Viewing Thread:
"Turok Evolution- Embracing Irony?"

Turok Evolution. Looks great doesn't it? But what has changed?

Obviously the graphics are nicer, it has to expected on a new console. Also, the enemies look set to be bigger, and quite possibly better than previous installments. Obviously there will be new weapons to aid in your quest to make dinosaurs extinct for good, but many of these will be variations on old FPS classics.

And we also have the idea that Turok is returning to its roots. Gone will be the sci-fi stylings, and the luscious jungle environments are back.

But where is the evolution of gameplay? The game looks set to improve in terms of graphics, scale, environmets, but have we heard any news of groundbreaking new gameplay innovations? No. Apparently this time around you have more opportunity to use stealth tactics, creeping around the foliage unseen and unheard and picking off enemies in the distance with sniper modes. Or using your silent weaponry, such as the bow, club and axe to take care of an enemy without alerting others. But these are hardly new innovations are they? Goldeneye and Perfect Dark used stealth to an extent, countless realistic FPS on the PC such as the Rainbow Six series use staelth, and the Theif series has been called a Stealth 'em up, so using stealth in first person shooters is hardly a new idea.

So Turok Evolution. What has evolved? Most of the evolution seems superficial. The gameplay elements are remaining essentially the same, albeit with a mild twist. By no means will this make it a bad game, I am just hoping that there will be a FPS on the GameCube that, if not revolutionises the genre, at least does evolve the gameplay somewhat.

tigamilla wrote:
> You can ride flying dinos in turok evolution... <--thats innovation for you..
> I dont remember flying around in Goldeneye or Perfect D.

This is for anyone
> knocks turok for being the same as any other FPS.....


okay, maybe that IS innovation, but it's NOT expanding on the FPS genre! The flying sections are sub games, which are not FPS sections, they are little flying Lylat wars esque sections. In that sense they are not evolving the FPS, just showing that they are willing to expand Turok so it's not all blasting. Yes a nice feature of the game, yes it'll make it different to other FPSs BUT it won't add anything to the FPS sections, which is what I was talking about. Having a few flying sections will not make the FPS levels any better or evolve them will it?

You can ride flying dinos in turok evolution... <--thats innovation for you.. I dont remember flying around in Goldeneye or Perfect D.

This is for anyone knocks turok for being the same as any other FPS.....

hey can some of you's guys check the SMDF topic, i need twenty members.

hmm, yeah although these factors all do look like they'll add up to a great game, none of the features are new to first person shooters, despite the fact that many are new to the Turok franchise. Ah well, still, looks an awesome game.

Another "evolution" is the organic feel of the grass and the surrounding environment, which will contribute to the atmosphere in the game.

I think that the real evolution will come in the form of the AI.
It'll be like a living, breathing world where the dinosaurs react to sound, vision and each other's actions.

I've heard that the raptors team up to confuse you by creating diversions while their friends sneak up on you.

Whether this means a genuinely gripping world or a few corny set pieces to show off the AI remains to be seen.

As for multiformat, wouldn't it be great if we could play against PS2 and Xbox owners online? Then we'd show 'em! :-)

Good points there Bonzo Banana.

I think the only difference between each one will be slight graphical differences. The PS2 version will suffer from bad anti-aliasing, but the other two versions should look better. Other than that, I doubt Acclaim will bother to create different versions of the models with different amounts of polys for the consoles that can hack it. More than likely the versions of the game will be almost identical.

Shame really as the Gamecube version could be soo much better if Acclaim utilise all the built in effect which are on the graphics chip. I guess we'll just have to wait n see how they all turn out.

:)

Well I'm a great Turok fan. I was truly amazed when I first played it back in 1996 I think. I found the locations amazing, the atmosphere quite frightening at times and the action well done.

Turok Evolution to me looks like a massive update on the original game and formula but with much more realistic graphics and immersive gameplay. Of the screenshots I've seen so far none have disappointed.

I've been to the turok evolution site and looked at the screens, watched all the movies, listened to the mp3s and read all the text. Yes I'm definitely interested in the game. However the game is being developed simultanously for all three formats. They are also claiming the game is basically the same on each system and theres not much to tell them apart. Well I hope this is pr talk because if turok evolution looks as good on ps2 as gamecube and xbox it might end up being a total failure. The ps2 shouldn't be able to run the game to the same standard as gc or xbox. The ps2 is averaging about 6 million polygons per second, the gamecube has already achieved 12 million per second with rogue leader and thats at a higher resolution with better textures and anti-aliasing. The xbox is peaking at 15 million polygons per second in wreckless. So if every version is running at a ps2 friendly 6 million polys then its going to be a big disappointment and its not making use of what the gc and xbox can do. The terrible mips IV processor of the ps2 is just not capable of much in the way of decent a.i. but the gc has a fast 485mhz risc processor with a 162mhz fsb. The xbox has a 733mhz cisc processor with a 133mhz fsb and both of these consoles really should be capable of a much more dynamic game world. I really hope Acclaim don't screw this great game up by having universal resources for all three versions, i.e. the same c code and graphic libraries for all three versions.

Sibs wrote:
> obviously that shoulda been Britney, not Britnet... I'm sure Cooky guessed :-)

Could be britnet: www.britnet.co.uk :)

Not if you're counting Rez in this.

:0)