Chase HQ2 on youtube

[Devilmarkus]

Even if its dumped, it wouldnt lower the price when re-sold on ebay...
Because the seller'd sell the Original and no CPR or Polish(ed) Cartridge...

[Badstarr]

Oh dear, I just watched the video on YouTube! While I stand by my original comments, the game doesn't seem a patch on the original CPC version! No samples??!! "Let's go Mr Driver!" Is badly needed in any Chase HQ game in my opinion! The amazing thing about those original samples is their clarity, very crisp and clear considering the trickery involved in even playing back samples on the CPC. The original is certainly a game that showcased the potential of the CPC.


Chase HQ 2 looks like a rather rushed reskin of Burnin Rubber which makes me wonder, if they essentially had the game structure ready to go, why didn't they spend some of the spare time really making the game shine? Why didn't they make more use of the GX/Plus enhancements? This makes me slightly entertain the possibility (however remote) that the game is a rather well played hoax. I know the games reputation as the most rare commercial release but there is a little nagging doubt in my mind that someone with access to the appropriate equipment made a very polished representation of a real Chase HQ 2 cart and that perhaps explains the reluctance to put it into the hands of an expert community member?


It's just me considering all the possibilities and I know it's less likely its a hoax but history is full of similar stories.

[ralferoo]

Chase HQ 2 looks like a rather rushed reskin of Burnin Rubber which makes me wonder, if they essentially had the game structure ready to go, why didn't they spend some of the spare time really making the game shine? Why didn't they make more use of the GX/Plus enhancements? This makes me slightly entertain the possibility (however remote) that the game is a rather well played hoax.

It more likely that they are pre-production copies intended for magazine review. It doesn't explain why there's a manual and boxart, unless they expected to be able to knock the game out quickly because it was essentially a re-skin of an existing game and had already finished these ahead of schedule.

Being a review copy would certainly explain why there's so few copies of the game in existence.

[Gryzor]

Since we don't know the whole story (hey, one for the Ocean book, perhaps?? That'd be great...), let's cut them some slack: the game wasn't released after all, from what it seems, so we can't judge them so harshly. I bet lots of crap games were (and still are) trashed before making it to the market

[TFM]

Oh no, no company could afford that. They just release it with a nicer cover if the game is really that crappy. See Drecksdrumm, eh Spectrum ports.

[ralferoo]

Oh no, no company could afford that. They just release it with a nicer cover if the game is really that crappy. See Drecksdrumm, eh Spectrum ports.

Well, as someone who writes games for living, I can assure you that this very much does happen. I've worked on a game that was cancelled after about 6 months and I've heard of people that have worked in games for over 10 years and still never had a game released!

The reality is that even if a lot of money has already been spent on development, actually releasing a game is very expensive. It's not uncommon for a very large percentage of the cost of making a game to be spent on advertising. There's also the issue that releasing a bad game can seriously damage the company's reputation and impact future sales. So even if a game is finished and potential customers eagerly awaiting it, it can often make commercial sense to not release the game even if that seems counter intuitive.

[Badstarr]

It could just be the video on YouTube but it does look like it lacks a bit of polish. Surely the developers would have been better off starting with the original game engine from the first Chase HQ and bolting on some eye candy that hooks into the Plus features. That would have been a damn sight better than what you can see on the YouTube video. Perhaps the best reason for this is that its a pre production release as suggested.


Maybe the community could pool it's resources to make Chase HQ 3, the game that Chase HQ 2 Should have been?

[arnoldemu]

It could just be the video on YouTube but it does look like it lacks a bit of polish. Surely the developers would have been better off starting with the original game engine from the first Chase HQ and bolting on some eye candy that hooks into the Plus features. That would have been a damn sight better than what you can see on the YouTube video. Perhaps the best reason for this is that its a pre production release as suggested.


Maybe the community could pool it's resources to make Chase HQ 3, the game that Chase HQ 2 Should have been?

different team
if the chase hq team was used I am sure chase hq 2 would have been great.

[Gryzor]

Maybe the community could pool it's resources to make Chase HQ 3, the game that Chase HQ 2 Should have been?

You mean put our heads close together and think about it really hard?

But, yeah, that would be fantastic. CHQ must have been one of those titles I've played the most...

[Badstarr]

You mean put our heads close together and think about it really hard?

But, yeah, that would be fantastic. CHQ must have been one of those titles I've played the most...

Never underestimate the power of thought! 

[Gryzor]

Yessss the mind can be a powerful thing, you don't even need any actual development!


[attach=2]

[TFM]

Well, as someone who writes games for living, I can assure you that this very much does happen. I've worked on a game that was cancelled after about 6 months and I've heard of people that have worked in games for over 10 years and still never had a game released!

The reality is that even if a lot of money has already been spent on development, actually releasing a game is very expensive. It's not uncommon for a very large percentage of the cost of making a game to be spent on advertising. There's also the issue that releasing a bad game can seriously damage the company's reputation and impact future sales. So even if a game is finished and potential customers eagerly awaiting it, it can often make commercial sense to not release the game even if that seems counter intuitive.

Well, that's not only shocking. It also explains the demise of the economy to me.

[TFM]

Maybe the community could pool it's resources to make Chase HQ 3, the game that Chase HQ 2 Should have been?

You could start one of this crowd funding projects (I'm not aquainted to that, but I would contribute).

[Gryzor]

Demise of the economy? For cancelling stillborn products? I think it would be the opposite that would be wrong - releasing sub-par products and trying to sell them through marketing and hype. 

This is not exclusive for software, of course, every sector of the economy is littered with cancelled products - several, for each successful one.

[Ynot.zer0]

releasing sub-par products and trying to sell them through marketing and hype.

don't know why but I read that and for some reason the word 'Vista' popped into my head... but I don't want to derail the thread.
I do agree with the post that it did look like a Burning Rubber framework with the CHQ graphics dropped on top.  If anyone has the time / patience / insanity then I'd buy a copy of CHQ3  :-)

[TFM]

Demise of the economy? For cancelling stillborn products? I think it would be the opposite that would be wrong - releasing sub-par products and trying to sell them through marketing and hype.

This is not exclusive for software, of course, every sector of the economy is littered with cancelled products - several, for each successful one.

1. Investing time and money and human ressources in projects which get not released

2. Investing too much money in out-dated media for advertisments

3. Starting projects without thinking of it before, then cancelling it

1 + 2 + 3 = pretty stupid waste of ressources! (Easy math here). In the result released products are too expansive and of suboptimal quality.

[Bryce]

1. Investing time and money and human ressources in projects which get not released

2. Investing too much money in out-dated media for advertisments

3. Starting projects without thinking of it before, then cancelling it

1 + 2 + 3 = pretty stupid waste of ressources! (Easy math here). In the result released products are too expansive and of suboptimal quality.

Nobody sets out to fail, it just happens. It's not maths, it lots of factors and a bit of luck too. Every project probably looked like a good idea at the time it was started. The skill of a good business is to recognise when something's going to fail and stop there before they've spent too much on it instead of continuing and throwing good money after bad.

Bryce.

[TFM]

OMG! If I would work that way, then they would nail me at a cross wrong around and put me into the sunshine to dry.

Nobodys tells that small errors or small problems can't happen, but such a large scale thing is just not supposed to happen. And if it happens you just can burn the management. Don't things I'm to hard, it's just the way thing work in an real efficient work environment.

You can also discuss this with my boss, and it will be my pleasure to see what happens (how high and far you will fly for example  ).

[Bryce]

You work in a research environment, not product development. They're two completely different worlds.

In (proper) research the goal is rarely profit driven.

Bryce.

[Gryzor]

TFM,

Don't act so surprised or snobbish. 

1. Happens all the time, and how could it not?
2. Irrelevant
3. that's called being stupid, it's not specific to the economy. If you start for the w/c then realize you don't need to pee, this is not a fault of biology.

Also, and I somewhat disagree with Bryce in this (but I guess he meant something else than what I understood), research or not it doesn't matter. Research is profit-driven, too. Maybe not money-driven, but there's *some* sort of profit in it. And in a world of finite resources you get to count your peas -dollars or cents, why not, it's nice and convenient. Somehow you need to keep track of your resources.

Now, even if there was a lab with infinite resources where scientists were let loose to research till kingdom come with no real purpose (ars gratia artis), there would still be, naturally, failed and aborted research paths or experiments. To make a distinction between scientific research and physical product development is utterly naive. If it were otherwise then I guess Thales would have already proceeded with nuclear fission and all CPCs would have 4MBs of memory.

[Bryce]

With "research" I was talking about the kind of Government backed research, that can swallow millions without any obvious product being possible. For example researching whether the lesser spotted armenian grass frog is really related to the common north european chirping lake frog. This research is done for knowledge of a subject rather than ever making a useful product out of it. Other scientific research even where the product isn't immediately obvious is of course very similar to commercial development and the decision to stop researching something is also quicker, when the institution decides that the research is not going to result in anything useful.

Bryce.

[Gryzor]

Ah, see what you mean now (I knew it   ). However, even in that sense, it's not like there's no resource management involved. Just because you can't count it precisely, or because follow-up is more lax it doesn't mean there's no oversight, feedback or some notion of failure. 

Even in your example if could be, for instance, that the armenian grass frog's skin, except for its excellent hallucinogenic properties (when properly dun-dried and processed - no picking up frogs to lick here, kids!) can also make for an excellent gorilla glass replacement. However, the Armenian grass frog is nearly extinct and can't live in capture. However it's speculated that the european shrieking lake frog (not the chirping frog, you've got them mixed up) contains part of the Armenian's DNA. So let's see what happens if we put them together in a blender - will they mix?

I don't think any government-funded research is purely knowledge-driven. It may be that the reasons are 'soft' (say, understand and protect bio-variety in Armenia), but noone gives out money just because!

[Bryce]

I'm all for my taxes being spent on compiling a list of which frogs will blow my mind and make me see wierd and wonderful things! Which party do I need to tick the box next to?? 

Bryce.

[TFM]

Ah, what ever, no need to get personal here.

I don't mind, time will sort'em out

[Gryzor]

Nah, you know I meant no offense