Luk3us 63 Posted December 17, 2008 So what games are you guys hanging out for next year? At the moment the only game I care about is Call Of Duty 4 2. Aside from that, seems kinda bare at the moment. Share this post Link to post
Saracen 16 Posted December 17, 2008 Just a few that I know of: Demigod Starcraft 2 (or is it still premature) Dawn of War 2 Supreme Commander 2 (unlikely until 2010, but we'll see) I personally don't think we'll see a C&C in 2009. If we do then I'd argue that it's been thrust out the door too quickly. There are a couple of more titles, but I'm too ill to remember them Share this post Link to post
Luk3us 63 Posted December 17, 2008 lol, you are rather optimistic thinking SC2 will be released next year. I still say 2012! I've heard a lot about Demigod, so it'll be on my watch list I guess. Share this post Link to post
Sonic 294 Posted December 17, 2008 F.E.A.R 2 - Project Origin. That's about all for now. Share this post Link to post
Nmenth 290 Posted December 17, 2008 Far as I know Blizzard still doesn't know when Diablo III will be out. If 2009, it will be on my list. Share this post Link to post
hagren 0 Posted December 18, 2008 Only SC2, only for the Blizz-bonus. DoW2 looks like a snorefest. Share this post Link to post
Doctor Destiny 41 Posted December 19, 2008 I'm awaiting Modern Warfare 2 and Wings of Liberty. Share this post Link to post
comander starlin 6 Posted December 19, 2008 kingdom hearts - birth by sleep for the psp Share this post Link to post
Mina Synd 0 Posted December 20, 2008 ... what do you know >.< dawn of war 2 is gonna be awesome (now watch it fail badly XD) but yah. from what i've heard and seen, it has tyranids and more of (if not all) the previous species, as well as a unique mission system. i personally can't wait. 'guard vs 'nids in an easy to use RTS enviroment... i've been DYING to do it. the tyranid mod for DoW/WA/DC was good, but they are just too slow making things. by the time they finish the mod the actual game will be out xD i'm also waiting for halo wars, the other halo game where you play a normal marine (i'm not a big fan of halo but that's because i LIKE playing a weak, vulnerable character which requires much more skill as opposed to a super soldier with advanced tech...) aaaaand i'm waiting for the Aliens: colonial marines game... there are a few other games i'm waiting for but none come to mind off the bat. i've already got a large percentage of the games i've been waiting for... i love how there was nothing really good for about half a decade then suddenly LOADS of good games come out in a row (admitedly there were a couple of good games in the past few years but not many... over the past couple of months there have been maybe 6 - 20 KICKASS games out xD) i know there were rumours of an Aliens RPG, which would be playable online (don't know if it would be a full-on MMORPG - i heard it was more small scale like a 4 - 8 player co-op or something) but when i heard the rumours it sounded impressive. and i would kill for another Aliens RTS. the AvP: extinction for the consoles was GREAT but it was limited... you only had the campaigns - no skirmish, and they never (to my knowledge...) ported it to the pc, which was a great disappointment. apart from all the maps that could have been made i would have loved to see some mods for it, editting things like the max unit allowance and so on... but yah i basically just want an RTS where you have some kind of human soldiers against masses of aliens or zombies. the alien type is negotiable ('nids, Aliens or starship trooper bugs work too! :3) but c'mon admit it, a proper game with any of those in would ROCK. it's a big gap in the market, especially zombie ones. Share this post Link to post
comander starlin 6 Posted December 21, 2008 i forgot one, the new Wolfenstein game, omg it looks so dam cool, a must have next year Share this post Link to post
General Leang 0 Posted December 21, 2008 A different game to the ones already mentioned, I want to see what The Sims 3 will be like. Many of the sports games and the like that are released every year will be worth seeing as well because by the time those are made the Playstation 2 will probably be gone so it will be worth seeing what they will be like with having the need to scale down for a lower end machine. Share this post Link to post
Sonic 294 Posted December 21, 2008 Starcraft 2 (or is it still premature) Deep down inside I really hope Starcraft 2 turns out to be utter crap and bombs big time.... but we all know it won't. Share this post Link to post
Doctor Destiny 41 Posted December 21, 2008 Why would you want it to bomb? That's not fair. Is it because it's insanely more popular than C&C or because it outclasses C&C in almost every way? What? >_> Share this post Link to post
hagren 0 Posted December 21, 2008 So far it does not look all that special imho, however. I'd like to see them fail for WoW, their overzealous fanbase, their price policy (25 € still for WCIII+Expansion?) and their godawful download manager personally, but if it turns out any good, I'm the last one to flame them. Point 2 goes for DoW2 as well. Share this post Link to post
Koen 2 Posted December 21, 2008 Can I add games released in 2008 as well? As my current machine isn't up to par for Fallout 3 and GTA4. For a real 2009 game, I'm looking forward to East India Company. I'm secretly hoping it will be the same amount of fun as New Horizons, from 1995 (or even earlier for the "Uncharted Waters" SNES versions) Share this post Link to post
Mina Synd 0 Posted December 22, 2008 i'm hoping to see some more napoleonic era and zulu + boer wars... maybe the indian conflicts too. that whole period in time facinates me. basically from the musket first major standardized usage until modern conflict o.o i'd say things like the jacobite rebellions but yaaah... i don't think they'd make that into a game... apart from being a real touchy subject still, it was VERY brutal. what with there being no standard set for war at the time and the "civilised" english army viewing the jacobites as savages... it was much like the vietnam war except that the only media was written in newspapers by the english government xD thus the english army were commiting HORRIBLE war crimes and the civilians all thought the jacobites were the bad ones... :\ but yah a lot of the older musket and rifle based conflicts pre-WW1... that would be kickass to see in games. i've seen a few... Imperial Glory (an RTS, like a cross between total war and Risk, not to mention the sea based game modes too! you have the main game board where you do most of the work, building things in capital cities and forging alliances or war... or declaring war o.O; and you have the "battle" modes, either land or sea, where you control your units real time o.o) it's a very good game, but it was limited to the european napoleonic era (well - from what i've seen it seems to have a near inifinite time scale, but technology wise you are stuck in the napoleonic era xD) aaand i would have loved to see both the american conflicts and what was going on in the east... >.> great game though i would love to see a sequel or similar game made using the same company and engine... also there was good american civil war game i saw on Steam the other day... can't remember what it was called though >.<; you basically follow the actions of a confederate commander and you go around and recruit locals and stuff to fight the union... it's generally all pretty small scale and tactics, like the commando missions in all the C&C stuff o.o Share this post Link to post
Sonic 294 Posted December 23, 2008 Why would you want it to bomb? That's not fair. Is it because it's insanely more popular than C&C or because it outclasses C&C in almost every way? What? >_> Because everyone gets the impression that it will revolutionise RTS, when all I see is an updated version of the first game. But I'm sure it will be popular when its released in late 2009 and the entire Korean population will buy it. I just don't understand the hype behind it. Share this post Link to post
hagren 0 Posted December 23, 2008 So far it does not look remotely ingenious as the first instalment, aside from the RPGesque intermissions. Share this post Link to post
Saracen 16 Posted December 24, 2008 Because everyone gets the impression that it will revolutionise RTS, when all I see is an updated version of the first game. But I'm sure it will be popular when its released in late 2009 and the entire Korean population will buy it. I just don't understand the hype behind it. I watched the first of Blizzard's Battle Report series the other day, and I will say that there's something different about Starcraft 2 to the original. I'm not talking about a graphical or engine overhaul either. There is something in this game that makes it different from the others. The game (although in Alpha) already screams quality and polish. It shouts tight balance and it just says "play me"... The Irony here? I thought the Original Starcraft was pants... I didn't like it, and I didn't get why it was so good... Here however, it's changed, the gameplay appears to have evolved... These battle reports that are being released are just Multiplayer videos of developers slugging it out, while another couple of developers commentate and report on the action going on. "Sure" you may say "... this is what C&C's Battlecast system is all about!" But no! It's not.... C&C multiplayer matches are often very boring to watch, developer commentary on these matches are boring, dull, and watching 2 so-called "Pros" battle it out is almost sleep inducing. I said this on MSN to Kevin Yu (Blizzard's RTS Community Manager) the other day, and he laughed. The fact of the matter is, I found the 21 minutes of Starcraft 2 action extremely entertaining. It wasn't just that the commentary was better, or the fact these devs could play pretty well.... But the gameplay was extremely solid... I saw some real strategy and tactics being used.... The game wasn't about who could use the best build order, tech the fastest or who could spam like nuts.... The game seemed to require some brain power and the requirement to adapt faster (strategically) on the fly, and make it work.... in comparison to other RTS games. An early mistake wouldn't mean instant doom. There are opportunities to claw the game back using skillful planning, and much more..... I'm sure DD will say it was evident in the first game, but I could really notice it here. For someone who widely regarded this game as Starcraft 3D, and had no desire to even look at the game before. Those 21 minutes have sparked my attention, and have placed me in a positive stead for 2009. I've played catch-up listening to podcasts, gathering information about the game etc, and I do like what I see here. Blizzard do have a rather strong and interesting Marketing Approach, and the game isn't slammed in your face like C&C is by the EA Marketing machine. But I will say this.... Starcraft 2 is planning to do something differently... I can't tell what it is, but when the game comes out... it is going to have a sheer dominance over the competition.... and it's not because several million Koreans regard it as a religion either. Sure, this game will not revolutionise RTS games in my opinion. But it will actually reset the bar to its correct height. It will show that Quality will prevail heavily over short development cycles and half-assed attempts at cloning classics. The most important thing in my eyes though is that it will show that a 30+ mission campaign per faction is how RTS gaming should be done... packaged with plenty of strategy, quality gameplay, and Multiplayer that's actually worth playing/watching! Share this post Link to post
hagren 0 Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) I didn't see any of the things You just mentioned in the vid, and I didn't get nearly as excited as the exaggerating commentators seemed to be- The Terran player gained economic advantage, teched were necessary and then produced ****loads of Marauders. The Protoss player used too few of the wrong units and did not pay too much attention, instead lead numerous unsuccessfull attacks, while he could stand his ground for a while, owing to the patience of the Terran player. Both scouted and expanded, ie. all the usual suspects. Except the "Operation Rock" there wasn't anything special or remarkable about the players or the gameplay, albeit the second half was naturally much more entertaining thanks to a faster pace. What I do like about SC2 however is the way the engine handles units- They concentrate on professional control, not visual superficialities like clipping, which is a very huge plus for micro and therefore MP. Nonetheless it seems very solid so far, but I can't see why some are jumping on the "SC2-->Best RTS evar!"-bandwagon so soon, let alone why you do. Imho the difference between what we've seen here, and, say a match in RA3 is the willingness to sacrifice a positive outcome for having a good time, ie. playing for the fun of it, not the victory. I do agree that we need highly polished and satisfyingly long games though. Edited December 24, 2008 by hagren Share this post Link to post
Doctor Destiny 41 Posted December 24, 2008 An early mistake wouldn't mean instant doom. Looks like in SC2, that still can hold true. You can die from an early mistake but that's any game really. I'm sure DD will say it was evident in the first game, but I could really notice it here. The first game had it but not quite to the new extent. Share this post Link to post
Mina Synd 0 Posted December 28, 2008 hmmph. it is REALLY gonna have to do something to impress me. unless i'm missing something here it's still an RTS... which means you're still gonna be spending ages making your base and teching up and so on... yes, there may be attacks and such along the way, but that could easily happen in an C&C game too... i'm honestly not hearing anything fantastically amazing happening by your description saracen o.O; aaaan last time i checked watching -any- game that you are not taking part in or heavily into in the first place simply won't be pleasurable o.O if you don't like a driving game you ain't gonna wanna sit there and watch a whole 20-lap race between some apparently-famous pro and some random people are you? i mean if you are into it, then yah you will have fun... but i have had a solumn grudge against starcraft for many a year now and i need to see things worth the hype before i get excited. i'm willing to give it a chance, but if it's just a standard RTS it's not gonna do a darn thing for me xD Share this post Link to post
Saracen 16 Posted December 29, 2008 Starcraft 2 is all about building large armies... but the main thing I see being a selling point in terms of Single player is High Level Strategy and Engaging Tactical Gameplay. In November's Roundtable (Question 3) I addressed there being 4 problems with C&C, and I would extend that to RTS in General. The first I outlined was 3 factions... OK Starcraft 2 has 3 factions, but I'm letting that slide. However there is a great Campaign Length and Story to come out of this, no crappy "Click-2-win" scenarios, and as I've already mentioned there's heaps of Strategy in this game. I don't care about flashy graphics, supreme innovation or fancy promises or hype. As I see it, the RTS genre needs to severely get back to some core basics, and develop these basics to the point of perfection. Once a game can truly define itself as a Real Time Strategy (Emphasis!!) game, build itself to a really high quality standard, and have the bar set high so it's a necessary staple in the genre.... that is when the genre can move forward with fancy physics, innovation and the like. When you look at C&C, is it really any different to anything out there? Does it boast a stunning campaign length and story? Does it offer deep, engaging strategy and thought? Is it developed and produced to the highest standard deemed possible with a heavy amount of polish and pride? Does it ****! Nothing against EA here, but it's really Westwood's fault for not attempting to raise the bar for the genre. Because the C&C franchise is seen as a flagship franchise in the Genre, most developers would rather follow in that game's footsteps rather than attempt to rival a franchise like Starcraft which has quality written all over it. It applies to anything really. C&C can be seen as basically made flat-pack furniture which you can pick up at Walmart/Argos or whatever. There's usually something wrong with it, and while it looks good and does the job, it's not going to be a memorable item of ownership many years down the road. Whereas I'd argue Starcraft to be more like a hand crafted, lovingly constructed, well made piece of furniture lovingly completed to a high standard by the best carpenters in the industry. Therefore I see it as ironic that a few of the best Westwood/EA talent, have actually quietly joined Blizzard over the years to work on Starcraft 2, rather than join Petroglyph, stay with EA etc. Share this post Link to post
mormreed 0 Posted December 29, 2008 Since I don't think this question deserves another thread since it does somewhat pertain to games in 2009, What games do you guys recommend for the PS3? I have LittleBigPlanet which looks awesome and Drake's Fortune (came with the system), all I plan on getting right now is NHL 09 which is really only because pretty much everyone says it's awesome but any games that are must haves for the PS3? (besides GTA4) Share this post Link to post