StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Yeah, you read right, a different Space Hulk.. an FPS this time.
http://www.pcgamesn.com/space-hulk-deat ... al-4-thing

Seems that now that GW isn't tied to one publisher, they're just throwing the license all over the place.. I don't think this is a really good idea, as it could ruin the rep that THQ/Relic spent years building for their 40k vidja games.

We'll have to wait and see, though!

Either my poor topic title is making everyone think I'm referring to the current turn-based game, or everyone really doesn't care if there's a Space Hulk FPS being made


If a mod happens to chance across this thread, can I have help to retitle it "40k Space Hulk First-Person Shooter in development"?

I'm not sure how they're going to make this terribly interesting. Tactically theres things that make the board game fun, but as an individual surely it isn't that thrilling, given that the premise is you're in a corridor literally too small to fit anything else into, how can you miss? Are the only decisions you make turn left vs turn right?

It could work as a survival horror/shooter sort of thing. Anything you see you kill, the hard part is knowing enough about the horrible gribblies all around you to actually get a line of sight to them/move your massive 500kg bulk smar or fast enough to engage them. As a result it will be a horrible clusterfuck because shooters these days apparently all have to be lightning fast twitch shooter CoD clones.

Considering the board game sucks balls, riding on it's back doesn't really endear the concept to me. Game play wise, it's a FPS so chances are nothing groundbreaking will be invented here. This leaves basically the story to make this interesting and I'm not holding my breath in this case either.
Space hulks could offer a lot more in terms of story and action than just shooting nids. It's too early to tell, but my gut reaction says this will be bland at best and just rehashes same stuff all the other hulk games have, only in FPS format.

-Gunhead

The board game sucks balls?

I was under the impression that the board game was received quite favourably, due to the rapid speed of the game and its simplified rules. The pace and tension resulting from that gave a very game experience compared to other tabletop, although I will guess that with the plethora of new games out since, its now just one of many such games.

The 90s FPS was also extremely fun, although horribly dated. Corridor shooters was a remnant of the 90s Doom experience and the command mechanics used has been overhauled by Splinter Cell and etc.

I mentioned before that I love to have another Space Hulk FPS, but I honestly don't know how they could make it as fun as the 90s FPS games because technology and expectations have moved on.

The board game might have been hot shit, 20 years ago. Even back then you had better games than Space Hulk in my opinion. Advanced Space Crusade comes to mind. That game was wicked fun.
Sure, it was a lot more complicated, but also had different types of enemies to fight and the board wasn't limited to corridors and a few tiny rooms. You could even play it with the Imperial Guard for that Aliens feel, which was fun.
Compared to that, Space Hulk played like a puzzle game with a luck factor. If you want the superior Space Hulk experience on the table top, save your money and buy the Space Hulk Death Angel card game. It's players vs. game mechanics game and you can play it single player too, though it's more fun in a group.

I tried the first Space Hulk game back in the day and as it is pretty much the board game made for PC, never liked it. I never tried the Vengeance of Blood Angels. Mostly because everyone said it's just like the first one except better. But you can see why I'm highly dubious about any possible FPS game. So far it's been "hey let's remake the board game" and so far doesn't look like it's going to change. Now I might be wrong, I actually hope I am. But I know game developers are spineless so they'll take the easy route and make a game the fanboys swoon over, even if it's horribly limited in both in scope and in terms of game mechanics and has been done before.

-Gunhead

Gunhead wrote: I tried the first Space Hulk game back in the day and as it is pretty much the board game made for PC, never liked it. I never tried the Vengeance of Blood Angels.e. Now I might be wrong, I actually hope I am. But I know game developers are spineless so they'll take the easy route and make a game the fanboys swoon over, even if it's horribly limited in both in scope and in terms of game mechanics and has been done before.

-Gunhead

Are we talking about similar games? Space Hulk only similarity with the board game was transiting through narrow corridors and Genestealers. Everything else was different and it had for what was its era, a high difficulty setting and game tension. Blood Angels perfected it further with better graphics, a more ominous soundtrack and voice acting, especially for the PS variant.

There was real tension that was lacking in AVP, another contender in the same genre. For example, a mission where one had to turn off the gas valves, resulting in a slow crawl through gasfilled vaults watching the gasonometer, knowing that as it creeps red, a single bolter shot will incinerate you. Then the tension as your scope picks up genestealer incoming. Or when you first took on an entire squad command, hearing the voices of your terminators killed as you scramble about. The game allowed time pause while on command mode, but it was also possible to play using entirely commands(leaving aside your main terminator, a change from Space Hulk). Campaign consistency for an FPS also made the game much harder, as dead terminators don't cross over.


However, as mentioned, these mechanics are dated and has been replicated and improved upon in other FPS, from Splinter Cells to etc. The only advantage of repeating them for Space Hulk would be the atmosphere/voice acting, or in other words, fanboyism. That or dakkadakkadakka.

Different how? The board game was about narrow corridors and genestealers. The (1st) PC version was about the same with clunky controls and real time aspects. They even had you stuck to a square grid. The only real difference was you could shoot in real time, which you can't really do on a board game. The other "big" change is that you don't have action points and you can put people in overwatch on the fly, but this is just another thing you can do when you have a real time game. Everything else is the same. Long corridors = stealers die Close combat = your terminator is fucked.

AVP was lacking in everything else too. Tried it, hated it, dumped it. I don't remember much about the missions, but I do remember they had the same puzzle feel of the board game, which is another thing I hated about the PC game. When the "tactical" aspect of a game turns it into a tower defense game, I'm hard pressed to find tension in it.
Come to think of it, if they had made a remake based on the 1st and 2nd games but dumped the FPS aspect and kept it as a plan and go game with better missions and maps, that might have been the bomb. Because the 1st and 2nd games did do one thing well and that was take a turn based game and make it real time.

I think the FPS aspect felt tacked on. Which is another reason I doubt this new FPS game is going to be any good. Only thing it did was give you a view of your face being eaten by a stealer, which might be nice as an effect but when the stealers are forced to come at you in a grid where you can't really miss them, the whole "3d" shooty aspect becomes kinda moot.
Today we could do bigger and better maps for FPS purposes but if you take away the squad aspect, you're stuck with a basic tunnel shooter with a boring enemy. If you implement some kind of squad mechanism, the chanced are you get stuck with a mediocre FPS with crappy squad mates. The enemy will still be boring though..

-Gunhead

Gunhead wrote:Different how? The board game was about narrow corridors and genestealers. The (1st) PC version was about the same with clunky controls and real time aspects. They even had you stuck to a square grid. The only real difference was you could shoot in real time, which you can't really do on a board game. The other "big" change is that you don't have action points and you can put people in overwatch on the fly, but this is just another thing you can do when you have a real time game. Everything else is the same. Long corridors = stealers die Close combat = your terminator is fucked.

The PC game was about you managing a squad and having to handle the intricacies of tactics, the relative realtime as opposed to turn based scenario(despite the pause time for squad actions) made it different from other FPS such as Doom.

The FPS aspect wasn't present because you couldn't change weapons on the fly so I will admit that.

I think the FPS aspect felt tacked on. Which is another reason I doubt this new FPS game is going to be any good.

I think you need to pick up the PS version of Space Hulk and the Blood Angels variant. A board game had dice rolls but the Blood Angels variant meant you could time close combat attacks, especially with the PS version. Its almost impossible to defend against certain stealer attacks but it was quite fun, There was also a certain...... tension from defending against a stealer HTH.

I'm not sure what you mean by space grid, unless you're referring to the tunnels channeling movement.

Its.. quite interesting that we had a different game experience. Granted, I'm basing my nostalgia off the Blood Angels variant rather than the Space Wolf variant as that was even more dated even back in 1998 when I first played. The basic genestealers did become boring but the mission design balanced that out, again, gas valve mission.
In later missions, you get Chaos with marines pumping bolters of doom at you.Oh, and the concept of friendly fire. This even as the mission ups the tension level, with trap designs and the like as you search the hulk.

I never did complete the game as it got too fiendishly difficult although my brother eventually found cheat codes and finished the game.......

Gotta say I don't think SH lends itself to FPS very well at all. Terminators are- especially in SH- not even remotely close to agile. They're clunky as and can't even turn quickly on the spot (there are real problems with the original idea of Terminator armour as it's presented in SH and what it has evolved into but that's another topic) and if you preserve this, well it's just shooting down a corridor.

If you're going to make an FPS set in the 40K universe surely there are better ways to got than SH? Leave SH to the SH game and tap into that wonderful repository of fluff that is 40K. Go a Battlefield clone with vehicles, small fliers and maybe some titans as Commander assets that can appear in the distance to deliver rare, devastating attacks. 40k has been screaming for a big FPS for years and it's probably the biggest missed video game opportunity after a portable version of Warhammer Quest.

Could even do a computer RPG following an inquisitors adventures or a guard one. Not like there aren't plenty of novels that could be turned into games.

Kojiro wrote: If you're going to make an FPS set in the 40K universe surely there are better ways to got than SH? Leave SH to the SH game and tap into that wonderful repository of fluff that is 40K. Go a Battlefield clone with vehicles, small fliers and maybe some titans as Commander assets that can appear in the distance to deliver rare, devastating attacks. 40k has been screaming for a big FPS for years and it's probably the biggest missed video game opportunity after a portable version of Warhammer Quest.

Fire warrior?
I never played it but I heard that while it was good fanboyism, the game was forgettable and meh.

InsaneTD wrote:Could even do a computer RPG following an inquisitors adventures or a guard one. Not like there aren't plenty of novels that could be turned into games.

No Space Marines for Games Workshop to sell:D

PainRack wrote: Fire warrior?

Fire Warrior was as bland as the Tau concept were back then.

GW should just beg EA to let the reskin Battlefield 3 since EA is about done with it.

The SH boardgame was very impressive in terms of components but very archaic in terms of actual rules and gameplay. Narrow corridors, few real tactical options, and a excessive dice-rolling all make it an early American-style boardgame that never really grew up.

They have also never done anything decent with marines in electronic mediums since DoW. And most stories have a marine in there somewhere. Plus genetically engineered super soldiers are getting cliche anyway. Time to look at armies for games.

The trailer, it does not impress.

I'm only familiar with the Space Hulk FPS game that came out on the 3DO system. hardest f!n game ever.

I suppose in our SD.net thread on the subject, it would be apt to add a link to the game's official site, for the record:
http://spacehulk-deathwing.com/

aussiemuscle308 wrote:I'm only familiar with the Space Hulk FPS game that came out on the 3DO system. hardest f!n game ever.

Indeed, the old Space Hulk games were very good for their time.


As an aside, I actually purchased the current Space Hulk game on Steam and completed it, in the time between my last post on this thread and now.
Well, I suppose it's a faithful rendition of the board game, which is its only selling point.. and, therefore, also its shortfall.

I certainly hope this new FPS is of sufficient quality that it can attract interest outside of already-established WH40k fans.
The last games (and possibly only) games to have done that were from Relic. Not only did their games grab people who didn't know about 40k, they "converted" people into becoming 40k fans. Thus, if Games Workshop isn't trying to work an arrangement that will put Relic back on popping out a few more good WH40k games, then I would have to conclude that GW is really ignorant or unintelligent.

A faithful recreation of the boardgame on iPad would have been really good if it had included a scenario builder and asynchronous multiplayer.

So..... Here's the question. Let say YOU have the reigns over a Space Hulk game. How would you design it?

A FPS? A tactical game? If tactical, would be more squad based, or you would go entirely in lieu with the boardgame?


For me, I'm thinking of maybe an RPG mentality, where you develop a 'party' of Space Marine Terminators to cleanse out a Space Hulk. I'm not sure how to develop quests that will flesh out into a full campaign, but a storyline along "DeathWing deploys to assist an Imperial/Adeptus exploration mission on an abandoned Space Hulk, finds signs of fallen and conflict between Space Marines, Mechanicus and IG erupt" might be interesting.

Depends on the platform.

On iPad I'd do the boardgame with a good async multiplayer and a scenario builder.

On the PC/console I'd probably do a squad based FPS (FPS I think would be better to convey the cramped environment the space hulks are supposed to represent).

I'm with Vendetta- all I want is a decent digital version of the game I can play with/against friends and a level editor. Anything more immersive than that would break my SoD which is already tested by the game.

That said if they did a Kill Team style game I'd probably like that too. Either make it abstract and tactical or make it silly and guns blazing. Anything inbetween I'd have doubts about.

I agree with Vendetta, especially on the PC part.
FPS with silly over-the-top action and enemy body counts, with CRPG-style "skill trees" to sink points into after gaining experience points.

Generally, though, I think basing a computer game on Space Hulk is an inherently flawed idea, regardless of whether it's turn-based or real-time action.
There is a lack of variety and enemy types in Space Hulk because it is a board game, that is limited by the terrain tiles and game pieces.. simply because it is a board game.
Computer games are not bound by these limitations, and thus after years of gaming (decades, for some of us) we have come to expect more from them.

Thus, when you make a computer game faithfully based on (and therefore limited by) a board game's design, the seeming dearth of variety in content starts looking like a major shortfall to many people.. even though those same people don't find fault with the board game for, say, only having narrow corridors, or only having Genestealer foes.