It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionRelease: STAR WARS™: Dark Forces Remaster(140 posts)(140 posts)
(140 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
This is my favourite topic
Posted February 28, 2024
An iconic classic, fully remastered by the team at Nightdive Studios, through its proprietary KEX engine, allowing the game to run on modern gaming devices at up to 4K resolution at 120FPS.

STAR WARS™: Dark Forces Remaster is now out on GOG!

Expect all fourteen original levels, featuring Star Wars™ worlds and capital ships, engaging first-person ground combat featuring ten weapons and twenty types of enemies, Personal Digital Assistant (providing you with in game information such including map, inventory, and mission briefing), modern gamepad support, controller support, advanced 3D rendering, up to 4K 120FPS visuals, and much more!



The original 1995 STAR WARS™: Dark Forces raised the bar for FPS games, offering players a significant degree of movement and interactivity, a large selection of items and power-ups, and engaging environments.
In that iconic title you assume the role of Kyle Katarn, a defector of the Galactic Empire turned mercenary for hire. Katarn joins the Rebel Alliance’s covert operations division tasked with infiltrating the Galactic Empire, where he discovers the secret Dark Trooper Project. The development of this powerful new series of Imperial battle droids and power-armored stormtroopers stands to strengthen the Empire’s grip on the galaxy unless Katarn and the Rebel Alliance intervene.

With STAR WARS™: Dark Forces Remaster, every new and returning player will be able to enjoy all of that with upgraded gameplay, high-resolution textures, enhanced lighting and rendering, and support for gamepads.

That’s not all, though! For those who already own the classic STAR WARS™: Dark Forces – you get a -10% launch discount on the Remaster, until April 29th, 2 PM UTC!

Make sure to check it out – with Nightdive Studios behind the wheel, we couldn’t be more excited!
Posted February 29, 2024
I always appreciate quicksaves because my household is hectic and there's a good chance I'll be called away from my computer for something urgent at any moment. Also, being able to pause cutscenes, that's another really nice QoL feature.
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Stabbey: The thing about save-scumming is that YOU can chose to NOT do it. No one is going to stand behind you and press your quicksave button.
I often do that in FPSs that allow saves at any time. In Jedi Knight, I allowed myself up to 2 saves per level (aside from right at the start), since otherwise the game is trivially easy.

avatar
Stabbey: The levels are long enough, and many of them have instant death pits which are easy to fall into, and some secrets are hidden in dangerous places. Lots of instant death pits and no manual saving is a bad combination. Having to repeat an entire level over again (and again and again and again and again) because you died at the end sucks. I got as far as the ice planet on the original version before the lack of any mid-level saving got too annoying.
Disagree. Most of the levels, once you know them a little, can easily be completed in 30-40 mins. Danger of death in game having actual consequences is nice. It gives you some 'skin in the game' and adds to the tension. What's the point of having a death-defying jump, if you know you can just reload it until you get it right? Yawn ... no thanks.

avatar
Breja: You realise that you could just... not save? I don't get why people want these kind of things to be hard-coded into a game, when it's entirely up to the player to use them or not. If you can save whenever you want, everyone can play it however they like - save scumming or not saving at all. Hell, you can play Morrowind like a roguelike, restarting the whole thing from day 1 when you day if you want to. But if limitations you like so much are implemented, only you can play it the way you like.
I guess I just like the idea of having limited saving built into the gameplay in a structured way, rather than leaving it up to the player to figure it out. Player options can still be facilitated by having different difficulty levels that allow a different number of saves/lives, or allowing an option to enable 'save any time' in the game settings.

We're probably going to have to agree to disagree on this one, fellas. Having played the game before, to me the limited lives is the way the game was meant to be played. I wouldn't consider buying a remaster that removed that without at least making it an option.
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Time4Tea: I guess I just like the idea of having limited saving built into the gameplay in a structured way, rather than leaving it up to the player to figure it out. Player options can still be facilitated by having different difficulty levels that allow a different number of saves/lives, or allowing an option to enable 'save any time' in the game settings.

We're probably going to have to agree to disagree on this one, fellas. Having played the game before, to me the limited lives is the way the game was meant to be played. I wouldn't consider buying a remaster that removed that without at least making it an option.
Hey, I'm all for options. The more we can tailor the experience to our liking/needs the better. It's just that the "save when you like" is in my opinion (in general, not always) a better default if the devs don't have the time or resources to implement and balance multiple modes, because it's a flexible "all options in one" kind of thing.

That said, I do believe that in the case of remasters whatever the original played like should be the default, and new more modern modes should only be added as optional features.
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Breja: That said, I do believe that in the case of remasters whatever the original played like should be the default, and new more modern modes should only be added as optional features.
I agree. In particular, removing the way the original game worked (if that's what they've done here, I'm not sure) would be a big 'no' for me.

And I get that maybe they're targeting it at the newer generation, rather than crusty old timers like me who played the original. Which is fair enough.
Post edited February 29, 2024 by Time4Tea
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Breja: That said, I do believe that in the case of remasters whatever the original played like should be the default, and new more modern modes should only be added as optional features.
avatar
Time4Tea: I agree. In particular, removing the way the original game worked (if that's what they've done here, I'm not sure) would be a big 'no' for me.

And I get that maybe they're targeting it at the newer generation, rather than crusty old timers like me who played the original. Which is fair enough.
Who is targeting whom? it sounds me to cliché. I will explain it below

The newest remasters of this kind have all the old features intact and new ones as an addition (graphics, controls etc)

This Dark Forces remaster has the old savemode intact (I hope that at least this time the checkpoint is saved once you reload the map or quit the game), and indeed is very debatable not offering a traditional quicksave system as an option In fact you guys are talking about that regard right now.

And the new Tomb Raider Remaster have switchable original and remastered graphics, tank and new controls.
This is what a remaster is about, the original game with new modernizations and additions bundled inside and trying to follow the original spirit.

So "they" (whatever they are) are targeting old and new audiences.
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Gudadantza: This Dark Forces remaster has the old savemode intact (I hope that at least this time the checkpoint is saved once you reload the map or quit the game), and indeed is very debatable not offering a traditional quicksave system as an option In fact you guys are talking about that regard right now.
I'm not entirely sure how they have handled the saving/lives system with this remaster. Would be good if someone could clarify.

My initial post above was in response to someone who was saying they were glad you can now save/reload whenever you want (which isn't how the original works).
Posted February 29, 2024
I would pay $20, not $30. So I'll wait on this one.
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Gudadantza: This Dark Forces remaster has the old savemode intact (I hope that at least this time the checkpoint is saved once you reload the map or quit the game), and indeed is very debatable not offering a traditional quicksave system as an option In fact you guys are talking about that regard right now.
avatar
Time4Tea: I'm not entirely sure how they have handled the saving/lives system with this remaster. Would be good if someone could clarify.

My initial post above was in response to someone who was saying they were glad you can now save/reload whenever you want (which isn't how the original works).
Still no manual saves, but a series of checkpoints. I "guess" that now they act as a series of proper autosaves.

In the original the game sorta checkpointed in the middle of a mission. But if you quit you needed to restart the whole level. Nothing was saved.
Old system but not a good system. I do not remember a lot of proper fps PC titles following that horrible design/tech concept
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
BreOl72: Also: I'm gonna predict that a lot of people won't be too happy with the remastered graphics.
I find it interesting the store page features very few in-game screenshots :|
-----------------------------------------
avatar
toma85: An alternative for this remaster is to use The Force Engine to enhance the original version. TFE also adds several features like mouselook or quicksave. It also features several graphical enhancements.
Ah, something which harkens back to the good old days.....when passionate fans redid old games like this (usually) for free.
------------------------------------------
avatar
I feel so tired: NightDive's remasters are getting more expensive .
We should pray they don't alter the pricing any further
Post edited February 29, 2024 by GamezRanker
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Gudadantza: Still no manual saves, but a series of checkpoints. I "guess" that now they act as a series of proper autosaves.

In the original the game sorta checkpointed in the middle of a mission. But if you quit you needed to restart the whole level. Nothing was saved.
In the original, there was no mid-level saving. You had fixed number of lives per level attempt (I think 3). If you died, you went back to sort of a checkpoint (as you say). If you ran out of lives, that level attempt is done and you have to start the level again. The game saved the level that you're on. It was possible to collect additional lives (usually found in secret areas).

avatar
Gudadantza: Old system but not a good system. I do not remember a lot of proper fps PC titles following that horrible design/tech concept
I disagree. I liked the limited lives system very much. It's how the game was intended to be played and I would like to see it preserved in a remaster. The game won't feel the same with unlimited respawns. As I said earlier, the limited lives added to the tension and the feeling of risk/reward with attempting something dangerous/stupid.

avatar
I feel so tired: NightDive's remasters are getting more expensive .
avatar
GamezRanker: We should pray they don't alter the pricing any further
Comment of the day! :-P
Post edited February 29, 2024 by Time4Tea
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Gudadantza: Still no manual saves, but a series of checkpoints. I "guess" that now they act as a series of proper autosaves.

In the original the game sorta checkpointed in the middle of a mission. But if you quit you needed to restart the whole level. Nothing was saved.
avatar
Time4Tea: In the original, there was no mid-level saving. You had fixed number of lives per level attempt (I think 3). If you died, you went back to sort of a checkpoint (as you say). If you ran out of lives, that level attempt is done and you have to start the level again. The game saved the level that you're on. It was possible to collect additional lives (usually found in secret areas).

avatar
Gudadantza: Old system but not a good system. I do not remember a lot of proper fps PC titles following that horrible design/tech concept
avatar
Time4Tea: I disagree. I liked the limited lives system very much. It's how the game was intended to be played and I would like to see it preserved in a remaster.
In summary you had to complete the game in one session or replay one level from scratch like a ZXSpectrum arcade platfom game if you quit the game.Tedious system for an overall scripted game, the groundhog day.

If you liked it good for you. But that is something you can do in any game with proper savesystem. just be diligent and restart the level you are playing at will because you love it.

Anyways if it is preserved it is fine. But not enough. If the checkpoint system claimed is true it could be enough for me. A good balance.
Post edited February 29, 2024 by Gudadantza
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Time4Tea: As I said earlier, the limited lives added to the tension and the feeling of risk/reward with attempting something dangerous/stupid.
You call it tension, and I call it frustration ;)

Personally, I like being able to save in games whenever I feel like it(usually before/during tough boss fights and acrobatics heavy sections) so I don't have waste much time redoing a bunch of progress over again...and again...and again.

p.s. I feel the tension of jumps/etc even when using saves....prolly due in part to my moderate fear of heights, even in games :D
Post edited February 29, 2024 by GamezRanker
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
GamezRanker: Personally, I like being able to save in games whenever I feel like it(usually before/during tough boss fights and acrobatics heavy sections) so I don't have waste much time redoing a bunch of progress over again...and again...and again.
That's fair enough - that's your preference. Although, games where you lose a bunch of progress if you die seem to have been quite in-vogue lately (Dark Souls/soulslikes?). Having the player actually feel some sense of loss when they fail can enhance the immersion and make it more satisfying when you do improve and achieve something. But I know those games aren't for everyone.

I liked the fact that Dark Forces did things a bit differently with regards to progress - it felt like a breath of fresh air. Of course, now it has to be forced to conform to the same 'standards' as every other play-and-forget shooter that's flooding the market ...
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
GamezRanker: Personally, I like being able to save in games whenever I feel like it(usually before/during tough boss fights and acrobatics heavy sections) so I don't have waste much time redoing a bunch of progress over again...and again...and again.
avatar
Time4Tea: That's fair enough - that's your preference. Although, games where you lose a bunch of progress if you die seem to have been quite in-vogue lately (Dark Souls/soulslikes?). Having the player actually feel some sense of loss when they fail can enhance the immersion and make it more satisfying when you do improve and achieve something. But I know those games aren't for everyone.

I liked the fact that Dark Forces did things a bit differently with regards to progress - it felt like a breath of fresh air. Of course, now it has to be forced to conform to the same 'standards' as every other play-and-forget shooter that's flooding the market ...
Are you calling doom 1993 a play and forget game because it offered save games? LoL

For you only two PC FPS games in the last 30 years are not play and forget? Edit: I mean Dark forces and Rebellion's AvP
Post edited February 29, 2024 by Gudadantza
Posted February 29, 2024
avatar
Gudadantza: Are you calling doom 1993 a play and forget game because it offered save games? LoL

For you only two PC FPS games in the last 30 years are not play and forget? Edit: I mean Dark forces and Rebellion's AvP
No, I wasn't referring to Doom (which was an original and has its own 'feel'). But there have been a lot of 'play and forget' copycat shooters released since then (many in the past 10-15 years).

My point is that this is one of the few first-person shooters that dared to break the mould with regards to saving and do things a little differently, and we have to make it comply. Any non-uniformity must be stamped-out.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionRelease: STAR WARS™: Dark Forces Remaster(140 posts)(140 posts)
(140 posts)