• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Serious Sam 3

V

v0rtic3s

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 20, 2006
Messages
370
Does anyone have any ideas/leads what-so-ever as to a release date?

I've just been seeing "summer 2011" listed for quite a while now, and my wife and I (as well as many others around here, I know) having been eagerly waiting!
 
Likewise, I'm eagerly awaiting this, but Croteam has never committed to a specific date, other than summer. :( I'm following Serious Sam on twitter, and there has been no mention of a hard release date there, either. :(
 
addictedto60fps said:
Likewise, I'm eagerly awaiting this, but Croteam has never committed to a specific date, other than summer. :( I'm following Serious Sam on twitter, and there has been no mention of a hard release date there, either. :(
Click to expand...

Damn. I was hoping at least for some kind of hint at a date, or a hint as to what they were aiming for at this point.
 
Tinsley-PR just told me "late summer."
 
Serious Sam 1 and 2 were awesome. Can't wait for 3. :D

Move over Duke, Sam is here!
 
v0rtic3s said:
Absolutely! I was actually shocked at how good it looked when they finally released the trailer, even though the first screens were impressive. Seeing it in motion was definitely pleasant surprise!
Click to expand...

I'm wondering what the system requirements for this will be. This looks like a big upgrade from the hd versions on Steam and with tons of enemies on the screen with this level of detail, I imagine it'll be somewhat taxing.
 
addictedto60fps said:
I'm wondering what the system requirements for this will be. This looks like a big upgrade from the hd versions on Steam and with tons of enemies on the screen with this level of detail, I imagine it'll be somewhat taxing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's definitely a huge step-up from older Serious Sam... entering the "modern age" of visuals.

Looks like DOOM 3-level graphics, which were actually good, so I'm sure it'll be taxing on lower-end systems.

Might push high-end systems a little with all the enhanced visuals, detail and destructible environments, but it's hard to even guess at how much, depending on how well it's optimized etc.

Either way, it really does look really good, and like one hell of a blast in the genre of twitch shooters.

Man, the 16-player co-op... fantastic! :D

Of course, having 16 people running around a map if you're hosting, blowing things up, with gore and particle effects flying around, might cause a bit of lag.
 
While I love the idea of 16 player co-op, having that many players in the game makes the game far too easy. The developers said that they would scale the number of enemies on the screen with the amount of players on the screen, but I'll see it when I believe it. Scaling the number of enemies proportionally to the number of players, if done correctly, would be INSANE.
 
addictedto60fps said:
While I love the idea of 16 player co-op, having that many players in the game makes the game far too easy. The developers said that they would scale the number of enemies on the screen with the amount of players on the screen, but I'll see it when I believe it. Scaling the number of enemies proportionally to the number of players, if done correctly, would be INSANE.
Click to expand...

Ha ha, I know! Exactly why I'm hoping they actually do manage to pull that off, because it was just be total insanity!

Of course, it would be at that point that I think SS3 would start "seriously" start taxing higher-end rigs.
 
v0rtic3s said:
Ha ha, I know! Exactly why I'm hoping they actually do manage to pull that off, because it was just be total insanity!

Of course, it would be at that point that I think SS3 would start "seriously" start taxing higher-end rigs.
Click to expand...

I would LOVE nothing more than to see the game scale the number of enemies onscreen proportionally to the number of players. Not only would that be a joy and so epic to see, but playing it would be downright insanity and crazy fun! But that's when we run into hardware limitations, where I don't think we have the technology yet to be able to render all that on the screen with the current graphic detail that the game has shown thus far. Let's assume that in a one player game, a good amount of enemies on the screen would be 30. In a 16 player game, to scale that proportionally, it would be: 16 * 30 = 480 enemies on the screen at once. Yeah, not going to happen, I don't think.
 
addictedto60fps said:
I would LOVE nothing more than to see the game scale the number of enemies onscreen proportionally to the number of players. Not only would that be a joy and so epic to see, but playing it would be downright insanity and crazy fun! But that's when we run into hardware limitations, where I don't think we have the technology yet to be able to render all that on the screen with the current graphic detail that the game has shown thus far. Let's assume that in a one player game, a good amount of enemies on the screen would be 30. In a 16 player game, to scale that proportionally, it would be: 16 * 30 = 480 enemies on the screen at once. Yeah, not going to happen, I don't think.
Click to expand...

Ha ha, no... don't think we'll see 480 enemies on-screen, certainly.

However, I'm sure they'll come up with something that, hopefully, will be a mix of perhaps harder enemies (i.e. same enemies, more health) with the number of enemies increased decently enough to make it at least "relatively insane", ha ha.
 
Climber said:
I'm really looking forward to this game. I loved the first two, so much so that I still play them once or twice a year. They seriously nailed down the fun factor in the first two games.

Been a long time since I played co-op but didnt the number of enemies scale in the first two? I'm pretty sure they did.
Click to expand...

I don't remember that they scaled? I could be wrong, though, but what I do remember was that the game was ridiculously easy with multiple players onscreen, which is why I played through the last two in single player only, as that was more of a challenge.
 
I still play First and Second encounter, HD style.
 
v0rtic3s said:
Yeah, it's definitely a huge step-up from older Serious Sam... entering the "modern age" of visuals.

Looks like DOOM 3-level graphics, which were actually good, so I'm sure it'll be taxing on lower-end systems.

Might push high-end systems a little with all the enhanced visuals, detail and destructible environments, but it's hard to even guess at how much, depending on how well it's optimized etc.

Either way, it really does look really good, and like one hell of a blast in the genre of twitch shooters.

Man, the 16-player co-op... fantastic! :D

Of course, having 16 people running around a map if you're hosting, blowing things up, with gore and particle effects flying around, might cause a bit of lag.
Click to expand...


croteam use their own engines so i'd expect it to be pretty damn good. but i'm sure they are also going to have to balance graphics with performance, especially when you get into the 100's of characters on a single map. i remember when the original games came out they would make a lot of systems drop to their knee's once the map started filling up with enemies.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
croteam use their own engines so i'd expect it to be pretty damn good. but i'm sure they are also going to have to balance graphics with performance, especially when you get into the 100's of characters on a single map. i remember when the original games came out they would make a lot of systems drop to their knee's once the map started filling up with enemies.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's cool they use their own engines, and it looks a lot like DOOM 3, and I like the look.

Yeah, they'll definitely need to balance things, especially with higher-end visual, destructible environments and all the particle effects; really optimize the game. Who knows how many enemies they're going for on-screen with upwards of 16 players, but hopefully they can manage it well.

If they do manage to pull it off well, it's going to be a huge blast... totally insane... cant wait!
 
I'm not sure the enemies scaling means its in linear fashion, as in 16x as many.

In single player there are battles in open areas where if you total the harpies flying around, kamikazes, horsey-things, and big guys up in the corners spamming fireballs it is at least 50 enemies at once. I can't imagine them throwing 800 enemies on there along with whatever projectiles are going back and forth, the CPU requirements alone would be insane.

In fact some of the less open areas it would be pretty much impossible there would be no room to move if they did 16x.
 
wrbt said:
I'm not sure the enemies scaling means its in linear fashion, as in 16x as many.

In single player there are battles in open areas where if you total the harpies flying around, kamikazes, horsey-things, and big guys up in the corners spamming fireballs it is at least 50 enemies at once. I can't imagine them throwing 800 enemies on there along with whatever projectiles are going back and forth, the CPU requirements alone would be insane.

In fact some of the less open areas it would be pretty much impossible there would be no room to move if they did 16x.
Click to expand...

Yeah, most likely not linearly, but wouldn't that be a sight to see? :)
 
wrbt said:
I'm not sure the enemies scaling means its in linear fashion, as in 16x as many.

In single player there are battles in open areas where if you total the harpies flying around, kamikazes, horsey-things, and big guys up in the corners spamming fireballs it is at least 50 enemies at once. I can't imagine them throwing 800 enemies on there along with whatever projectiles are going back and forth, the CPU requirements alone would be insane.

In fact some of the less open areas it would be pretty much impossible there would be no room to move if they did 16x.
Click to expand...

Modern day CPUs and CPUs of yesteryear are easily up to this task. In 2007, Supreme Commander was a game that facilitated these types of situations and the projectiles are calculated in real-time.
 
wrbt said:
I'm not sure the enemies scaling means its in linear fashion, as in 16x as many.

In single player there are battles in open areas where if you total the harpies flying around, kamikazes, horsey-things, and big guys up in the corners spamming fireballs it is at least 50 enemies at once. I can't imagine them throwing 800 enemies on there along with whatever projectiles are going back and forth, the CPU requirements alone would be insane.

In fact some of the less open areas it would be pretty much impossible there would be no room to move if they did 16x.
Click to expand...


lol play the single player. in some of the levels you can have upwards of 300-400 enemies on the screen at any one time.. if they could do that when the first game came out, i'm pretty sure they could do it now with modern systems that are designed for multitasking.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
lol play the single player. in some of the levels you can have upwards of 300-400 enemies on the screen at any one time.. if they could do that when the first game came out, i'm pretty sure they could do it now with modern systems that are designed for multitasking.
Click to expand...

Did the 1st/2nd Encounters really have 300 - 400 enemies on the screen at once? I've beaten both and I honestly don't ever recall that many enemies being onscreen at once. But then again, I never actually counted to see. ;) In any case, I'd love nothing more than to see many, many hundreds of enemies on the screen at once. That would be a joy to see. :D
 
addictedto60fps said:
Did the 1st/2nd Encounters really have 300 - 400 enemies on the screen at once? I've beaten both and I honestly don't ever recall that many enemies being onscreen at once. But then again, I never actually counted to see. ;) In any case, I'd love nothing more than to see many, many hundreds of enemies on the screen at once. That would be a joy to see. :D
Click to expand...


yeah there were a couple levels.. trick was to trigger 1 spawn for the enemy, run to the next trigger and then run for your life while raping the AI.. out of the hundred's of hours i played both games i don't think i ever beat them.. i use to just run around like a mad man killing everything.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
yeah there were a couple levels.. trick was to trigger 1 spawn for the enemy, run to the next trigger and then run for your life while raping the AI.. out of the hundred's of hours i played both games i don't think i ever beat them.. i use to just run around like a mad man killing everything.
Click to expand...

Lol, I never tried doing that. But if there's a way to get hundreds of enemies on the screen at once, that will definitely work, that's for sure!
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
yeah there were a couple levels.. trick was to trigger 1 spawn for the enemy, run to the next trigger and then run for your life while raping the AI.. out of the hundred's of hours i played both games i don't think i ever beat them.. i use to just run around like a mad man killing everything.
Click to expand...

it takes about 5 hours to beat each one if you get through it as fast as possible
 
Nothing like some SS lan party action. I remember hosting several lan parties that went all night long playing SS. I remember my finger hurting from clicking so much ...

SS3 looks pretty good.
 
addictedto60fps said:
New preview with new screenshots:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/11/first-on-rps-serious-sam-3-hands-on/
Click to expand...

Those look sweet. I'm very bummed we don't have this yet, but I'd rather they get it done right than rush it out. I just wish we could see some screens with shots of massive hordes, all of the ones I've seen so far just have a handful, but I know they're all focusing on the graphics end.

There are certain things people want from a Serious Sam game. They want a lot of monsters on the screen at once. They want to be constantly running backward to stand any chance of surviving. And they want it to be really, really hard. If these three levels set in Egypt are anything to go by, those people – the people who understand – are going to be extremely happy.
Click to expand...

[H]ardON
 
This game will be sweet if it has a LAN Co-Op mode. The original Serious Sam was awesome with 4 friends at the same time. And the amount of time we would jump the wall so we can walk across in order to skip a few levels.
 
Kokain said:
This game will be sweet if it has a LAN Co-Op mode. The original Serious Sam was awesome with 4 friends at the same time. And the amount of time we would jump the wall so we can walk across in order to skip a few levels.
Click to expand...

Not sure if it will have LAN, but it will have 4 player split screen. When was the last time a pc fps had 4 player split screen?
 
I don't remember when was the last time games had 2 player split screen. You know why? Because it sucks ass. On a PC you would need 2 keyboards and mice in order to play it, and even if it was a game that is based on keyboard play only, you better have NKRO or you would just end up locking more than two-three key presses. This is why LAN/Internet play was invented :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top