Fragony on 15/1/2006 at 15:00
Well I think it is a good idea to play the first one first. The opening level with the statue sucks imvho, but it gets a lot more interesting, it just keeps getting better and better really. I am one of the lucky few that could actually enjoy IW, I am aware of it's numerous problems, but when it comes to atmosphere ISO got it right.
june gloom on 24/1/2006 at 23:30
DX1's level design is... iffy. very, very iffy. i'm not bothered by the compass, i'm bothered by the fact that, among other things, the intererior of the 'ton is actually larger than its blocky exterior. (in my dream remake, the entirety of hell's kitchen would be very different from the original's layout. this includes the generator warehouse and the NSF base, which took me a long time to realize the NSF base was supposed to be a separate building, not just a shoddily done rehash of a building used in a previous mission) another example would be the versalife building- when you look out the window, it's apparent that the building has moved several hundred feet to be positioned directly over the canal in front of tonnochi road. to be fair, though, it improves as the game progresses.
the AI is mildly garbage, even the dev team admits that, but hey, considering what they were working with, at the time they were working with it... it's forgivable.
aside from a few time fudges in the story, the whole rest of the game makes up for the sloppy mapping and dumb AI.
ZylonBane on 25/1/2006 at 01:37
Silly me, I judge maps based on whether they're fun to play, not how obsessive-compulsively they correlated the geography.
Mere contemplation of Half-Life's layout must drive you insane.
BlackCapedManX on 25/1/2006 at 02:04
I for one would say that the mapping in DX1 was superlative to many other games I've played. Even if somethings are a bit odd (I had the same issue with the NSF base, I kept thinking, "wtf, that wasn't there before" before realizing it was a different place) I feel that overall it makes a lot more sense. The maps stick in your head as real tangible places that are navigatible, other than just following the direction of "where haven't I been yet" which can be cross checked with "is there something in the next room for me to shoot". HK alone felt a lot more alive than many of the linear levels of other shooter games (and I constantly have to disagree with ZB about the brilliance of HL, though some spots were awe-inspiring, much of the level design was cramped and illogical, with a pretty much one dimensional space to move through). I also personally think that compared to DXIW the maps in DX1 are infinitely more approachable and cohesive.
ZylonBane on 25/1/2006 at 03:13
Wait... you mean the building you transmit the warning from is supposed to be a different building than the NSF generator one?
That doesn't seem possible.
On the other hand, it doesn't seem much more possible that they're the same building either, so... c'est la vie.
BlackCapedManX on 25/1/2006 at 06:23
The point was simply that since the NSFHQ/Generator use the exact same building structure, are both used for the same organization, and are a bit skewed when relating to the overall Hell's Kitchen (they're both hidden off in places you can't see until you get there), they can be confusing to set seperately. It's quick to get over, but how many building with the exact same architecture do you see about two city blocks apart? It seemed to be a quick lack of cohesive mapping, but other than that, not a big deal.
june gloom on 25/1/2006 at 06:28
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Silly me, I judge maps based on whether they're fun to play, not how obsessive-compulsively they correlated the geography.
Mere contemplation of Half-Life's layout must drive you insane.
i didn't see much wrong with HL's layout. and if there was, it's not noticeable like DX's was. i'm not saying DX's maps weren't fun, they were; they're just illogical. i guess part of it could be attributed to the rather piecework style of development DX had.
Quote Posted by BlackCapedManX
and I constantly have to disagree with ZB about the brilliance of HL, though some spots were awe-inspiring, much of the level design was cramped and illogical
well, it WAS an old cold war era military bunker before it was ever a private-sector research complex.
BlackCapedManX on 25/1/2006 at 09:23
But from a gameplay perspective it wasn't mentally mappable like DX was. In DX you'd have specific buildings for different stores or places to visit (hospitals restaurants, etc) and the bases had a kind of open obviousness about them, you did have to run back and forth between two places 15 times to memorize exactly where you are.
HL is like: here's some train tracks, and some giant vats of toxic waste, and a dam! and a crane, and a lot of water, and here's a big cliff! oh! a courtyard! VENTILATION SHAFTS! BURNING THINGS! FLOATING ALIEN WORLD! (which actually seemed to make the most sense to me) It was just a lot harder to make sense of where you were in comparison to where you've been and where you're going, except that to progress you have to go opposite in the dirrection you came from, through small openings and random enclosures that magically wind up in good ole' open spaces.
In DX if I want to get into a building I use a door. In HL I'm already in a building and I don't know where I'm going but I'm probably going to have to swim, climb, use jumping puzzles to get there. It's the same way with a lot of games where they intend for you to go one way, and it's the most illogical stupid and randomly lucky way to go. What I liked about DX was that a lot of the time they're like go there, and you can just walk in, or you can make use of all the obligitory man-sized air ducts, but you are rarely expected to only be able to get through this little random crack in the wall that just so happened to be loosened by artillery fire shaking it open just in time for you to run away from the monsters who also just spawned in right then.
Yeah... [/rant]
ZylonBane on 25/1/2006 at 14:28
Have you ever been in a really, really large industrial complex before? They're actually like that. Multiple generations of expansion grafted onto whatever was there before, functionality crammed into whatever space is available, old spaces awkwardly converted to new uses, and twisting illogical corridors interconnecting the whole mess. These places grow in a way that's more organic than planned.
june gloom on 25/1/2006 at 21:29
Quote Posted by BlackCapedManX
But from a gameplay perspective it wasn't mentally mappable like DX was. In DX you'd have specific buildings for different stores or places to visit (hospitals restaurants, etc) and the bases had a kind of open obviousness about them, you did have to run back and forth between two places 15 times to memorize exactly where you are.
HL is like: here's some train tracks, and some giant vats of toxic waste, and a dam! and a crane, and a lot of water, and here's a big cliff! oh! a courtyard! VENTILATION SHAFTS! BURNING THINGS! FLOATING ALIEN WORLD! (which actually seemed to make the most sense to me) It was just a lot harder to make sense of where you were in comparison to where you've been and where you're going, except that to progress you have to go opposite in the dirrection you came from, through small openings and random enclosures that magically wind up in good ole' open spaces.
In DX if I want to get into a building I use a door. In HL I'm already in a building and I don't know where I'm going but I'm probably going to have to swim, climb, use jumping puzzles to get there. It's the same way with a lot of games where they intend for you to go one way, and it's the most illogical stupid and randomly lucky way to go. What I liked about DX was that a lot of the time they're like go there, and you can just walk in, or you can make use of all the obligitory man-sized air ducts, but you are rarely expected to only be able to get through this little random crack in the wall that just so happened to be loosened by artillery fire shaking it open just in time for you to run away from the monsters who also just spawned in right then.
Yeah... [/rant]
you're comparing apples to oranges here. the two are totally different games that are excellent for different reasons.
