| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
brad_sickness


Status: Offline Joined: 07 Jan 2007 Posts: 1447 $poons: 122.60 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Army of Two, the game itself is fine but it's too small and the online play annoys me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UWSguy


Status: Offline Joined: 07 Jun 2005 Posts: 2262 $poons: 429.60 Location: Sydney

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
So much Okami hate. I loved the ending.
Speaking of crap though, I just finished Condemned 2. Very disappointing sequel... Some levels were good but the end of the game was just painful. Felt like it was made in 1991.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeoSanity

Status: Offline Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2988 $poons: 17.20 Location: Sydney

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Bad__Wolf wrote: | | cod 4 has a balanced ranking system? in cod 4 anyone could get to 10th prestige if they play enough, its all about xp, it takes no skill, you could watch tv while playing and go up levels by match bonus. |
I don't agree there, you can work at Call of Duty 4 but unless you build up any skill it'll take you a very long time to build up your ranks. The increase in required points to get to each rank means you need to perform better on average to keep your rate of ranking up the same.
| Bad__Wolf wrote: | | while in halo 3 the ranking system its about skill to get to a general, you need to get a high skill of 50, and its not about playing as much as you can until you get to 50, its about beating other people with similar skill as you until you can't beat them anymore or get to 50 |
I found that to be one of the better things with Halo 2 & 3, but it became very difficult to get up to those higher ranks unless you were at the top of your game every game, if you messed up once you could drop a rank.
| Bad__Wolf wrote: |
it could be your first game and you could be playing against 10th prestige commanders on the other team. Since there is no skill rating you could get absolutely owned by some freaks on the other team,
|
Since Call of Duty 4 has open ended maps unlike the majority of Halo maps it becomes a thing of smarts more than skills, the amount of times I've beaten much better players in deathmatch or sabotage through smarts is more common than you seem. Usually it's though cleaver sniper positions or through creating a diversion to set up the bomb it becomes a game of who can think faster on their feet.
Look the whole unfair teams happens a lot less in Halo but in Call of Duty 4 as you join a game the players get spilt up according to their ranks and previous scores, which in itself creates a fairer playing ground.
| UWSguy wrote: | | Speaking of crap though, I just finished Condemned 2. Very disappointing sequel... Some levels were good but the end of the game was just painful. Felt like it was made in 1991. |
I liked Condemned 2, it was an interesting horror themed game that had me shaking in my pants during the single player.
...
Untill of course it threw the mysterious twist that turned it into a Half Life type game, complete with guns (except in this instance they were clumsy), a mysterious enemy (Who gave you the shits whenever they decided the shrill at you) and the asshole final boos who has turned bad and becomes a puppet for the enemy (Who you could kill by yelling at time a couple of times, I wish I was fucking kidding -Ben "Yahtzee" Crowshaw, 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ObsoletE


Status: Offline Joined: 30 Sep 2003 Posts: 20357 $poons: 34.20 Location: Perth, WA :: Jubei'Thos

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Gears of War.
try as i might, i just can't get into it. the cover system seems alright to begin with, but after a while it just annoys me, mostly because there are things i wanted to be able to do, but couldn't.
and the friendly AI sh*ts me to tears too. kept running in front of me, or getting into areas of cover i wanted to be in, and thus couldn't.
it's a shame, because i really WANT to like it, i just don't.
Halo.
it was (and is) an average shooter in terms of the genre, but happened to be a very good shooter on console. introduced possibly the worst addition to FPS games imo, with the self-healing thing. seriously i think that ruined the genre, sure med-kits aren't realistic, but neither is ducking out of sight for a few seconds. i just think that worrying about health as well added an extra dimension to the strategy of FPS games.
i disagree with people saying it was an average story though. personally i love the plot through all 3 games. it was probably the only thing that made me persevere through number 2.
Oblivion.
it's strange, pre-release i didn't really think much of it, i didn't like Morrowind, so i was not expecting to get into Oblivion, but somehow i got swept along by the praise and bought it, and was disappointed. it just plays like an MMORPG, but offline - so it's essentially everything i hate about MMOs (namely the leveling. i love the social aspect, and i love the endgame, but getting from level 1-60/70/80, i hate.) and if i wanted that experience, i'll keep playing WoW, where at least i can chat with mates, or have a laugh in the region's chat channel.
Doom 3.
now, i really like Doom 3. but i wasn't expecting a survival horror game, but rather a twitch-shooter, like Doom 1 and 2, so that was disappointing.
but i still really like Doom 3. big fan of suspense games.
Command and Conquer 3.
it just feels old and tired in the RTS genre. so much has changed around C&C, but it's remained the same.
as for Deus Ex 2: i played this before i played DX1, and i loved it so much i tracked down a copy of the first game. but now having played both, and trying to replay them, DX2 is far more a chore to play.
but as much as that was so, it's infinitely better than Project Snowblind, the other DX sequel. hugely disappointed by that. _________________
My Play-Asia Affiliate Link.
Last edited by ObsoletE on Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:11 am, edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Falcon


Status: Offline Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 185 $poons: 133.80 Location: Sydney

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
It's been said before, and I'll say it again. Phantom Hourglass. I wanted to like this game. I really wanted to like this game. Great reviews, all my friends said it was awesome, my cousin was totally obssesed with it for a while, but I played for a few hours but could not go on. I just didn't like it  _________________
"Where there's life, there's hope"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Kontoudis


Status: Offline Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 817 $poons: 221.40

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Anyone who says SUPER MARIO GALAXY is absolutely insane - that game blew down upon us from the heavens and we should cherish it forever.
Same with Okami!
You guys are crazy My biggest disappointment has probably been...I dunno, I can't really think of one. I thought Halo 3 was quite underwhelming when contrasted with the massive hype surrounding it. Still a good game, though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kurupt


Status: Offline Joined: 23 Apr 2007 Posts: 1140 $poons: 211.10

|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| sidzed2 wrote: | | Anyone who says SUPER MARIO GALAXY is absolutely insane - that game blew down upon us from the heavens and we should cherish it forever. |
I played it for about 5 hours, then just never turned it back on. It's still in my Wii. Must be about 4 months now. It's just so boring. You run around and jump. That's pretty much all you do in it. The whole game is different variations on where and how to jump.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Passa


Status: Offline Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 2613 $poons: 0.00 Location: Sydney

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| arbok wrote: | | Passa - were you around when SMB3 came out? That was the holy grail of gaming - the jump up in graphics and gameplay from SMB1 and SMB2 was freakish. It was also probably the first time you could fly in a platformer. |
I played SMB3 shortly after my obsession with Super Mario Bros: Deluxe on GBC (which I completed along with the Lost Levels). It just didn't do it for me.. I'd say I prefer SMB2 but I don't consider that to be a real Mario game, even with Miyamoto's involvement. _________________
Xbox 360 Gamertag + Xfire Username + PlayStation Network ID: Passa91
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blacko


Status: Offline Joined: 29 Sep 2007 Posts: 106 $poons: 27.60

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Spanca wrote: | | Dark Wolf wrote: | Halo.
It did nothing we have not seen before. |
What? Which games were we playing before Halo with vehicles and combat on that scale on a console? How many games directly after Halo introduced the regenerating health/shield system, and the 2 weapon system?
I can totally understand saying Halo was overrated (personally I loved it, but I can understand the alternative view), but basing that opinion on the idea that it was nothing new to consoles is a bit far fetched. |
1) Best Vehicular combat game twas Battlezone (Which I'm fairly sure was on Nintendo 64 + play station, the PC version was great), wayyyyy better then Halo (+ I liked the story more moreso the story in the 2nd game, can't remember much of the 1st) [Battlezone the prop 3d version, not the wireframe one.]
2) The regenerating Health/shield system sucked, so ain't much to rave about.
3) 2 weapon system, whoop de fricking doo. (Fairly sure other games have done it, but who cares anyway)
Point is, the game still sucks, and (Points) 2 + 3 are just little things, they don't make the game play great, and doesn't really make a difference, the game still boring (For me it is, both single player and multi player).
Simple.
Bah, Halo did nothing we have not seen before, the things that hasn't been done before, ain't great (Well to me it doesn't) [Also sorry if this sounds a bit mean, or attacking you or some crap, but I just think Halo did nothing great, nor revolutionary, twas "Meh!".]
Anyway, I'm tired as hell, I can't really think of what game I've been disappointed most by, but one I can think of right now would have to be Full Throttle, I went into that game expecting different.
Edit: Yea come to think of it, I'm not sure if I comprehended what you said fully, sorry, I'm tired and confused..... plus in the middle of watching Black Books  _________________
Last edited by Blacko on Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:25 am, edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Limericklad

Status: Offline Joined: 13 Mar 2008 Posts: 79 $poons: 8.60 Location: Limerick, Ireland

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I agree with a lot of what was said above:
I hate when critics and Journalists throw around the title of "Best game in the world ever":
-Gears of War
-Half Life 2
-Halo
They are not the best ever. I never got into half life, but I purchased the Orange Box, and I was so disappointed. Other than the gravity gun its terrible, ugly graphics, ANNOYING enemies, some of the worst sound effects in a game ever, bad story line. Luckily it wasn't a total waste of money as I loved Portal and Team Fortress 2
Gears of War should be called the "biggest victim of hype ever". Its a great game but I was disappointed at the end because I obviously had missed whatever the critics were seeing because I saw no qualities of "the best game ever". Its just shooting from one end of the game to the other. The novelty of most of the weapons wears off after 2 or 3 uses. The hammer of Dawn is just a pain after the first 2 times you use it. To be fair though, the cover system worked and has been in almost every game since GoW
Halo is one phenomenon that has totally passed me by, I never saw the draw and I didn't play halo 3.
I got Oblivion because people were saying it was the best RPG ever(not usually a fan) and it is enjoyable for action fans, but the combat was weak it was too menu-heavy. Mass Effect out-shined it in every sense, bar exploration
I hate the fact that these games get hailed as the best ever, and games like God of War get simply referred to as "great games" but get largely overlooked, probably because they don't have all the gimmicks or because they are last gen _________________ www.chairshot.org
www.chairshot.org/forum
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lennex15


Status: Offline Joined: 15 Mar 2008 Posts: 450 $poons: 147.60 Location: Melbourne

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
It would have to be Cabela's Alaskan Adventure. All i wanted to do was run around and do some hunting. After 5 minutes playing all i wanted to do was scratch my eyes out. Poor rendering, very glitchy, stupid stupid stupid fatigue couldn't run 30 seconds before having to stop and rest, poor vehicle dynamics. Truly s**te _________________
Döppel+Sig+Avatar=Kyser Soze+Respect
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bradc1988


Status: Offline Joined: 09 Oct 2006 Posts: 725 $poons: 356.60 Location: Sydney

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Metroid Prime 1/3. I just couldn't get into either of them, for some reason they just bored me to tears. I really wanted to like them as so many people seem to enjoy the Prime series, but unfortunately they're not for me.
Apart from that the only thing that springs to mind is Audiosurf. I played it once for about half an hour and haven't played it since which is fairly disappointing.
 _________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Pete


Status: Offline Joined: 02 Dec 2003 Posts: 3794 $poons: 278.80 Location: Brisbane QLD

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Metroid Prime
Patience is the key with this game and sadly with so many superb games coming out that year Prime really needed to hit my 13 year old being from the get go. After playing around 6-7 hours I eventually had to give it up for the more attractive LoZ: WW.
Mario Kart: Double Dash
The follow up to the memorable Mario Kart 64 fell well below expectations. Just felt far too superficial - sadly a theme you'll find with most GameCube games IMO.
Mario Power Tennis
Met the same shortcomings MK: DD did. Such a shame following the masterpiece that was Mario Tennis.
Yoshi's Story
Take one of the best platformers of all time and try and find a way to ruin it - congratulations you have something in common with Yoshi's Story. With a sickening cute over tone and a poor collect-them-all system Yoshi's Story failed to meet my expectations.
Many more to come I feel.  _________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kurupt


Status: Offline Joined: 23 Apr 2007 Posts: 1140 $poons: 211.10

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
I loved Metroid prime 1 and 3. 2 I didn't really get into, because the dark world damaged you, and this made you not want to go explore the world, which is basically the point of the Prime games. And by the time you get the suite that makes you not take damage, you're up to the final boss, and already explored 90% of the world.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ObsoletE


Status: Offline Joined: 30 Sep 2003 Posts: 20357 $poons: 34.20 Location: Perth, WA :: Jubei'Thos

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Blacko wrote: | | Spanca wrote: | | Dark Wolf wrote: | Halo.
It did nothing we have not seen before. |
What? Which games were we playing before Halo with vehicles and combat on that scale on a console? How many games directly after Halo introduced the regenerating health/shield system, and the 2 weapon system?
I can totally understand saying Halo was overrated (personally I loved it, but I can understand the alternative view), but basing that opinion on the idea that it was nothing new to consoles is a bit far fetched. |
1) Best Vehicular combat game twas Battlezone (Which I'm fairly sure was on Nintendo 64 + play station, the PC version was great), wayyyyy better then Halo (+ I liked the story more moreso the story in the 2nd game, can't remember much of the 1st) [Battlezone the prop 3d version, not the wireframe one.]
2) The regenerating Health/shield system sucked, so ain't much to rave about.
3) 2 weapon system, whoop de fricking doo. (Fairly sure other games have done it, but who cares anyway) |
yeah, both 1) and 3) had been done before - though the thing with vehicles was more the seamless integration of vehicles. no longer did you have an "on foot" stage that lead into an "in car/plane/mech" stage. you were free to jump in and out where-ever you felt like, but this had been done before too anyway (Operation Flashpoint i believe was the first to do it, which also had the limited number of weapons too, but that had been done earlier too, with games like the Delta Force series, or SWAT3 and so on.), so kind of moot.
2) i'm not sure about - but like you, i hate it. i much prefer the old-style %age based health, running around on 10% looking for a medkit, or medic.
but the thing about Halo was they hadn't been done on this scale before. both 1) and 3) were both really only done in smaller, almost sim-FPS games prior to Halo. games without much of a story anyway, and certainly never on a console before, which was really the clincher for Halo.
but i disagree with any negatory comments on the plot of Halo (and 2-3). aside from Bungie having no idea how to properly portray plot through their cutscenes (seriously, the end of H3 was a schamozzle), the story is really, very good - and not just in terms of your average videogame plot - it's a pretty damned good sci-fi plot. _________________
My Play-Asia Affiliate Link.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NismoR34


Status: Offline Joined: 09 Jul 2003 Posts: 6223 $poons: 136.00 Location: Canberra

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
It hurts me to read this thread and to see so many of my favourite games of all time (Metroid Prime series, BioShock, Okami - I mean come on) mentioned in it but I respect the fact that you're all entitled to your opinions and I appreciate the honesty about it too.
I can't say I really had any game that absolutely disappointed me as most of the games I had been really anticipating before release ended up being decent enough to justify my hype or whatever. If I was to choose a game (or two) though it would be Halo 2 and 3.
The original was awesome back in its day and it was certainly something different to what I had played before it. Naturally that meant that I fell for the hype for Halo 2 and then made the same mistake (although nowhere near as much) with Halo 3. They're good games, great even but once you've played Halo you have played Halo. It doesn't matter what version it is or what small additions a game has added or whatever, it's still Halo and that led to my disappointment.
Having said that, the story has still been pretty awesome (even with certain endings) throughout and I'd love to read the novels to extend that at some point. So yeah, I don't really have any disappointing games.
Edit: Wait, yes I do! Perfect Dark Zero.
MAAAAN was I disappointed in that atrocious piece of poo. Multiplayer had slight potential but after the brilliance of the original, to end up with that for a sequel (or prequel as the case may be) is just pathetic. The original Perfect Dark was ahead of its time but Zero was so behind the times it isn't funny. _________________
Raptured Reality
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bloody Tears


Status: Offline Joined: 11 Jul 2007 Posts: 289 $poons: 83.80

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
The most disappointing this year, or for any current generation console, is Burnout Paradise. Too many critical oversights to be able to offer more than a few minutes of fun. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the definition of disappointing.
Devil May Cry 4. I actually love the game but feel it was dumbed down heavily for greater appeal. Very disappointed in that respect, as the sense of accomplishment is all but gone – a critical aspect of prior games (with the exception of 2, of course, which is another great example of disappointment or disgust).
Halo series. It’s disappointing because the hype machine killed it. I still have no idea why it’s considered by many as the greatest thing in gaming.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unlachs


Status: Offline Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 870 $poons: 138.10

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
i found wind waker to be fairly underwhelming
and not at all because of the sailing, as it is probably my favourite aspect of the game
my disappointment most likely had something to do with the complete lack of interesting level/dungeon design and the all too familiar bosses _________________ DON'T SURRENDER
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dark Wolf

Status: Offline Joined: 21 Apr 2008 Posts: 42 $poons: 6.80

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Blacko wrote: | | Spanca wrote: | | Dark Wolf wrote: | Halo.
It did nothing we have not seen before. |
What? Which games were we playing before Halo with vehicles and combat on that scale on a console? How many games directly after Halo introduced the regenerating health/shield system, and the 2 weapon system?
I can totally understand saying Halo was overrated (personally I loved it, but I can understand the alternative view), but basing that opinion on the idea that it was nothing new to consoles is a bit far fetched. |
1) Best Vehicular combat game twas Battlezone (Which I'm fairly sure was on Nintendo 64 + play station, the PC version was great), wayyyyy better then Halo (+ I liked the story more moreso the story in the 2nd game, can't remember much of the 1st) [Battlezone the prop 3d version, not the wireframe one.]
2) The regenerating Health/shield system sucked, so ain't much to rave about.
3) 2 weapon system, whoop de fricking doo. (Fairly sure other games have done it, but who cares anyway)
Point is, the game still sucks, and (Points) 2 + 3 are just little things, they don't make the game play great, and doesn't really make a difference, the game still boring (For me it is, both single player and multi player).
Simple.
Bah, Halo did nothing we have not seen before, the things that hasn't been done before, ain't great (Well to me it doesn't) [Also sorry if this sounds a bit mean, or attacking you or some crap, but I just think Halo did nothing great, nor revolutionary, twas "Meh!".]
Anyway, I'm tired as hell, I can't really think of what game I've been disappointed most by, but one I can think of right now would have to be Full Throttle, I went into that game expecting different.
Edit: Yea come to think of it, I'm not sure if I comprehended what you said fully, sorry, I'm tired and confused..... plus in the middle of watching Black Books  |
Couldn't have put it better myself.
| unlachs wrote: | | i found wind waker to be fairly underwhelming |
I found Wind Waker to be one of the better Zelda games, yes better then Ocarina of Time.
Gears of War deserves a mention as a let down. The cover system seemed impressive, but became extremely irritating, the plot wasn't mind blowing either.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emech


Status: Offline Joined: 23 Aug 2006 Posts: 1525 $poons: 131.40 Location: Sydney

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Halo 2: texture pop up killed it for me from the start. The whole point of conosles was to have standadised systems you could optimise games for, and this engine couldn't load properly. Also forcing the switch to the alien - I enjoyed beinghte master chief, i wanted to kick alien butt, not be some green peace sympathiser with both sides.
Also Half life (1 & 2) - Apart form their community modability, I just dont get the hype................... _________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kikujir0


Status: Offline Joined: 29 Dec 2006 Posts: 1063 $poons: 114.90 Location: Sydney, Australia

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Tarr Chronicles
Don't know if many of you have played this, but anyway its a space sim released not too long ago I think. I think what swept me in to buying this game was the demo, it was exciting and new at first, with georgeous sceneries and exciting spaceship-dog-fights.
The demo was awesome, the mission was a little linear and simple, but it was a demo so I accepted that. In the full game.. damn was I fooled. The missions are boring as hell, after the initial oohs and aahs of the graphics and the novelty of the dog-fights wear off it started to get real tiresome. The missions stayed linear, always some sort of escort, or defeat x amount of enemies, stopped after 2 hours and never played it again. _________________ xfire = andylulz
steam = kikujir02
psn = kikujir01
PC Gamer Pewpew
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jellyfish

Status: Offline Joined: 17 May 2005 Posts: 5186 $poons: 22.60 Location: Melbourne, Victoria

|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
These threads always depress me because of normally hugely hypocritical posts they attract.
The game that disappointed me the most is The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.
I never owned it on my 64, I got it on a bonus disc I got with my Gamecube. I've tried playing it many times mainly due to it always winning "The Best Game of All Time Ever, No Expections blah blah blah" award. However I find it immensely boring, so boring in fact I just can't push myself to go further to see if it gets more exciting further on.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baad Woolf


Status: Offline Joined: 17 Sep 2007 Posts: 214 $poons: 18.90

|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Neo.Sanity wrote: | I don't agree there, you can work at Call of Duty 4 but unless you build up any skill it'll take you a very long time to build up your ranks. The increase in required points to get to each rank means you need to perform better on average to keep your rate of ranking up the same.
I found that to be one of the better things with Halo 2 & 3, but it became very difficult to get up to those higher ranks unless you were at the top of your game every game, if you messed up once you could drop a rank. |
Exactly in Cod 4 you can go up ranks but you don't necesarrily have to get any better
In halo 3 to go up a level you have to become better than the people on similar levels than you to enable you to go up
It makes sense to go up a rank you need to be better than others on your rank, if your not better than them why should you be a higher level than them?
Halo has got that thing going with the skill + experience = rank where as cod has got the exp = rank
| Neo.Sanity wrote: | | Since Call of Duty 4 has open ended maps unlike the majority of Halo maps it becomes a thing of smarts more than skills, the amount of times I've beaten much better players in deathmatch or sabotage through smarts is more common than you seem. Usually it's though cleaver sniper positions or through creating a diversion to set up the bomb it becomes a game of who can think faster on their feet. |
Cod4 can be more about smarts than skills because it is a lot easier/quicker to get a kill while in halo you have the extra time to play with where skill can come in hand for eg two people running at you + a well placed grenade can equal an easy double.
But what i meant is that they could just be really good at cod4 have the smarts and skills and just keep playing people of a lower standard than them with no real challenge because a lack of a good ranking system with appropriate matchmaking
| Neo.Sanity wrote: | Look the whole unfair teams happens a lot less in Halo but in Call of Duty 4 as you join a game the players get spilt up according to their ranks and previous scores, which in itself creates a fairer playing ground.
|
Yes it is true that the teams get split up according to their scores, but not if they go in as parties, if they go in as parties they stick together and keep on owning.
Anyway i probably like Cod4's gameplay more than halo 3's but in my opinion halo 3's matchmaking and ranking system is far superior to Cod4s.
Also halo 3 makes me wanna win beause if i lose ill most likely go down while in cod i dont care coz even if you lose and keep on losing your still going up.
Edit:
| ObsoletE wrote: |
Halo.
it was (and is) an average shooter in terms of the genre, but happened to be a very good shooter on console. introduced possibly the worst addition to FPS games imo, with the self-healing thing. seriously i think that ruined the genre, sure med-kits aren't realistic, but neither is ducking out of sight for a few seconds. i just think that worrying about health as well added an extra dimension to the strategy of FPS games.
|
Halo 1 was good in that sense, it had health plus a shield, you only lost health when you had no shields _________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dark Wolf

Status: Offline Joined: 21 Apr 2008 Posts: 42 $poons: 6.80

|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Bad__Wolf wrote: | | Halo 1 was good in that sense, it had health plus a shield, you only lost health when you had no shields |
Halo 1 was good because of that? It made the game far to easy.
I prefer FPS's that have no health regeneration, running for a medi-kit because you have only 1 point of health left was so much fun, albeit a little frustrating. But thats what made them good.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
merlingt


Status: Offline Joined: 17 Dec 2003 Posts: 544 $poons: 4.60

|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| ObsoletE wrote: | Command and Conquer 3.
it just feels old and tired in the RTS genre. so much has changed around C&C, but it's remained the same. |
I usually agree with you obs, and in this case i mostly do, but c&c3 (on pc at least) was pretty good, like a facelift, nothing really new, but it looked and felt better.
Super Mario Bros 2 was a big dissappointment for me, plug it in and it was like wth? what is this about?
as far as modern gaming, my biggest dissappointment was oblivion, it was hyped up by a lot of my coworkers, so i fiugred i'd spend the money and get the game of the year edition, played it for about an hour and (poof) lost interest. Though - will be restarting it this weekend to see if it was just my frame of mind at the time. I like to give games as many chances as i can before i release them into the wild. _________________
merlinGT
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|