skirt with a gratuitously rendered shot of cleavage. Yes,
>thats right: your character floats through the world on her breasts.
>Look down and fly around for a bit.. yep, she leads with her tits,
>which appear to only be about 2 feet off the ground. Fortunately,
>that's consistent with the fact that you feel like you're only about 4
>feet tall. What a strange sensation, to hover along through the
>undergrowth on my breasts! Is this what its like to be a woman? I
>always wondered. Now that I'm hovering along on this island allegedly
>filled with dinosaurs, I sure hope I can run! Oooh, I can! Well, I
>can hover along at a brisk pace. I can cover 10 whole feet in 5
>seconds! Wow! That should be useful! (gnash gnash gnash gnash)
>
>But where are the dinos?
>
>The dinos. Ah yes. The brachiosaurs (? I wasn't paying much
>attention to the irritating narration) seem to shuffle around on ice
>skates. Any critter that walked the way these things walk would soon
>die of exhaustion. Perhaps they're trying to make up for the fact
>that their entire ranging territory is a 50 meter by 50 meter square,
>which they circle relentlessly like a ice skating rink. Apropos,
>since they appear to slide with every step on the icy ground.
>
>Oh wait, you thought my ice rink description was only related to the
>small territory? Didn't I mention that everything is slippery?
>Sorry. Imagine a plank. Say, 10 feet long. Hoist it with your
>robo-corpse arm. Flail about for 20 minutes or so until you manage to
>lean it at a 30 degree angle on a fence. Friction should keep it
>there, right? No.. this is an ICE board. And the ground is made of
>ICE. So's the fence. So, it slowly slips and gets pulled until it
>falls off. Whee! Physics is fun!
>
>Wow, its hard to aim the gun, isn't it. Everything is jumping a foot
>or two up and down. Oh, it must be those pesky brachiosaurs. They're
>triggering magnitude 8 earthquakes with every step. Its annoying, so
>I guess I'll float around and watch the trees sprout.
>
>Hmm. Why am I grunting with pain? Oh look, theres a cute little
>kitty nibbling on me. BANG. Hmm, I guess it was a dinosaur of some
>sort. Marvel at its detailing. First person shooter? Nah. This
>is a... hovertit simulation.
>
>Well, I guess I'll keep wandering down this constrained valley. I'm
>sure there's many more exciting surprises for me. I could spend hours
>thinking about how their incredibly repetitive ground tiles are
>"organic" while everybody else's are "static". Oh look, another
>baseball bat. They must have loooovvved baseball on this island,
>there are bats everywhere!
>
>DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE
>
>Don't avoid Trespasser for its steep hardware requirements.
>
>Avoid Trespasser because its a REALLY BAD GAME.
>
>I wonder what the physics model will do when I try to uninstall it?
>
>-Roger
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Devo
That was a pisser but the sad thing is after having completed the game way
back when it first came out it's ALL BLOODY TRUE!
---------
Devo
<hermy...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8t6bms$uvp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Werner Spahl
> I'm not treating it all as a shooter, but as an exploration/adventure game
> like tombraider1, and so far it succeeds in that genre beautifully. The
I agree. The level design is great and it is fun to explore the island!
> All the complaints about "The Arm" interface just fade away after the first
> 10 minutes, as soon as you triumphantly pick up the first pistol after
Here I have to disagree. "The Arm" interface stays a nuissance throughout
the game and every time I dropped a weapon or had to run miles to pick up
another one because I can't reload them, I wondered about how much better
Trespasser could have been with a normal FPS interface.
> iron pole has more inertia and is harder to handle than a 2x4; noticing as a
> box you stacked starts sliding off and rushing to the other side to push it
Inertia is there but not enough friction to be any kind of realistic!
> One could wish for more, chiefly reduced scene detail loss with increasing
> distance, but this game does not deserve its reputation and I highly
Also I would have liked the dinos to have 3d enhanced textures too...
--
Werner Spahl (ui2...@mail.lrz-muenchen.de) Freedom for
"The meaning of my life is to make me crazy!" Vorlonships
Brad Grace
adored the exploring quality of the game, seeing the dino's do their AI
stuff, playing around with the physics, and just feeling like I was
somewhere. We need more games like this, with a few tweaks to the arm, and
the engine, this game would have rocked even more. I am definately going to
replay this game when I get a new system, cause on the one I am on(the one I
played the game on 2 years ago) had trouble in this city area where the fps
got too low to play. I loved the types of puzzles and the almost reality
base gaming I encountered, ie, you can pick up/use pretty much anything, and
the physics model was as accurate as I have seen.
roc4u
Roger Squires <rsqu...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:czqJ5.8613$NP.6...@news.flash.net...
Roger Squires
3dnews site that by adding a line to an .ini file you could get increased
detail on the dinosaur textures. Do you know anything about this ?
Nesotu
> couple years ago, but I just bought it used and am very impressed.
>
> I'm not treating it all as a shooter, but as an exploration/adventure game
> like tombraider1, and so far it succeeds in that genre beautifully. The
> puzzles are simple enough, but so what, that first view of two brontosaurs
> in the distance, with the ground shaking and Richard Attenborough's voice
> commenting on them, is priceless.
Ok, I did get hooked on adventuring around and experimenting with the physics.
> It seems to me the real problem with this game way back when was simply the
> unrealizable system requirements. I remember trying the demo on a k6-2 and
> voodoo1 (or whatever I had back then), getting about 1 frame per second, and
> just shrugging my shoulders, unplayable. Now on a K7-700 + voodoo3 I get
> anywhere from 15fps viewing the brontos to 40+ for most of the scenery in
> 800x600 with everything maxed out, still quite low by todays Q3a framerate
> standards. In a few months a k7-1ghz and the new video cards coming out
> should run this game at 80+ fps, smooth as glass but 2 years too late.
Is there any way the new machines and vid cards in the next 6 months will
increase the detail in mid to far distances of this game? Will the publishers
release any updates or downloads to increase the detail?
> One could wish for more, chiefly reduced scene detail loss with increasing
> distance, but this game does not deserve its reputation and I highly
> recommend it for anyone sick unto death of mindless FPS's (
The reduced scenery detail is why I don't have it on my system anymore. But at
least a few of the mid range and more of the up close trees, canyons and
buildings are great looking. The skies from a distance are like you're really
outdoors, and you could kick back and look up at the moving clouds for hours if
you felt like taking a break to do so.
Even cards like ATI 32 mb Rage Fury accelerate the game somewhat, and eliminate
pixelation in the ground, plants and everything up close. The dinos up close on
that ATI card are so realistic - whether in freeze frame with a cheat code, or
in normal game motion. But again, mid to far range stuff is so pixelated. I
still have hope in a sequel.
Nesotu
Eep²
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Roger Squires wrote:
>
> > I'm not treating it all as a shooter, but as an exploration/adventure game
> > like tombraider1, and so far it succeeds in that genre beautifully. The
>
> I agree. The level design is great and it is fun to explore the island!
Indeed; even Carnivore 1 & 2's levels aren't as good as Trespasser's.
> > All the complaints about "The Arm" interface just fade away after the first
> > 10 minutes, as soon as you triumphantly pick up the first pistol after
>
> Here I have to disagree. "The Arm" interface stays a nuissance throughout
> the game and every time I dropped a weapon or had to run miles to pick up
> another one because I can't reload them, I wondered about how much better
> Trespasser could have been with a normal FPS interface.
Perhaps, or just if it allowed reloading and the other arm to come up to support longer guns, and had a firmer grip on all guns. I like being able to control the arm though, and wouldn't even mind controlling 2 (or at least a command to have both come out to pick up larger stuff).
> > iron pole has more inertia and is harder to handle than a 2x4; noticing as a
> > box you stacked starts sliding off and rushing to the other side to push it
>
> Inertia is there but not enough friction to be any kind of realistic!
ANY kind of realistic? Trespasser's physics are certainly more realistic than MOST FPSes. http://tnlc.com/eep/compare.html to see for yourself.
> > One could wish for more, chiefly reduced scene detail loss with increasing
> > distance, but this game does not deserve its reputation and I highly
>
> Also I would have liked the dinos to have 3d enhanced textures too...
The mipmapping and LOD IS annoying and I wish there was a way to disable it, but the shadows are just so cool. Name one game that has shadows for EVERY tree, bush, rock, building, and NPC and I might be impressed (assuming it also has as near-realistic physics as Trespasser).
"Reb" Ruster
wrote:
>The 'radical technology' was crap code and there is no game 'ahead of its time'
>when it runs like crap on the best system.
Like so may games today, they 'run like crap on the best system also',
until you can afford to upgrade to a system like it was designed on.
I had no problem with running the game at it's full capacity but then,
I can afford to.
Jarno Kaarinen
Never look down in FPS games, because then you probably can't get past
the fact that you have invisible legs. How awful! Really destroys the
gameplay in Half-life and Thief 2.
Werner Spahl
> "Jeff Jones" <jtj...@netins.net.block> wrote:
>
> >I had trouble getting past your character holding, and aiming, a
> >high-powered rifle with one arm. Technology aside, the game is rife with
>
> Never look down in FPS games, because then you probably can't get past
> the fact that you have invisible legs. How awful! Really destroys the
> gameplay in Half-life and Thief 2.
Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
Jarno Kaarinen
>I read a review at the time that made me laugh so hard I captured the
>post. Allow me to reintroduce one of the best Trespasser reviews ever
>to hit Usenet, so that you may be educated. Lets call this
>review "Hovertits", and I will let the review say the rest about what a
>great great game Trespasser was and still is to this day.
(snip)
A few problems with the review, like
1) Obviously written before the patch.
2) He strongly complains about the graphics in his "high-end
dual-Voodoo 2" system, not realizing Trespasser does look much better
on good AGP 3D cards (which Voodoo 2 is not).
3) Complaining about seeing tits when looking down is about as silly
as complaining not seeing any legs when looking down in Half-life or
Thief. "What, so I am some medieval thief who hovers around, har har
har!"
Eep²
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Jarno Kaarinen wrote:
>
> > "Jeff Jones" <jtj...@netins.net.block> wrote:
> >
> > >I had trouble getting past your character holding, and aiming, a
> > >high-powered rifle with one arm. Technology aside, the game is rife with
> >
> > Never look down in FPS games, because then you probably can't get past
> > the fact that you have invisible legs. How awful! Really destroys the
> > gameplay in Half-life and Thief 2.
>
> Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game compared to the floating camera present in most, if not all, 1st-person games. I challenge game developers to render more player body parts to make us feel more immersed!
Werner Spahl
> Werner Spahl wrote:
>
> > Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> > gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
>
> My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give
> the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game compared to the
Balancing a shotgun in an outstretched hand surely doesn't give me any
sense of actually BEING in the game because it is unrealistic and looks
ridiculous, thus always reminding me I'm just playing! Also the second arm
obviously must have been limp, because Anne never uses it. Regarding the
body itself, think about the bloody heart or just look straight ahead at a
distant target and tell me you can see your breast. I can't until I bow
my head and looking at the ground while fighting will get you killed ;).
SpammersDie
Jarno Kaarinen <ja...@remotel.com> wrote in message
news:SQ74OWKufSpCrz...@131.228.6.99...
> hermy...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >I read a review at the time that made me laugh so hard I captured the
> >post. Allow me to reintroduce one of the best Trespasser reviews ever
> >to hit Usenet, so that you may be educated. Lets call this
> >review "Hovertits", and I will let the review say the rest about what a
> >great great game Trespasser was and still is to this day.
>
> (snip)
>
> A few problems with the review, like
>
> 1) Obviously written before the patch.
That's a problem with the game, not the review. It shouldn't need a patch
just to make the game acceptable.
Dan Stephenson
--
Dan Stephenson
stephed...@airmail.net
(You know what to do)
Dan Stephenson
<rebr...@angelfire.com> says...
> I was always impressed by this game, and never held the opinion of
> it's critics. True, part of the dilusionment was due to it's radical
> technology, but may games made today are using this same idea.
> Nice thing about it is, it's unpredicable.
> I too hope a sequel is in the works, or at least an SDK to make custom
> levels.
I heard of some people working on a homebrew SDK. All I know.
> "Reb" Ruster
> System Administrator
> Rebulon Communications Network
> Email: rebr...@angelfire.com
--
Dan Stephenson
says...
> The 'radical technology' was crap code and there is no game 'ahead of its time'
> when it runs like crap on the best system.
>
> Ahead of its time.
Thus spoke "Big Daddy"
Dan Stephenson
muenchen.de>, ui2...@mail.lrz-muenchen.de says...
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Jarno Kaarinen wrote:
>
> > "Jeff Jones" <jtj...@netins.net.block> wrote:
> >
> > >I had trouble getting past your character holding, and aiming, a
> > >high-powered rifle with one arm. Technology aside, the game is rife with
> >
> > Never look down in FPS games, because then you probably can't get past
> > the fact that you have invisible legs. How awful! Really destroys the
> > gameplay in Half-life and Thief 2.
>
> Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
Some people might think it helps the gameplay, since it allows you to aim
with the gun instead of a 'magic crosshair'. In which case the one-armed
thing is merely a contrivance.
Eep²
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Eep² wrote:
>
> > Werner Spahl wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> > > gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
> >
> > My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give
> > the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game compared to the
>
> Balancing a shotgun in an outstretched hand surely doesn't give me any
> sense of actually BEING in the game because it is unrealistic and looks
> ridiculous, thus always reminding me I'm just playing!
While holding weapons could've used better design, allowing arm manipulation is more realistic than simply showing it holding weapons as most, if not all, 3D action et al games do.
> Also the second arm obviously must have been limp, because Anne never uses it.
Regardless, it's still there.
> Regarding the body itself, think about the bloody heart or just look straight ahead at a
> distant target and tell me you can see your breast. I can't until I bow
> my head and looking at the ground while fighting will get you killed ;).
So don't look at the ground while fighting; try looking at the target. Duh. Would you rather have had Anne's nipples sticking out just at the bottom of your view while level?
Eep²
SpammersDie wrote:
> Jarno Kaarinen <ja...@remotel.com> wrote in message
> news:SQ74OWKufSpCrz...@131.228.6.99...
> > hermy...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > >I read a review at the time that made me laugh so hard I captured the
> > >post. Allow me to reintroduce one of the best Trespasser reviews ever
> > >to hit Usenet, so that you may be educated. Lets call this
> > >review "Hovertits", and I will let the review say the rest about what a
> > >great great game Trespasser was and still is to this day.
> >
> > A few problems with the review, like
> >
> > 1) Obviously written before the patch.
>
> That's a problem with the game, not the review. It shouldn't need a patch
> just to make the game acceptable.
--
Quatoria
Eep² <e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
>Acceptibility is relative.
Yes. You are relatively unacceptable to a relatively large segment of
the usenet population.
-Quatoria
--
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that
faith does not prove anything.
-- Friederich Nietzsche
Devo
Eep² <e...@tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39F8990C...@tnlc.com...
Werner Spahl wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Eep² wrote:
>
> > Werner Spahl wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> > > gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
> >
> > My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give
> > the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game compared to the
>
> Balancing a shotgun in an outstretched hand surely doesn't give me any
> sense of actually BEING in the game because it is unrealistic and looks
> ridiculous, thus always reminding me I'm just playing!
While holding weapons could've used better design, allowing arm manipulation
is more realistic than simply showing it holding weapons as most, if not
all, 3D action et al games do.
Could of used better design? How about 'shouldn't of fucking included such a
stupid idea in the first place'?
> Also the second arm obviously must have been limp, because Anne never uses
it.
Regardless, it's still there.
Umm okay...so that makes it alright then. She holds rifles with one
arm...she lifts large heavy boxes with one arm. What the fuck is the point
of a second arm. So completely unrealistic like EVERYTHING else in the game.
I wonder if the game designers must have all had an arm amputated or
something.
> Regarding the body itself, think about the bloody heart or just look
straight ahead at a
> distant target and tell me you can see your breast. I can't until I bow
> my head and looking at the ground while fighting will get you killed ;).
So don't look at the ground while fighting; try looking at the target. Duh.
Would you rather have had Anne's nipples sticking out just at the bottom of
your view while level?
That health meter on Anne's tits was the dumbest thing I ever saw. Hmm, let
me check my health by glancing down and looking at my big breasts...oh no
while my checking my health I couldn't see what was going on around me and
was ripped apart by multiple raptors jumping out of a bush.
Most of us know why this game was such a flop. I begin to wonder if they
even had any game designers.
Jeff Jones
the player more of a sense of
If holding and firing a high-powered rifle with one arm brings you a sense
of realism, well then I guess you've never fired a high-powered rifle (or
any rifle for that matter). That is probably the strangest design decision
I've ever seen in a game.
But hey, you keep up the good fanboy work, you're doing great.
"Reb" Ruster
wrote:
>Never look down in FPS games, because then you probably can't get past
>the fact that you have invisible legs. How awful! Really destroys the
>gameplay in Half-life and Thief 2.
In the case of Trespasser, the view of the legs were probably blocked
by that pair of double-D's.
"Reb" Ruster
System Administrator
Rebulon Communications Network
Email: rebr...@angelfire.com
"Reb" Ruster
>My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game compared to the floating camera present in most, if not all, 1st-person games. I challenge game developers to render more player body parts to make us feel more immersed!
Plus, they needed a place to put that tattoo.
Roger Squires
let
> me check my health by glancing down and looking at my big breasts...oh no
> while my checking my health I couldn't see what was going on around me and
> was ripped apart by multiple raptors jumping out of a bush.
This complaint is rightly and instantly dismissed by anyone who's played
the game for more than 1/2 hour and shows a lack of understanding of the
philosophy behind trespasser. What you should have realized is that in this
game the health meter is vestigial and unimportant - you don't see it on the
screen, it only has a few gradations, it's pretty much useless and an
afterthought. This fits in very well with the other elements of the game
FPS fans hate and a few connoiseurs grow to love: the slow movement, the
imprecise aiming, the chaotic nature of close combat, limited carrying
capacity, the real gun models used, the physics in general.
Anne was meant to take the Lara concept and add some depth and realism to
the character. You're no longer a bunny rabbit leaping from one block ledge
to another with infinite ammo, no longer can you freeze the action in the
middle of a flying backleap and leisurely open one of those 35 medipacks
you're carrying for instant relief. Now you're on a real island, that's big
and hard to get around, and where a few raptor bites mean death. Its not a
mark against the game that close quarters fights are so difficult and
frustrating, its a feature that fits with the lack of a health meter and
crosshair. Its a game where exploration of an uneven organic place and some
wonder and suspension of disbelief is the goal, not mouse-twitching. You
don't want a 7ft 600lb carnivore getting anywhere close anyway, and if he
does you should be breathing hard and running for cover, which is just what
happens in the game, not looking for a spinning powerup. So much for the
health meter.
That being said, The Arm is a source of frustration. I came upon two of the
fixed weapons in the game, remembered the fixed weapons in half-life and
thought Now I'm gonna Kick some Butt! and it didn't happen. They were
completely unaimable. Part of the problem could have been alleviated by
limiting the number of axes of freedom on the fixed weapons themselves (they
can be rotated around the axis of the gun for instance, which is a mistake)
but I suspect the developers basically gave up on trying to make it better
or introduce a second arm. With the rush to release and internal team
problems it never got addressed. But I can deal with that.
What really makes me grit my teeth in frustration about Trespasser is the
developers never foresaw machines of today's power and didn't include a
range of graphical quality settings that would let us get rid of that awful
mipmapping and popup. And now the development team is disbanded, and the
source code is closed. AARRGHH.
Courtney Evans
<e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
> My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give
the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game
So, you're saying you have breasts? And a little tattoo?
--
Courtney Evans
My email address is my first name. The domain name is my
last name, followed by the three letters inc, followed by
dot com.
hermy...@my-deja.com
It is truly amazing the amount of self-induced delusion people will lay
upon themselves to defend a really shitty game that they love.
If it looks like shit. And it smells like shit, what else could it be?
You can't make a silk purse out of sow's ears, and all that other good
stuff...
But hey, you probably liked Descent into Undermountain too.
It would probably sound similar to what you just posted above, let me
try my hand at it:
"I mean sure, the pink floating blobs are kobolds. They are uhh, flying
kobolds that are albino, thats why they are pink. I mean yea, regular
kobolds are brown and don't levitate, but these are, uhh, special
kobolds. The pixelated floating kind!"
Yeah. What he said.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jarno Kaarinen
>> Never look down in FPS games, because then you probably can't get past
>> the fact that you have invisible legs. How awful! Really destroys the
>> gameplay in Half-life and Thief 2.
>
>Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
>gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
Clearly it doesn't, because the "one arm holding a rifle" is merely a
visual object in Trespasser. It has nothing to do with the fact that
you can also drop your rifle. You could do that even if they had drawn
ten arms keeping the rifle in place.
Then again, invisible legs could "destroy" the gameplay in Half-life,
as now you can't shoot at your own leg. So obviously the invisible
legs change the gameplay.
Jarno Kaarinen
>Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
>gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
And if you really believe it is the number of arms that you see on the
screen that defines if the weapon drops down, how about games like
Doom or Quake where you had NO arms holding the gun? How did they
achieve that, huh?
At least Trespasser had one arm, while Doom and Quake had none. How
awful!
Jarno Kaarinen
>> A few problems with the review, like
>>
>> 1) Obviously written before the patch.
>
>That's a problem with the game, not the review. It shouldn't need a patch
>just to make the game acceptable.
Ah ok, so you obviously think X-Com was and is a very poor game,
considering how buggy it was on release (and even with the latest
patch it still had pretty bad bugs, like the green text bug that can
destroy your save game). Same with Falcon 3.0, Grand Prix Legends,
Doom multiplayer, Quake multiplayer, Half-life multiplayer etc. etc.
etc. etc. etc. They all suck now. It means nothing that they got
corrective patches later on.
Jarno Kaarinen
>Balancing a shotgun in an outstretched hand surely doesn't give me any
>sense of actually BEING in the game because it is unrealistic and looks
>ridiculous, thus always reminding me I'm just playing! Also the second arm
And you hated Doom and Quake too, as you had this shotgun which grew
out of your stomach? Ah, ok.
And you still don't see your legs in Half-life or Thief 2 either.
Really reminds you that you are merely playing a game, RIGHT?
Or is this another prime example of using double-standards?
Jarno Kaarinen
>It is truly amazing the amount of self-induced delusion people will lay
>upon themselves to defend a really shitty game that they love.
>
>If it looks like shit. And it smells like shit, what else could it be?
When you get ouf of pre-school, you'll see how pointless and stupid
your "counter-argument" is.
"I didn't like it, thus no one else can like it either". Grow up, kid.
hermy...@my-deja.com
Jarno Kaarinen <ja...@remotel.com> wrote:
> When you get ouf of pre-school, you'll see how pointless and stupid
> your "counter-argument" is.
>
> "I didn't like it, thus no one else can like it either". Grow up, kid.
>
>
Hey fucknut, lets try this a different way.
Gamespot Review: 3.9
Graphics: 7
Gameplay: 3
Sound: 6
Value: 3
Review Tilt: 3
Computer Game Review: 2 of 5
Adrenaline Vault: 2 of 5
Computer & Video Games: 1 of 5
Evil Avatar: 1/2 of 5
Gamecentre: 2 of 5
Gamepen: 2 of 5
Gamesmania: 5 of 10
Sharky Extreme: 3.5 of 5
There were a handful of reviews which gave it 6-7 out of 10, and even a
few wackos that gave it 8s and 9s, but they were few and far between. I
guess in this case the majority of major gaming sites are in preschool
too, eh?
Piss off.
Werner Spahl
> Werner Spahl <ui2...@mail.lrz-muenchen.de> wrote:
>
> >Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> >gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
>
> Clearly it doesn't, because the "one arm holding a rifle" is merely a
> visual object in Trespasser. It has nothing to do with the fact that
Ok maybe you misunderstood me. There are in fact two reasons, why I think
the arm interface is bad. One is that it looks much more unrealistic than
the normal FPS interface and this rather kills the immersion of the game!
The second reason is the dropping problem and while the arm hasn't much to
do with this as you are saying, I think that the weapons stick further out
in front due to this interface and therefore are more easily dropped.
> as now you can't shoot at your own leg. So obviously the invisible
> legs change the gameplay.
They don't because not being able to shoot your own legs doesn't affect
your progress in the game, while dropping your weapons does! And again to
prevent a more heated discussion, I think Trespasser was a cool game that
just could have been even better with a normal FPS interface...
Werner Spahl
> While holding weapons could've used better design, allowing arm manipulation is
> more realistic than simply showing it holding weapons as most, if not
Still the problem is, the ease with which you manipulate things with your
arms in the real world can't be replicated using a mouse interface. Just
remember how much harder it was in Trespasser to pick up stuff than it is
in reality. So it is better to use "shortcuts" like the "use" button to
simulate this ease! I agree with you though, that it would be a nice touch
to see your arm moving while "using" something, and I would appreciate the
need to press "use" instead of the normal FPS-picking-up-stuff-just-while-
running-over-it to get objects, which would be a great compromise between
too exakt Trespasser and too simple normal FPS methods...
Quatoria
hermy...@my-deja.com wrote:
>If it looks like shit. And it smells like shit, what else could it be?
>You can't make a silk purse out of sow's ears, and all that other good
>stuff...
No, but if you're Eep, you convince yourself that silk isn't all that
great to begin with.
SpammersDie
Not at all. But nevertheless, when you criticize a review for reviewing the
product that the developer shipped to first-time customers, you shouldn't be
surprised when you get called down as an apologist.
SpammersDie
> Werner Spahl <ui2...@mail.lrz-muenchen.de> wrote:
>
> >Sorry, but though this may be as unrealistic, it doesn't destroys the
> >gameplay at all, which the arm interface of Trespasser clearly does.
>
> And if you really believe it is the number of arms that you see on the
> screen that defines if the weapon drops down, how about games like
> Doom or Quake where you had NO arms holding the gun? How did they
> achieve that, huh?
This is just silly and you know it. The arms are off-screen, not visibly
missing. The gun view in Quake requires nowhere near the suspension of
disbelief that the one in Trespasser requires.
Rickenbacker
properly either.
--
Rickenbacker
Jarno Kaarinen
>Not at all. But nevertheless, when you criticize a review for reviewing the
>product that the developer shipped to first-time customers, you shouldn't be
>surprised when you get called down as an apologist.
I was more criticizing _using_ that review as a valid argument now.
Obviously the bashing review isn't as valid anymore, thanks to the
patch.
Jarno Kaarinen
>In article <+j75OVeZv0UvtG...@131.228.6.99>,
> Jarno Kaarinen <ja...@remotel.com> wrote:
>> When you get ouf of pre-school, you'll see how pointless and stupid
>> your "counter-argument" is.
>>
>> "I didn't like it, thus no one else can like it either". Grow up, kid.
>>
>>
>
>Hey fucknut, lets try this a different way.
(snip a list of obsolete, pre-patch reviews)
>There were a handful of reviews which gave it 6-7 out of 10, and even a
>few wackos that gave it 8s and 9s, but they were few and far between. I
>guess in this case the majority of major gaming sites are in preschool
>too, eh?
Eh eh, it doesn't help your cause at all to refer to obsolete reviews,
kid.
Eep²
Eep²
Eep²
Baron Calamity
wrote:
>Don't know how many of you have ever tried this game beyond the demo of a
>couple years ago, but I just bought it used and am very impressed.
What we have here friends is proof that no matter how bad a game is,
someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
internet.
Baron Calamity
http://rcmerritt.homestead.com
"If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting them down?
We might,if they screamed all the time,for no good reason."-Jack Handey
mma...@my-deja.com
"Big Daddy" <no...@nohow.net> wrote:
> The 'radical technology' was crap code and there is no game 'ahead of
its time'
> when it runs like crap on the best system.
Yet Trespasser ran fine for me on a PII-350 with a TNT card (or even a
Permedia-2), hardly 'the best system' available at the time. The big
problem with performance seemed to be that so many people kept trying to
run it on a Voodoo-2 card and complaining that it was slow, when it
quite clearly said on the box that an AGP card was recommended -- and,
in reality, required -- for best performance. Some of the magazine
reviews I read when it came out were utterly ludicrous (along the lines
'This game runs slow on our kick-ass Voodoo-2 system which stomps on
everything else in Quake, therefore it sucks').
Mark
Eep²
Jarno Kaarinen
>On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 01:20:08 GMT, "Roger Squires" <rsqu...@flash.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Don't know how many of you have ever tried this game beyond the demo of a
>>couple years ago, but I just bought it used and am very impressed.
>
>
>What we have here friends is proof that no matter how bad a game is,
>someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
>internet.
Or alternatively, some people have so restricted taste that if the
game does not fit into their jumping-bunnies-Quake-clone limits, it is
a bad game.
Baron Calamity
wrote:
I'm more of an adventure gamer and Trespasser fails on so many levels
it isn't funny. (well, actually it is but thats not the point) I'm
glad for the people who enjoy Trespasser. I'm just glad their aren't
enough of them to warrent a sequel.
Daxar
I didnt even play the game to get anywhere. I just pick up the wooden plank
and hit the drums and stuff. You actually get the feeling that
the objects you are hitting is solid.
At least they tried something fresh. Its always a gamble to try something
radical, but we need more radical games.
Game designers are getting lazy.
"Jarno Kaarinen" <ja...@remotel.com> wrote in message
news:pOb7OdrWzCYWPN...@131.228.6.99...
Courtney Evans
<e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
1. It's _man_, not woman. Courtney is my grandfather's name. Don't blame
me for the recent rash of people naming their daughters Courtney. I blame
Bobby Kennedy.
2. Learn to take a joke. Or if you are completely devoid of a sense of
humor (dropped as a child, or whatever) just be aware that there is a
thing called 'humor' and you should watch out for it.
3. It's actually an interesting issue. "Immersion" happens in different
ways. In many games, that immersion is achieved by removing as many things
that seperate the player from the illusion that they themselves _are_ the
protagonist of the game. In others, it's about doing as much as possible
to make the player identify with an established character as the
protagonist.
Take Half-Life. It establishes that you are Gordon Freeman, and you work
in a secret government lab. It also establishes a couple other details,
but they are really incidental. You never see yourself in the game, there
are no cutscenes that remove you from the first-person point of view, and
you never hear a voice that represents Gordon's. There's a void there, and
that void gets filled by the player himself. The transparency of Gordon
Freeman as a game character lets the player immerse himself more
thoroughly in the game, because there's very little to dispel the illusion
that the player himself is the one directly acting upon the game world.
System Shock 2 was much the same.
By comparison, a game like Trespasser, or Deus Ex, or Tomb Raider, etc.
shows you a character. It shows you how they look, how they talk, what
their personality is like, and expects the player to identify with them as
a character and use that to immerse himself in the game, playing out a
role. It's just a different way of bringing the player into the game. I
prefer Half-Life's approach, but it's very difficult to tell a compelling
story without giving the protagonist (the player) some kind of character.
My favorite game in terms of how it tackles this whole problem is the
Marathon series. The player does not even have a name, and is given only
his identity as "a security officer aboard the (spaceship) Marathon."
However, the story manages to engage the player completely. This is mainly
done by having the other characters in the game (rogue AI's) address the
player directly without requiring a scripted, verbal response to further
the story. They talk to you, and your response to them comes in what you
_do_ in the game world. It's a very simple system, and it's easy to see
through now that we've had games like Deus Ex, but it worked spectacularly
and conveyed one of the richest game worlds I've seen.
When I look down in Trespasser and see breasts, it just reminds me that
I'm not the one running around on that island, and instead I'm making a
character perform actions for me as an avatar. It reminds me I'm playing a
game. It's not a bad thing, but it's not total immersion.
Try this. Go outside and walk around. Pretend you're looking for someone
in disguise, or someone hiding. Don't look suspicious. Scrutinize
everything.
(think about doing that for a sec)
Were you looking at your hands the whole time? Did seeing your hands make
you more immersed in what you were doing?
BoGus
> >>someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
> >>internet.
> >
> >Or alternatively, some people have so restricted taste that if the
> >game does not fit into their jumping-bunnies-Quake-clone limits, it
is
> >a bad game.
>
This thread is getting way, WAY out of hand! Some gamers share the same
tastes for games others don't. Fact of life people!
This is exactly like a squabble between movie reviewers. Some people
like certain movies others don't. I have a brain, I have preferences, I
make my own decisions. I respect other people sharing their opinions and
even discussing them but not _argue_ about it ! It's all subjective and
a personnal assesment. We are not all looking for the same things in a
game. Live and let live.
It's by putting too much importance on reviews that we get bland games
(or movies!). Like sheep, some consumers only read reviews to decide
where to spend their money. Of course I understand some of the
developpers want to limit the risk of failure and follow trands, but
ultimately all this does is stiffle creativity. I root for those who
push the edge of gaming goodness!
btw, if you're interested, personally I was all hyped about Trespasser.
I got the demo and I did not enjoy it. That was enough to write it off
as a game not worth my money. End of story.
Eep²
Eep²
>
> In article <39FC3276...@tnlc.com>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Eep=B2?=
> <e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
>
> > Why the fuck are you so dense, Courtney? Ever heard of ROLE-PLAYING? God
> damn, woman; get a fucking clue!
> >
> > Courtney Evans wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <39F81EAC...@tnlc.com>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Eep=B2?=
> > > <e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > My ASS it does. At least Anne's arms (yes, there ARE 2) and breasts give
> > > the player more of a sense of actually BEING in the game
> > >
> > > So, you're saying you have breasts? And a little tattoo?
>
> 1. It's _man_, not woman. Courtney is my grandfather's name. Don't blame
> me for the recent rash of people naming their daughters Courtney. I blame
> Bobby Kennedy.
Might want to consider changing your name then.
> 2. Learn to take a joke. Or if you are completely devoid of a sense of
> humor (dropped as a child, or whatever) just be aware that there is a
> thing called 'humor' and you should watch out for it.
You forgot the smiley. Oops.
> 3. It's actually an interesting issue. "Immersion" happens in different
> ways. In many games, that immersion is achieved by removing as many things
> that seperate the player from the illusion that they themselves _are_ the
> protagonist of the game. In others, it's about doing as much as possible
> to make the player identify with an established character as the
> protagonist.
>
> Take Half-Life. It establishes that you are Gordon Freeman, and you work
> in a secret government lab. It also establishes a couple other details,
> but they are really incidental. You never see yourself in the game, there
> are no cutscenes that remove you from the first-person point of view, and
> you never hear a voice that represents Gordon's. There's a void there, and
> that void gets filled by the player himself. The transparency of Gordon
> Freeman as a game character lets the player immerse himself more
> thoroughly in the game, because there's very little to dispel the illusion
> that the player himself is the one directly acting upon the game world.
> System Shock 2 was much the same.
>
> By comparison, a game like Trespasser, or Deus Ex, or Tomb Raider, etc.
> shows you a character. It shows you how they look, how they talk, what
> their personality is like, and expects the player to identify with them as
> a character and use that to immerse himself in the game, playing out a
> role. It's just a different way of bringing the player into the game. I
> prefer Half-Life's approach, but it's very difficult to tell a compelling
> story without giving the protagonist (the player) some kind of character.
Ah, so you DO know what role-playing is. Do you also know that one can feel immersed whether or not the player character's body is visible? Immersion is relative, but role-playing still happens in Half-Life and other 1st-person-only games that never show your player character's face (though Half-Life did with a wall picture). Plus, Half-Life stated you were a male named Gordon so that only adds to the ROLE-PLAYING.
> My favorite game in terms of how it tackles this whole problem is the
> Marathon series. The player does not even have a name, and is given only
> his identity as "a security officer aboard the (spaceship) Marathon."
> However, the story manages to engage the player completely. This is mainly
> done by having the other characters in the game (rogue AI's) address the
> player directly without requiring a scripted, verbal response to further
> the story. They talk to you, and your response to them comes in what you
> _do_ in the game world. It's a very simple system, and it's easy to see
> through now that we've had games like Deus Ex, but it worked spectacularly
> and conveyed one of the richest game worlds I've seen.
>
> When I look down in Trespasser and see breasts, it just reminds me that
> I'm not the one running around on that island, and instead I'm making a
> character perform actions for me as an avatar. It reminds me I'm playing a
> game. It's not a bad thing, but it's not total immersion.
When someone addresses you as Gordon in Half-Life, are you reminded that you aren't named Gordon? If you want total immersion, go play a REAL role-playing game where you create the look and name of your character and have more control of its development.
Courtney Evans
<e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
> Might want to consider changing your name then.
I'm rather fond of it. Thanks for the advice though!
> You forgot the smiley. Oops.
If you can't tell that something is a joke without seeing an emoticon,
then maybe you should refrain from spouting off and calling people
ignorant fuckwits when you don't quite "get it".
> Ah, so you DO know what role-playing is. Do you also know that one can
feel immersed whether or not the player character's body is visible?
Immersion is relative, but role-playing still happens in Half-Life and
other 1st-person-only games that never show your player character's face
(though Half-Life did with a wall picture). Plus, Half-Life stated you
were a male named Gordon so that only adds to the ROLE-PLAYING.
Half-Life is not a role-playing game. They don't give the player any
information about Gordon's personality or voice, so the player puts their
own characteristics into the resulting void. It's a different *kind* of
immersion, and a different strategy for bringing the player into the game
world. Whether in-game representation of the player's body is appropriate
depends on which strategy you are using. It is not always the right thing
to do.
> When someone addresses you as Gordon in Half-Life, are you reminded that
you aren't named Gordon?
Not really. The feeling is more like, "I am Gordon Freeman, I am doing
these things" rather than "I am J. C. Denton, who is doing these things."
It's a fine line, but one that needs to be clearly drawn when you're
making a game.
>If you want total immersion, go play a REAL role-playing game where you
create the look and name of your character and have more control of its
development.
A "real" role-playing game uses mechanisms no computer game can possibly
use at this point, namely verbal and gestural face-to-face interaction
with other players. Once again, a completely different form of immersion,
but not germane to this discussion.
Eep²
>
> In article <39FCFB6B...@tnlc.com>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Eep=B2?=
> <e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
>
> > You forgot the smiley. Oops.
>
> If you can't tell that something is a joke without seeing an emoticon,
> then maybe you should refrain from spouting off and calling people
> ignorant fuckwits when you don't quite "get it".
If you need to rely on poor humor to supplement good argument, YOU don't quite get it.
> > Ah, so you DO know what role-playing is. Do you also know that one can
> feel immersed whether or not the player character's body is visible?
> Immersion is relative, but role-playing still happens in Half-Life and
> other 1st-person-only games that never show your player character's face
> (though Half-Life did with a wall picture). Plus, Half-Life stated you
> were a male named Gordon so that only adds to the ROLE-PLAYING.
> >
> Half-Life is not a role-playing game. They don't give the player any
> information about Gordon's personality or voice, so the player puts their
> own characteristics into the resulting void. It's a different *kind* of
> immersion, and a different strategy for bringing the player into the game
> world. Whether in-game representation of the player's body is appropriate
> depends on which strategy you are using. It is not always the right thing
> to do.
I can argue ANY game is a role-playing game. You constantly play roles in even "real life". Roles include: dad, mom, sister, brother, husband, wife; work roles: boss, gopher, grunt, scientist, teacher, student, etc, etc, etc. Because you are taking on the ROLE of Gordon in Half-Life, you are ROLE-playing. Immersion is immersion; role-playing is role-playing--you just need to think about these things relatively to see they're only differentiated in degree, not concept.
Oh and I am impressed with Blade: Rune of Darkness' 1st-person body rendering: when I look down I see my chest, stomach, hands, arms, and what I'm holding. Although the camera collision detection could use some work so it doesn't pass through body polygons, being able to see more of my player character's body in 1st-person view is just great.
> > When someone addresses you as Gordon in Half-Life, are you reminded that
> you aren't named Gordon?
>
> Not really. The feeling is more like, "I am Gordon Freeman, I am doing
> these things" rather than "I am J. C. Denton, who is doing these things."
> It's a fine line, but one that needs to be clearly drawn when you're
> making a game.
Regardless, BOTH are role-playing.
> >If you want total immersion, go play a REAL role-playing game where you
> create the look and name of your character and have more control of its
> development.
> >
> A "real" role-playing game uses mechanisms no computer game can possibly
> use at this point, namely verbal and gestural face-to-face interaction
> with other players. Once again, a completely different form of immersion,
> but not germane to this discussion.
I don't recall limiting real role-playing games to computers; I simply wrote "game", which could very well include paper-and-dice RPGs like AD&D also. Regardless, both mediums are still role-playing.
Jetbolt
twist.
--
http://www.x-entertainment.com -
Pop culture for children of the 80's
Pikachu could kick Neo's ass any day
"Werner Spahl" <ui2...@mail.lrz-muenchen.de> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.03.100102...@sun3.lrz-muenchen.de...
snip
> Ok maybe you misunderstood me. There are in fact two reasons, why I think
> the arm interface is bad.
snip
Jetbolt
--
http://www.x-entertainment.com -
Pop culture for children of the 80's
Pikachu could kick Neo's ass any day
"Jarno Kaarinen" <ja...@remotel.com> wrote in message
news:nzv5OY5kxQewam...@131.228.6.99...
snip
> Doom or Quake where you had NO arms holding the gun? How did they
> achieve that, huh?
snip
Slash
scribbled:
>Either you've never played Doom, or never got the shotgun.
Maybe he didn't run it full-screen, in which case less of the weapon
was shown due to the status bar on the bottom...
-Slash
-- -- -- --
"The people on the internet know more about what I am doing than I do.
Like, they will say that I am going to be in this mall on this day and
sure enough I am there."
- Tori Amos, Dew Drop Inn Tour, 17-June-1996
"Reb" Ruster
>Why the fuck are you so dense, Courtney? Ever heard of ROLE-PLAYING? God damn, woman; get a fucking clue!
That's Man, not Woman.
"Reb" Ruster
System Administrator
Rebulon Communications Network
Email: rebr...@angelfire.com
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Jarno Kaarinen
>Not to mention she must be one helluva contortionist the way her hand can
>twist.
So, what do you think about those silly invisible legs in Half-life
and Thief? How do the enemies see them if they are invisible?
Jarno Kaarinen
>>Or alternatively, some people have so restricted taste that if the
>>game does not fit into their jumping-bunnies-Quake-clone limits, it is
>>a bad game.
>
>I'm more of an adventure gamer and Trespasser fails on so many levels
>it isn't funny. (well, actually it is but thats not the point) I'm
>glad for the people who enjoy Trespasser. I'm just glad their aren't
>enough of them to warrent a sequel.
Rest assured, there'll be loads of straight Quake clones for you to
play. There are definitely enough people like you.
Jarno Kaarinen
>This thread is getting way, WAY out of hand! Some gamers share the same
>tastes for games others don't. Fact of life people!
>
>This is exactly like a squabble between movie reviewers. Some people
>like certain movies others don't. I have a brain, I have preferences, I
>make my own decisions. I respect other people sharing their opinions and
Hear hear. Thank you.
Werner Spahl
> I would've rather've had the option to control BOTH arms (perhaps with another mouse,
In the time you'll need to reload your gun with this you'll be killed :)!
>Another option is a virtual reality glove; Trespasser would've been a
This would be the only way to make an one or two arm interface useful!
--
Werner Spahl (ui2...@mail.lrz-muenchen.de) Freedom for
"The meaning of my life is to make me crazy!" Vorlonships
Eep²
>
> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Eep² wrote:
>
> > I would've rather've had the option to control BOTH arms (perhaps with another mouse,
>
> In the time you'll need to reload your gun with this you'll be killed :)!
Trespasser didn't have reloading, but a simple reload key would be mindless enough and wouldn't need any arm control.
> >Another option is a virtual reality glove; Trespasser would've been a
>
> This would be the only way to make an one or two arm interface useful!
I found mouse control useful enough. <shrug>
Werner Spahl
> Werner Spahl wrote:
> >
> > In the time you'll need to reload your gun with this you'll be killed :)!
>
> Trespasser didn't have reloading, but a simple reload key would be mindless enough and wouldn't need any arm control.
But using a simple reload key is cheating your two arm system isn't it?
Then we could go back to "use button" pick up of weapons and stuff too.
> > This would be the only way to make an one or two arm interface useful!
>
> I found mouse control useful enough. <shrug>
I didn't. <shrug>
SpammersDie
Do you actually think you're impressing anyone by repeatedly sinking to
Eep's level by calling everyone who dislikes Trespasser a Quake-clone
fanboy?
SpammersDie
They do interfere with gameplay and my immersion at times (i.e. when precise
jumping or positioning is needed.) I assume one reason that many FPS's don't
show your legs is that this is would restrict the games ability to let you
hang-ten off ledges to simulate your real-life ability to lean over and look
over a cliff edge. But with the addition of the lean-forward key in Thief,
this rationale is becoming obsolete.
Now, that you've gotten the answer you wanted, how about responding to the
criticisms of Trespasser rather than trying to deflect attention by taking
potshots at far more successful games?
Jarno Kaarinen
>> >Not to mention she must be one helluva contortionist the way her hand can
>> >twist.
>>
>> So, what do you think about those silly invisible legs in Half-life
>> and Thief? How do the enemies see them if they are invisible?
>
>They do interfere with gameplay and my immersion at times (i.e. when precise
>jumping or positioning is needed.) I assume one reason that many FPS's don't
>show your legs is that this is would restrict the games ability to let you
>hang-ten off ledges to simulate your real-life ability to lean over and look
>over a cliff edge. But with the addition of the lean-forward key in Thief,
>this rationale is becoming obsolete.
Thank you.
>Now, that you've gotten the answer you wanted, how about responding to the
>criticisms of Trespasser rather than trying to deflect attention by taking
>potshots at far more successful games?
Ok.
Just like the invisible legs on Thief or Half-life don't destroy the
game, likewise the "one twisting arm holding a rifle" in Trespasser
does not destroy the gameplay. Thus, that criticism is quite
unimportant (just like in the case of uninvisible legs of Thief and
Half-life), but to each his own.
Satisfied? I was not trying to "deflect the attention", but just
demonstrating how stupid those arguments about "one-arm killing the
gameplay of Trespasser" are with analogues from other games with
similar "problems".
Jarno Kaarinen
>> Baron Calamity <rcme...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> >What we have here friends is proof that no matter how bad a game is,
>> >someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
>> >internet.
>>
>> Or alternatively, some people have so restricted taste that if the
>> game does not fit into their jumping-bunnies-Quake-clone limits, it is
>> a bad game.
>
>Do you actually think you're impressing anyone by repeatedly sinking to
>Eep's level by calling everyone who dislikes Trespasser a Quake-clone
>fanboy?
Funny of you to say that, considering that in this thread it has been
the people who find _anything_ good in Trespasser that have been
bashed over and over again.
For example, one of your kind said that people who like Trespasser are
gays. Or just see the arrogant and silly comment by "Baron Calamity"
above? Here, I'll even quote it for you since you seemed to miss it
the first time:
>> >What we have here friends is proof that no matter how bad a game is,
>> >someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
>> >internet.
So what was it that you were saying again, SpammersD? You are not
thinking very clearly, are you? It is the Trespasser bashers who might
want to brush up their social skills.
SpammersDie
> "SpammersDie" <Spamm...@blah.com> wrote:
>
> >> Baron Calamity <rcme...@home.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >What we have here friends is proof that no matter how bad a game is,
> >> >someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
> >> >internet.
> >>
> >> Or alternatively, some people have so restricted taste that if the
> >> game does not fit into their jumping-bunnies-Quake-clone limits, it is
> >> a bad game.
> >
> >Do you actually think you're impressing anyone by repeatedly sinking to
> >Eep's level by calling everyone who dislikes Trespasser a Quake-clone
> >fanboy?
>
> Funny of you to say that, considering that in this thread it has been
> the people who find _anything_ good in Trespasser that have been
> bashed over and over again.
>
> For example, one of your kind said that people who like Trespasser are
> gays. Or just see the arrogant and silly comment by "Baron Calamity"
> above?
I didn't miss it, and it doesn't impress me either.
What I'm asking is why you feel the need to sink to the same level.
There are plenty of people who are criticising the _game_, not its fans, and
not its decision to be something other than a mindless Quake clone. Games
like Thief and Deus Ex are not mindless Quake clones, and they're well liked
by many here. But just because there are bigots on the anti-Trespasser side
of the fence doesn't mean you score any points by acting like one yourself.
Werner Spahl
> "SpammersDie" <Spamm...@blah.com> wrote:
>
> >They do interfere with gameplay and my immersion at times (i.e. when precise
> >jumping or positioning is needed.) I assume one reason that many FPS's don't
Agreed, but this is only rarely the case in normal FPS...
> >show your legs is that this is would restrict the games ability to let you
> >hang-ten off ledges to simulate your real-life ability to lean over and look
I guess this is just to save polygons that are not useful.
> game, likewise the "one twisting arm holding a rifle" in Trespasser
> does not destroy the gameplay. Thus, that criticism is quite
Nobody talked about destroying the gameplay but the arm interface surely
affects it much more than invisible legs! Because contrary to some exact
jumping in FPS now and then the following can happen a lot in Trespasser:
Arm interface > weapon sticks up wide on front > weapon hits level stuff
much easier > weapon drops in critical situations > Anne gets eaten!
Possible solutions: 1) normal FPS view, 2) weapon fix on outstretched arm
would make weapon go ridiculously through level stuff or hamper the player
movement, 3) weapon is retracted as arm nears level stuff as it would be
in reality. This would be the coolest but also most complicated solution,
still Anne should aim rifles not like Arnold Schwarzenegger on drugs :)!
Rickenbacker
<39FC435C...@tnlc.com>:
>Does for me. Learn how to use your Web browser, too. <shrug> Might want
>to get rid of Lynx...
>
What I was referring to was the fact that the table is wider than an
MSIE/Netscape browser window on a regular 1024x768 screen, which makes it
more or less unreadable at this resolution, much less the 800x600 still
considered standard in web design. Good content though, if you were less
abrasive you might get people to check it out.
--
Rickenbacker
Roger Squires
>I didn't. <shrug>
I think this is just another framerate issue. The fps are low in
trespasser just when you need it most, and makes aiming difficult. But on
my system I've had no troubles getting head shots on moving raptors at quite
a distance, with the more accurate weapons anyway.
Roger Squires
> demonstrating how stupid those arguments about "one-arm killing the
> gameplay of Trespasser" are with analogues from other games with
> similar "problems".
The 'problem' of dropping weapons or hitting them on objects doesn't
detract from gameplay for me, it adds to the realism.
>
Roger Squires
Because they played the demo on a p200+voodoo1 two years ago, couldn't
figure it out, then read some reviews. I think its mostly laziness.
Eep²
>
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Eep² wrote:
>
> > Werner Spahl wrote:
> > >
> > > In the time you'll need to reload your gun with this you'll be killed :)!
> >
> > Trespasser didn't have reloading, but a simple reload key would be mindless enough and wouldn't need any arm control.
>
> But using a simple reload key is cheating your two arm system isn't it?
> Then we could go back to "use button" pick up of weapons and stuff too.
There's a point where having to manipulate something using the mouse would just become annoyingly tedious. However, OPTIONS to separately auto: reload and pick up objects would suffice, but I like using the arm to pick up stuff; reloading would just be even more annoying.
> > > This would be the only way to make an one or two arm interface useful!
> >
> > I found mouse control useful enough. <shrug>
>
> I didn't. <shrug>
How much more useful would you like it to be? You can already pick up most small objects.
Eep²
The page averages around 30 hits a day so I'd say it gets checked out just fine for its specialized, focused content. Of course the table's wider than most resolutions. YOU try cramming all that info in a piddly li'l table and see how well IT looks. In case you hadn't noticed (obviously not), I'm trying to get a Perl script (or whatever) to allow only certain games to be listed, columns to be colored, etc. You CAN lower your font size and increase your screen resolution, too, you know...I also mention these things on the page. Stop acting so helpless and argumentative.
Eep²
hermy...@my-deja.com
> The 'problem' of dropping weapons or hitting them on objects
doesn't
> detract from gameplay for me, it adds to the realism.
>
> rms
> rsqu...@flash.net
>
> >
>
>
Yes because in reality, I can barely grasp objects with a handle (guns,
bats, etc.) in fact, I find myself clumsily wielding these things and
then dropping them over and over again. In fact, in reality, I can
scarcely lift a board and place it against a crate without it falling
at least five times. The board just bumps around and hits things wildly
because I have no motor control in reality, I just wildly flail objects
around. It really pisses my co-workers off as I'm constantly flinging
objects around with my uncontrollable robo-flail arm... what reality do
you live in? Bizzaro world?
I have a question for the group. Did only morons play Trespasser? It
is surely starting to seem that way.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
himr...@worldnet.att.net
arm to accurately model the sort of hand moves Moe used to use on
Larry and Curly pretty damned impressive. <g> And being able to lift
an oil drum with one hand takes things to a whole new level.
Remove "hi" from address or it will bounce....
Roger Squires
> bats, etc.) in fact, I find myself clumsily wielding these things and
You forgot to conclude that therefore half-life's physics are better
than trespassers, since you can push boxes around but are not given the
option to lift or move them in any other manner; you are not given the
option to orient a weapon except by turning your entire body; i.e. its
cleaner and simpler, therefore better. I don't buy the argument, sorry.
SpammersDie
Roger Squires <rsqu...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:e4nL5.259$pq3....@news.flash.net...
Alright, howzabout this then: Half-Life's interface did a much better job of
identifying the tasks that were important for you to do given the game's
design, and making sure *those* tasks were easy and natural. (And IIRC, the
crates in Half-Life were all large enough that a pocket-protector scientist
couldn't reasonably lift them singlehandedly anyway,)
In other words, it's not just the list of things that are possible or not
possible - because all games will have limits on what you can do. It's
what's given priority that's important.
Baron Calamity
wrote:
Thank you for not reading my message and just continuing to repost
your same argument over and over and over...
Baron Calamity
http://rcmerritt.homestead.com
"If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting them down?
We might,if they screamed all the time,for no good reason."-Jack Handey
Baron Calamity
wrote:
>
>Jarno Kaarinen <ja...@remotel.com> wrote in message
>> Or alternatively, some people have so restricted taste that if the
>> game does not fit into their jumping-bunnies-Quake-clone limits, it is
>> a bad game.
>
>Do you actually think you're impressing anyone by repeatedly sinking to
>Eep's level by calling everyone who dislikes Trespasser a Quake-clone
>fanboy?
I do feel for the guy. After all he realy likes a game that most
everyone thinks sucks. So he is forced in a position of extreme
advocacy. I've been there with Klingon Honor Guard myself. I really
like that game and most don't. (ofcourse the fact I beta tested the
sucker probably has something to do with it) However thats ok because
I know that and I don't go around insulting others.
Baron Calamity
wrote:
>
>>> >What we have here friends is proof that no matter how bad a game is,
>>> >someone, somewhere, likes it and odds are, they have access to the
>>> >internet.
>
>So what was it that you were saying again, SpammersD?
Explain how this is an insult? How did I offend you personally? All I
said is that you like a bad game, and you have access to the internet.
There are bad games that I like and I have access to the internet. I'm
just pointing out a fact of life. You just latched on to a game that
the developers themselves thought; "the product that we eventually
shipped was as disappointing to us as it was to the great majority of
game players and game critics"
Baron Calamity
wrote:
>Perhaps you should actually play Trespasser first before criticising it, eh?
>
> Because they played the demo on a p200+voodoo1 two years ago, couldn't
>figure it out, then read some reviews. I think its mostly laziness.
When I bought Trespasser I had a P2 300 with an ATI rage pro agp and a
12 meg voodoo 2. the p2 450 was the top of the line back then so I
wasn't slow by any means. The only think I couldn't figure out is how
did a game in that condition get shipped.
Baron Calamity
> what reality do
>you live in? Bizzaro world?
That explains a lot. Cause from the comics, in Bizzaro world, good is
bad and bad is good. :0
>I have a question for the group. Did only morons play Trespasser? It
>is surely starting to seem that way.
Naaa. The like it and they just can't except they like a crappy game.
Courtney Evans
<e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
> If you need to rely on poor humor to supplement good argument, YOU don't
quite get it.
Look, I'm not the one calling people "fucking clueless" because he can't
take a joke.
> > Half-Life is not a role-playing game. They don't give the player any
> > information about Gordon's personality or voice, so the player puts their
> > own characteristics into the resulting void. It's a different *kind* of
> > immersion, and a different strategy for bringing the player into the game
> > world. Whether in-game representation of the player's body is appropriate
> > depends on which strategy you are using. It is not always the right thing
> > to do.
>
> I can argue ANY game is a role-playing game. You constantly play roles
in even "real life". Roles include: dad, mom, sister, brother, husband,
wife; work roles: boss, gopher, grunt, scientist, teacher, student, etc,
etc, etc. Because you are taking on the ROLE of Gordon in Half-Life, you
are ROLE-playing. Immersion is immersion; role-playing is
role-playing--you just need to think about these things relatively to see
they're only differentiated in degree, not concept.
Yes, you can argue that. Chess can be a role-playing game. You could be
playing the role of a king, a Russian chess champion, or a character in
that (kickass) musical by Abba. Just because we *can* call it a
role-playing game doesn't mean "a role-playing game" is a useful
description of chess. If I tell someone about the game I'm working on and
describe it as a "role-playing game" when it's a game like Homeworld, I'm
not being precise and it's not helping anything. If I describe the
elements within the game that immerse the character in the world and role
they are playing, *that* is helpful.
In addition, I don't think you're reading my argument: immersion works in
different ways. Please stop telling me to think about these things
relatively, I *am*.
Immersion works in different ways. Yes? Some involve an established
character and personality, others make that as transparent as possible to
'get at' the player directly. First-person character rendering is not
*always* a good thing. That's all. Yes?
If you want the ultimate in transparency, take Myst. The protagonist
(player) has no personality or appearance whatsoever. There is nothing *at
all* to make the player believe he is playing a role different than
himself, moving through the world being presented.
How many copies did Myst sell again?
> > Not really. The feeling is more like, "I am Gordon Freeman, I am doing
> > these things" rather than "I am J. C. Denton, who is doing these things."
> > It's a fine line, but one that needs to be clearly drawn when you're
> > making a game.
>
> Regardless, BOTH are role-playing.
See above. Yes, but the psychological differences are important. Half-Life
was a more immediate and compelling kind of game than Deus Ex, though both
were stellar. The details of how the game presents the world are very
important, and first-person body rendering is one of those details that
needs to be considered carefully.
> > >If you want total immersion, go play a REAL role-playing game where you
> > create the look and name of your character and have more control of its
> > development.
> > >
> > A "real" role-playing game uses mechanisms no computer game can possibly
> > use at this point, namely verbal and gestural face-to-face interaction
> > with other players. Once again, a completely different form of immersion,
> > but not germane to this discussion.
>
> I don't recall limiting real role-playing games to computers; I simply
wrote "game", which could very well include paper-and-dice RPGs like AD&D
also. Regardless, both mediums are still role-playing.
I *was* talking about pen-and-paper RPGs. Please read my statements before
responding to them.
--
Courtney Evans
My email address is my first name. The domain name is my
last name, followed by the three letters inc, followed by
dot com.
Led Mirage
wrote:
> You forgot to conclude that therefore half-life's physics are better
>than trespassers, since you can push boxes around but are not given the
>option to lift or move them in any other manner; you are not given the
>option to orient a weapon except by turning your entire body; i.e. its
>cleaner and simpler, therefore better. I don't buy the argument, sorry.
Half-life didn't pretend to have realistic physics. Also, Half-life
offers a GAME, which is quite missing in Trespasser.
Eep²
>
> > The 'problem' of dropping weapons or hitting them on objects
> doesn't
> > detract from gameplay for me, it adds to the realism.
>
> bats, etc.) in fact, I find myself clumsily wielding these things and
> then dropping them over and over again. In fact, in reality, I can
> scarcely lift a board and place it against a crate without it falling
> at least five times. The board just bumps around and hits things wildly
> because I have no motor control in reality, I just wildly flail objects
> around. It really pisses my co-workers off as I'm constantly flinging
> objects around with my uncontrollable robo-flail arm... what reality do
> you live in? Bizzaro world?
Do YOU? Like any interface you have to learn how to use it properly. I can control objects well enough to not substantially take away the realism.
> I have a question for the group. Did only morons play Trespasser? It
> is surely starting to seem that way.
No, the morons are the ones who DIDN'T play it, or who played it but didn't appreciate it for its innovativeness and willingness to try new things.
Eep²
Eep²
>
> In article <39FD2387...@tnlc.com>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Eep=B2?=
> <e...@tnlc.com> wrote:
>
> > If you need to rely on poor humor to supplement good argument, YOU don't
> quite get it.
>
> Look, I'm not the one calling people "fucking clueless" because he can't
> take a joke.
No, you're the one who IS fucking clueless for having to resort to such poor humor to argue a point.
NOW you are, convienently after I pointed it out to you...<chuckle>
> Immersion works in different ways. Yes? Some involve an established
> character and personality, others make that as transparent as possible to
> 'get at' the player directly. First-person character rendering is not
> *always* a good thing. That's all. Yes?
<shrug> Do you have a point or are you going to babble on some more?
> If you want the ultimate in transparency, take Myst. The protagonist
> (player) has no personality or appearance whatsoever. There is nothing *at
> all* to make the player believe he is playing a role different than
> himself, moving through the world being presented.
>
> How many copies did Myst sell again?
<shrug> never played it...
> > > Not really. The feeling is more like, "I am Gordon Freeman, I am doing
> > > these things" rather than "I am J. C. Denton, who is doing these things."
> > > It's a fine line, but one that needs to be clearly drawn when you're
> > > making a game.
> >
> > Regardless, BOTH are role-playing.
>
> See above. Yes, but the psychological differences are important. Half-Life
> was a more immediate and compelling kind of game than Deus Ex,
Relatively more in some aspects; relatively less in other aspects. <shrug>
> though both
> were stellar. The details of how the game presents the world are very
> important, and first-person body rendering is one of those details that
> needs to be considered carefully.
What's your point again? Both games have 1st-person views.
> > > >If you want total immersion, go play a REAL role-playing game where you
> > > create the look and name of your character and have more control of its
> > > development.
> > > >
> > > A "real" role-playing game uses mechanisms no computer game can possibly
> > > use at this point, namely verbal and gestural face-to-face interaction
> > > with other players. Once again, a completely different form of immersion,
> > > but not germane to this discussion.
> >
> > I don't recall limiting real role-playing games to computers; I simply
> wrote "game", which could very well include paper-and-dice RPGs like AD&D
> also. Regardless, both mediums are still role-playing.
>
> I *was* talking about pen-and-paper RPGs. Please read my statements before
> responding to them.
Uh, I did. Nowhere did you mention paper-and-dice RPGs before in this thread. Perhaps you should write more effectively so what you later claim agrees with what you actually wrote.