Now, granted, Crysis was mostly about pretty pictures and who's got the bigger dic^Wvideo card. But that doesn't mean this particular game is going to be another Crysis.
This is really just a myth. Crysis has very good gameplay, and the narrative is quite engrossing too. The large environments and foliage aren't just there for appearance, they actually affect the gameplay. Enemies can see you from far away, and you can hide in bushes and behind trees, and crawl through tall grass to remain unseen. There's also a sense of distance and scale because going on foot to the next objective can often take a very long time.
Games were more playable on the 8-bit computers & consoles than on today's supercomputers/superconsoles. Yeah the graphics were shitty at times but you still got more immersed in the game than you do these days.
Really? Wolfenstein 3D immersed you more than Crysis? Yeah, ok...
Its hard to get too involved in an 'interactive movie' with a few decisions/actions.
What are these interactive movies that you're referring to? I haven't played an interactive movie since the mid-nineties when they were still being made. I've heard people say MGS4 is an interactive movie, but that's just one game out of thousands.
When discussing the present state of video gaming, there are two extremes. On one side you've got the drooling, slack-jawed idiots who are easily distracted by pretty colors and shiny things that go boom, and one the other side you've got posers who want to appear hardcore (or what they perceive to be hardcore) by damning modern games as heresy because they aren't Pong. Both camps are equally worthless.
Just because graphics don't matter in Wii Tennis doesn't mean they don't matter in an adventure game. Advanced graphics can only be a good thing for adventure games. Sounds to me like you're just pretending to be some sort of pseudo-hardcore gamer by performing the same old routine about how graphics are the devil and we should all go back to Pong.
Where did I ever say I believe that? I'm just pointing out what's going to happen if the West gets involved anywhere. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.
if you want to preserve rights and freedoms in this world, you go on the offensive, you take the fight to the regimes where they are being abused
Yeah, and then you get accused of being the Imperialist World Police who should mind their own goddamn business.
if you play a defensive game, if you only worry about yourself, you will lose your rights and freedoms anyway, and furthermore, you don't deserve the rights and freedoms you worry about because of this self-concern
How will Western country X lose its freedoms because of what's going on in third world country Y?
and furthermore, you don't deserve the rights and freedoms you worry about because of this self-concern
So what should the West do? Occupy every country where human rights aren't up to our standards? Then we'll be blamed of imperialism and genocide and God knows what else. We can't save all the peoples of the world from themselves, and it's not like we don't have problems of our own.
Anyway, we're already doing aid work and peacekeeping, giving money to developing countries and making a big scene about human rights violations (both real and imagined) through groups like Amnesty.
meanwhile, if you only care about yourself, how can you expect society to protect you? society protects you by you staying involved in society, and by society, i mean the world at large, not your own little nationalist fiefdom
I don't think developing countries on the other side of the world are heavily involved in protecting Finland.
BioShock was too easy. Due to past experience with SS2 and other games where you have to conserve ammo, I rarely used firearms. Then again there was no need to, since zapping and wrenching was enough in most situations. In SS2 I was desperately low on ammo aboard the Rickenbacker, making my way through some dark maintenance corridors and fighting spiders and cyborg assassins. It was really tense.
False dilemma. PCs and consoles are not mutually exclusive. I have a fairly high-end PC and a 360. You also seem to be forgetting that a) autoaim is usually optional (I always disable it), and b) not every game is a FPS.
No, this wasn't offtopic. Every time you abuse the moderating system you invite complaints. Maybe you should stop acting like assclowns, and stop crying when someone complains about it.
What the fuck are you smoking? I got modded troll. Which is why I said I got modded troll. Logic 101.
What counter-argument were you expecting? That you AREN'T a chickenshit little thief? You've already admitted that you are - and like the joke about the prostitute, we're now merely establishing how much you charge to have somebody's dick shoved into your mouth.
I haven't admitted anything. You're making shit up.
Slashdot Mirror
This is really just a myth. Crysis has very good gameplay, and the narrative is quite engrossing too. The large environments and foliage aren't just there for appearance, they actually affect the gameplay. Enemies can see you from far away, and you can hide in bushes and behind trees, and crawl through tall grass to remain unseen. There's also a sense of distance and scale because going on foot to the next objective can often take a very long time.
Really? Wolfenstein 3D immersed you more than Crysis? Yeah, ok...
What are these interactive movies that you're referring to? I haven't played an interactive movie since the mid-nineties when they were still being made. I've heard people say MGS4 is an interactive movie, but that's just one game out of thousands.
When discussing the present state of video gaming, there are two extremes. On one side you've got the drooling, slack-jawed idiots who are easily distracted by pretty colors and shiny things that go boom, and one the other side you've got posers who want to appear hardcore (or what they perceive to be hardcore) by damning modern games as heresy because they aren't Pong. Both camps are equally worthless.
Just because graphics don't matter in Wii Tennis doesn't mean they don't matter in an adventure game. Advanced graphics can only be a good thing for adventure games. Sounds to me like you're just pretending to be some sort of pseudo-hardcore gamer by performing the same old routine about how graphics are the devil and we should all go back to Pong.
The link just displays search results for "das modell," and doesn't contain a single post made by me.
So again, I'm still waiting.
Nope, wasn't a troll. Try harder.
Shit, moderating sure is difficult (for some people).
Protip: learn what "context" means before you go around using mod points. It can't be that hard.
Yes? I'm still waiting.
Well... the Bible didn't specifically say that he'd do the second coming in human form, did it?
This is pointless.
I guess you were unable to deal with it.
Where in those posts was I being a "paranoid jerk?"
Where did I ever say I believe that? I'm just pointing out what's going to happen if the West gets involved anywhere. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Hmm, both of my posts were modded down. I think some asshole with an axe to grind might be following me around...
Oh, I thought we were talking about taking action and making changes, not sitting around and feeling concerned.
When the US rolled into Iraq it was accused of being the Imperialist World Police and told to mind its own business.
What the fuck are you talking about?
Even with autoaim it isn't anywhere near comparable to a mouse and keyboard, but the point is that you don't need autoaim to play console shooters.
You set up a dichotomy between PC and console gamers.
Yeah, and then you get accused of being the Imperialist World Police who should mind their own goddamn business.
How will Western country X lose its freedoms because of what's going on in third world country Y?
So what should the West do? Occupy every country where human rights aren't up to our standards? Then we'll be blamed of imperialism and genocide and God knows what else. We can't save all the peoples of the world from themselves, and it's not like we don't have problems of our own.
Anyway, we're already doing aid work and peacekeeping, giving money to developing countries and making a big scene about human rights violations (both real and imagined) through groups like Amnesty.
I don't think developing countries on the other side of the world are heavily involved in protecting Finland.
Sorry, that wasn't offtopic either. Better luck next time, assholes!
BioShock was too easy. Due to past experience with SS2 and other games where you have to conserve ammo, I rarely used firearms. Then again there was no need to, since zapping and wrenching was enough in most situations. In SS2 I was desperately low on ammo aboard the Rickenbacker, making my way through some dark maintenance corridors and fighting spiders and cyborg assassins. It was really tense.
BioShock was really underwhelming.
False dilemma. PCs and consoles are not mutually exclusive. I have a fairly high-end PC and a 360. You also seem to be forgetting that a) autoaim is usually optional (I always disable it), and b) not every game is a FPS.
Just because you can do lots of things doesn't mean those things won't quickly become shallow and uninteresting.
No, this wasn't offtopic. Every time you abuse the moderating system you invite complaints. Maybe you should stop acting like assclowns, and stop crying when someone complains about it.
No. I was expecting a serious reply and didn't get one. Tough shit if you can't deal with that.
What the fuck are you smoking? I got modded troll. Which is why I said I got modded troll. Logic 101.
I haven't admitted anything. You're making shit up.
Offtopic? I don't think so. If you don't want people complaining about Slashdot's broken moderating system, don't abuse it. Problem solved.