I'm not going to part with money to evaluate clearly, but this is *on* the line if it doesn't pass it.

The UT comparisons don't quite cut it: UT had a campaign with an (if only token) story and escalating difficulty introducing you to all the mechanisms. And, more importantly, its multiplayer wasn't central-server dependent, but peer to peer (well, player hosted).

While it looks like this "game" might barely fall under OK to be here, it would have been better if they had rejected it. Unless there's real single player content that isn't just "click skirmish".

EDIT: Beyond that, it seems to have terrible reviews. And, somehow, a game a year old, has zero discussion posts even on Steam's forums.

Saying UT had actually campaign is stretching it. haha But agree the game look bad anyways.

Then you can’t read, it’s right there in the description at word 3.

As for other peoples post, fine, as with the discussion on cyberpunks online gated content versus hitmans online gated content, define what constitutes enough content locked behind an online wall for which to you have no control for it to be bad in your eyes, as you can be sure the next game will have more. Perhaps we will get a nice streaming only game with some credits you can watch offline. The simple fact is more and more are being made online only and not only is it being accepted but it’s being actively defended on a site which alledges to give users ownership of their product, and only recently made a big point of “going back to their core values”.

So is this the case here? Is the 'single player' mode just the multiplayer game with bots? If so, does the bot mode run completely offline? Or are there limitations?

Hmmm...honestly I don't know. I hope someone else could answer that! I guess I am speaking from more a theoretical perspective, going off my own impressions of looking at the game briefly, and indeed it is possible I could be mistaken. If it turns out the game isn't "same as the multiplayer, just with bots," then I would join you/others in being more critical of it. We will have to see if anyone can give us better info. I will say the fact that there are "gray area" releases like this is not doing anything to suggest GOG is re-committing to DRM-free, other than the general internet here being a vast improvement over "You must use the optional client Galaxy" mentality.

To add some perspective on where I'm coming from, I'm thinking of games that have multiplayer modes that can be played solo and feel like a complete experience in their own right, without touching a "story" singleplayer campaign. Other than Unreal Tournament, there are other examples throughout gaming such as Perfect Dark (Goldeneye's successor) and perhaps Call of Duty Zombies/Aliens/whatever mode (not totally sure on how playable this is). If the game only had the solo with bots multiplayer, and that was it, no singleplayer campaign, nothing different, just bots instead of human players, I am cautiously accepting of that and would feel it is a full enough experience.

By contrast, modern fps where campaign is an afterthought compared to online-only multiplayer, I would not say is cool. My example of CoD kind of straddles the line as I believe they did want people online but as far as I understand it one can play offline multiplayer.

The game itself is out across most of the big stores with steam and EGS.



21:45