I hope the level design is better than Serious Sam 3

[Morrigan]

The level design in Serious Sam 3, in my opinion, was horrible compared to TFE/TSE.
I prefer SS2 over SS3 tbh.

I hope you learn from your mistake and wont do SS 3.1

[Calabeza]

How was it worse? It was bigger, more complex and offered a lot more exploration.

Unless you're mistaking it for environmental design.

[Calabeza]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by GrandSecgend:

How was it worse? It was bigger, more complex and offered a lot more exploration.

Unless you're mistaking it for environmental design.

Serious Sam was never about "exploration". It was about nonstop, silly mindless fun. More complex? Serious Sam 3 had no places like tube where enemies walked on top, bottom and all sides. Serious Sam 3 had no tunnel where darkness moves in tunnel and hides enemies. Serious Sam 3 had no places where you had to defend your platform from flying enemies. Serious Sam 3 had no totally secret levels either. So no, actually Serious Sam 3 was the least complex of them all.

And you can't mistake "exploration" for secrets, because Serious Sam 3 had the most boring secrets in series.

Well, Sam has always been about exploration - the notion that the player has to explore the levels to survive - but it was never done decently before BFE.

The areas you described aren't examples of level desing; but rather examples of battle design. Two different things.

I'm talking about the layouts of the levels and areas, which in SS3 is far superior. SS1/2 was, for the most part, a series of empty arenas that lead one from another. It works for 'mindless' shooting, but that's boring and also simply going backwards from the series' potential which even SS1 was trying to achieve. Many areas in BFE have multiple paths to be traversed and a lot of resources scattered around to be found, and while it's not DooM or Quake level of complex, it's much more than either of the previous games managed to do.

You can argue that the environments in SS3 tended to be uninspired, but it's hard to deny BFE's superiority in level design and core gameplay design departments.

[Seamus]

Originally posted by Butcher:

I can and will deny that BFE level design sucked.

Oh, so we agree that the level design in BFE was an improvement then.

[Morrigan]

Serious Sam 3 was a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ maze, always lost.

TFE/TSE were goods mindless shooters, not a bloody maze where you spent more time lost askin "where should i go" instead of killing ennemies

[аnŌn]

Originally posted by Cersei Lannister:

Serious Sam 3 was a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ maze, always lost.

TFE/TSE were goods mindless shooters, not a bloody maze where you spent more time lost askin "where should i go" instead of killing ennemies

Lol what? SS3 was literally a straight line, it was impossible to get lost.

[Skorly]

Wait a second... BFE has sprinting and iron sights, but CoD also has sprinting and iron sights! OMG BFE COD RIPOFF!!!

[Seamus]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by Seamus:

Oh, so we agree that the level design in BFE was an improvement then.

We agree that BFE was a Call Of Duty ripoff.

In other words, you're incapable of looking past the most basic aspects of a game.

You're really not qualified to critique map design.

[Skorly]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Grey and uninspired urban enviroments?
Reloading?
Very tight corridors?
Actually serious narrative trying to look cool instead of being cool?

It's like they took their oldschool shooter roots and replaced them with military shooter gameplay. I see you really like military shooters, so maybe you will go and play them?

Unispired enviroments ≠ military shooter ripoff.

How is reloading ripping off CoD? Almost every FPS past 1998 has reloading.

TFE also starts with tight corridors.

How is the tongue n cheek story of BFE similar to whatever kind of stories the CoD games tell?

BFE may play differently from the classics, but it's nothing like a military shooter

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by Seamus:

In other words, you're incapable of looking past the most basic aspects of a game.

You're really not qualified to critique map design.

Probably you right. But I am qualified to give my opinion about game. Serious Sam 1 is probably one of my favourite shooters. I really enjoyed 2 too. Serious Sam 3 was a boring mess. I completed SS1-2 more than 3 times in singleplayer, even more in coop. Completed SS3 only once and it was in coop, so boring it was.

You're absolutely qualified to give your opinion! I still disagree with you tho.

[NOCTURNE]

Originally posted by Cersei Lannister:

Serious Sam 3 was a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ maze, always lost.

TFE/TSE were goods mindless shooters, not a bloody maze where you spent more time lost askin "where should i go" instead of killing ennemies

It seems you played a totally different game then. I have no idea how you managed to get lost anywhere... It was absolutely no more mazelike than any previous titles. + It sometimes even showed you the way with arrows on the walls. (second level for example) Please tell me a location where you lost. I really want to hear that! The whole game is either straight lines or bigger arenas. Where is the maze? I seriously don't see it.

(also, as for me, I enjoyed ss3 the most)

[Wytas]

Those underground levels in SS3 were really annoying and puzzling. And the flashlight was too weak. Also, the first level of JOTN was very puzzling, although it was in open air.

[NOCTURNE]

Originally posted by Wytas:

Those underground levels in SS3 were really annoying and puzzling. And the flashlight was too weak. Also, the first level of JOTN was very puzzling, although it was in open air.

Puzzling? Where exacly? In short cutscenes it always told you where to go next. But even without that, it was a small island after all. Again, even most of the FE and SE leves were more "maze" than this...

Also, underground levels usually just small corridors with a few bigger rooms with columns. No maze, no puzzling. Come on guys. I am worrying now. I thought I played through all Serious Sam games, but now It seems I played with something else. I just didn't see anything you guys saying here...

[Morrigan]

I do not talk with people who prefer this awful SS3 to the real Serious Sam wich are TFE/TSE.

[Seamus]

Originally posted by Cersei Lannister:

I do not talk with people who prefer this awful SS3 to the real one.

...wat?

There's only one Sam 3.

[NOCTURNE]

Originally posted by Cersei Lannister:

I do not talk with people who prefer this awful SS3 to the real Serious Sam wich are TFE/TSE.

That was a very strong arguement. But I didn't expect more from someone who manage to get lost in small corridors or arenas... Grand Chatedral is the suitable level for you.

[Jhinius]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by GrandSecgend:

How was it worse? It was bigger, more complex and offered a lot more exploration.

Unless you're mistaking it for environmental design.

Serious Sam was never about "exploration". It was about nonstop, silly mindless fun. More complex? Serious Sam 3 had no places like tube where enemies walked on top, bottom and all sides. Serious Sam 3 had no tunnel where darkness moves in tunnel and hides enemies. Serious Sam 3 had no places where you had to defend your platform from flying enemies. Serious Sam 3 had no totally secret levels either. So no, actually Serious Sam 3 was the least complex of them all.

And you can't mistake "exploration" for secrets, because Serious Sam 3 had the most boring secrets in series.

this post right here explains alot, one of them which is that your not a real SS fan, if you were you wouldn't say this ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, cmon guys am i really the only real fan here?