Bulletstorm, anyone interested?

WabeWalker said:
So a pretty decent FPS then? This could be a nice one for the summer maybe. First sale, I'm in.
Click to expand...

If you can live with its shortcomings, yeah, pretty decent. Nothing amazing, but definitely decent.

What I mentioned in my last post, makes me quite sad, because as technology evolved, we started getting sandbox type games. By limiting the player to a specific, pre-determined path that we can't deviate from in the slightest, is going back several years...As I mentioned, that kills the immersion factor for me and it is a deal breaker.
 
I've been reading that there is a problem with 16:10 resolutions on nvidia cards with this game. People are doing things such as creating custom resolutions such as 1680×1048 and this is resolving the problem and others recommend just using a 16:9 resolution.

I'll probably check D2D later if it's still $47; D2D is blocked from work. :\
 
I won't buy this at full price but first worthwhile sale I see I'll be in.
 
4.5 hours to beat, throwaway multiplayer, EXTREMELY repetitive. There are some cool segments mixed in, but about 1/3 to 1/2 of the game feels totally phoned in. Even with this very, very tiny amount of content you get for your $60, they can't even conclude it in a satisfying manner and the ending is just an ad for Bulletstorm 2, a game that does not need to be made since they didn't even have enough ideas to sustain Bulletstorm 1 over its short campaign. Almost all of the weapons are bland and uncreative, it's just your standard fare of pistol, shotgun, AR, sniper for the most part. There is one cool gun in the game but sadly it's the last one you get. The dialogue was more amusing than I expected. This game is worth about $10-$20, no more. Either go in on it with friends and take turns playing it (not like each person needs that long with it), or wait until the price comes down, which shouldn't take long.
 
anonmoniker said:
4.5 hours to beat, throwaway multiplayer, EXTREMELY repetitive. There are some cool segments mixed in, but about 1/3 to 1/2 of the game feels totally phoned in. Even with this very, very tiny amount of content you get for your $60, they can't even conclude it in a satisfying manner and the ending is just an ad for Bulletstorm 2, a game that does not need to be made since they didn't even have enough ideas to sustain Bulletstorm 1 over its short campaign. Almost all of the weapons are bland and uncreative, it's just your standard fare of pistol, shotgun, AR, sniper for the most part. There is one cool gun in the game but sadly it's the last one you get. The dialogue was more amusing than I expected. This game is worth about $10-$20, no more. Either go in on it with friends and take turns playing it (not like each person needs that long with it), or wait until the price comes down, which shouldn't take long.
Click to expand...

Unfortunate but not a surprising feedback. You're definitely not the first person I've seen essentially come away like this.
 
Silus said:
If you can live with its shortcomings, yeah, pretty decent. Nothing amazing, but definitely decent.

What I mentioned in my last post, makes me quite sad, because as technology evolved, we started getting sandbox type games. By limiting the player to a specific, pre-determined path that we can't deviate from in the slightest, is going back several years...As I mentioned, that kills the immersion factor for me and it is a deal breaker.
Click to expand...

Not every game has to be open. Obviously it's opinion, but I would just stop playing FPS games if they were all sand box style. How many sand box style FPS games have been good? Far Cry 2 sucked, Crysis 2nd half was linear so doesn't really count. There aren't many of them, so I'm not sure what you're comparing too.

Anyways, finished the game last night. Along with Starcraft 2, and Gears 2 this is the only game in recent years I have finished in only a few playthroughs. Had a blast with it.
 
I picked this game up yesterday morning. I literally sat and played the game start to finish in one sitting. I enjoyed it that much. Took me around 8 hours to finish altogether. But i enjoyed every single moment of it.

As for the people saying its a bad console port. Dont see why. It looks great. Runs really well. Apart from navigating the shop with keys you can hardly tell its a console port.

Cant wait for the sequel.
 
anonmoniker said:
4.5 hours to beat, throwaway multiplayer, EXTREMELY repetitive. There are some cool segments mixed in, but about 1/3 to 1/2 of the game feels totally phoned in. Even with this very, very tiny amount of content you get for your $60, they can't even conclude it in a satisfying manner and the ending is just an ad for Bulletstorm 2, a game that does not need to be made since they didn't even have enough ideas to sustain Bulletstorm 1 over its short campaign. Almost all of the weapons are bland and uncreative, it's just your standard fare of pistol, shotgun, AR, sniper for the most part. There is one cool gun in the game but sadly it's the last one you get. The dialogue was more amusing than I expected. This game is worth about $10-$20, no more. Either go in on it with friends and take turns playing it (not like each person needs that long with it), or wait until the price comes down, which shouldn't take long.
Click to expand...

Hey, I liked the flailgun too.

Otherwise, I agree. It's got that modern console game problem of having a 6 hour long campaign and virtually no replay value. I spent most of my time accomplishing the "skill" shot of kicking enemies into rebar and cacti or off of high ledges. The rest of the time I'd leash a guy over and shoot him in the face while he went into slow motion. It was one of the easiest games I've ever played. The only semi-challenging part of the whole game came about an hour for the end when they put me in a seemingly neverending arena full of enemies. Your squad is completely useless, to an even greater degree than the tards who follow you around in HL2. There is only one real boss fight and I already played Arkham Asylum so I didn't need to fight Poison Ivy again. Then the ending; oh boy, just what we need, a mediocre sequel to a mediocre game.
 
Skirrow said:
I picked this game up yesterday morning. I literally sat and played the game start to finish in one sitting. I enjoyed it that much. Took me around 8 hours to finish altogether. But i enjoyed every single moment of it.

As for the people saying its a bad console port. Dont see why. It looks great. Runs really well. Apart from navigating the shop with keys you can hardly tell its a console port.

Cant wait for the sequel.
Click to expand...

Would you say that this game could be finished in 4 hours - or does that make you skeptical?
 
WabeWalker said:
Would you say that this game could be finished in 4 hours - or does that make you skeptical?
Click to expand...

4 is probably a small exaggeration though not too far from the truth. I beat it in 2 solid sittings but did not time it. My guess is probably about 6-8 hours.

That said i have no clue what skirrow is going on about for what ut is this game runs like total shit. 2500k @4.3 and a gtx 560 i was able to manage 30-40 fps at 1680 with max settings and only 2x aa. Any more aa and i would dip below 30 in intense firefights. The engine don't look that good i should have gotten 60 easily.
 
I'm still holding out for the pc demo, or maybe I'll just rent the xbox version
 
TomGreen321 said:
Not every game has to be open. Obviously it's opinion, but I would just stop playing FPS games if they were all sand box style. How many sand box style FPS games have been good? Far Cry 2 sucked, Crysis 2nd half was linear so doesn't really count. There aren't many of them, so I'm not sure what you're comparing too.

Anyways, finished the game last night. Along with Starcraft 2, and Gears 2 this is the only game in recent years I have finished in only a few playthroughs. Had a blast with it.
Click to expand...

I wasn't comparing it with anything. And the post you quoted was a follow-up to the post I made before that oneand that was what I was complaining about.

Bulletstorm is the proverbial shooter on rails to a level beyond understanding in this day in age, just like Call of Duty games, where you can't even open a simple door and have to wait for NPC #64 to do it.
In Bulletstorm you can't even jump down on a hole in some building, because there are invisible walls around the hole and to go down, you need to use the "glowing" ladder...I wasn't saying that Bulletstorm should be a sandbox type game, but if sandbox is one extreme of freedom in a game, Bulletstorm is in the exact opposite specter. It's ridiculous...
 
Disposed said:
4 is probably a small exaggeration though not too far from the truth. I beat it in 2 solid sittings but did not time it. My guess is probably about 6-8 hours.

That said i have no clue what skirrow is going on about for what ut is this game runs like total shit. 2500k @4.3 and a gtx 560 i was able to manage 30-40 fps at 1680 with max settings and only 2x aa. Any more aa and i would dip below 30 in intense firefights. The engine don't look that good i should have gotten 60 easily.
Click to expand...

That sucks your having problems maybe with your video drivers or something cause mine plays just fine with everything turned up 1920x1200 8x aa with 16x af
 
Disposed said:
4 is probably a small exaggeration though not too far from the truth. I beat it in 2 solid sittings but did not time it. My guess is probably about 6-8 hours.

That said i have no clue what skirrow is going on about for what ut is this game runs like total shit. 2500k @4.3 and a gtx 560 i was able to manage 30-40 fps at 1680 with max settings and only 2x aa. Any more aa and i would dip below 30 in intense firefights. The engine don't look that good i should have gotten 60 easily.
Click to expand...
This game has a problem with 16:10 resolutions. Are you running it in a 16:10 resolution?

Go to the nvidia Control Panel, go to the Change Resolution option, create a custom resolution. If you're using 1680×1050 then create a custom res for 1680×1048. Bulletstorm will let you select that custom res and watch the game run 2x as fast with all the settings maxed.
 
djoye said:
This game has a problem with 16:10 resolutions. Are you running it in a 16:10 resolution?

Go to the nvidia Control Panel, go to the Change Resolution option, create a custom resolution. If you're using 1680×1050 then create a custom res for 1680×1048. Bulletstorm will let you select that custom res and watch the game run 2x as fast with all the settings maxed.
Click to expand...

I found that turning on AA in game murdered my framerate more than anything. Turn it on in your video card control panel if you really want it, but I barely noticed playing without it in this particular game. I'm on a 1680x1050 monitor and I got around 60 FPS through the whole game.
 
krameriffic said:
I found that turning on AA in game murdered my framerate more than anything. Turn it on in your video card control panel if you really want it, but I barely noticed playing without it in this particular game. I'm on a 1680x1050 monitor and I got around 60 FPS through the whole game.
Click to expand...
I don't know your specs but if you have a modern PC then using the in-game AA should not be a problem. The AA killing your FPS is likely a side-effect of the bug that prevents the game from running full speed at 1680×1050. I've seen it: AA in-game at max setting and it runs poorly, turn down AA and it's better but hardly an acceptable solution for hardware that should run it fine, setup custom resolution in nvidia Control Panel, run game, pick custom res, go back to max AA and suddenly it's running 60FPS smooth.
 
djoye said:
This game has a problem with 16:10 resolutions. Are you running it in a 16:10 resolution?

Go to the nvidia Control Panel, go to the Change Resolution option, create a custom resolution. If you're using 1680×1050 then create a custom res for 1680×1048. Bulletstorm will let you select that custom res and watch the game run 2x as fast with all the settings maxed.
Click to expand...

Odd i will try this out later and report back.

EDIT: Just checked, running at 1680 x 1048 i go from 30 FPS with 2x to 8x AA and a silky smooth 60fps. What a strange bug.
 
Last edited:
Just beat the game, and it was a blast. I don't get all the hate it is getting, it is much better than any other shooter I have played recently. Steam indicates that It took 7 hours. Is there a fix for that diagonal line bug?
 
Draax said:
Just beat the game, and it was a blast. I don't get all the hate it is getting, it is much better than any other shooter I have played recently. Steam indicates that It took 7 hours. Is there a fix for that diagonal line bug?
Click to expand...

Will you play it again, do you think?
 
leezard said:
I'm still holding out for the pc demo, or maybe I'll just rent the xbox version
Click to expand...

Apparently we are getting one soon, they just couldn't be bothered to give us one pre launch, just like I couldn't be bothered to buy the game so far............
 
The ending sucks balls. Nothing happens.

*Spoiler*










You don't kill the general, you don't stop the dna bomb and you don't save ishi. I finished the game and thought what the hell was the point of that. If they had stopped the game about 10 minutes before they did without dropping you back on the planet it could have been a good ending but as it is they were so focused on making a sequel that they didn't end the game.
 
I finished the game today and it was great fun. Looks wonderful and ran well for me too. The only issue I would say that the game has is it's length. I finished it in a day (although that included a 4-5 hour non stop gaming session, something I haven't done in many years; the game is just that much fun). No matter how good it was, it's really hard to justify full price for a 7 hour game. Other nitpicks would be a slow start, an unsatisfying ending and fewer setpiece fights than I would have wanted, but overall it really is a very entertaining game to play.

I even tried the multiplayer in a pub game and while it might not sound very interesting (it's basically surviving successive waves of enemies), it becomes a lot of fun because team work and co-ordination is not only recommended, it is actually required to progress. Here's how it works... you score points for every kill you make. At the end of the wave, all the points are added up and they have to cross a minimum threshold score for your team to progress to the next wave. As you can imagine, the required score keeps going up with every wave. You can score points for any kill, but the score will be significantly higher if multiple team mates were to participate in each kill. Without this kind of co-ordination, you cannot get the points required to progress past a certain level, so there is some depth to even a simplistic game mode like this.

In the end, I would wholeheartedly recommend this game to any shooter fan, and especially those who like the Painkiller/Serious Sam style of mindless shoot-everything-that-moves gameplay. Not sure I would recommend it at full price though... It is definitely worth the 30$ it will cost some time in the future, and if you can find a deal for 40$ or so soon, that should be okay too.
 
Zero82z said:
Why exactly is setting it up for a sequel a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Sequels should be unified under an overreaching story but each one should be a story of itself.
For example look at the mass effect games, you have the same characters and an over reaching plot of stop the reapers but the games so far have all had individual stories that are part of that over reaching story. Mass Effect 1 you discover the reapers and you find out that shit is going down...but you still stop sovereign and save the citadel. In the 2nd one there is still closure with the completion of warping through the omega portal.
Half life 1/2 sequels yet each has it's own goal.
Fallout series: individual stories
Halo series: individual stories with a unifying theme


There needs to be a sense of completion that you have finished at least the majority of the story arcs within the game. You can leave one open, maybe 2 if you have a lot going on, or you can have a hook only slightly related to what is currently going on but you still need to finish the majority of the arcs.

Lets look at the main story arc for bulletstorm, it's goals and how they panned out:
Kill General Serano (unresolved) - Primary Dialogue point for the game
Save Ishi (unresolved) - Primary Dialogue point for the game
Get off planet (semi resolved*)
Stop DNA bomb (failed) -minor

*yes you did escape the planet, but you are wanted fugitives stuck outside a dead planet in an escape pod with no propulsion.

There are a lot of ways they could have left it open to a sequel while still resolving plot points.

Examples:
You kill General Serano but still need to fix ishi with his ai thing, there are any number of things you can do with this. From owing somebody favors to having the only dude who can fix ishi hate is guts.
Save ishi, escape in a legitimate spaceship but general serano escapes.
Kill General serano, save ishi but trishka is captured


All they had to do was end the game 10 minutes earlier then they did where ishi saves you general serano is dead and you have the big spaceship and I would have been cool with that. It would have been a good ending.

If they had actually ended the game then I probably would have considered picking up bulletstorm 2, but as it is the lack of ending left a very sour taste in my mouth to an otherwise great game and I have no intention of picking up a sequel, at least not at full price. If bulletstorm 2 goes on sale for like $5 on steam sure, but why would I want to pay $60 for a game with no plot resolution.


Steam says I put 7 hours into the game.
 
Damn I gotta finish this before Dragon Age 2. I'm playing on the hardest difficulty. It's not super hard but damn normal must be easy as fuck.
 
|Tch0rT| said:
Damn I gotta finish this before Dragon Age 2. I'm playing on the hardest difficulty. It's not super hard but damn normal must be easy as fuck.
Click to expand...

Yea I played at normal difficulty and did regret it somewhat. The whole point of a game like this is for it to throw loads of enemies at you to play around with and I did kind of miss that. I would recommend playing the game at hard, if not hardest difficulty.
 
TheGreySpectre said:
Sequels should be unified under an overreaching story but each one should be a story of itself.
For example look at the mass effect games, you have the same characters and an over reaching plot of stop the reapers but the games so far have all had individual stories that are part of that over reaching story. Mass Effect 1 you discover the reapers and you find out that shit is going down...but you still stop sovereign and save the citadel. In the 2nd one there is still closure with the completion of warping through the omega portal.
Half life 1/2 sequels yet each has it's own goal.
Fallout series: individual stories
Halo series: individual stories with a unifying theme


There needs to be a sense of completion that you have finished at least the majority of the story arcs within the game. You can leave one open, maybe 2 if you have a lot going on, or you can have a hook only slightly related to what is currently going on but you still need to finish the majority of the arcs.

Lets look at the main story arc for bulletstorm, it's goals and how they panned out:
Kill General Serano (unresolved) - Primary Dialogue point for the game
Save Ishi (unresolved) - Primary Dialogue point for the game
Get off planet (semi resolved*)
Stop DNA bomb (failed) -minor

*yes you did escape the planet, but you are wanted fugitives stuck outside a dead planet in an escape pod with no propulsion.

There are a lot of ways they could have left it open to a sequel while still resolving plot points.

Examples:
You kill General Serano but still need to fix ishi with his ai thing, there are any number of things you can do with this. From owing somebody favors to having the only dude who can fix ishi hate is guts.
Save ishi, escape in a legitimate spaceship but general serano escapes.
Kill General serano, save ishi but trishka is captured


All they had to do was end the game 10 minutes earlier then they did where ishi saves you general serano is dead and you have the big spaceship and I would have been cool with that. It would have been a good ending.

If they had actually ended the game then I probably would have considered picking up bulletstorm 2, but as it is the lack of ending left a very sour taste in my mouth to an otherwise great game and I have no intention of picking up a sequel, at least not at full price. If bulletstorm 2 goes on sale for like $5 on steam sure, but why would I want to pay $60 for a game with no plot resolution.


Steam says I put 7 hours into the game.
Click to expand...

NONE of this is the least bit true if there is a sequel planned before making the product.

Look at just about every movie thats intended to be continued.

Did the fellowship of the rings have an ending? Did the first matrix have an ending? Etc. etc.

Look at HL2 EP2.

The plot resolution was that you got off world and are going to continue the fight.

The only real problem i see is they where not up front about this like they should have been.
 
Disposed said:
NONE of this is the least bit true if there is a sequel planned before making the product.

Look at just about every movie thats intended to be continued.

Did the fellowship of the rings have an ending? Did the first matrix have an ending? Etc. etc.

Look at HL2 EP2.

The plot resolution was that you got off world and are going to continue the fight.

The only real problem i see is they where not up front about this like they should have been.
Click to expand...

The first matrix movie is about Neo becoming the one. He does and defeats smith (the primary antagonist) that is the resolution.

The majority of the Episode 2 plot revolves around launching the satellite which is done just after the final climax where you run around shooting bomb things at the walkers. The death of eli and announcmenet of the aperture vessel are hooks to the next game but were never primary points during the majority of the game.

The first fellowship covers it's formation up through it's breaking. The breaking forms a nice pause with the closure of the fellowship traveling as a group and sets the stage for their new stories of their separate journeys. While the ring has not been destroyed the more minor conflicts of the journey through moria, lothlorian and the river have all been resolved. Also consider the fact that the Lord of the Rings was not written as a multipart story but as a single book meant to be coupled with the Silmarillion but publishers though it was far to large to publish as a single book so they broke it up along points that make sense. The movies added some crap and took away some crap but they closed on different points that also made sense.


I typed this all up but when it comes down to it I'm not even really sure why I'm arguing, probably because its morning. I'm not going to buy the 2nd game until it drops quite a bit in price because I thought the ending was absolutely atrocious.
 
Last edited:
TheGreySpectre said:
The first matrix movie is about Neo becoming the one. He does and defeats smith (the primary antagonist) that is the resolution.
Click to expand...

He does not actually kill Smith just like gray does not actually kill Sorrano. The sequels put him against Smith again. Funny how you try arguing with that example...



TheGreySpectre said:
The first fellowship covers it's formation up through it's breaking. The breaking forms a nice pause with the closure of the fellowship traveling as a group and sets the stage for their new stories of their separate journeys. While the ring has not been destroyed the more minor conflicts of the journey through moria, lothlorian and the river have all been resolved. Also consider the fact that the Lord of the Rings was not written as a multipart story but as a single book meant to be coupled with the Silmarillion but publishers though it was far to large to publish as a single book so they broke it up along points that make sense. The movies added some crap and took away some crap but they closed on different points that also made sense.
Click to expand...

Now you are just grasping for an argument. The fellowship of the rings ended with no closure, no resolution, nothing.

You are actually wrong the LOTR was written as a trilogy from the get go The Silmarillion was a different project altogether that came after the original trilogy.

The Silmarillion comprises five parts. The first part, Ainulindalë, tells of the creation of Eä, the "world that is". Valaquenta, the second part, gives a description of the Valar and Maiar, the supernatural powers in Eä. The next section, Quenta Silmarillion, which forms the bulk of the collection, chronicles the history of the events before and during the First Age, including the wars over the Silmarils which gave the book its title. The fourth part, Akallabêth, relates the history of the Downfall of Númenor and its people, which takes place in the Second Age. The final part, Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age, is a brief account of the circumstances which led to and were presented in The Lord of the Rings.
The five parts were initially separate works, but it was the elder Tolkien's express wish that they be published together.[1] Because J. R. R. Tolkien died before he finished revising the various legends, Christopher gathered material from his father's older writings to fill out the book. In a few cases, this meant that he had to devise completely new material in order to resolve gaps and inconsistencies in the narrative.
Click to expand...

The original trilogy was NEVER intended to be a part of it.
 
spindoctor said:
Yea I played at normal difficulty and did regret it somewhat. The whole point of a game like this is for it to throw loads of enemies at you to play around with and I did kind of miss that. I would recommend playing the game at hard, if not hardest difficulty.
Click to expand...

The whole point of the game is to throw loads of enemies at me and for me to kick them into the nearest sharp object or over the nearest high ledge.
 
Took me 6.3 hours to finish it according to Steam. It was definitely fun, the set pieces and environments were amazing, the dialog was pretty witty and better than I expected, and the story was also better than I expected. I'm not sure if it's worth $60. I would put it more around $40.

Spoilers:
One of the scenes in the game really struck me like no other scene in any game has, despite the fact that I've played dozens of games where you kill people left and right. In the section of the game right before you board the mothership for the first time, you walk through an area strewn with bloodied bodies, and the general taunts you about "killing all these innocent men, women, and children." As I looked down the path and saw the bodies strewn about, impaled on things, etc. it just struck me really hard. I turned around and looked back up towards the crashed ship and just imagined them raining down from the ship as it crashed into the atmosphere. I don't know why, but it really affected me emotionally and made me wonder, is Grayson actually doing the right thing here? Writers will brag about doing this thing all the time ("we are really going to make the player think here"), but this is the first time it really worked and it's the most I've ever been emotionally affected by a video game or movie.

Also, regarding Ishi - if you wait until the end of the credits there is a brief clip that makes it obvious that he's still alive.
 
This was a reasonably fun game (very short though, and the story took itself way too seriously), but I'd definitely say to anyone considering buying it: wait for a sale.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top