maybe not now, but late 90ties and early 2000s you had to keep the computer going yourself, so the tech knowledge of an average pc gamer had to be fairly high. whoever didn't want (or was not smart enough) to deal with that bough a console - limited, more expensive, no mouse and keyboard, but you just plugged it in and it worked.
For some PC gamers, yes. But most of my PC owning mates just left me to sort out their PC technical problems, install game mods, upgrade their hardware, etc. Not because any specific person was too stupid to manage their PC, or because I'm so much smarter than them (I'm not), but most of them had no real interest in the technical aspects of a PC, whereas I did (plus I had little social life, but I loved computers).
either way, whatever they were thinking, we ended up with something that would be better off erased from the timeline.
And yet Invisible War, from what I remember got mostly really good reviews from the magazines of the time, for reasons that escape me.
If that's the only reason you can see, that's a "you" limitation.
Here's a crazy idea: Maybe the developers of Invisible War had a certain stereotype of console gamers in mind when they were making Invisible War, and so designed it to cater to that stereotype.
Maybe, but if they were chasing more sales at the (deliberate) cost of dumbing down the game, they seriously misjudged what mentally demanding (ahem) features to leave out of the game. The result was a bland game with unconvincing shooting and levels set in various real world cities that felt like they were set in a biodome on another planet, with just enough upgrade options and GUI use to frighten off the most simple of first person shooter plans but not nearly enough to interest people who wanted more than just a straight FPS game. Add in a storyline that starts with a terrorist killing thousand of people and takes the player all over the world and involves various secret and powerful organisations and yet somehow manages to be both boring and forgettable, and well it's just a total failure whatever way you look at it.
Back when IW was nearing release, there was a Warren Spector interview where he said something like "This game was designed for consoles first, and I think players will be able to tell." Hoo boy yes we could.
Can you give a link for that please? It's difficult to believe that a developer would ever say something like that about his own game, as he would very obviously be (a) implying that the upcoming game was bad and probably not worth your time and money, and (b) risking console owners taking umbrage with him and boycotting the game. Like that time Gerald Ratner said his jewellery shops sold crap, and unsurprisingly lost most of his customers.
I was actually thinking about how to maybe salvage the game somehow back in the day (similarly to how T3 Gold+Sneaky update are salvaging T3), but.. there just isn't anything worth salvaging. hence, "proclaim everything but DE1 not canon and just start from square one". or rather, square two.
I actually hope this will happen at some point. I mean, it's not that crazy of an idea.
No, I wouldn't be interested in a remake of the game, unless it significantly changes things like the gameplay, the atmosphere, etc.
Loading...