Post by: yacool on December 06, 2003, 11:41:53 PM
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 06, 2003, 11:47:17 PM
Post by: Grey Ninja on December 06, 2003, 11:48:40 PM
I gave her my standard lecture on how PC Gamers just suck at any game where you can't click on the enemy to make them die, but she just said that she didn't think that when backtracking she should have to put up with a camera angle that showed 10 feet in front of her. I told her that no camera system was perfect, and refrained from telling her that she was on crack.
In short, the answer to your question is that Eternal Darkness is intended for a person who has a love for dark things, and has a minimum of ability to solve simple tasks of dexterity and problem solving. My friend had a problem differentiating the R button from the A button.
Eternal Darkness is a very intellectual game, and the true genius of it may very well be over some people's heads, given the truly literary atmosphere of the game. If you don't like to read, and you don't like deep things, it's entirely possible you don't like Eternal Darkness.
Post by: Ocarina Blue on December 07, 2003, 12:24:27 AM
BTW, what was your favourite chapter? Mine was easily Paul Luther's.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 07, 2003, 02:21:47 AM
Quote
Eternal Darkness is a very intellectual game
I thought it was the easiest game ever and nothing near that pretentious. I tore through all three paths in a weekend (also it was just a loaner at the time) - I thought it was okay, but the lack of difficulty really really hurt it.
However, I think it deserves the award of "most cool ideas introduced to a game, ever." It's more fun to show to friends, actually, and show them all the cool and messed up stuff in the game. And watch them jump at you-know-what.
Post by: Marcus Arillius on December 07, 2003, 02:48:20 AM
Post by: The Omen on December 07, 2003, 03:57:13 AM
Post by: RareWare on December 07, 2003, 05:07:01 AM
Hey, its good you actually tried it before saying it sucked. I personally like it, but not everyone will. Although most who are against and have never played it are small people looking for attention.
Thank you for a honest and valid opinion.
Post by: rpglover on December 07, 2003, 06:32:11 AM
Post by: The Omen on December 07, 2003, 08:16:21 AM
Quote
I can't see why everyone thinks this game is so good. I tried playing it but all it did was give me a headache, i didn't find it fun at all. It was slow, uninteresting and unexciting. I tried sticking with it for a bit but i just got annoyed. Could someone please tell me what makes this game so good and whether or not it gets better. This is the first game i've heard good things about then not liked myself. Please tell me what you think and don't be afraid to criticise
How long did you play it [ED]? You have to play around 2-2.5 hours to really get the story going.
Post by: KDR_11k on December 07, 2003, 08:43:35 AM
I have a room with really bright light conditions and thus prefer my games a bit brighter, to be able to make out anything on a sunny day. I had problems with many areas in MP and ED was downright unplayable. Even if you target a game at "older" (read: younger) gamers you should give it a decent amount of light. Or add those flares from Descent.
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 07, 2003, 08:51:23 AM
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on December 07, 2003, 08:54:29 AM
About ED, I only played it one time through, and it was good while it lasted. I tried to play it over again, but it just got too boring for me.
Post by: Grey Ninja on December 07, 2003, 08:56:13 AM
You would not believe how difficult it was playing the volcano level in Rogue Squadron on that TV... it was like taking wild stabs in the darkness while driving down a street at 80 mph.
Post by: KDR_11k on December 07, 2003, 09:01:02 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 07, 2003, 09:01:37 AM
(Haha, Grey, you're the master of converting a seemingly innocent reply into a plethora of insults
)
Post by: Cap on December 07, 2003, 09:31:34 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 07, 2003, 12:53:21 PM
Post by: Berny on December 07, 2003, 01:31:13 PM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 07, 2003, 02:20:38 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on December 07, 2003, 02:23:05 PM
But even so, a normally blank, white screen would probably be pretty grey on my television. I might still check it out, but I'm not sure.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 07, 2003, 02:31:29 PM
Post by: ThePerm on December 07, 2003, 06:12:17 PM
Post by: WesDawg on December 07, 2003, 07:33:27 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 07, 2003, 09:23:50 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on December 08, 2003, 06:37:46 AM
I imagine that in the future, games like ED will be more common and ED for the Gamecube will be one of those games everyone missed the first time around that is sought after by hardcore gamers. It will be like how RPGs for the SNES suddenly became a big deal after FFVII because everyone now liked RPGs and wanted to play some of the great ones they missed.
Post by: jaz013 on December 08, 2003, 07:41:01 AM
Ps. If you look for "Cathedar Oublier" in google , you can visit the place where the fight vs. the guardian was held, I mean, the real Cathedral.
Post by: ThePerm on December 08, 2003, 08:17:04 AM
Post by: The Omen on December 08, 2003, 10:55:41 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 08, 2003, 11:11:32 AM
Post by: BlackGriffen on December 08, 2003, 12:33:54 PM
One - there was insufficient variation between the story lines. Enemies that were more unique at every level and possible giving each line a level all its own would have helped this a lot.
Two - The difficulty was way too low. The two biggest culprits in this are the replenish as you walk magick meter and the trappers. Essentially, if you have the ability to walk around a bit and completely recover after every room, the difficulty should reflect that, or you should not have that ability. Another possibility is that sanity should have been more difficult to recover. My first choice was the blue path, and I actually had a decent challenge on my hands until I learned that a green recover spell heals sanity easily.
Runner up Flaw - the game was too subtle, cerebral, and slow for a lot of gamers. This, I think, has a lot to do with the financial success, and less to do with the quality of ED as a game.
I actually bought two discounted copies of the game (admittedly, it was because I scratched the first disk trying to clean it).
I very much hope to see a sequel to ED, perhaps on the N5. What I would hope would be added to the sequel:
1 - expand the magick system. The magick system in ED was a simple noun-verb (verb and direct object, subject was always "I") matching system with a single adverb (pargon/power). Given this linguistic basis, there are virtually limitless possibilities for expansion. The addition of 1-shot runes would be nice. An interesting, if difficult to implement, possibility would be to make casting disks that have more ways to arrange the runes than just in a circle.
2 - Keep it deep. It's important to grab new gamers, but it won't be ED without the history and depth.
That's all I've got right now.
BG
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 08, 2003, 02:17:59 PM
Quote
Two - The difficulty was way too low. The two biggest culprits in this are the replenish as you walk magick meter and the trappers. Essentially, if you have the ability to walk around a bit and completely recover after every room, the difficulty should reflect that, or you should not have that ability. Another possibility is that sanity should have been more difficult to recover. My first choice was the blue path, and I actually had a decent challenge on my hands until I learned that a green recover spell heals sanity easily.
Yeah, seriously, by having like, shield, recover health, recover sanity, enchant item and damage field on quick spell, the player instantly becomes an undefeatable terror and the game a trifling bug to be crushed beneath their feet. What we needed, seriously, was a super hard difficulty, or no regain-sanity spells or getting rid of magic that recovers at light speed or something like that. Plus, having a challenging game makes it MUCH more scarier.
It would be cool if there was a version with an expert quest (like Zelda) released as a bonus disc, maybe when Too Human comes out in 2009.
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 08, 2003, 02:25:04 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 08, 2003, 02:39:27 PM
Seriously though, there's a problem when I cruise through the game all three routes without dying on my first attempt.
Post by: Luciferschild on December 08, 2003, 02:46:30 PM
Quote
I can't see why everyone thinks this game is so good. I tried playing it but all it did was give me a headache, i didn't find it fun at all. It was slow, uninteresting and unexciting. I tried sticking with it for a bit but i just got annoyed. Could someone please tell me what makes this game so good and whether or not it gets better. This is the first game i've heard good things about then not liked myself. Please tell me what you think and don't be afraid to criticise
I pretty much felt the same thing you did. I found this game to be terrible to point of being annoying. I thought RE was a lot better than this game and I don't care much for RE. In conclusion, NO not everyone thinks this game is good.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 08, 2003, 02:55:38 PM
Er anyway, I'm hoping that everybody in this thread can accept that ED has both really fun featurs and legitimate problems both. :S
Post by: GaimeGuy on December 08, 2003, 03:07:19 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 08, 2003, 03:15:21 PM
QuoteQuote
Eternal Darkness is a very intellectual game
I thought it was the easiest game ever and nothing near that pretentious. I tore through all three paths in a weekend (also it was just a loaner at the time) - I thought it was okay, but the lack of difficulty really really hurt it.
I'm surprised no one has pointed this out yet, but Eternal Darkness's level of difficulty has nothing do with it's intellectuality. The only reason it was easy was because you could shield yourself from any harm, and refill health and sanity when necessary- without those two spells, I think you would all be playing a very different fiddle. In any case, I think Ninja was referring more to the story and puzzles when he called it intellectual, in which case it is easily the most intellectual game I've ever played, or ever will play.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 08, 2003, 03:32:55 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on December 08, 2003, 03:37:21 PM
Post by: Grey Ninja on December 08, 2003, 04:53:59 PM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 08, 2003, 05:45:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
I can see where you're coming from, but I still beg to differ. Puzzles like this have been in every game ever made, many times, and you can just get the story from a Lovecraft book. I think a real intellectual game like, you know, a game where you employ strategy and tactics of sorts.
What are you talking about? There are many ways you can play ED. Sometimes I like to send zombies to fight, set up a damage field, send a horror, use a trapper, enchant guns, and cut off zombies' arms so they can't hurt me. You can use strategy in ED, or just use normal weapons.
Post by: savanna03 on December 08, 2003, 06:22:21 PM
also, i didn't like the fact the levels were reused and it wasn't inspiring... they made the sword base weapon too powerful compared to the guns... i swear, the guns where useless in that game, i didn't actually used the guns other than killing those stupid trappers... ahhhh but the plot was just unbelievable though, that the strength of the game... i dont know about the sanity's effect, but it feels it was just a gimmick... (i have interesting ideas for the sanity's effect but who cares, developers doesn't listen to fans about game ideas anyways.)
but i still think SILICON KNIGHT are talented bunch... us CANADIANS got to stick together u know... and DENIS DYACK, ur still my favourite and i cant wait for METAL GEAR SOLID.
Post by: yellowfellow on December 08, 2003, 06:29:33 PM
Post by: Bloodworth on December 08, 2003, 07:49:18 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 08, 2003, 08:12:58 PM
Quote
What are you talking about? There are many ways you can play ED. Sometimes I like to send zombies to fight, set up a damage field, send a horror, use a trapper, enchant guns, and cut off zombies' arms so they can't hurt me. You can use strategy in ED, or just use normal weapons.
Yeah, that might be fun if the enemies put up any real fight. Every enemy can be killed at light speed with a sword at arm arm head or just head, depending on the critter. I mean, I dunno, the enemies just feel so absurdly weak in this game, you needn't employ anything further than a certain optimal pattern for destroying them as fast as possible.
Quote
mouse_clicker has it right. I was referring to the rather deep literary references and epic backgrounds that joe-blow-works-at-gas-station would not normally understand. I didn't bother fighting with you SUPER, because frankly, I think you are one of the people I was referring to.
I'm hurt that you might accuse me of being uncultured. Our bizarre love-hate relationship continues
What I'm getting at is that it's not a good thing when the story of a game overshadows the gameplay itself.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 08, 2003, 09:24:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
Yeah, I really like this thread.
Yeah, that might be fun if the enemies put up any real fight. Every enemy can be killed at light speed with a sword at arm arm head or just head, depending on the critter. I mean, I dunno, the enemies just feel so absurdly weak in this game, you needn't employ anything further than a certain optimal pattern for destroying them as fast as possible.
While that's true for some of the enemies, you can't kill the guardians at light speed. I wasn't trying to imply that the enemies were tough, I was just saying you could choose how to kill them. I think the player being stronger and faster than the monsters makes for a fun experience. In Resident Evil, the player is weak and moves like a tank. That takes away from the game. Much of the horror in RE comes from the control issues, knowing that you cannot easily and naturally get away from enemies.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 08, 2003, 09:39:08 PM
As for RE, well, sure the controls are a little unintuitive, but I don't think the difficulty comes from that. Honestly, it's not hard to 'master' the RE controls after an hour or two at most (and we've had like six RE games out). Even if it controlled exactly like ED, it'd still be pretty challenging. Monsters are tough, the player is weak, and items are scarce. That makes the game challenging to the point where you actually have to use your head, and I that's where I get my RDA of fun from a game.
Quote
I think the player being stronger and faster than the monsters makes for a fun experience.
Okay, I can see where you're coming from, except from this statement. I think a game implies some sort of challenge and not just rolling over every critter like it was nothing. Unless we're talking about taking some sort of sadistic pleasure here, and I'm all for that.
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 08, 2003, 10:14:13 PM
) Also, you have to admit, in RE having the defense items is easier than having to shake off bone thieves by yourself in ED. That is a challenge in ED, and if you fail, you're dead. Not even Tyrant in RE has an instant kill like the bone thieves. In the end though, RE is like a video game equivalent of Night of the Living Dead, and Eternal Darkness in some ways is like a few of HP LoveCraft's stories bound together, and I like both of them.
Post by: Glenn2K4 on December 09, 2003, 02:01:48 AM
only flaw: the plot was too weird! i liked the historial accuracy thing but the enemies and bosses were just too weird for me....kinda tookaway from things/
Post by: KDR_11k on December 09, 2003, 05:26:51 AM
I found the horrors (or Shamblers, as I call them) to be really difficult. I tried aiming at the heads, but that just meant it took me longer to kill them and left me open for enemy attacks. The red zombies were pretty annoying, too, because they could take so many hits.
Also, I don't know why people call the mana fast loading. It takes me minutes of running to recharge that metre. That's also the reason why I don't use every spell available to me, after maybe two of them the mana is empty and I need to play threadmill.
Post by: Ian Sane on December 09, 2003, 06:27:12 AM
They sure killed me instantly a few times. Maybe it depends on which path you take. I took the red one which is supposed to be the hardest and those stupid things killed me at nearly full health a few times. All they have to do is jump on you and borrow into your neck.
I thought the game was a little easy but I did die a few times and there were a few enemies (bone thieves, horrors) that I dreaded encountering. Again though the enemies in the red path are supposed to take the most damage so maybe the game's a lot easier if you're on the green or blue path. I think the game would have been better if you either couldn't use a heal spell or your magic either didn't replenish on it's own or replenished slower. However if they made a change like that then they would have to have more healing items in the game. Otherwise with the current design in the later levels there would be no way to heal yourself which would have been a little too hard for my liking. I think the reason they went with the heal spell was because they probably felt that having items that heal you or replenish magic wouldn't fit with the realistic design. Using herbs to heal mortal wounds in Resident Evil does look a little silly.
One thing I really liked about ED over RE was that it was hard to screw yourself over in such a way that you couldn't beat the game. In RE you can do that by using too many items or ink ribbons and it REALLY sucks when, because of choices you made earlier, you can't continue on. In my opinion that's poor game design.
"i didn't like the fact the levels were reused"
I actually really liked that. It was cool to play a level and notice how things had changed over hundreds of years. I remember how cool it was when I discovered that the cathedral I was in was the same church that I had played in centuries earlier. If it was just the same levels with different characters that would have sucked but because the levels were similar yet different it was cool. It was like when you become adult Link in Ocarina of Time but on a much grander scale. I think incorporating something like that into a Zelda game where you revisit a dungeon hundreds of years in the future would be great.
Post by: CHEN on December 09, 2003, 07:33:28 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 09, 2003, 07:51:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
luke: Eh? The Bone Thieves just cause damage while they sit on you. If you let them inflict too much you're dead, but I never saw them do an instakill.
You're lucky then! Any manner of the bone thieves can take control of your body if you don't shake them off, and they are harder to force off then zombies. The reason they "just cause damage while they sit on you" is because they're using their blades to bury themselves in your body and take control! I hope ED2 has more bone thieves and even more creepier monsters than before.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 09, 2003, 08:28:52 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 09, 2003, 09:32:15 AM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 09, 2003, 09:36:24 AM
Edited: okay, what I actually like about the game is, well, yeah, the story (also nice bit of troll mastery there GN), the insanity effects (especially the comedy ones) and definitely the art and presentation. It played well, too, but how it plays doesn't mean a whole lot when I'm in almost no danger of dying whatsoever. : (
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 09, 2003, 10:05:55 AM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 09, 2003, 10:11:41 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 09, 2003, 10:15:35 AM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 09, 2003, 10:22:05 AM
Post by: the_zombie_luke on December 09, 2003, 10:27:01 AM
Post by: ThePerm on December 09, 2003, 07:32:57 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on December 09, 2003, 08:06:50 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on November 10, 2005, 02:26:17 PM
Quote
Eternal Darkness is a very intellectual game, and the true genius of it may very well be over some people's heads, given the truly literary atmosphere of the game. If you don't like to read, and you don't like deep things, it's entirely possible you don't like Eternal Darkness.
Quote
mouse_clicker has it right. I was referring to the rather deep literary references and epic backgrounds that joe-blow-works-at-gas-station would not normally understand. I didn't bother fighting with you SUPER, because frankly, I think you are one of the people I was referring to.
THREAD NECROMANCER'D FOR HILARITY
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 10, 2005, 03:30:10 PM
Hooray for things.
Post by: Mario on November 10, 2005, 03:34:02 PM
I can't see why everyone thinks this game is so good. I tried playing it but all it did was give me a headache, i didn't find it fun at all. It was slow, uninteresting and unexciting. I tried sticking with it for a bit but i just got annoyed. Could someone please tell me what makes this game so good and whether or not it gets better. This is the first game i've heard good things about then not liked myself. Please tell me what you think and don't be afraid to criticise
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on November 10, 2005, 03:34:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
I've played and own this game now.
Hooray for things.
Eternal Darkness is a very intellectual game, and the true genius of it may very well be over some people's heads, given the truly literary atmosphere of the game. If you don't like to read, and you don't like deep things, it's entirely possible you don't like Eternal Darkness.
Post by: PIAC on November 10, 2005, 03:37:10 PM
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on November 10, 2005, 03:42:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: FREE KEVIN
I tried playing Eternal Darkness at the petrol station but a QUANTUM PHASE SHIFT FLUX sucked my gamecube into another realm. Or maybe I was all high on petrol fumes and I gave it to Joe.
mouse_clicker has it right. I was referring to the rather deep literary references and epic backgrounds that joe-blow-works-at-gas-station would not normally understand. I didn't bother fighting with you SUPER, because frankly, I think you are one of the people I was referring to.
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 13, 2005, 11:53:43 AM
I would not put it as one of the best gamecube games out there...its just above average.
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on November 13, 2005, 12:21:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
I've played and own this game now.
Hooray for things.
I'm guessing you paid less than 10 dollars for it
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 13, 2005, 01:03:23 PM
Well worth my money.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on November 13, 2005, 01:09:53 PM
Post by: wandering on December 18, 2005, 04:56:46 PM
Post by: marvel_moviefan_2012 on June 05, 2014, 11:08:49 PM
Post by: Khushrenada on December 18, 2015, 12:33:59 AM
built
the
