Ah yes, it’s SAE Self Addressed Envelope in the UK.

Self Amplification of Stimulated Emission - one of the methods to get an X-ray laser out of an electron beam.

Awesome news!!

Meh, always wanted to like both of the new Shadow Warrior games, but I found both to be deeply flawed games. Lets hope third one actually manages to be good...

...and I eagerly await to see what idea guys who made Doom and Doom Eternal steal from this one.

What do you consider the deep flaws in sw2013?

I don't like the all too common (today) thing of locking you into an arena with spawning monsters.. that is the laziest way to do level design (if you can even call it that), and leads to very artificial pacing. Hand-picked and placed enemies can do much more interesting scenarios.

Yes, also the best way to get something else of something...
Exactly, and that is oneoof the things that really killed SW2, all randomised. No real sense of purpose, or story, or really progression.

Yeah lazy F***ing level designers if I wanted to play an arena style game I'd just boot up my Quake III Arena disc!

Also they pummel you with 9,999,999,999 Monsters all at once which makes me want to f***ing Kill the level designers!

You hear me Wild flying Hog NO MORE DAMN ARENA'S!!!

The original Shadow Warrior is one of my favorite games (I'll die on the hill of calling it better than Blood, in fact) and I really enjoyed, if somewhat less, the reboot. The reboot's sequel I have mixed feelings about, mostly at odds with the adoption of proc-gen aspects of its levels and the looter shooter mechanics. The latter made it feel a bit like Borderlands at times and while I have no serious axe to grind with that series, I'd prefer Borderlands to stay in Borderlands... land.

The reboot was, essentially, Hard Reset in a Shadow Warrior wrapper. I didn't find myself hating Hard Reset to a high degree so I guess it was easier to tolerate what was essentially more of it but with some minor improvements and different approaches to the formula I was already exposed to.

From what I've read, and perhaps for better or worse dependent upon who views it, it seems as though the third game is going back to the arena FPS that the first (reboot) title was and likely doing away with the loot stuff. The trade-off seems to be that it's going to be, as others have pointed out already, borrowing heavily from Doom 2016 and its sequel. I don't know how to feel about that just yet, at least until I get a better sense of how FWH is going to deliver their take on things (that cinematic trailer gives away precious little other than showing that they still want modern Lo Wang to be a motor mouth who quips sarcastically) but I'll remain cautiously optimistic about it... for now, at least.

I agree that the levels in SW2 were weak and way too repetitive. But I loved all the guns and customising them with elemental effects. I liked having to use all the weapons for different effects, and switching them out completely when better ones came along, instead of getting comfortable with one or two guns I like best for the whole game as is often the case in shooters.

I really don't get what's wrong with looter shooter mechanics. I mean, who wants less guns and less diversity in gameplay?

The right tool for the situation.

A diverse arsenal is possible without dozens upon dozens of guns with upgrades, sub-upgrades, sub-sub-upgrades and kitchen sinks bolted on for good measure. The original game was a decent example, though I'll refrain from calling it "the best" example.

Worse examples would be the likes of Turok 2, with an arsenal that's excessive and that's before the looter shooter craze took hold. Sure, on paper a line-up that huge to pick from is like you're a kid in a candy store but when you realize some of the weapons only have extremely specific uses within context of a level, it just becomes a "Christ, why do I need this in the middle of everything else?" situation.

Sure, but it's going to be the same tool for that situation all the time. I liked the fact that at one point my go-to electric weapon was a bow, and at another it was a shotgun. And that my shotgun was a different one than at the beginning of the game. All the weapons, even of the same type, looked and worked different enough for it to be fun to keep changing things up. It wasn't a poorly done looter where you get tons of trash wepons that are barely any different except for small stat variations, and having to swap old ones for new ones is a chore rather than fun.

Meh, I can deal with arena level design, my problem were clunky controls (especially with stairs and dodge, it was good way to get yourself killed); bad upgrade system (too many meaningless upgrades with too many different upgrade resources); bulletspoonge enemies; low enemy variety; and last but not the least, fucking berserkers.

So, essentially the same impact you could get with a solid and static arsenal - got it.

Uhm... no? That's the exact opposite of what I said. How can you "keep changing things up" and get new, substantially different weapons of one broad type with a static arsenal?

If you've got a shotgun and a bow, respectfully what the hell difference does it make if one's got an electric attribute or a fire aspect or whatever nonsense modifier slapped onto it? If you're relying on the modifiers, then where does the actual variety come into play? You shoot a bolt instead of a shell? BFD. You don't (outside of say, a Source Engine game) snipe with a shotgun or melee with an AR-15.

I'm not going to see the benefit you're trying to convey in favor of variety when the variety is as monotonous as you find my preference of the opposite to be. For you it's, as a random example, 12 sets of one type of weapon and that's great, for me I'm honestly okay with 1 set of 12 weapons and don't find that indicative of a lack of diversity in the options available to me as a player.