Descent Underground

FrEaKy

[H] Movie and TV Show Review Guy
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
14,110
I can't seem to get into the kickstarter for games. I hate the pay tiers to get better items etc. Why can't we just all get a game with everything in it like back in the day without having to pay up the nose to get more from a game?
 
$25 is a fair price for me to get this game. Hopefully it works out.
 
I just fixed mine! :D

And I was one of the lucky 500 to get the $25 early bird specials.

Dick lol j/k I had to get the $30 one. Now lets hope it actually gets finished and the backer don't get screwed.
 
I don't have any reason to believe that Star Citizen won't be released, but a new kickstarter from a bunch of people with Star Citizen on their resumes just isn't sitting well with me, particularly if it's going to be another purchasing-virtual-goods (ships/credits) extravaganza.

Loved Descent and would love to see a new one but looking at this campaign and seeing "1 year of maps and ships", "perpetual subscription", in-game credits, etc...I don't think so. I'll wait and see.
 
I got really excited about this when I first saw it. Then I read about it and got un-interested quickly.
 
I got really excited about this when I first saw it. Then I read about it and got un-interested quickly.

Might have read it wrong

Any maps / ships (DLC) will be free add-ons for that 1 OR 5 year period depending on which pack you get, the lower packs, your just getting the base game and maybe a spare ship or two.
 
I don't have any reason to believe that Star Citizen won't be released, but a new kickstarter from a bunch of people with Star Citizen on their resumes just isn't sitting well with me, particularly if it's going to be another purchasing-virtual-goods (ships/credits) extravaganza.

Loved Descent and would love to see a new one but looking at this campaign and seeing "1 year of maps and ships", "perpetual subscription", in-game credits, etc...I don't think so. I'll wait and see.

QFT.
 
I'm surprised they got the license so easily? The only mention to it is at the bottom of the page "DESCENT is a registered trademark or trademark of Interplay Entertainment Corp. in the U.S. and other countries, and is used under license. All rights reserved."

And as much as I love Descent (I still play the original 2 regularly) I'm not sure they'll be able to pull off what made them so great. Customization and multiple ships was never the point. The excellent level design and powerful weapons is what made the game. Even to this day I've yet to see a game with levels as good as Descent 2's, particularly the expansion levels. The amount of secrets and traps they managed to cram into every level is amazing.

Trying a cold-start (new game) every level on Insane difficulty is something I've still yet to complete in D1 (did it for the base game of D2). It really forces you to learn the layout of every level and find all the secrets to get enough ordinance to survive; it makes you appreciate finding concussion missiles for once. Also only starting with 2 extra lives per level makes things much more interesting (and strategic - for example suiciding through a heavily guarded key room).
 
I'm surprised they got the license so easily? The only mention to it is at the bottom of the page "DESCENT is a registered trademark or trademark of Interplay Entertainment Corp. in the U.S. and other countries, and is used under license. All rights reserved."

And as much as I love Descent (I still play the original 2 regularly) I'm not sure they'll be able to pull off what made them so great. Customization and multiple ships was never the point. The excellent level design and powerful weapons is what made the game. Even to this day I've yet to see a game with levels as good as Descent 2's, particularly the expansion levels. The amount of secrets and traps they managed to cram into every level is amazing.

Trying a cold-start (new game) every level on Insane difficulty is something I've still yet to complete in D1 (did it for the base game of D2). It really forces you to learn the layout of every level and find all the secrets to get enough ordinance to survive; it makes you appreciate finding concussion missiles for once. Also only starting with 2 extra lives per level makes things much more interesting (and strategic - for example suiciding through a heavily guarded key room).

likely wasn't hard to get, when they saw who was wanting it.
 
Take a classic and amazing game, and then whore it out with the shit concepts that are popular like "DLC"

Plain and simple they are designing a game around DLC (like everyone else these days). As much as I love descent -- they can go suck a bag of dicks.
 
First screens at least look nice.

http://www.dsogaming.com/screenshot-news/descent-underground-first-official-screenshots-released/

Mining.jpg
 
Take a classic and amazing game, and then whore it out with the shit concepts that are popular like "DLC"

Plain and simple they are designing a game around DLC (like everyone else these days). As much as I love descent -- they can go suck a bag of dicks.

Why are you surprised? People cannot stop throwing money at Star Citizen. Roberts promised a game at $2 million. We are more than $72 million past that point. So far, from CIG's perspective, this is not a broken model. Then some ex-SC devs start a new studio and design a new game - what do you think it's going to look like?

People moan and complain about how big publishers are ruining gaming by chopping games up into little pieces and selling them as DLC (though I have problems with that popular meme graphic featuring the Mona Lisa), but when we get the very definition of an indie dev saying "Let's make a game together, community!" and people swallow the whole microtransaction thing hook, line, and sinker - who's really to blame here?
 
Take a classic and amazing game, and then whore it out with the shit concepts that are popular like "DLC"

Plain and simple they are designing a game around DLC (like everyone else these days). As much as I love descent -- they can go suck a bag of dicks.

Its all this kickstarter garbage. The more you back, the more "stuff" you get. What ever happened to "equality" in gaming. Buy something you get everything the game had to offer. Outside of subscription services, I find this garbage IMO.
 
Its all this kickstarter garbage. The more you back, the more "stuff" you get. What ever happened to "equality" in gaming. Buy something you get everything the game had to offer. Outside of subscription services, I find this garbage IMO.

you mean like star citizen, where you can just buy the base game and then have access to every bit of content that will ever be on the persistent universe?
 
you mean like star citizen, where you can just buy the base game and then have access to every bit of content that will ever be on the persistent universe?
I can't for the life of me understand why SC, in its current Alpha state, in what is presented as an in-game simulation, limits you to the ship you purchased - I'm sorry, pledged for. If their goal at this stage is testing rather than monetization, why can't anyone with alpha access fly any currently available ship? Who buys a racing game expecting it to be limited to the Honda Civic in their garage? At least this game has the Proving Grounds level - though having to pay $500-$600 for it is ridiculous.

And, as far as I currently understand the plan for DU, everyone will have 'access' to all the in-game content on release, just like owners of SC will have 'access' to all the SC content on release. New ships can be earned in-game in both games. Any new maps, however, seem to be something DS intends to sell.
 
I can't for the life of me understand why SC, in its current Alpha state, in what is presented as an in-game simulation, limits you to the ship you purchased - I'm sorry, pledged for. If their goal at this stage is testing rather than monetization, why can't anyone with alpha access fly any currently available ship? Who buys a racing game expecting it to be limited to the Honda Civic in their garage? At least this game has the Proving Grounds level - though having to pay $500-$600 for it is ridiculous.

And, as far as I currently understand the plan for DU, everyone will have 'access' to all the in-game content on release, just like owners of SC will have 'access' to all the SC content on release. New ships can be earned in-game in both games. Any new maps, however, seem to be something DS intends to sell.

In the next patch, 1.1 which is expected to be released some time in the next few days there will be an REC system and REC is rental credits so you can rent ANY ship that is flyable as well as equipment to upgrade them for testing so if you are serious about "wanting" to test you can test pretty much everything.

My thought process on why they originally wanted you only flying what you bought is they wanted people to feel like the ship they pledged for mean something, so you can walk around it and fly it. also enough of every ship was sold that they get plenty of data on each, not everyone really needs every ship to test the ships.

But i agree it would be better for this testing phase to allow everyone to fly everything but i can also see why they didn't let us.

They do want the in game sim to be a representation of you in the PU, so even once you are in the full PU it will still be limited to the ships you own or the ones you rent within the sim with the REC, so once you acquire a ship in the PU you can play with it in the ingame sim as well.

They are just trying to be consistent, but is maybe a little too early for that, or was the REC system should make it a lot easier to fly what you want too.
 
Well, I guess gamers in the year ~2950 have it much worse than we do when it comes to DLC. At least we get to keep the fake ships we buy in our games :D

EDIT: But let's keep this thread about DU. You compared DU to SC, I compared DU to SC, but these last two posts have been pure SC.
 
They are 1/4th of the way with 29 days to go seems like they will hit it no problem.
 
I might pledge a $35 mark but paying for stuff that is going to be in the game doesn't make much sense to be. The original games, you just picked your ship and went to blowing each other up.
I don't see why they have to put all this extra stuff in.
Being that it is going to be UE4, the game should look amazing if they can get the textures right.
 
I like these games, but I've never been into one of these enough to finish the campaign (Descent 3 and Forsaken). They are the perfect types of game for 3D displays and VR headsets.

Based on the name, I thought this was going to be a sequel to the D&D game that used the Descent engine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_to_Undermountain
 
I absolutely loved the first 3 Descent games, but I'm really leery about this one. MP heavy with hinting of microtransactions? I hope I am wrong but it sounds dubious at best. Must have a full SP campaign or no buy for me.
 
Just occurred to me, if Interplay was prepared to whore out the Descent IP for a kickstarter, then why the hell didn't these guys instead push for Descent Freespace?! God I would pay unfathomable amounts of money for Freespace 3!
 
Just occurred to me, if Interplay was prepared to whore out the Descent IP for a kickstarter, then why the hell didn't these guys instead push for Descent Freespace?! God I would pay unfathomable amounts of money for Freespace 3!

might have something to do with them working on Star Citizen, and knowing how hard it would be to make freespace with modern technology, compared to making a tunnel shooter an a small budget.
 
I think they have a really good team of people putting Descent Underground together. So early in the development, they don't have a lot of WIP to show, obviously, but I think the passion is there to make something special. A lot of great talent.

For me, it is worth the $30 pledge to get on-board. I piss that away in beer in a week, so might as well support what I think will be a great comeback.
 
I think they have a really good team of people putting Descent Underground together. So early in the development, they don't have a lot of WIP to show, obviously, but I think the passion is there to make something special. A lot of great talent.

For me, it is worth the $30 pledge to get on-board. I piss that away in beer in a week, so might as well support what I think will be a great comeback.

That was my logic for backing it too lol.
 
It is my understanding that ALL the ships in game can be earned via playing.

25 bucks isnt jack if you even get a few hours of enjoyment out of it.
 
Wasn't Freespace a break off from the first three games, from another team?
I remember playing Descent 2 with a 3D VR headset back in the late 90's and it blew my mind.
 
IF they want me to buy this kind of game, they need to kickstart a new USB based space orb. Joystick and keyboard and mouse just didn't work for me at all.
 
Wasn't Freespace a break off from the first three games, from another team?

The original Freespace was indeed "Descent: Freespace"
The second didn't carry that title. "Freespace 2"

And the team you're looking for is Volition - you know, of Red Faction / Saints Row fame. Unfortunately after being purchased by THQ they lost all rights to the IP and can no longer make Freespace games.


I remember getting a Voodoo 2 to play Descent 2 with... that was the most amazing thing ever. Being able to run 800x600 at a locked 60 FPS with no texture popping. Even to this day nothing has quite felt as smooth as that did.
 
I very much doubt that they will hit 600k.

The Descent games were iconic. I played them myself and was highly entertained by the blend of tight corridor shooting and 6-axis spacecraft flying.

However, this new Descent does not look like it will be similar to the old ones. The tiny slice of grainy 'cinematic' proof-of-concept trailer they put in their video doesn't invoke nostalgia or excitement at all and the single player component has been scrapped entirely for a much less appealing (IMO) focus on multiplayer with progression.


Even if they start promising a campaign as well later in the KS month, I won't be backing it. Since my income is not great at the moment, I only ever even consider putting over 15$ into a project if it's something that has a very popular franchise and dev behind it. 15$ is an amount I see mentioned a lot in discussions of various game kickstarters, as it is a good compromise between getting a good deal and not feeling like you lost a lot of money if the game's development fails. This pricepoint has been the backbone for highly successful kickstarters like Shadowrun Returns.

Compared to the standard of games being pitched on KS, the quality of the initial presentation of this Descent game did not make me feel like the finished game will be worth 50$, and the initial limited 500*25$, limited 2500*30$ and 35$ afterwards for the base game tier made me shake my head. They have created a permanent 25$ base tier now, but I fear the damage of a lukewarm initial impression has been done.
The devs trying to kickstart the game Strafe had a really cool pitch and only asked for like 90k, but only managed to just crawl past the goal in time for the deadline. My theory is they lost a lot of initial hype by pricing it at 25$ initially - it took a lowering of the base tier to 15$ and a playable demo just to pick up the pace enough to reach that 90k, a result I think could have been much higher if tons of people had thrown 15$ at them in hype on day one.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top