PDA

View Full Version : DX3 not coming in 2009? Things look bad for Eidos.



imported_van_HellSing
15th Sep 2008, 19:22
http://m.gamespot.com/news/6197698/

"Eidos racks up £99.1m in losses"

"CEO Phil Rogers described 2008 as "a year in which we took decisive action to transform our business," and confirmed that Tomb Raider Underworld would be swinging onto consoles this November. Rogers also confirmed that Just Cause 2, Battlestations: Pacific, Championship Manager 2009, and Batman: Arkham Asylum would be arriving in 2009, as expected."

Note: no DX3 on that 2009 list.

El_Bel
15th Sep 2008, 20:02
Well they never said that it was going to arrive in 2009!!!


Longer development schedules - at least 24 months

I have faith in Eidos Montreal.

René
15th Sep 2008, 21:21
Don't worry.

Wait for October's magazines. :D

minus0ne
15th Sep 2008, 23:11
at least 24 months
I still see this as a good thing (for one it's the opposite of what was done with IW).

Blade_hunter
15th Sep 2008, 23:13
I don't know because I read in a forum some guys from Eidos Montreal are from Ubisoft Montreal and it have many chance they are very talented(second the word of the poster), but I don't know if it's only a rumor or the truth ...
I go a bit off topic here but this article sounds mysterious to me, but perhaps René have right, I think we need to be patient, I think the team needs time to make the game

ricwhite
16th Sep 2008, 00:04
I wouldn't be surprised or upset if DX3 didn't come in 2009. But Rene says not to worry and he's the insider with all of the secrets, so I guess we should just wait until the October info release to see what's up.

Either 2009 or 2010 is fine with me, however. Personally, I'd want them to take whatever time they need (within reason) to polish the game before releasing it.

Jerion
16th Sep 2008, 01:40
I wouldn't be surprised or upset if DX3 didn't come in 2009. But Rene says not to worry and he's the insider with all of the secrets, so I guess we should just wait until the October info release to see what's up.

Either 2009 or 2010 is fine with me, however. Personally, I'd want them to take whatever time they need (within reason) to polish the game before releasing it.

I am a patient man.




But not that patient.

JerichoMccoy
16th Sep 2008, 01:50
I am a patient man.


But not that patient.

Ha ha. Someone is gonna have the auto-shotty in place if he doesn't get the answers he needs.

Director of FEMA does not mess around.

minus0ne
16th Sep 2008, 02:58
I am a patient man.

But not that patient.
I'm not worried, EM has plenty of motivation to release the game when it's finished and polished but not so far into the future that everyone's forgotten about Deus Ex :p

And we can hardly agree with EM to have a lengthy 24+ months development (which is a good thing, trust me) and at the same time start acting impatient (I'd say "you can't have your.." but I'm afraid this thread might suffer from all the subsequent Portal references).

DXeXodus
16th Sep 2008, 03:57
Eidos went through a lot of restructuring lately, setting up a new development studio and what-not. Obviously they would lose alot of money in the process. The point is that this restructuring took place in order to make more money and better games. Games like TRU are in place to make up for those losses.

A lot of people hate the way the Eidos Montreal are going about the development of DX3 with regards to how they release info and interact with the community, but I love it. it is all so mysterious and intriguing.

October the 9th Not long now :)

JerichoMccoy
16th Sep 2008, 04:32
A lot of people hate the way the Eidos Montreal are going about the development of DX3 with regards to how they release info and interact with the community, but I love it. it is all so mysterious and intriguing.


Next thing you know, there will be conspiracy theorists out there who claim that the long development time for DX3 is because the Illuminati want to be able to test out a new sub-conscious relay information software to give to those that are "illuminated" and to point them in a direction that they think is towards their personal destiny but in fact, manipulated to go towards what the Cabal wants them to do...

And now I just confused myself. :confused:

minus0ne
16th Sep 2008, 05:43
Next thing you know, there will be conspiracy theorists out there who claim that the long development time for DX3 is because the Illuminati want to be able to test out a new sub-conscious relay information software to give to those that are "illuminated" and to point them in a direction that they think is towards their personal destiny but in fact, manipulated to go towards what the Cabal wants them to do...

And now I just confused myself. :confused:
Dude, just meditate and imagine yourself dissolving into light :p

Romeo
16th Sep 2008, 06:27
Find your Zen, brotha. Yeah, try and bear in mind that Eidos hasn't released any a-list games too recently, despite paying for the devellopment costs for upcoming games, so of course they're going to post some losses.

Larington
16th Sep 2008, 09:26
A lot of people hate the way the Eidos Montreal are going about the development of DX3 with regards to how they release info and interact with the community, but I love it. it is all so mysterious and intriguing.

Actually I think its nice to see some hype management for once. Far too many games start building the hype way too soon and it always ends up turning out to be detrimental to the game in the long term. And considering whats at stake, this is one game that needs good hype management.

And I wonder if gamers are a bit spoiled in the "getting more hype stuff than they deserve or are ready for" sense.

DXeXodus
16th Sep 2008, 09:33
Actually I think its nice to see some hype management for once. Far too many games start building the hype way too soon and it always ends up turning out to be detrimental to the game in the long term. And considering whats at stake, this is one game that needs good hype management.

QFT.

I just hope that it doesn't backfire and gamers start to build up a perfect image in their heads which doesn't become a reality. Resulting in disappointment.

[EDIT] I suppose that is what October the 9th is for then...

imported_van_HellSing
16th Sep 2008, 12:03
Honestly, what I'm really worried about is the other Eidos Montreal game, the one that starts with "T" .

...And ends with "hief 4".

All references to the game are now gone from the EM site.

ewanlaing
16th Sep 2008, 15:40
Actually I think its nice to see some hype management for once. Far too many games start building the hype way too soon and it always ends up turning out to be detrimental to the game in the long term. And considering whats at stake, this is one game that needs good hype management.

And I wonder if gamers are a bit spoiled in the "getting more hype stuff than they deserve or are ready for" sense.


My favourite example of game development hype: Max Payne 2, announced early 2003, to be released late 2003. Released as intended in late 2003. Did exactly what it said on the tin, got good reviews.

THAT'S how you announce a game. I thought that was a super-cool way for Remedy to work.

jordan_a
16th Sep 2008, 15:42
I love this forum. :D

Spiffmeister
17th Sep 2008, 00:45
The longer we wait, the more polished of a game we get. Be patient, the wait will be worth it.

binlargin
17th Sep 2008, 00:53
The longer we wait, the more polished of a game we get. Be patient, the wait will be worth it.
Agreed. I'd quite happily wait until 2020 or at least until after Elite 4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_4)

JerichoMccoy
17th Sep 2008, 03:38
Agreed. I'd quite happily wait until 2020 or at least until after Elite 4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_4)

Depends if we last through 2012. With that particle accelerator, I'm sure some nut job will find a way to make it go bonkers at around that year...

...What? Why is everyone looking at me? Get that straight jacket away from me!

DXeXodus
17th Sep 2008, 03:54
And apparently they are about to construct an even bigger accelerator soon.

Unstoppable
18th Sep 2008, 15:11
Well it's not really a loss. See what they consider a loss is making less than last year which is dumb. How can you lose something you haven't made know what I mean? They just made less money that's all.

Romeo
18th Sep 2008, 15:27
Which, again, is almost to be expected.

AaronJ
18th Sep 2008, 20:24
If nobody has noticed, 2008 has been a SHlT year for gaming.

Romeo
19th Sep 2008, 04:40
It wasn't too too bad. Just the last little while hasn't been to exceptional. But Spore was just released, Gears of War 2 and Fallout 3 have yet to be released.

Larington
19th Sep 2008, 21:18
Don't let the person who created the swear filtering see that bypass attempt :rasp:

On the PC its been a somewhat lacklustre year so far, but Left 4 Dead is on the horizon. That and Far Cry 2 could easily make up for other dissapointments, such as the furore surrounding Spore being a good instead of excellent game now with added DRM, and its still open money as to how well Fallout 3 will go down, theres obviously going to be people who won't be the slightest bit happy about it though I'm more curious to see what the general public make of the game in the end, not just the upper 3%.

Romeo
19th Sep 2008, 23:10
Oh yes, I almost forgot FarCry 2 (Despite the fact I'm PISSED Jack Carver wont be in this one), and Left 4 Dead looks alright, it just doesn't look overly groundbreaking to me. Another one I forgot was Too Human, as a recent game.

Tracer Tong
21st Sep 2008, 09:40
Well, Spore developed too much hype, too early (3 years before they went gold) and look what they came up with: A lousy, repetitive and boring game.

imported_van_HellSing
21st Sep 2008, 09:46
Oh yes, I almost forgot FarCry 2 (Despite the fact I'm PISSED Jack Carver wont be in this one)

What was so special about Jack Carver anyway? I couldn't care less for him.

Absentia
21st Sep 2008, 09:59
Yeah he just seems like your average witty action hero with painfully bad one-liners.

jordan_a
21st Sep 2008, 10:21
Well, Spore developed too much hype, too early (3 years before they went gold) and look what they came up with: A lousy, repetitive and boring game.Indeed unfortunately.

Romeo
22nd Sep 2008, 01:56
What was so special about Jack Carver anyway? I couldn't care less for him.

Yeah he just seems like your average witty action hero with painfully bad one-liners.
I just liked him. For one thing, because he didn`t want to be there, and another because he was still coming to terms with being half-feral. It was especially nice in the expansion, to notice at the end how both halves are sort of fighting to be the dominant personality.

Indeed unfortunately.
Still gotta say, Spore's one of my favorite games.

ricwhite
23rd Sep 2008, 00:24
Oh yes, I almost forgot FarCry 2 (Despite the fact I'm PISSED Jack Carver wont be in this one), and Left 4 Dead looks alright, it just doesn't look overly groundbreaking to me. Another one I forgot was Too Human, as a recent game.

I think Far Cry 2 will be quite good. I am also hearing some good things about Mirror's Edge that might give a new twist to the FPS genre. That's about it for 2008, as far as I can see. All of those pale in comparison to a DX game, though.

Gary_Savage
23rd Sep 2008, 01:46
My favourite example of game development hype: Max Payne 2, announced early 2003, to be released late 2003. Released as intended in late 2003. Did exactly what it said on the tin, got good reviews.

THAT'S how you announce a game. I thought that was a super-cool way for Remedy to work.

Actually, I like it that Eidos has announced the game so long ago (and contained the hype), since otherwise I might have bought a new computer by now, which might be unable to DX3 when it comes out. Now, I can just wait till DX3's system requirements are known (whenever the game comes out) and I can buy a new laptop accordingly.

DXeXodus
23rd Sep 2008, 04:44
I agree. I also plan on holding off on a major upgrade until a few months before DX3. That way I will be able to play it perfectly smooth on maximum settings. The way it is meant to be played.

Lo Bruto
23rd Sep 2008, 05:36
I'm looking forward to Tom Clancy's EndWar.
Looks pretty nice.

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 17:23
I'm looking forward to Tom Clancy's EndWar.
Looks pretty nice.
Yeah, i give them absolute credit for going their own way, and I think it'll be the first RTS that actually has decent controls for a console.

I think Far Cry 2 will be quite good. I am also hearing some good things about Mirror's Edge that might give a new twist to the FPS genre. That's about it for 2008, as far as I can see. All of those pale in comparison to a DX game, though.
I still think the game looks amazing, I just wish Carver was still in it. Notso interested in Mirror's Edge.

SubTonic20
23rd Sep 2008, 17:26
The longer this game takes to release, the better it'll be. In fact, I wouldn't want it to be any sooner than 2010.

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 17:57
Hm... No. Seeing as how they already have a working prototype, delaying is only going to cause problems, not improvements. Sure, perhaps you can add a llittle content, but then all the work you did to graphics is worthless because technology has advanced so much farther. And your community has lost interest. You cost is through the roof.

My point is, there's a certain window where you can work on making a good game, too long or too short a devellopment cycle, and the quality suffers. I like the approach Eidos has. Like Blizzard, they tend to push their releases towards the border of overly long, but still make it economically sensible.

foxberg
24th Sep 2008, 12:20
Depends if we last through 2012. With that particle accelerator, I'm sure some nut job will find a way to make it go bonkers at around that year...

...What? Why is everyone looking at me? Get that straight jacket away from me!

Well, maybe then we'll get to where Sumerians came from... We won't need any Sci-Fi games then.

MagnumJoe
25th Sep 2008, 10:28
If nobody has noticed, 2008 has been a SHlT year for gaming.

I Totally agree with you on this :thumbsup: ! The only thing that is worth waiting for, at least for me, is Call of Duty World at War...

K^2
25th Sep 2008, 17:13
Hm... No. Seeing as how they already have a working prototype, delaying is only going to cause problems, not improvements. Sure, perhaps you can add a llittle content, but then all the work you did to graphics is worthless because technology has advanced so much farther. And your community has lost interest.
I don't know about that. I'm still really looking forward to seeing my grandchildren finally play Duke Nukem: Forever.

jordan_a
25th Sep 2008, 17:56
Still gotta say, Spore's one of my favorite games.Only 20 minute sessions for me. :)

pewbeng
25th Sep 2008, 23:21
I don't know about that. I'm still really looking forward to seeing my grandchildren finally play Duke Nukem: Forever.

Duke Nukem Forever, world peace and not a single hungry mouth to feed. Gotta be the top three things people want for their grandchildren. :)

minus0ne
25th Sep 2008, 23:26
I Totally agree with you on this :thumbsup: ! The only thing that is worth waiting for, at least for me, is Call of Duty World at War...
You can't be serious. A retreading of a mindless sequel attempting to go back to its WWII roots? I guess gaming is in serious trouble after all.

Fallout 3 might be good, though it's looking less likely.

Jerion
25th Sep 2008, 23:46
You can't be serious. A retreading of a mindless sequel attempting to go back to its WWII roots? I guess gaming is in serious trouble after all.

Fallout 3 might be good, though it's looking less likely.

Ditto.

Crysis Warhead is actually a pretty good game, despite the shortcomings of the first one.

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 03:31
I don't know about that. I'm still really looking forward to seeing my grandchildren finally play Duke Nukem: Forever.
LOL! Classy, brother.

Only 20 minute sessions for me. :)
She must be so dissappointed. ;)

Kidding of course. But still, it's a testiment to the game that an 8 year old boy, car-fanatic teen, RPG girl and tactical shooter adult can all enjoy the game.

You can't be serious. A retreading of a mindless sequel attempting to go back to its WWII roots? I guess gaming is in serious trouble after all.

Fallout 3 might be good, though it's looking less likely.
Yeah, I'm quite annoyed that they're getting so much attention. Call of Duty 4 deserved attention: They took a massive gamble and left the safety of their WWII roots, and made a modern day shooter where you can customize your weapons. So, what are they doing to deserve attention this time? Hiding behind the veil of a WWII shooter, yet again, and copying the customization aspect of their previous title.

I don't know, I think Fallout 3 is pretty damn cool. For one thing, accredit Bethesda for going from swords and spells to rifles and rockets. From stables to streets, horses to horsepower, and mudhuts to metropolises. Besides, if nothing else, the proposed 300+ different outcomes deserves some recognition all it's own.

DXeXodus
26th Sep 2008, 03:47
Yeah, I'm quite annoyed that they're getting so much attention. Call of Duty 4 deserved attention: They took a massive gamble and left the safety of their WWII roots, and made a modern day shooter where you can customize your weapons. So, what are they doing to deserve attention this time? Hiding behind the veil of a WWII shooter, yet again, and copying the customization aspect of their previous title.

Call of Duty 4 was awesome and I have a lot of respect for Infinity Ward for moving out of the WW2 genre. Treyarch started development of COD5 about a year before COD4 was released, so this was a time when WW2 was the way to go, more or less. Even though it is an old, flogged genre, it is still entertaining. Well, in my point of view at least. They messed up with COD3, but this time Treyarch has had much more time to develop the game. I am fairly optimistic about this new Call of Duty.


I don't know, I think Fallout 3 is pretty damn cool. For one thing, accredit Bethesda for going from swords and spells to rifles and rockets. From stables to streets, horses to horsepower, and mudhuts to metropolises. Besides, if nothing else, the proposed 300+ different outcomes deserves some recognition all it's own.

I am also quite excited about FO3. I am not an absolute die-hard Fallout fan though, so the new approaches Bethesda have taken have been welcome to me. I love the whole Post-apocalyptic genre and this, I'm sure is going to be a highly enjoyable game.

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 03:52
I'm totally with you for Fallout. But as for COD5, this, in my opinion, is the problem with having two devellopers for the same game. Call of Duty, more than other games by far, seems to suffer from a high then low effect, as Infinity Ward really raises the bar, only to have Treyarch play limbo under it. And while the WWII genre wont be going anywhere soon, it would be nice to see some chances taken in it. Brothers in Arms is adding total destruction to the mix (slightly copied from Battlefield: Bad Company, I'll admit), Velvet Assassin is completely taking a new direction and who knows what other ideas people could put forth. But Treyarch? "Let's just throw out another CoD, with a couple new weapons, a change of scenary and borrow an idea from Infinity Ward. Good job team!"

DXeXodus
26th Sep 2008, 04:10
I don't agree with having two developers on one IP by any means. But I do think that COD5 will at least live up to the COD name. I doubt that it will be as good as COD4 though.

Apparently Infinity Ward may be taking COD6 into the FUTURE! :eek:


Call of Duty 4 was top notch because it was developed by series originators Infinity Ward, so it’s pleasing to know that it’ll be returning to them in 2009 for its sixth installment. This was confirmed by Activision Publishing CEO Mike Griffith at yesterday’s Activision Blizzard Analyst Day. No other details yet, although the rumour-mill suggests that the theme might be sci-fi war. I’m not so sure this has anything to do with the COD series: why break a winning formula? I think there’s a whole lot left in the contemporary combat theme.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/call-of-duty-6/

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 04:58
Yeah I had been reading about that myself. Still, I have my sci-fi thrills taken care of at the moment: The new Halo trailer, GoW2, Mass Effect 2, Deus Ex 3, Borderlands and Fallout 3. I'm set. But I will keep my eye on that one.

Jerion
26th Sep 2008, 06:43
So basically they are going to make a Call of Duty equivalent to Battlefield 2142? I hope they don't overdo it.

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 07:27
I think it would be more along the lines of Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter, or Frontlines: Fuel of War. That would be my guess.

DXeXodus
26th Sep 2008, 08:31
Yeah, I was also thinking along those lines. Still gritty and "real", but with futuristic combat elements. Not light sabers and teleportation pads.

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 21:19
You never found those in GRAW? Yeah, they were secret weapons, actually...

lol

Abram730
7th Oct 2008, 05:21
Well, Spore developed too much hype, too early (3 years before they went gold) and look what they came up with: A lousy, repetitive and boring game.

So much hype that people forgot that we are talking about the maker of The Sims lol... People imagined a different game.

be specific with hype as many people will over sell a game to themselves lol

So over hype can be bad. Especially when the bar isn't set. Demonstrated features were removed as in the demonstrated procedural verbs eat and move causing the creature to drag. See they though big and I think that game was worth it, but they hyped before they knew where the game was going to be at. So they set expectations sky high. They did make up a good tool set, so they started something new to build on.

better then expected is always better then a disappointed. Think big and hype internally to keep the people working on the project giving their best and fired up. DX3 has something good working for it. DX1 was a cult classic game in my mind and DX2 did lower expectations so things should work out.. "Better then DX2" is something I want to buy. I played that demo and was disappointed. This summer I played DX2 and did enjoy it as that let down feeling had gone. If there had not been DX1, DX2 would of been a good enough game. It was the feeling of bait and switch with the dumb down. DX 3 is still a ways out time wise. Judge by the forums where fans are at.

Dx1 wasn't revolutionary in graphics, but it felt like they finished early and kept adding things so the longer development cycle is a good sign for me. It had the feeling like they enjoyed making it. If it ends up being better then dx1 in feel, it'll be a smash hit. But then that is relative as games have improved.

while on the subject of hype and Public Relations.
fact: Public Relations was a name with less baggage given to Propaganda. So in a pinch people who work in say a PR department could be seen as an asset in DX3 game design. As in how should this npc spin X event so that the player can follow that path? Every path has it's spin and the hidden truth is somewhere in the middle kooks:nut: aside.