XIII Rocks!

[Marvelii]

I downloaded the demo in fileplanet. This game rocks. Im recommending everyone to play this great fps. It gives the fps genre a kind of twist when its cell shaded. Also the auditory system is a great idea. Sneaking around has never been easier or fun since splinter cell. The graphics is no HL2 or doom3 but its fun and is a totally different experience. I completed both levels already but I want more! I cant wait till the game is released.

Shuttle SN45G
Athlon XP 3200+
FN45 nForce 2 Ultra 400 MCPT
512mb PC3200 Corsair
Apollo Devil Monster 3 Radeon 9600pro
WD 160gb HDD
TOshiba dvd-R

 

[phsstpok]

I like it! Haven't finished the second map yet (annoyed by the lack of save game feature).

The AI is just OK from what I have seen so far (but much better than Splinter Cell). The enemy does duck, hide, and take cover. They also wait to ambush you but don't do a very good job of it. Perhaps in the higher maps they get better.

I played around with the difficulty setting in the XIII.INI file but higher values just seem to increase the amount of damage the foes can take. It doesn't change the number of foes nor make them "smarter". It does make the game more difficult. Give it a try. I tried a difficulty of "7" but I run out of bullets pretty quickly.

The game is definitely addictive.

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[Marvelii]

wow! the settings really make a difference. i nearly finished two clips on one guy and thats shooting him on the head area. i cant wait for the full release.

Shuttle SN45G
Athlon XP 3200+
FN45 nForce 2 Ultra 400 MCPT
512mb PC3200 Corsair
Apollo Devil Monster 3 Radeon 9600pro
WD 160gb HDD
TOshiba dvd-R

 

[phsstpok]

Game gets pretty tough when you run out of bullets.

Speaking of tough, that second map is pretty tough. Took me several tries before I could get though it. (I'm not the best player of FPS's). It would have been really tough if character locations/actions were more random.

I like playing with game setting on demos. Get's a little more play time out of them.


<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[Marvelii]

I could swim in water! its been a while since a person can swim in an FPS. in the first level i jumped into the ocean and suprisingly i didnt die! i remember quake 2. u could swim there too!

Shuttle SN45G
Athlon XP 3200+
FN45 nForce 2 Ultra 400 MCPT
512mb PC3200 Corsair
Connect 3D Radeon 9600pro
WD 160gb HDD
TOshiba dvd-R

 

[Caimbeul]

(Stroking his fluffy white pussy....cat) Hmmm, this game is rather good! methinks I may have to buy it when it comes out.

Max detail settings @1024x768 and it ran brilliantly....kept black screening in 1280 but it is a demo after all.

<i>Mmm Dawn AND Eve at the same time...Drroooooll
-------------------------------------------------
<b>XP2100+, 1Gb RAM, ASUS A7N8X, PNY 64Mb Ti4200.

 

[phsstpok]

Did you make the plunge and buy the commercial game?

Was it worth it?

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[sirak]

Meh, the game is made by a French development team. Screw that

----------------------
PIV 2.4c @ 2.89ghz
1gig PC3200 (512mbx2)
ASUS P4P800
GF3 Ti200 64mb (soon to be replaced)
WinXP Pro
3DMark2001SE: 6300
3DMark2003: 688

 

[kinetic_tw]

Reviews of this game are average. Mostly siting the lack of a mid level save feature, and boring repetition.

 

[sparky853]

The mid-level save feature definatly sucks. Working you way through a level, saving the game in case something happens, and you can't even re-load except for the beginning of a level? How crappy is that?? I've basically given up on the game for that reason alone. The gameplay was alright, the graphics were neat, it was an interistingly differnt FPS which I did enjoy.

Spec:
Intel P4 2.4B
MSI 645E Max-U Mobo
512MB DDR333
GF3 ti200 64MB
SB Live 5.1
WD 60GB
Maxtor 120GB
LG 12x8x32 CDR
WIN2K PRO SP4

 

[phsstpok]

Hate that kind of save game feature!

What about a workaround? I wonder if there are any utilities that would let me take a snapshot of memory and restore to that condition at will?

I really liked the demo. I may pick up the game anway, despite the save game flaw.

Thanks for the heads up, though.

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[Esso]

I heard the ending is really bad.
Don't spoil it though!

 

[Wolfy]

game looks good, nice twist on the old FPS genre, game is let down BADLY by pathetic enemy AI and the game just degenerates into a move and shoot game with a gimmick. Anyway as I've said before play Call of Duty if you havent yet done so and you will discover that no other FPS can compare with it and every other FPS seems shallow and boring.

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"

 

[phsstpok]

Too bad about the AI. The game seemed promising. Plenty of style and not just the cell shading.

COD was my next choice. Though, it runs a little sluggishly on my old hardware. At least, the demo did.

Games seem too short these days, especially FPS games. What happened to the games you could play for a whole week (or two even)?

4-5 hours seems ridiculously short for a $50 game (IMHO).

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>

 

[kinetic_tw]

I happily pay 50 dollars for shorter games such as Call of Duty and Max Payne 2. What bothers me, is when I pay 50 dollars for a game that I have to trudge through, despising every minute, for a week or two, only to say that I beat it.

I think the last really long game that I enjoyed was Half-Life. Whether that's because of declining quality product being produced from the gaming industry, or the increasing demands of the end users, is up to the individual. (I think it's both.)

 

[Wolfy]

yeah im happy to pay the money for a tight/compact game. take maxpayne 1/2 for example they play well for a bit but get samey very quickly (was it just me but i found playing as the girl in max payne2 was more fun than max, not just cos the levels were good but she seemed much better suited to the game and cooler too)

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"

 

[phsstpok]

Of course, I don't consider a poor game a good value regardless of how long it plays. I also admit that FPS games are handicapped by the high demands of 3D. A lot happens in a short period of time. I'm sure it is too much work and too costly to produce one 20-hr game. Much more cost effective to produce it in three or four, 4-6 hr installments.

One peeve though, If somebody produces a good game that plays for say 6 hours. I find it really annoying when the sequel (often using the same engine) only plays for 4 hours. Even if the sequel is better I still feel cheated if its shorter.

Sometimes I prefer a game that might only be a 7 or 8 out of 10 in quality if I will be enjoying it for more than one afternoon vs a 9/10ths game which only lasts a few hours.

Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with a good short game. I'm just not willing to pay full price for all such games. I'll wait to they are discounted. Sometimes I'll buy them used. I'll even wait until they are long out of favor. I don't mind playing 1-2 year old games. They are always new to me!

FPS is not my favorite genre. I'm not sure I have a favorite but FPS is not it.

There were a few exceptions, Half-life (though this was a 7/10ths game for me but the play time was long and the story good), Soldier of Fortune, Star Trek: Elite Forces, MOHAA (but I got bored half way through it). My all-time favorite FPS was/is (I'm replaying it off and on) System Shock 2. This was a 10/10ths game for me (the only game that was).


<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b>