Warhawk - Single player dropped

Looks a lot of fun. Way more polished than before imo (graphically and gameplay wise).
30 dollars would be perfect for what you get.

Summary stolen from gaf:

 

Huge maps and 32 players I like, but still I wanted a fully fleshed out game, this seriously doesn’t make me confident in getting a ps3.

 

I suppose this is supposed to be like something between Counter-Strike Source and Battlefield. Looking at the game in motion doesn't seem to be too big of a disappointment, but I think a big factor would be the number of people who actually play, as well as how well the matchmaking is going to be handled on the PSN side.

 

Seems they added some volumetric lighting.

 

I agree with that. If nobody buys it, the value is kinda diminished greatly unlike a retail game with a single player game with a online portion. Meaning you can always go back to single player if multiplayer is crap. I also think this type of game MUST follow resistance's lead and have Clan/Party support with the already going dedicated servers. It would be perfect for this.

Imagine having clan skins and such vehicle/character customizations. I think it would boost the "community feeling" a lot more.

If it's fairly priced, I'm sure it should do well if its genuinely fun and the word gets out.

 

Just wondering, are there any download accelerators that work for IGN?

I notice IGN seems to be capped at about 260 KB/s, well below my ~500 KB/s capability. When I try to use my download accelerator, Down Them All for Firefox, on any IGN videos, it never works, always gives a 404 not found.

I'd prefer to download something like IGN weekly than stream it, but it takes too long to be practical at 260k.

 

Yeah it looks great. I love the look.

 

The hills and the mountains seem to have a much more organic feel now. More detailed perhaps? It might turn out to be a lot of fun afterall.

 

So how would it work, you have a big online map where some players are doing aerial combats and others are manning ground units?

Or some maps are aerial-only and some are ground-only?

Now as a single-player game, if you have different levels where you have fly to get to some ground portion, that makes sense. But in an online-only context, it's confusing.

Would deathmatches mean aerial dogfights? Or deathmatch is like a FPS game, only on the ground?

It would be cool if some people flew around fighting both aerial and ground-based opponents and vice-versa for ground opponents manning AA or SAM batteries.

Guess it could be like Battlefield in a way.

 

From what I saw in the video, you can fight in the air, land on the ground, get out of your jet, walk to a tank, etc etc...

I don't think unless you confine yourself to a set match type, that you will in anyway be restricted to a singular form of vehicle during the course of the game.

 

Sorry but I have no intentions of supporting these sort of games.

Firstly, remember that "Blu Ray high capacity" tagline you shoved down my throat? USE it. I don't care how long it takes to get me a complete game, spend the time. A campaign is rather critical to me. If it wasn't, I'd still be only playing Counter Strike. Stir about all the crap you want about "PSN" but it's all noise. Basically, they wanted to cut their losses and release the online element, save on manufacturing and distribution costs and get this game out the door.

Ofcourse, we have, as expected, the same people running around claiming how wonderful it is they're getting half of a game.

I can understand Mortal Kombat 2 being a download game and can't wait to buy THAT! but I'm hoping people can see the difference between MK2 and this.

As for people who do buy this, hope that you can disable Air or set maps to infantry only. Otherwise, it might end up like BF2......

 

So more dev time = better single player mode automatically?

 

Did sony kill your dog or something.

First, I think its obvious this wont be a full fledged 60 dollar game. I could see it being a problem if we got half a game at 60 dollars, but thats clearly not the case.

Second, I don't see any problem with scraping what doesn't work for them, and focusing on the things that are working well. The game is claimed to be fun, at least by the press who have spoken about their playtesting so far. So as long as it's....uhhh I dunno... fun perhaps, and I get a good value at a good price, I don't care how the hell its distributed.

I could see if you have a grudge with it lacking single player, which it was originally going to have. Or even disliking the ground missions. Thats understandable, and I'm kinda sad SP is gone as well. But I think it's also obvious you have more than a couple grudges with the game.

Are you saying I shouldn't buy this game because it isn't fun and not a good value, OR that I shouldn't buy this game because it went through design changes you disagree with?

At the end of the day for the average joe, is there really that big of a difference? If somebody never knew of the game's development issues or changes prior to the release, would they really care at the end of the day, considering they are getting their money's worth?

BF2 was fun to me, so that wouldn't be terrible imho. But from the sound of things, the game will be very customizable.

 

I have a big grudge against bait and switch.

 

In this case, more Dev time = ATLEAST a single player mode.

Resistance has a good online and an equally good single player. So does RB6: Vegas, Gears and many others. Clearly it helps more than it hurts when it's done well. This game didn't get cut out of the goodness of someone's heart. It's likely a financial decision more than anything.

 

Well thanks for the well thought out reply. If bait and switch is what you call it, so be it. I think the game seems better off how it worked this way. But I won't knock the ones who dislike the lack of SP.

If it's a good game/value, your loss I suppose.

 

Robert even the devs said that the single player in Warhawk sucked. Think about that. All those other games had great single player campains.

 

How is this a bait and switch?

It isn't like you just bought Warhawk, brought it home and then found out the game is online only. It certainly isn't going to be $50-60 dollars either, so the "half a game" comment seems rather disingenuous.

I'd have liked a single player campaign and maybe that'll come sometime in the future, but watching that IGN vid has me excited again for it -- initially the rumors were kind of disappointing to hear, but this actually seems like a lot of fun... they've certainly seemed to have done all the right things with it -- Dedicated servers on consumer consoles!

If the choice is no Warhawk or online only Warhawk, then it's a pretty obvious choice if you ask me.

 

Heh, we have had that since RTCW on the Xbox. Shame no 360 game has bothered with it yet.

 

Just my opinion, but a developer changing course mid-development due to issues (like a gameplay mode or machanic not working out) and trying to salvage their game for the better doesn't seem as much bait and switch as it does adapting to the pains of game development.