[quote]People like to boast they finished a game in the shortest time imaginable, as if that’s some kind of achievement. It’s nonchalantly phrased. “Coming in at around six hours,” they’ll say, because eight is around six, right? And then someone on another site reads this and thinks, “Six?! It took me seven! Um, I’m going to call it five.” Because god forbid you take longer – it would mean you must be bad at the game! Or, perhaps, you took your time, explored it a bit more, stopped to blow up the roses. Games aren’t a race, and it would be rather nice if my cousins in this business could stop the one-upping. Homefront took me four hours.[/quote]
Why go off on such a weird tangent, people finish the game at whatever time they finish I've never encountered someone that's gone "LOL YA I FINISHED ME2 IN LIKE 2.5 HOURS W/ MAX STUFF"
This game looks so generic.
They didn't mention multiplayer, which is the only thing the game has going for it.
[QUOTE=markg06;28692559]Why go off on such a weird tangent, people finish the game at whatever time they finish I've never encountered someone that's gone "LOL YA I FINISHED ME2 IN LIKE 2.5 HOURS W/ MAX STUFF"[/QUOTE]
mirror's edge
portal
[QUOTE=EliteGuy;28692620]They didn't mention multiplayer, which is the only thing the game has going for it.[/QUOTE]
When a game's main selling point is that it's written by the guy who wrote Red Dawn and is set in a Korean invasion of the U.S., I'd say it's main point is the fucking singleplayer.
Who gives a shit if the multiplayer features Koreans VS Americans. No one is going to fucking notice. You could replace it with Dwarves VS Sweat shop workers and it's still be the same generic "kill the other team" gameplay.
The original CoDs before CoD4 were fantastic at making you feel like one of many, part of an actual war; and then they started making you the dumb hero again. There needs to be a middleground between the two, where you're not the most important man but you're not useless.
the game looks fantastic but the gameplay looks laughable
[editline]19th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;28692683]When a game's main selling point is that it's written by the guy who wrote Red Dawn and is set in a Korean invasion of the U.S., I'd say it's main point is the fucking singleplayer.
Who gives a shit if the multiplayer features Koreans VS Americans. No one is going to fucking notice. You could replace it with Dwarves VS Sweat shop workers and it's still be the same generic "kill the other team" gameplay.[/QUOTE]
seriously
this is written by the guy who wrote red dawn?
that's pathetic
[quote]From the spiteful scene at the start in which you watch some parents shot against a wall in front of their infant son, who runs to his dead mother, shaking her clothes and screaming, it sets the tone for some clumsy and downright insulting “horror of war” rhetoric. It just doesn’t mean it, at all. The game [i]loves[/i] war. It relishes in gory headshots and atrocities, feverishly wanking itself into oblivion every time it thinks it’s Saying Something. The final third’s epic set pieces have all the sensitivity of a Roland Emmerich film (and are just as memorable – I finished it an hour ago and I’m struggling to remember what happened.) So don’t start preaching to me about the terrible ways of mass graves.[/quote]
That was a pretty good observation.
[QUOTE=geogzm;28692671]mirror's edge
portal[/QUOTE]
Portal wasn't $49.99
Mirrors Edge was a ripoff, but at least it was entertaining.
[editline]uh[/editline]
Ripoff doesn't mean I don't like it. It was a great game. $49.99 is just a little steep for how long it was.
I was hoping this game would be good. Great thing I didn't buy it.
Well, looks like I and the several hundred or so others who immediately thought 'CoD-clone' when we saw the first gameplay vids were right all along.
This is exactly how I feel and I 100% agree with this review.
Wot I thot (hehe)
[QUOTE=goon165;28674367]Yeah, if there's anything to learn from Homefront it's how they pulled off that opening scene, Powerful stuff. the real world retailers and food chain outlets also make the world a lot more believable.
[editline]18th March 2011[/editline]
But the main fault of the Singleplayer is that it feels like you're just watching the story progress instead of participating in it, the Characters will sometimes unnaturally stop and pause in a situation while the game halts your progress so they can deliver lines and exposition.
It shows that a Movie Screen Writer wrote this script, because it feels one.
in the fact that the script has it's own plans and it will rigidly dictate your pace and progression through it and since you really have no impact on the story itself you're just watching it happen in front of you like watching a Movie. you're just there to find some entertainment in filling body bags will the meat of countless numbers of hapless Korean cannon fodder, and the player is written in so haphazardly that it's clear the Writer had wrote this as a movie with out any knowledge on how games should work and then the design team just sort of jerryrigged the player into it without playing with the script too much, it really feels like the player is out of place in all this because of that.
This is barely qualify as a game, more like a movie that stops it's self now and again to have you kill a bunch of dudes to un-pause it.
that doesn't mean it's bad though, it's just not really what this medium is for or about.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;28692754]The original CoDs before CoD4 were fantastic at making you feel like one of many, part of an actual war; and then they started making you the dumb hero again. There needs to be a middleground between the two, where you're not the most important man but you're not useless.
the game looks fantastic but the gameplay looks laughable
[editline]19th March 2011[/editline]
seriously
this is written by the guy who wrote red dawn?
that's pathetic[/QUOTE]
Star wars battlefront is quite good at that, you are more valuable than the NPC soldiers but you need them there to at least be your meat shield. Unless you're playing on hoth, then you just get in the big 4 leg walker and never die again.
Correction:
It is a CoD clone with the recoil of Medal Of Honor.
Got it when it was leaked. I'm so glad I didn't spend $50 on this piece of shit COD clone.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("We don't need to know you pirated it." - Pascall))[/highlight]
Bought game for multiplayer.
Beat scripted, typical FPS singleplayer in 5 hours.
Enjoy the multiplayer portion immensly, replaces the other two FPS games I had been playing recently.
Everything went better then expected.
[QUOTE=McNab;28694946]Correction:
It is a CoD clone with the recoil of Medal Of Honor.[/QUOTE]
I.E. none.
[editline]19th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28695116]Bought game for multiplayer.
Beat scripted, typical FPS singleplayer in 5 hours.
Enjoy the multiplayer portion immensly, replaces the other two FPS games I had been playing recently.
Everything went better then expected.[/QUOTE]
Yes I've heard the Multiplayer is very good.
I'll probably give it a rent to see.
I called it when the multiplayer trailer was released
which is a shame, considering so so much could have been done with the setting
Another game with ruined potential. Other examples include Spore.
[QUOTE=Dlaor-guy;28695533]Another game with ruined potential. Other examples include Spore.[/QUOTE]
Spore is a complete different story
I tried to take as long as possible, wandering around levels, collecting papers only managed to get 40 of them though and still took 3.2 hours exactly on hard.
Just as it got better it ended.
Hated how battles always had the sun staring you right in your face. Always finidng my self looking for cover that would best block out the sun and wasn't stolen by the AI.
Instead of spending so much money advertising for the game they should have spent the money on the actual game
We need a name for the "CoD4 clone" subgenre of FPS. I suggest Shit FPS.
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;28692949]Portal wasn't $49.99
Mirrors Edge was a ripoff, but at least it was entertaining.[/QUOTE]
What the hell was Mirrors Edge a rip off of?.
[QUOTE=goon165;28696704]What the hell was Mirrors Edge a rip off of?.[/QUOTE]
Ripoff as in "That wasn't worth half of what I paid!"
I though it was pretty good, too short though and a shitty ending.
If a game has to be like MW2 to be "good", it's not gonna be a good game. Thank God there was no [i]B-B-B-BLOODY SCREEN![/i] when you got hit.
Also, the ending made me disappointed. For a guy who wrote Red Dawn, he fucked up hard.
[sp]I can't beleive it just had to end there, right when they drop the bomb on the bridge. I wish it was longer. They could have made it so you could liberate all of San Francisco with the help of the army.[/sp]
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;28692949]Portal wasn't $49.99
Mirrors Edge was a ripoff, but at least it was entertaining.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, because as short as ME was, it had something going for it.
It had those damn sexy set pieces and the novelty of freerunning. This game has scenery, but no gameplay behind it.
Or rather no new gameplay behind it.
I knew this was gonna be a bad COD clone when I saw the first teaser.
[QUOTE=T F;28697170]If a game has to be like MW2 to be "good", it's not gonna be a good game. Thank God there was no [i]B-B-B-BLOODY SCREEN![/i] when you got hit.
Also, the ending made me disappointed. For a guy who wrote Red Dawn, he fucked up hard.
[sp]I can't beleive it just had to end there, right when they drop the bomb on the bridge. I wish it was longer. They could have made it so you could liberate all of San Francisco with the help of the army.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Yeah the ending was pretty fucking weak, and is obvious seqal bait.
[QUOTE=Dlaor-guy;28695533]Another game with ruined potential. Other examples include Spore.[/QUOTE]
i actually thought spore was very entertaining. and i think i'm the only one who thinks so. although attacking cities and watching the citizens run in agony as the sirens screamed wasn't so childish, the game itself felt childish. they should make a grittier, more realistic version of spore, and add more gameplay features to it if they ever do it, because even if (in my opinion) spore felt pretty damn balanced, they could've added a lot more into the game to make it more diverse and add more replayability to it. still, it's false to say that it didn't deliver most of what it promised. it was the first on its unique simulator genre, and was a very good example on how other games (if ever done) on that genre should be like.
still, i'm derailing the thread, sorry.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
