Wet Announced for September 15th, Economy Be Damned

Wet Announced for September 15th, Economy Be Damned

image

Some developers may be afraid of the down economy, but stores will at least have one interesting shooter on the shelves this Fall: Bethesda Softworks and A2M announced today that Wet will be released on September 15th for Xbox 360 and PS3.

"We are extremely excited to bring Wet to gamers on September 15th," said Vlatko Andonov, president of Bethesda Softworks. "A2M has created an explosive gaming experience and the action is non-stop from start to finish."

Although Fall is traditionally a time of peak excitement in the industry, when store shelves are flooded with games, this Fall is developing a reputation for being something of a let-down. Dark Void, BioShock 2, Mafia 2, Heavy Rain, Guild Wars 2 and more have all slipped their release dates into "early 2010" or beyond.

Bethesda's Pete Hines, however, says none of that concerns him. When asked if Wet's September release date was selected as a strategic move in response to competitors' fears about the economy, he responded:

"Wet is coming out in September because that's when it will be ready and we want to get it out so folks can play it. I think it's a really fun game, I've been enjoying playing it, and sitting on it because of whatever state the economy is in doesn't make any sense."

Wet, developed by Artificial Mind and Movement, and previewed at Bethesda's press event earlier this year in London, is a hyper-stylized action-shooter, starring Rubi, the female protagonist who's just as comfortable shooting you in the face as she is slashing your head off with a sword.

"We've worked really hard to make Wet different from any other action game available," said Patrick Fortier, Creative Director at A2M. "When players experience the game's unique blend of gunplay, sword combat and acrobatics, they won't want to put the controller down."

Permalink

According to sources, Wet = crazy "tarantino-esque" action, over the top storylines...

I can't wait...

Frankly, I think the other developpers are afraid people will only buy one 360 game, and that game would be Modern Warefare 2, or Assassin's Creed 2. Thats my opinion, well, the economy probably has something to do with it but I'd like to think my theory is better.

Y'know, a studio calling itself A2M releasing a game called "Wet" has some unfortunate implications to those with a dirty mind.

SimuLord:
Y'know, a studio calling itself A2M releasing a game called "Wet" has some unfortunate implications to those with a dirty mind.

You know it really didnt occur to me until you mentioned it, in fact i had to think about it for a moment lol. You sir have a filthy filthy mind.

xmetatr0nx:

SimuLord:
Y'know, a studio calling itself A2M releasing a game called "Wet" has some unfortunate implications to those with a dirty mind.

You know it really didnt occur to me until you mentioned it, in fact i had to think about it for a moment lol. You sir have a filthy filthy mind.

Could be worse. They could've gotten DVDA (the South Park guys' band) to do the soundtrack music.

SimuLord:

xmetatr0nx:

SimuLord:
Y'know, a studio calling itself A2M releasing a game called "Wet" has some unfortunate implications to those with a dirty mind.

You know it really didnt occur to me until you mentioned it, in fact i had to think about it for a moment lol. You sir have a filthy filthy mind.

Could be worse. They could've gotten DVDA (the South Park guys' band) to do the soundtrack music.

haha, oh that would have been almost too perfect...and the female lead should have been voiced by Jenna Haze. Oh how games corrupt young fragile minds. I wonder if anyone knows what the hell we're on about here.

So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

You will pop it in the drive and it will crash, and you will walk away with the realization that Bethesda doesn't fully take time to do something called "Programming"

sturryz:
You will pop it in the drive and it will crash, and you will walk away with the realization that Bethesda doesn't fully take time to do something called "Programming"

...Except I think Bethesda is only publishing it, not making it.

Also, i'm sure they cry themselves to sleep on their great big giant piles of money every night, just because you think that.

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

Aw. Tis' a shame that Heavy Rain and Wet aren't going to be released at the same time. I'm sure Yahtzee would have made a pun about it (or a **** joke.)

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

Both? I can't think of a single game without FMVs in it.

Amnestic:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

Both? I can't think of a single game without FMVs in it.

You need to play more than just Squaresoft titles.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Amnestic:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

Both? I can't think of a single game without FMVs in it.

You need to play more than just Squaresoft titles.

I'm gonna sit myself here while you find a game without an FMV in it for me. Current-generation if you please.

How enticing. Something's actually coming out in the fall!

Amnestic:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Amnestic:

Both? I can't think of a single game without FMVs in it.

You need to play more than just Squaresoft titles.

I'm gonna sit myself here while you find a game without an FMV in it for me. Current-generation if you please.

Half Life 2. Fallout 3. Possibly even Resident Evil 5, though that game has good enough graphics to not need FMV. Of course, now we're going to get into the semantic argument of what defines an "FMV" when you insist that all three of those games do in fact have FMVs. (Edit: Actually nevermind, I seem to recall a brief FMV sequence at the very beginning of RE5.)

I could probably cite more examples, but I'm heading to bed in just a moment so my mind doesn't exactly have much in the ways of focus right now.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

I'm here to play a fun game with good graphics.

Byers:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

I'm here to play a fun game with good graphics.

Then you really need to re-evaluate your priorities if the quality of graphics is a factor in how much you're able to enjoy a game.

When players experience the game's unique blend of gunplay, sword combat and acrobatics, they won't want to put the controller down.


or

Replaces monsters with gangsters is not that original.

Looks like Kill Bill: The Game, not that there's anything wrong with that. I'm especially glad to see that we'll actually get it this year along with L4D2, and I'll certainly endeavor to keep a close eye on this one.

that looks like an awesome game

glad they're taking a bit of a risk and releasing it when they are. so many good games coming out in the next few months

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
So it's basically Grindhouse - the game. The graphics look like playstation 2 however.

Which is one of the key problems with many gamers. Are you here to play a fun game, or to watch a movie?

I'm here to play a fun game with good graphics.

Then you really need to re-evaluate your priorities if the quality of graphics is a factor in how much you're able to enjoy a game.

Well, I'm awfully glad you're around to tell me what I need and need not do.

Regardless, the games I enjoy the most are the ones that immerses me the most in the story, atmosphere and game world. Only then does it truly become my idea of escapism. Effective graphics are a part of that. That isn't to say I want graphics that require a computer from the future to play (hello Crysis), but games released in 2009 that look like they were developed 5 years ago don't instantly catch my attention as a must play title.

Byers:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
I'm here to play a fun game with good graphics.

Then you really need to re-evaluate your priorities if the quality of graphics is a factor in how much you're able to enjoy a game.

Well, I'm awfully glad you're around to tell me what I need and need not do.

Regardless, the games I enjoy the most are the ones that immerses me the most in the story, atmosphere and game world. Only then does it truly become my idea of escapism. Effective graphics are a part of that. That isn't to say I want graphics that require a computer from the future to play (hello Crysis), but games released in 2009 that look like they were developed 5 years ago don't instantly catch my attention as a must play title.

The past 5 years has probably seen the least graphical improvements in any given 5-year span. Sure you could easily notice a graphical update going from Halo 2 to Halo 3, but to argue that either of them is lacking in the graphics department requires some very shallow thinking.

You claim that graphics are a part of getting immersed into a game. Yet the existence of novels proves you wrong.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:
I'm here to play a fun game with good graphics.

Then you really need to re-evaluate your priorities if the quality of graphics is a factor in how much you're able to enjoy a game.

Well, I'm awfully glad you're around to tell me what I need and need not do.

Regardless, the games I enjoy the most are the ones that immerses me the most in the story, atmosphere and game world. Only then does it truly become my idea of escapism. Effective graphics are a part of that. That isn't to say I want graphics that require a computer from the future to play (hello Crysis), but games released in 2009 that look like they were developed 5 years ago don't instantly catch my attention as a must play title.

The past 5 years has probably seen the least graphical improvements in any given 5-year span. Sure you could easily notice a graphical update going from Halo 2 to Halo 3, but to argue that either of them is lacking in the graphics department requires some very shallow thinking.

You claim that graphics are a part of getting immersed into a game. Yet the existence of novels proves you wrong.

A novel as a narrative is very different from a game. A game narrative is more akin to a movie, or TV series, as it's a visualized narrative. But an interactive one.

In a game, the central character is you. The point of view is yours. And while a novel explains the character's thoughts and feelings going through his head when pitted against the events and surroundings of a book, a properly immersive game should not be telling you how to feel or act when you face the various surroundings you face or events that transpire, but rather let you think and feel for yourself. The degree of this being possible is dependent on how well the game shows or illustrates these ideas to you. Simply writing something like "You find yourself facing a house of astounding beauty but with an underlying eerie atmosphere" in a text box on your screen does not in any way provoke the types of reactions from you that makes an interactive narrative effective. It needs to illustrate and make it come alive around you, at which point graphics, sound and music becomes vitally important tools.

As for the lasting power of game engines, it's true certain engines were sophisticated enough to be modified and developed for further use without looking terribly dated, like the Source engine (which was a product of a remarkable long and comprehensive development, I'm sure). But the game footage in question looked unremarkable even compared to a somewhat dated Source engine.

Byers:

A novel as a narrative is very different from a game. A game narrative is more akin to a movie, or TV series, as it's a visualized narrative. But an interactive one.

In a game, the central character is you. The point of view is yours. And while a novel explains the character's thoughts and feelings going through his head when pitted against the events and surroundings of a book, a properly immersive game should not be telling you how to feel or act when you face the various surroundings you face or events that transpire, but rather let you think and feel for yourself. The degree of this being possible is dependent on how well the game shows or illustrates these ideas to you. Simply writing something like "You find yourself facing a house of astounding beauty but with an underlying eerie atmosphere" in a text box on your screen does not in any way provoke the types of reactions from you that makes an interactive narrative effective. It needs to illustrate and make it come alive around you, at which point graphics, sound and music becomes vitally important tools.

As for the lasting power of game engines, it's true certain engines were sophisticated enough to be modified and developed for further use without looking terribly dated, like the Source engine (which was a product of a remarkable long and comprehensive development, I'm sure). But the game footage in question looked unremarkable even compared to a somewhat dated Source engine.

So... I decided to go and look at some screenshots to check out these "PS2 Graphics", and honestly, I wanna know what game you're talking about.

This is not PS2-quality graphics.
This is not PS2-quality graphics.
This is not PS2-quality graphics.
This is not PS2-quality graphics.

So I don't know which game you thought you were talking about, but it clearly isn't Wet.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:

A novel as a narrative is very different from a game. A game narrative is more akin to a movie, or TV series, as it's a visualized narrative. But an interactive one.

In a game, the central character is you. The point of view is yours. And while a novel explains the character's thoughts and feelings going through his head when pitted against the events and surroundings of a book, a properly immersive game should not be telling you how to feel or act when you face the various surroundings you face or events that transpire, but rather let you think and feel for yourself. The degree of this being possible is dependent on how well the game shows or illustrates these ideas to you. Simply writing something like "You find yourself facing a house of astounding beauty but with an underlying eerie atmosphere" in a text box on your screen does not in any way provoke the types of reactions from you that makes an interactive narrative effective. It needs to illustrate and make it come alive around you, at which point graphics, sound and music becomes vitally important tools.

As for the lasting power of game engines, it's true certain engines were sophisticated enough to be modified and developed for further use without looking terribly dated, like the Source engine (which was a product of a remarkable long and comprehensive development, I'm sure). But the game footage in question looked unremarkable even compared to a somewhat dated Source engine.

So... I decided to go and look at some screenshots to check out these "PS2 Graphics", and honestly, I wanna know what game you're talking about.

This is not PS2-quality graphics.
This is not PS2-quality graphics.
This is not PS2-quality graphics.
This is not PS2-quality graphics.

So I don't know which game you thought you were talking about, but it clearly isn't Wet.

Footage tells more than a thousand screenshots. My comment was mostly concerning the gameplay video I saw on the official website. Granted, the screenshots don't look too much more impressive to me than The Fall of Max Payne, a similar looking game released years back. However I haven't played "Wet" and will save my final judgment until then. But my initial impressions are that it will end up mediocre.

However, I find it amusing that suddenly in the discussion you go from defending the game's choice of having less than great graphics (and the claim that its an unimportant issue) to defending and lauding the graphics it has. It just feels like you're grasping for any straw you can to prove the whole line of reasoning behind the opinions I have as fallacious. Yet you didn't reply to a single point regarding my views on the importance of graphics in game development and games as a visual narrative, even though you were so eager to make wild claims that the mere existence of other narratives proved that I had to be wrong.

Byers:

Footage tells more than a thousand screenshots. My comment was mostly concerning the gameplay video I saw on the official website. Granted, the screenshots don't look too much more impressive to me than The Fall of Max Payne, a similar looking game released years back. However I haven't played "Wet" and will save my final judgment until then. But my initial impressions are that it will end up mediocre.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-09-wet/50274

Again. Not PS2-quality graphics. Perhaps it's early current-gen graphics at worst, but it's certainly far better than anything you'd see on the PS2.

However, I find it amusing that suddenly in the discussion you go from defending the game's choice of having less than great graphics (and the claim that its an unimportant issue) to defending and lauding the graphics it has. It just feels like you're grasping for any straw you can to prove the whole line of reasoning behind the opinions I have as fallacious. Yet you didn't reply to a single point regarding my views on the importance of graphics in game development and games as a visual narrative, even though you were so eager to make wild claims that the mere existence of other narratives proved that I had to be wrong.

I wasn't defending any game's choice. I was making a point that unless graphics are intrusively bad (like to the point where it's debatable what your character even is), then there's really no such thing as "bad graphics".

Frankly, I hadn't even seen the screens at the start of the discussion, I was simply pointing out the fallacy in complaining about graphics looking like they're from 5 years ago when graphics 5 years ago were not shitty by any standard that's feasibly plausible in current technology. Then I went and looked at some screens and trailers to get a better idea of what the game looked like, and was floored that you somehow think the graphics are shit.

Maybe you need to go back and play your PS2 again. I know I used to have a problem where if I hadn't played a game for a long time, my memory just kind of "updated the graphics" for me, then I'd go back and play the game again and be floored at how dated the game looked compared to what I remembered it looking like. Cause trust me, Wet does not have PS2-quality graphics.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Byers:

Footage tells more than a thousand screenshots. My comment was mostly concerning the gameplay video I saw on the official website. Granted, the screenshots don't look too much more impressive to me than The Fall of Max Payne, a similar looking game released years back. However I haven't played "Wet" and will save my final judgment until then. But my initial impressions are that it will end up mediocre.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-09-wet/50274

Again. Not PS2-quality graphics. Perhaps it's early current-gen graphics at worst, but it's certainly far better than anything you'd see on the PS2.

However, I find it amusing that suddenly in the discussion you go from defending the game's choice of having less than great graphics (and the claim that its an unimportant issue) to defending and lauding the graphics it has. It just feels like you're grasping for any straw you can to prove the whole line of reasoning behind the opinions I have as fallacious. Yet you didn't reply to a single point regarding my views on the importance of graphics in game development and games as a visual narrative, even though you were so eager to make wild claims that the mere existence of other narratives proved that I had to be wrong.

I wasn't defending any game's choice. I was making a point that unless graphics are intrusively bad (like to the point where it's debatable what your character even is), then there's really no such thing as "bad graphics".

Frankly, I hadn't even seen the screens at the start of the discussion, I was simply pointing out the fallacy in complaining about graphics looking like they're from 5 years ago when graphics 5 years ago were not shitty by any standard that's feasibly plausible in current technology. Then I went and looked at some screens and trailers to get a better idea of what the game looked like, and was floored that you somehow think the graphics are shit.

Maybe you need to go back and play your PS2 again. I know I used to have a problem where if I hadn't played a game for a long time, my memory just kind of "updated the graphics" for me, then I'd go back and play the game again and be floored at how dated the game looked compared to what I remembered it looking like. Cause trust me, Wet does not have PS2-quality graphics.

The PS2 was out for a few years, maybe pick a newer game.

Just play the trailer again and take a look at the close ups of the various characters. They look awkward and blocky to the point I associate with PS2 era models, such as titles as GTA and recent tomb raiders (Not so much the main character itself, which seems to be more anti-aliased and with more polygons than the rest of the characters - it seems obvious that they spent a little more time on her but didn't bother to put in as much time on the rest).
And this is with highly stylized effects such as Grindhouse-style dust and scratches, and burn away frames, which I can only guess has been added to the video to make it look better.
Most of the car scenes and explosions also display moderate framerate drops to the point where I can see from the video it would be painful for me to play. And that's on a gameplay trailer, which isn't liable to be played on anything less than an amazing computer. However, it's hard to deduce how hard it would be to play, since most of the trailer is made up by what appears to be in game cutscenes - also, I have to suspect, to make it look better. The fact that with all these tricks and touches it still manages to look mediocre, only reinforces my initial impressions.

Although, I have to say, I'm getting tired of the lengths I'm forced to go to justify my own opinions.

Ugh....I hate September. I have all this time but not much to do, while the stuff I could be wasting this time on wont be around till Im busy with school. MUA2 is also out on Sept 15th, so Ill be getting em together it seems, while I DONT play them cause of class. Christmas should be in June.

I will definetly try this one out. It's Bethesda's first try at a pure action game.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here