Well after sleeping on it I contacted SimplyGames and they offered me a refund for it even if its activated on steam as a goodwill thing I think they have had a number of calls from unhappy people also spoke to GMG this morning and there going to sort out a refund for my season pass.
OR that earlier 2009 leak was using different - better engine, but since it was taking so long they had to make a quick U3E port to get out and now in looks like ****, lost all its atmosphere. That video comparison - demo vs final just proves it. >_< I mean why would they screw up lightning/fx/detail, it doesnt make any sense.. Kinda like how original Painkiller was ported to U3E and imo its crappy too.
Didn't Gearbox pull the same stunt with BIA: Hell's Highway? I recall the E3 demo being better than the final product.
Did I fall asleep while I was playing this game because you start off on the rescue ship, board the Sulaco for all of five minutes then return to the rescue ship, complete with mildly exciting breaking boarding tube and a chest burst (which actually made me laugh because it looked so ridiculous), where you find hundreds of aliens and eggs along with PMCs who had apparently snuck onboard. These aliens and eggs all appeared during the five minutes you're aboard the Sulaco before returning to the ship. Then prior to heading down to LV-426 I'm told to escape the Sulaco. Eh? When did I get back aboard the Sulaco? I think I must have been comatose at that point... was it the bit involving those boring PMCs who all look exactly the same? And here's how dumb this game is... the start shows a medic doing compressions on a fallen marine who is still wearing his chest armour... yes, you got to admire the attention to detail in this game! LOL
I wonder if the game was demoed on a PC and then when it came to getting it running on seven year old console hardware, the developers struggled so ended up porting the engine to the console-friendly Unreal Engine 3 and stripping out most of the lighting and effects in the process? The ageing consoles are generally to blame for lacklustre PC ports as their hardware holds back game development IMO as everything has to be shoehorned into 256 MB of system memory and run on seven year old graphics hardware. Over the last five years for example I've seen graphics options in many PC games reduced to just a resolution and v-sync option, a reduced number of playable demos in favour of console-only ones and proper anti-aliasing being replaced by massively inferior console-friendly FXAA/MLAA and so on. Makes me wonder sometimes why I bother paying hundreds of pounds for powerful graphics hardware when most games don't bother to make use of them. Some developers put extra effort into enhancing the PC versions but, sadly, too many are at the mercy of publishers and tight release deadlines so generally don't bother. The sooner the next-gen consoles come out the better as there should be a shift to 64-bit coding and games that make better use of the PC's plentiful VRAM and system memory as well as processing power. Hopefully. I would personally like to see developers creating the lead version of their games on the PC then tweaking them for the consoles, even if it means removing things to get them to work. That way everyone gets the best version of a game possible. That may well happen once the new consoles are released as their architecture is more PC-like than before so it may be good news in the long run.
Only because these types of games (non MMO, F2P or hardware intensive genre like simulators and strategy) sell much better on consoles. Mr. Bigtime I already beat you to that link
My bad Sorry and there will be DLCs for this game..what kind of i wonder? the FIX a game i may pay lol .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6lGXDM3LGnk Demo version 10 times better then the final product, graphics and atmosphere pov.
Had the game engine be any other than Unreal Engine 3, I would agree with you. You have so many great looking games on the Xbox 360/PS3 using UE3, what has suddenly made Aliens:CM so demanding? It's not even standard UE3 stuff. Just take a look at how many great looking games, which are clearly more demanding than A:CM, run great on consoles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games#Unreal_Engine_3 Unless of course the developers were struggling to meet the deadline and just went with whatever they had. But nothing makes sense when you look at the demo. Animations are different, AI is different, lightning is different, even the level design is different and dumbing down level design for consoles makes no sense. Seriously. This game makes no ****ing sense. Interviews were lies, dev commentary was bull****, demo and final product clearly aren't the same, story is crap (and CANON, oh god why), lies, lies, lies. I honestly want to hear something from Gearbox, I'm in disbelief with the whole thing.
That demo was probably only a small section of the game designed to show off to the media and it is far easier to make that look terrific for demonstration purposes with specific animations and A.I. coded for it. Anyone remember Bungie demoing Halo 2 on the Xbox 360, a demo that ended up looking far better than the actual game did. As soon as the developers tried to make a full game out of it and fit it on the consoles, that is when I suspect they had to start making compromises. I read somewhere that the game was shifted onto the Unreal Engine 3 and enhancements made to to it for the lighting. That may have been a decision made for the console versions. I'm pretty sure that if this game had been made only for the PC then it'd have been a far better game and more like that demo.
Randy used to tweet practically every day, now all he has done is retweet a Gearbox account tweet about a BL2 shift code and a patch which was apparently part of the pre-load on PC. Meh .. I think Sega came knocking as a badass level 51 raid boss.
That might be true about the graphics, yet what about the terrible terrible AI? Even almost 10 year old games already had considerably better AI. AI has far less to do with hardware than things like graphics, it's just that good AI takes a lot of work. And that apparently was something they could not manage in the 6 years? they were working on it, putting some effort in it I mean.
