EvaUnit02 on 15/9/2008 at 19:11
l just read (
http://m.gamespot.com/news/6197698/) this.
I hope that DX3 doesn't get canned. I might just buy a new retail copy of Tomb Raider Underworld after all.
demagogue on 15/9/2008 at 20:05
Yeah, the way they actually give a list of games that will still be released on schedule really makes you worried about those games that are conspicuously absent from that list, like DX3!
redrain85 on 16/9/2008 at 00:55
DX3 seems pretty safe. I've read another article about SCi's current situation, where they mentioned that DX3 was still important to them.
What worries me is that Thief 4 hasn't been mentioned in a long time.
jtr7 on 16/9/2008 at 01:10
A couple of months ago, Eidos-Montreal removed all mention of the game that starts with a "T", including the news about a second game besides DX3, and the only remaining hint is the job openings.
Jashin on 16/9/2008 at 15:55
Curious hmm...
To be honest I think DX3 will be a lot like BioShock and no deeper. The tough question is how to ease people into something deeper than they're willing to bother with. Frankly I don't think Eidos Montreal has the talent or the inclination to do a geniune DX game. It's gonna be a follow-the-leader (bioshock) title.
TF on 16/9/2008 at 16:20
Quote Posted by Jashin
Curious hmm...
To be honest I think DX3 will be a lot like BioShock and no deeper. The tough question is how to ease people into something deeper than they're willing to bother with. Frankly I don't think Eidos Montreal has the talent or the inclination to do a geniune DX game. It's gonna be a follow-the-leader (bioshock) title.
Rogue Keeper on 23/9/2008 at 09:31
The decision that it will be a prequel may suggest they'd like to attract new audience too. But I'm fairly sure they're taking lessons from failure of IW.
ZylonBane on 23/9/2008 at 19:25
Quote Posted by BR796164
The decision that it will be a prequel may suggest they'd like to attract new audience too.
I'm not following your logic here. Whether it's a sequel or a prequel, obviously they want to attract new audience.
demagogue on 24/9/2008 at 00:00
I think the logic is supposed to be, if it were a sequel some new-comers might be turned off by reflex because they hadn't followed the previous episodes. But if it's a prequel, it might at least give the illusion that you don't need any previous experience to follow the story and you could start with game 3.
Nobody is going to make a sequel that you couldn't independently follow, anyway, but maybe the perception matters and that's what they're after. I get the idea, but I wonder how much difference that would really make with people seeing it on the game shelf.
Re: other reasons for a prequel... I recall Spector talking about some of DX's magic being its setting in the near future, still recognizable but changed enough to make it unsettling. But IW got too far into scifi that it lost some of its relevance. A prequel could get back in touch with that edge. I think it's true that the near-future setting is better than one that's too generically scifi, and that's one thing that sets the DX world apart.
