Let me get this straight, they released a OLDER version of the demo as oppose to the up to date one?

Isn't this kinda retarded? What kind of marketing is this?

Does no one know how to make a good impression anymore?

Don't worry about the PAL PS3, it's doing fine ;)

I'm pretty certain the DEMO is new, the content isn't.

That is to say, this was the same level I played in internal code months ago, but this one let you select a multitude of different audio and menu/subtitle languages (including Finnish for both :tpg:). Obviously, the sequences were the same, but the code itself is probably newer and more stable. I'm really not surprised they're not keen on giving out any more playable material when the point is to get people to buy the game.

That said, this means I need to go play the other playable code at work as that really does have more content.

Also to Ultima, we got a new preview version of Lair at the office. Going to try it out next week~

Oh wow. You guys weren't kidding when you said it's about 2 minutes of gameplay. I'm kind of surprised by the low framerate as well...for some reason I thought it would be a little better than that...

I'll have to look at the finished product before I give a final verdict, I guess.

I don't have anything else to base this off other then that the performance of the HS demo sounds more like what has been described in previews of the Gamer's Day demo, and noth the latest build. Things like frame rates (this demo was definately around the 30fps and not 60) and some other smaller glitches all connect with that of the Gamer's Day version.

I'll give you that they most definately localized the demo a lot more to make it multi region friendly, but that doesn't mean that it's a newer build of the game of it's own, it just means that they were actually doing something during all that time of waiting.

"According to Sony, the demo is the same as that shown during Sony's Gamer Day earlier this year." -IGN

Also in this week's Beyond IGN podcast, the crew say that the Gamer's Day demo is no where near as good as the E3 '07 demo. If you want to hear more on it, check out the podcast.

P.S.
More on framerate. This is usually the last thing they fix in games for any added or removed content changes the performance. And I'm not just making this up. You can check dev notes for 70% of games and they'll same the same thing. Especially Capcom games, which is why they hardly ever do demos.

While I'm glad the final product will improve in quality like framerates, I still don't understand the mentality of releasing an obviously older and less stable demo to a nation wide audience. Its ASKING for a bad impression and people WILL decide not to get the game based on the demo. To a regular person, a demo is suppose to be a taste tester. If it tastes like crap already, fat chance they wanna try it again, with a price. Not all of them are gonna be all "Well its just a demo, I'm sure it will improve." nor will they research why the demo sucked.

If I had to guess the E3 demo was most likely their latest build with the entire beta game on it with only the first 2 or 3 levels unlocked and not an actual demo. Therefore since the Gamer's Day demo was already standalone code, instead of taking people off the actual game to make a newer demo they took the demo they already had, put three or so people on it to make the menues all nice and shinny and then they threw it out the door.

From a development standpoint it makes perfect sencse. From a PR side of things it's a disaster.

This line of logic is based on whether or not the demo actually sucked, which quite frankly it didn't. Just because it's a demo from a previous build and not the latest one doesn't mean the demo was horrible.

Oh, yeah. By all means, the demo was good - I didn't intend to give the impression that it sucked at all. I just don't think it was "OMFG THIS GAME TOTALLY PWNZ" like I thought it would be from all of the reviews I've been reading from people who had played the game at E3 and stuff.

If the framerate can be increased, that would be awesome. I think that was the biggest flaw of the demo, and it wasn't even that big of a deal.

They are? I remember when I bought a PSX some... eight years ago, I didn't have any games at first, so I just played a demo disc from Official PlayStation Magazine. Same with Dreamcast, played a demo disc that came with the console.

Also, Kojima? What? The topic is Heavenly Sword, and it's one and a half month away, not six to nine.

I played the demo again. I had no idea that the control screen elaborated on the counter system and other things, which was practically hidden in the menu.

If this is truly an older build with a slower framerate, then I will likely be very impressed with the final product. I'll get the game, based on the counter system alone....the counters were arguably the best aspect of the Ninja Gaiden games, and Heavenly Sword seems to completely revolve around it, which makes it fun.

I'll probably get sick of the damn thing after the fifth enemy wave, but at least I'll have something other than VF5.

Perhaps I threw in the word "suck" prematurly, but my point is that the older demo has a technical problem which was erased in a later demo, and that I didn't understand why they chose the one with a tech problem that WAS fixed later on and show it to the public, the people that will determine the sales.

Which I now understand the development reasoning behind it thanks to Slayer X. But its still a PR's nightmare. You guys are aware that the framerate problem is already fixed, while others would think the framerate is gonna be present in the final version, especially if they're ignorant of game development what not.

Espcially since the game will be out in a month or 2, the demo that is released would give the impression that THIS is close to the final build. WE know thats not true, but the broad audience dunno what "research" means, and probably will never know and assume this is it.

For some reason I thought this was referring to MGS4... o_o Don't ask. I think I had my tagged topics confused...

DISREGARD MY POST =( And regarding demos, I had it more clarified before I wiped and restarted the post. Demos on a large scale are new. They used to be confined to big-name companies mostly (ie: Square). This nextgen stuff makes downloadable demos very doable.

Either way. Disregard my post. Very stupidly done on my part.

Oh hell yeah. It took me a couple playthroughs (15 minutes max lolin') but I finally got the counter system nailed down. Are the cinematic ones just kinda...picked at random? I mean, sometimes the camera would zoom in and you'd get this nice close-up death scene and other times it would happen from the normal perspective. Either way, bonus.

I think that's the aftertouch, isn't it? I remember seeing something about using the sixaxis to control the camera during the aftertouch segments.

Sorry to derail this a bit from the current Heavenly Sword discussion, but since this thread is monstrous, I'd figure I'd ask.

What is GFF's thoughts on the Warhawk beta, for those who got in? I know Iwata's already, but what about everyone else's? I'm not even sure who got in and who didn't, to be honest.

I was in for the last week and honestly it's a good game but I'm not sure if I'll buy it. It doesn't offer more then any fps like battlefield :\

I got interested in this game before they announced the drop of the single player and I wish they didn't drop it but the aircraft was the best part of the beta for me and I wish they would have kept the single player around that :\

but it's a very good game for people who like this genre ^^

Firstly, it is not a FPS. Also you seriously enjoyed the Warhawk? I thought it flew horribly and was basically a Airplane that had the controls of the Warthog, only far worse. Imagine Tails and Elliott Mason getting into a catfight while flying a plane and you have an accurate representation of how the Warhawk flys.

I got accepted into the Beta, 3 weeks before it ended and put in a good solid 15 hours into it. It is a fun game for what it is and i'm sure i'll buy a copy if skills and miles also grab a version of it for online awesomeness.

But just coming off the H3 beta which IMO was one of the most polished beta's i've ever played. Warhawk was horribly disappointing and so this really didn't help my preception of the game. You know a game has fundamental design flaws when the majority of players rush to tanks and jeeps and don't even bother with the namesake vehicle; the Warhawk.

Also the game was chalk-full of glitches. Numerous walls and mountains you could walk into like they didn't exist. Vehicles would spawn only to vanish 5 seconds later while your rushing to em. The beta would randomly freeze up and you'd have to reset your PS3. That's just to name a few and their are plenty more, trust me.

Also things like the VC implementation was done horribly as well. They really need to design a headset made specifically for the PS3 as too many jackasses had their Bluetooth headsets set-up and not noticing the volume control was set to the max and so you would hear like 4-6 jackasses breathing heavily the entire match and when they did speak, it sounded like they were speaking through a megaphone. It doesn't help either that the game does a shit job at properly displaying who is speaking, so when you go to mute someone; you don't know who is talking and so the only logical conclusion i could find was to just mute everyone instead of enduring having to manually mute each person one by one and exit the cumbersome menu to see if it was the right person.


Honestly, it is a decent game that will be very enjoyable if we could scrounge up a PSN crew ala the xblive crew and do some online-matches. But given that the entire GFF consists of a few people, most who don't have any interest in online gaming. I doubt this will ever come to fruitation, sadly. As it would be pretty sweet to play with the some of the PSN people.

Also Warhawk has the horrible disadvantage of being released around the same time that many superior online-enabled games are being released ala H3 and so even if i buy Warhawk as do you Skills, i doubt either of us will be putting much time into it when we have far more stable online games to play via the 360 with far more people we consider friends.

As like xbox live; the PSN is also saturated with a bunch of degenerate retards when it comes to online play and it is horrible playing online games with randoms without any incentive to do so ala achievement points.

Additional Spam:
Love the insinuations on your part. Even if the Demo is not based on the final build and an older one. It is no excuse for the Dev company to release an inferior demo from so many months ago, when the game is dropping in a month and a half; Espically when they have a more superior demo available. Countless of Demos on the 360 have swayed me to buy a game and even the Ninja Gaiden Sigma Demo swayed me to buy the game.

This is not the case with Heavenly sword. It was a game i was psyched for and I finally get ahold of the demo and find it has many many problems in many departments. I was thoroughly bummed.

Also i can guarantee you that the framerate issues that many people are complaining about will still be prevalent in the final build. I talked to my buddy who did get to play the E3 build, after people mentioned the demo was an earlier build and he said the slowdown was still around in the E3 build. I also love that the only people who state they didn't notice the framerate slowdown are confirmed PS3 fanboys; SouthJag and to a lesser extent, SlayerX.

What are you talking about. Unless you hacked the unix OS, installed fraps on your PS3, and are a mastermind to engage it in the demo, I would say that my eye at gauging the FPSs is pretty accurate to previewers of the Gamer's Day build.

Secondly in response to, "It is no excuse for the Dev company to release an inferior demo from so many months ago, when the game is dropping in a month and a half..." reffer to my last post. I'm not going to repeat myself because you've decided to come late to the game. (Though you've obviously skimmed over things to get a just of what's going on)

Lastly I can't disprove whether you have a friend who's played the E3 demo or not. However that does not matter for like I said earlier. The VAST majority of games don't deals with FPSs until the near end of development. Therefore even the E3 build is HIGHLY subjecy yo change in performance before release.

To prove my point look at Dead Rising at the E3 before release and then release. Pratically every reviewer compained about the HUGE frame drop. However at retail release, this issue pretty much never came up.

The frame rate is the last thing developers work on anyway. I don't know how many developer interview I've read who all say the same thing -- frame rates come last. The final build is a month and a half away barring any release date setbacks, so I wouldn't worry about frame rate being an issue.

Also, lolin' at the two called-out PS3 fanboys were the first two to respond.

Not trying to go off-topic, but I would like an outside opinion about this.

My friend and I have been arguing about the real stay power for the PS3. What I mean is that PSX was a system that lasted for a while even after PS2 came out and PS2 is the same. It had a crapload of great games that made the PS2 a real great investment (fun-wise) in the long run.

I really think, that Xbox 360 has a solid amount of good games that have lots of replay value, not to mention Xbox Live that expands the amount of content and fun exponentially.

Nintendo's Wii is another console that has a decent amount of fun games that even a hardcore gamer can have fun playing. I mean, I go from playing all the FF games and Tekken games and Resident Evil games on PS, but I enjoy playing Wii sports and Wario Ware and Twilight Princess.

PS3 doesn't look like it has any of either of those things. To me games play like they just took an old idea and put really fancy graphics and physics on it. Don't get me wrong, I love the look of some of the games that PS3 has, but it looks like PS2 rehashed with a Cell processor.

Well...I liked the Warhawk beta...

Like, a lot :(.

Maybe it's just me, though. I got pretty damn good at flying the Warhawk, so I thought it flew perfectly fine (I WILL admit that the default motion controls completely suck), and the game rarely freezed on me after the patch. I don't want to start anything, but I really don't think I encountered any of the glitches you stated, either :/. I will admit that I had to turn off the mic chat, but I'm also pretty sure that it was later changed so you had to press a button to talk. I don't know, the beta has been closed for a while...

I dunno. I just really enjoyed the pure chaos that it could provide.
But...but...you forgot the Sixaxis controller!!!

The PS3 has an immense load of great games coming out for it; only problem is that most of these games are a year or two away from being released. Spec-wise, the PS3 and the 360 are equals, both with strengths and weaknesses that are unique to each console. Hell, Ratchet and Clank: ToD is one of my most anticipated games of this year and it is a PS3 game.


The way I see this gen going is

2007: Year of 360
2008: Year of PS3
2009: Year of 360
2010: Year of PS3
2006-2010: Wii, the leader of the 5-10 and +40 demographics

I also only made it 4 years as with the way technology is progessing, i don't see a console having a longer lifespan then 5 years at max, nowadays. I also find the whole PS3 ten year plan to be utter bullshit that won't last.

So in general, does Warhawk have a realistic Battlefield 1942/Battlefield 2 edge to it, or is the combat more arcade-like?

I was really disappointed to see that Warhawk dropped the single player, too. I wish they'd just kept the aerial missions for SP and then had the on-foot and other vehicles in MP. Frankly I'd gladly have spent an extra $20 for a single player campaign.

I lol'd. Would you guys believe me if I said that I still have yet to actually try out that thing.

If these consoles only last until 2010, then I don't know if I'm going to be able to afford being a gamer :(.

Well, it's no flight simulator, that's for sure. The moment someone took off in one of those things, they would black out instantly. As of the beta, a lot of the weapons seemed pretty unbalanced, if you ask me :/. When a Warhawk fires its machine guns on someone running on the ground, it shouldn't take 30 seconds of straight firing to kill him. The pistol seemed way more powerful than the rifle, stuff like that. Supposedly all of this stuff is going to be fixed, as the developers released a list of confirmed changes being made to the game in the beta forums (which are no longer up. I could post them, if somebody wanted me to).

I can't really compare it to Battlefield, as I'm not too familiar with those games.

I'm not exactly sure what I think about this. Apparently, the game director himself said that the single player campaign straight up sucked, and that he would rather have a kickass mulitiplayer game instead of a crippled single player game.

If anything, it would have been nice to see a well done single player mode.