15:15. No idea if they're streaming gameplay, but they're booked in.
Crackdown 3 Gameplay First Look
- Thread starter zakislam
- Start date
15:15. No idea if they're streaming gameplay, but they're booked in.
LegalEagleMike
Member
It says we are getting a beta. Nothing about only a beta.
Maybe a late 2016 or early 2017 launch? Hopefully the former.
Miles Quaritch
Member
I'm looking at the core gameplay that's on offer. The game itself of course looks rough, that's a given with the game being a year+ away, but the core mechanics look to be in place and they look pretty good.
At the end of the Gamescom trailer it said Multiplayer Summer 2016. It's hard to know how much time will be needed between that and a full release.
Gamezone
Gold Member
What's so special about the AI in Titanfall? Unreal Tournament from 1999 have better AI bots offline. Forza's drivatars is basically stored profiles. Nothing special at all.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Cool, I'll check it out and hope we get some gameplay.
Spring 2016 for beta, Summer 2016 release?
Hopefully so, I always thought that I'd be happy with another Crackdown with another city to play in, Crackdown 2 kinda wasn't enough as it was the same city (mostly) and the Zombies altered the gameplay quite significantly.
I got a proper nostalgia hit watching that video, about 2 minutes in when it pans back across the city. They've really captured the art style and lighting of the original
What year is it? Who is the president?!
*picks up newspaper*
I think I've been sent back in time
tomchoucrew
Member
We just asked the devs. The game will be playable without Internet conection and in solo mode but the destruction will only concern smaller things. We saw real gameplay footage in front of us and it really works (with the cloud I mean), it's impressive, without lag. At the end of the demo, the dev told us it was as if there was 7 others Xbox One in the cloud ("Xbox One Compute") thanks to the cloud to do all the destructions things.
http://www.xboxygen.com/News/20603-Crackdown-3-le-mode-solo-sans-le-cloud-est-possible
NullPointer
Member
Thanks for looking into it. Looks like I'm in for offline solo or online co-op.
What was shown in the video doesn't give me much core gampley apart from the "nostalgia hit" that EvB has said...
Now, of course if they can't get the feeling of chaos, character development, fights with gangs and "acrobatics" from the first one... (i didn't like Crackdown 2 mainly because the monsters).oh boy, that will be pure fun.
I was about to ask what would happen when the cloud goes offline a few years later, so even offline it'll still run 30fps but with less destruction. Cool.
Fucking amazing.
This is from last year.
I know GAF "in general" is very pessimistic about the cloud. And yes, somehow I can understand that - because so far, there weren't that much games that really took advantage of server calculations. To be honest, no new-gen so far really did (Titanfall touched 5% of the possibilities ...). And this is also why I try to be very careful about the words I choose.
No. You can not boost your games resolution with Azure. And no. You can not create better lighting effects with Azure. But, if you focus on it, you can still boost the overall graphical look of your game by a mile. We are currently creating a game. But in fact, we are kind of creating two-in-one. One with Azure available, and one for offline only. Everything you code, you need to code for two scenerarios. This is a ton of work. if online = dynamic grass; if offline=static grass ... To say it very simple. And so on.That's why we are currently thinking about going "online-only". But to be very open to you, we have some fear about that. Obviously. The gaming community is very careful when they hear "online-only" ... Games like Sim City simply ... Well, did it wrong.
If I could show you a screen comparison of our latest build right now - Azure on/off (no, sorry, I can't ...), you would understand what I am talking about. Wind, dynamically moving vegetations, footprints that stay for hours and even wildlife nearly without losing any local CPU power. This is just awesome in the right situations.
I know MS has some own projects in the works, too, that will go all-in with the Azure servers. Crackdown is the already known example.
That's all I can say for now. Really. I'm out here!
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
This too. I said before the show I personally would be happy with a spruced up Crackdown 1. That's almost what we're getting here in a way and I'm rapt about it.
ffejeromdiks
Banned
As someone with an abysmal 700kbps connection, I'm terrified the cloud based destruction straight up won't function on my end, but heres hoping.
Rushersauce
Banned
They chose to alienate those who don't have a decent connection and, also, those who live far away from the servers (i.e: other countries). Also, good luck trying to play it in a few more years.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Man, PDZ still has active servers, and that was a launch 360 title. This isn't The Show, MS isn't going to shut things down the minute the population drops.
Rushersauce
Banned
. Didn't know that. I hope they deliver, then.RedSparrows
Member
There is a post on this very page saying the game can be played offline. It's not going to be optimal, but it's not the end of the world either.
It's all Peer to Peer, that's why. It just needs other people playing for it to work
Rushersauce
Banned
not really if you read a few posts up that says that the devs confirmed offline w/ limited destruction
RedSparrows
Member
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
Pretty cool destruction.
Many P2P games are not P2P in the strictest sense. Classically it would be one is the server and one player is the client (From a PC point of view) Most still use the Publisher/Developer to connect players together. EA did a lot of P2P stuff but you still needed to log in. If they choose to cut the link, P2P dies outside of LAN modes (Which is more like the Client/Server option, If the game supports it)
LukasTaves
Member
Ms has Azure servers in the whole world. They are always expanding also.
It was also one of the reasons why xbone took so long to launch everywhere, dunno if they actually delivered on the server capacity for all regions though.
Messofanego
Banned
I love that it still looks like Crackdown in the movement and hasn't become a claustrophobic over the shoulder third person shooter.
I think the simplest explanation is looking at it like this:
Main matchmaking server/authentication server find X people for Y match, finds a host among them and match them together but the match itself runs between Host and Player in a P2P network setting, and once game is over stats might upload to a database and the main server repeats the act.
Omega Kirby
Member
Red Faction Guerilla finally has a rival in destruction
joecanada
Member
I like how it kind of chains on the other buildings but I don't see it being far and away better than Battlefield 4, which is already going to be two years old this fall. So I don't quite understand why the cloud is necessary unless this is just basic build footage and its expected to get better.
Outside of the pre-canned levelution stuff, the destruction mas majorly gimped from previous BF games.
CD3 was showing way more detailed destruction that BF has.
LukasTaves
Member
Rushersauce
Banned
Then, my post dies, again.
Yeah, server capacity is a problem. Didn't know that was the reason. Thanks for the info.
tomchoucrew
Member
It is far far, away from BF4. Really.
MrTroubleMaker
Member
I hope the sp is good, I don't play mp
I'm not doubting you, I'm sure this is what they said, but this fills me with skepticism.
You simply cannot design a game for *both* 100% destructibility and small scale destructibility at the same time. There's no way I can play the solo campaign online with 100% destructibility and then suddenly decide to continue on offline with less destructibility. That would just be a different game.
What this means to me is none of this crazy destructibility in solo. In multiplayer I'll be bringing down entire city blocks, but not in solo, no matter if I'm connected or not.
Now I don't blame them for that, because aside from the "political" issues that they'd have with most people by requiring to be online for solo (people are touchy with that), from a design standpoint, having 100%destructibility seemed like a silly premise for a game that thrives on platforming and verticality.
So I guess this means more indication that Crackdown 3 will be Crackdown, which is good. But it's going to be hella frustrating/awkward playing multiplayer for hours and then going back into solo and have only a fraction of it.
You'll just spend your time firing into walls as a reflex, see nothing happen, and instantly go like "oh, no, that's right, I'm in solo now..."
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad Crackdown is Crackdown, and I'm glad someone is making a whacky experiment for cloud based destruction aside from it, but it's super weird to have such schyzophrenia in a single game.
