StarDestroyer.Net BBS

FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!

Link

Australia, October 17, 2007 - Another one bites the dust - this time, the bloodthirsty Soldier of Fortune: Pay Back, part of Activision's early 2008 line up, has been refused classification by the OFLC. This comes off the back of an initial delay for the game to separate it from the impending release of Call of Duty 4 in Australia. We contacted Activision on the classification refusal. They refused to comment on the classification itself, but reiterated that the initial delay had nothing to do with the OFLC's refusal.

Piracy, here I come.

God damn it, we need a fucking 18+ classification for games, here in Australia. It's god damn retarded...

Will people's heads now blow off

Double Helix doesn't count any more?

MKSheppard wrote:Will people's heads now blow off

You mean flying of their owner's body more or less intact rather than simply being splattered into a gooey crimson cloud? Everything I've seen and heard suggests that SoF:PB will continue it's predecessors' fine traditions of insanely over-the-top gore (this time supposedly taking it to a new level in detail, damage modelling, and dismemberment physics), while probably having pretty generic FPS gameplay. I'll probably buy it anyway, after the price has come down a little.

Gameplay video

As per the title, it should say SoF3 not 2. I am just all excited that it is coming out in less than a month.

One question, are there any games that follow the same over the top gore FPS? I don't mean the pansy ass gore like in the GTA series but like this:


That was done courtesy of a shotgun blast to the face.

Not quite as frequently, but every time you use the precise shot power on Stranglehold you're treated to a location specific death animation like having jaws blown off and such.

Vympel, the SoF games have always sucked. Like you'd pay $100 for the dubious pleasure of bog-standard FPS anyway.

Vendetta wrote:Not quite as frequently, but every time you use the precise shot power on Stranglehold you're treated to a location specific death animation like having jaws blown off and such.

That sucks. Why is it that the uniqueness in the games like the SoF series (for their body specific gore) and Red Faction series (total ...well almost destructible envronment) don't seem to be used in other games?

Probably because in SoF's case it doesn't help the game not suck and in Red Faction's case it was a gimmick that had to be heavily controlled to keep the player going in the right direction.

Stark wrote:Probably because in SoF's case it doesn't help the game not suck and in Red Faction's case it was a gimmick that had to be heavily controlled to keep the player going in the right direction.

I'm not asking to make a SoF clone but a good FPS that incorporates the body shot gore that SoF is famous for. Plus any game that uses the "total" destructible environment would be a whole of a lot more fun.

It's kind of funny to watch games like SoF market themselves on a single cool feature but having nothing special other than that specific feature. Which is only made worse by how controlled/limited/balanced/other shit that dumbs down said feature is. Am I paying for a new video game or a partial engine upgrade?

Enigma wrote:I'm not asking to make a SoF clone but a good FPS that incorporates the body shot gore that SoF is famous for.

I guess the dickless gore fanatic market isn't big enough to justify it? Easier to pull in the tards with pretentious storylines like Halo!

Enigma wrote:Plus any game that uses the "total" destructible environment would be a whole of a lot more fun.

And very difficult to control the player. Did you ignore my post? Shooters are corridor strollers: you basically go in a straight line. There will always be limits and you'll always be pushed in the right direction (games like Halo take this to an insane degree). In Red Faction, the prevalance of non-destroyable stuff was crazy, and later in the game it became a gimmick that was useful SOMETIMES in the standard 'weak part of wall' way. Something that lets the player go anywhere or get lost or fuck themselves up isn't a great feature for these games.

Ma Deuce wrote:I'll probably buy it anyway, after the price has come down a little

So will I; I bought SoF 1 and 2 for cheap, and they were fun enjoyable romps through gore.

So Manhunt 2 is probably a no go for our brothers down under too, eh?

Vympel wrote: Piracy, here I come.

Can you not simply buy the game elsewhere online, outside of the country? Does this lack of a classification mean it cannot be sold in or shipped to Australia at all?

MKSheppard wrote:So will I; I bought SoF 1 and 2 for cheap, and they were fun enjoyable romps through gore.

I actually got my copy of SoF 1 essentially for free, as it came with the graphics card of my previous rig (yes, it was the full version, not a demo). For SoF 2, I found a $25 used copy at EB.

Enigma wrote:Plus any game that uses the "total" destructible environment would be a whole of a lot more fun.

It would be nice, especially with a genuine physics engine to help push the experience along. The problem with RF was that the implementation was absolutely terrible from both gameplay and technical aspects. The game actually filled the placed you were blowing up with what my friends coined 'Negative Space.' It took up memory, over-wrote but didn't delete the old data, and basically, the game would crash if there wasn't a hard coded limit to how much shit you could actually blow up in any specific level because of the over abundance of data that's rendering over itself.

So, I mean.. If someone did in a way that didn't add data when you're supposed to be removing it, I could see it working a lot better.

Stark wrote:Probably because in SoF's case it doesn't help the game not suck and in Red Faction's case it was a gimmick that had to be heavily controlled to keep the player going in the right direction.

Sorry, but no game where you can disembowel someone with a shotgun can be said to "suck".

Flagg and me agree!

I'm sad that they toned the violence down with SoF2 Double Helix; I wanted more over the top stuff like in SOF1.

Flagg wrote: Sorry, but no game where you can disembowel someone with a shotgun can be said to "suck".

You're everything that's wrong with the world. I hear some juvenile stupidity totally makes up for the laughable level design, uninspired game, absurd bossfights and all that, right? BECAUSE IT HAS GORE LOLOLOL.

Stark wrote:

Flagg wrote: Sorry, but no game where you can disembowel someone with a shotgun can be said to "suck".

You're everything that's wrong with the world. I hear some juvenile stupidity totally makes up for the laughable level design, uninspired game, absurd bossfights and all that, right? BECAUSE IT HAS GORE LOLOLOL.

Yes, goddamnit. You can disembowel someone with a shotgun. What part of that isn't awesome? I shot a dude in the head with a Desert Eagle and his brain fell out. It fell out!
I actually saw a dudes eyeball rolling around on the floor after a headshot once.
I don't care if the levels had the same care put into them as the warddrobe of a $2 whore, any game where you can disembowel a motherfucker with a shotgun doesn't suck.

Stark wrote:

Enigma wrote:Plus any game that uses the "total" destructible environment would be a whole of a lot more fun.

And very difficult to control the player. Did you ignore my post? Shooters are corridor strollers: you basically go in a straight line. There will always be limits and you'll always be pushed in the right direction (games like Halo take this to an insane degree). In Red Faction, the prevalance of non-destroyable stuff was crazy, and later in the game it became a gimmick that was useful SOMETIMES in the standard 'weak part of wall' way. Something that lets the player go anywhere or get lost or fuck themselves up isn't a great feature for these games.

Actually, they're taking a new crack at the 'destructible terrain' idea in action shooters; a thing from Lucasarts called "Fracture". Whether it's a gimmick or not, at least the devs are trying something new.

Battlefield: Bad Company has that feature as well. I suppose that destructible environments have to be a bit more limited in objective-based shooters, but there's no reason why they can't be done well in deathmatch games. In fact, it'd have the potential to end games where everyone just hides behind a wall and snipes at the opposition - just blow their hiding spot the fuck away!

MKSheppard wrote:Flagg and me agree!

I'm sad that they toned the violence down with SoF2 Double Helix; I wanted more over the top stuff like in SOF1.

Toned down? I found that in fact it had more gore than the original. There were more areas on the body that you can hit that would result in a gory explosion. Are you sure you don't have the european version?