/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.3056887]

HOLY SHIT THERE WAS DESCENT 3???????????????????????

[Anonymous No.3056906]

Yes but it wasn't received very well.

[Anonymous No.3056973]

Obligatory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHFazkfmBE4

[Anonymous No.3057547]

It's portal implementation had weird multiplayer bugs re: how different clients predicted projectile hits.

[Anonymous No.3057841]

>>3056887
No, there wasn't, and don't you dare telling me otherwise. Such an insult to the real Decent games

[Anonymous No.3057941]

>>3056887
>>3056906
>>3057841
Huh? I liked Descent 3 just fine. Is this some neo-contrarian thing, like Sonic The Hedgehog being a bad game?

[Anonymous No.3058305]

>>3056887
Yep, and it wasn't as good as 1&2. Especially 2. I played the shit out of Decent 2 in the 90s.

[Anonymous No.3058306]

>>3058305
At least it wasn't Freespace, though.

[Anonymous No.3058307]

I had no idea there are people who thought Descent 3 was a bad game. Can someone fill me in on why? I'm not a Descent "fan" so I don't know what is going on with this.

[Anonymous No.3058461]

>>3057941
>>3058307
The tutorial is utter bullshit (fuck tutorialized gaming, seriously). The visuals, despite being more complex 3D, objects look considerably worse than 2 and are a chore to navigate. The indoor locations are needlessly cramped, making movement more work than control. The outdoor environments stutter because the engine's not made for them, and they're way too large to be useful. The pacing, at least in the few levels I put up with, is fucked, where you just impatiently wait for the game to start, and just get all kinds of tedious bullshit thrown at you instead. Basically, the whole Descent feeling is gone, and what's left is an uninspired shooter that gets nothing right.

[Anonymous No.3058859]

>>3058461
So Descent 2 is where it's at right? Where does Descent Maximum fall into this?

[Anonymous No.3061212]

A few weeks ago there was a Reddit AMA promoting Descent Overload with the devs, they mentioned they're working on a compatibility patch to get D3 running smoothly on modern systems, so keep an eye out.

I really think it's underrated, had nice atmosphere, a lot of variety, robsufficiently confusing level design, better puzzles, bots had tons of personality, but people were turned off by it not being *exactly* the same game as D1 and D2.

[Anonymous No.3061217]

>>3057941

It's one of those annoying things where people deny the existence of something in a series because it's not as good as the others. It's just people being wusses.

[Anonymous No.3061221]

>>3061217
>because it's not as good
no, because it fucks with things to the point that the reason it is has the same name is purely marketing, and we don't fall for that bullshit

[Anonymous No.3061346]

>>3058461
>The outdoor environments stutter because the engine's not made for them
That's weird, I recall the devs talking (back in the day) specifically about how their "Fusion engine" (as they called it because it could do both indoor and outdoor areas at the same time) could easily handle large terrains.

I don't remember any stuttering. The game is a bitch to get properly working on modern machines, but once it's up and running, it's very smooth, shouldn't stutter at all.

>>3058859
Descent Maximum is a PlayStation version of Descent 2, with completely different levels. They're small and generally inferior to the PC version levels.

>>3061212
>they mentioned they're working on a compatibility patch to get D3 running smoothly on modern systems
About fucking time. While they're at it, they should just release the source code.

[Anonymous No.3061357]

>>3056887
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47LEgykMYF4
EXPERIENCE THE AWESOME SOUND

[Anonymous No.3061418]

>>3061346
maybe I'm a victim of the game just not running well. I tried it again a couple months ago, just to see if it was as bad a "game" as I remember. Firing up D1 or D2 nowadays, I feel home (although helpless, got no Sidewinder 3D Pro any longer), but D3? Really everything about it pissed me off, absolutely nothing feels "Descent" about it. Maybe the damn tutorial got me off on the wrong foot (seriously, devs, get rid of your fucking tutorials!), maybe the objectives in the first level felt needlessly railroading. I remember none of that level making sense in terms of a mental map, it was hell. I've played all the way through 1 and 2, never made it past the first level of 3, because it's just so repulsive to me.

[Anonymous No.3061424]

>>3061418
>(seriously, devs, get rid of your fucking tutorials!),

It only got worse since 1999.

[Anonymous No.3061434]

>>3061424
oh it did, it's why I largely avoid games of that era. However, D3 really takes the cake, with its controls-disabled sequence of treating you like a damn pre-schooler. It was so insulting, I will openly admit that damn tutorial put me in such a wrong mood, the game had to "make up" for it, and failed at that.

[Anonymous No.3061454]

>>3061357
A3D sounds better than EAX in this.

[Anonymous No.3061460]

>>3056887
From Las Angelas California...

Geese

[Anonymous No.3061461]

>>3061418
Ignore the handful of new weapons, the new bots, and different maps and Descent 2 is EXACTLY the same game as Descent 1. Descent 3 was a fresh start, something new from the very beginning, and I think for whatever reason some people got super butthurt about that.

If you never even made it past the first level, which takes less than an hour, I don't know if you're really qualified to call it a "bad" game. The railroading you mentioned is really only there to stop new players from being overwhelmed and a couple levels in everything becomes just as confusing and frenetic as the first 2 games.

Also, it's incredibly easy to COMPLETELY SKIP the tutorial. God forbid they try assumed somebody who wasn't already a hardcore Material Defender might try the game.

[Anonymous No.3061475]

>>3061461
>Ignore
Or how about I don't ignore all the subtle and carefully crafted improvements to the gameplay and visuals? Because, you know, that's how you do a solid sequel to a good game, by not ripping it apart and replacing every aspect of it with an interferior variant.

>The railroading you mentioned is really only there to stop new players from being overwhelmed
It's insulting, annoying and distracting, it's bad game design, very bad.

>God forbid they try assumed somebody who wasn't already a hardcore Material Defender might try the game.
I have no problem with new players playing a game, I have problems with tutorials. Ever noticed how the first level of Descent 1 was a tutorial? Everything's level, simple navigation that gradually gets more complex, until the exit after the reactor is in an "unusual" location. You get space to navigate, robots are placed in such a way as to produce few but controlled situations of excitement. THAT is how you introduce someone to a game. Assume they know what button does what, and then just put them in situations where they can work the controls, and especially, where they can fail the controls and it's not fatal. The way D3 did it, the tutorial assumed the player is a drooling retard, instead of a rookie material defender, that at least knows what part in the cockpit is the yoke.
Tutorials are, without exception, a TERRIBLE way to introduce a game to someone. They're restrictive, awfully paced, destroy player discovery, and do absolutely nothing good.

That said, wipe that fucking sarcasm off your face. It was uncalled for and is not appreciated. If you're too fucking stuck in modern ways of baby-gaming, that you can not imagine how someone might get into a game without the dev laying out everything for them, that is your problem, and yours alone. How you manage to play /vr/ games you have not played so far, without the game just treating you like a retard is beyond me. You certainly must have forgotten along the way.

[Anonymous No.3061479]

>>3061424
Players got a lot dumber (and somewhat younger) since 1999, to be fair.

[Anonymous No.3061485]

>>3057941
Just saying it wasn't well received, and that was at the time it was released. I haven't even played the game. It's okay if you like it.

[Anonymous No.3061496]

>>3061461

>Ignore the handful of new weapons, the new bots, and different maps and Descent 2 is EXACTLY the same game as Descent 1

I just want to address this specific point. That doesn't actually mean anything against D2. That doesn't actually address the points he has made. The other points, you're fine. It's just this specific statement is actually useless.

Descent 2, and DOOM 2, and many other sequels never claim to try to revamp or reboot or create a fresh coat of paint in their franchise, and yet, people attribute this "quality" (which often times ends up missing the point of the original, like DOOM 3 or DmC) to one of the hallmarks of a "good" sequel. And yet DOOM 2 is widely considered to be fucking amazing, both amongst it's dedicated fanbase and without. It only adds to a winning formula. It doesn't detract from it. That's a great design philosophy.

It's easy to get caught up trying to reinvent the wheel, only to understand that the wheel is really doing fine and that your input is shit.

[Anonymous No.3061503]

>>3061475
>I don't like something, IT'S BAD GAME DESIGN!

>the tutorial assumed the player is a drooling retard, instead of a rookie material defender, that at least knows what part in the cockpit is the yoke.

The irony here is the way you get so hung up on a tutorial that's not mandatory and can be skipped in seconds. Who's the real drooling retard here?

A 6DOF game can be incredibly intimidating to the average shmuck. You also had people who bought D3 because they liked Freespace, who have never slid an inch in their life. You've got people who haven't played Descent in years, and want a refresher telling them what all the keys are. And you've got kids and morons too. They have needs too and I don't see why you're so offended by this.

[Anonymous No.3061508]

>>3061503
>Who's the real drooling retard here?
The developer, possibly you

>You also had people who bought D3 because they liked Freespace, who have never slid an inch in their life. You've got people who haven't played Descent in years
Did you know that when Descent 1 came out, people have not played a 6DOF game in years, and had no idea what the game would be like? These poor little people not only survived, but actually grew on Descent 1. Why deny the players of D3 the same thing?

>A 6DOF game can be incredibly intimidating to the average shmuck
So make the first level or two accordingly. That's how D1 and D2 worked, that's how practically every action game before explicit tutorials worked.

>and want a refresher telling them what all the keys are
The keys are all in the manual and the options screen. The tutorial contributes nothing to that.

>And you've got kids and morons too
Let them fail, retry, learn and get better, instead of denying them any such abilities.

>They have needs too and I don't see why you're so offended by this.
Then read again what I said about playr agency. It applies to them just as much.

[Anonymous No.3061520]

>>3061454
Yeah it does, you need to update the game to the latest patch for A3D support though.

[Anonymous No.3061637]

>>3061508
>So make the first level or two accordingly. That's how D1 and D2 worked, that's how practically every action game before explicit tutorials worked.

> maybe the objectives in the first level felt needlessly railroading.


Could you please make up your mind, Charlie Brown?

>Did you know that when Descent 1 came out, people have not played a 6DOF game in years, and had no idea what the game would be like? These poor little people not only survived, but actually grew on Descent 1. Why deny the players of D3 the same thing?

Probably had something to do with the massive demographic change of PC owners between 1994 and 1999. In '94 most people with PCs were technically competent (pretty much had to be) and could distinguish their ass from a hole in the ground. 5 years later, the internet was catching on, Windows was more common and user-friendly, and housewives, dudebros, kids, and other techno-illiterate plebians became a huge part of the market audience.

[Anonymous No.3061641]

>>3061496

I didn't mean it as a slight against D2 at all, I just think a considerable number of people were expecting improved but identical gameplay in the sense that D2 was iterative of D1. When D3 delivered something that was quite a bit different some of those people hung on those differences as reasons it was an inferior game.

[Anonymous No.3061645]

>>3061637
>Could you please make up your mind, Charlie Brown?
D1 has a simple objective. Rescue the hostages, destroy the reactor. The game gets completely out of your way from that point on.
D2 is a bit more annoying, with the guidebot moving you from objective to objective.
D3 is all out, constantly nagging you about what you got to do this time. The devs probably thought it's cool, having more diverse objectives. In reality it's just annoying, because these objectives need to be communicated, and it gets in the way.

>and housewives, dudebros, kids, and other techno-illiterate plebians became a huge part of the market audience.
And they're all retards? I'm quite confident they aren't. Treat your players with respect, or gtfo of the business. They'll either learn, and become capable players, or they'll play something else. Breaking your game for people outside of your audience just alienates your audience, it does not draw in new people.

>>3061641
>expecting improved but identical gameplay
Well, duh? Anon said it, don't reinvent the wheel if it works pretty damn well. D2 worked pretty damn well. They reinvented it, poorly.

[Anonymous No.3061725]

Descent 3 has a few things going for it:
>graphics, obv
>much more complex and varied environments, levels have totally different styles rather than just variations on mine shapes and wall textures
>more interesting objectives than simply blowing up the reactor and escaping each level

Unfortunately it's got a bunch of stupid shit too:
>sound design worse across the board
>aesthetic style worse too, much less grit and robots like they're designed for coolness rather than Descent 1/2's bulky industrial look
>robot AI feels like it's designed to be annoying with many small enemies that dodge like crazy, especially in open areas, but aren't very threatening
>infinite lives -- death means you drop your items and respawn at a checkpoint, but otherwise keep all your progress
The last two made combat feel like a dull time sink to me. I wasn't excited about dogfighting robots, I just wanted to clear the rooms of annoyances and get it over with. I ended up lowering the difficulty and rushing through the last half of the game just to say I finished it.

It absolutely deserves its reputation as a crappy sequel. I mean, yeah, I guess if you're starved for 6DoF action it's fine, and they're aren't many games like this so I wouldn't say it's really a BAD game, but it's really easy to see why fans thought the Descent feeling was lost.

[Anonymous No.3061896]

>>3061641

Oh, fair enough. I'd agree that it's probably one of the cases, that it polarized people who are expecting more of the same.

[Anonymous No.3062201]

what does /vr/ think of descent: underground

[Anonymous No.3062210]

>>3062201
You mean Descent to Undermountain? Never played it, RPGs were never my thing

[Anonymous No.3062217]

>>3061357
where's the music? disabled for the sake of sound demonstration?
other than that this looks good what the hell people

[Anonymous No.3062223]

>>3062210
there is a new descent game called that anon /app/360950

[Anonymous No.3062235]

>>3062210
I think Anon was making a reference to The Dig (1995), which is a pretty good adventure game. Not RPG, check it out.