New Broken Sword game announced.

TheYak · Mon 05/12/2005 14:36:29

Regardless of some of the quirks that came with the departure from glorious sprites and animation to the somewhat tepid 3D, the last Broken Sword game was a damned good game. In particular, it filled the gap nicely after the lack of adventure games recently.

THQ's announced Broken Sword: Angel of Death. There's a small announcement at 1up.com with a link to the newly-started website with trailer (no gameplay revealed, sorry). It looks to the be the last of the series, but I consider it substantially better news than having Sleeping Dragon be the last.

Ashen · Mon 05/12/2005 15:14:55

Wasn't this announced a while ago? There're already a thread about it (which you've posted in).

(Actually, there're two threads, if you count Scuthberts.)

Still, I suppose that thread doesn't mention the site or the trailer.
Is this a new start, or are 1up just a bit behind?

TheYak · Mon 05/12/2005 15:39:17

I think it's more the advent of website/trailer. After all, many games (adventures too) have been announced but never gone anywhere. I had totally forgotten about the previous BS4 thread, just as I eventually managed to forget Sam and Max: Freelance Police and FT2 (Not to mention the quickly-canned potential press release for GF-2).

Admittedly I forgot about the previous thread (despite posting in it), but who wants a bunch of unburied zombie threads roaming around anyway?

Rui 'Trovatore' Pires · Mon 05/12/2005 16:26:58

Ashen · Mon 05/12/2005 17:30:05

Would moderators be issued shotguns to deal with the zombie-thread menace?'Cause then I'm definately in...

QuoteI think it's more the advent of website/trailer.

It was just that the 1up article says "today's announcement of Broken Sword: Angel of Death" (despire being dated December 2nd, while Revolution's site has an announcement dated August 28th), rather than 'release of a trailer/website for' - I wasn't sure if there was something I missed.

I found the trailer a little disappointing, it doesn't actually say anything about the game you wouldn't have been able to guess knowing the other 3. I realise it's only a teaser, but still.

Elliott Hird · Mon 05/12/2005 18:42:25

Ashen: And the Star Wars teaser with anakin with the shadow of vader was any better?!?! It IS a teaser.

ManicMatt · Mon 05/12/2005 19:28:34

How many here would prefer the game to be 2D again? Just me? I was slightly disapointed with 3, the block puzzles were dull! And the puzzles too easy. I didn't regret buying it hough, and if the new one is the same, I'll still get it!

MrColossal · Mon 05/12/2005 21:11:39

3d doesn't make for sliding block puzzles, bad design does.

ManicMatt · Mon 05/12/2005 21:33:30

Not just that, it was the climbing around cliffs that I didn't really enjoy either. Again, bad design I guess...

AlbinoPanther · Mon 05/12/2005 22:24:12

We want 2D games 3D sucks because you just can't make adventure in full 3D( beside Grim Fandango ).So Third BS is the worst in series.First was the best and second was realy good.

SO WE VOTE FOR 2D 8)

ildu · Tue 06/12/2005 00:17:26

Grim Fandango wasn't full 3D. It had rendered 3D backgrounds and real-time 3D for the characters. If 2D is regular 2D, and 2.5D is 2D backgrounds with 3D characters, I would call Grim Fandango 2.75D.

So here's the laydown:

2D - 2D bgs, 2D characters (The classics)
2.25D - 2D bgs, 3D rendered sprite characters (Runaway)
2.5D - 2D bgs, 3D realtime characters (Can't think of any; suggestions?)
2.75D - 3D rendered bgs, 3D realtime characters (Grim Fandango, Still Life)
3D - 3D realtime bgs, 3D realtime characters (Bone)

(If you can't tell, this is mostly a joke.)

Redwall · Tue 06/12/2005 04:02:43

It doesn't matter how the bks were made, Grim Fandango's, Syberia's, etc are still 2D bks (and thus 2.5d games).

TheYak · Tue 06/12/2005 04:56:58

Quote from: Rui "Shodan" Pires (a divine AI) on Mon 05/12/2005 16:26:58
<George Romero fan raises his hand>

Indeed. "Rui raises his hand only to have it savagely ripped off by a zombie thread muttering, "Help M3 Mak my Gaem!"

Whether 2D or 3D is preferred, the 3rd in the series was a pretty worthy addition (apart from the obvious: "We're in 3D, we need 3D-style puzzles!" problems). Yep, 1up seems a little slow and dragged me into the abyss of forgetfulness with them. 3D seems the way adventure games are going. Hopefully, they learn from past mistakes and manage to avoid 3D platformer tedium.

Ali · Tue 06/12/2005 13:13:11

Quote from: LJUBI on Mon 05/12/2005 22:24:12
We want 2D games 3D sucks because you just can't make adventure in full 3D( beside Grim Fandango ).So Third BS is the worst in series.First was the best and second was realy good.

SO WE VOTE FOR 2D 8)

I've played more bad 2D adventures than 3D ones. I'd be genuinely surprised if any AGSers could say differently.

There's nothing inherently un-adventure game about 3D graphics. As MrCollosal indicates, how well a 3D adventure works is down to design. Not all, but many of the 2.5-3D adventures I've played have been great. I actually found that BS2 was very disappointing, while BS3 was excellent. (I'd also have it that GK3 is the best of the bunch, Vampires, Masons and the Holy Grail? Genius.)

ildu · Tue 06/12/2005 13:58:56

Yeah, I think I enjoyed GK3 most, although I haven't played GK2 much. However, I found BS3 to be quite a lot worse than it's predecessors, and I think being 3d kind of lowered the score for me.

Sure it does come down to design with any adventure game. But the design is more difficult to get right in a 3d game. 2d adventures are easier to make and 3d is still relatively new, so it's safe to assume there are probably ten times more 2d adventures than there are 3d. So, of course one has played more bad 2d adventures than bad 3d adventures. If you look at the percentage, you'll find that you have played a higher percentage of bad 3d adventures than 2d adventures. But this is still not an accurate way of looking at it.

MrColossal · Tue 06/12/2005 15:11:11

I beg to differ that 3d is harder to design for.

You can have push block puzzles in 2d games along with stealth. The problem is it's hard to design an adventure game and it's hard to design an adventure game that will appeal to more of a general game playing crowd than it is to design some other games.

I see no reason why 3d adventures should be harder to design for. Not an adventure game obviously but look at WarCraft, started as 2d and moved to 3d, I don't think it was harder to design the 3d WarCraft vs the 2d because it's still the same game just in 3d. So it again all comes down to how they implemented 3d, the market, their target audience and other factors.