Aliens; Colonial Marines a Sci/Fi L4D ?

So, I'm seeing at lot of comments on other sites that state Gearbox basically outsourced most of the game. Timegate Studios (Section 8 and the F.E.A.R expansions people) did the single player while Nerve Software (they've done some work on other games) handled most of the multiplayer.

the majority of Gearbox Software's Aliens: Colonial Marines was not actually built by Gearbox, a report suggests...comments from an ex-Gearbox developer dug up by Superannuation suggest that the majority of the game was outsourced to TimeGate Studios, developer of downloadable console shooter Section 8: Prejudice and various FEAR expansion packs.

"Hate to say it, but I wouldn't get your hopes up too high for Colonial Marines," the ex-dev wrote last year. "I used to work at Gearbox, and the development of that game has been a total train wreck, going on what, six years now?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...o-section-8-developer-timegate-studios-report

Gearbox is totally overrated...whenever a game tanks they shift the blame to someone else while taking full credit for Borderlands and BIA
 

Dear god, that review is fucking terrible. There is no detail, no explanation of why anything is good. It's nothing but vague terms and flowery language. That is possibly one of the worst "professional" reviews I have read in a long time. It feels like a shitty Amazon user review. There is absolutely nothing in that review that justifies ANY score, much less 9/10. It is complete trash.
 
Pitchford was noticeably absent (compared to BL2) from his usual game pimping which leads me to believe he did not have high confidence in this game.

When BL2 was close to release the man was everywhere! I could have sworn I saw him at my little cousins birthday party promoting the game.

Anyway, thank you hardocp community for saving me 50 bucks.
 
Yeah reading the reviews, I'm more than disappointed about the wasted potential :/

i212wUcwcU0eE.gif


Yeah, I'm gonna hold off on this one.

AHAHAHA. I'm a huge Aliens fan, but what the heck.
 
I almost bought it on Steam but after reading around and the ign review giving it a 4.5/bad I don't feel it warrants my $50 so I'll be buying something for my vita instead.
 
I almost bought it on Steam but after reading around and the ign review giving it a 4.5/bad I don't feel it warrants my $50 so I'll be buying something for my vita instead.

I was originally gonna pre-order it, but when I noticed Pitchford was NOWHERE to be seen, I decided to hold off on it because hes not out unless the game is gonna be good. He has his own personal standards, and if he dont show for a game event, it aint gonna be good to him.

I will wait till it hits about $20.
 
I was originally gonna pre-order it, but when I noticed Pitchford was NOWHERE to be seen, I decided to hold off on it because hes not out unless the game is gonna be good. He has his own personal standards, and if he dont show for a game event, it aint gonna be good to him.

I will wait till it hits about $20.

Actually he did a decent amount of press and narrated a 10 minute playthrough which kinda makes me angry because of what I did see looked really good.

My general feeling and from what I've seen of the retaliatory critical reviews is that Gearbox really faked this one out the door.

It's just kinda ok. Like something I'd expect from a lowbudget $20 developer. It's not a screaming pile of poop some are claiming but it's passable only for fans of genre. If I wasn't an aliens fan I'd be pissed.

I gave Gearbox a pass on the Duke Nukem situation because they stated the game was 70% when they got it but no I won't be shelling out cash for anymore Gearbox titles. I wasn't even impressed with BL2.
 
This is the first game i've ever asked for a refund through steam for. When I saw how bad the console version looked I promptly asked for a pre-order refund from Steam and got it.
 
Im going to buy this on ps3 regardless of reviews. Me and the wife are dying to play as aliens and we will tear through some marines
 
Thank you.

@Colonel Sanders:

Guess I'm not just being "stubborn" or "trolling", eh?

Don't make it out to be as if I'm just being ignorant or stubborn. What the hell is "people like me"? Don't make personal judgments, man. You don't know me, nor have I displayed any ignorant behavior, or said anything that did not have any basis or that lacked intelligence.

You can get an extremely clear feel for a game by watching five hours of footage that clearly shows how bad it plays. For the last damn time: I don't need to use my own KB/M to know what the hell I'm looking at.

I've been objective, and can clearly see how bad the mechanics are, the animations, the complete lack of atmosphere, the horrid voice acting, the bad pacing etc, and obviously I'm far from the only one.

I was never out to hate the game. I wanted it to succeed, intensely. But since it's a horrid mess and an inexcusable travesty, clearly visible and audible to the human senses, perhaps it's the ones making me sound "bull-headed" who are truly ignorant, only perceiving things how they want to, out of their own one-eyed, desperate desire to see the game succeed.

I'm not here to argue, attack or make enemies. I'm not here to troll. But a spade is a damn spade. What the hell do what you from me... or the countless other people with the same damn perspective as mine. It is what it is, and no amount of trying to sound "reasonable" by stating that "because you haven't played it..." bullshit is going to make your point valid.

I simply pointed people to things that show how blatantly horrible this is, and that they might have wanted to see/know going into the game. I'm as disappointed as anyone, if not more so. I wasn't "making multiple posts to attack the game". I, like anyone else, have been posting my thoughts and facts on the game, based on physical evidence, as they were being presented, so that others would also get a feel for what they might be getting into.

Excuse me, for attempting to inform people with things they might want to see because, upon seeing it, maybe they save themselves five hours and $60, and go play something that's not a complete waste of their time and money.

Watch it with the personal attacks/judgments, man. That's your own bad attitude and warped perspectives.

Holy fucking HELL, dude. No where, I repeat, NOWHERE did I call you stubborn or a troll or make any personal attacks of ANY kind. ALL I said was that I expect nobody's opinion to change but that describing how bad a game without having seen it first hand (on ones own PC/console) is seems "improper." I never called you a troll, I never said that you were making things up, I never said I thought the game was great and everyone else was delusional. The single point I was trying to make was that I personally feel "reviewing" a game without having played it is improper or "impolite" if you will.

You need to reread what I wrote without getting so defensive.

I apologize if I offended you, it absolutely was not intended.

Anyway, yes, after having played it myself, this game is really, really bad. Period, end of story. Do not pass go, do not spend $50, go directly to "fuhgetaboutit."
 
bwuhuhuhuuuuh...nnf..after all the waiting...oh gawd i wanna die bwuhuhuhuuuuuu... <user D4rkn3ss still in corner, crying, says he wants to die>
 
Im going to buy this on ps3 regardless of reviews. Me and the wife are dying to play as aliens and we will tear through some marines

AvP 2010 would be a better choice IMO. Even more so on the PC as it does have some fairly good graphics. While the gameplay wasn't nearly as good as AvP/AvP2 - It was still a decent game. WAY better then this piece of shit.
 
AvP 2010 would be a better choice IMO. Even more so on the PC as it does have some fairly good graphics. While the gameplay wasn't nearly as good as AvP/AvP2 - It was still a decent game. WAY better then this piece of shit.


I never finished the new AvsP because it felt like a downgrade compared to the first two, but atleast the reviews were consistent. From average to slightly reserved good. I may have to try it again rather than wasting my time with Colonial Marines.
 
well ive got a 5/10 review from a friend. Single player sucks but he says the multiplayer is a blast
 
I never finished the new AvsP because it felt like a downgrade compared to the first two, but atleast the reviews were consistent. From average to slightly reserved good. I may have to try it again rather than wasting my time with Colonial Marines.

The 1/3 of the singleplayer where you play as the Alien is brilliant IMO. Just as brilliant as the first game. The predator section is OK, and the marine section is just meh. The problem is that you have to play through the marines section first before you get to the alien section and many people gave up on it then. What they don't realize is just how good the Alien section is.

The multiplayer at this point is likely dead. Which is a shame really. It was dead even at release for the most part. It had a decently fun survival coop mode where you played as marines fighting off hordes of Aliens.

And of course the graphics on the PC version are stunning. Even now AvP 2010 is still one of the best looking PC games out there.

So yeah. People who were really wanting this A:CM to be good, and still want to play a decent aliens game should just purchase AvP 2010 instead. It's only $15 on steam, and the singleplayer is well worth $15. I can assure you that it is way more fun then colonial marines. The singleplayer in AvP 2010 is decently challenging on the hard modes as well, and it has decent replay value. You'll get at least 1 replay out of it to either collect the collectables that are hidden, or to just approach a level in a different way. The marine section sucks because it is so straight forward. The alien and predator sections are awesome because you can go through each area in different ways.
 
PC version looks way better, but it still doesn't look that great IMO.

AVP 2010 came out almost exactly 3 years ago and it blows this game away in every department.
 
Wow, what a mixed bag of reviews...some places you get 7/10 and some you get 3/10. Kinda hard to tell what to believe. My guess is it's probably closer to a 5-6/10...a little sad, but I haven't had a chance to put my hands on the game yet so I'll see how I feel about it.

Also, I see IGN reviewed the 360 version but not the PC version yet. I wonder if there will be a significant difference.
 
AVP 2010 looks like a work of genius compared to this piece of shit. I'll probably finish the Predator campaign from that game before ever going back to play Gearbox's crapfest agin. $50 down the toilet.
 
Why did you guys pay $50-60 for this? It's routinely been on sale for $30-35.

In any case, I wonder if this will spawn a renewed interest in the 2010 AvP game. It was highly underrated IMO, and last time I checked the MP scene was more or less dead.
 
Holy fucking HELL, dude. No where, I repeat, NOWHERE did I call you stubborn or a troll or make any personal attacks of ANY kind. ALL I said was that I expect nobody's opinion to change but that describing how bad a game without having seen it first hand (on ones own PC/console) is seems "improper." I never called you a troll, I never said that you were making things up, I never said I thought the game was great and everyone else was delusional. The single point I was trying to make was that I personally feel "reviewing" a game without having played it is improper or "impolite" if you will.

I apologize if I offended you, it absolutely was not intended.

Anyway, yes, after having played it myself, this game is really, really bad. Period, end of story. Do not pass go, do not spend $50, go directly to "fuhgetaboutit."

I never said you had accused me of being such things directly, but certain things seemed rather strongly insinuated through certain statements. I wasn't "reviewing" the game either, simply discussing the blatantly obvious problems you could see even from simply watching videos of it.

But hey, no problem. Water under the bridge.

As I had said numerous times, you don't always need to actually play a game to be able to see clearly that's it's a horrible experience, so there are times when it's not improper at all to make full-out judgments. Especially if you've seen a large chunk of a game that shows enough of the gameplay, visuals and mechanics, such as was the case here.
 
http://www.pcgamer.com/review/aliens-colonial-marines-review/2/

Damn.

I should have gone with my gut. My fault. That's shit's on me.




Derangel said:
So, I'm seeing at lot of comments on other sites that state Gearbox basically outsourced most of the game. Timegate Studios (Section 8 and the F.E.A.R expansions people) did the single player while Nerve Software (they've done some work on other games) handled most of the multiplayer.

^^



the majority of Gearbox Software's Aliens: Colonial Marines was not actually built by Gearbox, a report suggests...comments from an ex-Gearbox developer dug up by Superannuation suggest that the majority of the game was outsourced to TimeGate Studios, developer of downloadable console shooter Section 8: Prejudice and various FEAR expansion packs.

"Hate to say it, but I wouldn't get your hopes up too high for Colonial Marines," the ex-dev wrote last year. "I used to work at Gearbox, and the development of that game has been a total train wreck, going on what, six years now?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...o-section-8-developer-timegate-studios-report

Gearbox is totally overrated...whenever a game tanks they shift the blame to someone else while taking full credit for Borderlands and BIA



Lesson learned from here on out.
 
Its got some good reviews from regular youtubers that are major on the PC gaming scene.

FrankieOnPCin1080p gave it a rather okay review, 7 outta 10.
And TotalBiscut (The Cynical Brit) is supposedly releasing his WTF is video today.
 
Its got some good reviews from regular youtubers that are major on the PC gaming scene.

FrankieOnPCin1080p gave it a rather okay review, 7 outta 10.
And TotalBiscut (The Cynical Brit) is supposedly releasing his WTF is video today.

Yeah, the user scores seem to be around 7-8/10, whereas the "official" reviews are like, 4-5/10.
 
Yeah, the user scores seem to be around 7-8/10, whereas the "official" reviews are like, 4-5/10.

I think a lot of depends on the multiplayer experience. For whatever reason Ive yet to get a multiplayer game going.(Oh right its gearbox *sigh*). Single player I'd agree is a steady 5/10 so far. I really wanna check out the multiplayer which looks fun.

Edit: Multiplayer seems cool so far.
 
Last edited:
ive finished the first mission and i must say, its better than what all the reviews say about it.
maybe everyone should try it for themselves instead of going by what others say, who may require more effort to please. theres alot of hardcore gamers out there, and reviewers that are hard to please, no matter what.. and will nit pick every little thing. i've bought and played games far "worse" than this.
people like to jump on the bandwagon of negativity and hate which ruins it for a good portion of people.


last aliens game i played was trilogy on the playstation 1. and i enjoyed it. i told myself, if this is equal to or better, its a win. So far its exciting, graphics are very good at 1080p maxed out. its no farcry or crysis, but its visually better than i expected.

gameplay wise, its aliens pop out and you shoot them. typical 90's movie/gaming throwback.
the animations are cool, climbing on the walls and coming at you from all directions almost nonstop.
whys everyone gotta be so uptight like it was expected to be the greatest game ever... lol.

people man, i swear. i dont know about the console version, but pc is doing well by me so far.
i just got to mission 2 where youre shooting humans, so i dunno.. we'll see.
 
As many have already said the reviews are all over the place. For me personally, it's somewhere between a 5.5 - 6, and this is only the SP campaign. I haven't jumped into multiplayer, so my score my increase overtime based of future experience(s)

My biggest fault with the game is that it shouldn't have been released as AAA title, I've seen Indie games that look better than this, and I think that Gearbox should have been more forthcoming about Timegate's involvement in the SP campaign. There were some good coupons that brought the came down to around $35, but in all honestly the A:CM's retail price should be no more that $30. Gearbox got really greedy here folks....

That being said, I won't probably buy anything else from Gearbox unless it has Borderlands stamped on it. It appears that they are a one-trick pony in terms of game development, and if that IP for some reason went to hell they are fuskered as a studio.
 
Adan Sessler's review, officially the closest review to my sympathies regarding the story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv5bt2h1M-E

Yeah so far I agree 3/5 game hyped and MSRP'd as a 5/5 dragging it down to a 2/5. It's not the worse game ever made it's just immensely disappointing. Not the money which I only paid $30 but just having waited so long I would have expected better. Better graphics alone would have inched it up but instead its just the nail in the coffin.
 
Wow, what a mixed bag of reviews...some places you get 7/10 and some you get 3/10. Kinda hard to tell what to believe. My guess is it's probably closer to a 5-6/10...a little sad, but I haven't had a chance to put my hands on the game yet so I'll see how I feel about it.

Also, I see IGN reviewed the 360 version but not the PC version yet. I wonder if there will be a significant difference.

wow you just refuse to accept that the game is bad...mixed bag lol?...of course you can find some 9/10 reviews from best-gamer-you-can-trust.com but c'mon guy...I've never seen a AAA game receive so many scores below 5 from major, reputable gaming websites...sites like Eurogamer (3/10), Destructoid (2.5/10), ArsTechnica (Verdict= skip)...and even though I personally don't trust their reviews as much as other sites even high scoring GameSpot gave the game a 4.5/10...yes even GameSpot gave the game that score!!...even IGN gave the game 4.5/10

desperately clinging to any lifeline you can by claiming that reviews were only for the console versions is ludicrous...do you think the basic gameplay will be different on the PC?...will the AI, voice acting and story be much improved?...by the way the Destructoid review was for the PC version...if you want to buy and play the game despite what anyone says then more power to you but to blindly ignore anyone who says otherwise is making you look like a fanboy
 
Damn.

I should have gone with my gut. My fault. That's shit's on me.
Lesson learned from here on out.

I'm shocked you ended up buying the game...you were posting so much about how disappointing the early previews and gameplay footage was and then all of a sudden you did a 360 and ended up buying it on release day?...always trust your instincts

As I had said numerous times, you don't always need to actually play a game to be able to see clearly that's it's a horrible experience, so there are times when it's not improper at all to make full-out judgments. Especially if you've seen a large chunk of a game that shows enough of the gameplay, visuals and mechanics, such as was the case here.

agreed...saying that you need to play the game before being able to make an informed decision/opinion is ridiculous...so I'm supposed to pay $60 for a game that I have a strong feeling will suck and only then do I have a right to voice my opinion?...makes no sense at all...I do give Col Sanders credit though for saying that the game sucks and not trying to justify or his purchase or stubbornly cling to his 'game is great' position despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary
 
Back
Top