|
 Let's Play Red Faction Guerrilla Hey there everybody I'm Jade Star and I'm going to LP this here game. Red Faction Guerrilla, or RFG, was just a game sitting in the forgotten corner of my steam library until I re-discovered it, installed it, and played about an hour and a half of it on stream. That was all I needed to think 'I have to LP this. It's so good'. The short of it is that RFG is fun, it's really fun. You can demolish everything. Blow everything up. Demolish any obstacle in your path with a magic sledgehammer. The game engine makes the destruction so much fun to watch and so satisfying. RFG makes Mars your red sand box and tells you to go nuts. Have all the fun you can think of by destroying any and everything you lay eyes on. RFG was released in 2009 by Volition, published by THQ. Two names pretty well known for good games. Volition is also responsible for the Saints Row games, and The Punisher on Xbox, one of my favorite old games. Get your rear end to Mars I'm doing this LP mostly blind, as is my co-commentator AhrimanPK. We streamed an hour and a half of this game and then stopped because I knew this LP had to happen and I didn't want to spoil any of it for myself. Because of this neither of us know a drat thing about the plot, or anything else past Parker sector. If you know the game, please don't spoil plot or story. Do not spoil the story. If you want to talk about weapons or gadgets or minor things we haven't gotten to yet, that is fine. Honestly I doubt the story is going to be the biggest deal in the game, I'm here for the explosions, but don't ruin it for me. I'm going to divide the videos up in two formats. Story missions will be done in post and there will be 'Sandbox' videos done live. There is a lot of free world sort of stuff to do that stops you from blitzing through the game hopping from story mission to story mission. These side activities are pretty diverse and fun, and include demolition challenges, helping out the residents of mars, blowing up EDF structures, defending Guerrilla holdings, and more. Space rear end in a top hat? Ohhh yeah. RFG lets you do incredible stuff. It also lets you be the biggest physics rear end in a top hat in a game since maybe ever. I am going to be plowing into people, ruining their homes, their buildings, exploding everything they hold dear. Make no mistake, Alec Mason is a space rear end in a top hat. Click here to enjoy the original Space rear end in a top hat music video.  Bonus Stuff Failed Ambush The Chimney Science One Wheel Drive The Guard Shack Thermoberic mistakes Videos #1 - Welcome to Mars #2 - Cleaning up Parker Sector #3 - Welcome to Dust #4 - Exploring & Destroying the Dust #5 - Industrial Revolution #6 - Blowing up what's left of Dust #7 - Echos and Ashes #8 - Making the Badlands worse #9 - The Mohole #10 - A Tough Nut To Crack #11 - Inefficient Sabotage #12 - We forgot about Jenkins #13 - Confusing the definition of 'Withdrawing' #14 - Blowing stuff up to kill time. #15 - The Guns of Tharsis #16 - Exploring Eos #17 - Human atrocities and stubborn bridges #18 - Revenge of the Bridge #19 - Corporate Murder #20 - The weakest plot twist ever. And one actual twist #21 - We come in peace #22 - Liberating Eos #23 - The Last Stand Samanyas DLC Videos Samanyas story begins Marieners Valley Goobye Mars Jade Star fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Jul 10, 2016 |
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Ooh, I am looking forward to this. This game is loads of fun, and I am a huge sucker for the destruction engine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
 The first two videos cover most of Parker Sector, the tutorial area of the game. The first video will cover some story missions and the second is the first 'Sandbox' Video where we roam around and explore the secondary objectives and diversions they provide the player around Mars. Welcome To Mars Cleaning Up Parker Sector And I know what you may be thinking after watching the first video. "What was that 0.2 seconds of Hard Gay doing there?". Well I got you covered. See I had a little accident and a run in from an old friend... Failed Ambush Outtake
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
Things you can look forward to in this LP: http://www.twitch.tv/sa_jadestar/c/7048475 (this as from a stream a few nights ago)
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
I loved this game when it came out and I still love it now - I'm glad they got around to fixing the game so it ran properly on modern hardware. In the opening set piece here I always try knocking the large tower over into the lab in order to watch the chaos unfold. But in the interest of not spoiling the game I'll leave it there. I did not love the sequel to this game, it is like the anti-RFG and I hope that one day, when this franchise is picked up again, that they go back to the formula that made this game great instead of whatever the hell Armageddon turned into.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
I never got this game working on Steam, which is a shame. Videos always make it look like a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
It was never the prettiest game, but drat if this didn't hit that sweet spot of sandboxy goodness. A surprisingly destructible world, lots of toys to dismantle said world, and just enough variety in plot missions to keep you moving along. Shame the sequel was nowhere near as good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
The title cards a nice pro touch edit-maybe use comic sans
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Scaramouche posted:The title cards a nice pro touch Or Dingbats.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 10:51
|
|
|
This is a really good game, the only thing it's lacking for greatness is a working stealth system - the only thing better than dropping buildings on corporate mooks is dropping buildings on unsuspecting corporate mooks. Also the black hole gun from the sequel but that'd probably be just a tiny bit broken. edit: It has never really occured to me but our protagonist has a wonderfully ironic surname. Speaking of names, you were wondering about Sam's: it's some kind of African language, it'll get elaborated on and it's stupid as gently caress. I don't remember if she tells you outright at some point or if you find out from a log, either way it's not much of a spoiler. anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 12:24 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 12:09
|
|
|
Jade Star posted:Do not spoil the story. This game has a story?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
Oh hey, it's Destruction Porn: The Game. I remember getting this in one of those THQ Humble Bundles ages ago, but never got around to actually playing it. Brainamp posted:It was never the prettiest game, but drat if this didn't hit that sweet spot of sandboxy goodness. A surprisingly destructible world, lots of toys to dismantle said world, and just enough variety in plot missions to keep you moving along. I keep confusing the two. I remember this flying deep under the radar, since the originals were neat, but underwhelming, but when the followup came out, it tanked hard because people kept comparing it to this. Not quite sure how that works, but there you go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
Kaboom Dragoon posted:I keep confusing the two. I remember this flying deep under the radar, since the originals were neat, but underwhelming, but when the followup came out, it tanked hard because people kept comparing it to this. Not quite sure how that works, but there you go. Armageddon got panned because, where Guerrilla ran on an engine that excelled in giving you open environments, complex buildings, cool weapons, multiple vehicles, and the capacity for glorious rampages of destruction, and then put all that stuff in the game, RFA kept the engine but took out the open environments, complex buildings, cool weapons, multiple vehicles and glorious rampages. They took away everything the Geomod 2 engine was built to excel at, and they replaced it with a linear corridor-crawling bugshoot. The few gimmicks they introduced to compensate, like the rebuilding mechanic, didn't do anything to recover the damage done by the fact that they took away GTA: Mars (now with structural engineering) and gave us Literally Gears of War (with bridge-building).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 13:13
|
|
|
Now that's unfair. RFA kept the cool vehicles and weapons (and added much cooler ones - the magnet and the black hole gun come to mind), but stuck it inside a rather bland corridor shooter. It's not a bad game but it's not exactly a proper sequel to this one. Really, the trick to enjoying RFA is to take one good look at the standard shooter weapons they give you, then forget about them and go obliterate bugs with the gimmick guns. It's not Guerilla 2 but it's plenty of fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
Roar posted:This game has a story? Alec Mason is on Mars for vacation. *explosions*
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
Jade Star posted:Alec Mason is on Mars for vacation. *explosions* Also as I remember from the previous LP of this game, everyone in the Red Faction is a complete lunatic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Jade Star posted:Alec Mason is on Mars for vacation. *explosions* Something something mining permit. *Building explodes* Also, ahriman is correct about the side missions not popping up while you have a wanted level. The billboards you see on the side of the road count as 'propoganda' and give +5 morale for each one you run through with your car. Easy stuff. Drakenel fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
So I had a lot of JAIDS pop up in video two. The full video wouldn't compile and be playable, but any arrangement of cutting it into chunks was perfectly fine. So video 2 is actually three 10 minute chunks uploaded to youtube and then used youtube editor to make it a single file. Cludgey, but it worked. Here is a great moment from the original take of the second episode that was scrapped due to audio issues. IE. you can hear Ahriman and not me. The Chimney
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Let's see how many hard drives Jade is going to go thru this LP. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
I love this game, wide open sand box, so so much destruction to be had, funny or at least some what interesting characters, some consistency with the previous games, and an overall not too bad story line. Also some of the side missions are really fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Man that is some amazing destruction. and all done in just two videos. I can't wait to see how much mayham you cause. If only the EDF didn't try to arrest you on bullshit charges, then they'd probably be far better off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
I remember starting this game and then getting real pissed off with the respawn rate after a few hours.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
In the first video, you threw the mine on that person - the npc's flailing around was consistent with the first game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:Now that's unfair. RFA kept the cool vehicles and weapons (and added much cooler ones - the magnet and the black hole gun come to mind), but stuck it inside a rather bland corridor shooter. It's not a bad game but it's not exactly a proper sequel to this one. I actually prefer Armageddon to this game (partly because this games control scheme and trying to edit it to appease my sanity  ) because while it's a bad sequel to Guerilla it's pretty decent in all other categories and the gimmick guns are actually fun, effective and take away from the whole 'Gears of War' thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Triple A posted:Let's see how many hard drives Jade is going to go thru this LP. Jaids. Jaids never changes
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
Hydrogen is present as a common fuel for power generation or other uses and it's volatility is as good a justification as any for explosive barrels. Although I think it is explained in lore that methane is the primary fuel in order to create a greenhouse effect to aid terraforming efforts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
Gideon020 posted:Hydrogen is present as a common fuel for power generation or other uses and it's volatility is as good a justification as any for explosive barrels. That actually makes sense. I assume methane is what's in the non-hydrogen explosive barrels, like the one which killed Jade in his Failed Ambush outtake. The water to make the Hydrogen probably comes from the soil. I read the other day that the Curiosity rover found that Martian soil is 1.5 to 3% water by weight. Burning the Hydrogen would pump the water into the atmosphere, also helping terraforming. What bothers me is where the oxygen is coming from, you'd expect to see some sign of vegetation being encouraged here and there to start pumping that out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
The hydroponics and algae farms that are keeping them all fed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
AhrimanPK posted:That actually makes sense. I assume methane is what's in the non-hydrogen explosive barrels, like the one which killed Jade in his Failed Ambush outtake. The water to make the Hydrogen probably comes from the soil. I read the other day that the Curiosity rover found that Martian soil is 1.5 to 3% water by weight. Burning the Hydrogen would pump the water into the atmosphere, also helping terraforming. What bothers me is where the oxygen is coming from, you'd expect to see some sign of vegetation being encouraged here and there to start pumping that out. If they're electrolyzing the water to get hydrogen for fuel, you get three guesses as to what's left over and the first two don't count. Even if you were able to cultivate vegetation to convert the CO2 down, that alone isn't going to solve the atmospheric pressure problem. The problems with terraforming Mars is that there's a lot of minor fiddly details that make Mars unhabitable, that would all need to be addressed to be able to have people running around the surface in the open air and not dying. For example, because of Mars's lower gravity, you would need to be around three times as much air for the same surface area as here on Earth in order to have the same atmospheric pressure at sea level. You'd also have to figure out a solution to keep it all on Mars, since even the very low-density atmosphere on the surface of Mars right now are slowly being stripped off and escaping at the highest levels of the atmosphere - a problem that would only be exacerbated if you increased the mass of the atmosphere, since invariably the atmosphere would extend even further out from the surface and the rate of loss would increase in the absence of some clever solution that hasn't yet been proposed. For comparison, the density of gasses (95% of which is CO2 right now anyway) on the surface of Mars is less than 1% that of the Earth. Even if we charitably rounded this up, if we need the atmospheric pressure to be approximately Earth standard, we're talking about a back of the envelope multiplication of around three hundred times. The actual average surface pressure, according to NASA, is actually as such that we'd only need to multiply the atmospheric pressure by 150, so that's nice. Mars still consists of about 25 teratonnes (25,000,000,000,000 metric tons), so we're talking about coming up with 3,725,000,000,000,000 metric tons of atmospheric gases, in such as mixture as would be capable of sustaining life. Fluid dynamics have never really been my thing, and the relationship is almost certainly non-linear, but whether the reality is more or less mass needed to achieve the desired surface pressure? I have no clue. Even if we charitably assume we'd only need 1/100th of that number in terms of additional mass of atmospheric gasses, we're still talking about another 37 teratonnes, which is all the gas already free on Mars and then half again as much. So we'd mostly have to come up with a bunch of additional nitrogen and oxygen (i.e, more than what's already there), while also figuring out a way to keep it from escaping since Mars's low gravity means that even their modest surface pressure causes the atmosphere to extend almost seven miles up from the surface of the planet - that number would certainly increase with the addition of a significant mass of gas on the surface. This isn't even getting into the temperature, or the soil composition, or the solar radiation, or any of the other myriad issues that render Mars uninhabitable as it currently stands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Olesh posted:If they're electrolyzing the water to get hydrogen for fuel, you get three guesses as to what's left over and the first two don't count. Even if you were able to cultivate vegetation to convert the CO2 down, that alone isn't going to solve the atmospheric pressure problem. I was about to make a long post saying everything you just said. They would have had to smash half the Oort cloud into Mars to get enough volatiles for a sustainable ecosystem. Unfortunately your smartass comment about the Hydrogen doesn't make sense as they could never actually burn the Hydrogen for energy as it would use up the Oxygen again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Those blue canisters are called "propane tank"s in the game files. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Any society capable of terraforming Mars has no need to terraform Mars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
goatface posted:Any society capable of terraforming Mars has no need to terraform Mars. This is an extremely good point. It seems like terraforming Mars would be a vanity project for a civilization that had more resources and time than it knew what to do with. It's far more prectical for everyone to be living in O'Neil Cylinders or hollowed out asteroids.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
Roar posted:This game has a story?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
AhrimanPK posted:This is an extremely good point. It seems like terraforming Mars would be a vanity project for a civilization that had more resources and time than it knew what to do with. It's far more prectical for everyone to be living in O'Neil Cylinders or hollowed out asteroids. I recall Zorak doing a bunch of effortposts on why it'd be much easier and healthier to just build a bunch of space cities than colonise planets in a slowbeef LP of a Kojima game I'm going to feel really dumb when someone names. Basically, there's a LOT of usable mass in the asteroid belt for building space houses, and as a bonus, asteroids are way less likely to kill you than planets
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
AhrimanPK posted:I was about to make a long post saying everything you just said. They would have had to smash half the Oort cloud into Mars to get enough volatiles for a sustainable ecosystem. Really the whole post started off with the thought pattern of "Well, if you're using electrolysis from water to separate out hydrogen for fuel, you're naturally going to end up with O2 as a byproduct." Given a sufficient amount of energy and a sufficient source of water, you could theoretically generate enough atmospheric O2 this way to meet human needs, with the bonus of having a gigantic stockpile of hydrogen for short-duration high-energy purposes, like fueling vehicles. Then I had to sit down and look up some numbers and figure out how much, in terms of tonnage and type of atmospheric gases you'd have to generate. Along the way I discarded the dropoff of O2 from the use of hydrogen as a fuel as being practically insignificant relative to the scale we're talking about - if you possess the energy to perform the kind of mass-scale electrolysis necessary to generate the teratonnes of gas we're discussing, you don't really have a practical need to combust the hydrogen as fuel in mass quantity outside of some sort of hypothetical process like nuclear fusion for power generation, where the need for oxygen as a combustion medium is questionable. At some point, I saw the scales involved and assumed (possibly incorrectly) that there wasn't enough accessible water on Mars to make mass electrolysis a practical option, and just focused on the scales instead. In any event, you would have to maintain a steady process of generating more hydrogen and oxygen than is being consumed by the use of hydrogen fuels, which would suggest the use of hydrogen as a propane/gasoline analogue - transportable, condensed energy useful for powering vehicles or generating local power outside of existing infrastructure, when simply tapping into the existing electricity grid is impractical or insufficient for the scale involved. Additionally, massive stockpiles of hydrogen could effectively serve as a chemical flywheel, allowing times of low power generation (when solar power is unavailable) to be mitigated by an existing and prolific chemical stockpile. You're correct, though - you could never burn more than a fraction of the hydrogen this way and would necessarily have to maintain a stockpile many orders of magnitude above demand to compensate. Such a stockpile would itself represent a tremendous danger if mishandled. AhrimanPK posted:This is an extremely good point. It seems like terraforming Mars would be a vanity project for a civilization that had more resources and time than it knew what to do with. It's far more prectical for everyone to be living in O'Neil Cylinders or hollowed out asteroids. The energy requirements for any sort of terraforming project would not only have to be spread out over thousands (or tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands) of years , but these projects would have to be maintained and kept up and actively managed without significant interference, backslippage, or disruption to the plan during that time. Human nature being what it is, I can't imagine any human-like civilization being willing to undergo and follow through and such a lengthy commitment short of automation, and the idea of establishing an automated process to terraform the planet and manage it with minimal human oversight and maintenance over such a long duration borders on the ludicrous. Space cylinders would certainly involve a much lesser total investment in both time and energy for a far greater return in terms of habitable space and general usefulness; to do the same with an asteroid you'd essentially just be building a space cylinder inside the asteroid with minimal advantages.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Veloxyll posted:I recall Zorak doing a bunch of effortposts on why it'd be much easier and healthier to just build a bunch of space cities than colonise planets in a slowbeef LP of a Kojima game I'm going to feel really dumb when someone names. Basically, there's a LOT of usable mass in the asteroid belt for building space houses, and as a bonus, asteroids are way less likely to kill you than planets You're thinking of Policenauts in this case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
I can't think of a way of doing it in human-timescales without invoking elemental alchemy, probably involving ominous amounts of Von-Neumann nanotech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Olesh posted:Space cylinders would certainly involve a much lesser total investment in both time and energy for a far greater return in terms of habitable space and general usefulness; to do the same with an asteroid you'd essentially just be building a space cylinder inside the asteroid with minimal advantages. Asteroid colonies would indeed be just a space cylinder inside an asteroid. The advantage of this is that hollowed out asteroids could easily be the result of asteroid mining, and you wouldn't have to fabricate or transport anywhere near as much stuff to build it. Just leave a shell a few meters thick, enough to maintain structural integrity and keep out nasty space rays. I remember reading that such an arrangement would even be immune to gamma ray bursts. This is why any real settlement on Mars would probably be underground, given that Mars' lack of a magnetosphere means that it gets bombarded by a lot of nasty poo poo. Dig a little deeper than necessary to protect from the normal radiation and you've got an extinction proof colony. I quite like the idea of hollowing out Olympus Mons, impractical but still orders of magnitude easier than actually terraforming the planet, and really cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
AhrimanPK posted:What bothers me is where the oxygen is coming from, you'd expect to see some sign of vegetation being encouraged here and there to start pumping that out. There is, in Oasis sector. Guerrilla starts off in the lovely part of Mars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 04:15
|
|