We'll make Turning Point better - Spark Related content
-
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty - Star spangled banner
-
Latest Turning Point: Fall of Liberty screenshots
- Review Turning Point: Fall of Liberty [56]
£2.96
RRP: £34.99
In stock
Buy Online
Order before 5.30pm and receive your order the next working day!
Advertisement
We'll make Turning Point better - Spark News
PC
Xbox 360
PlayStation 3
News
by
Robert Purchese
Spark Unlimited has said the Xbox 360 retail version of Turning Point: Fall of Liberty will not feature any of the various niggles gamers picked out in the demo.
The promise was made on Spark's IGN blog, in a posting claiming the code that was put on Live Marketplace on 23rd January was several months old.
Since then, and with the help of your feedback, notable improvements have been made. Launch copies will have significantly better movement, targeting, AI behaviour, ammo levels, grappling and graphics.
Spark is hoping it will quell the largely negative feedback the demo received.
Demos are often compiled early in development when a project reaches a feature complete stage. Once cobbled together you can't update them with changes made since.
However, with Codemasters yet to confirm the 29th February release date most retailers are listing, perhaps we are not seeing the full picture.
The publisher also offered no further confirmation on whether a fresh demo representative of final code would be released on 360.
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty is a first-person shooter for PC, PS3 and 360, set in an alternate world where Hitler won the Battle of Britain and is now rampaging across US soil.
You play as a construction worker caught in the middle of it all, who rather helpfully finds he can swing a punch and fire a gun.
Advertisement
Are you excited about Turning Point: Fall of Liberty on PC/PlayStation 3/Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Thanks!
Related Games
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty
Latest Features
Latest Videos
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty - Star spangled banner [3] 25 February, 2008
Latest News
-
New Turning Point demo on Live [17]
-
Codemasters' Leipzig line-up [8]
-
Turning Point date narrowed down [10]
-
Turning Point slips to March [9]
-
Codies looks for taxi driver progeny [8]
Latest Screenshots
24 April, 2008 [0]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-43 of 43 in total
Poster
|
0
That was finished code. The problem was they didn't expect the complaints. What this shows is that they have either inadequate play testing in place or the development team simply ignored any qa feedback they got. I've seen a lot of arrogant devs (I was guilty of it on a few occasions), who think the QA guys don't know squat and simply talk down their suggestions at meetings.
After a really eye opening playtest session with some local gamers, it really opens your eyes that you can get too close to a game you are developing and simply fail to see the flaws. So I'll give kudos to Sparks for having the guts to see that the gameplay needs some tweaking. Now if only the burnout paradise crew had done this too. |
|
ostrasized
31/01/08 @ 11:42
0
What did we expect them to say? "Yeah, sorry - that's the final game. Please buy it anyway."?
This is merely lies from Codemasters' marketing department - as usual. From the company that brought you rendered screenshots of Rally cars, then fired anyone who let slip that they were renders... |
|
farticusmaximus
31/01/08 @ 11:44
0
The turning point demo was truly truly dreadful.
It didnt look all that bad to be honest, but handled like sludge, had terrible AI, boring linear gameplay had a bad framerate due to the dreadful unreal engine. Please please please Infinity ward license out your engine and lets rid the world of UE3! |
|
farticusmaximus
31/01/08 @ 12:01
0
JSPOOLE - I can only assume you have low standards if you enjoyed the turning point demo. Isolated it may seem okay but compared to any other FPS it just doesnt cut the mustard.
The UE3 engine has proven itself to be difficult to work with. There are a lot more bad, truly bad and awful games out there using UE3 than there are good ones. UE3 works better from a 3rd person perspective, but frankly games like turning point, turok and frontlines suffer too much from the engine. Infinity ward however, have crafted a beautiful engine, it's fast and fluid and has incredible detail and animation. It's called progress and some embrace it. |
|
0
OK so it's not Call of Duty or Halo but that doesn't make it shit, yeah judging from the demo it needs some polish and if that's what they've done then great, I'll wait for the finished product before I judge the whole game.
I agree with JSPOOLE, stop whining like a bunch of teenage girls. The Unreal Engine? you seriously what to get rid of a very good engine that through being licensed out will drastically reduce development time not to mention how versatile it is. Also it's not exactly the first time unfinished code has been released on live. |
|
0
@JSPOOLE
There's no need to insult people. Personally, I don't consider myself an idiot. Others may see differently but certainly not based on seven word comment posted on a gaming forum... You're not doing your own profile any favours though. Especially considering your inability to accept the opinions of others on what is an entirely subjective matter.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 31/01/08 @ 12:05
|
|
optimusprym8
31/01/08 @ 12:09
0
first Bungie with Halo3 beta, then Sony with Home and now Spark with a demo; listening to feedback and implementing changes based upon it!? Good times, good times. Looks like someone somewhere knows that betas aren't demos, demos aren't finished and feedback is invaluable and the whole process is more worthy to a title than just as a marketing exercise. As Bill Hicks said "If you work in marketing..."
|
|
optimusprym8
31/01/08 @ 12:17
0
come on now, we all know Bush rigged the results and the majority didn't vote for him...
|
|
farticusmaximus
31/01/08 @ 12:20
0
Mr-Brett:
"Have you actually used both engines?" I've not developed using either, but I have played (360 only) every UE3 engine game and I've played CoD4 and could tell within a minute of play that the IW engine is superior in every way to the UE3 engine. This is purely from a technical standpoint. Framerate/texture quality/lighting/animation frames. I'm not asking for Turning point to be 'just like' CoD, but there is a minimum acceptable quality for any product and this just doesnt meet acceptable quality. I liked the art direction, kinda cartoony and the cityscape looked good (whist not moving) from the scaffold atop the building. From a technical point of view though, turning point failed to tick any of the required boxes. "This is stupid. demos are released to MAKE YOU WANT to buy the game, not beta-test it." I totally agree. |
|
Kazzahdrane
31/01/08 @ 12:29
0
To people defending this demo:
What the hell are you smoking? The graphics - while not as terrible as some people have made out - did genuinely make me think of an Xbox games. The hit detection is a complete joke - i.e. it's simply not there most of the time. After firing about 6 shots into the chest of a Nazi he finally played his "hit" animation and appeared to take damage. The controls are bodged - there are three settings for turning sensitivity, Medium is too slow (for me, but I'm not one of these gamers who likes to turn 360 in a millisecond or anything) and Fast was ridiculously unplayable to me. Frankly, this game should be an XBLA game at best. I'm not graphics whore, but to pay Ł40 for a 360 game it needs to actually use the power of the console and not suck badly. Will be interested to see how much (if at all) the game changes before release. Shame, as I really liked the concept and wanted this to be good. |
|
farticusmaximus
31/01/08 @ 12:45
0
JSPOOLE - calm down mate, no-one called your mam a whore or spilled your pint.
I said specifically I didnt want every game to be just like CoD, just to live up to something close to the technical standards that have been set by it. I'm all for variety, just not at the expense of quality. |
|
0
Does anyone else get the distinct feeling that developers are releasing demos as betas for the public to test for them? I mean if I had a penny for every article I've read over the past year from devs promising to fix all the issues in their demos then I'd have at least... oooo... a quid by now! Alternatively, if we aren't beta testing, why do devs release incomplete/early demos knowing full well that it could adversely affect people's opinion of the game, or even sales? :?
Anyway, I thought the demo was OK, it started off well before becoming a bit "ordinary". Deffo not a purchase for me though as I'm actively avoiding FPSs this year due to almost overdosing on them on the 360 during its past two years. Condemned 2 will be my next first-person game but that's not exactly a gun-and-run FPS anyway. |
|
0
The look of this game is fine as it's not going for the realism of COD4. Just the menu screen should have told people that. The problems people are having is with the gameplay.
If you shoot the soldiers in freeview, then they seem to ignore bullet hits a lot of the time. If you shoot them from aim mode, they seem to get hit just fine. It wasn't obvious about climbing ledges etc. etc. and I even managed to exit the game the first time I tried to play, because I naturally figured the white highlighted menu item was the one selected (as opposed to the dark, barely flashing item on the menu). The gameplay has some major issues which the developers simply didn't seem to be aware of. |
|
farticusmaximus
31/01/08 @ 13:01
0
If they released the demo as a Beta I'd take it in a better light than releasing it as a demo then saying 'ok it's shit, we'll fix it'.
The former implies they want the game to meet gamers expectations, the latter implies they view customers as suckers and dont care as long as it goes on sale and breaks even. |
|
0
@ JSPOOLE: You lost any semblance of credibility when you said that you liked Turok.
I played the TP demo and it was quite bad. At first I was awed by the opening scene. From then on everything started falling apart. Jumping feels heavy, aiming is laborious, AI is primitive and the scene where the mob starts running away at the end is ridiculous. The game definitely needs work for it to be of acceptable standards. Can these developers just hire normal gamers to do the playtesting? |
|
0
"Can these developers just hire normal gamers to do the playtesting?"
I was a play tester about 10 years ago. Believe me, the QA department is aware and no doubt the development team is aware too. Unfortunately it's the Finance and Marketing departments that make all the decisions these days and there simply isn't time to polish games to the same degree in the rush to get to retail. |
|
0
"I understand what you are saying. Surely its harder and more expensive to market a crap game though."
Couldn't agree more, but I think the people at the top lose sight of that or aren't gamers in the first place and wouldn't know (or possibly care) if the product is good or not!. It's not just the games industry that suffers from this sadly. I'm gonna blame da management :-) |
|
Tirpitz666
31/01/08 @ 14:02
0
Frankly, this demo is crap. As many here have pointed, it made me think I was playing an Xbox 1 game: everything was boxy and there was no sign of "next gen shaders" on objects. Controls feels terrible as well, which is utterly unforgivable if even the graphics sucks so hard.
It's not UE's fault though, GOW looked like charm, Bioshock look waaay better than this shitty game and UT3 on PS3 is beautiful (and I'm sure will be on 360 as well). It's only a matter of who is using it :)
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 31/01/08 @ 14:58
|
|
SomaticSense
31/01/08 @ 14:07
0
Wow, what maturity.
While to you, it might sound like you are rising above everyone in your opinions, you actually come across as an arrogant child to the rest of us. |
|
0
At the end of the day, if teams are becoming bigger to cope with 'next-gen' requirements you are going to get quite a few sub-standard games (this is a good example, as is Turok) because there simply are not enough quality development staff to go around. It's very, very easy to screw a game up, it can be the result of one or two rubbish devs in a position to make key game decisions.
|
|
cabbadgecase
31/01/08 @ 15:03
0
^^^ aye and as a result companies start using tried and trusted engines (unreal) in the hope it'll sell the game for them, innovation dies and people are left with a load of stock fps that feel and look the same. shame.
oh and i hope they do make this game better, if it weren't for a few control niggles i'd play many of these 'bland' fps games. but when the controls/targeting are broken then it just makes them a pain to play.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 31/01/08 @ 15:04
|
Comments: 1-43 of 43 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
