3d intensive game worth bothering to play?

[bvanevery]

I have a new laptop arriving in 2 weeks that has a modern NVIDIA 8600M GT 256MB 3d card in it. I think I should get out of my Freeciv rut and play something that exercises the 3d HW. What's worth bothering with? From a 3d standpoint, I would want it to be something that stretches the capabilities of the 3d HW. But from a game design standpoint, I'd like it to not be the usual boring mainstream industry drivel.

What's the intersection of innovative game design and heavy duty 3d graphics? Hope they aren't mutually exclusive in shipping products.

[ilya2]

You could try Trackmania. It's a racing game with pretty weird physics where you're supposed to build your own tracks. Before you can build anything, you'll need points called "coopers" to spend on parts(roads, ramps, ect). You don't actually lose any of your coopers when you make, say, a road, but you can't spend more than you have on any one map. You fill grid spaces with an object which makes level editing easy(you can change the elevation too, also based on a grid). The editor has over 100 tiles, catigorised into groups of ten, and you can do other things with a level like record replays of you going through it for people to compete with. You can pick one of three locations to have your map be in(each one has 100 tiles).

To get coopers, you have to play singleplayer. I'd guess that the game has at least 200 maps here over several modes. There's a normal racing mode, where you choose a catigory and race in the maps there. To advance to the next map, you have to get at least a bronze medal in a map. To advance to the next catigory, there are requirements for the total number of gold/silver/bronze medals you have in total. In each map, you race against prerecorded ghosts(there are no AIs in Trackmaina, and everyone is a ghost in the multiplayer too). The type of medal you got on the map previously, if any, will determine which ghost you race against(bronze, silver, gold, author ghosts). If you beat the ghost, you'll get a better medal for that map.

You get coopers for every medal you have. You don't get any coopers for, say, getting gold on a map the second time, and you'll effectively lose the coopers you get for a silver medal and gain the ones for the gold if you got a gold medal on a map where you had a silver before. You can never actually lose any coopers though.

There's also puzzle mode, which is like the normal mode except that you have to place blocks on the map in the way that would get you the quickest time before you race on it. It has no ghosts.

And there's survivor mode, which is different from the other two. You pick between a few maps, race on the one you chose, and pick between another set. You can skip maps if you get first or second place, I think.

In multiplayer, there are a few modes too(normal, points, team points). You race against everyone else but you can clip through them. In normal, you race constantly to get as low of a time as you can, you'll go back to the starting line after finishing; the person with the lowest time wins. In the points mode, you race against everyone else in one round, whoever gets first place gets a lot of points, second gets less, ect. The person with the most points at the end of the game wins. Team points is like the points mode except with teams. I just made up those names, I don't know what they're actually called.

The thing that's good about multiplayer is that, since everyone makes their own maps since it's an important part of the game, there are a bunch of custom maps. It'll be a coincidence to race on the same map twice because everyone uses their own maps(or other people's).

The downside is that it has Starforce. I don't think it's too graphics-intensive but it isn't that old either. You could try turning the quality up. I don't think it can use DirectX 10.

And they've released many other games which have the same premise but different content.

[zoombapup]

I'd give company of heroes a try, its pretty bleeding edge in terms of graphics for 3D RTS games.

My students play battlefield 2142 but I found it a bit crap.

You could try Prey for the visual stuff.

Did you ever play halflife 2? You could check out some of the cool mods for that (Garry's mod, source forts).

Another engine stretcher is something like Oblivion, although I didnt think it was visually that nice.

[bvanevery]

Is Oblivion worth bothering with? I thought Morrowind was ok from a "free play" standpoint. I particularly enjoyed flying over the continent and shooting fireballs at a long distance to kill the pteradactyls or whatever they were. But from a story, NPC, and leveling up standpoint, the game was utter crap. Boring boring boring! If Oblivion is similar I'll pass. Did Bethesda learn any lessons?

[ChrisP]

If Oblivion is similar I'll pass. Did Bethesda learn any lessons?

Not really. The environments are a bit prettier, they got rid of the annoying pterodactyl things, there are horses now, combat is a bit more twitch-based, and there are a host of other tweaks; but underneath it's pretty much more of the same. There is a little more variety in the quests and so on, but nothing to write home about. If you didn't get bored of Morrowind then you'll like it; if you did, pass.

[Ratboy]

There is some random humor caused by their AI and NPC conversation engines now and then. I've seen a guard kill a theif, then kneel over the body and say "There seems to be a murderer about."

[bvanevery]

I did roleplay "Silence Of The Lambs." I was a half-orc cross dresser! Whenever I'd slay someone I'd take an article of clothing from my victim. My original goal was to slay every entity in the game. After 20 such kills it got old and I realized how gargantuan a task I had set for myself. Gave up. I did enjoy finding a quiet room alone with a victim, pulling out my knife, and having them not react at all! "Stupid Computer!!!" I'd scream as I plunged it into their hearts over and over again.

[bvanevery]

Regarding Company Of Heroes. Isn't "innovative RTS" an oxymoron? Aren't they all clickfests?

[zoombapup]

Well, COH has some interesting differences, in that its mainly tactical (in the same vein of gettysburg). But yeah, its definitely genre-tastic.

Try something like Savage?

You DID say you wanted graphics though and apart from FPS's COH is pretty much "it" for bleeding edge.

[bvanevery]

I judged Savage in the IGF. Clearly it had technical merit, and it was done well, but from a game design standpoint I didn't see what was so innovative about it. A RTS played like a FPS or MMORPG, big deal. Maybe at the time that wasn't done much in RTS, I dunno, or maybe it was. I don't like RTS much at all. I like FPS ok, but not to the point of playing a lot of it. I played Ground Control several years ago, which did the RTS+FPS thing. It kept things manageable by restricting the number of units you had to control. 3 groups of 4..8 units IIRC. So, I think that's proof that RTS+FPS has been done, it's not new or anything.

BTW if it wasn't clear in my 1st post, the games don't have to be indie games. I'm just looking for an intersection between intense 3d graphics and some form of innovative game design.

[vjvj]

zoomba is right, COH is pretty much your best bet. Most of the bleeding-edge 3D graphics is being done in FPS games, and most of them are basically the same.

You'll be able to run COH in DX10 mode on your 8600 (patch up to the latest to get the DX10 option), but it runs at about 1/4 speed of DX9 mode and the differences are subtle. Chances are you'll just revert to DX9. If you are interested in what was added in DX10, just ask; I wrote a large chunk of the DX10 code :D

One interesting FPS on the horizon is Portal; a Source Engine game that introduces an interesting mechanic that may actually end up being neat. Keep an eye out for it.

As for generalizing RTS games as "clickfests", I think that pretty much leaves me speechless. I guess we've all agreed to ignore varied unit mechanics?

However, I fully agree that blending RTS and FPS gameplay into a "omgz innovative hybrid" is a fucking stupid idea and I wish people would stop trying to do it. It's just innovation for the sake of innovation, which is essentially a major waste of time.

[MrBozo]

STALKER is the game of the year so far for me. The open FPS gameplay is nothing new (Far Cry), but the post-apocalyptic world you're evolving in is simply amazing. Everything around you feels very much alive and coherent and dangerous. And with your PC the graphics and framerate should be awesome.

[bvanevery]

I tried the TrackMania Nations demo on Vista. It didn't work. I had just gotten done making the Caesar IV demo work (run as Administrator with XP Compatibility) and I didn't feel like poring over webpages to get yet another stupid demo to work. I've got better things to do than struggle with various developers' lack of Vista support. I'm noticing a pattern that once a demo gets written, there's often no updating for it. Which is silly because the demo does sell the game. Caesar IV had no official support for Vista; the Company Of Heroes patches that bring it up to DX10 were for the full game only.

[ChrisP]

Professional, non-indie gamedev places never seem to place much emphasis on demos. I guess they figure that most of their sales come from people reading reviews and browsing game shops.

Which is fine by me; it means that all the best-supported game demos around are by indies... ;)

[Diragor]

I thought Oblivion was boring but plenty of people disagree with me.

I recommend Bioshock. It's a FPS but I think it's fairly unique in many ways, the art direction and sound design are fantastic, the story is interesting and it's fairly leading-edge; it'll put that new system to work.

[bvanevery]

I've posted abundantly on my woes with BioShock, my Dell Inspiron 1720 laptop running Vista, and my NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT. My current opinion is there's something seriously wrong with the laptop drivers.

[Mikademus]

I played Ground Control several years ago, which did the RTS+FPS thing.
Are you talking about Battlezone? Ground Control is a Real-Time Tactics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_tactics) (RTT) game.

[bvanevery]

I meant Ground Control. It's been awhile since I heard anyone use the RTT acronym.

[Mikademus]

<topic_drift>

Ok, but where do you find anything of FPS nature in Ground Control? The only renown strategy games to date that have combined RTS with FPS mechanics are Battlezone and Hostile Waters.

</topic_drift>

[cliffski]

another vote for company of heroes. its a pretty interesting tactical RTS, the mega physics and graphics are just extra candy.

[bvanevery]

Ok, but where do you find anything of FPS nature in Ground Control?

Half the time you run around looking at stuff from the perspective of your units. Have you actually played the game?

[Mikademus]

Half the time you run around looking at stuff from the perspective of your units. Have you actually played the game?

No hostility, ok? :)

Are we really talking about the same game? It sounds to me you're really talking about BattleZone.

http://www.groundcontrol2.com/modules/xoopsgallery/cache/albums/album02/GCII_Total_War.sized.jpg
Ground Control is that game by the Swedish developer Massive Entertainment where you control units from a top-down perspective and direct their combat in a tactical way. You never are inside your vehicles though your camera is relatively free-floating, and can be locked to units and zoomed-in enough to be among the units. However, it is never a true FPS camera, and you never steer the vehicles or units themselvs, only give them orders.

http://www.siggraph.org/publications/newsletter/v33n2/columns/images/rouse6.jpg
BattleZone is where you're inside a tank-like thing from a FPS view, steer it round the landscape, order other units, fire you guns yourself, and pop down buildings where you please.

[bvanevery]

I was talking about Ground Control. The problem is you're picking nits on a very strict definition of FPS. As far as I'm concerned, if a game is 3rd person perspective and you can lock the camera so close to the units that you'll see what a 1st person perspective would see, then game mechanically it's got a FPS component. In Ground Control you could activate that nearly FPS style view with the push of a button, it was core to gameplay.

[Bernard François]

You could try Prey for the visual stuff.


I did like the changing of gravity direction in prey...
After playing prey for a few hours, I started looking at my appartment in a whole new way, I can perfectly imagine now how it would be to walk on the wall :D

[bvanevery]

In college I used to take the wheeled platforms off the bottoms of the recycling bins, grab 2 of 'em, lie on my back, then pull myself along the floor of my dorm like an upside down snake. With a little imagination, it looked very much like I was swimming on the ceiling of some crazy inverted world! Kids, try this at home.

[Sammgus]

However, I fully agree that blending RTS and FPS gameplay into a "omgz innovative hybrid" is a fucking stupid idea and I wish people would stop trying to do it.
Battlezone was a fantastic game, which was sadly not bettered by its sequels.
Isn't "innovative RTS" an oxymoron? Aren't they all clickfests? In real-time games, thinking and acting faster is, ceteris paribus, advantageous. It is still possible to innovate under these conditions.

[tagged]

I loved Morrowind, but hated Oblivion. The simplified interface really got to me, I felt Morrowind's was perfect.. Worse still they said that it was still TOO complicated, and are looking at simplifying it for future projects!! Honestly, is the average gamer a blind monkey? I remember when sequels meant adding features, not taking them away. Yes I liked the range of skills in Daggerfall/Morrowind.

The fact that they hyped up their 'Radiant AI' for years before release, and then dropped it without (any?) warning before release also p*ssed me off. Not to mention many reviews seemed to ignore the fact it was missing! What's left is the usual affair of an Elder Scrolls game, a buggy engine that still needs months of polish. Not that bethesda will, the users have taken it to themselves to patch the game (At last count, Bethesda had <50 bug fixes, a User mod had >1000). The best part of Obilivion is of course the editor, I had a working farm mod in a few days after release that allowed you to grow crops and sell them... But then I realized I had just paid $90 for a 'script editor' :rolleyes:

Sorry bit of a rant there, in closing wait another year and then grab Oblivion and all it's mods and you'll have a real treat.. Just look at the state of Morrowind today! NPC's with jobs is one mod I'm keeping track of, it's adding in some of the fabled AI that went missing :)

Oh and second Prey, the best part of that game is still in the demo when they play 'fear the reaper', but it only takes <10 hours to complete and never got stale for me... Plus it got me hooked on After Midnight Project, their song was the main theme.