Spider-Man: Edge of Time - Part 1

[SolarTiger]

I think some of you are being a little too fanboyish. All I want is a kick ass spiderman game like AA. I'm tired of these mediocre to ok games.

 

[spider13]

I agree with you on wanting a game like aa for spider man. What I'm saying is this could be a step in the right direction lets wait and see.

 

[Anno_Domini]

They can never go in the "right direction" when we'll see a game every year. A game every year means less and less time of actually planning out a more-than-decent gaming experience.

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.

They don't have to create a new engine, lol, but do something different where it doesn't look EXACTLY like SD, which, I assume no one gets my point with that, lol. The clearest thing I can mention is how SD looked different than how WOS looked.

And SD was a big success, but to the more hardcore fans, they didn't like certain aspects of the gameplay mostly, but Beenox kept pretty much all of these things that made the gameplay a bit dreadful. Mind you, I liked SD, but I hated certain things, such as the web weapons, which are still on board with EOT.

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.

That's what I mean. I think franchise can work with the word series as well, so perhaps some posters thought otherwise of my definition of the word franchise when I used it with series. Oh well, haha. You know what I meant though, yes? After our many disagreements and arguments, we agree on something.

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.

Wolvieboy also said the same thing as I was trying to get at. With EOT, it's not in the same "franchise/series" as SD, but, of course it'll belong in the same Spider-Man franchise that Beenox is building on.

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.

Ehh, SD didn't even deserve a sequel in the first place. Beenox is just doing something new because a SD sequel wouldn't be a smart idea, imo. You can't break tablets of time ALL the time.

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.

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.

EDGE OF TIME ISN'T A BLOODY SEQUEL TO SHATTERED DIMENSIONS. That's exactly like saying The Incredible Hulk is a sequel to Hulk.

Activision - doesn't give developers time to create a great gaming experience as Activision only gives them a year, or even a little less than a year to do such, so, they never come out as crisp or detailed or even fascinating as a game such as Batman: Arkham Asylum.

The gameplay showed pretty much everything, so far, to show that the gameplay isn't ONE BIT different, and to not get that, then you may need to watch that gameplay once more.

And...Anti-Venom is EXACTLY like the same crap that Activision stuffs into their Spidey games. Non-sense symbiote villains that pretty much push the entire game without even caring about the villains that need to be in the limelight: Green Goblin and Doc Ock. Granted, SD tried, but we didn't get the 616 versions and mostly likely Activision will never give us those as long as they keep their motto with shooting out a game every year without taking time out to give us an AA-caliber Spider-Man game.

I think some of you are being a little too fanboyish. All I want is a kick ass spiderman game like AA. I'm tired of these mediocre to ok games.

This.

X1,000,000,000

 

[OmarBatGeek]

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.

Exactly! I think there truly is the making of a GREAT game there, they just need to figure out how to fine tune what they already have. As for "given more time" I suppose they could use some more time. Time is always nice when it comes to games, they almost always come out better for it. The Force Unleashed was AMAZING, and then they spent a couple months working on the next one and it was still okay, but WAAAAYYYY too short to be called a great game. I'm confident the story will be nice and fleshed out, however, since they were already brainstorming and stuff before SD was even released.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Beenox's version of brainstorming is thinking of random villains to use without having a script.

 

[spider13]

which is why they are using the same engine is because they aren't givin enough time. Also using the same engine is why it looks like sd. Everthing we have seen so far are the parts of the game that are already done, that stuff is why it looks like sd.

 

[spider13]

Beenox's version of brainstorming is thinking of random villains to use without having a script.

that is a stupid statement. They have already talked about how this game was being talked about before sd. I don't think you really no what your talking about. and I'm not trying to be a ass hole either.

 

[Anno_Domini]

which is why they are using the same engine is because they aren't givin enough time. Also using the same engine is why it looks like sd. Everthing we have seen so far are the parts of the game that are already done, that stuff is why it looks like sd.

More than anything, the game is already done. Don't kid yourself.

that is a stupid statement. They have already talked about how this game was being talked about before sd. I don't think you really no what your talking about. and I'm not trying to be a ass hole either.

First....Beenox did the SAME thing and said the SAME thing about SD, but, if YOU knew what you were talking about, then you'd know that they think of what villains to use before they even have a script.

 

[OmarBatGeek]

@Anno:

They don't have to create a new engine, lol, but do something different where it doesn't look EXACTLY like SD, which, I assume no one gets my point with that, lol. The clearest thing I can mention is how SD looked different than how WOS looked.

And SD was a big success, but to the more hardcore fans, they didn't like certain aspects of the gameplay mostly, but Beenox kept pretty much all of these things that made the gameplay a bit dreadful. Mind you, I liked SD, but I hated certain things, such as the web weapons, which are still on board with EOT.

WOS and SD are completely different games that don't have anything at all to do with each other. They didn't use the same engine. SD and EOT have the same voice actors and the same dimension Spideys interacting with each other, along with a very similar story concept. Therefore they will use the same engine, so they look similar. So no, you're correct, I don't understand what you mean by that.

Why do you single out "hardcore fans"? I'm pretty sure anyone who played the game had certain things they did and didn't like about it. Just saying. Like the wall crawling? That was horrible, and I'm pretty sure nobody liked it. Beenox has already said that they were working on fixing that for us. As for the web weapons... I actually liked those. Why didn't you? (Just out of curiosity )

Ehh, SD didn't even deserve a sequel in the first place. Beenox is just doing something new because a SD sequel wouldn't be a smart idea, imo. You can't break tablets of time ALL the time.

Why didn't SD 'deserve' a sequel? Sequels don't have to be the same story line, you know. Of course they wouldn't have made another game that involved breaking the tablet of time.



I'm tired of arguing about this whole thing. It's really pointless. We should all just be happy we're going to get another non-repetetive sandbox game like the last hundred Spidey games have all been.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

that is a stupid statement. They have already talked about how this game was being talked about before sd. I don't think you really no what your talking about. and I'm not trying to be a ass hole either.

Eh, Anno's got a point. I mean thats all Shattered Dimensions was. It was 'lets see how many villains we can throw in a game because fans like villains'. There was absolutely zero thought as to how those villains would fit into the story. I also HIGHLY doubt Beenox was actively thinking about this game before SD, sure they might of been tossing around ideas, but there is no way they were actively developing this prior to SD. If anything, development began on this game towards the end of SD's dev cycle.

 

[spider13]

damn stright. (I'm just talking out of my ass I now nothing about anything It's not like I didn't read ten thosand articles about this game and read interviews with the people makeing) (thats sarcasm by the way)

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Why didn't SD 'deserve' a sequel?

Because Shattered Dimensions wasnt that good.

 

[spider13]

Eh, he's got a point. I mean thats all Shattered Dimensions was. It was 'lets see how many villains we can throw in a game because fans like villains'. There was absolutely zero thought as to how those villains would fit into the story. I also HIGHLY doubt Beenox was actively thinking about this game before SD, sure they might of been tossing around ideas, but there is no way they were actively developing this prior to SD. If anything, development began on this game towards the end of SD's dev cycle.

No thats not what I meant, I meant that eot and sd where on the table at the same time and Activison went with SD.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

No thats not what I meant, I meant that eot and sd where on the table at the same time and Activison went with SD.

Ah got ya, but even still they werent developing EoT parallel to SD. Beenox is too small a team to do that, but then again maybe thats why SD felt so thin.

 

[OmarBatGeek]

Because Shattered Dimensions wasnt that good.

Well I guess if you weren't satisfied with that, then you should just pretend there are no new Spiderman games coming out. You can ignore all of that nonesense (you know, since they all apparently suck) and go back to replaying all the old sandbox Spidey games that had even less development and thought put into them. You can play those a few more times, to remind yourself why you should be thankful there are any new games with decent quality coming out at all. I mean if you're not going to be grateful for it, than why waste $60+, right?

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Well I guess if you weren't satisfied with that, then you should just pretend there are no new Spiderman games coming out. You can ignore all of that nonesense (you know, since they all apparently suck) and go back to replaying all the old sandbox Spidey games that had even less development and thought put into them. You can play those a few more times, to remind yourself why you should be thankful there are any new games with decent quality coming out at all. I mean if you're not going to be grateful for it, than why waste $60+, right?

Grateful for what? A mediocre Spider-Man game every year? There hasnt been a good Spider-Man game since the first PS1 game. Every one since then has ranged from ok(Spider-Man 2) to flat out terrible(Web of Shadows).

 

[ProjectPat2280]

And on to another point, can someone explain to me why they think Activision has to drop a yearly Spider-Man game? Why cant they take the approach WB did with Arkham Asylum and soon to release Arkham City. I mean take your time, develop a great game and you WILL see results. Arkham City, a game that was in development for right under 3 years came out to great reviews and amazing sales (approx 4.9 million units) which is more than the last 3 Spider-Man titles combined, SD didnt even top the 1 mill mark. I really do not get Activisions business model.

 

[SolarTiger]

I agree with you on wanting a game like aa for spider man. What I'm saying is this could be a step in the right direction lets wait and see.

I highly doubt that this will be a step in the right direction. Its virtually a carbon copy of SD. Yeah yeah I know I haven't played EoT yet, but its a safe bet judging on the videos released so far.

I don't want to hate on spiderman games. It's most likely Activision pushing for a yearly spiderman game. I just wish they'd take their time and release an amazing spiderman game (even if it took them 3 years to make it) then have an OK game that I rent for the weekend and never play again.

 

[spider13]

yeah I understand what your saying I do, Just they don't get to have to time so this is the next best thing they can do. I now if they fix the wall crawing and fine tune the combat have a better story that this game already goes form a 7 like sd to 8.5 and I will take a 8.5 game over wos 5 rating.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

I don't want to hate on spiderman games. It's most likely Activision pushing for a yearly spiderman game. I just wish they'd take their time and release an amazing spiderman game (even if it took them 3 years to make it) then have an OK game that I rent for the weekend and never play again.

Yea i agree 110%, which leads me to believe that the people in charge at Activision truly are morons. Im assuming they feel that releasing a Spidey title every year will cut down on dev costs while increasing profits. But how much money can they truly be making when their games barely reach the 1 million units sold mark? I mean does Activision rather have 3 Spider-Man titles over the course of 3 years that barely sells 2 million units or would they rather have 1 Spidey title over the span of 3 years that sells close to 5 million copies? I just do no understand Bobby Kotick. That guy is a effing joke.

 

[spider13]

**** activision they are what we should be whing and throwing fits about not beenox.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

**** activision they are what we should be whing and throwing fits about not beenox.

I agree and disagree. Yes its activisions fault for making Beenox work on such a tight schedule but Beenox still decides to throw a bunch of random villains in a game and label that a story.

 

[HELL N' SPIDERS]

I know I am not involved in any of what is happening above, but I gotta say I am still excited about this game. I just enjoy being Spidey in new stories.

 

[GamerSlyRatchet]

I agree and disagree. Yes its activisions fault for making Beenox work on such a tight schedule but Beenox still decides to throw a bunch of random villains in a game and label that a story.

In SD's case, yes, that could be said. But we still haven't seen enough of EoT's story and other villains to make that assumption. I may not be happy that Anti-Venom is the killer, but it does make sense and more thought was put into that decision than, say, regular Venom or Carnage.

It doesn't mean I don't want to see Green Goblin or Doc Ock at some point, though. Those two really need to be done justice in games (ESPECIALLY Goblin). But it would be trickier to explain how two villains Spidey has beaten again and again would just suddenly manage to kill him. It makes a bit more sense to have him fall to a brainwashed ally that can actually take away Spidey's power and give him a deadly beating.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

In SD's case, yes, that could be said. But we still haven't seen enough of EoT's story and other villains to make that assumption. I may not be happy that Anti-Venom is the killer, but it does make sense and more thought was put into that decision than, say, regular Venom or Carnage.

It doesn't mean I don't want to see Green Goblin or Doc Ock at some point, though. Those two really need to be done justice in games (ESPECIALLY Goblin). But it would be trickier to explain how two villains Spidey has beaten again and again would just suddenly manage to kill him. It makes a bit more sense to have him fall to a brainwashed ally that can actually take away Spidey's power and give him a deadly beating.

Oh yea im not completely writing EoT off story wise, at least not yet. Im just assuming, given their past performance, that it will be similar.