StarDestroyer.Net BBS

So, received this game on Thursday and I have been playing it and I have to say that it is a superior title. The story is good, the controls are smooth, and it's fun. Also, this is actually a scary game. I'm not talking about the jump scares of dogs crashing through the windows, but an actual sense of creeping dread and fear.

Finally as a resident of the Pacific Northwest, it really does please me to see how Remedy went the extra mile to make it look realistic. My home has never looked prettier.

Although the Dark Presence wouldn't stand a chance against my state's greatest hero.

Anyone else have this game and their own opinion?

Only that the company should have been more straight-forward when they suddenly decided that they won't make a PC port so close to release.

Scary? Alan Wake? The only scary thing in the entire game is right near the end when they nearly drop a truck on you; and it probably isn't intentional.

The plot is hackneyed nonsense (and at the end doesn't even appear to make sense), they blow nearly the entire mystique and unknown of the game in the first clumsy tutorial level where God Himself shows up, gives you a light and a gun, and literally describes the core game mechanic to you baldly. It's horribly linear and the combat is simplistic. The game CONSTANTLY takes all your gear away (at least seven times by my count), so pickups are far too common and you basically can't run out of anything.

The protaganist is mindblowingly retarded, his guardian angel is a Big Daddy, his voiceactor appears to be asleep, and unlike Silent Hill and other genre games the use of industrial/service industry locations and enemies is quite jarring. 'Tiny town' = 'abandoned' power plant that still works despite having no feed water and is home to a crazy woman with unlimited resources, abandoned coal mine, abandoned silver mine, collapsing mill, three lumber yards, scrap yards, three spooky ruins, at least TWO 'scary mountain peaks', a nature reserve at least 200m long, and HUNDREDS of guys to be 'taken' and effortlessly killed with no consequence. Almost every bridge and ladder is a deathtrap. He feels that with his world/wife in danger, the best thing to do is get drunk and arrested; none of the characters are explored and seem to have no motives at all. The policewoman in Silent Hill (who gets about four near-meaningless lines) is a greater presence.

However, the levels are pretty (if illogical) and effort is made to link the levels spatially as you can see other locations in the distance and get a sense of actual presence. Sadly the scale of the town just doesn't match up to the plot (ie hundreds of people going missing and nobody noticing) and the transition to 'darkness' isn't striking. It's also based on the core idea that in order for you to serve their evil plot, they will try their damnedest to kill you (until right at the end where they decide to stop trying to kill you and go all out to kill you instead).

It is fun to play, but it's not an interesting game. Amusingly the manuscript around which the action rotates is absolutely awful. It's a shame the themes were so mishandled; the actual plot is quite interesting, but the execution in the game systematically blows every bit of uncertainty with too many obvious cliches. The finale in particular is daft, and several of the events that force Wake down his plot would require him to be the stupidest man alive.

However, it's more fun than Red Dead Redemption, even if you can finish it overnight. They appear to have stolen a musical cue from Condemned too, which added to the atmosphere by reminding me of a greatly superior game.

PS? PC gaming is dead.

PS? PC gaming is dead.

Perhaps, but is it too much to ask the developers to come out and say it? I mean, look at this:

Some games are more suited for the intimacy of the PC, and others are best played from the couch in front of a larger TV screen. We ultimately realised that the most compelling way to experience "Alan Wake" was on the Xbox 360 platform, so we focused on making it an Xbox 360 exclusive. Both Microsoft and Remedy have long histories in PC game development. This decision was about matching this specific game to the right platform."

From here because the source website doesn't come on my currently problematic internet connection.

If they don't want to make a port because of the costs or because they think its not worth it, come out and say it. Don't feed us bullshit about how its better enjoyed in a noisy living room, in front of a large-screen TV that not everyone has.

I thought the game was really good, despite some parts of the plot being a bit hokey.

Stark wrote:PS? PC gaming is dead.

Yep. WOW servers got shut down last night. Cataclysm has been moved to PS3 release.

Alyeska wrote:WOW servers got shut down last night.

If that was all they had left, its was worse than dead anyway.

Ryan Thunder wrote:If that was all they had left, its was worse than dead anyway.

PC Gaming isn't dead. Even Stark knows this. Its certainly changed. Its slumped. Dedicated PC Games are not nearly so numerous as they once were. But as a whole PC gaming isn't dead.

The future of PC Gaming has changed though. There will be a handful of dedicated PC releases. Some will be big titles. The Sims, WOW, or something from Relic. Others will be smaller indy titles, some of those being cross platform. Then there will be the multiplatform games. A majority of these are going to be console designed games that are ported to the PC. The quality of the port being anywhere from shit (Force Unleashed) to reasonably good (Gears of War, excluding the Games for Windows shit). A minority of the multiplatform games will be partially redesigned for PC release.

The era of dedicated PC titles is largely gone. Even some of the most famous PC titles eventually got console release. Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Counter Strike, Doom, Command & Conquer, Wing Commander. But PC Gaming as a whole will not die. There exists a large user base. Plenty of profits to make from it. The worst case scenario is that AAA titles will largely disappear from the PC and get replaced by casual gaming releases. And that is still not death, though for a PC gamer like myself it would feel like it. Change happens.

The topic has nothing to do with the would-be death of PC gaming. The only thing I am asking, is for the developers to have some balls and say it that the game they say that will be made for PC since its development, is cancelled a few months before release (the no-windows release was announced in Feb 2010, the game was released in April 2010) because they wanted to go console-exclusive.

If they don't want to port, fine. Its their decision, their potential loss. But don't give us such bullshit excuses about "compelling"!

There is no survival-horror game out there, just action games with a strong horror theme. I had a fucking adventure game make me feel more scared of an empty hallway than the AAA title's biggest fucking monster.

Well I got the Limited Collectors edition, for the same price as the regular edition, and while the game is very well done, I must admit to being a tiny bit disappointed. First off, the environment as mention is lovely, graphically its very good and the voice acting is well done. Wake does drone a bit at times though.

I finished it on Normal difficulty last night and the ending is ambigious, obviously to make space for expansions and a possible sequel. There are a ton of unanswered questions which look like they wont be answered due to certain events in the game. The game is very linear however and that is its main fault. Alan Wake had originally been designed as more of a sandbox game but this has been dropped. Was it worth the wait? Hard to say..

Of note, the ending is broken into parts. Basically you have to beat the game on Nightmare in order to see the true ending.

Jade Falcon wrote: Alan Wake had originally been designed as more of a sandbox game but this has been dropped.

The sandbox aspect was dropped pretty early in development. Remedy had talked about that recently in an interview, about how a sandbox world was not conducive to properly staging a thriller, as it would be too easy for the player to do something to ruin the mood that was trying to be set "such as showing up in a monster truck at a scene that was supposed to be quiet".

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I thought the game was really good, despite some parts of the plot being a bit hokey.

It's -fun-, but it's a complete waste of the premise and failure at being a thriller or scary. The game would be improved by removing the first tutorial level (which feel quite tacked on) as it blows the gimmick and has some of Wakes worst acting.

It's just lame that they don't use the premise (ie you're not the 'real' Wake) and they appear to think flashing pictures of your wife onscreen is 'scary'. It kinda is since she's so ugly, but it doesn't work at all. The writers needed to keep the game designers under control.

GR, while the game was easy on hard, I have little interest in playing a game full of so many unskippable walking sections to get the 'real' ending. Do any of the characters get any more development in the 'real' ending?

Stark wrote:GR, while the game was easy on hard, I have little interest in playing a game full of so many unskippable walking sections to get the 'real' ending. Do any of the characters get any more development in the 'real' ending?

LOL, oh no...I was just posting it for people who think DLC will *reveal* a true ending. I played it a little bit and went "I liked Silent Hill better...even the crappy Wii remake." and let my friend have the controller.

Alyeska wrote:

Ryan Thunder wrote:If that was all they had left, its was worse than dead anyway.

PC Gaming isn't dead. Even Stark knows this. Its certainly changed. Its slumped. Dedicated PC Games are not nearly so numerous as they once were. But as a whole PC gaming isn't dead.

The future of PC Gaming has changed though. There will be a handful of dedicated PC releases. Some will be big titles. The Sims, WOW, or something from Relic. Others will be smaller indy titles, some of those being cross platform. Then there will be the multiplatform games. A majority of these are going to be console designed games that are ported to the PC. The quality of the port being anywhere from shit (Force Unleashed) to reasonably good (Gears of War, excluding the Games for Windows shit). A minority of the multiplatform games will be partially redesigned for PC release.

The era of dedicated PC titles is largely gone. Even some of the most famous PC titles eventually got console release. Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Counter Strike, Doom, Command & Conquer, Wing Commander. But PC Gaming as a whole will not die. There exists a large user base. Plenty of profits to make from it. The worst case scenario is that AAA titles will largely disappear from the PC and get replaced by casual gaming releases. And that is still not death, though for a PC gamer like myself it would feel like it. Change happens.

So PC gaming isn't dead because we changed the definition of death.

GR, I just dropped Silent Hill in my emulator and the opening (while ugly) is far more effective than Mr Wake. It doesn't give anything away, sets the mood, and starts the plot. If I still had a PSX memory card I'd drop it in my dusty PS2 and play it.

Why do all the other Silent Hill games suck so bad?

Stark wrote: Why do all the other Silent Hill games suck so bad?

They do? I thought I heard good things about Silent Hill 2.

Its far too centred on a personal relationship the writing gives no reason to be interested in. It 'works', but it's very predicatable and lacks the overall sense of oppression SH managed to conjure up. SH2 isn't complete rubbish like SH3 though.

JointStrikeFighter wrote:So PC gaming isn't dead because we changed the definition of death.

What sort of useless nonsense is that? PC Gaming is playing games on the PC. As long as there are continued releases of games on the PC, PC Gaming can't be dead. What we used to know and think of as PC Gaming might not exist in the future, but that doesn't mean PC Gaming is dead. Its just changed.

Stark wrote:GR, I just dropped Silent Hill in my emulator and the opening (while ugly) is far more effective than Mr Wake. It doesn't give anything away, sets the mood, and starts the plot. If I still had a PSX memory card I'd drop it in my dusty PS2 and play it.

Why do all the other Silent Hill games suck so bad?

I know...it's why I just didn't play Alan Wake. What I think is funny is while SH2 is praised as such, it like you said has too much centered around him. There's a certain anxious morbidity to finding out his grand secret but the feeling is more on "So what did this doof do?". At least with Silent Hill 1, you get entrenched with the town's atmosphere and the weird lore...something I really really hated of the remake.

If you ever get even the slightest what the fuck is he talking of remake...don't. It tries to some half assed psychoanalysis that is nothing more then choosing between chaste, sex!!!!, and dumb. The game then tailors some half assed game/ending from there. The oppression was kind of there, but lacked any fucking danger. You only died because you fell asleep on your controller.

As for the others, I will not comment beyond I really wondered what the fuck did they fucking want to do honestly.

Yeah I looked up the Wii remake and saw the 'no combat' and 'use phone to explore VIRTUAL WORLZ' and stopped looking.

It's REALLY funny going from playing SH (even smoothed and filtered on an emulator) to playing RDR, though. I think RDR has more polys in a gun than Silent Hill has in the entire game.

Stark wrote:Yeah I looked up the Wii remake and saw the 'no combat' and 'use phone to explore VIRTUAL WORLZ' and stopped looking.

I watched youtube...still wanted my time back.

It's REALLY funny going from playing SH (even smoothed and filtered on an emulator) to playing RDR, though. I think RDR has more polys in a gun than Silent Hill has in the entire game.

LMAO, yes. looking back at any old PS1 game and just minor transitions are funny with things like FFVII and MGS. But going from SH to RDR is awesome in looking at the sky and wondering if that cloud is likely a disc or five on the PS1.

What's funny is imaging my SH disk gives a 600 meg iso; I'm pretty sure 400mb+ is the cutscenes compress with MPEG-2.

It's interesting also that Silent Hill is 'open' in that you can walk around, while being 100% linear just like Alan Wake. The mood is built up by having you run around familiar (if you squint and use imagination) domestic and suburban scenes filled with unknown wierdness, rather than HERE IS ANOTHER LOGGING CAMP KILL THESE DOZEN BADGUYS stuff. The gunplay is horrible, though.

I second Zixinus, the thing that really bothers me about the whole migration to consoles made by many publishers is how it is blamed on Piracy or, as with this game, on the console being somehow the ideal platform for the game. They won't outright say that it is way more cost-effective to develop exclusively for consoles. Heck, some even announce the game as coming out for the PC, and then take it back after the console release.

The question is, do they do it to avoid negative backlash from PC users? Or do they need to convince their shareholders or something? Or maybe they don't want to piss off nVidia, or the many manufacturers of overpriced gaming peripherials.

They may simply not care. This is a genre that is not well-served on PC anyway: RE and SH etc have never been big on PC.