The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Painkiller'.
After being recommended it by a mate, I downloaded the demo for the game Painkiller, Weighing in at about 214MB (i think).
The game is a bit like Serious Sam, or Will Rock, but with a twisted, satanic theme to it. It's a bit mild for what it wanted to be, but i guess they wanted to appeal the younger, less mind-numbed of all of us, and not scare the living crap out of them. I prefer the latter myself...
Anyway, from what i've seen, the game is impressive as far as technology goes, but it lacks any real fun or excitement. The physics are great - pin zombies to walls with a huge wooden stake launcher or anything similar, and the graphics are nice and spooky, and relatively fast.
Of course, I have to add that i didn't like the game enough to consider buying it.
If you've played the demo, care to add to this thread?
The game is a bit like Serious Sam, or Will Rock, but with a twisted, satanic theme to it. It's a bit mild for what it wanted to be, but i guess they wanted to appeal the younger, less mind-numbed of all of us, and not scare the living crap out of them. I prefer the latter myself...
Anyway, from what i've seen, the game is impressive as far as technology goes, but it lacks any real fun or excitement. The physics are great - pin zombies to walls with a huge wooden stake launcher or anything similar, and the graphics are nice and spooky, and relatively fast.
Of course, I have to add that i didn't like the game enough to consider buying it.
If you've played the demo, care to add to this thread?
Page:
UrkiE-UK wrote:
> Of course, A game is not made on technology alone.
>
> I think the success of the first video games relied only on the fact
> that it was spanking new.
True. How else would you be motivated to get through over 200 levels of Qix?
:D
> Of course, A game is not made on technology alone.
>
> I think the success of the first video games relied only on the fact
> that it was spanking new.
True. How else would you be motivated to get through over 200 levels of Qix?
:D
Of course, A game is not made on technology alone.
I think the success of the first video games relied only on the fact that it was spanking new.
I think the success of the first video games relied only on the fact that it was spanking new.
Der Nazi wrote:
> I haven't downloaded it yet, but is it any good, and will the full
> version be worth getting?
I found it diverting but not exiting, and tedious in places (no save option midlevel. First level completed in 16 minutes, second in 20. Some of the time I was bored)
As I've said, the technology is amazing, and watching it in action was far more interesting to me than the gameplay itself.
Wait for a demo of a magazine disk if you can't get the 200 mb download, and make your own decision. Its one of those games people will either wax lyrical about, or brush under the carpet i think.
> I haven't downloaded it yet, but is it any good, and will the full
> version be worth getting?
I found it diverting but not exiting, and tedious in places (no save option midlevel. First level completed in 16 minutes, second in 20. Some of the time I was bored)
As I've said, the technology is amazing, and watching it in action was far more interesting to me than the gameplay itself.
Wait for a demo of a magazine disk if you can't get the 200 mb download, and make your own decision. Its one of those games people will either wax lyrical about, or brush under the carpet i think.
I haven't downloaded it yet, but is it any good, and will the full version be worth getting?
UrkiE-UK wrote:
> Good post there. For the most part, I agree.
>
> But, does anyone else here feel that the weapons aren't exactly
> exciting?
Hmmm, I love the "PainKiller" melee spinning blade or grapple / weird energy beam thing. The stake launcher / grenade launcher is quite fun too, esp pinining zombies to the walls.
The nail / lightning gun is pretty weedy, although powerful, and the gatling / rocket launcher is pretty poor.
A number of FPS staples, but I feel if the sound effects were beefed up, then they would be a little more satisfying. Oh, and left shift throws a grenade. Thank the good lord for Halo forcing FPS to include this now. Grenades are actualy now useful, if unrealistic.
Still, nothing as innovative or fun as the HL2 physics gun...........
> Good post there. For the most part, I agree.
>
> But, does anyone else here feel that the weapons aren't exactly
> exciting?
Hmmm, I love the "PainKiller" melee spinning blade or grapple / weird energy beam thing. The stake launcher / grenade launcher is quite fun too, esp pinining zombies to the walls.
The nail / lightning gun is pretty weedy, although powerful, and the gatling / rocket launcher is pretty poor.
A number of FPS staples, but I feel if the sound effects were beefed up, then they would be a little more satisfying. Oh, and left shift throws a grenade. Thank the good lord for Halo forcing FPS to include this now. Grenades are actualy now useful, if unrealistic.
Still, nothing as innovative or fun as the HL2 physics gun...........
Good post there. For the most part, I agree.
But, does anyone else here feel that the weapons aren't exactly exciting?
But, does anyone else here feel that the weapons aren't exactly exciting?
Oh, and its quite pedestrian, I never felt at one point to be pinned in a corner fighting for survival, which is a damn shame. Bland maps too.
Played it yesterday. As a game, I'm unsure, as a technical achievement, its astounding. 1024 x 768 setting, max detail, on a 1.8Ghz Athlon with a geforece 5600 fx. No slowdown.
The physics are jawdropping, the maps are massive, and contain a lot of open spaces (something ID games have always had a problem with.)
Ragdoll and rigid body physics are seamless.
MASSES of creatures on screen, avoiding the usual FPS mo more than 2 or 3 on at a time.
The only problem I've got with it is the pallet, which is directly lifted from the original Quake. Its all browns, which maks it visualy boring.
The final boss has to be technically tho most impressive thing I've seem on the PC so far. Its a (relavive scale) 200 foot ogre, weilding a hammer in temple ruins. If the beast knocks into an arched column, a domino effect occurs, and other columns get knocked.
Value really have to pull a rabbit out of their hats for HL2. Games like this and "Far Cry" are stealing their thunder. Value do however have the scripted events and strong storyline to fall back on, something "Painkiller" has never pretented to have.
The physics are jawdropping, the maps are massive, and contain a lot of open spaces (something ID games have always had a problem with.)
Ragdoll and rigid body physics are seamless.
MASSES of creatures on screen, avoiding the usual FPS mo more than 2 or 3 on at a time.
The only problem I've got with it is the pallet, which is directly lifted from the original Quake. Its all browns, which maks it visualy boring.
The final boss has to be technically tho most impressive thing I've seem on the PC so far. Its a (relavive scale) 200 foot ogre, weilding a hammer in temple ruins. If the beast knocks into an arched column, a domino effect occurs, and other columns get knocked.
Value really have to pull a rabbit out of their hats for HL2. Games like this and "Far Cry" are stealing their thunder. Value do however have the scripted events and strong storyline to fall back on, something "Painkiller" has never pretented to have.
Its an ok game. Basically your trapped in an area and you have to kill all the enemies to escape. Nice graphics and not alot of slow down. Running 1600x1200 max detail and even with 30 odd enemies and tons of explosions the game never slows down.
UrkiE-UK wrote:
> Righto
Not that it makes a great deal of difference however. :)
> Righto
Not that it makes a great deal of difference however. :)
Page: