The Cure for the Common Shooter

Recommended Videos

irani_che

New member
Jan 28, 2010
630
0
0
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Hard Reset. It is a work of art from Poland, who are quickly outdoing Japan when it comes to good, innovative videogames.
You carry two guns which diversify until you have a hl2 style arsenal at you disposal and you will need them as there are a shit-tonne of robots. Not only that but a variety of robots, all with their own quirks, weaknesses and tactics to deal with them, mostly involving either charging in and shooting like a madman or circle strafing and using environmental explosives. Cover is almost non-existant and you dont really miss it as most enemies just swarm and try to eat your face like zerglings or blow up.
The games story is a bit of a blur and the environments are dirty brown/grey/black
but what it does best is the terrifying lows of being surrounded or being attacked by something huge followed by the exhilarating rush of wiping out every ************ in the room.

Also, they do not shy away from old-school difficulty, even the normal difficulty can be testing at times. Often, you can feel the game chomping at the bit wanting to throw you back into the deep end.

I dont normally do reviews etc, but this is exactly the sort of game which can slip under the radar and its too good to let it slide so go out, get it, hell, download the demo and go back to a time when shooters were just about killing every ************ in a room and collecting goodies from the corpses
 

DEAD34345

New member
Aug 18, 2010
1,929
0
0
irani_che said:
-snip- ...go back to a time when shooters were just about killing every ************ in a room and collecting goodies from the corpses
I hated those shooters even more than the ones we have nowadays.

>.> <.< ... I'll just let myself out, then.
 

hazabaza1

Want Skyrim. Want. Do want.
Nov 26, 2008
9,612
0
0
I'll stick to Vanquish, thanks.
Going from the screen-shot impressions it all just looks like one big grey blob.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
Eh, it's not that great.

It's fairly fun, but the game only lasts about four and a half hours.

Also, there are only four types of enemy (little kamikaze robot, little slicy robot, human-sized shooty robot and big charging robot) and they all have the same weakness, namely gunfire.

Environments are rather nice though.
 

Aeshi

New member
Dec 22, 2009
2,640
0
0
It's basically Quake IV with fewer enemy types and the odd bit of destructible scenery. Not really anything special by a long shot.
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
hazabaza1 said:
I'll stick to Vanquish, thanks.
Going from the screen-shot impressions it all just looks like one big grey blob.
Vanquish was an amazing game. So sad that it only lasted like four hours.

Would definitely want to see another game like that. TPS or FPS.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Yeah, no. Hard Reset might be of the Serious Sam school of thought, but I need something to keep me invested. Just giving me a gun and telling me to shoot things for shits and giggles doesn't exactly sound like my idea of an engaging game mechanic.

Four enemy types? Four hours of gameplay? Weak plot?

It's definitely not my cup of tea, then. I'm a lot more interested in the modern cover-based shooter mechanic, myself; seeing as it feels more authentic to *not* be your Common Bullet Sponge. I'd still recommend DEHR, on the grounds that it can be played as a cover-based shooter with very few run-and-gun sequences.

I mean, I still enjoy an occasional round of Quake III Arena so I'm no stranger to being nigh-invincible - but I get tired of shooting for the sake of shooting pretty quickly.
 

Jdb

New member
May 26, 2010
337
0
0
It's pretty, but not special. I think Hawken and Natural Selection 2 are better cures.
 

hazabaza1

Want Skyrim. Want. Do want.
Nov 26, 2008
9,612
0
0
Kopikatsu said:
hazabaza1 said:
I'll stick to Vanquish, thanks.
Going from the screen-shot impressions it all just looks like one big grey blob.
Vanquish was an amazing game. So sad that it only lasted like four hours.

Would definitely want to see another game like that. TPS or FPS.
Yeah. Plus, the sequel bait ending... that sucked.
Still trying to finish the challenges though. Shit's hard.
 

AugustFall

New member
May 5, 2009
1,110
0
0
I looked at it and wasn't overly impressed. Looks okay but I'll stick with TF2. Timesplitters was about the only shooter I liked before the CoD/Battlefield/Halo era so I'm not really that target demographic I guess.

Looks well polished though.
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,789
0
0
Yeah, i don't think something that only has 4 to 4 and a half hours is worth £23, sorry. And without multiplayer. That's pretty abysmal value right there. It's pretty much the same price as every other mainstream high profile release on PC. I'd rather get something that's value for money like The Witcher 2 for the same price than that shallow experience. Quality is nice, but you need at least some quantity to make it worthwhile. Otherwise it's just a glorified tech demo. Let's leave that to Capcom, shall we?

Also, this may just be a personal quirk of mine, but it bothers me that none of the enemies are organic. Killing robots just doesn't give the same level of satisfaction as killing living things. It might look pretty and all but i like to see guts and hear screams rather than watch electricity sparkle and metal melt. I saw a post elsewhere once where someone said the same thing and asked why they felt that way, to which someone else replied "It's simple. Go punch a microwave, then go punch a hobo. Now tell me which felt more satisfying." Obviously he was joking (I hope!) but the point was there. Blasting zombie heads and aliens gives more visceral feedback than taking apart walking Mechano sets.

Not to mention having only two weapons. Yeah, they have other firing modes that let them change from say a machine gun to a shotgun, but two weapons is just so... archaic and dull. I like to have a full Doom-style arsenal at my disposal, one that i can visibly see as being different and unique rather than "Well if you push a button you can make it do this, so technically it's different!"
 

weker

New member
May 27, 2009
1,372
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
Four enemy types? Four hours of gameplay? Weak plot?
The enemy number is incorrect there is roughly.... 7 with some bosses, apart from their quantity, level layout and design, and weapon variety keep the experience fresh and entertaining. The game is great, it has a serious sam with added realism feel, I have to really hand it to the level designers as well, as each level feels superb, as each area is littered with a variety of explosive and electrifying props, and this is only aided by each weapons alternate fire.

The game is also a budget price, so the shorter then normal length is fair, but don't forget apart from easy and normal (normal was fairly tough as it is) there is hard, very hard (I think there is very hard bit sleepy atm) and EX mode, and with the level design there is more then enough replay value.

Shameless self bump post
http://www.invisioncommunity.co.uk/index.php/a-z-back-catalogue/41-h/91-hard-reset.html

OutrageousEmu said:
Hard Reset was considered a mediocre to quite bad game.
WHAAAA who said such a thing... my guess edge, they always put out some bat shit crazy reviews... looking at you edge's dragon age 1. (the guys review seemed like he was angry due to the "Lust" Demons looking sexy and I kid you not)
 

weker

New member
May 27, 2009
1,372
0
0
Gralian said:
but two weapons is just so... archaic and dull.
Two weapons? Archaic? Is't that kinda a modern trend more then anything else.

I can understand what you mean with the punching a hobo statement, but I enjoy how the machines explode in a shower of oil, electricity and metal shards, with their remains scattered across the flaw. In the games defense you have more then the average game variety in weapons with a total of twelve guns ALL WITH INTERESTING ALT FIRE AND UP-GRADABLE (i miss you alt fire *SOB) tho it is minus one for the zoom.
 

Nalgas D. Lemur

New member
Nov 20, 2009
1,318
0
0
OutrageousEmu said:
Hard Reset was considered a mediocre to quite bad game.
I've only seen a couple reviews that were actually bad. There weren't really any that said it was the greatest thing ever, either, but the majority of them at least seem to say that it's fairly average, and the ones by people who liked Painkiller/Serious Sam tend to be a little bit higher than that. I've only played the demo myself, but it seemed entertaining enough, so I'll probably grab a copy on sale at some point. It's also encouraging that they've been very responsive to feedback with the stuff they've changed in the first patch that people were complaining about.
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,789
0
0
weker said:
The enemy number is incorrect there is roughly.... 7 with some bosses
I have to stop you right there, because one of the first games to pioneer the shooter genre has, and i quote from the wiki, "There are 10 types of monster".

The game in question is the original Doom. 10 types of monster. That's a quarter more monster. That's pretty embarrassing.

But scooting away from the retro section, take a look at the game you plugged, Serious Sam. That game had an insane amount of enemy types. Syrian soldiers, kamikaze soldiers, Demons, Bio-organic walkers, Alien frog things, Were-bulls, Skeletal horse things, Gnaars, the list goes on but even with that list right there that's still 8 types not including the multiple versions of the same type (two types of Syrian Soldier, two types of Walker, two types of Demon etc). Hell, look at the classic Painkiller with its themed levels. Skeletons, undead swordsmen, demon monks, undead WW1 soldiers, undead ninja, undead bikers, flying grim reaper type things, etc. Again only scratching the surface of enemy types but the point is that there are far more than just 7 and they are all diverse and relevant to the level design in each scenario so as to keep the experience fresh; chucking the same enemy at you room after room for a 4 to 6 hour stretch without so much as a re-skin is very monotonous, even embarrassing when you consider how many games that came before which it supposedly draws inspiration from have done it before.

The game is also a budget price, so the shorter then normal length is fair
No, it's not. It's not budget price for a PC title. PC titles, even high profile ones (i'm talking PC exclusive here not multi-platform like CoD) are generally of lower cost than console titles.

Hard Reset in the UK is £23. The Witcher 2 is £25. That's about the right pricing for PC exclusives. It is by no means a budget title and the stunted length is certainly not justified by that price.

weker said:
Two weapons? Archaic? Is't that kinda a modern trend more then anything else.
Carrying only two weapons but being able to swap them out for something else is a modern trend, but being forever restricted to just two weapons, insane amount of alt fire modes or not, isn't and i wish i could give you a concrete example to back up that statement.

But the point is while you can only carry two weapons in modern games, you can still swap them out for other ones. Different ones. You aren't restricted to those same two weapons indefinitely. We even have alt fire on weapons in contemporary titles; that's what that underbarrel grenade launcher / keymaster shotgun attachment is, or that melee bayonette on the end of your barrel is for. It might not be on the same level as "you can change the firing mode of your weapon so it's basically an entirely different weapon" but at least the alt fire option is generally there and you can still exchange your weapon for something else if you grow tired of it.

In the games defense you have more then the average game variety in weapons with a total of twelve guns ALL WITH INTERESTING ALT FIRE AND UP-GRADABLE (i miss you alt fire *SOB) tho it is minus one for the zoom.
The problem i have with this is that saying you have all these weapon modes and the ability to upgrade is entirely pointless if the experience is over in a few short hours. It's like giving someone the keys to a Ferarri, only to tell them they have 5 minutes to make the most of it before they have to give it back. It's just so pointless. It makes upgrading and acquiring new things moot when it will only last you the next one or two rooms before the next "big upgrade" until the credits roll.
 

Stall

New member
Apr 16, 2011
950
0
0
Yeah, it's a really fun game. It's got its problems, yeah, but it's a great time if you are just in the mood to kill a lot of shit. The devs actually fixed a lot of the problems I had with the game with the first patch: they removed the cooldown for switching weapons!!! The only real problem I have with it now is that the story is kind of convoluted, but then again: you don't play these kind of games for the story, now do you?

Zhukov said:
The game does not last 4 and a half hours... What? Did you only play an ARCADE STYLE GAME that is MEANT TO BE PLAYED MULTIPLE TIMES only once and totally ignored the new game plus mode? If so, then why are you complaining about the length when it is clearly YOUR fault? You are the one who doesn't want to play it multiple times when that is the clear purpose. YOU are the only who doesn't want to take part in the new game plus mode. These are YOUR problems... not the games.

I've seen you post this a few times. You are so misinformed it isn't funny. Please, stop spreading blatant lies. Seriously dude... it's not cool to run around and lie like this so blatantly. Sure, it only lasts 4-6 hours PER PLAYTHROUGH, but you aren't supposed to play it just once and uninstall it. If you do, then that's YOUR problem... NOT THE GAMES.

If you take those 4-6 hour playthroughs and multiple it by 4 (once per each difficulty setting), then you've got a 16-24 hour game. Now tell me... since when has 16-24 hours been an unacceptable length for a game?

Gralian said:
The problem i have with this is that saying you have all these weapon modes and the ability to upgrade is entirely pointless if the experience is over in a few short hours. It's like giving someone the keys to a Ferarri, only to tell them they have 5 minutes to make the most of it before they have to give it back. It's just so pointless. It makes upgrading and acquiring new things moot when it will only last you the next one or two rooms before the next "big upgrade" until the credits roll.
Only if the developers included some kind of mode that let you play through the game with all the previous upgrades you got -_-

Oh wait... THEY DID.

Seriously. Does no body on this planet understand the concept of a "new game plus"?!
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,789
0
0
Stall said:
Gralian said:
The problem i have with this is that saying you have all these weapon modes and the ability to upgrade is entirely pointless if the experience is over in a few short hours. It's like giving someone the keys to a Ferarri, only to tell them they have 5 minutes to make the most of it before they have to give it back. It's just so pointless. It makes upgrading and acquiring new things moot when it will only last you the next one or two rooms before the next "big upgrade" until the credits roll.
Only if the developers included some kind of mode that let you play through the game with all the previous upgrades you got -_-

Oh wait... THEY DID.

Seriously. Does no body on this planet understand the concept of a "new game plus"?!
Except then the challenge is gone. Surely after you've beaten the game, anything it throws at you in a "new game plus" isn't going to compare to the things you dealt with in the final few rooms of the game. There is no point in playing again to make use of those upgrades you only just got ahold of because the challenge is gone and you know what's coming up next. That's the point of upgrades. Not to give you a "god mode" to trounce weaker enemies, but to help you deal with tougher enemies. Yes, a game is meant to be replayed, but replayability should not be tantamount to the core concepts of the design like upgrades. It should be secondary to the experience. Before you make the argument "well run through it again but on hard / insane", i actually do run through on the highest difficulty whenever possible on the first try, so that point is moot in my case. There is no need to go into an ALL CAPS RAGE to defend lazy game design by touting what should be a fun little bonus as a necessary feature to enjoy the full experience.

Upgrades are there to help you overcome challenges of incremental difficulty. Not fun toys to mess around with on subsequent playthroughs. If they couldn't fit in a suitable challenge-reward scheme it only highlights the point that it is too short and too ambitious for what it tries to be.
 

Stall

New member
Apr 16, 2011
950
0
0
Gralian said:
snip, should it not offend you
Actually, you'd be surprised. The game is still difficult on the highest difficulty with all the upgrades. Heck, it was still fairly difficult with all the upgrades on hard. Having all the upgrades hardly kills the challenge like you accuse it of doing. Plus, you'll get to the parts of the game where you need all those upgrades fairly soon anyways. The game is just as fun to replay without NG+ too. The replayability of the game is there, even if you don't want to do a new game plus and just start fresh. Most of your points are pretty pointless, as anyone who has played the game can testify that most of them just do not make sense in the paradigm of the game.

You're really intent on hating on this poor little indie dev, aren't you? I can understand hating on a AAA pub who did this, but man... isn't it in poor tastes to rip the little guys a new one for all these things? This WAS effectively Flying Wild Hog's first game you know...

I seriously get the impression you didn't play the game and are just ragging on it for the sake of ragging on it. Most the points you are saying are so general and wrong that I seriously have a hard time believing you played anything beyond the demo.

EDIT: You know, you really shouldn't start bashing games when you have your Steam profile linked, because it isn't hard to verify that you have NEVER played the game, and are just outright making up your points without having ever touched it. Not a good strategy.