OUTCAST (game) - why was it such a commercial flop ?

Maybe because I've never even heard of it.

Second that..

I remember that game, had the demo from PC Gamer. I thought it was really cool. I think some of the problem was that it came out right around when 3D accelerated games were starting to look good too, and while Outcast had cooler effects, polygon games were easier to look at imo.

Quote:

Taken from Charlie Brooker's review, PCZone Here's what happens. Having breathlessly slammed the CD into the computer and twiddled your thumbs through the installation process, you're presented with an impressive FMV opening sequence in which the game's basic premise is hammered into your eyes, ears and mind. Trouble is, despite the cinematic ambience (nifty camera angles, full orchestral score and so on), it's a crashing bore: it's all talk, talk, talk. The story's far too dull to recount in full (blah blah research lab... blah blah... parallel universe experiment... blah... unforeseen problem... blah blah... Planet Earth endangered... blah blah blah) - the upshot is that you, yes you, must guide Cutter Slade, square-jawed renegade hero type, as he journeys into a mysterious alien world on a quest to save the Earth. So far, so snooze-o-gasmic. But then... but then... having patiently resisted the urge to hit 'Escape' all the way through the over-long opening salvo, guess what? You awaken in an exotic otherworld and are immediately subjected to an interminable conversation with a goat-faced oddball in a cape, who witters on and bloody on about what a weird and wonderful place this parallel universe is, continually using utterly baffling 'alien' phraseology to describe things. Still, you reason, it's the very start of the game, so you may as well sit tight. After all, this character's probably imparting important information, right? Right. ... But, this being an adventure, if you want to get anywhere you have to complete a series of tasks - and this is where the trouble begins. If you want to know what's going on, you soon discover that there's a lot of talking to be done. A lot of really boring talking. Now, the storytellers are doubtless proud of the intricate fantasy world they've created. They've put a lot of thought into it. They've come up with a weird alien expression for practically everything. Scarcely a moment goes by without a character blurting out a new word. You must go and talk to the Mons, they'll say. The what? The Mons? They are the leaders of the Talan. The who? Didn't you know? They inhabit Shamazaar, which is in the grip of the Fae Rhan. The which? Open your mouth to speak and, within seconds, even the simplest of exchanges congeals into a dispiriting trudge through a quagmire of Crap Alien Terminology (see panel, opposite). And they all talk like that. All of them! And not just for a few moments, oh no. They bang on and on and on... for ages. Ask a straightforward question and they're off, jabbering like an astrophysics student trying to compose a particularly verbose and impenetrable end-of-term thesis on the fly. It drives you crazy. We wanted to hurl rocks at the bastards. And Cutter Slade himself isn't any better. He wisecracks at every opportunity, and although some of his lines are genuinely amusing, his incessant sub-Bruce Willis smart-arsery soon grates. Once we'd done getting angry with the cast, we worked on getting angry with the rest of the game. A couple of hours in, it transpires that a few neat tricks and lighting effects aside, the combat sequences are awkward and unexciting - and really don't warrant further description. The much-vaunted AI doesn't seem to do much except cause the occasional character to run or attack, while the exploration largely consists of uneventful rambling and disorientating teleport jumps. There's no sense of immediacy or excitement. Bottom line: it's boring.

Thats the only review I recall reading of the game. If more went like it, then I'm not surprised myself.

I haven't heard of it either, but...

Quote:

From Wikipedia: The Eternal Outcasts [3] are developing a free sequel called Open Outcast using the Crystal Space 3D engine.

So... yay?

Good reviews, good gameplay, good graphics, good story, good sound/music, innovative, etc, mean absolutely nothing to the success of a game. Sure, they help, but doesn't necessarily mean the game will sell. Hence why many game magazines have a Best Game No Ones Played catagory for when they do games of the year.

I mean, if a game being great meant it sold well, well, let's just take a look at games which wouldn't have been commercial flops.

Games everyone has heard of, and claimed to have played.

Final Fantasy 2 US (aka 4)
Final Fantasy 3 US (aka 6)
Crono Trigger US

Neither of the Final Fantasy's sold over 400k copies outside Japan.
Crono Trigger sold less than 300k copies outside Japan.

Now, let's take a look at a company which created great games, and was extremely innovative.

Ultima Underworld. Heavily advanced 3D engine for the time.
System Shock. Half Life years before Half Life came out.
Terra Nova. Think Tribes before Tribes came out.
System Shock 2. Extremely good reviews from almost everyone. Very scary game, great use of sound, etc.
Theif. One of the first first person sneaker games.
Flight Unlimited. Excellent use of physics, which at the time, was unheard of in flight simulators.

All of these were created by 1 company, Looking Glass (well, Blue Sky at first, but blah:P). Each of these games received very good reviews. What happened to the company? It went bankrupt. No one bought their games.

As others have stated, it didn't sell well partly because no one has heard of it. Marketing is probably the biggest factor in the success of a game, not the game itself.

I too remember the PC Gamer demo, and quite liked it. Why did it flop? I bet the 4 year development time was part of it. That long of a development time must have been horribly expensive. That, and I bet other games were stealing all the attention when it was released.

Quote:

Original post by aidan_walsh Quote: Taken from Charlie Brooker's review, PCZone Here's what happens. Having breathlessly slammed the CD into the computer and twiddled your thumbs through the installation process, you're presented with an impressive FMV opening sequence in which the game's basic premise is hammered into your eyes, ears and mind. Trouble is, despite the cinematic ambience (nifty camera angles, full orchestral score and so on), it's a crashing bore: it's all talk, talk, talk. The story's far too dull to recount in full (blah blah research lab... blah blah... parallel universe experiment... blah... unforeseen problem... blah blah... Planet Earth endangered... blah blah blah) - the upshot is that you, yes you, must guide Cutter Slade, square-jawed renegade hero type, as he journeys into a mysterious alien world on a quest to save the Earth. So far, so snooze-o-gasmic. But then... but then... having patiently resisted the urge to hit 'Escape' all the way through the over-long opening salvo, guess what? You awaken in an exotic otherworld and are immediately subjected to an interminable conversation with a goat-faced oddball in a cape, who witters on and bloody on about what a weird and wonderful place this parallel universe is, continually using utterly baffling 'alien' phraseology to describe things. Still, you reason, it's the very start of the game, so you may as well sit tight. After all, this character's probably imparting important information, right? Right. ... But, this being an adventure, if you want to get anywhere you have to complete a series of tasks - and this is where the trouble begins. If you want to know what's going on, you soon discover that there's a lot of talking to be done. A lot of really boring talking. Now, the storytellers are doubtless proud of the intricate fantasy world they've created. They've put a lot of thought into it. They've come up with a weird alien expression for practically everything. Scarcely a moment goes by without a character blurting out a new word. You must go and talk to the Mons, they'll say. The what? The Mons? They are the leaders of the Talan. The who? Didn't you know? They inhabit Shamazaar, which is in the grip of the Fae Rhan. The which? Open your mouth to speak and, within seconds, even the simplest of exchanges congeals into a dispiriting trudge through a quagmire of Crap Alien Terminology (see panel, opposite). And they all talk like that. All of them! And not just for a few moments, oh no. They bang on and on and on... for ages. Ask a straightforward question and they're off, jabbering like an astrophysics student trying to compose a particularly verbose and impenetrable end-of-term thesis on the fly. It drives you crazy. We wanted to hurl rocks at the bastards. And Cutter Slade himself isn't any better. He wisecracks at every opportunity, and although some of his lines are genuinely amusing, his incessant sub-Bruce Willis smart-arsery soon grates. Once we'd done getting angry with the cast, we worked on getting angry with the rest of the game. A couple of hours in, it transpires that a few neat tricks and lighting effects aside, the combat sequences are awkward and unexciting - and really don't warrant further description. The much-vaunted AI doesn't seem to do much except cause the occasional character to run or attack, while the exploration largely consists of uneventful rambling and disorientating teleport jumps. There's no sense of immediacy or excitement. Bottom line: it's boring. Thats the only review I recall reading of the game. If more went like it, then I'm not surprised myself.

the person who wrote this suggests that there have been games around where the things he bashed upon were better/more realistic/more senseful. but there weren't.
Also, he sound's like pong is the most complex game he enjoys playing. at least it's not fun for him to explore "other worlds" and interact with a simulated society, I don't know a game that complex from 1999 or before.

Many if not most game mags (at least in europe) rated this game "game of the year" in 1999,
so it's not that bad critiques were a problem for the game to become comercially successful.

I kind of want to know what happened to Anachronox too. That game absolutely PRAWNED, it was good stuff.

AH yeah, the voxel game! I too played the demo from PC Gamer, back when they had that monkey they tried to promote as their wacky, zany mascot. I thought it was cool, but as with anything done in voxels it looked blurry and blocky. Because it was.

Anyone ever use the Super Scope for the SNES? I had so much fun with those games, but it never really took off. Metal Combat was probably the most badass game I'd ever played at that point.

Quote:

Original post by UnshavenBastard Quote: Original post by aidan_walsh Quote: Taken from Charlie Brooker's review, PCZone Here's what happens. Having breathlessly slammed the CD into the computer and twiddled your thumbs through the installation process, you're presented with an impressive FMV opening sequence in which the game's basic premise is hammered into your eyes, ears and mind. Trouble is, despite the cinematic ambience (nifty camera angles, full orchestral score and so on), it's a crashing bore: it's all talk, talk, talk. The story's far too dull to recount in full (blah blah research lab... blah blah... parallel universe experiment... blah... unforeseen problem... blah blah... Planet Earth endangered... blah blah blah) - the upshot is that you, yes you, must guide Cutter Slade, square-jawed renegade hero type, as he journeys into a mysterious alien world on a quest to save the Earth. So far, so snooze-o-gasmic. But then... but then... having patiently resisted the urge to hit 'Escape' all the way through the over-long opening salvo, guess what? You awaken in an exotic otherworld and are immediately subjected to an interminable conversation with a goat-faced oddball in a cape, who witters on and bloody on about what a weird and wonderful place this parallel universe is, continually using utterly baffling 'alien' phraseology to describe things. Still, you reason, it's the very start of the game, so you may as well sit tight. After all, this character's probably imparting important information, right? Right. ... But, this being an adventure, if you want to get anywhere you have to complete a series of tasks - and this is where the trouble begins. If you want to know what's going on, you soon discover that there's a lot of talking to be done. A lot of really boring talking. Now, the storytellers are doubtless proud of the intricate fantasy world they've created. They've put a lot of thought into it. They've come up with a weird alien expression for practically everything. Scarcely a moment goes by without a character blurting out a new word. You must go and talk to the Mons, they'll say. The what? The Mons? They are the leaders of the Talan. The who? Didn't you know? They inhabit Shamazaar, which is in the grip of the Fae Rhan. The which? Open your mouth to speak and, within seconds, even the simplest of exchanges congeals into a dispiriting trudge through a quagmire of Crap Alien Terminology (see panel, opposite). And they all talk like that. All of them! And not just for a few moments, oh no. They bang on and on and on... for ages. Ask a straightforward question and they're off, jabbering like an astrophysics student trying to compose a particularly verbose and impenetrable end-of-term thesis on the fly. It drives you crazy. We wanted to hurl rocks at the bastards. And Cutter Slade himself isn't any better. He wisecracks at every opportunity, and although some of his lines are genuinely amusing, his incessant sub-Bruce Willis smart-arsery soon grates. Once we'd done getting angry with the cast, we worked on getting angry with the rest of the game. A couple of hours in, it transpires that a few neat tricks and lighting effects aside, the combat sequences are awkward and unexciting - and really don't warrant further description. The much-vaunted AI doesn't seem to do much except cause the occasional character to run or attack, while the exploration largely consists of uneventful rambling and disorientating teleport jumps. There's no sense of immediacy or excitement. Bottom line: it's boring. Thats the only review I recall reading of the game. If more went like it, then I'm not surprised myself. the person who wrote this suggests that there have been games around where the things he bashed upon were better/more realistic/more senseful. but there weren't. Also, he sound's like pong is the most complex game he enjoys playing. at least it's not fun for him to explore "other worlds" and interact with a simulated society, I don't know a game that complex from 1999 or before. Many if not most game mags (at least in europe) rated this game "game of the year" in 1999, so it's not that bad critiques were a problem for the game to become comercially successful.

In the states, in 1999 game of the year for most spots seemed to go to one of the following: Everquest, Age of Empires 2, Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, or Free Space 2. Although Everquest seemed to win out more often than not. The only awards I ever saw for OutCast was "Adventure Game of the Year". Around 1999 no one really wanted to play adventure games any more. The market for them had died off (or atleast had started to) more or less. Add on to that, it had terrible advertising and you have yourself a commercial flop. (I didn't even know that it had been released until a year after it had come out...)

Like any brand of consumers, video game buyers are very fickle people and if the history of video games has shown us anything, is that there are plenty of instances of good games falling through the cracks. I am assuming that the story of 'Outcast' is similar. I remember when a game called Demon's Crest came out for SNES and it got amazing reviews and good press. The game had a good control scheme, good graphics, good music and a sweet dark story. The game also managed to have negative sales somehow during its release. No one ever knew why. Perhaps its because most gamers wouldn't know a good game if it bit them in the ass, but I like to think its because there are just some good games that were meant to be ordained to the status of cult classic. Even within that, there are quite a few riches to be found for all who are willing to look a little harder than usual.

It is my understanding that since peripherals for consoles do not sell very well, neither do the games that need them.

The one exception I know of was the memory expansion pack which came with certain nintendo 64 games.

Quote:

Original post by Rain 7 I remember when a game called Demon's Crest came out for SNES

I remember that game it was f'ing sweet

Quote:

Original post by Funkymunky AH yeah, the voxel game! I too played the demo from PC Gamer, back when they had that monkey they tried to promote as their wacky, zany mascot. I thought it was cool, but as with anything done in voxels it looked blurry and blocky. Because it was.

only with the wrong settings / not powerful enough PC.
Unlike other voxel engines, Outcast's employed all kinds of filtering done in software, and with the right settings all looked pretty smooth, but still with enough crispness, unlike all those slimey, pale 3dfx & co games at that time :D
the characters even had bump mapping, and the water rendering (with full detail on) was just plain outstanding for even several years to come.
just at some angles in some corners/endges of buildings it could look a bit blocky, yes. but the overall look is pretty smooth and colorful, unlike polygon games of the time.
Perhaps it's a matter of taste, but I can easily forgive a bit of blockyness here and there for the overall georgeous looks :-)

I think the demo I have seen did not have the option menu to configure this fully and it was all without the filtering which was of course a bit demanding on the CPU.

I don't know for other localisations of this natively french(belgian) game,
but in the German version the translated texts vs. meanings in the graphics options menu were shuffled, not even just in reversed order but mixed. for some detail settings or so, the German word for middle was actually the highest detail option, low - middle and high the lowest, or something like that. I guess some of the know-it-all's who weren't satisfied with having the game determine the best options for their computer and thus immediately fiddled in the options menu themthelves, might never have experienced the game's full beauty because of this... lol
If I hadn't fiddled in the menu even more because of dissatisfaction and reading of the effects in the the manual and seeing screen shots... it might have been true for me, too :D


for those who know this game only strongly blocky,

just download and watch the videos I have linked to in the first post!

I still have the PC Gamer issue in which Outcast was reviewed.
I remember it as one of the games that got my graphical juices flowing a bit. Prior to Outcast, I was largely indifferent to graphics programming and usually messed around with other aspects.

Even though it triggered my interest and eventually led me to waste a portion of my life "learning" game "programming", it was still a fun time. I kind of wish I had never heard of it and, instead, just continued to work on other aspects of programming like reading new books and learning better techniques. But no, I instead lived on half-ass tutorials and horrible advice from idiots heh.

Ahhh anyway....

Oh yeah, I remember that game, it looks (still) gorgeous. I remember the first time I saw the water, darn it looked like they were using pixel shaders, the sky looked amazing too, and the storyline was excellent (game set in 2007).

This was 1998 1999 technology without 3d acceleration







look here and check the ratings

Gamespot Outcast reviews

here

IGN Outcast reviews


About the previous PCZone review posted earlier, the guy can't even take the time to read and learn about the culture of the people living in the game, and obviously only enjoys games that require little thinking and pure blasting-kill everything that moves type of game, dumbass. That's the main reason I don't care much about reviews until I test the game myself.

I loved that game.

I agree with the previous poster; I played that game many years after it was released and I loved the graphics and (more importantly) the gameplay. You can really notice that the developers worked their asses off while making it.

Quote:

Original post by Nytegard Good reviews, good gameplay, good graphics, good story, good sound/music, innovative, etc, mean absolutely nothing to the success of a game. Sure, they help, but doesn't necessarily mean the game will sell. Hence why many game magazines have a Best Game No Ones Played catagory for when they do games of the year. I mean, if a game being great meant it sold well, well, let's just take a look at games which wouldn't have been commercial flops. Games everyone has heard of, and claimed to have played. Final Fantasy 2 US (aka 4) Final Fantasy 3 US (aka 6) Crono Trigger US Neither of the Final Fantasy's sold over 400k copies outside Japan. Crono Trigger sold less than 300k copies outside Japan. Now, let's take a look at a company which created great games, and was extremely innovative. Ultima Underworld. Heavily advanced 3D engine for the time. System Shock. Half Life years before Half Life came out. Terra Nova. Think Tribes before Tribes came out. System Shock 2. Extremely good reviews from almost everyone. Very scary game, great use of sound, etc. Theif. One of the first first person sneaker games. Flight Unlimited. Excellent use of physics, which at the time, was unheard of in flight simulators. All of these were created by 1 company, Looking Glass (well, Blue Sky at first, but blah:P). Each of these games received very good reviews. What happened to the company? It went bankrupt. No one bought their games. As others have stated, it didn't sell well partly because no one has heard of it. Marketing is probably the biggest factor in the success of a game, not the game itself.

Yeah!! Looking Glass ruled! Damn shame it went bankrupt

I blame it on the majority of retards.

/MindWipe