Alex Hilhorst writes, "In the lead-up to this year’s E3 show, many publishers have released trailers for their upcoming games, to stir up buzz before the floor doors even open. Some, such as those for Batman: Arkham City and Assassin’s Creed: Revelations are heavy on gameplay and use in-game assets. Others, such as the stunning trailer for the Tomb Raider reboot are beautiful rendered cinematic trailers that make the FX in this summer’s crop of blockbusters look ancient in comparison. But in today’s market, where the graphics of many games, even those on consoles, rival the CGI seen in films and cutscenes aren’t generally pre-rendered, is there still a place for the cinematic trailers of old?"
You can understand some games getting canceled, but these awesome looking games still baffle us to this very day.
"Tommy saving the planet from an army of aliens after they abducted him and his entire bar, with the game ending on the promise that Tommy would be back, but that promise was never fulfilled"
The thing is with the original Prey 2 that Tommy wasn't even the main character, they replaced him with some generic looking space bounty hunter. It was a refreshing change to see an awesome Native American character with ancestral like powers fight aliens yet they ditched him. It was only after an outcry they showed much later in a new preview that Tommy was in the game as an NPC.
I'd have prefered a real sequel with Tommy as the main character, literally picking right up from the originals ending.
As for Eight Days...Sony really needs to pick this up
If Amy Hennig was still at ND, I'd have loved to see her tackle it after what she did with Uncharted.
I thought that was awesome too, and honestly i wish people werent so damn critical about cultural variety in games. I feel like people try to ruin devs lives if even one detail is off about their culture in a game and so everyone is too scared to try anymore
One of the lead engine programmers for Prey 2 at Human Head was my programming instructor when i was taking game design. This game was in limbo at the time and we asked once and only once about this game, the misery in his eyes when he told us "this is the 1st and only time ill ask you to never ask me about that game" was something ill never forget😅 he used a couple assets through the curriculum for teaching purposes but nothing very tangible. Just a function here, a 3d prop there. Such a shame. Years later i saw him at a magic tournament, we caught up and he still thinks about that game and how it's "practically done" probably sitting on a drive somewhere
Practically done? Jeez that fking blows because that looked much more interesting then what bethsada made. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed the one bethsada made.
Lmno looked interesting.
I'd knock titanfall and fez off the list. Add something else. Scarface 2 man only if would've been awesome. Prey 2 should be higher to. Either way not a bad list. Out of 20 there's only 2 I'd hate on.
That gen got a lot of games canned right before the finish line. Cipher Complex, Battlefront 3, legacy of kain dead sun just to name a few
One that's not on the list is Killing Day, I remember seeing the trailer in 2005 and being impressed at the time. Being Ubisoft you know it would have been a AAAA game too, lol
2 Days to Vegas and The Getaway 3 are two other games that seemed promising but never came out.
Crystal Dynamics' daring reboot of Tomb Raider brought Lara Croft back into the spotlight.
An attempt at a reboot with no momentum for continuance. Just a torture-porn trilogy about a poor rich girl with daddy issues reluctantly being pulling into a world of violence, versus say the adventures of a quipping Brit treasure hunter who solves ancient puzzles while gunning down rare and extinct animals that it originally was?
Honestly, don't have all that killing. If the devs had been truly clever, not focused on mangling a message about the senselessness of killing which was seemingly and quickly forgotten, they could have worked, if not bloodlessly then not directly by Laura's hand, dealing with enemies as part of the puzzle solving - they didn't have in the game in the first place...
"Revived a '90s Gaming Icon"
LOL
the only thing similar between the 2 is the name of the protagonist. if they would have given the game a different name, NONE would even think that it was somehow a resurrected Tomb Raider IP. the last game with the real Tomb Raider DNA was TR Underworld.
We might be in the age of remasters, but it doesn't look like the Dead Island 2 devs believe remaking the original game is the right move for the series.
but remakes require far less effort for these companies and they can still charge $70 for them!
Feel like everyone makes fun of Skyrim re-releasing like 18 times yet applaud these remasters elsewhere. Would much prefer NEW games
Making sequels really is the way to go. Otherwise we'll be stuck playing only the first entry, forever!!!
Like one wise DICE developer said....
"Advertise your game by showing your game".
If you make a game and the first thing you show is a CGi trailer then that's a sign that you have no confidence in your product so then why should I buy it?
We are at the point in Game Tech where most Game engines look almost as good as CGI anyway. Besides I'm spending money on the game not your CGI skills.
That goes for cut scenes too. Only CGI that is OK is maybe the intro story and the ending other than that save the CGI for Hollywood.
Yes
The Cinematic trailer has taken over for most demos these days. Developers rely on us believeing a game is good without playing it ourselves , then cry that the game gets pirated. Games werent pirated near as much when we got a demo for every game that was released , because everybody was able to sample the game before paying out for the game. We are expected to pay for a game and like it after watching a trailer , but what if the trailer showed all the best parts of the game and when we bought the game it was rubbish.
I say bring back the demo's and leave us decide if the game is good after playing it first. Even if its the game with a 30 minute or 1 hour trial period and after that you cant play it any more it would help us decide if the game is for us or not.
Also these developers rely on us to think the game is good with reviewers giving a good review (Some developers will take down bad reviews) , but at the end of the day everybody is different and one reviewers taste of game might not be the same as yours. I've played a few games that got a bad review only for it to be a good game in my opinion.
If you have faith in your game release a demo (BEFORE THE GAME RELEASES)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is no excuse not to other than laziness or fear that people will know it sucks before you trick them out of their money.