×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Shadowrun FPS Forums Retired

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the leaving-with-a-little-dignity dept.

XBox (Games) 62

With FASA studios closed and the Shadowrun IP now under better care, what remains of the disastrous Shadowrun FPS is now being swept under the rug. Team Xbox notes that the official forums for the game are going to be closed. This news comes with hope for a better tomorrow from the ex-FASA folks: "We're going to be closing down the Shadowrun forums in about two weeks. As many of you know, the old FASA crew has mostly moved on to other roles within Microsoft, and that means we don't have enough people to monitor and respond to posts here for the coming year. We'll eventually close down www.shadowrun.com and transition it to the folks working on the next generation of Shadowrun products."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

62 comments

With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

PrescriptionWarning (932687) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909236)

Battletech always seemed a more interesting universe, especially when it comes to video games. That said, it would be kinda fun to a play a NeverWinterNights type game in the shadowrun universe.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

grapeape (137008) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909392)

I agree about Battletech in light of the new online version of Talisman coming out you would think that Battletech, Starfleet Battles and others in its genres would be the perfect games for MS to bring to Live perferable as true to the original board and miniatures battles as possible.

On a side note, what ever happened to Gurps? Im surprised that nothing from the Gurps world made it to video games. Car Wars would have been perfect for Live and PSN as well, and seeing Cyberpunk, Ogre or Illuminati would be great as well. The last I heard of them was when I ran across a card game years ago called Chez Geek.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

Thansal (999464) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909522)

Well, SJ Games never seemed to really want to go into the video game market. However they did pick up UltraCorps from MS a while back (2006), but nothing much has come of it or of their supposed other projects.

UltraCorps &c (1)

Steve Jackson (262861) | more than 6 years ago | (#21918692)

In fact, we're quite interested in videogames . . . I personally would love to be involved in the design side. And there's been a lot of negotiation over the years, mostly over GURPS, Car Wars, and Munchkin, but few deals have been made and none have survived to the ship date. If anyone reading this is involved with content acquisition for a competent and honest videogame publisher, feel free to make my day.

Which means that eventually we might try to enter the field on our own, or by contracting with a developer. UltraCorps is a learning project, aimed in that direction. We acquired it from the original developer, Jaleco (nee VR-1), not from Microsoft. We have indeed done quite a bit with it, starting with a complete code reimplementation in perl so it would run under Unix rather than the Microsoft OS that the Zone used. Granted, we thought we'd be DONE with it by now, and we're not. But it is in open beta at www.ultracorps.com, runs much more smoothly than it used to, and has a lot of new features. Feel free to drop in; you can now set up solo learning games and initiate private games for up to six players, and we start a massive game every month or so. (But if you hated UC before, you'll still hate it, because it's still a browser-based 4X that's all about strategy, resource management, and negotiation, and nothing about fancy graphics.)

It would have gone faster if our coder (note the singular) had had nothing else to do . . . In fact, I would be happy to hear from competent perl coders interested in part-time contracting to help us finish it. I'm best reached at sj@sjgames.com.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910092)

Fallout was originally going to use GURPS... Interplay and SJ Games had a falling out which cause the dev team (before they were even called Black Isle Studios) had to "quickly" change the ruleset to something else (but somewhat resembles GURPS)... thus the birth of SPECIAL.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910100)

Car Wars would have been perfect for Live and PSN as well, and seeing Cyberpunk, Ogre or Illuminati would be great as well.
 
Man, that list brings back some really great memories. Like the year we rolled for who would be president of the rpg club at school because the vote was a tie. I was really into Car Wars - and spent weeks building a campaign based around gurps with maps of our home town, school and stuff like that. It was a lot of fun.
 
It would be really cool to have software to do something like that. Import maps, stats, scenarios, etc. Then be able to put it all together. Another project I'll probably never have time to do but that will be bouncing around in my brain.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910846)

I was really into Car Wars - and spent weeks building a campaign based around gurps with maps of our home town, school and stuff like that. It was a lot of fun.

It would be really cool to have software to do something like that. Import maps, stats, scenarios, etc. Then be able to put it all together.
Yeah, and around the turn of the century it could have been called Instant Expulsion Toolkit. After 2001, it would be called Terrorist Attack Planner. Damn current events always spoiling opportunities for kids to have good clean fun.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 6 years ago | (#21911860)

You are probably right. But should I find myself independently wealthy and with a lot of time on my hands, I'll be writing it.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

Fieryphoenix (1161565) | more than 6 years ago | (#21914970)

Car Wars did make it in the 80s as Autoduel. As a big Car Wars freak I enjoyed the heck out of it. I was surprised for many years that the really good table top games did not get digitized. I bet a lot more people would play Car Wars today if you could handle virtual miniatures instead of cardstock pieces.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

sanosuke76 (887630) | more than 6 years ago | (#21915154)

Car Wars was already made. What, everyone's forgotten Autoduel already? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoduel [wikipedia.org]

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

grapeape (137008) | more than 6 years ago | (#21919476)

I didnt forget Autoduel...in fact I still have it though I lack a 1541 to read them, if the disks are still good :)

I want full on Car Wars with a modern RTS full 3D view (the twisted metal series was like poor mans car wars but fell woefully short since carwars is about strategy more than action)...with the real rules with fully upgradable cars and weapons, lots of maps arenas, highways, canyons, etc. Hell they could even bring on the ballons and helicopters. Though I admit, I'd even settle for a remake of Autoduel with modern graphics.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

sanosuke76 (887630) | more than 6 years ago | (#21920840)

Aha. Now that you mention it, it reminds me of ANOTHER C-64 vehicle combat strategy game, but I can't for the life of me remember the title. It was turn based, and you scrounged up various types of vehicles for your fleet, recruited soldiers, etc. The soliders would get promoted by surviving combat, and followed some sort of A-E thing. I remember that D stood for Dragoon, and it was the next to highest rank they could achieve; I think Elite was the final but I'm not sure.

Anyway, you'd have guys on the top of your vehicles and guys inside of 'em, you could scuttle other peoples' vehicles, and of course the semi trucks were the baddest things on the road. Get a bunch of elite soldiers on top of a flatbed, and they could eliminate just about any other vehicle broadside by shooting out its tires.

The game was set after a (nuclear?) apocalypse, and you were trying to take over a certain city before the timer ran out. I never did manage to take over that city, although I did manage to take over a bunch of 'em.

Multi-vehicle RPG and such reminded me of that game... hopefully someone will remember the game I'm talking about, because I'm actually wanting to hunt it down for emulation now. :)

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (2, Informative)

Thansal (999464) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909456)

Well, an NWN style game is what SR SHOULD have been as a video game, Or at least the easiest one to do.

Admittedly, if you would like to play one, there are some out there (and they are rather good).

Personally I want to see 2 things from the franchise:

1) Standard RPG ala NWN/KotOR/whatever. Let us play what we want, integrate magic and decking and rigging all properly, etc etc. I would prefer if it had multilayer capability (like the NWN ability for one person to run a game for others).

2) A squad based action game. I know, I know, No one actually would ever make this correct, but wouldn't it be awesome?

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

djasbestos (1035410) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909564)

2) A squad based action game. I know, I know, No one actually would ever make this correct, but wouldn't it be awesome?
Well, there's been a trailer out for Fallout 3...not the same as Shadowrun, but similar flavor...and *hopefully* out sooner. I imagine it'd be a lot like Fallout, except with bionic implants and magic. Which would rock.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909670)

There was a rumor when Fallout 1 came out that it was inspired largely by Shadowrun's back story and rules set. It could as easily have been Rifts, Cadillacs and Dinosaurs, or any other post-apocalyptic game, if it was indeed directly inspired by any of them. Obviously they went a different direction from Rifts or Shadowrun with it not having the big return of magic and all the cybertech even if there was an initial connection.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909598)

Shadowrun got poor treatment from MS, but a decent RPG (with single player) would be great. I would have liked them to do something with Crimson Skies. The only FASA game they seemed interested in was BattleTech and the only BT game that interests me is Megamek.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909606)

Wait... are you asking for ShadowRun using d20 rules as their back or a d20 Modern computer game? Cuz if you where askin for the first chummer, I'd have to hurt you... And I roll 6's so I'd do it with style...

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

3278 (1011735) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910156)

Battletech always seemed a more interesting universe...
A competition of "interestingness" between Shadowrun and Battletech would be difficult, even for players of both games, so I'll avoid the issue and simply declare that by far the most interesting roleplaying universe ever is that of Earthdawn.

"Earth-what?" everyone says. *sigh* Nevermind. Another FASA-failed fragment of brilliance.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

Thansal (999464) | more than 6 years ago | (#21911806)

well, except that Earthdawn IS SR.

Ha, I can still out geek you!

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

3278 (1011735) | more than 6 years ago | (#21912086)

Speaking of amusing add-ons, did you know it wasn't originally part-and-parcel of SR? FASA half-finished ED before thinking, "Hey, we could just make this the 4th World, yeah?" Unfortunately, by then it was too late to dispose with ED's step system [and magic and race differences] which seemed to mostly make everyone bleed from the ears, although I found after a few sessions it burned its way into your brain.

When it comes to Earthdawn, I'm un-out-geekable. ;) Well, with the exception of Ancient History, perhaps, whose list of links between SR and ED [dumpshock.com] is as close to canonical as it gets, which almost makes up for his grievous personality faults. [Hello, Annie!]

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

Drawkcab (550036) | more than 6 years ago | (#21914698)

Shadowrun was responsible for one of the greatest RPG games available on the SNES. Its still fun on an emulator. I hope it makes it to the Wii virtual console someday.

Since then, it hasn't been associated with anything good. An FPS, are you kidding me? I don't understand why they can't just make a solid computer RPG out of such a great system. The fallout series are pretty good games in that genre.

Re:With all respect to shadowrun: (1)

donaldm (919619) | more than 6 years ago | (#21940734)

While I did like Shadowrun on the SNES it was fairly simplistic but is was good fun. I thought Shadowrun on the Sega Megadrive was so much better since it had IMHO a better story and a better character build path, of course that made the game so much harder and challenging, this was especially so when you thought you were fairly powerful then got slaughtered when you went into a new area, Well back to running some less dangerous jobs - sigh! Unlike the SNES Shadowrun you really needed to depend on the people you hired (let them get hurt and their re-hire cost went up). Still both games were good on their own merits.

After reading the Xbox360 Shadowrun review on gamespot [gamespot.com] it turns out this game was fairly mediocre even though it should have been much better, from what I can gather even though I have not played the game since I an not a fan of on-line games and especially FPS games, the review gives me the impression that it has similar RPG elements to the Shadowrun on the Megadrive. Still no mater what the review said I am quite sure some will have liked it.

Good riddance (1)

Huntr (951770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909244)

The sooner the last vestiges of that abortion are dropped the better. Now, let's focus on what Shadowrun fans really want - a good Shadowrun CRPG. Go Go Smith & Tinker!

It *was* a good RPG (2, Interesting)

binaryspiral (784263) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909344)

As a tabletop RPG - shadowrun was one of the games that I will always have a fondness in my heart for. The rules were cryptic, battles took forever, but that didn't seem to make a difference. The world was described so clearly with so many things that were logically futuristic it didn't seem like were you playing a fantasy sci-fi game - you were just role playing in the future.

Microsoft milked this cow for all it could - finally ending the with a PC game that required Vista or an Xbox 360. Neither I was willing to purchase just to play a game that would probably ruin my memory of the weekends rolling dice.

So long FASA, thanks for the great RPG...

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909862)

The rules were cryptic, battles took forever
For those very reasons, my players cheered with joy when I wiped their Shadowrun party and we switched back to D&D.

Still, I loved the game setting. I haven't looked at the Shadowrun 4th Edition rules to see if they're any more consistent or comprehensible, but I don't think I can fool my group into picking it up a second time ;)

Re:It *was* a good RPG (2, Informative)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910014)

I haven't read the 4E SR rules, but I've heard they move a bit faster. Apparently everything now has the same difficulty number and bonuses/penalties add/remove dice instead of moving the difficulty number. I'm not sure if I'm in love with that, but I admit the previous SR system had difficulty number weirdness, i.e. rolling a 6 is twice as hard as rolling a 5, but rolling a 7 is just as easy as rolling a 6, so +1 difficulty could either be immense or meaningless.

I didn't have a problem with the combat system in SR 2E/3E though. Yeah, there are more rolls involved in resolving an attack than in a game like D&D, but equally a single attack is more likely to put someone out of the rest of a fight than an attack in D&D is, past the first few levels. I can't think of a lot of SR fights I ever saw that went more than 1-2 rounds of combat. If anything, I think D&D feeling like its fights go faster has more to do with my having played a lot, lot more D&D.

(Aside: Nearly everything I've heard so far about 4E D&D scares me.)

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

MagusZeal (1156955) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910390)

Haven't read through the SR 4th rules much myself, but what your describing sounds exactly like what White Wolf's done with the new World of Darkness stuff. Beyond that I know in the new SR version they combined rigging and netrunning for the most part. Which depending on your opinion on man machine interfaces for vehicles and drones makes perfect sense. Also the net became a wireless system. On the other hand the module they produced to make the changeover from 3rd to 4th involved so many impossibilities happening on the same day to make it beyond annoying. AI hacking the new super powered stock exchange while another group tries to detonate magic'd nukes as mass emp bombs in nearly every major city? Lets not even get into them killing all the major npcs for the most part much like the newer edition of Cyberpunk 2020 did. Switching gears though, after playing Saga Edition Star Wars I was hopeful about 4th ed D&D, then the local game store got the new preview book containing the race info. Any hope I had of it not sucking went down the tubes faster then little Anny in a pod racer.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

Razed By TV (730353) | more than 6 years ago | (#21912598)

I've never played shadowrun 3rd ed. My gaming group just recently started playing shadowrun 4th edition. We haven't been playing it long enough for me to form an overall opinion on the system, but one thing sticks out at me as problematic: the initiative pass sytem.

For the uninitiated, each round of combat is broken up into 4 initiative passes. By default, a character has only one initiative pass and acts only once per round. However, you can get your reflexes jacked up through cyber implants (something you buy that reduces your ability to use magic) or through magic. These modifications/enhancements give you bonus initiative passes, up to +3 for a maximum of 4 passes. This becomes a problem when half of your party has 3-4 passes and the other half has only 1. For the people with 1 pass, it is as if they act only once every 2 or 3 rounds, which gets kindof boring for them. I don't know whether it is a player issue, and that next time they will know better to purchase these enhancements (I got the spell), or if it is a dm issue, and that the enhancements should be restricted to street samurai and the like, or if it is just a system issue, practically requiring the players to purchase something that should be included if it is so integral to game play.

One more thing that stems from the system is that movement is broken up over the initiative passes. If your movement rate is 8 meters per round, you move 2 meters per initiative pass, which is awesome from a tactical point of view. You can shoot and find cover, and people can shoot you and find cover. Unfortunately it gets cumbersome when you have 7 players, not to mention the npcs that you are fighting. Thats 7 characters * 4 rounds = 28 decisions on where to go, just for the players, in one round. Granted, it might not be such a problem with a smaller group...

As for dnd 4th edition, let me state first: I am not a wizards fan boy. A few months ago I was just about fed up with dnd 3.5. Every month a new book would come out, and there were constantly new classes, feats, prestige classes, and occasionally spells and equipment. These are all great things to have, except when it gets to the point where you have to know the content from 20 or 30 books to make an effective character. Anyways, onto 4.0...

I've read some of the proposed changes for 4.0, and I don't see what there is to be afraid of. They've identified a level range that is fun to play at (something like level 7 to 13?), and they aim to make gameplay in general reflect that level range. I am all for this. In 3.5, level 1 is grueling. The best thing about level 1 is level 2.

Another proposed change is to make all player types battle capable, so that you aren't drawing straws over who has to play the cleric, etc. Once again, fine by me.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 6 years ago | (#21912976)

Just wanted to comment on a few things:

These are all great things to have, except when it gets to the point where you have to know the content from 20 or 30 books to make an effective character.

Yeah, I definitely think that agreeing on a much smaller subset of books to be used for a campaign is the only sensible way to play 3.5. You're always going to end up excluding something that someone wants to use, but if you don't, there's just too much there and the DM has to be too much of an expert on too many different rules and possible abusive combinations of things. I've known players who could do that, but they weren't generally the same players that were the best DMs.


I've read some of the proposed changes for 4.0, and I don't see what there is to be afraid of. They've identified a level range that is fun to play at (something like level 7 to 13?), and they aim to make gameplay in general reflect that level range.


I don't have a problem with the idea of extending the 'sweet spot' of D&D, although I personally enjoy the lower levels in 3/3.5E too. The game definitely breaks down in a bad way at higher levels and probably more of the campaigns I've played in have been killed by that than anything else. I'm all for trying to fix that.

I'm not in favor of the WoW-ification of D&D, and it really feels to me like that's where they're trying to go with the rules they're changing -- like they're trying to streamline 95% of the strategy and interesting bits out of the game.


Another proposed change is to make all player types battle capable, so that you aren't drawing straws over who has to play the cleric, etc. Once again, fine by me.


This is a mindset I've never really understood.

Everyone has favorite classes or favorite kinds of characters, but they're usually not the same kinds. I know a guy who pretty much plays wizard every time. I know a guy who always plays a cleric or a rogue. Etc. I've never played with a group where no one wanted to be the cleric but everyone felt like someone had to be. (In any case, clerics are bad-ass tough in 3.5E.)

I feel like the direction they're really going in is homogenizing the classes, and that feels like a huge mistake to me. The guy who always plays wizard likes the strategy of the class, the way you can be the toughest guy in the party or the weakest guy in the party on any given day depending on how well you picked spells. Another guy who mostly plays spontaneous casters doesn't want to screw around with that, and so on. If you make all the classes basically the same, probably you've now got a bunch of classes that make none of those people happy.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

MagusZeal (1156955) | more than 6 years ago | (#21914162)

Without having the rules in front of me, or having run SR 3rd in a year I can tell you be glad they max out at 4 passes. The old system could theoretically have someone acting 7+ times each round. The reason it could be so high was because you'd have your reaction stat, which could hit 10 fairly easily, added to a number of d6 rolls based on your cyberware or magics along with other modifiers from more cyberware and magics. Never mind the merits that allow you to reroll six's on initiative Now this may not sound bad till you realize every time you break ten points on initiative you would get an action. So 10 is only one, while a 22 would get you two. Last game I ran, 40-50 was the typical area for all the combat guys with one breaking 70 on really good rolls. Than again the same guy who managed that also talks with others about getting his halfling caviler to break 200+ points of damage on a charge from the back of his war dog with a lance in D&D.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 6 years ago | (#21915840)

The last time I looked at the SR 3E rules, I swear the thing that let you reroll sixes on initiative was mutually exclusive with anything that added extra dice -- in other words, a way for the exceedingly rare character with no initiative-boosting magic or cyberware to be a little less pathetic.

Usually (but not always), the really broken things in any system require a 'creative' reading of the rules.

As best as I remember, 3 passes in a round was pretty standard for any decently optimized character, but getting into 4+ country pretty much required that you were a cybered character and that was the *only* thing you were doing with your cyberware, assuming everyone wasn't a cyber-zombie and/or running around with all kinds of delta-grade stuff.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

erdraug (962369) | more than 6 years ago | (#21920616)

Delta? The party i was playing with actually was so munchkined-out they actually DESIGNED their own stuff.

I was playing this cyberware-free adept who kept dying, it was hilarious - thank god for that platinum Doc Wagon Contract.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 6 years ago | (#21935844)

I didn't have a problem with the combat system in SR 2E/3E though. Yeah, there are more rolls involved in resolving an attack than in a game like D&D, but equally a single attack is more likely to put someone out of the rest of a fight than an attack in D&D is, past the first few levels. I can't think of a lot of SR fights I ever saw that went more than 1-2 rounds of combat. If anything, I think D&D feeling like its fights go faster has more to do with my having played a lot, lot more D&D.
I guess I should clarify a bit, then - plain old combat in SR wasn't too bad. The rules were fairly consistent and well-written. We had fits trying to figure out vehicle combat in particular, though. Decking wasn't too bad - you roll dice often enough that you start to figure out the rules fairly quickly - but between decking and astral surveillance, we had a considerable part of each game session that involved individual players doing things on their own. Part of this is probably my fault as the GM, but my players love to plan and plan before actually doing something. That's engineers for you.

At least in D&D, there aren't that many special rules. There are a few combat actions (grappling, bull rush, etc.) and special abilities (turn undead) that sometimes make you take an extra look at the rules if you don't use them that often, but in general, everything is well-documented (especially in 3.5th compared to 3rd edition) and doesn't result in rule conflicts very often.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

SuiteSisterMary (123932) | more than 6 years ago | (#21918044)

The good: I remember GMing my very first Shadowrun game. 2nd ed. The players decided, as a 'distraction,' to load up a van with plastique. I wanted to know how much damage this would do (as a sidenote; in-play, we just rule-of-thumbed it to keep things going.)

The rulebook provided rules to figure this out.

The bad: Had one of the NPCs at 'ground zero' of the detonation, under this system, managed to roll something like 86 sixes in a row, they would have survived the blast. It wasn't until the Fields of Fire sourcebook that somebody could, canonically speaking, be outright killed. They did this to prevent characters from dying left right and center the first time they walked into SMG fire, but still.

I still have tons of 1st and 2nd ed sourcebooks, if anybody's looking.

Re:It *was* a good RPG (1)

grumpygrodyguy (603716) | more than 6 years ago | (#21913368)

As a tabletop RPG - shadowrun was one of the games that I will always have a fondness in my heart for. The rules were cryptic, battles took forever, but that didn't seem to make a difference. The world was described so clearly with so many things that were logically futuristic it didn't seem like were you playing a fantasy sci-fi game - you were just role playing in the future.

Yeah, Shadowrun was my favorite PnP roleplaying game only after D&D. Fun times.

Neither was I willing to purchase just to play a game that would probably ruin my memory of the weekends rolling dice.

If you miss PnP Shadowrun...I would highly recommend Shadowrun for the Sega Genesis. The graphics are dated, and it takes several hours to 'get' the gameplay, but once you hit your stride I think you'll find it's a fantastic recreation of the PnP Shadowrun experience. Here's a descriptive review [ibiblio.org], and a great fansite [rpgclassics.com] with lots more detail. To play it, you need two things:

        1) A Sega Genesis emulator. I use Kega Fusion [emulator-zone.com]
        2) The Shadowrun ROM [the-underdogs.info] for Genesis.

This is one of the easiest emulators I have ever used, it's plug and play all the way. For the best experience, I'd recommend a USB Gamepad [newegg.com]. You can get them for around $25 plus shipping. They also have wireless versions.

One caution; there's a Super Nintendo version of Shadowrun that you may run across googling. I've never played it, but almost everyone claims it's an inferior version of the game more geared towards a FPS than an RPG. So I'd recommend avoiding it.

Again, all you need to enjoy this one is a little patience. It's by far the best electronic version of Shadowrun currently available. The game can be a little difficult at first, but it really grows on you if you give it some time. Good luck!

disastrous? (2, Interesting)

spyrochaete (707033) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909532)

I never played the game (Vista prerequisite? That's cute.) but I listen to the PC Gamer Podcast and those chaps seemed to thoroughly enjoy the game until Team Fortress 2 came out. Was Shadowrun really such a trainwreck?

BTW, for a very hard-hitting and informative look into the late FASA studios I highly recommend listening to this interview with FASA GM Mitch Gitelman [pcgamerpodcast.com]. No punches are pulled in the questioning and I have great respect for Mitch for bravely meeting each challenge head-on.

Re:disastrous? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21910070)

As someone who picked up Shadowrun when the price came down a bit, it's a decent team-based (as opposed to squad-based) FPS game. Basically, it's CounterStrike with special abilities. Earn money between rounds, buy weapons and abilities, play until one team gets 6 wins on a map. Said abilities include magic with various effects, such as pushing things with wind, teleporting, or summoning beasts, while the equipment includes things most people cheat to get, like seeing through walls, speeding up, or auto-aim. However, you can only have 3 of these abilities mapped at a moment (Though switchable during rounds), and there are management issues between using both magic and equipment.

In a way, it's sort of like tribes; team-based combat towards a goal, various classes and loadouts that are changable, and a variety of tactics that require changing because of how opponents can adapt (Everyone keeps turning to smoke to avoid bullets? They use gust for massive damage). Teleport is a pretty neat trick, as you can warp behind people, or use it for shortcuts that are intentional.

All and all, it's a pretty good FPS/CounterStrike clone. And therein lies the problem. After playing the Genesis version (Sandbox-style with storyline), ShadowRun could be so much more. Shadowrun has RPG elements: leveing system, quest system, magic system, and cyber-system for the matrix/cyberspace. There is so much content that a game to blow away Grand Theft Auto could have been made. And all we get is a CounterStrike clone.

Just ask those who got stuck with the end results of Legends of Might and Magic. Especially after the original hype about the game. Hell hath no fury like a gamer scorned.

Re:disastrous? (1)

Mprx (82435) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910740)

Teleporting? In Shadowrun? The best feature of Shadowrun is how the magic system is powerful if used correctly, but not immediately gamebreaking (without heavy houseruling) like in D&D. It manages this because there's at least some attempt at consistency and hard limitations on what it can do. One such limitation is "No Teleporting". Anyone who's seriously considered the implications of teleportation on both combat and society will release why this is necessary. If they're going to ignore important parts of the magic system they shouldn't have called it "Shadowrun" at all.

Re:disastrous? (2, Informative)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910160)

When did cute start meaning completely illogical and moronic? The game didn't even need Vista or DX10 to run but they just hacked the install to check for it and force it. There are work-arounds for XP and DX9 but they are not reliable. The game was a complete disaster for this reason alone, let alone all the bugs in the game at release.

Re:disastrous? (2, Interesting)

spyrochaete (707033) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910528)

When did cute start meaning completely illogical and moronic? The game didn't even need Vista or DX10 to run but they just hacked the install to check for it and force it. There are work-arounds for XP and DX9 but they are not reliable. The game was a complete disaster for this reason alone, let alone all the bugs in the game at release.
According to the interview I linked to in my original post, it wasn't the developers' idea to limit the game to Vista - it was Microsoft's. I'd wager this is true because what developer would purposefully alienate a huge potential customer base? I've seen many patches and full downloads of the game available here and there that enable it to work on XP, which confirms everyone's suspicions that the Vista limitation is synthetic.

Re:disastrous? (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910922)

The Vista limitation is synthetic for a LAN battle between a bunch of guys all set up with the patches.

What it's not synthetic for is tying into the Windows version of XBox Live, as all the crap to do that doesn't come with XP. Integrated play between 360 and PC owners was one of the big things that Microsoft was pushing with the game, and that meant Vista.

Re:disastrous? (1)

Drakino (10965) | more than 6 years ago | (#21912724)

What it's not synthetic for is tying into the Windows version of XBox Live, as all the crap to do that doesn't come with XP.

Nope. When you install Shadowrun on Vista, it installs a "Games for Windows Live" re distributable. The 360 - PC integration was all done at that level or inside the game and had nothing to do with Vista. Want proof? Grab a Shadowrun PC disc, run the GFW Redist off of it on XP, and watch as it installs fine.

The only thing Vista about Shadowrun was the installer, and one not even required function call in a DLL. Getting the game to run on XP with full legitimate Live and 360 crossplay is easy, and for me proved to even run better.

Re:disastrous? (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#21940318)

Really? In which case I apologise; I'd swallowed MS's FUD that GFW has Vista hooks for security reasons.

What do you mean /more/ Shadowrun games? (2, Insightful)

3278 (1011735) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909724)

Because the most recent abomination has very, very little to do with Shadowrun, for reasons which simply are not justifiable from a gameplay perspective. If you're going to change an IP as much as this one got changed, don't use the IP's name: "Shadowrun" doesn't have enough cachet to draw massive numbers of non-dedicated fans, and completely altering the game universe is going to do nothing but infuriate the dedicated ones.

I've been playing Shadowrun since a few weeks after the first edition was released, and am heavily involved on various Shadowrun forums, and you wouldn't /believe/ the backlash this game caused, and for good reason: everyone knows you have to take some liberties when transferring a tabletop RPG to a computer game, but the Shadowrun video game played like someone had made an average multiplayer FPS and then slapped a Shadowrun sticker on it as an afterthought.

I good Shadowrun game doesn't /have/ to be an MMORPG or an NWN-style game, but it would certainly help. An FPS - even a multiplayer FPS - could make a decent Shadowrun game, but only if there's some respect for the property will there be support from the fans, and only if it's exceptionally good is there going to be support for the non-fans [and why slap the sticker on in the first place when, like, eight people have heard of Shadowrun?].

Ironically, SR has been one of the most influential RPG properties of the last few decades. "The Matrix" was based on a Shadowrun short story [which was the back half of Virtual Realities, for those who played that long ago and still have memory of those days]. And yet these funny FASA fellows never did seem to be able to make a buck - or a decent video game [the FPS not being the first try] - out of it. Finally, they just sold off and closed doors, and the property has suffered - in my opinion - ever since. But I thought it started declining with the death of Findlay and the departure of Dowd, which really just means I'm old.

Re:What do you mean /more/ Shadowrun games? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21910558)

Funny how everyone you talk to has a different "The Matrix was based on ..." story.

Re:What do you mean /more/ Shadowrun games? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21913704)

Funny how everyone you talk to has a different "The Matrix was based on ..." story.

That particular claim predates the theatrical release of "The Matrix" by years [archive.org], so it isn't backwards projection.

Re:What do you mean /more/ Shadowrun games? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21912294)

Yeah, the material made by Tom Dowd and Nigel D Findley were what made Shadowrun Shadowrun. When Mike Mulvihill took over, as well as some of the forum/mailing list creeps, it went too far into animé/Hong Kong action crap and real-world over-the-top libertarian propaganda sprinkled into the gaming material, totally unbalancing what Shadowrun had been about. It could be summarized as the following: Shadowrun 1&2=Some Mega corps do evil, some mega corps do good, and you're just trying to survive doing your own thing. Shadowrun 3=All mega corps are evil evil evil, and it's you and your friends against them all, and you're trying to bring down the governments too, because they are obviously evil too.

Both Tom Dowd and Findley managed to write very consistent and gritty material which really gave the world that gray feel. Not black and white, like in much of the 3rd ed stuff.

It wasn't a train wreck. (2, Interesting)

RiddleofSteel (819662) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909746)

As an old school fan of Shadow Run, it really wasn't a train wreck. Is it what most people were expecting, absolutely not. I wouldn't call it a Shadow Run game as much as calling it a game with a Shadow Run theme. For a team centered FPS, it was actually a lot of fun. If the company didn't fall apart as it was being released, with a few quality updates it could have been really good in fact. I think a lot of the hating on it was because it wasn't an RPG.

Re:It wasn't a train wreck. (1)

Erik Fish (106896) | more than 6 years ago | (#21917724)

I don't need to pay $60 (assuming I have Vista or an Xbox 360 already) to play a wide variety of games with a Shadowrun theme. Between the free MUSH games, Half-Life mods, Neverwinter Nights mod and even (gasp) the pen-and-paper RPG itself (which can be played online) there are plenty of games that are cheaper and "more Shadowrun" than the official FPS.

Re:It wasn't a train wreck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21918746)

Well, I was brokenhearted. I've always wanted to play Shadowrun as a video game, and I thought this would be a full-on RPG, where I could select a hacker career and go for it. Sigh...

I'm happy now, though. Mass Effect has given me exactly what I needed.

Maybe the next Shadowrun game will be better...

Shadowrun for X360 (1)

9mm Censor (705379) | more than 6 years ago | (#21909852)

Wasn't really that bad. It was a fun game, a bit half assed with the animation (no animation for going up ladders, just hovering up or down), but had some awesome fun things to do, run backwards at someone teleport behind people and stab them in the back, and the fact that it allowed PC and console gamers to duke it out was fun, I never felt disadvantaged due to the controller.

I'm a huge fan of Shadowrun... (2, Interesting)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910034)

When I heard it was vista-only, I steered clear.

Microsoft completely sabotaged Shadowrun with their vista turd program.

I don't even know how the game is, though it looked dumb.

When will a respected RPG company make another good Shadowrun game?

The last good one I played was for sega genesis. The super-nintendo version wasn't as good.

Re:I'm a huge fan of Shadowrun... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21910828)

it was a good game really, just no community and it was sabotaged probably to justify liquidating what was left of the FASA studio.

Reviewers Killed This Game (2, Interesting)

solcott (1002711) | more than 6 years ago | (#21910722)

As one of the few people who actually tried playing Shadowrun on PC despite the horrible reviews (hooray for piracy groups letting me play Shadowrun on a pair of Win XP machines with 512 of RAM) I have to say the game really _isn't_ as bad as everyone thinks it is.

My wife and I play Shadowrun over our LAN (both Win XP machines) almost every day and have a blast against the bots. The weapons and classes are all very balanced and even though there are some common setups (Trolls with miniguns, Elves with swords) there isn't really any of the usual everyone trying to use the same weapon that there is in the other simple multiplayer shooters (eg. the lightning gun in Quake, guass gun in Half-Life, AWM in Counter-Strike, etc.) The layout and design of the maps are great, the controls are smooth and responsive (even on a machine with 512 of RAM like I said before, HALF of the minimum requirement and a quarter of the recommended), the character models are pretty good looking, and from my experience this game had everything going for it other than the alleged Vista only compatibility and the Shadowrun name.

I think the problem with Shadowruns demise (other than the closing of FASA) was with the reviewers scaring people away from playing it. What the reviewers were trying to review was a game that is LIKE Shadowrun, instead of jsut reviewing the game as it is and ignoring the fact that the game had Shadowrun in it's name. Another great, but mostly overlooked, game dodged a similar fate. Project Snowblind, the REAL Dues Ex 3, had people working on it who knew people wouldn't like it if it carried the Dues Ex name, because a team shooter wasn't what people would _expect_ a Dues Ex game to be like so they changed the name to Project Snowblind and released it to mostly good reviews.

Would they have gotten any of the good reviews if the exact same game was released named Dues Ex 3, instead of Project Snowblind?

Stop letting great games die because of reviewers, and try the games for yourself. And when reading a "user" review of a game stop reading if you get to the line "I haven't played it, but..." because if you read about games like Shadowrun that is how most of the reviews begin.

Re:Reviewers Killed This Game (1)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21913260)

Stop letting great games die because of reviewers, and try the games for yourself.

It's easier for people to "try the games for themselves" if the games aren't shackled to a completely illogical and unncessary requirement that you be running a version of your OS that's so new practically nobody has it. Nobody's going to upgrade their operating system just to play a game, unless your game is a truly historic achievement, and those only come along every ten years or so.

Dystopia (1)

Hemogoblin (982564) | more than 6 years ago | (#21911418)

For everyone interested in a Shadowrun-esque FPS, you should try out the Dystopia [dystopia-game.com] Half-life2 Source Mod. It's free if you have the Source SDK, and it's extremely polished and a blast to play. In my opinion, it's pretty much everything the Shadowrun FPS wanted to be, but better. To quote the overview page:

Dystopia places the player into tense combat situations in a high tech world spanned by computer networks. As either Punk Mercenaries or Corporate Security Forces the player will fight through the physical world to gain access, via jack-in terminals, to cyberspace.

Cyberspace is a three dimensional representation of the world's network. Inside cyberspace, players will launch programs to hack into systems linked to the physical world while fighting off enemy hackers and defending critical systems. Gameplay progresses through inter-linked physical and cyberspace objectives, some are completed in either the physical world or cyberspace, others only by a well timed combination of the two.

Whether the player is a heavily augmented combat mercenary armed to the teeth with the latest in firepower, or a twitch reflex cyberdecker racing to infiltrate a cyberspace node; they'll be immersed in an action packed battle. Only through skillful use of the high tech arsenal we're making available and intelligent team play will players truly jack-in and kick ass.
Check out the trailer here [youtube.com]

In case you're wondering, I'm just an enthusiastic fan who is interested in having more people to play with. If you like Shadowrun, download [dystopia-game.com] and come play!

Re:Dystopia (2, Interesting)

Jack9 (11421) | more than 6 years ago | (#21915856)

Personal Experience:
God did I want Dystopia to be a game I could enjoy, but it just seems like Tribes2 without the maneuverability, flexibility of gear, or effective counters. Some of the gear is plain useless and the cyberspace looks like it should be it's own game (beautiful, original, fun) since it has very little impact on the game (obvious from the number of ppl in cyberspace at any given time, it's usually a simple jack in->rush in->kill someone->do something affair). Might as well be a psychadelic underground tunnel system.

I played for about 2 days and uninstalled.

Re:Dystopia (1)

Hemogoblin (982564) | more than 6 years ago | (#21916062)

When did you play? Perhaps some of the earlier demo's were less balanced.

The way it is now is the complete opposite of your experience; there is a huge flexibility of gear, and each requires different counters. There are at least 12 different "implants" which you use to customize your character, and you constantly change them as you move through a level. Cyberspace is one of my favorite parts of the game; its fun, and very important. Its absolutely crucial to capture most cyberspace objectives because without them taking meatspace objectives are usually incredibly difficult. Also, if you're a good player, you can be in cyberspace for practically the entire round, depending on the map. That's hardly "little impact".

Played through beta and liked it on 360 (1)

Is0m0rph (819726) | more than 6 years ago | (#21927798)

Not a bad game, definitely last gen animation/graphics. Had a good time playing it during the beta, very interesting concepts that you don't see in the normal FPS genre. I was looking forward to it until I found out that retail launch it would be $60, no single player, and a very limited amount of maps. That killed it for me and a lot of people on the 360. It should have been $40 and released with more maps it might have gained a following then.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...