Serious Sam 4 not at E3

It's Turkey, there will be blood in the streets regardless.

...

So long as I can drink from the skull of my foes, I couldn't care less what Turks stab each other in the ass with.

...

>serious sam bogus detour
serious sam 4 never ever

They're probably working on some other project then? Good, the guys are like only known for Serious Sam, if they can create another popular franchise like that it might be good for them

ASSFAGGOTS

DON'T FUCKING JINX IT

...

You're right, that was very irresponsible.

...

It's okay it, will release around the same time as Star Citizen and Half Life 3, user.

Croteam always puts their own anti-piracy measures in the game, to them using Denuvo would be dishonorabru.

Oh yea im never expecting croteam to use denuvo, I was replying about bannerlord.

Serious Sam was never good anyway. Painkiller is superior.

...

...

They're completely different games

steamdb.info/app/257420/subs/
Well this popped up recently

...

So maybe they'll be an E3 trailer, but not at the actual show?

Or as a sort of behind closed doors trailer for the press, who knows really

As much as it pains me this is long overdue.
NEVER EVER

Lets be honest Holla Forums, do you really want a current SS4?

Yes.

Yeah, one of them is shit.

Well, they said that they would release it this year in one form or another, so it seems logical that they'd announce it at E3. I just hope they managed to finish the goddamn game.

In what way?
In what way?
How is there a better or worse movement speed? Is Resident Evil a worse game because its movement speed is 'bad'?
To what Serious Sam game are you comparing Painkiller to begin with?
Yeah okay, no. Just because level design in Painkiller isn't mostly large open fields doesn't make it necessarily better. I also sincerely doubt throwing largely homogenous packs of enemies at you can constitute as better level design when Serious Sam understood things got more challenging when it faced you with more than one enemy type at once. Moreover, because there's practically no enemies which can outrun you in Painkiller since you can already gain huge amounts of speed through bunnyhopping, melee enemies are rarely ever that much of a threat in Painkiller, yet they throw them by the dozen at you. The first few levels have you fight against these simple as sin undead which can do nothing but run up to you and try to slash you while your shotgun takes them out in one or two shots, they don't even compensate for such simplicity with numbers. Of course it'd be too easy if you could outrun everything in a game like Painkiller, so the game opts for a sizeable amount of hitscan enemies which are already enough of a cancer in Serious Sam, but made even worse in Painkiller because of how frequently they tend to be used. Serious Sam forgoes the limitations of narrow maze-like level design to focus on larger open battles instead and using several enemy types to make things challenging.
This is just subjective, even if I don't get what kind of aesthetic Painkiller is going for with its nonsensical levels where you fight undead ninja warriors in an opera house and Mad Max bandits in a Mediterranean coastal city.
Explain.

And I'm fully expecting some additional delays into Q4.

At this point, Croteam are trolling us.

Serious Sam Fourever

Serious Sam Never 4 Ever

This goes as far back as 2014, lad.

...

But we already did it was the vr game the entire time

...

I didn't even know there is a Serious Sam 3 lmao

it was pretty good
lmoa

Serious Sam was always practically a turret shooter anyway as there was no level and stuff just ran at you, you should take that VR one to be SS4.

Where's the source for that tweet? Any archive? Anything?

How to spot someone who's never played Serious Sam.

First-person mobile tower defense game would be more accurate.

Serious Sam: The Third Encounter

...

...

They feel more like working guns whereas SS' guns are very cartoony. Guns in SS have crappy looking muzzle flash, worse animations, worse texture, and don't feel solid all around. Painkiller blades is a far better melee weapon than the chainsaw in SS, that feels like a hitscan weapon with limited range than actual solid thing with tangible impact.

Staggering and shredding physics look better. Also, save for the bosses, they're not bulletsponges, unlike many enemies in SS. The blood splatter is better as well. Just more satisfying to shoot.

You can bunnyhop to increase your speed drastically. The jumping and speed increase or decrease feel smoother than SS as well.

SS2

Well, each to their own taste, but I find enclosed levels with holes, headstones, and other obstructions less boring than open fields.

It's hell with all it's lunacy. Not very unique or coherent, but compared to SS games, exceptionally the abomination that is SS2, it's a masterpiece.

More breaks between the battles, and as I've said the enemies are less bullet spongey.

b-but they've talked at length on many occasions about mod support being their number one priority for the game…

Most people consider SS2 to be the black sheep of the franchise. SS3 on the other hand looks gorgeous and has some beautiful graphics and gore.

Bunnyhopping automatically makes a game better than others? Would you say that bunnyhopping would make Resident Evil better?

You find huge waves of enemies boring? You're comparing Gradius to danmaku here.

Serious Sam always had plenty of breaks between fights. The enemies in SS aren't even that bulletspongy, though I can't speak for SS2 as I never played it all that much. At most the bigger enemies take 5 rockets to go down or a charged cannonball to the face.

Also, try playing SS3, and you will see why open fields just work better for Serious Sam than tighter spaces.

Goldenface is basically a cursed pic by now. Spew it enough and it will guarantee the game happening

Hey dipshits, quit arguing for a second and realize you're talking about two seperate games.

Painkiller is a single player arena shooter. It's got tiny levels that require finesse, knowledge, and most of all patience to complete. You figure out where your enemies spawn from and you build your playstyle on it. It doesn't like hitscan bullshit and uses it only to frustrate you. Painkiller is a simple and gorgeous masterpiece and I'll be damned if people talk shit about it. People Can Fly did a fucking awesome job with no money and they made a game I still boot up to this day for some fun slaughter.

Serious Sam is the BIG shooter. When I play SS, I prepare for onslaughts of enemies. Massive quantities of these cunts fill my screen and it's my job to slaughter them one by one. SS also has fucking KLEER which are the worst enemy in any game ever designed but holy shit do they make SS what it is. Yeah, I fucking hate Kleers but do they make for some rough late game. Sometimes I play SS because I remember how much I fucking hate Kleers. It feels SATISFYING to fucking kill them. Also SS is full of memorable enemies that I enjoy killing. Painkiller's enemies are fun to slaughter but leave little imprint on the memory.

Either way, Painkiller and Serious Sam are sweet fucking games I love for totally different reasons. Just enjoy some games for a while anons.

So it doesn't like hitscan bullshit, yet it still uses it purely to annoy the player? You know what, that sounds like pretty bad design.

Have you ever played Doom user?

Are you telling me Painkiller has plenty of cover to break line of sight with hitscan enemies to the same extent Doom does?

If I had to get one Serious Sam game what should it be.

TFE still might be the overall most solid choice. TSE has more settings aside from Egypt, and more weapons and enemies, but people's opinions on the gimmick rooms tends to vary. SS2 is just weird with some of the stylistic changes and vehicles, so you're better off playing the first two. For SS3 they addressed the complaints of 'large open spaces are not real level design!' with the first half of the game where you more than often fight in enclosed quarters, whereas the second half goes back to the roots and features some of the best levels in the franchise. Needless to say, everyone considered the second half better.

Lith user here, when the fuck did this happen.

Hey, wasn't Serious Sam 3 in development hell for a while, too?

Useless VR shit that nobody cares about

Denuvo has yet to have a true crack. It gets bypassed, but that's not the same thing.

original version of the first game. if you don't like it you won't like any of the others.

Is there anything wrong with HD.

Some models and animations look different, otherwise its the Sam we all know and love and its great.

Because the enemies are shit?

My biggest reason why I hate SS is the unsatisfying gunplay and physics. Painkiller is far better at that department.

I read on Croteam's Facebook that they're working on SS 4 full blast. I'd rather they it all polished before they show it off at E3.

SS3 was released in 2011.

Would you say that tank control would make SS better? That's how retarded you sounds. Bunnyhopping is fun in any arcade FPS games.

I find huge waves of unresponsive bullet sponges boring.

Compared to what? Painkiller's common mobs are less spongey.

Explain

You don't like the rocket launcher? Or the grenade launcher? Or the cannonball launcher? Or the coach shotgun? Or the melee weapons?

Explain.
Alright, let me spell it out to you directly: being able to outrun most enemies in Serious Sam would make the game too easy and there's quite frankly no place for bunnyhopping in Serious Sam. It's why I said SS is more of a first-person mobile tower defense game, you have to kill everything as fast as possible before they get close, after which things get out of hand and you have to improvise. If you could outrun the enemy at all times, part of that challenge would be lost. When Painkiller throws charging enemies at you, distance never becomes a problem, and most of the levels accomodate this. Remember all the nazi zombies in the train station? It would be a lot harder if they were faster than you, wouldn't it?
Goddamnit, man, explain yourself. Name examples. List some arguments. Don't make me have to repeat myself over and over as you make sweeping generalizations with nothing to support your claims.
What do you mean with unresponive bullet sponges? Examples, son.
That's one part of why the game felt so boring. Enemy packs were largely homogenous and didn't make use of more than two enemy types at once. Encounter a heavier enemy? Just freeze him with the shotgun and blast him into pieces with ease. All other enemies are easily dealt with with the rocketchaingun or stakegrenadegun (all the weapons in this game are just two weapons slapped together). Compared to Serious Sam, which knows that you can do more than just a whole pack of Kleers. Later on, they mix it up with Reptiloids throwing green fireballs at you which you have to shoot down, or Headless Kamikazes which are a major instant threat, or Werebulls being able to run past you if you fail to kill them at once. How you can conclude that shooting one/two enemy types over and over is more engaging than a large varied pack of enemies is beyond me. Fucking Doom realized that, fucking nuDoom realized that and that game is even more solid than Polish shovelware like Painkiller and Hard Reset.