View Full Version : Please make Legendary 2

02-02-2011, 11:23 PM
IGN gave an unfair & unethical review about Legendary. But they almost never give any good game a good review. There the equivalent of the IRATE Gamer. All they do is get fat of truck loads of money, not caring about gamers at all focusing on things that either make no sense or no difference. They really need to stop because it's killing the gaming community.:mad:

All that aside, I want to say this:
Listen up Steam, don't take the unfair criticisms anymore. Legendary is an awesome game. Make a sequel happen!

Of course if there's anything that needs to change, it's two things.

1.MORE MONSTERS: You only have a handful of monsters. At least have more this time and ones that fit in whatever country there native from.

2.MORE LEVELS: The game feels short. You only go to 3 major cities. Consider the fact that in both Destroy all Monsters (1968) & Godzilla:Final Wars(2004) has the creatures destroy major cities all over the world, have more cities in the game. Aside from New York & London, have cities like Moscow, Tokyo, Beijing, Sydney, Rome, Berlin, LA, San Francisco, DC, Bangkok, Paris, and Vancouver.

So please make it happen.

03-20-2011, 05:43 AM
Yeah, Spark, if you hear us, please make a sequel ;) The game is great!

03-21-2011, 09:50 AM
Game sucks...deal with it. No wonder this board here is so dead. Nobody likes "legendary"

03-21-2011, 10:03 AM
It was ok. It was heavily consolized but still was fun and it had werewolves.:D It's just not a game I think of when wanting sequels. It simply wasn't that good to me. Of course after the bomb of a fail called Homefront, Legendary is looking very AAA to me.;)

03-21-2011, 10:51 AM
Time ago someone told me that Legendary is like original 1996 Quake is that true?

I mean same dark, creepy atmosphere.

03-26-2011, 11:33 PM
The original game was surprisingly okay, but I wasn't left wanting more at the end. They obviously left the door open for another installment, but I really doubt that it'll happen.

04-17-2011, 02:35 AM
Game sucks...deal with it. No wonder this board here is so dead. Nobody likes "legendary"

Excuse me, but *I* don't qualify as "nobody". I like Legendary, and since I like Legendary, your statement is invalid. I am also more qualified to voice an opinion on this subject than you because 1) look at my reputation and post count, and 2) I'm a bird and you're not. Well, I may or may not be a bird, up to you to believe what you want there, but I am an old-school gamer with a lot of experience, including over 10 years of modding experience, and I've also read the reviews and compared what the reviewers had to say with the game's reality and then looked into the politics of video game sales to find the truth in all of this. I will now give my perspective, which is much more thorough and informed than yours appears to be.

Legendary is a decent game with a great concept that got ripped by IGN, Gamespot and Eurogamer. They're review sites that get paid by big devs to write good reviews. It released against Gears of War 2 - a Microsoft title and you know how much money they can throw at something vs a smaller game dev. It was up against Bioshock, Far Cry 2, CoD: World at War, and Left 4 Dead, so you had a lot of competition with a lot of advertising behind them. I hadn't even heard of Legendary prior to seeing the game and thinking, "this is a neat concept". You can even dig up some older pre-reviews by Gamespot, et all, when they had beta versions of Legendary (then titled Legendary: The Box) and liked what they were seeing and gave it high marks. Well, throw in the big game devs and money and it turns into "let's stomp on the little guy because we don't want any competition." No other reason for a 180 degree turn on a review site like that.

I've played Legendary through several times, and most points that IGN and Gamespot ripped the game on I can't find any evidence of. I had no problems with the controls, running, shooting, jumping, etc. Jump height is limited, yes, but I've heard complaints from the very same game publications about how people can jump unrealistic heights in games, so good luck with consistency there. This isn't a parkour-style game, it's a shooter. The only area they might have something is in hacking the door pannels to cover sector loads between chapters, but if that's enough to ruin a game for you that's pretty shallow.

I'll pick apart IGN's review and show to a small degree how they're full of excrement.

Not only are the environments not distinctive or unique enough, you frequently feel as though you're retreading the exact same ground over and over again.

They play what, the first level? The environments vary from inside the museum to NY city's subway, city streets, a church graveyard, inside shattered skyscrapers, and so on. Most of the fighting is in urban environments so yeah, what do you want, lava and ice flows? That's like complaining about a WWII game being set in Germany!

The next problem is attached to the monsters, which come off as a cobbled together mélange of beasts without any rhyme or reason to being included in the story, other than a designer thought they might be cool to include in the game.

See Doom 1 and Doom 2. There's freaking chainsaws on Phobos. Why is this all of a sudden a problem that game designers do things because they think it's cool? As for the logic behind this, it's explained during the chapter narration about how all these various creatures of myth from around the world tie into Pandora's box, so that criticism is also factually wrong.

What's more, when it comes to killing these creatures, the game does a mix of holding your hand and leaving it up to you to figure out how to destroy them (something that isn't particularly difficult in some cases, like water for a fire monster), which feels like an insult to the player's intelligence.

Um... you're simultaneously complaining about the game making kills obvious and not obvious. Pick one? Any preference? Some things SHOULD be obvious and other things people learn for themselves. You find out that certain weapons work better against certain enemies and some puzzles require some brains. That's a staple in ANY video game. Players LIKE finding out how to own a baddie or how to solve a problem.

For instance, in the sewers, you won't be attacked at random by tentacles of creatures that are obviously swimming beneath you -- you have to get to specific locations to be attacked.

Not knowing when you'll be attacked builds suspense, and the tentacle creatures, as shown later, have specific entry points like sewer grates and manhole covers, as you'd expect them to realistically because - and if the reviewer had played the entire game - the creatures DO NOT SWIM. They grow from a common root trunk and punch through to the surface to grab stuff. Again, factually incorrect. As for scripted encounters, where have you been for the last decade? This is like complaining about the Pinkie Demon cut scene in Doom 3, or horde rushes in L4D. :rolleyes:

You won't be leveling up these abilities to learn new destructive powers or anything else, which seems a bit tame, since you'll solely rely on melee or ranged weaponry to eliminate your opponents.

This isn't World of Warcraft! You kill stuff with guns, mmkay?

Another issue is that aiming down the sight of any firearm immediately seems to eliminate all recoil or force from a weapon, which doesn't make any sense to anyone who's ever fired a weapon.

Did we play the same game? The guns most certainly recoil and then realign when using the sights. The submachinegun has little recoil and anyone that's fired a real MP-5 Navy with any bit of training knows that some weapons can be very controllable even under full automatic fire. Now shoot the shotgun or the magnum and you'll get a bit more recoil.

There's also mixed in the standard complaint about the game being linear. It's a story-driven game, so yes, it will be linear. Doom 3 is linear. Half-Life 2 is linear. So what?

In fairness, I will note that the review was on the PS3 version of the game, and I do not have a console. I have played only the PC version, but I do believe that the PC version was ported over. I've also not tested the multiplayer because I really didn't care about multiplayer. I play Quake for that.

Seriously though, after having played the game several times, and coming from the perspective of a VERY oldschool gamer - having played everything dating back to Pong and Asteroids to Portal and Team Fortress 2, I can say there's no reason the game deserved a 2.5/10 rating. If we put, say, Half-Life 2 at 10, Legendary is a 7. It's not perfect, but it's not horrible either. I'd give it a 7.5 except for a few menu bugs and no obvious way to reset the PDA so you can treasure-hunt again.

As for why there isn't much participation here, I can explain that as well. First, most of us that own the game purchased a boxed retail copy. Second, lack of advertising. I did not even know Legendary was on Steam until I was discussing underrated games with a friend. Said friend had not heard of Legendary, so I told him about it and what kind of game it is. He looked to see if it was available for download through Steam, and downloaded a copy. This particular friend also happens to work for a large game developer, so if he hadn't heard of it I'm not surprised that a lot of people wouldn't even know about the game, much less this message board. I've had the game since Jan 2009 and I just now found out that this message board existed. As for said friend's presence in the gaming industry, he knows John Romero personally. I think that counts for something.

Yes, I want a sequel to Legendary, and yes, it's worth the current $10 price on Steam. Anyone that happens to stumble upon this thread and likes old-school shooters and is rather tired of all the current "super-realistic modern military shooters that are clones of each other" and wants something different, give it a try.

tl;dr - Wendigo is full of crap. Legendary is a decent game if you like run'n'gun shooters with monsters. Pay the $10 for it and decide for yourself.

04-17-2011, 02:51 AM
Time ago someone told me that Legendary is like original 1996 Quake is that true?

I mean same dark, creepy atmosphere.

It is a classic Doom/Quake style shooter for certain as far as overall game play is concerned, and while you do have friendly forces that you cooperate with there's sections where you're completely alone and have to rely on just you and your guns. You can't carry 8 different weapons like in Quake. That aspect is a bit more realistic. You can carry two firearms, a melee weapon, 4 explosive grenades and 4 molotovs. If you find a better weapon you can trade one you're carrying for the other gun. You have a mix of soldiers and monsters for enemies and the monsters aren't really on anyone's side so you can use that to your advantage in spots. That's one of those things that once you figure out you can do it and how to do it is one of the more rewarding aspects of the game.

As for atmosphere, the game is dark, and I don't mean that in a Doom 3 "no freaking light" kind of way, I mean it's got a strong horror theme to it. You start out right away seeing that the world is going to hell in a hand basket, and you have some situations that are stand up fights, and other situations where you're skulking about wondering what's going to jump out at you. Certain creatures can mess with your head a bit as well. I don't want to spoil anything in case you decide you want to play it, but the overall feeling is that you just personally unleashed the Apocalypse and now you have to figure out how to put the genie back in the bottle while everyone's trying to kill you in the process.

Hope that helps! :)

09-09-2012, 01:04 PM
@Phoenix9000: Your wall of text is 100% right. Thanks!

09-25-2012, 02:39 PM
@Phoenix9000: Your wall of text is 100% right. Thanks!

Thanks! Usually people complain about my walls of text, but if I can be helpful that's what it's there for. :D

04-09-2013, 10:13 PM
I second that. This game is fantastic.