Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
6 
Report this post
You PERSONALLY don't like the game. That's fine. You're fully entitled to your opinion.
But you're not making any argument supporting your point.
Personally, I LIKE this game. And, I LIKE the original "Blood."
They really don't feel like they're RELATED. That's true. They're drastically different games. But when viewed independently, both are pretty good. Not "great," but "pretty good."
The problem really is that the second game is almost entirely unrelated to the first game... in play style, in visuals, in audio, in overall "feel." That's perfectly all right, except if you really, really LOVED the first game and were expecting "more of the same." If that's the case, you'll be disappointed, that's true.
But when viewed SEPARATELY... without comparing it to the first game... it's actually a pretty decent game. Not a "100% great" game... more like a "70% great game." A lot better than many other 1st-person shooter/slasher/etc games out there.
It's just not really in the same ballpark as "Blood." No more than Doom 3 was the same as the original Doom.
Not an especially effective arguing technique. Assertion in lieu of evidence.Was it? Are you PROVING anything you just wrote, or just (again) ASSERTING IT, thinking (wrongly) that saying "IZ NOT! IZ TOO!" is how "arguing" is done?
It isn't "generic." It has quite a bit of style, in fact, but that style is simply a different style than the first game had. "Bland, boring, tedious, dull, mundane?" All synonyms. Essentially just shouting "IZ NOT! IZ NOT!" again and again, thinking it will be "convincing" if you just shout it loudly enough. You haven't actually SUPPORTED your claim, in any way. What was lacking in the game design, which was good? What was present, which was bad? Be SPECIFIC. (And saying "fun was absent" isn't an answer. That's just saying the same emotional thing once again, using slightly different language.)It's apparent that either (a) English is not your first, or even second, language, or (b) you're just very, very poorly educated, and have poor language skills. Oh, and you seem to think that using profanity somehow makes you more likely to be taken seriously... which infers that you're likely about twelve years old... or at least the mental equivalent of a twelve-year-old. Most of us grow up eventually.
Oh, and the "and everyone agrees with me" tactic is a universally rejected one. It's weak sauce, attempting to bolster your own position by unsupported claims of "authority" which you, yourself, have not earned.
You literally have NO IDEA what "everyone else" happens to think, nor can you speak for "everyone else," unless you have some scientifically collected, statistically meaningful data proving that. And I'm pretty sure you don't. So, while you can certainly speak for yourself, you can speak for no one else, and it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.And I should care who this "Civvie 11" is, and what he or she says? Again, the weakest possible "appeal to authority in lieu of an argument" tactic. It's not saying that you're wrong, it's saying that you don't have faith in your OWN argument, because you're not defending your own argument, you're just trying to pretend that "peer pressure" is more important than actual reasoned arguments. (sigh)
And "literally just utter trash?" Apart from emotionally laden over-the-top "garbage writing," what exactly does that mean? "LITERALLY TRASH?" So, this game is made up of unrelated, thrown away elements from other things, not intended for consumption, just for disposal?
Do you think adding "literally" and "utter" to your statement actually makes it STRONGER? It doesn't. It makes your statement more ridiculous nothing more and nothing less. If you think that the game is "trash," you should establish, using facts, logic, and reason, WHY you think it's "trash." You should NOT insert terms like "literally" (which you're using entirely incorrectly here, obviously) or "utterly" (which is an absolutist term which infers that there is NOTHING redeeming about this game whatsoever).
Even the worst FPS games I've ever encountered have SOME redeeming values, however small they may happen to be. "Daikatana" had fun bits. "Alien Anarchy" had some interesting ideas. "Alien Cabal" had a few pieces of decent design behind it. And so on. These games were TERRIBLE, in my opinion, but even they were not "utterly" devoid of any redeeming value, nor were they "literally trash." They were just poorly designed games which, as a result of their poor design, sold poorly and earned a lot of scorn.
Did this game earn as much scorn? Nope. But it did earn some legitimate complaints. Some about bugs, and some about how it was not thematically related to the first game. Those are legitimate points, and can be supported with actual reasoned arguments. It was not as beloved as the first game, that's for certain. And that was certainly a mistake by the developers, no doubt. But that doesn't make it "literally utter trash." (sigh)Again with the "I'm a bratty twelve-year-old" routine. No, I'm trying to judge this game FAIRLY and ACCURATELY. Pointing out it's shortcomings, but not allowing the sort of ridiculous garbage YOU just spewed to go unchallenged.
The game needs no "defense." It stands, as it is, for each of us, individually, to judge.
My main issue with this game isn't the game design, it's the fact that it's so awkward to get running on many modern system configurations. I have multiple computers, and only three of them I own are capable of running this at present. The only one capable of running it WELL is a desktop system running Windows XP, and then, only if I disable the sound card and go with the AC97 codec on the motherboard.
That's annoying as @#$*, no doubt. But once done, the game can be run, and is relatively enjoyable to play. It's not "literally utter trash" or "a sh1tshow" or whatever else you try to label it. It's not the best game ever... but it's a fun way to spend some hours. Just not the same sort of game as the first "Blood" was.Waitaminute... so you don't even own the game? How, then, can you have any idea how it plays?
Could it be... hmmm... that you're just a troll?
Or are you a "pirate?" Having played it without ever buying it? (In which case, well, your frustrations with the game would be due to the "pirated copies are broken" technique these particular game devs used, I would guess!)
In either case, I tend to laugh at people who have no legitimate knowledge of a subject matter, pretending to speak authoritatively on it. So, that's just another reason for me to ridicule you. You've given me plenty of opportunities to do so, haven't you?That's an ODD comment. You're claiming to be "making a comparison," but not stating specifically what you're comparing it to... only saying that whatever you're hypothetically comparing it to is "underrrated, overlooked and great," which might be a legitimate claim, if you were stating what game you refer to and comparing the two, using facts, logic, and reason.
Case in point... comparing it to "Thief - The Dark Project." That game, to me, is likely the most "underrated, overlooked, and great" game out there. Those who know it LOVE it, but far too many people know nothing about it. And this game is by no means even remotely as good as that game, certainly... it's one of my favorites, while this game is just an "also-ran" in my collection... not standing out too much in any way.
I get the impression you were trying to say it's "bad compared to other games which are NOT all that great." But that's not what you wrote, is it?
And thus, your comment is simply meaningless, and ridiculous to boot.Uh-huh. A "warning." Fine. Whatever you say, kiddo.
People can make their own decisions, based upon FACTS. Facts like "It doesn't run on many modern systems," or "it's not stylistically or thematically the same as the first game, so if you expect more of the first game, you'll be disappointed."
But emotionally-fraud imprecations, like you keep spouting? Those are WORTHLESS. They tell no one anything, except that you think people should listen to you because you stamp your feet and shout and pout and hold your breath unti you turn blue.
And trust me, kiddo, this is NOT even in the running for "the worst FPS of all time." It's also not in the running for "the best FPS of all time," of course. It's just a fairly solid, middle-of-the-pack FPS, which wasted an opportunity to win good will by deviating too far from the "parent" property it was based upon.
Want some really bad First-person-shooter action? Try "Terra Wars: N.Y. Invasion."
... PROFIT!!!
https://github.com/elishacloud/wiki-attachments/raw/master/dxwrapper/Games/Blood%20II%20The%20Chosen/blood2-fix.zip
It's pointless to beat up on blood2 because there wasn't a 36 month development time, which Blood and half life benefited from tremendously. B2 cannot hope to match the gameplay dynamics of it's younger sibling, that's just a fact. It still has moments of humor and combat that are worth while.
Microsoft. Lithtech designed the engine in collaboration with Microsoft. It "optimized" by using backdoors (undocumented) within DirectX, for example. Things not documented in official literature, and (since the programmers who worked on that are long since moved on) no longer easily managed. Most of these "backdoors" were removed over time.
It's possible to recode the engine... in part or in full.. to run on more "routine" systems. But, apart from TRON 2.0, I'm unaware of any games which have seen that fully accomplished.
Night Dive and GOG were trying to get the rights to do this... they've done it before... with the NOLF games. But somehow, the rights to do so proved impossible to obtain.
Here's an article on the Lithtech engine. If you go through the list, you can likely pick out your own favorite "won't run on modern systems" game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LithTech
Remarkably, almost ALL "won't run on modern systems" issues are related to one of two things... Microsoft altering "DirectX" (and in the process disabling functionaity once used by a particular piece of software), or "copy protection."
The first is actually usually fairly easy to get around (with, as you could probably guess, the notable exception of Lithtech engine games). Yes, games written to run on DirectX 7 usually won't run properly on a modern system... and God help you if you want to run anything earlier than that.
HOWEVER... there are "wrappers" which translate the calls to those earlier versions of DirectX into DX9 or DX11... making the overwhelming majority of these older games fully functional on modern systems if used. I use one written by a fellow who goes by Dege... not mentioning it by name in case Valve is still grumpy about "unofficial" patches, as they were a while back.. but there are several options available to accomplish the same thing. Anything that can translate "old DirectX" calls into their "new DirectX" equivalents should work just fine.
Between my DirectX (and Voodoo) wrapper(s) and DOSBox (which Valve makes use of... albeit initially without properly crediting the authors as required by law!)... the vast majority of "old games" can be run on my modern 64-bit system.
There's a gap in there... programs specifically written to run on Win3x, using 16-bit code. DOS (and thus DOSbox) run 8-bit code... but note, you CAN install Windows 3.x in DOSBox and get that 16-bit support. I have a DOSBox installation of WIndows for Workgroups 3.11 which runs all my "lost" 16-bit stuff, running in a single folder on my 64-bit system.
In fact, the ONLY stuff I've found pretty much impossible to make work have been Lithtech programs. However... they are "hit and miss," and seem to suffer more problems from Lithtech's SOUND DirectX support than from Lithtech's VIDEO DirectX support. I've found, for example, that by disabling my system's main audio and using a set of USB speakers, in stereo and at low quality, SOME of these Lithtech engine games will run.
I ask because most VMs don't include emulation for all hardware features. For example, you can run "software graphics" in VMs, but seldom can run hardware-accelerated graphics in DMs.
If you're running this in a VM, you must be using one of those with full hardware acceleration support. I'm curious which one you've had success with re: this game.