Most thus far have been fairly terrible, although the original Tomb Raider is probably amongst the best.
I don't think they have have to be sad and nerdy by default, though. A lot of films these days are either adapted from books or older films; there's no reason games can't successfully be used the same way.
Of course, it'd also be nicer if games had better writing in general beyond Us vs Them scenario #56485734892.
Quote from KakburkWell, the ID tech4 SHOULD be able to render better quality of details, textures and models aswell as special effects than what's beeing observed in the beta. But then let's remember the word B-E-T-A... Not saying the game's far from completion, as it seems to be quite close to the full games release. But let's just keep that word in our minds, I'm quite sure with the technology they have they'll add some eye-candy.
Betas very RARELY change at all. But you knew that.At this point in development a beta is basically a finished product, besides a few bugs and errors here and there. Nothing will be changed in the maps visually really (except bug fixes) so the maps are going to stay boring and bland.
The maps are a little on the low poly side yes. We did this to allow a more broader range of pc's to be able to run the game at acceptable speeds.
Megatextures aren't used on the walls, only on the outside terrain, which doesn't really tile.
I'm not one to really defend the game, but ffs you can't out rightly bash something when you got no clue on how it works
Yar, an excellent film for sure. The only thing that outdoes it in my opinion is Band of Brothers, which might as well be a super-long film. 
Anyone who hasn't seen either seriously owes it to themselves to watch them. I don't think there are any films depicting WW2 that're more stellar than those pair.
It's pretty good for what it's intended to be, but I'd recommend somehow splitting up the columns a bit better. It's kind of hard on the eye to differentiate them quickly at the moment, which could easily be fixed with some well-chosen colour (perhaps lighten the grey for the backgrounds of two of them, or use a vivid colour for headers, etc).
The overall direction reminds me of Total Spore. You might want to look there for some inspiration since it's a good example of the (increasingly rare) light on dark style.
I have to admit, the game looks pretty shit going off that video. The pace and general feel doesn't seem quite right to me, reminding me more of UT2004's Onslaught mode than anything else. The bits where infantry directly encountered each other felt very deathmatch-like, although I guess it's hardly surprising considering the heritage.
I guess it doesn't help that a lot of people are looking forward to Quake Wars with the expectation that it'll be a futuristic Battlefield-esque game done right (I know a lot of people said "I'll just wait for Quake Wars instead" when BF2142 came out), while the reality is that Battlefield 2142 is the one that did do it right and this will just be something altogether different.
I never played the original Enemy Territory so I wasn't completely sure how it felt. Quake Wars seems a bit too fast-paced and -- dare I say? -- arcadish (You'll love that, Rick_D!) for me.
I did have similar concerns when I watched the old videos on GameTrailers from E3 and stuff, but kind of brushed them off as early footage/etc. It looks like this may genuinely be a game not for me after all, although I will of course try it regardless. 
One unfortunate thing about old classics getting a modern sequel is that the old fans always want nothing more than essentially the same game but with better graphics. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but depending on the game it might simply not work and be that successful in a modern climate.
I mean, they are professionals. They probably know better than most what's actually going to work for the majority of gamers, especially if you take into account their portfolio.
Let them get the fucking game out before you go on a zealous rampage of criticism.
You seem to be all over this, Mac. You doing their PR? 
st0lve, stop geeking out and just wait for the game to be released before you write it off. Jesus.
This thread has become incredibly sad.
Well it's really well rated Rick_D and I'm surprised you missed the immense hype it's had, but I think it's more of a casual impulse buy that'd pleasantly surprise than anything to get excited about. Possibly not quite so suited to the PC in that respect.
Well, as long as you didn't just try the demo and give up on it. 
I say so because the unlocks are really what make it so awesome. I mean, in 2142 I can basically be Solid Snake thanks to the stealth camo, proning stealthed in front of tanks and shit and they just drive right past. 
Unless they stay for more than like 20 seconds, at which one begins to sweat.
I guess what I like about 2142 is that the roles are much more specialised and there's more of them you can do. It's the focus on infantry I love, while BF2 seems a little too leaned towards the vehicles and I end up really frustrated when a tank I didn't see just wipes me out in one shot a whole bunch of times, or a plane drops a big bomb on my face. 
Quake Wars is even more infantry-oriented though so that's why I'm really looking forward to it.
I hope this happens to you SixThree:
Nobody really cares what you read or what you do, blender.
Cock envy.
No way, the train one really made me go "wow", totally not expecting the superb loop CGI. That one seems a bit easy/boring in comparison.
I'm sorry but that is the best video I've seen all week. All week!!!!!
Did you play it much? I went into BF2142 equally as sceptically, but after I got a few ranks into it I realised that they've evolved the gameplay on pretty much every front and as a result it's more lastingly fun.
I seriously find it difficult to point at any one element of BF2 and not think BF2142 does it better. It doesn't even seem that rushed to me, other than the fact that it's graphically very similar (but if you look at Vietnam and 1942, you'll realise the evolutions between those and BF2 were equally as small).
Of course, 2142 would basically be nothing without its unlock system. About 40 unlocks, makes it almost like PlanetSide as far as customisation goes.
I suppose if you just have an inherent obsession with modern warfare and don't like the futuristic stuff then that's fair enough. I just can't see how anyone could not think the gameplay is much better, though. It absolutely eclipses BF2's in my opinion and generally feels more focused and exciting for infantry, and I loved/played BF2 to death.
It's not destroying them at all; as I said earlier, we're actually coming out of a long age of immense censorship, and it's far better now than it's ever been. Things like this are an inevitability when you bear that in mind -- especially when those who grew up throughout the censorship make most of the decisions.
You should get 2142 and play with me Mazy. It's much better than BF2 in pretty much every way apart from graphics progression.
No, what the gaming public will do is see the title "Quake", and those of them that didn't like any of the previous Quake games will immediately write it off as not for them -- kind of like how ifO did, but with a bit less willingness to look into it further. If you think a great number of them won't do that, then you do indeed have too much faith.
Enemy Territory isn't quite as well known as many would like to believe, so most people will think immediately to their experiences with the Quake series. Which is unfortunate as the Quake series has every little in common with it from a gameplay perspective, and largely a visual perspective too.
Sure, it'll be a great success with the hardcore audience and I've no doubts we'll have far more than enough servers to play on for a long time to come, but I was mainly speculating on its implications for the wider picture.
Yeah, an AO rating in the US is like a commercial death sentence. I think there're only like 20 games that've ever received it.
I can't help but feel that Rockstar has really pushed it too far. I mean, only a decade ago Nintendo were well known for censoring games, having the blood removed in Mortal Kombat, etc.
It might seem weird but we're still moving out of an era of heavy censorship. In the UK, at least. The 70s and 80s were absolutely full of film bans from the BBFC, and according to the internets they had the power (and exercised the power) to ban films based on political content for propaganda reasons before t'war.
