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 discussion (archive)EA = System Shock?(38 posts)(38 posts)
(38 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
Malfsyde: There's nothing to buy from because EA doesn't have full rights of System Shock. Nobody does, and they appear disinclined to cooperate. GOG can't publish the games because there is no single entity to make the deal with.
avatar
gyokzoli: There is hope at least since GOG could make a deal with ATARI and HASBRO about the D&D games (Baldur's Gate, etc).
True. An insurance company certainly isn't going to gain anything by holding onto sole development rights indefinitely, unlike HASBRO and D&D.

avatar
FraterPerdurabo: Meh the concept of SS3 really doesn't make me excited. Essentially it's already been done - Dead Space and Bioshock, both of which were very mediocre games. If a SS3 were ever to be made, especially by EA, don't expect it to be anything like the originals.
I agree, I don't find anything to gain from SS3. The legacy of the game design lives on, if only tangentially, in the uprise of FPS/RPGs lately. It is disappointing though that two of the most ambitious, forward thinking and influential games in the short history of the medium are basically stuck in this bureaucratic limbo.
Post edited June 08, 2011 by Malfsyde
Posted June 08, 2011
Why is it that many who look through nostalgia glasses at games like BG/SS/etc always seem to think a sequel would be crap or should never be made? Maybe they're afraid of it failing? How can we know if they don't try?
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
GameRager: Why is it that many who look through nostalgia glasses at games like BG/SS/etc always seem to think a sequel would be crap or should never be made? Maybe they're afraid of it failing? How can we know if they don't try?
Not nostalgia for me, I only first played the games for the first time 3 years ago. SS2, ten years later, is still ahead of its time. I think if it were to come out now, with everything intact, it would probably still not do very well without significant nerfing. I think it says a lot about the state of games when Bioshock basically streamlined and stripped back a lot of the depth and complexity of what SS2 had and it still managed to be a league ahead of its contemporaries. System Shock 1 and 2 were great because it deconstructed the the genre, fucked with your expectations and offered a completely refreshing experience. You don't need the System Shock name to do that
Post edited June 08, 2011 by Malfsyde
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
GameRager: Why is it that many who look through nostalgia glasses at games like BG/SS/etc always seem to think a sequel would be crap or should never be made? Maybe they're afraid of it failing? How can we know if they don't try?
Because the "sequels" thus far have been mediocre at best?
avatar
Malfsyde: System Shock 1 and 2 were great because it deconstructed the the genre, fucked with your expectations and offered a completely refreshing experience. You don't need the System Shock name to do that
Exactly. The game defines the name and not vice versa.
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: Because the "sequels" thus far have been mediocre at best?
Those weren't even TRUE ss games though, just "spiritual successors" *Bad taste in mouth now for some reason*
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: Because the "sequels" thus far have been mediocre at best?
avatar
GameRager: Those weren't even TRUE ss games though, just "spiritual successors" *Bad taste in mouth now for some reason*
If SS3 ever was made, why do you think it will be the "true successor"? Like Malfsyde said - it's not about the name, it's about the gameplay. If anyone was interested in making a "true successor", then why haven't they yet?
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
GameRager: Those weren't even TRUE ss games though, just "spiritual successors" *Bad taste in mouth now for some reason*
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: If SS3 ever was made, why do you think it will be the "true successor"? Like Malfsyde said - it's not about the name, it's about the gameplay. If anyone was interested in making a "true successor", then why haven't they yet?
Um, some of us LIKE to play more of a good series? I agree it's about the gameplay but I just want more in the same universe. I think it'd be good actually, even if some games this decade weren't so good.

Oh and in order to be a TRUE successor, it has to be set in the same universe/series.....and most times it's made by the same rights holders or the new ones and they use the same name obviously. I guess I meant true successor/sequel.
Post edited June 08, 2011 by GameRager
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: If SS3 ever was made, why do you think it will be the "true successor"? Like Malfsyde said - it's not about the name, it's about the gameplay. If anyone was interested in making a "true successor", then why haven't they yet?
avatar
GameRager: Um, some of us LIKE to play more of a good series? I agree it's about the gameplay but I just want more in the same universe. I think it'd be good actually, even if some games this decade weren't so good.

Oh and in order to be a TRUE successor, it has to be set in the same universe/series.....and most times it's made by the same rights holders or the new ones and they use the same name obviously. I guess I meant true successor/sequel.
For a while I had forgotten that "fanboyism" existed. Thanks for reminding me though.
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: For a while I had forgotten that "fanboyism" existed. Thanks for reminding me though.
For awhile I thought I could be a fan of a series and not get my head bitten off and called a fanboy for wanting a true SS sequel.

You know there's a big difference between blindly liking something and just being a fan right? Just because YOU don't want them to make a sequel doesn't mean you have to attack my credibility.
Post edited June 08, 2011 by GameRager
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: For a while I had forgotten that "fanboyism" existed. Thanks for reminding me though.
avatar
GameRager: For awhile I thought I could be a fan of a series and not get my head bitten off and called a fanboy for wanting a true SS sequel.

You know there's a big difference between blindly liking something and just being a fan right? Just because YOU don't want them to make a sequel doesn't mean you have to attack my credibility.
Yeah I can tell the difference very well. I like SS series a lot and would love to have a worthy sequel. It appears that you will buy anything as long as the name is right. The former is healthy, the latter is detrimental to the gaming industry as a whole.
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
GameRager: For awhile I thought I could be a fan of a series and not get my head bitten off and called a fanboy for wanting a true SS sequel.

You know there's a big difference between blindly liking something and just being a fan right? Just because YOU don't want them to make a sequel doesn't mean you have to attack my credibility.
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: Yeah I can tell the difference very well. I like SS series a lot and would love to have a worthy sequel. It appears that you will buy anything as long as the name is right. The former is healthy, the latter is detrimental to the gaming industry as a whole.
No, I want a good sequel, and even if it isn't 100% like the first two but close to it & plays good I would like it. It doesn't have to be exactly like the originals or perfect in my eyes for my to like it.

Thing is, you say im a fanboy yet you are more of one it seems...albeit a nostalgia type. As in instead of wanting more you don't want more because you think they'll suck if made by anyone nowadays & want the first two to be the only ones to maintain your nostalgia.
Post edited June 08, 2011 by GameRager
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: If SS3 ever was made, why do you think it will be the "true successor"? Like Malfsyde said - it's not about the name, it's about the gameplay. If anyone was interested in making a "true successor", then why haven't they yet?
avatar
GameRager: Um, some of us LIKE to play more of a good series? I agree it's about the gameplay but I just want more in the same universe. I think it'd be good actually, even if some games this decade weren't so good.

Oh and in order to be a TRUE successor, it has to be set in the same universe/series.....and most times it's made by the same rights holders or the new ones and they use the same name obviously. I guess I meant true successor/sequel.
You might be interested in watching the interview on Giant Bomb with Ken Levine which discusses, among other things, his decision to move on from the Rapture universe onto something else. Not System Shock of course, but ideas are the same.

http://www.giantbomb.com/we-talk-to-ken-levine-about-bioshock-infinite/17-3261/
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
GameRager: Um, some of us LIKE to play more of a good series? I agree it's about the gameplay but I just want more in the same universe. I think it'd be good actually, even if some games this decade weren't so good.

Oh and in order to be a TRUE successor, it has to be set in the same universe/series.....and most times it's made by the same rights holders or the new ones and they use the same name obviously. I guess I meant true successor/sequel.
avatar
Malfsyde: You might be interested in watching the interview on Giant Bomb with Ken Levine which discusses, among other things, his decision to move on from the Rapture universe onto something else. Not System Shock of course, but ideas are the same.

http://www.giantbomb.com/we-talk-to-ken-levine-about-bioshock-infinite/17-3261/
I will look at that later after watching some horror films on youtube. Thanks. Also did you see that pic for Bioshock Infinite with the old man on the bench? That pic was sweet, imo.
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: Yeah I can tell the difference very well. I like SS series a lot and would love to have a worthy sequel. It appears that you will buy anything as long as the name is right. The former is healthy, the latter is detrimental to the gaming industry as a whole.
avatar
GameRager: No, I want a good sequel, and even if it isn't 100% like the first two but close to it & plays good I would like it. It doesn't have to be exactly like the originals or perfect in my eyes for my to like it.

Thing is, you say im a fanboy yet you are more of one it seems...albeit a nostalgia type. As in instead of wanting more you don't want more because you think they'll suck if made by anyone nowadays & want the first two to be the only ones to maintain your nostalgia.
?
I'm not one to tell developers what they can or cannot make. They can make SS2367426 if they want to, but if it's anything like Dead Space or Bioshock, albeit in the SS universe, they won't get my money.
Posted June 08, 2011
avatar
GameRager: No, I want a good sequel, and even if it isn't 100% like the first two but close to it & plays good I would like it. It doesn't have to be exactly like the originals or perfect in my eyes for my to like it.

Thing is, you say im a fanboy yet you are more of one it seems...albeit a nostalgia type. As in instead of wanting more you don't want more because you think they'll suck if made by anyone nowadays & want the first two to be the only ones to maintain your nostalgia.
avatar
FraterPerdurabo: ?
I'm not one to tell developers what they can or cannot make. They can make SS2367426 if they want to, but if it's anything like Dead Space or Bioshock, albeit in the SS universe, they won't get my money.
You're telling me that if the gameplay/story is good and feels like SS you won't play if they add in some new gameplay elements?
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)EA = System Shock?(38 posts)(38 posts)
(38 posts)