Support NeoGAF

[M.W.]

Uh oh. He beat it in under 4 hours. But, he was playing on EASY.

 

[Derrick01]

Uh oh. He beat it in under 4 hours. But, he was playing on EASY.

So 5-6 hours on normal then? *sigh*

 

[M.W.]

So 5-6 hours on normal then? *sigh*

Seems to be about right.

 

[Derrick01]

and they want $50-$60 for this game. This industry will never learn from its mistakes.

 

[M.W.]

and they want $50-$60 for this game. This industry will never learn from its mistakes.

I agree to an extent, but I am more interested in the MP for this. My friends have been looking for a new MP experience and we've decided on this.

 

[NateDrake]

Uh oh. He beat it in under 4 hours. But, he was playing on EASY.

Where did he say this?

 

[M.W.]

Where did he say this?

In one of the comments on his YT channel.

Yes it was Really under 4 hours but bare in mind this was on the easiest Settings Ive played about 5 mins of multiplayer have to say its awsome must buy it 9/10

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Uh oh. He beat it in under 4 hours. But, he was playing on EASY.

Hm... well, I have an HMV gift card from my birthday a year or two ago, I'll use it on this game if it turns out to be really short. It'll take the sting out of having to pay $60 if it turns out to be unreasonably short.

Though Arthur (?) played it and is reviewing it and has said it's 7-9, so for a linear third person shooter, that sounds reasonable.

 

[Messofanego]

and they want $50-$60 for this game. This industry will never learn from its mistakes.

GMG $37.50

 

[Derrick01]

GMG $37.50

Still too much. A 5 hour linear game with MP that I'll never play, and will probably be dead in a few months regardless, means $10 or less steam sale.

 

[codhand]

CoD is five hours and it can hardly be called a "mistake" for Activision.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

CoD is five hours and it can hardly be called a "mistake" for Activision.

Call of Duty also has a stranglehold on the multiplayer side of things so you know it'll, at least, be decent and always populated. If any game wants to make a dent in the shooter genre at $60, it should focus on a meaty, unique campaign. Nobody is going to leave CoD or Battlefield multiplayer for Spec Ops, no matter how good it is, so a mediocre campaign will always be an easy target for criticism. We've seen that numerous times. For them to release at full price with a 5 hour campaign dooms this game from the word "Go."

 

[Duxxy3]

Played the demo last night.

It's not worth more than $20 to me.



Also, what the hell is with all the god damn cut scenes in shooters lately?

 

[smr00]

So 5-6 hours on normal then? *sigh*

So $20 bin it is.

CoD is five hours and it can hardly be called a "mistake" for Activision.

Comparing COD multiplayer to this is like comparing a sweet gala apple to a dirty rock.

As much i don't care for mutliplayer at least COD offers a highly competent multiplayer.

 

[M.W.]

Nobody is going to leave CoD or Battlefield multiplayer for Spec Ops,

Umm, I am and so are about 10 of my friends. That's at least a few people!

 

[Net_Wrecker]

Umm, I am and so are about 10 of my friends. That's at least a few people!

You know what I mean. We've seen a bunch of games come by with solid multiplayer experiences just get dropped after the first few weeks as the masses flock back to Halo, or CoD, or Battlefield. It's just not worth the effort for 3rd party games to put focus into PvP shooters. Since that's the case, you'd better go all out on your campaign as a dev making a modern military shoooter, a subgenre already well past saturation. A 5 hour campaign will only hurt word of mouth.

 

[M.W.]

MP is being hacked/modded already.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbkiqCuXoKU&feature=plcp

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming...-why-people-are-tired-of-violent-video-games/

Spec Ops: The Line is out Tuesday and faces the challenge of sticking out in a sea of shooters. Creative lead Cory Davis talks about how to make a shooter mean something.

It’s hard enough to make a game about soldiers and guns stand out in the modern video game market, but harder still to do it at E3 when every publisher on the planet is bludgeoning people with images of buildings exploding, helicopters crashing, and semi-bearded men screaming about reloading.

Cory Davis, creative lead on 2K Games and Yager Development’s Spec Ops: The Line, has to face both the challenge of making his third-person shooter stand out from the crowd but also convince people to play it without a competitive multiplayer mode. Before sitting down to try its bonus co-op missions at E3 2012, Davis talked about the challenges of getting publishers to take risks, how to name your game, and why people are finally getting tired of violence in video games.

Spec Ops: The Line was designed to challenge people’s moral conceptions about shooting video games. Why?

There are a lot of games that just don’t do that and those that do don’t do it very well. If we’re going to develop a game in this genre, we had to do something different to start with. As developers, as gamers, we’ve matured. Me personally, when I play a shooter, I’m looking for something that challenges me. Not all the time. I’m not saying those other games aren’t fun or that they’re not good. They do what they do extremely well, but what we’re doing is a lot different.

Why do you think there are so few games that try to make people think about violence?

It’s a cycle. If you like at war films from the pre-Vietnam era, they were very gung ho and heroic. They wanted to remind people how awesome America is. After the Vietname War though, people came home with a lot of different experiences, experiences that affected them emotionally and those people came back and made films or got involved with films. Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, The Deer Hunter, Platoon—these really dive into not just the body of a soldier but also the mind of a soldier. They’re not necessarily realistic films, but they are authentic to what these soldiers feel and the psychological journey that they go on. We really want to do for games what those movies did for film. We want to show a strong character arc and evolution for our characters. Where they start is different from where they end up in the game. We have a great opportunity since you’re in control with a game, so we can build a different type of relationship than you can with characters in a film. We let you make some decisions as these characters that really bind you to the things that happen between them. We also stay with these characters through their journey through Dubai when they’ve been cut off from the world. It’s a human story. It’s not about politics, it’s not about their ability to overcome anything.

How did this philosophy get born out in the free co-operative DLC missions you’re releasing?

We wanted to focus on our single-player first and foremost. Throughout development, it’s always tempting to say, okay, let’s make a co-op game. Co-op games sell, people are looking for that, but at the same time, I think there’s a gap in the single-player experiences in a lot of games. For us, to be able to touch on these horrific topics—the terror of war, the soul of man, the heart of darkness—we didn’t want you to be tea-bagging your buddy while you’re trying to make a meaningful decision.

Yeah, that would probably ruin the moment.

Or having your buddy to it to you is even worse! But this is a third-person, cover-based shooter where you’re part of a squad and our AI is built to tackle multiple threats. We love playing co-op as well. We wanted to show a different part of the narrative with the co-op even though it isn’t really narrative focused. You get to embody a bunch of different characters in different contexts. You get to play as refugees trying to escape an internment camp for example. Or you play as Exiles, former members of [antagonist] Conrad’s force that have defected, and you’re going in to assassinate your former commanders. It’s not necessary to get the most out of the story.

There’s a good deal of fatigue settling on the industry when it comes to shooters, especially at this year’s E3. It’s more than that there are so many shooters though, it’s that people are exhausted by the violence. You guys seem to be trying to combat that with your story. Why do you think that it’s now that people are pushing back when shooters have been so popular for so many years?

There are a lot of different factors. Like I said, I think that players as a group have matured but the games we play haven’t matured with us. That’s not to say that every game needs to be a meaningful emotional experience. I love playing all these heroic games as well—they give a lot of strong feedback, they’re very powerful, a lot of fun, very cool, and they’re well developed. They have value, but there’s something missing. Gamers overall though are looking for something more meaningful. We’re pushing in one direction with Spec Ops. The technology is now giving us opportunities to do things we weren’t able to do in the past. This game we’re developing here, even if we’d tried to do it earlier this generation, we would have struggled to do some of the emotional stuff we do. The lighting, things we can do with the sand making the environment come to life and not just be a backdrop, we can do new things. We’ll be forced to do new things because that’s what people are looking for.

Speaking of this generation of consoles, game budgets skyrocketed when the Xbox 360 came out back in 2005. The sheer cost of making a high-definition game crippled a lot of developers and many publishers were scared off of investing in original ideas. What do you think is going to convince publishers to invest in original ideas in the future?

It’s really tough. You have to take risks. A lot of times though, taking a risk doesn’t always result in the desired outcome. Some people would rather just play it safe. Luckily there are publishers out there willing to take some of those risks, and if they’re successful as they do that, other people will follow suit. Developers especially say, “We don’t want to work on something we don’t carry about.” Or, “We want to work on something that pushes the envelope.” 2K for example was always on board with that. They stand out and they wanted to take risks with us right from the start. Even at E3 2010, we had a lot of stuff we were excited about, some scenes we thought were impactful, but at the same time when we went to focus test our main storyline, we found that a lot of the story wasn’t hitting home as much as we wanted. You can imagine if we set off on this path to make something we thought was meaningful and then miss the mark, it would probably hurt not just us but studios trying to do similar things. Publishers would say, “Oh look at that game. It didn’t work!”

I hope that’s not the case though. We had 16 different nationalities working on this game, and we fostered that international perspective on everything. There was a lot of strong, healthy debate about all of these topics. Just to get our squad mate actors to understand what we’re trying to accomplish, we brought them into the office with everyone, fine tuning and iterating with them. 2K was right there the whole time pushing alongside us to make sure it came out right. I’m excited, but it’s risky.

Branding is a really hard thing to do with shooters. Everything has such similar names. Hearing the name Spec Ops: The Line right next to something like Ghost Recon: Future Soldier, it’s tough for the average consumer shopping at Walmart to distinguish between those things. What are the challenges in deciding what to call your game?

It’s always a big debate. For me personally as a gamer, I knew about the Spec Ops franchise and what it was about, but what we’re doing is so different that I think when people take a look at it, it’ll set us apart in the future. What I want is that, in a few years when people hear the name Spec Ops, they don’t think of those past games or other games, they think of this game we’ve made.

The cards were stacked against us, and that pushed us to find ways to make the game stand out. The color scheme for example. We had to intentionally make sure we didn’t make a generic brown shooter. Our technology was heavily focused on that throughout development. We had a really, really strong tech and lighting team making sure that Dubai came to life. Then we had to make sure that these characters were going through things that meant something to people. It’s a challenge. It is. The Line, that name, has a lot of meaning to us. We want people to think about what it’s actually like for soldiers to cross this line that they have to every day, those decisions they’re going to make in order to survive, and how those decisions psychologically effect them in the long term.

My bolding might be crap, but eh, why not read the whole thing, it'll take two minutes.

Impressions from the first three hours:

http://www.psu.com/a015872/Spec-Ops--The-Line-impresses-with-great-audio-work-and-fierce-gun-battles

In terms of cinematic impact, 2K Game’s Spec Ops: The Line isn’t likely to compete against the big spending shooter franchises, such as Call Of Duty and Battlefield, but it does have a few tricks up its sleeves that have impressed us so far.

We’re about three hours into the campaign so far and it’s refreshing to see that Spec Ops hasn’t gone down the same route as many other shooters, particularly in its audio production. The intro, in which the American flag flies proudly while a heart-felt version of “Star Spangled Banner” plays out on an electrical guitar, suggests that we’re just about to meet yet another in-your-face, loud and brash set of soldiers that shout out “Hell yeah” and swear at every opportunity.

On the contrary though, it turns out that Spec Ops dialogue feels more authentic than a lot of shooters we’ve played and the voice-acting is impressive. The dialogue is actually quite toned down compared to what we’re used to hearing from soldiers in video games, with clever and occasionally witty banter that has actually made us sit up and want to listen to what they’re saying and soak in the storyline.

In fact, the audio as a whole has already played an important part in our Spec Ops experience. The soundtrack is superb with the likes of ‘Hush’, originally sang by Deep Purple, blasting away as you come face to face with some stiff resistance from enemies while caught up in a fierce sandstorm.

In fact, audio has already played an important part in our Spec Ops experience so far. The soundtrack is superb with the likes of ‘Hush’, originally sang by Deep Purple, blasting away as you come face to face with some stiff resistance from enemies while caught up in a fierce sandstorm.

The audio experience is just one aspect of Spec Ops: The Line that has impressed so far though. The cover system is also very slick, combat fierce and level design impressively varied to ensure there’s a new type of challenge around every corner. It’s also particularly clever how the developer has used sand in the game, which is almost like having an extra enemy or an ally in your team. The most impressive use of sand so far was when we shot through a giant glass window behind a group of enemies and then saw it pile through on top of them.

Sand works against you too and you can end up losing your footing and getting caught out by sand drifts, but it's good to see that there's something new to think about in this shooter than just running from one cover spot to the next. In truth, sand could get a little annoying if it continues to pop up and blind our vision throughout the campaign, but so far Spec Ops: The Line has really surprised us. It sounds great, plays well and the storyline and voice acting have so far kept us hooked.

 

[M.W.]

SP Stream - en espanol

 

[SteveWD40]

You know what I mean. We've seen a bunch of games come by with solid multiplayer experiences just get dropped after the first few weeks as the masses flock back to Halo, or CoD, or Battlefield. It's just not worth the effort for 3rd party games to put focus into PvP shooters. Since that's the case, you'd better go all out on your campaign as a dev making a modern military shoooter, a subgenre already well past saturation. A 5 hour campaign will only hurt word of mouth.

Couldn't agree more, these days I am more interested in re-playability in the form of Spec Ops style modes that can be played with friends or offline as MP always ends up dead within a month when everyone goes back to the big titles.

A Unit 13 style mission mode would make this kind of game much more appealing to me than empty MP lobbys.

 

[M.W.]

More MP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxW_SNsg1RE

Guy isn't very good.

 

[Messofanego]

Yeah, the soundtrack's going to be great. The song in the demo "The First Vietnamese War", I had to look it up.

 

[Gustav]

First review in a german mag (GameStar): 85%

Caution: German mag, german developer! Score most likely inflated.

 

[Messofanego]

Some of the developers are from Monolith (FEAR, Condemned) so I'm looking forward to the more horror and surreal parts like that Sauron Burj tower.

 

[daviyoung]

The demo is good, very good. Never heard of the developer but they sure made a solid action game. Will pick it up on Steam some time down the road.

 

[Sojgat]

SP interests me, but I'm not paying full price for 4-6 hours of entertainment. MP looks average/awful. I will probably hire this one.

 

[DieH@rd]

Demo was good, but i hope i can turn off mouse accell.

This game will most probably be this years version of Singularity. Very fun and well made game with interesting stories, but with very low hype around it.

 

[Vilam]

So 5-6 hours on normal then? *sigh*

Ah, good to know - that's the perfect game length. Just secured my preorder, thanks!

 

[codhand]

Some of the developers are from Monolith (FEAR, Condemned) so I'm looking forward to the more horror and surreal parts like that Sauron Burj tower.

Where did you hear this? Makes me more excited for this game, but more depressed about the prospects for a Condemned 3. Is old Monolith basically gone?

 

[Gustav]

Where did you hear this? Makes me more excited for this game, but more depressed about the prospects for a Condemned 3. Is old Monolith basically gone?

It's only one guy (the lead designer) and he worked at Monolith for almost 2 years.

 

[Messofanego]

Launch Trailer

Looks like visually Walker is in for one fucked up journey. Will we become the villain?

 

[codhand]

Launch Trailer

Looks like visually Walker is in for one fucked up journey. Will we become the villain?

Cool

made a violent gif

 

[Messofanego]

Cool

made a violent gif

I made this

 

[codhand]

I made this

haha damn you

Just realized it shows the level progression via amount of facial damage.

 

[theDeeDubs]

Wow. I usually don't care for launch trailers, but that one was great.

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

Last Friday's Weekend Confirmed actually has me a little excited for this one. I'm not sure if I'd pay more than $30 for it, though, I don't really have any desire to play the MP.

 

[mr stroke]

GMG $37.50

Might have to bite for that. PC version could look great maxed out.

 

[BattleMonkey]

So 5-6 hours on normal then? *sigh*

You were complaining that 7-8 hours for Max Payne was too long. Make up your mind

 

[Messofanego]

You were complaining that 7-8 hours for Max Payne was too long. Make up your mind

plus, this looks more varied. I'd rather have a quality time than one that overstays its welcome.

 

[Derrick01]

You were complaining that 7-8 hours for Max Payne was too long. Make up your mind

Max Payne 3 is also a terrible game. Besides I think I complained about how short it was if anything. I know it doesn't make sense but I don't like spending $60 on games that don't last me 10 hours minimum even if they suck. It's like a double insult, a shit game that I spent all that money on and then to top it off it was so short.

 

[Denzar]

The more I see and read, the more interested I get. Seems like this game has the balls to do something different for a change. Hope the narrative holds up.

Can not unhear Nathan Drake though... Too bad

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Max Payne 3 is also a terrible game. Besides I think I complained about how short it was if anything. I know it doesn't make sense but I don't like spending $60 on games that don't last me 10 hours minimum even if they suck. It's like a double insult, a shit game that I spent all that money on and then to top it off it was so short.

Max Payne 3 is a fantastic game.

Launch Trailer

Looks like visually Walker is in for one fucked up journey. Will we become the villain?

Looks awesome, hahahaha. I love when characters change how they look over the course of the game.

 

[revolverjgw]

Demo was good, but i hope i can turn off mouse accell.

This game will most probably be this years version of Singularity. Very fun and well made game with interesting stories, but with very low hype around it.

I'm not getting this game new but I'm hoping it's one of those Singularity/Wolfenstein/Timeshift type B games that have some interesting quirks and makes for a decent 30 dollar pickup. And actually, even if it turns out mediocre, I almost have to try it eventually, the setting intrigues me that much.

 

[Denzar]

OPM benelux gave the game 83/100. Got it in the mail today.

Pro's:

- Unexpected
- Great audiovisual presentation (but texture pop in here and there)
- Good Squadmate AI
- Resonates emotionally (makes you think about the choices you made)

Con's

- Short (around 6 hours)
- Takes some time to get going (but when it does, it grabs you by the throat until the very end)


They did not test co-op. They always split up the reviews into single- and multiplayer and give them separate scores.

 

[codhand]

OPM benelux gave the game 83/100. Got it in the mail today.

Sweet, sounds like it'll land in the 77-83 range of reviews, Gamefly just shipped it.

 

[AgentOtaku]

I have hope for the actual story content of this but the actual shooting is bland as balls. Completely Unsatisfying bang bang pew pews.

Sucks to hear the campaign may be a bit too short :/

 

[Karak]

OPM benelux gave the game 83/100. Got it in the mail today.

Pro's:

- Unexpected
- Great audiovisual presentation (but texture pop in here and there)
- Good Squadmate AI
- Resonates emotionally (makes you think about the choices you made)

Con's

- Short (around 6 hours)
- Takes some time to get going (but when it does, it grabs you by the throat until the very end)


They did not test co-op. They always split up the reviews into single- and multiplayer and give them separate scores.

Agree with these. I only played 1.5 hours before I was kicked of the machine but that sounds about right.
I do disagree with many others. The cover system is sometimes great and sometimes horrid with a randomness that I disliked. Sometimes a stone wall is protection then the very next moment it isn't...then it is again, then not again. I could deal with degrading cover dynamics but walls were somehow regenerating their cover ability it was just odd and offputting for sure. Especially when 1-4 bullets kill you. I do like the extra lethality in the game though.

The sandstorm dynamic really is great though shooting things to drop sand on people or otherwise did get boring within the time I played. Its still pretty cool.

Also ammo seems less available then most games which was welcome. I felt like many times I was in dire need of an extra clip.

 

[codhand]

the actual shooting is bland as balls. Completely Unsatisfying bang bang pew pews.

It does have a bit of a Blood on the Sand feel to it.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

OPM benelux gave the game 83/100. Got it in the mail today.

Pro's:

- Unexpected
- Great audiovisual presentation (but texture pop in here and there)
- Good Squadmate AI
- Resonates emotionally (makes you think about the choices you made)

Con's

- Short (around 6 hours)
- Takes some time to get going (but when it does, it grabs you by the throat until the very end)


They did not test co-op. They always split up the reviews into single- and multiplayer and give them separate scores.

Sounds good. Hoping this becomes a sleeper hit.

 

[Phthisis]

The more I see and read, the more interested I get. Seems like this game has the balls to do something different for a change. Hope the narrative holds up.

It does, very well.