RPGWatch Forums

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Torchlight II - Footage of Gameplay @ Gamespot (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14127)

aries100 July 2nd, 2011 22:12

Torchlight II - Footage of Gameplay @ Gamespot
 
Gamespots offers 35 minutes of gameplay from this game. Max Schaeffer from Runic Games is doing the commenting in their 'Now Playing' video segment. Head on over if you're interested in the game.
More information.

guenthar July 2nd, 2011 22:12

There was mentioned an upcoming sale on Torchlight on Steam in the video.

DArtagnan July 3rd, 2011 09:01

Looks a lot better than Torchlight in terms of features - but it's still not particularly exciting.

If the first game was an inferior Diablo, this seems like an inferior Diablo 2 - or perhaps an on-par one.

Still, to go from Hellgate to this is like rubbing salt in the wound.

We want the old Bliz North back!

Bah….

rich ruffo July 3rd, 2011 20:53

I think Runic is heading in the right direction with Torchlight2. If they can pull off a huge world with this game it will be great ! I thought the first was good , just to repetative but i really like the art style , controls, sound.

Thaurin July 4th, 2011 12:27

Didn't Hellgate fail because it sucked? (At least at launch.)

DArtagnan July 4th, 2011 12:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thaurin (Post 1061078942)
Didn't Hellgate fail because it sucked? (At least at launch.)

I think that's pretty subjective. Lots of people seem to think it sucked.

The launch sucked hard, that's for sure - but I loved the actual game from the moment go.

As for the handling of PR and Hellgate in general, FSS arguably sucked hard as well - though I personally see it somewhat differently. They over-extended themselves A LOT by trying to please too many people at the same time, without the resources or business-savvy necessary for such a thing.

Is that sucky? Yeah, I suppose - but they were also very unlucky in some ways. One of the biggest complaints at launch were from people who got charged multiple times for a single subscription month, which is fatal for a business trying to establish a reputation within the market. Turns out it was the credit-company handling transactions that messed up.

Something I never personally understood, was the reaction to the pricing model of the game itself. FSS clearly said from the beginning that they wanted to give players a continuous stream of content - rather than 1-2 expansions spread out over 2-3 years. So they made an OPTIONAL subscription model which was 50% cheaper than other MMOs - for people willing to support such a thing.

The entire full game was free and playable online without it, but they did place certain restrictions on the online features for non-subscribers. People were incredibly pissed off by this, for some reason - but I think it was quite reasonable.

Afterall, putting into place the server-infrastructure needed for online play is not a cheap endeavour - and just because Blizzard did it with Battlenet, it doesn't mean it's something you can reasonably expect from a company with limited funds.

In any case, I was very supportive of the idea of the 3-month content cycles - even though they didn't quite make it. But what they did manage to release, was pretty solid and meaty.

But there's little doubt the technical state of the game upon release was horrid. If only they'd had 2-3 more months and a better way of communicating with the audience - it could have been thriving today.

The core gameplay and mechanics are unrivaled in the genre - in my opinion. The story was crap and the quests likewise. But it wouldn't have taken much to make it all work.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 22:53.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch