Conker, impressions and questions
- Thread starter KarishBHR
- Start date
The Main Event
Member
Unless they added a few new levels, it took me like between 15-20 hours to beat the N64 version if I remember correctly.
And the game is pretty much divided 50/50, first half is platforming, the other is basically a third person shooter.
And the game is pretty much divided 50/50, first half is platforming, the other is basically a third person shooter.
The Main Event said:
Yep.
First part up until the dinosaur level is basically Banjo-Kazooie type platforming, and then the Dracula parody = RE style TPS, normal TPS in the war part (which is a big, big part of the game), and then a little bit at the end for The Matrix. I bet The Matrix levels get expanded a little...
Personally, I didn't really enjoy the gameplay of Conker; The control for the shooting portions was god-awful, and the platforming was pretty unresponsive; I'd hit A, only to fall off a ledge instead of jumping. The game was complete crap in terms of response. (The immature potty humor was a real turn off to me, as well.)
Dunno if they made the game not control like shit or not in the remake.
Dunno if they made the game not control like shit or not in the remake.
The Main Event
Member
GaimeGuy said:
I'm sure I finished the game close to that 8 hours then. Had a hard time remembering since the last time I played that game was 3 years ago :/
Prince of Space
Banned
10 hours at the most. Perfect length for it.KarishBHR said:
Yep, no HUD.
Shooting takes up about 15% of the overall game.
Prince of Space
Banned
Off the top of my head:AniHawk said:
Conker gives audio cues for when to move up the beach "okay it's safe, go go GO!"
When Conker gets his gun (just one this time), you now have to fight a wave of Tediz before getting into the bunker.
In the medical room, a giant Tediz surgeon breaks out of one of the tubes to a Kill Bill-esque Ironside parody theme.
The electrocution cutscene is now longer, and more annoying.
captainbiotch
Banned
Lyte Edge said:
Lyte Edge has good taste.
This is definately a game I'm very excited for.
CajoleJuice
Member
Conker was definitely a shining star at the end of the N64's life. One of the top games for the platform and one of the funniest games ever. It's just so great. If the single-player is basically the same and the multiplayer is expanded upon greatly, it could be a GOTY contender. We all know what game will win GOTY 2005 though.
The demo wasn't so hot. Shooting segments had a pretty tiresome and generic feel. Walk 5 feet, enemies pop out, shoot them....walk 5 feet, enemies pop out, shoot them.....all down a straight, narrow corridor. None of the Tediz seem particularly intelligent.
The graphics don't seem all that great either, I really don't get what all that hype is about. Lighting model is very basic, no bump mapping or normal mapping.....runs at 30 frames per second. Is it just the fur that is impressing you people? The graphics are pretty easily trounced by the likes of Riddick or Dead or Alive. If Master Chief had fur, even Halo 2 would look better :lol
The graphics don't seem all that great either, I really don't get what all that hype is about. Lighting model is very basic, no bump mapping or normal mapping.....runs at 30 frames per second. Is it just the fur that is impressing you people? The graphics are pretty easily trounced by the likes of Riddick or Dead or Alive. If Master Chief had fur, even Halo 2 would look better :lol
citrus lump
Banned
Anyone else here feel the camera was a little slow?
I'll have to check again but I thought I saw some bump mapping. But the source light was static (as in position), so it wasn't that apparent.
Plus, down the narrow corridors, every single tile was modelled.
Personally I thought the "fur shading" was done better in Star Fox Adventures...
Plus, down the narrow corridors, every single tile was modelled.
Personally I thought the "fur shading" was done better in Star Fox Adventures...
Fight for Freeform said:
I thought so too.
I think the graphics look great. I don't think anything was technically that impressive, but Rare is so good at putting the tiny little details into the game. You spend a lot of time just walking around and looking at stuff... the crates, bombs, doors, etc. Then there's the water splatter on the camera lens and the bullett holes that stay there. It's all just cool stuff.
There was also dodging the flame throwers and maneuvering through the trip mines. It's not a straight up shooter, so I'm cool with it all. However, I hope they include sliders for the multiplayer game. Moving my reticule seemed slower than it should have been.
Its not the demo graphics that impressed everyone its the multiplayer and the small amount of footage thats been shown of the beginning of the single player game that looks so fucking awesome, the partical effects, the vivid colours, it all looks incredible (the fur looks great in motion too, pretty mediocre in screens though).
It will be one of, if not the best looking game on xbox.
As for the length i guess 8-10 hours is about right, thing is because the experience is changing all the time (even the various shooting sections are very different, as are the platforming ones) it never drags, its 8-10 hours of totally fresh experiences (or it was at the time, it'll be interesting to see how its aged)
It will be one of, if not the best looking game on xbox.
As for the length i guess 8-10 hours is about right, thing is because the experience is changing all the time (even the various shooting sections are very different, as are the platforming ones) it never drags, its 8-10 hours of totally fresh experiences (or it was at the time, it'll be interesting to see how its aged)
Ninja Scooter
Member
if the demo is taken from the Tediz levels, than i can see why it wouldn't seem that great (at least if its still like the n64 version). The game fell apart by that point IMO. Those levels play like a boring, repetitive cooridoor FPS if you ask me.
As I recall, some of the multiplayer levels on the N64 version were a lot of fun, even with just two or three people. Me and my buddies always had fun doing that refugee level, where you had to run them in past the Tediz base. The capture the flag level was a lot of fun too.
I always loved the little quirks ... like if you were a sniper Tedi and made a head shot, he'd chuckle at the blood-flowing, half-headed corps in his sight.
I always loved the little quirks ... like if you were a sniper Tedi and made a head shot, he'd chuckle at the blood-flowing, half-headed corps in his sight.
I can't believe there are people who don't think this game looks amazing. The lighting model may (or may not) be basic, but either way it comes across as more impressive looking than just about anything else I've seen, Halo 2 and Riddick included. Just stand outside the door that you shoot down for a minute and watch the light play off Conker as he moves around; he just looks so tangible and solid. Textures are extremely sharp and the effects like explosions and gunfire are superb.
The graphics are competently executed and it certainly looks better than most 3rd party multiplatform drek, but making a case for it as the system's graphical showcase just seems silly. Doesn't Ninja Gaiden run at double the framerate and look even better? That's a game that shows of the hardware. Conker has a nice presentation, but it's nothing spectacular.
Yeah, I played the Nintendo 64 version right up through Dracula's Castle so this was pretty much a new experience for me. Sounds as though I quit playing just before it turned all crappy and stuff.
Go watch a couple of IGNs vids, its the early parts othe game that have everyone drooling.
http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/490/490304/vids_6.html
(the intro run vid)
http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/490/490304/vids_5.html
(Beautiful hill vid)
As i already said, crisp shadows, enviromental partical effects, incredibly vibrant colours...its a stunning game.
http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/490/490304/vids_6.html
(the intro run vid)
http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/490/490304/vids_5.html
(Beautiful hill vid)
As i already said, crisp shadows, enviromental partical effects, incredibly vibrant colours...its a stunning game.
Serenade Cycle
Member
I have to agree here. In my opinion at least, I think that it can be hard to compare games that have more of a cartoon or animated theme to a realistic theme in terms of graphics. Besides, I don't hear a lot of people complaining about the graphics in a game like GTA: SA. I'm not saying that they don't have their reasons, obviously the world is to huge to have amazing graphics too and fit it on the disk. But the game still appeals. The big thing that appealed about the N64 Conker was the comedy and multiplayer. When my friend and I were playing the bankrobbing multiplayer part and the weasel said, "give me the money you cock-sucker" we both almost laughed ourselves sick. This game isn't just about the graphics, gameplay always plays a big part for me.
Who the hell said Conker lighting model was basic ? It's one if not the most amazing use of lighting I've ever seen in a game ! It's not really very visible in the demo because it's a kinda dark level, but just watch when there is an explosion or a gunfire near a 3d model. The light looks absolutely stunning, very CGish. It's very noticeable in just when you finish the sneak part of the beach and discuss with the other guy and then shoot the teddyz.Redbeard said:
The fact that the game uses a Spherical Harmonic Lighting model is certainly a very big factor in the surreal look of the light sources. They also have implemented a dynamic shadowing system in some levels (it's in one of these IGN videos, you see a moving lamp casting a very nice looking dynamic soft shadow of a wood barrier if IIRC), but I guess they do not use for every light sources and objects.