PDA

View Full Version : Comparison between original Section 8 and prejudice?


҈Oc†ө
05-04-2011, 12:41 PM
I own the original one, never played it much because i found it kinda cheap done, i mean the textures where very poor, and overall loocked like a pure console arcade shooter port.

I'd like to know if prejudice use the very same engine or if it has improveed someway. Is it just a standalone expansion of the original game or is it a completely new designed game?

The game looks nice, but i dont want to buy it just to get a second attempt of a game i kinda dislike.


Thanks in advance!

Jackcolt
05-04-2011, 12:46 PM
Simply put, if you disliked the gameplay of the first one, you will not like this one. It's essential the same game, just improved in many ways and with plenty of features added.

Dingo
05-04-2011, 11:55 PM
Everything from the first game is here with some new features

Freyar
05-05-2011, 12:05 AM
My knee-jerk reaction is simply:

Same Game, Smaller Maps, Still Doesn't Make Sense

shrinkshooter
05-05-2011, 12:12 AM
Still Doesn't Make Sense

I'm sorry, what? How does this game not make sense? You kill stuff, you blow stuff up, you capture stuff, and the points rewarded from doing so allow you to call in more stuff to help you keep doing it. What sense doesn't it make? It's more or less a combination of Battlefield and Halo (or Tribes, take your pick), unless none of those make sense either.

You want to see something obscure and unintelligible, try The Path. Unless you happen to be one of those hipster people that think throwing together an incredibly boring "interactive art" piece with unnecessary obfuscation in an effort to give the illusion of depth and symbolism counts as a game. Then it might be your cup of tea.

But I digress. Why doesn't it make sense?

MIK3K
05-05-2011, 12:15 AM
My knee-jerk reaction is simply:

Same Game, Smaller Maps, Still Doesn't Make Sense


Point gun, pull trigger. It's all the same - hit some keys, move the mouse around and click once in a while.

SapientWolf
05-05-2011, 12:21 AM
I'm sorry, what? How does this game not make sense? You kill stuff, you blow stuff up, you capture stuff, and the points rewarded from doing so allow you to call in more stuff to help you keep doing it. What sense doesn't it make? It's more or less a combination of Battlefield and Halo (or Tribes, take your pick), unless none of those make sense either.

You want to see something obscure and unintelligible, try The Path. Unless you happen to be one of those hipster people that think throwing together an incredibly boring "interactive art" piece with unnecessary obfuscation in an effort to give the illusion of depth and symbolism counts as a game. Then it might be your cup of tea.

But I digress. Why doesn't it make sense?
You have to do stuff besides shoot people in the face.

shrinkshooter
05-05-2011, 11:03 AM
You have to do stuff besides shoot people in the face.

Lol. You're right, that makes no sense.

Point gun, pull trigger. It's all the same - hit some keys, move the mouse around and click once in a while.

As can be said for any FPS or sidescrolling 2D shooter ever made.

Spattercat
05-05-2011, 11:37 AM
"Doesn't make sense" implies to me that he's asking "why'd they bother remaking the same game, with smaller maps?" I'm not saying it IS the same game, just that's where he seems to be coming from with that statement.

Zorlac
05-05-2011, 11:44 AM
My knee-jerk reaction is simply:

Same Game, Smaller Maps, Still Doesn't Make Sense

I hate to say it but if it doesn't make sense you're not a very good gamer. Really, there's not much of a nice way of putting it.

shrinkshooter
05-05-2011, 11:49 AM
"Doesn't make sense" implies to me that he's asking "why'd they bother remaking the same game, with smaller maps?" I'm not saying it IS the same game, just that's where he seems to be coming from with that statement.

Ah. Well in that case, the reason would be because the original game flew in way under the radar. Nobody knew about it. They made a fantastic game with great potential, but they had no press, and no advertising whatsoever. So they decided to essentially re-release it with quite a few enhancements and updates, and this time they actually let people know about it, so they could make sales.

Honestly, though, I would have put the price tag at 25 bucks. For how good the game is, how polished it is, and how it plays, putting at 15 not only means less money in the devs pockets but that people are underrating THIS game as well. I already knew exactly what this game was going to be like before I preordered it, but people who don't know anything about it are assuming that because it's 15 bucks it's some lame game that will be amusing for maybe a week. I mean I just saw someone who was surprised that there's a campaign.

psychosavant
05-05-2011, 12:09 PM
My knee-jerk reaction is simply:

Same Game, Smaller Maps, Still Doesn't Make Sense

At least they're are more features, adjustements to gameplay for the better, more weapons/vehicles/passive modules etc.

I have a similar complaint about sports like Basketball, Football, and Soccer (Football for non Americans). The only difference is that they NEVER even change their maps at all (and their current map is a rectangular field... and that's all). I don't know how people can stand playing the same game over and over again on the same bland rectangular field for the better part of their life, but even worse... watching other people play it for the better part of their life and never actually playing it themselves. Boring!

SapientWolf
05-05-2011, 01:23 PM
"Doesn't make sense" implies to me that he's asking "why'd they bother remaking the same game, with smaller maps?" I'm not saying it IS the same game, just that's where he seems to be coming from with that statement.
He said "still doesn't make sense" which implies that not making sense was an issue the last time too.

KDR_11k
05-05-2011, 01:48 PM
For people who played the previous game much: Players can take less damage and defensive modules give less of a boost so people die faster. On the other hand guns can no longer bypass the shields at all (instead there are weapon mods that make them more or less effective against shields or armor). DCMs are no longer tied to feat types (not sure how they trigger now). Also it now has an unlock progression and swarm turned from a team balance mode into a full on game mode with one CP and campaign-style enemies. In essence it's a bit dumbed down but maybe it needed that.

For people who didn't, it's still the same old Unreal Engine 3 with the same old netcode issues* and the same old GFWL. I think the game does look somewhat prettier than the last one.

*=Epic wants to make Gears 3 a multiplayer powerhouse. I don't see that happening until they get the UE3 netcode up to the level demonstrated by the likes of Call of Duty or the Source Engine.