Spider-Man: Edge of Time - Part 1

[WolfCypher]

8 min is not enough you know it i know it, I can't even think of a game that I went "yes this game is a amazing and i've only played 8 min"

batman aa took about 2 hours before I was sold on it.
uncharted took till mission 7
god of war I diden't like till the very end
spider man sd took three levels.

the only game that has ever hooked me in under a hour was final fantasy 7.

Oooookaay...if you're willing to play a game until the very end to decide whether its worth playing or not...I mean, who plays a game all the way to the end and then say "this game is/isn't worth finishing" :/

 

[SolarTiger]

Oooookaay...if you're willing to play a game until the very end to decide whether its worth playing or not...I mean, who plays a game all the way to the end and then say "this game is/isn't worth finishing" :/

Haha no kidding eh?

 

[spider13]

I did with god of war, I bought the game becasue it was the only thing there. I would play a part and go that was amazing and play another part that made me go oh hell. I couldn't decide how i felt about the game. but I'm glad I did keep going becasue it has become one of my fav. games parts 2,3 are better but thats not the point.

 

[OmarBatGeek]

It's just plain stupid to say you know whether a game is good or not with eight minutes of footage. Not even you being able to play it, just watching a couple cut scenes and some gameplay of other people playing. I mean seriously? That's like saying whether or not you like a movie with ten seconds of set footage that hasn't been completely edited and worked over yet.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

That's like saying whether or not you like a movie with ten seconds of set footage that hasn't been completely edited and worked over yet.

Thats not even remotely accurate. The only thing we dont know about is story, and still the chances of it being more than mediocre are slim based on previous Spidey titles, but we know how the gameplay is as we've all played it when it was called Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions.

I agree you cant deem a game good or bad from such short footage, but when you add in what we've seen and Activisions track record, you can come to the conclusions that the chances of the game being much more than decent are at best, slim.

 

[Anno_Domini]

It's just plain stupid to say you know whether a game is good or not with eight minutes of footage. Not even you being able to play it, just watching a couple cut scenes and some gameplay of other people playing. I mean seriously? That's like saying whether or not you like a movie with ten seconds of set footage that hasn't been completely edited and worked over yet.

8 minutes of lackluster gameplay. Two terrible trailers. Activision's track record. Edge of Time copying everything from Shattered Dimensions with only a few minor new adjustments. There...are those enough reasons, or is it still "stupid", as you deemed?

Plus...there's a HUGE difference then having an idea from polished or almost polish gameplay to "set footage that hasn't been edited". Besides...who the hell looks at set footage and creates their opinion?

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I'm getting this mainly for the free roam they said they'd offer

 

[dtud]

Anno: I like how you say it's okay for GTA to look samey because it's a franchise but Spider-Man isn't. Of course his games are a franchise, and EoT is a sequel in everything but the word.

 

[dtud]

Okay, sorry for the double but now I've watched the trailer a couple of times and can comment on it properly.

First of, Josh Keaton proves in just a couple of lines that he can handle adult Spidey, something people have doubted. It feels very natural. The game seems to be a bit more story driven to, which can only be a good thing.

And while it is an interesting premise, I don't like the tone they have been presenting it in. I liked how colorful Shattered Dimensions was and this is a bit of a let down. Nothing major tho and we haven't seen that much yet. Hopefully we'll get a live demo with some color and quipping from one of the major game outlets during E3. But thats just me. The webshapes doesn't really fit with tone either at this point.

And one thing I really don't like. In both the trailers and the gameplay we got a while back, there is this flash of light when you land a hit or get hit. God I hate when things like that are in games, it lessens the impact of the combat for me. It wasn't in SD so I don't see why they need it.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Anno: I like how you say it's okay for GTA to look samey because it's a franchise but Spider-Man isn't. Of course his games are a franchise, and EoT is a sequel in everything but the word.

Lol....sure bud.

 

[dtud]

Lol....sure bud.

In what way aren't the Spider-Man games a franchise?

 

[Alchemyst]

In what way aren't the Spider-Man games a franchise?

Do you mean the Spider-Man games being in somewhat the same continuity as far as visual appearance? At least thats what I've been picking up in the previous posts.

 

[dtud]

Do you mean the Spider-Man games being in somewhat the same continuity as far as visual appearance? At least thats what I've been picking up in the previous posts.

Nah, I was just wondering how it can be okay for AC, GTA, etc etc to reuse assets because they're a franchise. But when a Spider-Man game does it it's not even a franchise anymore. All according to Anno of course.

There is just too many holes in that logic for me to understand where he is coming from.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Nah, I was just wondering how it can be okay for AC, GTA, etc etc to reuse assets because they're a franchise. But when a Spider-Man game does it it's not even a franchise anymore. All according to Anno of course.

There is just too many holes in that logic for me to understand where he is coming from.

What don't you understand? Edge of Time should quite frankly be as different as Shattered Dimensions was different than Web of Shadows.

Assassin's Creed and Grand Theft Auto can look the same, because they're part of a franchise, yes, but there are things with those games that have some type of tag to tie them up together, as with BioShock Infinite is to the BioShock games. There's nothing that shows Edge of Time belongs in the same type of timeline, continuity and they only look the same because Beenox was either too lazy or just didn't have time to do any drastic changes.

 

[spider13]

I have to agree with dtud on this they are a franchise just in the same way friday the 13th is a franchise jason does not look the same from film to film nothing is the same from film to film besides kane hodder and the music. So if that is in the same continuity and is different why can't somthing in a different continuity look the same. Also sd had many flaws fun game but many flaws, I glad there using the same engine now maybe I can get a spiderman game that has been polished. besides you people are spider man fans right why the hell are you whining about another game I understand that you want a A pluse spider man game. I want one two and this is a great way to get one using the same engine and makeing it better.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I disagree with what you're saying there Anno. I agree about the difference in graphics and qualities from a game like Spider-Man 3 by Treyarch and a game like WOS or SD, but when SD and EoT are both made one after the other by the same developer, using the same incarnations as the previous game, there is no reason at all they would need to look drastically different. If theres a generational gap between consoles, or they have a completely difference concept or angle, sure, but why would they NEED to develop a whole new game engine for a game that is very, very similar? If anything, EoT will be closer to the Spider-Man game they really want to make because they've already GOT the same engine but they've had time to think through properly what they really want to do, how to streamline it in some areas and how to deepen the experience in others. Why bother to TRY and make it look like something different when maybe they don't want to? You don't have to reinvent the wheel with every new game, and for Beenox, SD was a big success, regardless of what we actually think of the game.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

There are differences in franchises though... Spider-Man isn't a game franchise like the examples that have been mentioned. Spider-Man is the franchise, but the continuity is obviously different from game to game like it is from comic to movie etc. Like any game series part of an already existing franchise, you group them together according to who made them, like we refer to the Rocksteady Batman games, or the XML/MUA game. No one includes X-Men Origins Wolverine and X-Men Legends part of the same game franchise but they are all obviously part of the X-Men franchise as a whole, but you judge by the people making them.

 

[dtud]

Anno: Basically what Wolvieboy said, can't really say it better myself. But to me it seems you're mistaking franchise for for sequel. EoT is technically not a sequel to SD, but it is still a game in the same franchise/series. Namely the Spider-Man franchise.

EDIT: Having read Wolvie's second post. It was pretty stupid by Beenox to tout this as not being a sequel. Sure it isn't one in the true meaning of the word, but they could have gone at it in a different way. IGN made fun of them for it in their first trailer walkthrough to.

 

[OmarBatGeek]

But Anno... YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED THE GAME YET!!! How are you supposed to just KNOW that absolutely nothing is different about the gameplay in EoT from SD? It's NOT the same as the difference between WoS and SD because EoT is SUPPOSED to be a kind of sequel. Just because it's not necessarily going to be level based and all that, like SD doesn't mean it's not a sequel.

8 minutes of lackluster gameplay. Two terrible trailers. Activision's track record. Edge of Time copying everything from Shattered Dimensions with only a few minor new adjustments. There...are those enough reasons, or is it still "stupid", as you deemed?

As far as all of THAT goes... First of all, you don't know yet how many adjustments there have been and how major or minor they are... Unless you've actually somehow been allowed to play it already and I'm unaware of that? O.O

Why does everyone keep mentioning "Activision's track record"??? What does that have to do with it? (In this aspect I actually don't know, so if you want to just explain... xP)

And the trailers? I thought they looked kick ass! How can you NOT be excited to see Anti-Venom, instead of the same ******** that is always stuffed into Spider-Man games? Josh Keaton sounds great as Spider-Man, the cut scene of 2099 walking with the Amazing version of Spiderman was fantastic and the graphics looked spectacular, the music was epic (like it should be with a game like this). And I personally don't ever judge gameplay before I actually am the one playing the game. Because you could watch someone else play a game and think it probably sucks and then YOU get to play it and it's an entirely different experience. Or maybe you just have a bigger imagination than me, is that it?

So yes, actually. It is still stupid. None of the reasons you listed off there are really valid. In my opinion, of course.

 

[spider13]

There are differences in franchises though... Spider-Man isn't a game franchise like the examples that have been mentioned. Spider-Man is the franchise, but the continuity is obviously different from game to game like it is from comic to movie etc. Like any game series part of an already existing franchise, you group them together according to who made them, like we refer to the Rocksteady Batman games, or the XML/MUA game. No one includes X-Men Origins Wolverine and X-Men Legends part of the same game franchise but they are all obviously part of the X-Men franchise as a whole, but you judge by the people making them.

I like you. (these comment was meant to funny in case somebody doesn't under stand)

 

[spider13]

I agree with omarbatgeek Lets not just say where going to skip it and rent the game play a little and then decide. I felt the same way with the spectular spider man cartoon and thank good a check it out. opinion are fine and I love hearing what people got to say but come on play the game then decide. Also if we support games that are not movie tie ins then maybe they make more orgainal games.

 

[jacobed]

I think its safe to say that none has to do with laziness. If they were given the right amount time Beenox could deliver a great Spider-man game.

 

[spider13]

I think its safe to say that none has to do with laziness. If they were given the right amount time Beenox could deliver a great Spider-man game.

I agree I think that this is the best way of dealing with the problem. Activision is given them a deadline witch is on realistic if you ask me and beenox is doing the best with what they have (aka useing the same engine)

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Also, as a first attempt at the Spidey license, I think it was a very solid effort. It wasn't perfect, but a strong base if Beenox really want to push. I think there was enough evidence in SD for me to feel like they at least had a good idea of what the key and core values of Spider-Man are. Now it's just a matter at seeing if they can perfect trying to translate that into gameplay. It was halfway to what Rocksteady did with Arkham Asylum. I think they clearly had the passion and understanding of Spidey, but they fell short in making gameplay that was unique and FELT like Spider-Man.

 

[spider13]

my point lets play and see if they did any better.