Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I thought Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay was awesome, but now I am dieing for the next one, Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena. The first half of the game is a revamped Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay, and the second half is the Assault on Dark Athena. You will be on a ship, and the game will be twice as big as it was before.

Who else is waiting for this? Why will it be great?

It depends on how good they retool the first game, and how long and good the second half of the game is.

Will this game be an exclusive or multiplatform? Also, what's the release date for this game?

Originally posted by Nemesis X
Will this game be an exclusive or multiplatform? Also, what's the release date for this game?

PS3 , and Xbox360. I think it is going to release February, or March of next year.

Originally posted by Smasandian
It depends on how good they retool the first game, and how long and good the second half of the game is.

The entire Butcher Bay part, and then the Dark Athena part. Believe me, if you liked the Butcher Bay part, you probably will like the Dark Athena part.

Well I'll see when the game comes out. I'm going to buy it again just for 3-4 hours more gameplay and it being retooled.

I liked the game, but I didn't like that much.

I kinda of wish the developing firm did something different because they are pretty talented.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Well I'll see when the game comes out. I'm going to buy it again just for 3-4 hours more gameplay and it being retooled.

I liked the game, but I didn't like that much.

I kinda of wish the developing firm did something different because they are pretty talented.

I already told you that it will come out February or March of next year. Double the time of the 1st Riddick, and that will be the 2nd.

I dont really care when it comes out.

"Well, I'll see when the game comes out" means I will see if I want to buy it or not.

Are you positive the gameplay length of the second game is equal to the original game. Any proof?

I loved Butcher Bay so, yeah, i'm curious to see how this one turns out.

Butcher Bay was awesome. The best movie franchise game. I remember when I rented it and watched the graphics. They totally ruined Halo 2 for me, eventhough H2 looked good.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I dont really care when it comes out.

"Well, I'll see when the game comes out" means I will see if I want to buy it or not.

Are you positive the gameplay length of the second game is equal to the original game. Any proof?

Sorry.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/934/934847p1.html

20 hours isn't bad at all.

Beat ya.


http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=452235&highlight=riddick+forumid%3A66


But I am psyched about this game, I loved the original.

That was such a long time ago dude. It is all about the now. And we know more now then we did back then.

I just dont understand why they are remaking, or retooling the first one.

Put that effort into a new game.

It is like the Orange box. It is the first part, and then a second part. If you don't understand this, then you obviously didn't understand the Orange box.

Originally posted by Wil7
It is like the Orange box. It is the first part, and then a second part. If you don't understand this, then you obviously didn't understand the Orange box.

It has nothing to do with the Orange Box. Orange Box was all about TF2, Episode 2 and Portal. They decided to add Half Life 2 and Episode 1 for people who didn't buy it already, if you bought it already, you can give away your free copy of the game. They didn't touch anything about Half Life 2 and Episode 1.

This game is a retooling of a game that was released a couple of years ago. In fact, if the game was not in publishing limbo, it would of only been a remake of the first game because they couldn't emulate it for the 360. Originally, it was suppose to be a remake of the game, but because of the shit that went with merger of Activision and Blizzard, it didn't have a publisher. Because of that, they decided to create another part of the story.

So in essence, its a sequel, but instead of spending a year or two making a remake of game that wasnt needed, they could of spent their ability to make a completely new game. I rather have that instead of 8 month new campaign.

On the otherhand, Orange Box is not the same. It's a compilation of games. Valve spend all their time creating Portal, TF2 and Ep2 and didn't touch HL2 and Ep2. They added those because of the fans. So no, I understand what the developer did and I understand what Valve did. They not remotely the same at all.

You obviously didn't read this: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/934/934847p1.html
This is done by IGN, and they say it is there own version of the Orange Box.

Well, their wrong. It's not like the Orange Box at all.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Well, their wrong. It's not like the Orange Box at all.

The people who created the game are wrong about there own game,

No, their not wrong about their own game, they're wrong about the Orange Box.

Again, the Orange Box was sold because of three completely new games. They added HL2 and Episode 1 as a bonus for the fans who wanted to try the first two in the series.

This is different. They remade the game (or just added more graphics and a few game play enhancements) and retailed it as a new game. Because of the shit that happened with the Activision merger, they decided to add a new 10 hour campaign to it. If it was like Orange Box, this would included that new 10 campaign (which started in May, or June so who knows if its good or not), the original game (without out being remade) and 2 other new games.

All I'm saying is that I wish they decided to leave the original alone (which had no problems with it) and make a completely new game from scratch. There was no reason to remake it all and it was kinda of lame to expect people to buy the game when it was only released a few years ago and had no major problems with it. Luckily, we get another campaign from it, but who knows how good it will turn it with the very short time it was in develop.

The only reason Orange Box was Orange Box was because Valve had 3 completely different games and a compilation sounded like a good way of marketing it but the basis of the Orange Box was Ep2, TF2 and Portal. This game though, the remade game is the basis of it.

Originally posted by Smasandian
No, their not wrong about their own game, they're wrong about the Orange Box.

Again, the Orange Box was sold because of three completely new games. They added HL2 and Episode 1 as a bonus for the fans who wanted to try the first two in the series.

This is different. They remade the game (or just added more graphics and a few game play enhancements) and retailed it as a new game. Because of the shit that happened with the Activision merger, they decided to add a new 10 hour campaign to it. If it was like Orange Box, this would included that new 10 campaign (which started in May, or June so who knows if its good or not), the original game (without out being remade) and 2 other new games.

All I'm saying is that I wish they decided to leave the original alone (which had no problems with it) and make a completely new game from scratch. There was no reason to remake it all and it was kinda of lame to expect people to buy the game when it was only released a few years ago and had no major problems with it. Luckily, we get another campaign from it, but who knows how good it will turn it with the very short time it was in develop.

The only reason Orange Box was Orange Box was because Valve had 3 completely different games and a compilation sounded like a good way of marketing it but the basis of the Orange Box was Ep2, TF2 and Portal. This game though, the remade game is the basis of it.

The creators of the game are the ones who said it is like the orange box, their own LITTLE version of it, got it.

I will not answer to all of it but one part I will:

Conferming Information............................................Conferming Information Complete. They did it like that because they wanted you to go through the entire game again, with better AI, better weapon system, etc. People would return their game and get this because as I already said it will be an improved weapon system, and AI dude. There is a whole lot more added than what I said, and it will be great, because I can't wait to get thin game.

I understand why they are doing it.

Doesn't mean I have to agree with it. The game was great, so why make people buy it again with update gameplay mechanics. That's horrible.

Why couldn't they just make a sequel to the great game and not remake a game that people already have?

If Valve remade Half Life 2 with better AI and a better weapon system and made the price of it around 50 bucks. I wouldn't pick it up. Why? Because they shouldn't do that.

Hopefully this isn't the case with other developers. It's wrong to make a game, charge full price, and then redo it and then charge full price again.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I understand why they are doing it.

Doesn't mean I have to agree with it. The game was great, so why make people buy it again with update gameplay mechanics. That's horrible.

Why couldn't they just make a sequel to the great game and not remake a game that people already have?

If Valve remade Half Life 2 with better AI and a better weapon system and made the price of it around 50 bucks. I wouldn't pick it up. Why? Because they shouldn't do that.

Hopefully this isn't the case with other developers. It's wrong to make a game, charge full price, and then redo it and then charge full price again.

I know, doesn't mean you have to, but you have no say in the matter.

Because they thought it would be good if they remade the 1st one, and did the 2nd one mixed together. Some people didn't understand that.

I probably might, but not for 50 bucks. I would wait for the price to go down and have it used.

I know, it isn't that smart, but hey, if it works, it works, and if it doesn't, it doesn't.

True, but the only reason there is a second part of the game is because of the Activision merger. If that didnt happen, or they continued to fund the project, the remade game would of been released without the extra content.

Remake the game 10-15 years when the game is completely obsolete. It isn't though, especially for the PC and expecting people to pay for the remade game because it offers fixes for the problems the original had is plain wrong.

Originally posted by Smasandian
True, but the only reason there is a second part of the game is because of the Activision merger. If that didnt happen, or they continued to fund the project, the remade game would of been released without the extra content.

Remake the game 10-15 years when the game is completely obsolete. It isn't though, especially for the PC and expecting people to pay for the remade game because it offers fixes for the problems the original had is plain wrong.

Dude, the game wouldn't have been released again if there wasn't anything new to it. If it didn't have bigger areas, improved weapons, improved AI, etc, then they never would have came out with it again, and just have the Dark Athena part.

I don't know what you are talking about. There was nothing wrong with the game. They are improving stuff, not fixing the problems, because there were no major problems in the original games. Butcher Bay is just giving improvments, not fixing problems, and Dark Athena gets the same improvments, not fixed problems.

FYI, my dad played through the game 5 timesjawdrop, and he had no problems with it at all.

Also, improving stuff isn't the same thing as fixing problems, just in case you don't know.

New is about content and meaningful content at that. New weapons, improved AI and "bigger areas" is not what I consider content. I consider that as a patch, or a game update. Generally, those are free in the PC world, and maybe 5 bucks on XBOX Live.

I know there isn't any major problems but if their re releasing an 3-4 old game and doing what you say, improving the game, then obviously the developers feel that they could of done something better with the game. That's what improving means. It's the positive word for fixing the problems the developers thought wasn't as good. If they didn't think anything was wrong with the game, why would they feel the need to remake the same game? Why would they need to improve the AI, if their wasn't anything wrong with the AI?

Originally posted by Smasandian
New is about content and meaningful content at that. New weapons, improved AI and "bigger areas" is not what I consider content. I consider that as a patch, or a game update. Generally, those are free in the PC world, and maybe 5 bucks on XBOX Live.

I know there isn't any major problems but if their re releasing an 3-4 old game and doing what you say, improving the game, then obviously the developers feel that they could of done something better with the game. That's what improving means. It's the positive word for fixing the problems the developers thought wasn't as good. If they didn't think anything was wrong with the game, why would they feel the need to remake the same game? Why would they need to improve the AI, if their wasn't anything wrong with the AI?

There is more than just new weapons, bigger areas, and better AI, I just didn't put them down.

No, you got it wrong. The improvments they did to Dark Athena they thought was awesome, and they wanted to do the same thing to Butcher Bay because of how well it turned out in Dark Athena. Why would they have to fix problems they don't even have. You also have improving messed up. And as I already said, there is more than what I said to the remade game. I guess they wanted to make the AI stronger or something. Don't know the details.

You know that the add on campaign has only been in production for 6-8 months or so?

The original idea was to remake Butchers Bay.

Originally posted by Smasandian
You know that the add on campaign has only been in production for 6-8 months or so?

The original idea was to remake Butchers Bay.

Oh, I flipped it, thanks for catching my mistake. What I meant was taht it was so good, they wanted to put another part on, and it worked on both. The game will be twice the size as the other, better AI, and better weapons, and more. That right there seems cool, and I don't know what else you want.

Well, that they spent their time making a new game, either in the Riddick universe, or a completely new setting.

They seem to be pretty talented bunch of individuals. I wish they spend that time making some cool and new instead of redoing a game that didn't need to be redone.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Well, that they spent their time making a new game, either in the Riddick universe, or a completely new setting.

They seem to be pretty talented bunch of individuals. I wish they spend that time making some cool and new instead of redoing a game that didn't need to be redone.

I think it will be a great game. Butcher Bay was a big hit, now with the new stuff that they added in it, people should buy this.

Originally posted by Smasandian
New is about content and meaningful content at that. New weapons, improved AI and "bigger areas" is not what I consider content. I consider that as a patch, or a game update. Generally, those are free in the PC world, and maybe 5 bucks on XBOX Live.

I know there isn't any major problems but if their re releasing an 3-4 old game and doing what you say, improving the game, then obviously the developers feel that they could of done something better with the game. That's what improving means. It's the positive word for fixing the problems the developers thought wasn't as good. If they didn't think anything was wrong with the game, why would they feel the need to remake the same game? Why would they need to improve the AI, if their wasn't anything wrong with the AI?

Just read over this last post again, and I think you are misinformed. As computing power I.E. Xbox360, PS3 inproves any game can be improved. I think the developers wanted to give people a chance who maybe hadn't played the original game a chance to try it. Along the way they've added significant improvements to the core gameplay and a second area to the game making this "update/expansion well worth the money. The game is going to be twice as big as the original and the original Buthcher Bay part is supposed to have significant changes to its envirorments as well. It's not going to be a $5 update anywhere, just like the expansion pack for Halo3 won't be $5 either on xbox live.

Again, I understand there's a new campaign and that is all fine and dandy but the original idea was to remake a game that didn't need to be remade and expecting people who already bought the game to pay again just for some added features like improved AI and some bigger areas and better graphics.

The idea was brought up because for some reason, Butchers Bay couldn't be emulated. That's the reason why the game is being remade.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Again, I understand there's a new campaign and that is all fine and dandy but the original idea was to remake a game that didn't need to be remade and expecting people who already bought the game to pay again just for some added features like improved AI and some bigger areas and better graphics.

The idea was brought up because for some reason, Butchers Bay couldn't be emulated. That's the reason why the game is being remade.

Which is all right. Nothing wrong with remaking a game to improve the graphics, better AI, better weapons, and twice the size as the last one at all.

I have no idea where you are getting this info, but you are misinformed, and incorrect.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/792/792189p1.html

"GN: It's only been a few years since the original Riddick game was release on Xbox; Why revisit it and not just work on an all-new game?

Ian Stevens: For a while we were trying to get the original game onto the backwards compatibility list for the Xbox 360 and Microsoft seemed to have some pretty fair reasons why it couldn't do it. We were disappointed with that conclusion and we've seen the same disappointment in the community, so we felt compelled to find some kind of way around that."

"The fact that we were already working with new technology for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 platforms lead to some obvious ideas, and the new technology is based on what we developed for Escape from Butcher Bay, so the subject of a remake came up pretty quickly."

"We also had some hesitation about moving too quickly into a sequel. The story we tell in Escape from Butcher Bay is an important one, and we felt like it was a better decision to get that experience into the hands of a larger audience before moving on to something new and creating some gaps for gamers that had never played the original."

Originally posted by Smasandian
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/792/792189p1.html

"GN: It's only been a few years since the original Riddick game was release on Xbox; Why revisit it and not just work on an all-new game?

Ian Stevens: For a while we were trying to get the original game onto the backwards compatibility list for the Xbox 360 and Microsoft seemed to have some pretty fair reasons why it couldn't do it. We were disappointed with that conclusion and we've seen the same disappointment in the community, so we felt compelled to find some kind of way around that."

"The fact that we were already working with new technology for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 platforms lead to some obvious ideas, and the new technology is based on what we developed for Escape from Butcher Bay, so the subject of a remake came up pretty quickly."

"We also had some hesitation about moving too quickly into a sequel. The story we tell in Escape from Butcher Bay is an important one, and we felt like it was a better decision to get that experience into the hands of a larger audience before moving on to something new and creating some gaps for gamers that had never played the original."

This what I have been trying to tell you. You just pretty much answered your own question.

Nevermind.

Your not getting it.

I think its bad. I think its wrong to remake a game that doesn't need to be remade and expecting people to pay full price for it. No matter what you say about how improved it doesn't change my view of it. It didn't need to be improved.

Get it now?

Now knowing that there is a second campaign does lighten the fact that I would be repaying for the same game I have on my shelf and I would think of getting it if the second campaign is of good quality like the original game and not some tacked on campaign it might turn out to be.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Nevermind.

Your not getting it.

I think its bad. I think its wrong to remake a game that doesn't need to be remade and expecting people to pay full price for it. No matter what you say about how improved it doesn't change my view of it. It didn't need to be improved.

Get it now?

Now knowing that there is a second campaign does lighten the fact that I would be repaying for the same game I have on my shelf and I would think of getting it if the second campaign is of good quality like the original game and not some tacked on campaign it might turn out to be.

No, it is you who isn't getting it. Not only will it have all of those things, but now it will have Online Multiplayer with 20 different maps. Now what is wrong with putting Butcher Bay in to get all of those things? Now is it worth of trying?

Nevermind.

Well, I don't know what your point you are trying to prove dude. You answered your own question o.k. something that I was trying to tell you, I don't know what else you want.

My point was that I rather have a sequel than a remake of a game. I had no questions. I know what the game was about it and why they are doing it.

Originally posted by Smasandian
My point was that I rather have a sequel than a remake of a game. I had no questions. I know what the game was about it and why they are doing it.

It kind of is a sequal, it's just Butcher Bay put together with Assault on Dark Athena, so in is kinda like a sequal.

That's was before they decided to create another campaign in June of this year.

I wish they took the last 2-3 years to create a kickass sequel, not 6-8 months.

Originally posted by Smasandian
That's was before they decided to create another campaign in June of this year.

I wish they took the last 2-3 years to create a kickass sequel, not 6-8 months.

It is the same thing. They didn't change it.

It will still kickass.

That annoying pop up loading screen is back. For five years, they couldn't remove the thing?

Dark Athena isn't exactly what you would call game of the year. Some say that you should stick to Butcher Bay other than Dark Athena because it's awful. It's more run and shoot than stealth, the AI is lacking, the story is bad, the multiplayer isn't good, and even I can come up with better game characters. These newbies in the Riddickverse are lame. What else is unbelievable is that you'll literally run around in circles. After a cut scene is over, norally the game would have your charcter aiming in the direction he looked in the cut scene but isn't. You think you're going in the right way but a few minutes later you'll realize you've been going in the wrong direction. With this annoying thing happening, gamers will want to think about taking the bread crumb trail out of Fable II and into Dark Athena. Because of this game being more of a run and shoot than stealth (which the people who made this game promised), it's annoying because Riddick doesn't have any armor on him, just a tank top so the the health bar will go down really fast. Dark Athena is pretty much a game for those who hadn't played Butcher Bay and if you played Butcher Bay, stick to that game. There are positive things with this game. Graphics are good and shiny, there are some good (not many) moments when you do stealth, and driving around in a walker or two is fun.

Won't listen to your post, and will try it for myself.