I want to punch everyone that purchases Doom on XBL. It's the original twitch deathmatch shooter, and on a console it's just wrong. Plain, fucking, wrong. It's dirt cheap in the Collector's Edition pack, and there are plenty of mods online that make it look better and run on Windows and give true mouselook etc etc.
Meanwhile, all these losers will mess around on XBL with it thinking they are playing a part of history, awkwardly strafing around and hopelessly trying to quickly flick and shoot, when they are simply supporting an abomination of a version while I sit there refreshing servers crying that no one wants to play with me.
Well I hope you've followed your own advice and moved away from home as well.
I mean, the current administration in power in the land of Eternia hasn't been able to remove the terrorist threat of Skeletor for, how many seasons of power again? Too many, I'll bet.
How many times have they had him in a position of weakness or captured, and how many times has the bony blue dude got away? Pretty much every episode that wasn't a multi-part story line, IIRC.
By staying there and not moving to another planet you are pretty much saying you support this line of inaction.
I'll admit that nearby planets, such as Thundera or Cybertron probably aren't in a habitable state right now, but maybe you could move in with that pain in the ass tin can Seven-Zark-Seven down in Center Neptune. Affix a drink tray to his head and turn off his speech circuit and you'd be set.
"Hell,even I think so, and I love all kinds of horrid, tasteless humor."
Well, obviously not all kinds.
Also, isn't it great when people that do like 'horrid, tasteless' stuff decide that they are now the judge of what is in poor taste and what isn't?
So when something come along that they finally find to be in bad taste, 'you have to admit' that he is right, because, you know, he knows because he likes that sort of shit, so he should know. Just think of the times that you've laughed at something that someone else regarded to be in poor taste but you laughed it off and said that it was actually funny or just messing around.
We are so lucky to have you people around to let us know when others have crossed the line. Phew.
Wow, I feel like I've written this post myself. This won't interest anyone else, but I'll answer for yours and my sake, just so we know we aren't alone;)
I'm 29, I consider myself in that group.
I turned 29 three weeks ago.
I've got just under 80 PS2 games.
I'd say I have just over 80. Plus about 50 Xbox games, half that many Gamecube games, and... probably 200+ PC games. And yes, those are all originals.
Every month I average the purchase of 1 PS2 game and 2-3 PC games.
Sounds about right, but I buy more many more consoles, and if you include budget titles and the odd times I'll pick up second hand cheapies from Gametraders, I would definitely exceed that.
I also enjoy getting out, have the girlfriend, and don't spend all my time inside.
While I'm not the most outside person in the world, my friends still know it's not a waste of time to see if I'm up for something. I live with my fiance, and as well as playing the odd FPS and WoW, when she got her diamond ring, I got an Xbox 360. And it was her idea to do that. I would have been single my entire life if I had never found someone that understood the 'hardcore' gaming lifestyle.
Which also means I haven't actually played all the games I own, but I'm still a collector.
I'm a little guilty of this as well, but that is more WoW's fault than anything at the moment.
Oh yeah, and I own a PSP, DS Lite, X-Box (only found 2 games I liked on it - Strategy and RPG is my taste).
Same here, and a bunch of older consoles/computers (SNES, Genesis, SMS, Saturn, C64)
And yes, that means if I'll buy a system just to play two games, you can bet I'll be getting a PS3.
And I'll probably get a 360 when Mass Effect comes out.
Three games is my requirement to purchase a console, although over the life of one you can pretty much guarantee you're going to find three you'll like, but I at least wait until there is three before I make the purchase. And yeah I'm saving up for a PS3 at the moment.
A lot of my friends aren't as "hard core" as they used to be, due to various reasons (family, other interests, time, etc).
Me still being the hard-core one they always know who to turn to when they feel the urge to dive into gaming for a night.
I have the exact same thing. A good friend of mine who used to be at my place every monday night religiously, and half of the weekend without fail now has a law job that's driving him into the ground and a girlfriend that takes up most of the rest of his time, but he will still gimme a call to come over and just bash some games for a night every so often when he gets the chance. And another friend who has a few other semi-gaming friends (ie social gamers that play crap like Halo) always knows that if he wants to talk anything other than Halo then he can talk to me.
I was definitely starting to think that the high end of the 18-34 'hardcore' gamer spectrum really was only the guys still living in their parents basement.
COD2 does give you a fair bit more freedom, but all it really does is alternate between two scenarios.
Firstly, you find yourself in a standoff where you are trying to advance, and have infinite allied forces that constantly respawn, and they have infinite bad guys that constantly respawn, and it's a matter of just culling them down before a spawn so that you can charge in and trigger the level flag that turns off that spawn, thus 'capturing that position' and allowing you to move onto the next such setup.
Or, there will be a structure of some sort occupied by the defending germans which you'll have to liberate, again effectively with the same infinite spawning flag that needs to be tripped before you then begin the other way around, which involves you being the defenders against the incoming german attack.
COD1 had a lot of both but also IIRC some 'go here and do this' objectives where you weren't supported by a infinite number of allies. I hear COD2 has the same bloody annoying style of on-rails sections that the first did, but I've been too bored with the game to continue.
Oh, and it's done a Deus Ex 2 with regards to health and grenades, i.e. dumbed down. There are no health packs now, if you take some damage the screen gets red at the edges and you need to find cover before you get hit too much more, and just naturally heal in a few seconds. Works for sci-fi games (even if Halo is shit) but harder to work with in a WW2 setting. Sure, medkits that you walk over to activate aren't exactly logical but at least there was a visible level to your health instead of a arbitrary red coloring and the ability to auto-heal. And the grenade indicator is obviously meant for people using the xbox360 version that can't quickly swing their aim around to see where that grenade they heard landed. It actually points in the direction of the grenade, obviously requiring you to bolt in the opposite direction. It's actually really lame and takes away a lot of the confusion and panic involved when you hear the dreaded metallic bounce of the grenade.
Although I have to admit that the 360 demo I played was actually quite playable for a console shooter. It's been done quite well. But then I guess that's the point/problem. PC gamers and fans of the first COD would probably not miss COD2 much if they didn't play it, it's obviously more for the console crowd. If any more proof was required just check out the formats that COD3 is going to be released on.
"No rules of engagement - Users can define their own roles and interactions, opting in or out as they wish"
hahahahahaha
i.e no one fights, everyone sits around the bank doing nothing and the only people that want to fight are the ones that can guarantee they will win, which of course means no one wants to fight them. in other words, Ultima Online after the carebear land patch, or presumably, PvE WoW servers (I play on a PvP one so I don't know exactly how it works on PvE).
5. Idiots will come to forums and post detailed critiques of how they don't understand being placed above when they didn't even read the fucking article header saying that it was BASED ON SALES
There must be other people that don't see it this way as well as myself. To have this sort of logic you'd have to already have a few thousand points piled up, which have obviously cost you money in the past, a long, forgotten past that is no longer relevant to your current financial situation, which you just throw around without remembering that at some point in time they did actually cost you money. I only buy points when I want to make an immediate purchase, which means that each time I'm buying a game, I pretty much have to part with US$20.
I haven't bought enough games to get myself a 'free' game from leftover points yet... okay, okay, so I wasted money on some retarded gamer pictures, so technically I should have, but even then, I know that these points didn't just magically arrive for free in my account and were traded for other real life virtual currency (now this is getting confusing) from my credit card. Maybe it's just because I've bought so many games and appreciate the correlation between the number of games I have and the balance of my bank account.
Or maybe I just couldn't think of a good analogy given the poker one has already been played to death.
(crickets)
bringing the real cost of Lumines Live to nearly $24
OMIGOSH!!!... or rather, still well less than the original version, which you can play on the go, and which was a full price PSP game, that was quite popular and that a lot of people paid that full price for. It's not going to become magically cheaper just because it's only a virtual copy.
The UMD format might have cost Sony a lot, but they aren't actually that expensive to make.
Oh god here we go again. The Halo fanboys charge out to defend their champion of mediocrity. I'm waiting for a build at work so I'll bite.
Side question : Do you write for Edge magazine? The people there seem to have an eternal boner over this game as well.
Vehicles that can be more fun than moving on foot.
The only valid point you have. For it's time Halo did FPS+vehicles quite well, even if it did go to a third person perspective and somewhat break that feeling of 'being' the character. At least you had the sense to make the point up front before delving into the masturbatory fanboy garbage I'm reading further down. The vehicles in Halo were fun. In fact, the largest critisism of Halo is that it's single player is so amazingly boring to play, and that you end up just waiting for the next open vehicle section.
Insane amount of polish for its time.
Please tell me you don't honestly believe this. The game went thru more changes than any other that immediately comes to mind. First it was an RTS, then a third person strategy/shooter/something, while finally settling on a generic FPS. It moved from Mac to PC before being bought out by Microsoft in order to save their otherwise probably failed console. It was rushed to release to come out as early as possible with the console (or was it actually a launch title), and the level design is obviously almost non existent in many places (Library, destroying the three cores, virtually all ship interiors etc etc). And of course, this apparently gave them time to write the awe inspiring 'Legendary AI', which, for anyone that has played that difficulty level without the aid of rose-colored fanboy glasses, can clearly see is simply a wallhacking aimbot setting with perfect leading skills. Soldier of Fortune 2 (PC) did the exact same thing and everyone hated it. Maybe that's cause PC gamers have had enough experience with FPS games to be able to pick good and bad ones and not just cream themselves over the first FPS game they play.
The game made the console.
I think you're confusing 'made' with 'saved'. The Zelda argument is a moot one, because Zelda has a million fanboys that will buy pocket calculators en masse if they come out with a Zelda game for it. People buy the Playstation 2 because all the games come out for it, and tons of exclusive popular franchises (Tekken, FF etc) and plenty of exclusive new games (Disgaea, God of War etc). The Xbox is the haven of graphically superior multiformat ports and rare decent titles that were either bought out by Microsoft or needed the graphical horsepower of the Xbox (Ninja Gaiden, Forza etc), not to mention plenty of crap ones (Brute Force et al). That's not me saying that the PS2 has no crap games of course, because it clearly does, but in the PS2s case the crap games are more often than not the shitty budget titles that would have sucked anyway. The Xbox had plenty of big name games that were overhyped and failed or were just generally poor (Fable, anyone). Halo became popular because the vast majority of console gamers had never played LAN/WAN deathmatch/co-op before, and it's awesome fun regardless of the game itself, not because the game itself is a 'masterpiece'. Deathmatch makes any game better (people loved SOF2 DM), and co-op makes people see thru the worst flaws.
Pure fanboy bullshit not worthy of argument. So you like ugly games with orchestral music and shallow sci-fi tales. Good for you.
Master Chief.
Hahahaha, this whole section is awesome, pure comedy fanboy gold. The Master Chief character looks like a douchebag in a sci-fi knight armor that his mom made for him before stepping into battle, and he might as well be a robot for all we know/see about him. Hell, the only other person he really talks to is a fucking hologram AI. You wan't a well created ch
You've never eaten while watching TV before? People can eat while playing games as well. They are the ones that randomly run into static environmental objects or who stand still for 30 seconds at a time and don't actually say anything in team chat as they start moving again.
Poo?
Well if I'm not eating, I don't see this as being a problem either.
Spend "quality time" with the wifey?
If 'the wifey' can't live with you spending 10 hours defending the world from alien invaders, maybe you married the wrong person. I mean, it's her future you're working to ensure here. Those aliens aren't going to roll over and die all on their own. Unless they catch a cold or something.
It's a shame you got so many replies, because anyone that includes this fanboy bullshit line in any post should be immediately ignored.
I really love Oblivion, but I have the intelligence to understand that there will be people that don't like the same games that I do. Even though it's not an old scho... wait, what?
It's an old school dungeon adventure RPG.
Are you kidding? The creatures and loot level up as you level up. Unless you gimp your character with skill selections (which is quite possible, I'll admit) you never have a problem because the entire game is like you've never levelled at all. No areas you can't venture to early on because they are above your pay grade. So phat loot you can't find somewhere and hold onto until you're strong enough to use it. And entire game that's played as though you've never levelled, and just picked up some new skills on the way.
It's not a full scale RPG by any means, but try the Gothic games. You go into an area you aren't strong enough for yet, you get slaughted, it's that simple. People were finishing Oblivion at level 1 for crying out loud. That just totally spits in the face (I really couldn't think of a good analogy here) of everything that RPG experinece gain and levelling stands for.
They wanted an RPG spoonfed to them like so many Saturday morning cartoons, complete with detailed plot expositions and explanations even a six year old could follow.
And they got it. Instant map travel, quests that mark on the map exactly where you should be heading. Hand holding of the highest order.
I personally really like the game, but some people (like myself) want more complication and less hand holding from their RPGs, you know, like old-school dungeon adventure RPGs.
It's early friday morning and the clock watching has already started until the 5:30 freedom call, and in my blurred 'havent had sugar/coffee' state I just assumed this was an article about the Commodore 64. I got all excited, and then I find out it's all about the few people that have actually grasped technology that wasn't around before they hit 30.
(RIP DNA)
Hey man, there is no need to be like that. It was an interesting post. And I don't know about you, but I found the fact that he isn't interested in HD console while having a HD TV totally hilarious. Hearty guffaws all round.
Halo isn't the best example because the 'Legendary' AI in Halo is pretty obviously, for anyone thats played it who doesn't kneel at the altar of Halo, primarily a wallhacking, aimbotting, rate-of-fire increasing mod for the enemies. If you're out in the open for more than a few seconds, you're dead, because they just don't miss, and they lead perfectly.
SOF2 did EXACTLY the same thing; it totally raped you with it's cheating AI, and yet everyone panned that game for being too hard. Halo does it, and it's the best thing ever and you have to try it on Legendary cause it's just so smart. I agree with you though, it's simply not fun. I want a challenge, not a 'with luck I wont have to reload' fest.
It's funny how Halo was obviously a pretty rushed effort for the Xbox release; terrible level design that is boring and cut and paste in the majority of areas, lame enemy design in places, and all round a pretty done-quick generic game that only succeeded because all the console-only gamers had never experienced deathmatch before, yet people still believe they had time to code in this all-conquering deep-blue AI that is as smart as hell.
A good FPS would be one where the game is hard because the enemies are smart, not because they lead perfectly and are effectively aimbots, but I'm not convinced that many games actually do have impressive AI. Smart AI for the most part in current FPS seems to be enemies that don't fire on sight regardless of distance and obstacles, but that actually attempt to get in as close as possible without making their presence known, so they can hit you hard and at close range. It's a good start, but still has loopholes that can be worked around. FEAR and Far Cry do this to an extent, but on the flipside their AIs can be quite easy to get into stupid situations where they don't seem so smart, so overall they have the reputation of being stupid. It's disappointing that people expect an all or nothing affair, and if a decent AI does one thing stupidly then the whole AI routine is frowned upon as being retarded. Although maybe this is the best we can expect, because Far Cry and FEAR are older games now, and the newer crop of games, Prey included, don't have anything approaching decent AI.
Players have whined and whined and fucking whined that Paladins and Shamans are too different and need to balance better between each other. In other words, they were effectively asking for them to be the same.
Instead of destroying two classes to make the one class that might keep people quiet, they decide the best way around it, while still keeping the uniqueness in both classes, is to allow both factions access to it. No more complaints that the Horde get overpowered Shammys and the Alliance get overpowered Loladins.
And yet, somehow, people still find a way to complain. Now apparently, even the people that don't play. They can't fucking win.
I think you're right, I've been playing WoW at the expense of all other gaming news for waaay too long.
"Those experiences taught me that I need to pick my gaming prudently."
All work no play etc etc. Not all time has to be spent productively, Jack. That experience should have taught you that Civ X is a good game and money well spent instead of some EA Sports X title that was just like last years and that bored you within a few hours.
"And I think when I'm 50, I'd rather look back on the fun times I had with (eventual) children than fun times I had with avatars in a world that didn't exist."
Yeah, that inbuilt biological instinct can be hard to shake off sometimes. People still feel the need for a 9-5 with 2.4 kids. And it would just be plain strange to thoughfully consider memories that don't involve said children.
Also, just in case you didn't know, creating a big WoW end game raid that involves adventures that you'll be talking about for months or weeks to come can take in excess of 6 hours to do, let alone the months of levelling and planning beforehand. Creating a kid takes as little as 20 seconds depending on how trigger happy you are. You'll have plenty of time for both. Play some fucking games.
How did this garbage get modded interesting? This is a troll if ever I've seen it. Either a troll, or one of those psuedo-intellectual losers that thinks they are better than everyone and that they have the answers for everything based on their extremely limited experience. In fact, it's actually hard to pick which one of the two it is. I can't be bothered pull it all to pieces because other than the idiots that marked it interesting, everyone else should have no trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
But then, we all know that 95% of statistics are made up on the spot.
It's actually more like 89%.
You sound like one of the 76% that don't check their made up facts before posting. Sigh.
I want to punch everyone that purchases Doom on XBL. It's the original twitch deathmatch shooter, and on a console it's just wrong. Plain, fucking, wrong. It's dirt cheap in the Collector's Edition pack, and there are plenty of mods online that make it look better and run on Windows and give true mouselook etc etc.
Meanwhile, all these losers will mess around on XBL with it thinking they are playing a part of history, awkwardly strafing around and hopelessly trying to quickly flick and shoot, when they are simply supporting an abomination of a version while I sit there refreshing servers crying that no one wants to play with me.
Not that I'm bitter. Oh no.
Well I hope you've followed your own advice and moved away from home as well.
I mean, the current administration in power in the land of Eternia hasn't been able to remove the terrorist threat of Skeletor for, how many seasons of power again? Too many, I'll bet.
How many times have they had him in a position of weakness or captured, and how many times has the bony blue dude got away? Pretty much every episode that wasn't a multi-part story line, IIRC.
By staying there and not moving to another planet you are pretty much saying you support this line of inaction.
I'll admit that nearby planets, such as Thundera or Cybertron probably aren't in a habitable state right now, but maybe you could move in with that pain in the ass tin can Seven-Zark-Seven down in Center Neptune. Affix a drink tray to his head and turn off his speech circuit and you'd be set.
"Hell,even I think so, and I love all kinds of horrid, tasteless humor."
Well, obviously not all kinds.
Also, isn't it great when people that do like 'horrid, tasteless' stuff decide that they are now the judge of what is in poor taste and what isn't?
So when something come along that they finally find to be in bad taste, 'you have to admit' that he is right, because, you know, he knows because he likes that sort of shit, so he should know. Just think of the times that you've laughed at something that someone else regarded to be in poor taste but you laughed it off and said that it was actually funny or just messing around.
We are so lucky to have you people around to let us know when others have crossed the line. Phew.
Wow, I feel like I've written this post myself. This won't interest anyone else, but I'll answer for yours and my sake, just so we know we aren't alone ;)
... probably 200+ PC games. And yes, those are all originals.
I'm 29, I consider myself in that group.
I turned 29 three weeks ago.
I've got just under 80 PS2 games.
I'd say I have just over 80. Plus about 50 Xbox games, half that many Gamecube games, and
Every month I average the purchase of 1 PS2 game and 2-3 PC games.
Sounds about right, but I buy more many more consoles, and if you include budget titles and the odd times I'll pick up second hand cheapies from Gametraders, I would definitely exceed that.
I also enjoy getting out, have the girlfriend, and don't spend all my time inside.
While I'm not the most outside person in the world, my friends still know it's not a waste of time to see if I'm up for something. I live with my fiance, and as well as playing the odd FPS and WoW, when she got her diamond ring, I got an Xbox 360. And it was her idea to do that. I would have been single my entire life if I had never found someone that understood the 'hardcore' gaming lifestyle.
Which also means I haven't actually played all the games I own, but I'm still a collector.
I'm a little guilty of this as well, but that is more WoW's fault than anything at the moment.
Oh yeah, and I own a PSP, DS Lite, X-Box (only found 2 games I liked on it - Strategy and RPG is my taste).
Same here, and a bunch of older consoles/computers (SNES, Genesis, SMS, Saturn, C64)
And yes, that means if I'll buy a system just to play two games, you can bet I'll be getting a PS3. And I'll probably get a 360 when Mass Effect comes out.
Three games is my requirement to purchase a console, although over the life of one you can pretty much guarantee you're going to find three you'll like, but I at least wait until there is three before I make the purchase. And yeah I'm saving up for a PS3 at the moment.
A lot of my friends aren't as "hard core" as they used to be, due to various reasons (family, other interests, time, etc). Me still being the hard-core one they always know who to turn to when they feel the urge to dive into gaming for a night.
I have the exact same thing. A good friend of mine who used to be at my place every monday night religiously, and half of the weekend without fail now has a law job that's driving him into the ground and a girlfriend that takes up most of the rest of his time, but he will still gimme a call to come over and just bash some games for a night every so often when he gets the chance. And another friend who has a few other semi-gaming friends (ie social gamers that play crap like Halo) always knows that if he wants to talk anything other than Halo then he can talk to me.
I was definitely starting to think that the high end of the 18-34 'hardcore' gamer spectrum really was only the guys still living in their parents basement.
COD2 does give you a fair bit more freedom, but all it really does is alternate between two scenarios.
Firstly, you find yourself in a standoff where you are trying to advance, and have infinite allied forces that constantly respawn, and they have infinite bad guys that constantly respawn, and it's a matter of just culling them down before a spawn so that you can charge in and trigger the level flag that turns off that spawn, thus 'capturing that position' and allowing you to move onto the next such setup.
Or, there will be a structure of some sort occupied by the defending germans which you'll have to liberate, again effectively with the same infinite spawning flag that needs to be tripped before you then begin the other way around, which involves you being the defenders against the incoming german attack.
COD1 had a lot of both but also IIRC some 'go here and do this' objectives where you weren't supported by a infinite number of allies. I hear COD2 has the same bloody annoying style of on-rails sections that the first did, but I've been too bored with the game to continue.
Oh, and it's done a Deus Ex 2 with regards to health and grenades, i.e. dumbed down. There are no health packs now, if you take some damage the screen gets red at the edges and you need to find cover before you get hit too much more, and just naturally heal in a few seconds. Works for sci-fi games (even if Halo is shit) but harder to work with in a WW2 setting. Sure, medkits that you walk over to activate aren't exactly logical but at least there was a visible level to your health instead of a arbitrary red coloring and the ability to auto-heal. And the grenade indicator is obviously meant for people using the xbox360 version that can't quickly swing their aim around to see where that grenade they heard landed. It actually points in the direction of the grenade, obviously requiring you to bolt in the opposite direction. It's actually really lame and takes away a lot of the confusion and panic involved when you hear the dreaded metallic bounce of the grenade.
Although I have to admit that the 360 demo I played was actually quite playable for a console shooter. It's been done quite well. But then I guess that's the point/problem. PC gamers and fans of the first COD would probably not miss COD2 much if they didn't play it, it's obviously more for the console crowd. If any more proof was required just check out the formats that COD3 is going to be released on.
"No rules of engagement - Users can define their own roles and interactions, opting in or out as they wish" hahahahahaha i.e no one fights, everyone sits around the bank doing nothing and the only people that want to fight are the ones that can guarantee they will win, which of course means no one wants to fight them. in other words, Ultima Online after the carebear land patch, or presumably, PvE WoW servers (I play on a PvP one so I don't know exactly how it works on PvE).
5. Idiots will come to forums and post detailed critiques of how they don't understand being placed above when they didn't even read the fucking article header saying that it was BASED ON SALES
1200 points seems somehow cheaper than $15.
... okay, okay, so I wasted money on some retarded gamer pictures, so technically I should have, but even then, I know that these points didn't just magically arrive for free in my account and were traded for other real life virtual currency (now this is getting confusing) from my credit card. Maybe it's just because I've bought so many games and appreciate the correlation between the number of games I have and the balance of my bank account.
... or rather, still well less than the original version, which you can play on the go, and which was a full price PSP game, that was quite popular and that a lot of people paid that full price for. It's not going to become magically cheaper just because it's only a virtual copy.
There must be other people that don't see it this way as well as myself. To have this sort of logic you'd have to already have a few thousand points piled up, which have obviously cost you money in the past, a long, forgotten past that is no longer relevant to your current financial situation, which you just throw around without remembering that at some point in time they did actually cost you money. I only buy points when I want to make an immediate purchase, which means that each time I'm buying a game, I pretty much have to part with US$20.
I haven't bought enough games to get myself a 'free' game from leftover points yet
Or maybe I just couldn't think of a good analogy given the poker one has already been played to death.
(crickets)
bringing the real cost of Lumines Live to nearly $24
OMIGOSH!!!
The UMD format might have cost Sony a lot, but they aren't actually that expensive to make.
BOOM BOOM TISH!
Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week.
Oh god here we go again. The Halo fanboys charge out to defend their champion of mediocrity. I'm waiting for a build at work so I'll bite.
Side question : Do you write for Edge magazine? The people there seem to have an eternal boner over this game as well.
Vehicles that can be more fun than moving on foot.
The only valid point you have. For it's time Halo did FPS+vehicles quite well, even if it did go to a third person perspective and somewhat break that feeling of 'being' the character. At least you had the sense to make the point up front before delving into the masturbatory fanboy garbage I'm reading further down. The vehicles in Halo were fun. In fact, the largest critisism of Halo is that it's single player is so amazingly boring to play, and that you end up just waiting for the next open vehicle section.
Insane amount of polish for its time.
Please tell me you don't honestly believe this. The game went thru more changes than any other that immediately comes to mind. First it was an RTS, then a third person strategy/shooter/something, while finally settling on a generic FPS. It moved from Mac to PC before being bought out by Microsoft in order to save their otherwise probably failed console. It was rushed to release to come out as early as possible with the console (or was it actually a launch title), and the level design is obviously almost non existent in many places (Library, destroying the three cores, virtually all ship interiors etc etc). And of course, this apparently gave them time to write the awe inspiring 'Legendary AI', which, for anyone that has played that difficulty level without the aid of rose-colored fanboy glasses, can clearly see is simply a wallhacking aimbot setting with perfect leading skills. Soldier of Fortune 2 (PC) did the exact same thing and everyone hated it. Maybe that's cause PC gamers have had enough experience with FPS games to be able to pick good and bad ones and not just cream themselves over the first FPS game they play.
The game made the console.
I think you're confusing 'made' with 'saved'. The Zelda argument is a moot one, because Zelda has a million fanboys that will buy pocket calculators en masse if they come out with a Zelda game for it. People buy the Playstation 2 because all the games come out for it, and tons of exclusive popular franchises (Tekken, FF etc) and plenty of exclusive new games (Disgaea, God of War etc). The Xbox is the haven of graphically superior multiformat ports and rare decent titles that were either bought out by Microsoft or needed the graphical horsepower of the Xbox (Ninja Gaiden, Forza etc), not to mention plenty of crap ones (Brute Force et al). That's not me saying that the PS2 has no crap games of course, because it clearly does, but in the PS2s case the crap games are more often than not the shitty budget titles that would have sucked anyway. The Xbox had plenty of big name games that were overhyped and failed or were just generally poor (Fable, anyone). Halo became popular because the vast majority of console gamers had never played LAN/WAN deathmatch/co-op before, and it's awesome fun regardless of the game itself, not because the game itself is a 'masterpiece'. Deathmatch makes any game better (people loved SOF2 DM), and co-op makes people see thru the worst flaws.
Amazing soundtrack. Compelling, epic story. Beautiful artwork.
Pure fanboy bullshit not worthy of argument. So you like ugly games with orchestral music and shallow sci-fi tales. Good for you.
Master Chief.
Hahahaha, this whole section is awesome, pure comedy fanboy gold. The Master Chief character looks like a douchebag in a sci-fi knight armor that his mom made for him before stepping into battle, and he might as well be a robot for all we know/see about him. Hell, the only other person he really talks to is a fucking hologram AI. You wan't a well created ch
Don't you people have to work?
Not on weekends.
Eat?
You've never eaten while watching TV before? People can eat while playing games as well. They are the ones that randomly run into static environmental objects or who stand still for 30 seconds at a time and don't actually say anything in team chat as they start moving again.
Poo?
Well if I'm not eating, I don't see this as being a problem either.
Spend "quality time" with the wifey?
If 'the wifey' can't live with you spending 10 hours defending the world from alien invaders, maybe you married the wrong person. I mean, it's her future you're working to ensure here. Those aliens aren't going to roll over and die all on their own. Unless they catch a cold or something.
Sorry guys, you didn't get it.
It's a shame you got so many replies, because anyone that includes this fanboy bullshit line in any post should be immediately ignored.
I really love Oblivion, but I have the intelligence to understand that there will be people that don't like the same games that I do.
Even though it's not an old scho... wait, what?
It's an old school dungeon adventure RPG.
Are you kidding? The creatures and loot level up as you level up. Unless you gimp your character with skill selections (which is quite possible, I'll admit) you never have a problem because the entire game is like you've never levelled at all. No areas you can't venture to early on because they are above your pay grade. So phat loot you can't find somewhere and hold onto until you're strong enough to use it. And entire game that's played as though you've never levelled, and just picked up some new skills on the way.
It's not a full scale RPG by any means, but try the Gothic games. You go into an area you aren't strong enough for yet, you get slaughted, it's that simple. People were finishing Oblivion at level 1 for crying out loud. That just totally spits in the face (I really couldn't think of a good analogy here) of everything that RPG experinece gain and levelling stands for.
They wanted an RPG spoonfed to them like so many Saturday morning cartoons, complete with detailed plot expositions and explanations even a six year old could follow.
And they got it. Instant map travel, quests that mark on the map exactly where you should be heading. Hand holding of the highest order.
I personally really like the game, but some people (like myself) want more complication and less hand holding from their RPGs, you know, like old-school dungeon adventure RPGs.
It's early friday morning and the clock watching has already started until the 5:30 freedom call, and in my blurred 'havent had sugar/coffee' state I just assumed this was an article about the Commodore 64. I got all excited, and then I find out it's all about the few people that have actually grasped technology that wasn't around before they hit 30. (RIP DNA)
For example, go ahead and ask a counter strike player if they know where the safety latch is on a Maverick M4A1 Carbine
Duh, it's the 'L' key.
But, 30 polygons try to do it doggy style, and it's the end of the world.
Mommy, that polygon looks like it's trying to jump over that other polygon, but it can't quite make it.
Hey man, there is no need to be like that. It was an interesting post. And I don't know about you, but I found the fact that he isn't interested in HD console while having a HD TV totally hilarious. Hearty guffaws all round.
And whoosh goes the joke. It's just trying to catch up with the humor, which bailed on your post ages ago.
Belissimo!
(groan)
Make sure you fumble it awkwardly as well. That makes it all the more golden.
That's a pretty lack lustre site. It's like the person designing it had to suddenly rush off and start masturbating before they fi
Halo isn't the best example because the 'Legendary' AI in Halo is pretty obviously, for anyone thats played it who doesn't kneel at the altar of Halo, primarily a wallhacking, aimbotting, rate-of-fire increasing mod for the enemies. If you're out in the open for more than a few seconds, you're dead, because they just don't miss, and they lead perfectly.
SOF2 did EXACTLY the same thing; it totally raped you with it's cheating AI, and yet everyone panned that game for being too hard. Halo does it, and it's the best thing ever and you have to try it on Legendary cause it's just so smart. I agree with you though, it's simply not fun. I want a challenge, not a 'with luck I wont have to reload' fest.
It's funny how Halo was obviously a pretty rushed effort for the Xbox release; terrible level design that is boring and cut and paste in the majority of areas, lame enemy design in places, and all round a pretty done-quick generic game that only succeeded because all the console-only gamers had never experienced deathmatch before, yet people still believe they had time to code in this all-conquering deep-blue AI that is as smart as hell.
A good FPS would be one where the game is hard because the enemies are smart, not because they lead perfectly and are effectively aimbots, but I'm not convinced that many games actually do have impressive AI. Smart AI for the most part in current FPS seems to be enemies that don't fire on sight regardless of distance and obstacles, but that actually attempt to get in as close as possible without making their presence known, so they can hit you hard and at close range. It's a good start, but still has loopholes that can be worked around. FEAR and Far Cry do this to an extent, but on the flipside their AIs can be quite easy to get into stupid situations where they don't seem so smart, so overall they have the reputation of being stupid. It's disappointing that people expect an all or nothing affair, and if a decent AI does one thing stupidly then the whole AI routine is frowned upon as being retarded. Although maybe this is the best we can expect, because Far Cry and FEAR are older games now, and the newer crop of games, Prey included, don't have anything approaching decent AI.
ICEBURN. You so should have put your name to this. This is brilliance.
... shows the ignorance of your comment.
Players have whined and whined and fucking whined that Paladins and Shamans are too different and need to balance better between each other. In other words, they were effectively asking for them to be the same.
Instead of destroying two classes to make the one class that might keep people quiet, they decide the best way around it, while still keeping the uniqueness in both classes, is to allow both factions access to it. No more complaints that the Horde get overpowered Shammys and the Alliance get overpowered Loladins.
And yet, somehow, people still find a way to complain. Now apparently, even the people that don't play. They can't fucking win.
Holy shit, Civ 10?!?!?
I think you're right, I've been playing WoW at the expense of all other gaming news for waaay too long.
"Those experiences taught me that I need to pick my gaming prudently."
All work no play etc etc. Not all time has to be spent productively, Jack. That experience should have taught you that Civ X is a good game and money well spent instead of some EA Sports X title that was just like last years and that bored you within a few hours.
"And I think when I'm 50, I'd rather look back on the fun times I had with (eventual) children than fun times I had with avatars in a world that didn't exist."
Yeah, that inbuilt biological instinct can be hard to shake off sometimes. People still feel the need for a 9-5 with 2.4 kids. And it would just be plain strange to thoughfully consider memories that don't involve said children.
Also, just in case you didn't know, creating a big WoW end game raid that involves adventures that you'll be talking about for months or weeks to come can take in excess of 6 hours to do, let alone the months of levelling and planning beforehand. Creating a kid takes as little as 20 seconds depending on how trigger happy you are. You'll have plenty of time for both. Play some fucking games.
How did this garbage get modded interesting? This is a troll if ever I've seen it. Either a troll, or one of those psuedo-intellectual losers that thinks they are better than everyone and that they have the answers for everything based on their extremely limited experience. In fact, it's actually hard to pick which one of the two it is. I can't be bothered pull it all to pieces because other than the idiots that marked it interesting, everyone else should have no trouble.