So the inevitable Christmas sale is coming up soon, and this is on my list of things that interest me. I admit I was very put off at first (And second and third) glance by the graphics. I'm not normally a stickler for such things but certain older 3D games with those massive blocky polygons can really turn my interest off fast, and it didn't help when I saw all the texture pop in and very awkward looking animations that this game has (Assuming there wasn't something wrong with the version or settings that the person was using in the videos I watched of this).

So with that in mind I'm trying to give this game a chance, but I really want to be sure it's worth it. From my understanding the game uses 3rd person shooting combat with a lot of exploration and dialog. So these will be the focus of my questioning.

Firstly, how fluid is the combat? I'm not naive enough to expect it to feel like a modern shooter, but are the controls at least workable or do they get in the way? Does your character move in a natural feeling way or do you have lead feet?

Second, are there any RPG elements to the combat? Leveling stats, gaining perks or special abilities, or even just discovering new weapons and armor to equip?

Third, can someone tell me the ratio of fighting to everything else? Like, roughly speaking, the amount of hours you spend shooting guys vs. the time you spend talking and exploring in an average playthrough.

Fourth and last, I've already heard a bit of the voice acting. It was nothing special but I can forgive it considering the time this game came from. But from someone who has played the game a fair amount themselves, can you tell me how good I should expect the writing and storytelling to be? Can you compare it favorably to other games that came out around the same time? And what kind of pace does the plot move at?

That should be all, thank you in advance for anyone and everyone's help.

Outcast has very low-resolution graphics (although you can increase this with the unofficial high-res patch, check the sticky thread), but it uses voxels for terrain so it actually has some really nice rolling hills and mountains, as well as cool water ripples. Both of those looked mind-blowingly good when the game was released, and I still think Outcast is a beautiful game. But you do have to get used to the unusual visuals first. Combat has more of a slow and deliberate pace than many action games, but it never felt clunky to me. Enemies had good AI for the time, and will try to flank you and even retreat in certain situations. You can fight on foot or while riding a twon'ha, which is kind of an ostrich-shaped animal, and I found both to be very fun. Explosions look really awesome and there are plenty of cool items to use as well. You can even use stealth a little, to sneak up on enemies. You will definitely discover new weapons (although you will have to do a little exploring first), and you can then upgrade those weapons to improve their attacks. For example, the rapid-fire pistol (kind of like an uzi) can be upgraded to increase the fire rate when fired in short spurts, or to have the bullets bounce off of walls. You can also switch the weapons between these different modes. There are no direct stats as such, but there are some big quests that will hamper your enemies... cut off their food supply and enemies will have less health, for example. This definitely varies. The game is totally open-world, so you can go ahead and attack strongholds if you want to fight more often, or avoid them if you want to fight less often. I feel like I maybe spent about a third of the time fighting, and the other two-thirds exploring and talking to people. But it might be more like half-and-half for some players. I liked the voice acting, personally. The protagonist, Cutter, is sort of a wisecracking guy instead of the more usual gruff soldier-types we get in most modern games, and the various aliens have weird voices, but overall I was impressed with them, especially when compared to many modern games that don't have great voice acting. I especially liked the female lead's voice.

As for the writing, I think it's quite good. The premise is a little ridiculous but once the game gets going, things get interesting pretty quickly. I found the story to be much more interesting than the story in most games. The plot pacing is a bit odd, however... since it's an open-world game, there are several overarching goals, and the main story only progresses when you complete a major step towards these. Since you can run around wherever you want, the main plot can be "on pause" for extended periods of time. Things do speed up towards the end, however. Plus there are lots of sidequests and other stories to investigate in the meantime. The world is really well done and very interesting, so just exploring it and talking to people is interesting enough to fill the time between major plot events.

I feel I should conclude by saying that I was very, very impressed with Outcast. I first played it a few years ago and it was one of the best games I played that year. There are so many ideas in Outcast that were way ahead of their time, which combine to make a really unique game. An example: one of the items is a futuristic zooming binocular thing, like the one Luke Skywalker had in Star Wars Episode IV, and it can toggle a mode that lets you see enemy soldiers through walls. So you can scope out an enemy outpost, count the soldiers, and make a plan of attack. And there's so many ways to get in, from just lobbing explosives over the walls and then going in guns blazing, to sniping the enemy captains first and then picking off the disorganized stragglers with your other guns (they actually fight worse when their leaders are down), to cloaking yourself, sneaking in, grabbing what you need and teleporting out. It's awesome.

I highly recommend you give it a try!

And don't forget to check out that fan-made high-res patch! It will help with the dated graphics. I actually played before I knew about the patch, so my impressions are all from the original, low-res version; with the patch it should be even better!

Huh. So it's kinda like a sci-fi and much older look Far Cry 3? lol


Okay, you convinced me. I believe I'll be giving it a shot.

I actually haven't played that, but from what I've heard, it's not a bad comparison. Awesome! Enjoy the game!

I must admit I haven't put many hours into the game, largely because of technical difficulties (the screen flickers black, though I eventually fixed that by forcing a frame rate limit on my GPU drivers). I did play it when I was 12 years old back in 1999 and I remember being impressed with it, though I don't remember anything specific. In short, today I feel that the game feels like an unfinished mess. The awful character animations, the wonky graphics, the atrociously bad dialogue writing, grating sound effects, the poor "kinetic" feel to how the game and the combat moves and the completely unimmersive dialogue system.

It's like playing an early prototype or proof of concept build. So much of the game design feels like placeholder solutions that were never refined.

Let's dive into my criticism a little further:

- Character animations and poor kinetic feel. These two are related. The character animations are very simplistic and don't feel very well connected with the physics of the game. Jumping is particularly awful, especially combined with the ridiculous cartoony sound effect when you hit the ground. From the sound you would think Cutter Slade was thrown on to gravel from a moving car, even when he is just jumping up and down on the spot.

What does "kinetic feel" mean? It's how the gameplay flows and how it looks in motion. It's not very good. I've only used the starter pistol so I can't say this applies to all shooting in the game, but the fired projectiles move very slowly and I see no reason why they should from an in-universe point of view. It doesn't draw me in. I imagine one of the designers realised they knew how to model real projectiles and decided to include it even though it might not actually make any sense or enhance the look and feel of the game. Much of what I've seen in the 5-6 hours I've experimented with the game have problems like these. The game just does not look finished while in motion. Everything is in place but nothing has been polished, no designs are truly finished and perfected.

- Wonky graphics. This isn't really a big problem. I'm very curious about the design philosophy that went into the technical art design for this game no one has ever done voxels like this before or since. It is a truly unique game from a technical standpoint. The reason I list it is a negative and calling the graphics wonky however is because it did alienate me. Much of the time it feel like there is a beautiful looking game behind all the garbled pixels. 3D games were not this ambitious in their artistry back in the late 90's. If you approach it with a 1999 mindset the game looks fantastic. It's use of particles and shaders was probably 5 years ahead of it's time, Unfortunately I find these things a little unpolished as in they got the tech working but the design is not very good. This game was a leap forward from a technical and artistic point of view, but it was a very long branch off to go alongside the future of gaming. If you imagine game tech as a straight timeline with milestones, Outcast is not on it. It branched off in 1999 and ran next to for a few years before it got old. A unique technological marvel that inspired programmers and artists that would follow, but it went off in a direction completely on their own. I said it does make me feel a little bit alienated playing the game and that's pretty much why. It doesn't look like other games and the tech isn't intuitively familiar.

- Bad dialogue writing and system. There is not two ways about it. I loathe the writing in this game. I can not imagine that the writers were comfortable with the english language. Sure, the grammar is probably correct all the way through and I didn't spot anything wrong with the subtitles. It does not feel like naturally flowing spoken english however. It's like what someone would imagine an english speaking audience would say. "I've never failed on a mission yet". This stuff is nails on a chalk board to me. It kills the game completely. I know most people think I'm over reacting. Many people say they enjoyed the writing. I just can't immerse myself in the game world the way things are however. The acting is quite decent, but the writing. URGH! It makes Fallout 3 look like the work of veteran novelists.

The dialogue system itself is a big hurdle in my enjoyment of the game. The game freezes, dims the screen and gives you boxed in keywords to select with your keyboard to continue the conversation. It gets old and disruptive real fast. It stops the flow of the otherwise cinematic conversations and I can not imagine that this is the design they were happy with. There has to be some technical reason why they decided this placeholder'ish looking system was the way to go. That goes for the rest of the ingame menus that are of the same unintuitive and ugly design.

I did not enjoy any aspect of the gameplay and could not get far enough into the story to start enjoying it and get past my first impressions which is that the game is unintentionally funny, but damningly not fun. I know 6 hours is too early to judge but few games have frustrated and bored me this much this way. I want to discover why the game is so popular but the more I look into it, the more I think that being unique is all the game has going for it. I don't think the game is suddenly going to become amazing in the 12th hour and all the basic design flaws that I don't like are going to be overcome with suddenly better writing and gameplay.

I admit that the animations can be poor, especially for jumping (fortunately there are only a few points in the game that require jumping). But I guess I disagree about the kinetic feel. It is odd that bullets move so slowly, but mechanically it makes combat interesting, because aiming to hit enemies is more difficult. And yes, Cutter moves slowly and deliberately as well. To me battles felt more like strategic engagements rather than twitch gameplay. But I suppose this would not appeal to everyone. As I said earlier in the thread, I think Outcast looks beautiful. But it is of course a matter of taste. I actually think the developers' first language is French. But I did not have the same problems with the writing that you did. Yes, there are silly moments in the game, but overall I quite enjoyed my conversations with the locals, and especially conversations with my teammates (which you may not have gotten to; it takes a little while to find them). I'm not sure what you mean here. The dialogue system is the standard "conversation tree" style that's been used in pretty much every adventure and RPG game ever. Including modern ones like Fallout 3 and Skyrim. Are you complaining because the game "freezes" during conversations? Having the game continue to move while the player is in a conversation is a very recent feature; I think I first saw it in Oblivion in 2006. As for the actual menu interface, it's not amazing but it's certainly serviceable. And it's WAY better than the un-modded Skyrim menu and inventory interface, for example. I guess we just disagree here; I loved the gameplay, especially the freeform exploration and combat. Sure, initial combat with just the pistol isn't that interesting, but with more weapons and items the possibilities open up a lot, and dealing with soldiers who actively flank you and seek cover makes for interesting battles. I wonder if you simply wandered around the first big area for a bit... it's definitely worth exploring the other areas too. You can get to the city of Okriana in Talanzaar quite early, for example, and I recommend going there.

Anyway, I stand by my recommendation to EckoShy, and I hope they enjoy the game!

Well if you have windows 8 don't bother. it chashes the computer on launch. even after all the fixes I was told to do.

I appreciate that 'it works for me' won't solve your problem, but for the information of any potential purchasers with Win8 (or at any rate 8.1) it, erm, works for me.