In August 2010 an official message was posted on the North American Huxley forums at IJJI. Huxley for the North American region will now be self hosted by Webzen.
-------
Dead? Doesn't sound like it. But who knows. It'll probably be another 5 years before this thing gets released.
And by the time Webzen gets off their ass, noone is even going to look at Huxley.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Can't say I'm sorry in some respects if this has come to a close.
Huxley, like Global Agenda, had the potential to be a proper sci-fi tactical shooter as a true successor to Planetside, a niche that has yet to be intelligently filled. Planetside itself is still trucking along due to the fact that nothing else has really challenged it's gaming niche (and it is just a shame that Planetside couldn't finally decide what it wanted to be rather than building mechanics of foolish appeasement for 'cool factor' only over time).
Huxley was a doomed game from the moment the devs foolishly decided to support 'battle pogo' as their primary form of combat while putting in lots of interesting, well thought out abilities that simply do not work in an environment for tactical advantage if everyone is bouncing around all over the map with splash damage weapons as the optimal strategy. This is doubly true the moment you put vehicular combat into the model.
It trivialized their otherwise potentially good combat offering and core gameplay out of some ridiculously stubborn pre-conceived notion on the part of development that this was a feature and not a liability. I know not one single beta player who believed this was a good feature, and it was so completely decried they had to specifically say NOT to talk about it in their suggestions material.
Huxley had tremendous flavour and real opportunity, squandered into irrelevance. That's a real shame.
Arrakeyn
"The only thing man learns from the study of history is that man does not learn from the study of history." ~ G. Santayana
Can't say I'm sorry in some respects if this has come to a close.
Huxley, like Global Agenda, had the potential to be a proper sci-fi tactical shooter as a true successor to Planetside, a niche that has yet to be intelligently filled. Planetside itself is still trucking along due to the fact that nothing else has really challenged it's gaming niche (and it is just a shame that Planetside couldn't finally decide what it wanted to be rather than building mechanics of foolish appeasement for 'cool factor' only over time).
Huxley was a doomed game from the moment the devs foolishly decided to support 'battle pogo' as their primary form of combat while putting in lots of interesting, well thought out abilities that simply do not work in an environment for tactical advantage if everyone is bouncing around all over the map with splash damage weapons as the optimal strategy. This is doubly true the moment you put vehicular combat into the model.
It trivialized their otherwise potentially good combat offering and core gameplay out of some ridiculously stubborn pre-conceived notion on the part of development that this was a feature and not a liability. I know not one single beta player who believed this was a good feature, and it was so completely decried they had to specifically say NOT to talk about it in their suggestions material.
Huxley had tremendous flavour and real opportunity, squandered into irrelevance. That's a real shame.
Arrakeyn
"The only thing man learns from the study of history is that man does not learn from the study of history." ~ G. Santayana
Hahahahaha....Are you serious? If you had looked at anything involving Huxley, you would have seen that Huxley at its core was a Deathmatch and CTF/point driven game. Have you ever played a first person shooter? Have you ever played a competitive first person shooter? Since the days of Quake and Unreal Tournament after that, bunny hopping has been a part of competitive FPS's.
What you imply is just wrong. Saying they killed Huxley by supporting bunny hopping is like saying any game killed itself by adding a fishing profession. Noone's forcing you to bunny hop, and if you can't hit the enemy while they're bunny hopping, you need to learn to aim better. Put a little more thought into your strategy instead of just point and shoot.
Almost forgot to mention. I was in the CB and enjoyed every bunny hopping minute of it. I played an avenger and a sniper.
The big problems Huxley had:
Peer to Peer hosting = people hosting with horrible internet connections. Think MW2 but with little to no matchmaking solution.
Horrible scheduling/releasing on time/ever releasing whatever. I have lost interest but may try it again anyways if it ever comes out!
Hahahahaha....Are you serious? If you had looked at anything involving Huxley, you would have seen that Huxley at its core was a Deathmatch and CTF/point driven game. Have you ever played a first person shooter? Have you ever played a competitive first person shooter? Since the days of Quake and Unreal Tournament after that, bunny hopping has been a part of competitive FPS's.
What you imply is just wrong. Saying they killed Huxley by supporting bunny hopping is like saying any game killed itself by adding a fishing profession. Noone's forcing you to bunny hop, and if you can't hit the enemy while they're bunny hopping, you need to learn to aim better. Put a little more thought into your strategy instead of just point and shoot.
Almost forgot to mention. I was in the CB and enjoyed every bunny hopping minute of it. I played an avenger and a sniper.
The big problems Huxley had:
Peer to Peer hosting = people hosting with horrible internet connections. Think MW2 but with little to no matchmaking solution.
Horrible scheduling/releasing on time/ever releasing whatever. I have lost interest but may try it again anyways if it ever comes out!
You're entitled to your opinion and preferences same as I'm entitled to mine.
And I didn't say I couldn't hit anything, quite the contrary. It was, however, just silly and not remotely the gameplay experience I or anyone else I knew was looking for from the game. Perhaps we were misguided in believing it was a potential Planetside successor; entirely possible.
Fact is the battle pogo just isn't as much fun for people wanting a tactical game. If Huxley was not intending to be that game, so be it. You say it wasn't. I say it was. And if you were in the beta you know what I said was absolutely true that there was enough dissension about the style of play that the dev's did indeed have to expressly forbid it as a topic.
Interesting though that where I say it was a flaw hurting it's popularity, appeal and overall gameplay and you say it was wonderful that the game has completely failed to make it to market in a timely fashion.
The game had a lot of potential. I just think that bunny hopping is always less desirable in a tactical environment and I'm not alone in that assessment. It's not that you can't hit anything. It just looks, feels and presents stupidly in something that otherwise did a pretty good job at creating a nice techy, gritty atmosphere. Huxley had it's merits on that we both agree.
We disagree that core game mechanics was one of them.
This game was not received very well by the eastern community. Don't get your hopes up for this title.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Hahahahaha....Are you serious? If you had looked at anything involving Huxley, you would have seen that Huxley at its core was a Deathmatch and CTF/point driven game. Have you ever played a first person shooter? Have you ever played a competitive first person shooter? Since the days of Quake and Unreal Tournament after that, bunny hopping has been a part of competitive FPS's.
What you imply is just wrong. Saying they killed Huxley by supporting bunny hopping is like saying any game killed itself by adding a fishing profession. Noone's forcing you to bunny hop, and if you can't hit the enemy while they're bunny hopping, you need to learn to aim better. Put a little more thought into your strategy instead of just point and shoot.
Almost forgot to mention. I was in the CB and enjoyed every bunny hopping minute of it. I played an avenger and a sniper.
The big problems Huxley had:
Peer to Peer hosting = people hosting with horrible internet connections. Think MW2 but with little to no matchmaking solution.
Horrible scheduling/releasing on time/ever releasing whatever. I have lost interest but may try it again anyways if it ever comes out!
You're entitled to your opinion and preferences same as I'm entitled to mine.
And I didn't say I couldn't hit anything, quite the contrary. It was, however, just silly and not remotely the gameplay experience I or anyone else I knew was looking for from the game. Perhaps we were misguided in believing it was a potential Planetside successor; entirely possible.
Fact is the battle pogo just isn't as much fun for people wanting a tactical game. If Huxley was not intending to be that game, so be it. You say it wasn't. I say it was. And if you were in the beta you know what I said was absolutely true that there was enough dissension about the style of play that the dev's did indeed have to expressly forbid it as a topic.
Interesting though that where I say it was a flaw hurting it's popularity, appeal and overall gameplay and you say it was wonderful that the game has completely failed to make it to market in a timely fashion.
The game had a lot of potential. I just think that bunny hopping is always less desirable in a tactical environment and I'm not alone in that assessment. It's not that you can't hit anything. It just looks, feels and presents stupidly in something that otherwise did a pretty good job at creating a nice techy, gritty atmosphere. Huxley had it's merits on that we both agree.
We disagree that core game mechanics was one of them.
I was a forum regular on Huxley fansites (and the short lived official forum Webzen had) for a very long time. I have seen this argument time and time again of what. I'm not saying what is right, what is wrong, what the game should have been or wasn't. Here is a nice little run down for you.
Huxley was ALWAYS, I will repeat, ALWAYS advertised as a Quake/Unreal Style game. If the art style alone wasn't enough proof of their inspiration then the old press releases when the game was first being murmered about even said as such. This last bit isn't jsut for you but all the people who have played this in some shape or form. You were not lied too! Huxley did under deleiver in the end during the CB, but not in the "tactics" department you like to complain about oh so much.
"Battle Pogo" as you like to call is a valid style of FPS gameplay, whether you like it or not. I'm not forcing you to, but understand that multiple games have done this and been succesfull
Also, just becuase a game is fast doesn't mean it isn't "tactical" the definition of that word gets abused way too often on gaming forums everywhere, not just Huxley. I'll take a game of Battlefield over UT and it's onsluaght mode most days but that doesn't mean that UT isn't fun as hell and doesn't require coordination and teamwork to accomplish a team goal, it simply plays differently. Personally, I think this stle is fun as hell and I miss it no adays in my shooters.
I was a forum regular on Huxley fansites (and the short lived official forum Webzen had) for a very long time. I have seen this argument time and time again of what. I'm not saying what is right, what is wrong, what the game should have been or wasn't. Here is a nice little run down for you.
Huxley was ALWAYS, I will repeat, ALWAYS advertised as a Quake/Unreal Style game. If the art style alone wasn't enough proof of their inspiration then the old press releases when the game was first being murmered about even said as such. This last bit isn't jsut for you but all the people who have played this in some shape or form. You were not lied too! Huxley did under deleiver in the end during the CB, but not in the "tactics" department you like to complain about oh so much.
"Battle Pogo" as you like to call is a valid style of FPS gameplay, whether you like it or not. I'm not forcing you to, but understand that multiple games have done this and been succesfull
Also, just becuase a game is fast doesn't mean it isn't "tactical" the definition of that word gets abused way too often on gaming forums everywhere, not just Huxley. I'll take a game of Battlefield over UT and it's onsluaght mode most days but that doesn't mean that UT isn't fun as hell and doesn't require coordination and teamwork to accomplish a team goal, it simply plays differently. Personally, I think this stle is fun as hell and I miss it no adays in my shooters.
Fair enough. You say that it was advertised as that style of play, but I would point out that the bulk of their promotional material presented a far different style and feel to their environment. I challenge you to get the sense of battle pogo from their introductory cinema, for instance. It may be fair to say that they were not outright deceptive, I'll grant you that. But it doesn't appear they did themselves any favours either.
I'm glad to see you agree they under delivered (a depressingly common trend in any online game where they believe they can 'add more later' it seems). Personally, I believe a fundamental component of that under delivery was slaving themselves to a play style that didn't mesh well with their overall game feel and gameplay proposition.
And let's be clear, I have no objection to 'fast'. You are right, that bouncing around like that does have the capacity to be a fun and engaging FPS style. But it suits a very specific set of variables, in my opinion, and Huxley wasn't them. Tribes could also be considered an FPS with an excellent vertical component, but it wasn't the rubber boots bouncing battle Huxley was.
I'll concede the point that Huxley may just very well not have been for me or those I game with and I'm well aware many games have done that style of play successfully. But the moment we are talking about tactical games, the focus is on teamwork and objective handling rather than deathmatch/frag fest as a general rule. Speed, you are quite right, has nothing to do with that. Huxley, in my opinion, offered little in the way of genuine tactical play and anchored itself in mechanics and styles solely suited for deathmatch gaming.
Ultimately, we are just going to disagree on it's merits and flaws. But if you think I was suggesting they had deliberately bait and switched, I will retract any such aspersion, as that is apparently unfounded. However, I think that whether or not that was a deliberate measure, the gameplay blend they went for was unfortunate in direction, unfun and poorly executed.
I do respect however your efforts to present your case honestly and intelligently though the oh so much was a bit offside .
Thank god its finally dead. They're been working/releasing this game for about 5 years now. I heard about this/saw footage of the game when I first started playing guild wars.
I was a forum regular on Huxley fansites (and the short lived official forum Webzen had) for a very long time. I have seen this argument time and time again of what. I'm not saying what is right, what is wrong, what the game should have been or wasn't. Here is a nice little run down for you.
Huxley was ALWAYS, I will repeat, ALWAYS advertised as a Quake/Unreal Style game. If the art style alone wasn't enough proof of their inspiration then the old press releases when the game was first being murmered about even said as such. This last bit isn't jsut for you but all the people who have played this in some shape or form. You were not lied too! Huxley did under deleiver in the end during the CB, but not in the "tactics" department you like to complain about oh so much.
"Battle Pogo" as you like to call is a valid style of FPS gameplay, whether you like it or not. I'm not forcing you to, but understand that multiple games have done this and been succesfull
Also, just becuase a game is fast doesn't mean it isn't "tactical" the definition of that word gets abused way too often on gaming forums everywhere, not just Huxley. I'll take a game of Battlefield over UT and it's onsluaght mode most days but that doesn't mean that UT isn't fun as hell and doesn't require coordination and teamwork to accomplish a team goal, it simply plays differently. Personally, I think this stle is fun as hell and I miss it no adays in my shooters.
Fair enough. You say that it was advertised as that style of play, but I would point out that the bulk of their promotional material presented a far different style and feel to their environment. I challenge you to get the sense of battle pogo from their introductory cinema, for instance. It may be fair to say that they were not outright deceptive, I'll grant you that. But it doesn't appear they did themselves any favours either.
I'm glad to see you agree they under delivered (a depressingly common trend in any online game where they believe they can 'add more later' it seems). Personally, I believe a fundamental component of that under delivery was slaving themselves to a play style that didn't mesh well with their overall game feel and gameplay proposition.
And let's be clear, I have no objection to 'fast'. You are right, that bouncing around like that does have the capacity to be a fun and engaging FPS style. But it suits a very specific set of variables, in my opinion, and Huxley wasn't them. Tribes could also be considered an FPS with an excellent vertical component, but it wasn't the rubber boots bouncing battle Huxley was.
I'll concede the point that Huxley may just very well not have been for me or those I game with and I'm well aware many games have done that style of play successfully. But the moment we are talking about tactical games, the focus is on teamwork and objective handling rather than deathmatch/frag fest as a general rule. Speed, you are quite right, has nothing to do with that. Huxley, in my opinion, offered little in the way of genuine tactical play and anchored itself in mechanics and styles solely suited for deathmatch gaming.
Ultimately, we are just going to disagree on it's merits and flaws. But if you think I was suggesting they had deliberately bait and switched, I will retract any such aspersion, as that is apparently unfounded. However, I think that whether or not that was a deliberate measure, the gameplay blend they went for was unfortunate in direction, unfun and poorly executed.
I do respect however your efforts to present your case honestly and intelligently though the oh so much was a bit offside .
Haha, I'm glad we can agree to disagree, and then agree again. Honestly I wrote that coming off a bad day so if i was a tad overbaord, well my bad.
I was actually afraid I was gonna get a long angry reply but was pleasently surprised by this. Essentially my argument was about the idea of the bait and switch as you mentioned it as that definitely appears to be how people reacted to it. However, quick question, what cinematic are you refering too exactly. the one opening the game or the original teaser trailer with doc Huxley in it?
I kind of forgot to check the theread again so that is the reason for a late reply. On a positive note. Here's to hoping the planetside sequel delivers some goods.
It seems that ijji have dropped Huxley from their games lists and even their forum.
Good bye Huxley i hope someone else will revive it !
I'd suggest looking up APB Revived....probably more of a chance there.
Eh, I don't know man. APB had a lot of problems, awesome ideas, but ssorta like Huxley it really under delivered in my opinion. We will see if that is actually coming to fruitiion and if they actually manage to fix things.
But ya, I don't think that there is much if any chance of seeing this game pop up in the future. If it does i'm sure it will be mentioned but i wouldn't sit around waiting for it,
Comments
I wonder if Webzen is even doing anything?
Maybe they just took away the rights from ijji or something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huxley_(video_game)
In August 2010 an official message was posted on the North American Huxley forums at IJJI. Huxley for the North American region will now be self hosted by Webzen.
-------
Dead? Doesn't sound like it. But who knows. It'll probably be another 5 years before this thing gets released.
Dead. lol
It was never really alive to begin with.
And by the time Webzen gets off their ass, noone is even going to look at Huxley.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Can't say I'm sorry in some respects if this has come to a close.
Huxley, like Global Agenda, had the potential to be a proper sci-fi tactical shooter as a true successor to Planetside, a niche that has yet to be intelligently filled. Planetside itself is still trucking along due to the fact that nothing else has really challenged it's gaming niche (and it is just a shame that Planetside couldn't finally decide what it wanted to be rather than building mechanics of foolish appeasement for 'cool factor' only over time).
Huxley was a doomed game from the moment the devs foolishly decided to support 'battle pogo' as their primary form of combat while putting in lots of interesting, well thought out abilities that simply do not work in an environment for tactical advantage if everyone is bouncing around all over the map with splash damage weapons as the optimal strategy. This is doubly true the moment you put vehicular combat into the model.
It trivialized their otherwise potentially good combat offering and core gameplay out of some ridiculously stubborn pre-conceived notion on the part of development that this was a feature and not a liability. I know not one single beta player who believed this was a good feature, and it was so completely decried they had to specifically say NOT to talk about it in their suggestions material.
Huxley had tremendous flavour and real opportunity, squandered into irrelevance. That's a real shame.
Arrakeyn
"The only thing man learns from the study of history is that man does not learn from the study of history." ~ G. Santayana
Not yet... While it's not looking great for the game and it certainly looks like it is at the very least, a long ways off:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/111/1116725p1.html
I still have hope.
edit: forgot to put link in... doh
Wildstar:
Phantazm, Pago(PvP), Exiles
Guild: Socks with Sandals
Playing: Wildstar
Retired/Tried: DCUO. The Secret World, Darkfall UW, Darkfall, Mortal Online, DDO, Rift, Fallen Earth, Aion, APB, EQ, EQ2, PoTBS, WoW, WAR, SWG, CoX, Vangaurd, CO, GW, EVE, DAoC, LotRO, SW:ToR, GW2, Dragon Nest
lol i saw tons of prepaid game cards with Huxley all over 'em when i went to pick up my PWI $$ card..
Wonder why they'd still advertise it, if it never got a release in the NA anyways lol.
Currently Playing:
Rift + Starcraft II + Gears Of War 3 Beta
im guessing thats why my gamestop doesnt carry these cards anymore but ya im sure it will get revived by someone maybe not soon but in good time.
If your going to ban the trolls please for our sake ban the Fan Boys too.
Hahahahaha....Are you serious? If you had looked at anything involving Huxley, you would have seen that Huxley at its core was a Deathmatch and CTF/point driven game. Have you ever played a first person shooter? Have you ever played a competitive first person shooter? Since the days of Quake and Unreal Tournament after that, bunny hopping has been a part of competitive FPS's.
What you imply is just wrong. Saying they killed Huxley by supporting bunny hopping is like saying any game killed itself by adding a fishing profession. Noone's forcing you to bunny hop, and if you can't hit the enemy while they're bunny hopping, you need to learn to aim better. Put a little more thought into your strategy instead of just point and shoot.
Almost forgot to mention. I was in the CB and enjoyed every bunny hopping minute of it. I played an avenger and a sniper.
The big problems Huxley had:
Peer to Peer hosting = people hosting with horrible internet connections. Think MW2 but with little to no matchmaking solution.
Horrible scheduling/releasing on time/ever releasing whatever. I have lost interest but may try it again anyways if it ever comes out!
You're entitled to your opinion and preferences same as I'm entitled to mine.
And I didn't say I couldn't hit anything, quite the contrary. It was, however, just silly and not remotely the gameplay experience I or anyone else I knew was looking for from the game. Perhaps we were misguided in believing it was a potential Planetside successor; entirely possible.
Fact is the battle pogo just isn't as much fun for people wanting a tactical game. If Huxley was not intending to be that game, so be it. You say it wasn't. I say it was. And if you were in the beta you know what I said was absolutely true that there was enough dissension about the style of play that the dev's did indeed have to expressly forbid it as a topic.
Interesting though that where I say it was a flaw hurting it's popularity, appeal and overall gameplay and you say it was wonderful that the game has completely failed to make it to market in a timely fashion.
The game had a lot of potential. I just think that bunny hopping is always less desirable in a tactical environment and I'm not alone in that assessment. It's not that you can't hit anything. It just looks, feels and presents stupidly in something that otherwise did a pretty good job at creating a nice techy, gritty atmosphere. Huxley had it's merits on that we both agree.
We disagree that core game mechanics was one of them.
release date: est.rel 2010
its getting awfull close for no news.
This game was not received very well by the eastern community. Don't get your hopes up for this title.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Really not enough to it to make it cost effective I think.
I enjoyed the time I was playing it.
No news? Are you kidding me, you honestly couldn't be farther off.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/299023/What-does-this-mean.html
I take it your the kind of person that just sits back and does nothing while everybody else is doing something useful.
That was Legit.
I was a forum regular on Huxley fansites (and the short lived official forum Webzen had) for a very long time. I have seen this argument time and time again of what. I'm not saying what is right, what is wrong, what the game should have been or wasn't. Here is a nice little run down for you.
Huxley was ALWAYS, I will repeat, ALWAYS advertised as a Quake/Unreal Style game. If the art style alone wasn't enough proof of their inspiration then the old press releases when the game was first being murmered about even said as such. This last bit isn't jsut for you but all the people who have played this in some shape or form. You were not lied too! Huxley did under deleiver in the end during the CB, but not in the "tactics" department you like to complain about oh so much.
"Battle Pogo" as you like to call is a valid style of FPS gameplay, whether you like it or not. I'm not forcing you to, but understand that multiple games have done this and been succesfull
Also, just becuase a game is fast doesn't mean it isn't "tactical" the definition of that word gets abused way too often on gaming forums everywhere, not just Huxley. I'll take a game of Battlefield over UT and it's onsluaght mode most days but that doesn't mean that UT isn't fun as hell and doesn't require coordination and teamwork to accomplish a team goal, it simply plays differently. Personally, I think this stle is fun as hell and I miss it no adays in my shooters.
Fair enough. You say that it was advertised as that style of play, but I would point out that the bulk of their promotional material presented a far different style and feel to their environment. I challenge you to get the sense of battle pogo from their introductory cinema, for instance. It may be fair to say that they were not outright deceptive, I'll grant you that. But it doesn't appear they did themselves any favours either.
I'm glad to see you agree they under delivered (a depressingly common trend in any online game where they believe they can 'add more later' it seems). Personally, I believe a fundamental component of that under delivery was slaving themselves to a play style that didn't mesh well with their overall game feel and gameplay proposition.
And let's be clear, I have no objection to 'fast'. You are right, that bouncing around like that does have the capacity to be a fun and engaging FPS style. But it suits a very specific set of variables, in my opinion, and Huxley wasn't them. Tribes could also be considered an FPS with an excellent vertical component, but it wasn't the rubber boots bouncing battle Huxley was.
I'll concede the point that Huxley may just very well not have been for me or those I game with and I'm well aware many games have done that style of play successfully. But the moment we are talking about tactical games, the focus is on teamwork and objective handling rather than deathmatch/frag fest as a general rule. Speed, you are quite right, has nothing to do with that. Huxley, in my opinion, offered little in the way of genuine tactical play and anchored itself in mechanics and styles solely suited for deathmatch gaming.
Ultimately, we are just going to disagree on it's merits and flaws. But if you think I was suggesting they had deliberately bait and switched, I will retract any such aspersion, as that is apparently unfounded. However, I think that whether or not that was a deliberate measure, the gameplay blend they went for was unfortunate in direction, unfun and poorly executed.
I do respect however your efforts to present your case honestly and intelligently though the oh so much was a bit offside
.
Thank god its finally dead. They're been working/releasing this game for about 5 years now. I heard about this/saw footage of the game when I first started playing guild wars.
The game had no future, it was repetitive as all hell with MMO elements so laughable that one might as well have played a proper shooter instead.
- Ordokai
Haha, I'm glad we can agree to disagree, and then agree again. Honestly I wrote that coming off a bad day so if i was a tad overbaord, well my bad.
I was actually afraid I was gonna get a long angry reply but was pleasently surprised by this. Essentially my argument was about the idea of the bait and switch as you mentioned it as that definitely appears to be how people reacted to it. However, quick question, what cinematic are you refering too exactly. the one opening the game or the original teaser trailer with doc Huxley in it?
I kind of forgot to check the theread again so that is the reason for a late reply. On a positive note. Here's to hoping the planetside sequel delivers some goods.
Word has it Huxley is even being canceled in Korea.
I'd suggest looking up APB Revived....probably more of a chance there.
Eh, I don't know man. APB had a lot of problems, awesome ideas, but ssorta like Huxley it really under delivered in my opinion. We will see if that is actually coming to fruitiion and if they actually manage to fix things.
But ya, I don't think that there is much if any chance of seeing this game pop up in the future. If it does i'm sure it will be mentioned but i wouldn't sit around waiting for it,