Marathon - Durandal Review

By Kristan Reed Published 7 August, 2007

Snickers never happened.

Version tested: Xbox 360

And now it's Bungie's turn to wallow in some timely nostalgia, as we turn the clock back almost 12 years to a time when 3D accelerators had barely left the drawing board. Those happy, expensive days...

The wallet-draining mid-'90s was definitely a good time to be paying close attention to the genesis of first-person shooters; every new game seemed to build on the one before in an interesting way, and an awful lot of the innovations we now take for granted were still very much up for grabs.

At the time, the relatively unknown Bungie studio was content to plough a lonely furrow on the Macintosh - tantamount to commercial suicide at a time when the PC was fully in its stride as the cutting edge gaming platform of choice. Still, it didn't hurt them in the long run, did it?

Fill that gaping knowledge gap

Given the impact Halo had subsequently, it still feels a bit wrong to have missed out on a large body of the company's work - like coming to a band six albums down the line. But there are mitigating circumstances. For a start, most committed PC gamers at the time, like me, were far too entranced by Doom 2, Quake, Rise of the Triad, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, Descent and System Shock to notice that there was another equally interesting shooter series emerging on another even more improbably expensive platform.

1

Checking the map screen becomes an essential part of plotting your path through the game.

The other factor for Marathon's relative obscurity was that Mac gaming in most parts of the world got zero air-time whatsoever - few specialist gaming stores even bothered to sell Mac games - and still don't. By the time the belated Windows 95 port came out for Marathon: Durandal, it was old news and its impact was all but lost in mainstream terms.

But by the magic of Xbox Live Arcade, the second game in the revered Marathon trilogy now has another chance to show all of us PC heads what we were missing (that's if you never got around to downloading it for free a few years back). Placed in the context of when it came out (November 1995), it's easy to see that it was one of the few to attempt a coherent plot, and some of the technical innovations were neat for the time, but it's not so easy to unpick why the game was any better or more important than the games listed above.

Be patient

It all kicks off 17 years after the events of the original - you're sent in alongside an army of ex-colonists to search the ruins of Lh'owon by Durandal, an AI being. Unlike practically every FPS out at the time, Bungie's focus appears to be less about killing everything in sight to proceed through each level, and more about patient exploration and finding out what each level demands from you. To do this, you have to pay close attention to the various information terminals dotted around the map. Sometimes you're just dumped a big segment of narrative (usually full of unpronounceable names, unhelpfully), and other time given a concise overview of a switch to seek out, or task to perform. It's pretty basic stuff, in truth, but it definitely helps give you a sense of purpose and place, rather than merely wandering around shooting things.

2

Green blood: should be okay for a German release, then. (Yes yes, we know, popular misconception and all that.)

The main problem with the game, in 2007, is that it takes an age to truly get your bearings in any of the game's labyrinthine levels. You might well have a handle on roughly what you're supposed to do, but the samey-looking nature of the simplistic design means it can take a long time before you stop wandering around in circles. Back in 1995, game designers hadn't really figured out that it wasn't much fun being lost, and as such Marathon: Durandal quite quickly becomes a bit of a slog to play through more than a handful of its 30 or so levels.

As atmospheric as it must have felt at the time, it only goes a small way towards excusing what was, and is, quite wretched combat. The AI is practically non-existent, with enemies standing around gormlessly, waiting for you to pick them off one by one. Next to the seminal Doom 2, it can't even hold a candle to id's classic in this respect - even if it does boast some neat innovations like dual-wielding, and the ability to swim through liquid.

Moan, whinge, whine

There are a bunch of minor complaints that don't help endear you to the game, either - like starting a new level with the health you left the last one with. Not only is this fairly annoying, it makes further progress extremely tough if you're low on health - often resulting in a lengthy backtrack as you reload a previously saved game and repeat an entire section simply to stand a chance of getting anywhere with the next level. Another common moan is that it's one of the worst games for inspiring motion sickness - although it's not something that affected us - and in any case, camera bob is turned off by default, so it really shouldn't be an issue for many people.

3

Let's see how many hideous colour combinations we can pack into one screenshot.

On a personal level, as nice as it is in theory to have a slightly more involved plot-line and sense of purpose, the game still inevitably resorts to getting players to push switches to progress. It's not as revolutionary as the passionate fan-base would have you believe - give us Duke 3D any day of the week (please, 3D Realms - you know it makes sense).

On the other hand, if you played and enjoyed Marathon at the time, then you'll be in for a treat. The game's art has been entirely cleaned up to enhance it for HD displays, the HUD has been tweaked to ensure it takes up less of the screen, the game now runs at 60 frames-per-second instead of 30, and the whole shebang now takes full advantage of widescreen displays. In terms of giving fans the ultimate version, you can't fault it whatsoever.

Survival horror

On top of that, there's a brand new score-based single-player 'Survival' mode, where you have to see how long you can last against wave upon wave of enemies, as well as all the online modes that you'll remember from the old days. In addition to the standard 'Every Man for Himself' Deathmatch, there's Kill the Guy with the Ball (the skull, more accurately), King of the Hill, Tag, Team Play (Team Deathmatch), and Co-op for up to eight players. Although most of these now feel exceptionally old-school, they still have a certain charm about them and give gaming historians the chance to see how some of Halo's multiplayer ideas were first implemented.

All told, Marathon: Durandal offers an intriguing insight into Bungie's early days, and for the sake of 800 points it's well worth checking out. That said, despite being ahead of Doom 2 in many respects, it's simply nowhere near as fun to play. Saddled with clunky combat, it's impossible to come to this with fresh eyes and appreciate what the fuss was about. If you're a die-hard fan, though, this will be an irresistible purchase, with real care and attention lavished on taking full advantage of what Xbox Live Arcade has to offer. Either way, try before you buy - it may be Bungie, but that's no guarantee you'll like it.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kristan.

About Kristan Reed

Kristan is a former editor of Eurogamer, dad, Stone Roses bore and Norwich City supporter who sometimes mutters optimistically about Team Silent getting back together.

Read more articles from Kristan by visiting the Kristan Reed archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (64) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • menage #1 5 years ago

    Ugh, I really didn't like this.

    People getting motion sickness aren't to hard to find either.

  • ProdigyBE_OPM #2 5 years ago

    1st!

    Woohoo!

    /goes back to boring job.


    Edit: Damn.
    Edited by ProdigyBE_OPM at 07/08/07 @ 11:31

  • souljacker2000 #3 5 years ago

    sofalover beat u stupid ass

    also realised he edited
    Edited by souljacker2000 at 07/08/07 @ 11:32

  • Eighthours #4 5 years ago

    You might well have a handle on roughly what you're supposed to do, but the samey-looking nature of the simplistic design means it can take a long time before you stop wandering around in circles.

    Oi! Stop lifting the paragraph-about-the-indoor-levels from every single Halo 1 review! ;)

  • Darkedge #5 5 years ago

    tried demo. it's a bit crap.

    Bungie may have created Halo but tbh thats about all they have done good, marathon back in the day was ok, Oni was pretty bad though.

  • Darren #6 5 years ago

    Not as bad as I thought it'd be, kind of reminded me a lot of Doom 64 on the N64 visually with it's non-pixellated, smoothed out 2D sprites and 3D backgrounds, but it's not a patch on the vastly superior Doom when it comes to gameplay. At 800 points, it's waaaaaaaaaaaaaay overpriced, it should be 400 at the most.

  • kangarootoo #7 5 years ago

    Played the demo the other day. It hasn't aged well at all. I got very mildly stuck, and boredom prevented further attempts at exploration. Nostalgia is dangerous stuff.

  • Mint #8 5 years ago

    Woohoo!
    I've been waiting years for someone to admit Marathon is overrrated!

  • Yaster #9 5 years ago

    @Mint

    A bit like all games Bungie are involved with, ooooooooooo what a bitch!

  • SimonM7 #10 5 years ago

    Good review, well put. The crux is really that the story and lore are so great, but the game itself just.. was.. never really... good.

    It's debatable if it'd still be Marathon, but a remake that reworks combat and the camera (woozy zoom crazyness as is!) with stylized, high res Xbox standard visuals would've been preferable I think. Incorporate the story of Marathon, Durandal and Infinity, flog that at 2000ish points and set a content standard the way Tekken 5: DR did for PSN.

    Even if I'd like to dive into the name droppings, quotations and references of the sophisticated narration here, I could never put up with the action itself.

  • captainrentboy #11 5 years ago

    Played the demo, and was repulsed after about 10 minutes. Like the review said, it's just soooo easy to get lost, for most of that 10 minutes I just circling around in the same rooms.
    Like someone mentioned, bar the Halo series (Which I effing love), Bungie's back catalogue isn't that impressive is it? Infact it's weird how they went from developing some right tripe, to developing one of the most popular series of games out there.

  • crazyhorse174 #12 5 years ago

    tried demo. it's a bit crap.

    Bungie may have created Halo but tbh thats about all they have done good, marathon back in the day was ok, Oni was pretty bad though.

    Bungie did the Myth series as well - that wasnt bad.

  • krudster #13 5 years ago

    I'm glad it's not just me, then. I was half expecting irate Bungie fanboys to descend and kick me to the curb for daring to suggest one of its games might not be akin to the second coming.

  • Batman2100 #14 5 years ago

    6/10? Not as good as Halo 3 may or may not be then? :)

  • Dizzy #15 5 years ago

    >thats about all they have done good

    Are you a gamer? Probably not.

    Does Myth ring a bell?

  • fluff_the_tiger #16 5 years ago

    18th Prost!

    Yeah the demo made me have to go and lie down, I wouldn't want to play the game on acid

  • Der_tolle_Emil #17 5 years ago

    Myth was not too bad, that's true. Marathon however is bad imho. I really enjoy old FPS games, I like getting lost. But the zoomed in and way too low FOV just ruins the experience. It just looks so wrong when you play it. Also the reworked graphics look like shit and don't fit. Some of the graphics look like they belong in a comic but not a game.

    Also -1 for the pistol having the same sound effect like the one in Doom.

  • Wash #18 5 years ago

    Bungie did myth and that was pretty good.

  • captainrentboy #19 5 years ago

    If anything, from reading the comments sections on here with regards to anything Halo related, I'd say the Bungie haters far outnumber the Bungie fanboys on this site anyway. So I doubt there will be any uproar over this score.
    If Halo 3 got a 6 though, I would quite likely kill myself, possibly by suffocating myself in the legendary edition's Spartan helmet.

  • joephish #20 5 years ago

    I haven't got round to playing this on XBLA yet, but I played the Marathon series when it came out back in the day, and I definitely loved it a much as I loved Halo when it came out. Everyone's saying that Bungie's back catalogue is rubbish, but I really don't think that's true.

    I only recently played Goldeneye for 64, and despite really trying to have an open mind, I didn't enjoy it much at all. I'm afraid the basic situation is that everything that they did in both Goldeneye and Marathon have pretty much been improved upon - they are simply early attempts to the sophistication of modern FPSes.

    The difference with Doom is that it is a more pure example of the genre. It has a simpler formula. It was a good game then and it's a good game now, just because of what it is.

  • mcmonkeyplc #21 5 years ago

    First game I have ever experienced motion sickness.

    Bungie have not deemed me worthy :(

  • Tweakmonkey #22 5 years ago

    I tried playing this when it first came out on the Mac but I didn't enjoy back then when it was cutting edge. Doom ftw.

  • dcangel #23 5 years ago

    Nostalgia is wonderful, but necessarily rose-tinted. The past, in this case, is best left in the past, lest we be crushingly disappointed.

    The crux is really that the story and lore are so great, but the game itself just.. was.. never really... good.

    Sounds to me awfully like another game from the same stable... ;)

  • FooAtari #24 5 years ago

    "I'd say the Bungie haters far outnumber the Bungie fanboys on this site anyway"

    Why does everyone have to be a hater or a fnaboy? Personally I don't give a damn who develops a game, I wouldnt let it get in the way of my opinions of it. Maybe some people, you know, just dont like Halo, weather that be the story, the mechanics or whatever.

  • S.J.Rogers #25 5 years ago

    I suffer from motion sickness in a lot of games (Doom, Time Splitters, Quake 2 and more)...

    So i will give this a miss..!

  • Yossarian #26 5 years ago

    Bungie did myth and that was pretty good

    you made my post for me. :)

  • Mint #27 5 years ago

    "Sounds to me awfully like another game from the same stable... ;)
    ignore poster"

    Pathways Into Darkness? ;P

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #28 5 years ago

    Does Myth ring a bell?

    What, the tedious graphic adventure written (on the PC, at least) in Macromedia Director with abstract rendered graphics that's one of the best-selling PC games ever, having persuaded legions of idiots to buy CD-ROM drives?

  • Mint #29 5 years ago

    Thats Myst, you fool. Myth was a strategy thingy if I recall . . .

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #30 5 years ago

    Bungie did myth

    Lies!

    Myth was clearlly written by Magnetic Scrolls:

    http://amigareviews.classicgaming.gamesp...

  • NegativeZero #31 5 years ago

    If you're experiencing it now, then yes, it's tired and flawed. The problem is really that you just can't unlearn the over ten years of gaming evolution that the FPS genre has gone through.

    As someone who had a PC and a Mac back in the day, I can honestly say that Marathon really was good. Really, the Doom games are the only shooters from that era which have aged really well. And even then, nostalgia plays a significant part - I only had the shareware version of Doom, so when playing on XBLA I had heaps of fun blasting through the first chapter then got very quickly bored when I started the others. Seriously, give Rise of the Triad or Duke 3D or any of them a go, they aren't as great as you remember but if you'd played them a lot, you're not probably not going to notice.

    The AI is practically non-existent, with enemies standing around gormlessly, waiting for you to pick them off one by one. Next to the seminal Doom 2, it can't even hold a candle to id's classic in this respect

    The AI in Doom and Doom II is exactly the same as the AI in Marathon. They just don't turn on each other as often.

    There are a bunch of minor complaints that don't help endear you to the game, either - like starting a new level with the health you left the last one with.

    Every FPS ever made has done this. Why is that a complaint? Hell, they made it heaps easier in XBLA - the original game, if you died you'd drop back to the last pattern buffer you saved at - even if that was several levels back. At least here you just restart the level.

    There certainly are some frustrating bits in the game. I had trouble remembering how to complete a few levels, and there's a few in the middle of the game which are painfully difficult. However they're reasonably straightforward once you know the route through. But again, this ties back to the whole issue that if this is the first time you're playing it, you're not going to enjoy it anywhere near as much.

    Really though, this one is definitely aimed squarely at the fans. I think a 6 is a little harsh, I'd have given it a 7. Personally for me it's one of the only XBLA games I've really enjoyed a lot, but I played the shit out of M2 back when it was fresh.

    Thanks for pointing out the view bob setting, too. I knew there was something that seemed missing from the way it moved but for the life of me I couldn't figure out what it was.


    EDIT: I would love to have a good remake of Pathways into Darkness. That was a really unique game.
    Edited by NegativeZero at 07/08/07 @ 13:31

  • Raya #32 5 years ago

    He he - Remember playing Marathon 1 on the Mac - never played this one. II came out on windows as well and was a flop ;-)

    When I played Halo it rang a lot of bells! I think Bungie was developing Halo as another Marathon before MS bought them if I remember rightly - it shows in the enemies.

    Myself I never got into Halo - I finished it on PC but it was a major let down. Some of the worst level design I've ever seen

  • bdc #33 5 years ago

    LETS BASH HALOL

  • Durandle #34 5 years ago

    Just looking at my username you can tell which camp I'm in. However its a pretty fair review, although maybe a little harsher than expected. To say that Doom/II is better or more fun is totally subjective to what playing style you happen to like. I actually found the endless killing of brown pixels really quite dull and unimaginative, and found the Marathon progressing sci-fi plot mixed with blowing stuff up a lot more fun - not to mention a lot less brown.

    heh I suspect though my rose-tinted glasses are amplified by the various amazing total conversions that were made for the game. Oh and the fun with the map editor when you realise that the engine supports 5D space.

  • Entity #35 5 years ago

    I was underwhelmed by the game, i'd never played it before but paid the 800 and agree with the 6/10 score

  • jack_klugman #36 5 years ago

    Durandle - Durandal?

  • Durandle #37 5 years ago

    jack_klugman: yeah, cos if I used Durandal, it'd be taken pretty much anywhere I go ;) Been using it since waaaaay back... sad I know.

  • crazyhorse174 #38 5 years ago

    He he - Remember playing Marathon 1 on the Mac - never played this one. II came out on windows as well and was a flop ;-)

    When I played Halo it rang a lot of bells! I think Bungie was developing Halo as another Marathon before MS bought them if I remember rightly - it shows in the enemies.

    Myself I never got into Halo - I finished it on PC but it was a major let down. Some of the worst level design I've ever seen

    I'm pretty sure Halo was always being developed as Halo - it was originally supposed to be out for the PC waaaay before the XBox version was released. Remember reading about it in PC Zone years ago.

    Bit strange that it was released for the XBox first, then came out on the PC ages after that!

  • wizbob #39 5 years ago

    Bungie's success with Halo must be down to striking a deal with the Prince of Hell / Microsoft Certification Process.
    Edited by wizbob at 07/08/07 @ 14:09

  • Xerx3s #40 5 years ago

    First game I have ever experienced motion sickness.

    Skipped the 90's then? ;)

  • Durandle #41 5 years ago

    crazyhorse174: Amusingly, it was first shown at a Mac expo event on OSX. Funny how things can change directing at a drop of hat... or drop of a big fat bundle of cash.

  • WJF #42 5 years ago

    Was there another Myth other than Magnetic Scrolls' awesomo adventure with the ace graphics (for the speccy)?

    Oh and for a more cerebal FPS of the time, play System Shock. Blows Doom out of the water if you like a bit more thought in your mid-90's FPS game (and is almost certainly better than Marathon too, but I cannot say having not played the game)

  • Chtulie #43 5 years ago

    "Doom 2, Quake, Rise of the Triad, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, Descent and System Shock"

    There is no way Rise of the Triad fits in a list like that.
    Unless it's something like:

    "Rise of the Triad unlike Doom 2, Quake, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, Descent and System Shock was not any good then, certainly isn't a classic viewed in the present day and is best not mentioned anymore ever again"

  • morriss #44 5 years ago

    I gave it a 6 too. Although I haven't published my review yet. Doom XBLA is just so much in every way.

  • crazyhorse174 #45 5 years ago

    Was there another Myth other than Magnetic Scrolls' awesomo adventure with the ace graphics (for the speccy)?

    Yep - it was a real-time strategy game set in a fantasy universe.

  • Krun #46 5 years ago

    The best thing about Marathon was it came with its own level editor, it was easy to use and many Public domain maps and whole new games came out using the marathon engine. That's what made it good.

  • krudster #47 5 years ago

    I'm too much of a born consumer to ever care about level editors - as nice an idea as it seems, there are always too many other games I haven't played/finished...

  • Waldo #48 5 years ago

    Myth wasn't very good either, although the multiplayer was fun for about 10 minutes.
    Edited by Waldo at 07/08/07 @ 15:32

  • miiiguel #49 5 years ago

    I'm totally with krudster on the "level editor" thing.

  • dryden555 #50 5 years ago

    Loved the review's dig at Halo 2. A game that took 3 years to come out and yet the single player game was at best mediocre.

    Bungie's only success from a gamer's POV was Halo 1 and even that game suffered from deeply repetitive indoor levels. I'm not convinced Halo3 will be any good.
    Edited by dryden555 at 07/08/07 @ 16:16

  • captainrentboy #51 5 years ago

    dryden, as lots of folk on here have mentioned before, the thousands and thousands of gamers who still frequently play Halo 2 online might disagree with you on Halo 1 being Bungie's only success.
    The campaign might have been a bit of a let down in Halo 2, but the online side of it was mighty fine.

  • Machiavellian #52 5 years ago

    I see there are a lot of subjective people here. Anyway, I could not get into Marathon but then again I could not get into DOOM for XBLA again either. My glasses are not tinted because I played very version of Doom including Co-op and Dwango (for you old schoolers) but trying to play it again was very boring which tells me my taste definitely have moved on.

    On the other hand, anyone who bad mouth Myth will be tared and feathered on site. Myth was the first game that introduced me to Bungie and I still think as a strategic game is one of the best. Also Myth at the time had the best Online match making outside of Blizzard.net.

    Just to show that I am human, I also liked Oni. I had a lot of fun with Halo and even more fun with Halo 2 playing Co-op with my son so I guess you can easily say to each their own. Usually when people start to say this game or that is crap, I always like to know which game they consider great most times you nothing but dead air.

  • dryden555 #53 5 years ago

    Hey captain, gotta disagree -- the multiplayer of Halo 2 was so VERY similar to the multiplayer in Halo 1. It wasnt a substantive upgrade from the previous game in any way. Saying that the muliplayer of Halo 2 was great is really saying you liked the multiplayer of Halo 1.

    With 3 years of RandD and unlimited $$ to spend, Bungie extremely fumbled Halo 2's single player mode.

    if you want to call Halo 2 awesome, well, that's nice.

  • JP #54 5 years ago

    I respect the craft that went into the story for the Marathon series, but the way some Marathon fans look down at the Doom games for their story-free "mindlessness" is a good example of why "narrative chauvinism" is lame. Ten years on, Doom is still quite playable, no more or less mindless than Geometry Wars or Halo for that matter, while Marathon is a chore to play for all but the most nostalgia-driven, and you can get all the goodness out of it by reading over the Marathon Story page.

    A good story is worthless if it exists apart from solid core mechanics. Story should not be put in the role of "legitimizing" gameplay.
    Edited by JP at 07/08/07 @ 18:19

  • Krun #55 5 years ago

    @krudster
    I don't think so much it was using the editor yourself that was good (although many find that fun), it was more that you could get hold of of maps and entire games others had made you for free. On a Mac with next to zero games, those new maps and games were all much appreciated. (Warcraft humans ver orcs, was the only other game I had on that Mac).

    So in retrospect, the real reason Marathon was a great game, was that it was one best games on a system with no games.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #56 5 years ago

    Since I recently played Deus Ex for the first time (incredible game) I was hoping that Marathon would deliver a somewhat similar experience or a game that is still as playable today as Doom is with more than just frantic shooting.

    As for the endless Halo discussion, I played Halo last year for the first time since I never had a xbox but I do own a 360 now so I wanted to play it. Halo indeed does not stand out like I thought it would. I thought the story and setting were quite compelling but that was about it. It's an ok-ish game but nothing more.

    Personally I think it's really hard to get the right balance between a game that is basically shooting only and a game that is heavy on the storyline. On the one hand there are games like Doom, Serious Sam and also Painkiller, which drop everything but leave a very playable and fun singleplayer mode. On the other hand there are games like Deus Ex or System Shock (I haven't played the latter though yet) that have their focus on completely different elements. I enjoy both extremes but I have yet to find a game that does both without sacrifing either gameplay or story.

  • AOFanboi #57 5 years ago

    I have Myth II: Soulblighter, but ironically it will not play on my Mac since it's a pre-OSX title and I have an Intel Mac (Rosetta, the emulator software, only handles OSX-based PowerPC titles). Have to install and play on the PC.

    Man I wonder if Mac gaming had been a different beast had Microsoft not bought Bungie and cut off their Mac output. There are only so many titles Aspyr can license and port, and only Blizzard and id care otherwise. Unless you count more trivial stuff like Real Arcade and the like, their titles also work.

    Interview with the guys doing a Marathon: Resurrection thingy

  • captainrentboy #58 5 years ago

    dryden I wasn't trying to change your opinion on either aspect of Halo 2, I get that not everyone likes the Halo series, I was merely suggesting, judging by the many many fans of Halo 2's online multi-player that still play it today, that you stating Halo 1 was Bungie's only success to date seemed a bit daft.
    When clearly, Halo 2 was a massive success for the company, whether it has haters galore or not.
    Edit- And surely, just by the fact that Halo 2's multi-player actually allowed players to compete online, would mean it was a pretty big improvement over Halo's original MP.
    Edited by captainrentboy at 07/08/07 @ 21:49

  • dryden555 #59 5 years ago

    yes Bungie's halo 2 was a HUGE sales success -- there's no denying it sold tons. I bought it at full price like everyone else who had a XBOX. However I said "success from a gamer's POV" and I wasnt talking sales figures. As a game to be played, Halo 2 was a pale shadow of Halo 1, most especially if you dont care about the multiplayer mode. I really enjoyed Halo 1 too (loved the sticky grenades, enemy AI and vehicles).

    I hope Halo 3 is amazing but the gameplay videos so far show "more of the same kinda stuff" multiplayer modes.

  • ilmaestro #60 5 years ago

    Has anyone said 'it's all about the story' yet? And, possibly related to that, 'what's the point if you're not going to give people the other two to play?'.

    edit: or maybe just 'has krudster had his wages docked for that groan worthy tag line?'
    Edited by ilmaestro at 07/08/07 @ 22:05

  • krudster #61 5 years ago

    Actually, Tom did the strapline! Mine was slightly different :)

  • ChromeMud #62 5 years ago

    The demo proved to me for the umpteenth time that nostalgia is overrated and immediately deleted it after 5 minutes of play.
    The demo of Flatout 2 kept me busy for over an hour and was loads more fun with good visuals,physics and carnage that made me feel it was a full game in comparison.

  • ilmaestro #63 5 years ago

    What was the original, krudster?

  • corzair #64 5 years ago

    motion sickness your not joking

    I played the demo for 5 min and my head nearly exploded!
    think blipverts - maxheadroom etc

    also it looks bloody awful - waste of time with it cardboard cutout aliens and stuff
    why not redo the gfx make a good job of it under a good modern 3d engine like the roboblitz thing with unreal engine! and updo the gfx

    really dont see the point of this game