Few people remember the original "Deadly Dozen", released by
Infogrames way back in 2001. It was put out early in the World War 2
FPS era, and utilized an early 3D engine (more sophisticated than the
original Quake engine, but not quite so capable as Quake 2).

"Deadly Dozen" was, in all honesty, wasn't a great game, but neither
was it terrible; it was functional, if absolutely forgettable. It took
a slightly more tactical approach to the combat, with specializations
and squad controls, but the AI was brain-dead, the line-of-sight
incredibly close (Fog! Fog everywhere!) and the interactivity limited.
It attempted more than it could ever hope to achieve, and - aside from
a near-identical sequel set in the Pacific theater - it disappeared
without much trace soon after its release.

So of course, it needed a reboot/remake.

Even as I shake my head at the idea, I can't help but feel a little
bit intrigued. I don't expect much from the new game (unimaginatively
entitled "Deadly Dozen Reloaded"), which largely seems a graphic
overhaul with a few quality-of-life enhancements. Financially I
suspect this game, even as a budget title, will be a flop. Neither its
combat mechanics nor its level design will inspire much loyalty, I
think, from modern gamers, and even with the best of intents the
updated visuals aren't going to impress anyone.

Nonetheless, there's a part of me that wants to play it. With tempered
expectations, I'm hoping it will be an acceptable - if somewhat
frustrating and not entirely enjoyable - single-player FPS devoid of
the usual nonsense that crowds modern shooters. No side-missions, no
overly complicated plots with heavily scripted set-pieces, no QTEs, no
collectibles... just a bunch of Nazis, a gun, and lots of bullets.
There's a purity to that lacking in too many modern games and even if
the rest of the package is lacking, that simplicity alone might be
enough to carry the game.

Or maybe not. Like I said, the original was pretty forgettable, and
the new developers - Ziggurat Interactive - don't have the best track
record. But I'm willing to give it a chance.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 21:22:41 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>Few people remember the original "Deadly Dozen", released by
>Infogrames way back in 2001. It was put out early in the World War 2
>FPS era, and utilized an early 3D engine (more sophisticated than the
>original Quake engine, but not quite so capable as Quake 2).
>
>"Deadly Dozen" was, in all honesty, wasn't a great game, but neither
>was it terrible; it was functional, if absolutely forgettable. It took
>a slightly more tactical approach to the combat, with specializations
>and squad controls, but the AI was brain-dead, the line-of-sight
>incredibly close (Fog! Fog everywhere!) and the interactivity limited.
>It attempted more than it could ever hope to achieve, and - aside from
>a near-identical sequel set in the Pacific theater - it disappeared
>without much trace soon after its release.
>
>So of course, it needed a reboot/remake.
>
>Even as I shake my head at the idea, I can't help but feel a little
>bit intrigued. I don't expect much from the new game (unimaginatively
>entitled "Deadly Dozen Reloaded"), which largely seems a graphic
>overhaul with a few quality-of-life enhancements. Financially I
>suspect this game, even as a budget title, will be a flop. Neither its
>combat mechanics nor its level design will inspire much loyalty, I
>think, from modern gamers, and even with the best of intents the
>updated visuals aren't going to impress anyone.
>
>Nonetheless, there's a part of me that wants to play it. With tempered
>expectations, I'm hoping it will be an acceptable - if somewhat
>frustrating and not entirely enjoyable - single-player FPS devoid of
>the usual nonsense that crowds modern shooters. No side-missions, no
>overly complicated plots with heavily scripted set-pieces, no QTEs, no
>collectibles... just a bunch of Nazis, a gun, and lots of bullets.
>There's a purity to that lacking in too many modern games and even if
>the rest of the package is lacking, that simplicity alone might be
>enough to carry the game.
>
>Or maybe not. Like I said, the original was pretty forgettable, and
>the new developers - Ziggurat Interactive - don't have the best track
>record. But I'm willing to give it a chance.
>
*--

Don't think I have heard of it. I have heard of The Dirty Dozen
though :-)

On 16/04/2022 02:22, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
> Few people remember the original "Deadly Dozen", released by
> Infogrames way back in 2001. It was put out early in the World War 2
> FPS era, and utilized an early 3D engine (more sophisticated than the
> original Quake engine, but not quite so capable as Quake 2).
>
> "Deadly Dozen" was, in all honesty, wasn't a great game, but neither
> was it terrible; it was functional, if absolutely forgettable. It took
> a slightly more tactical approach to the combat, with specializations
> and squad controls, but the AI was brain-dead, the line-of-sight
> incredibly close (Fog! Fog everywhere!) and the interactivity limited.
> It attempted more than it could ever hope to achieve, and - aside from
> a near-identical sequel set in the Pacific theater - it disappeared
> without much trace soon after its release.
>
> So of course, it needed a reboot/remake.
>

I don't think I've heard of it but it does seem a strange one to
reboot/remake especially as it doesn't seem to be a particularly well
know, or loved game, and won't be doing much more than giving it a bit
of polish.

It seems strange that it even got the green-light to be developed.

On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 10:38:57 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>On 16/04/2022 02:22, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>> Few people remember the original "Deadly Dozen", released by
>> Infogrames way back in 2001. It was put out early in the World War 2
>> FPS era, and utilized an early 3D engine (more sophisticated than the
>> original Quake engine, but not quite so capable as Quake 2).

>> So of course, it needed a reboot/remake.

>I don't think I've heard of it but it does seem a strange one to
>reboot/remake especially as it doesn't seem to be a particularly well
>know, or loved game, and won't be doing much more than giving it a bit
>of polish.

>It seems strange that it even got the green-light to be developed.

Ziggurat Interactive's primary business seems to be re-publishing
video game from the 1990s and early 2000s. They add a few tweaks
getting the programs to run on Steam and work with modern operating
systems and hardware, but generally don't tinker with the gameplay or
graphics. They actually brought the original "Deadly Dozen" to Steam
back in 2020, along with games like "Line of Sight: Vietnam",
"Requiem: Avenging Angel", "NAM", and "Killing Time."

My guess is that - of the lot - "Deadly Dozen" sold the best, so they
believe it has enough of a fanbase to justify the cost of a remaster.
After all, the team already had some familiarity with the tech and
obviously have access to the license, so that's two problems already
taken care of.

Personally, I think most people bought the 2020 re-release of "Deadly
Dozen" not because they remembered it fondly or because the gameplay
itself was so remarkable, but out of nostalgia. That's enough to
carry a $10 game which required very little development to run on
Windows 10 and Steam, but a remaster is targeting an entirely
different market. People will be more demanding of that sort of thing,
and I don't think what Ziggurat is offering is going to attract enough
of an audience to cover the cash they'll need to update the graphics
and gameplay.

Actually, I'm surprised Ziggurat Interactive didn't decide to remaster
the "Bloodrayne" games. Those titles weren't particularly good either
but they have /a lot/ more name recognition (they even made a movie
based on the franchise!) than "Deadly Dozen".

Maybe somebody on the team just really likes "Deadly Dozen"?

On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 2:58:18 PM UTC-7, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 10:38:57 +0100, JAB <no...@nochance.com> wrote:
> >On 16/04/2022 02:22, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

> Actually, I'm surprised Ziggurat Interactive didn't decide to remaster
> the "Bloodrayne" games. Those titles weren't particularly good either
> but they have /a lot/ more name recognition (they even made a movie
> based on the franchise!) than "Deadly Dozen".

Bloodrayne was pretty good, whichever one it was of them I played. I'd
certainly be interested in a remake. However with the GTA III remakes
it's obvious these are all cheaply funded cash grabs, and in their case
worse than playing the original program, especially as considered with
free mods, so it's unlikely I'd be buying without some strong scrutiny first.

Deadly Dozen I've also never heard of.

- Justisaur

On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 10:38:57 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>I don't think I've heard of it but it does seem a strange one to
>reboot/remake especially as it doesn't seem to be a particularly well
>know, or loved game, and won't be doing much more than giving it a bit
>of polish.

>It seems strange that it even got the green-light to be developed.

I have it (and played it) as well as the Pacific Theatre follow-up.

It's OK if you like WWII shooters and can tolerate AI companions that
sometimes act as if they're a pork pie short of a picnic and get
themselves killed stupidly.

It's similar in some ways to Hidden and Dangerous in that you have a
squad to look after and organise with each soldier having different
skills.

It's not as polished or as tactical as H&D. I will buy the remastered
version when it is released and play it again. I hope it does well
enough to encourage them to give Pacific Theatre the same treatment

--
Rob

On 18/04/2022 21:50, Mr Rob wrote:
> I have it (and played it) as well as the Pacific Theatre follow-up.

Now why doesn't that surprise me!

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:58:34 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>On 18/04/2022 21:50, Mr Rob wrote:
>> I have it (and played it) as well as the Pacific Theatre follow-up.

>Now why doesn't that surprise me!

Personally, I preferred the "Pacific Theater" game over the original.
Partly this was because of the change of venue; even in 2002, there
were a lot of games set in the European theater of war, so being able
to take the fight to the Pacific was a welcome change. The
ever-present fog - necessary to keep the frame-rates up - also worked
to the game's advantage; it helped replicate the smothering heat and
claustrophobic closeness of the jungles. An extra couple years of
development helped too; the team was more familiar with the tech and
had better experience with gameplay mechanics.

I rather liked the "Line of Sight: Vietnam" - another contemporary
tactical FPS - game too, for much the same reasons. It wasn't anymore
polished than the "Deadly Dozen" titles but it was a welcome break
from shooting Nazis and/or space-aliens.

On 19/04/2022 18:48, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:58:34 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2022 21:50, Mr Rob wrote:
>>> I have it (and played it) as well as the Pacific Theatre follow-up.
>
>> Now why doesn't that surprise me!
>
> Personally, I preferred the "Pacific Theater" game over the original.
> Partly this was because of the change of venue; even in 2002, there
> were a lot of games set in the European theater of war, so being able
> to take the fight to the Pacific was a welcome change. The
> ever-present fog - necessary to keep the frame-rates up - also worked
> to the game's advantage; it helped replicate the smothering heat and
> claustrophobic closeness of the jungles. An extra couple years of
> development helped too; the team was more familiar with the tech and
> had better experience with gameplay mechanics.
>
> I rather liked the "Line of Sight: Vietnam" - another contemporary
> tactical FPS - game too, for much the same reasons. It wasn't anymore
> polished than the "Deadly Dozen" titles but it was a welcome break
> from shooting Nazis and/or space-aliens.
>

I played Medal of Honour + expansion, CoD + expansion and CoD 2 and
although I enjoyed all of them I thought it was time that the FPSes
needed to move one with the basic idea to something with a bit more
depth. Unfortunately here we are twenty years later with me being
disappointed.

$30? I don't think so. Not right now.

https://www.gog.com/game/deadly_dozen_reloaded?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=20220429_nl_good_old_games_EN&utm_term=EN&track_click=1&link_id=deadly_dozen_reloaded_game

But maybe! :-)

-pw

On 29/04/2022 18:29, PW wrote:
> $30? I don't think so. Not right now.
>
> https://www.gog.com/game/deadly_dozen_reloaded?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=20220429_nl_good_old_games_EN&utm_term=EN&track_click=1&link_id=deadly_dozen_reloaded_game
>
> But maybe! :-)
>

Well nostalgia is a powerful thing but I'm not sure at all that it's
that powerful. If I was being cynical it wouldn't surprise the they will
grab the first tranche of customers before relatively quickly reducing
it to a more reasonable price for what it is.