Reply 20 of 86, by Reckless
Agreed, HL2 was indeed a shooter on rails. I really don't recall having to 'think' about what to do (unlike an adventure game where I'd piece info together to come up with some probable solutions). It was more a case of there was only ever one solution and it was as pre-planned, obvious and usually right in front of you. Overall. it was a good game but a little flawed (for me at least) in a number of areas.
There's too much bitchin' re 3DR with DNF just 'cause they've not managed to release it. Sure it's unheard of for a company to release info, trailers, etc. only to retract them and start over - 3+ times no less 😁 Unfortunately they did something similar with Prey so, as a production company, 3DR seem to have 'issues'. But then we buy games [not company shares] and if those games are 'good enough' does it matter how long it took to arrive? If, when the game is eventually released, it's below par (and no I don't mean graphically) then it's time to give them honest feedback.
Graphics do not make a good game but unfortunately the general populous (probably not many of the readers here it's safe to assume) only think a game is good when considering its graphical presentation. That's not to say that good graphics can make a good game great - it's a question of getting the basics right first. Prey didn't make enough of portals (or at least for me they shouldn't have been 95% scripted events) and was mostly too indistinguishable amongst other SciFi shooters.
I can only hope 3DR capture 99% of the humour, the interactivity and the 'roundness' of D3D. None of this is apparent from the teaser (unlike the 2001 trailer) so it's an unanswered line of questions for the time being (until a full trailer is done)!