• Battlefield 4: The Reckening
    19 replies, posted
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky5UkN8Mxtk[/media]
Reminds me of the whole Ramirez thing from MW2 [video=youtube;PkuLj5uCgSk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkuLj5uCgSk[/video]
[QUOTE=Egon Spengler;46090421]Reminds me of the whole Ramirez thing from MW2 [video=youtube;PkuLj5uCgSk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkuLj5uCgSk[/video][/QUOTE] Despite all the shit people give it, the MW2 campaign was good fun, even if it was very scripted and linear. It was like an interactive action movie where you could look around.
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;46090753]Despite all the shit people give it, the MW2 campaign was good fun, even if it was very scripted and linear. It was like an interactive action movie where you could look around.[/QUOTE] Same counts for MW1, MW3 and the Black Ops ones, in my opinion.
Love the games that make you do everything while your teammate AI just kinda sit back randomly spraying things. Its such lazy game design.
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;46090753]Despite all the shit people give it, the MW2 campaign was good fun, even if it was very scripted and linear. It was like an interactive action movie where you could look around.[/QUOTE] Call of duty campaigns are like the 80's B action movies of video games IMO
Battlefield 4 SP is really weird. The story tells you that you're a squad commander, but you can't tell your teammates to do anything despite "shot some these guys".
[QUOTE=residualgrub;46093075]Love the games that make you do everything while your teammate AI just kinda sit back randomly spraying things. Its such lazy game design.[/QUOTE] No it's not If your teammates were competent then you wouldn't have anything to shoot Even when you can control them like in Mass Effect you're still killing 90% of the enemies yourself
[QUOTE=Jund;46094197]No it's not If your teammates were competent then you wouldn't have anything to shoot Even when you can control them like in Mass Effect you're still killing 90% of the enemies yourself[/QUOTE] No one really minded Alyx being able to take on Zombies, Combine and other threats just fine. So long as it's balanced out and your AI partner isn't basically aimbotting everything in the area, a partner or two actually being competent is never inherently bad. Call of Duty games (and the Battlefield 3 and 4 campaigns by association) just do it so the player feels like a Rambo action hero so they seem super badass. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing either, but it does get ridiculous by that logic that a hyperactive supersoldier that might as well be a coked up regenerating squirrel with a gun renders the near entirety of their allied forces (besides aerial support so long as they're not a chopper that gets shot down) completely obsolete.
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;46090753]Despite all the shit people give it, the MW2 campaign was good fun, even if it was very scripted and linear. It was like an interactive action movie where you could look around.[/QUOTE] That was honestly my problem with it. Games need gameplay, and they should strike a balance between cinematic aspects (story and graphics) and gameplay aspects (mechanics and environments). Taking too much of either results in an imbalanced game. I would rather have had them make a movie for the campaign by that point.
[QUOTE=RikohZX;46094247]No one really minded Alyx being able to take on Zombies, Combine and other threats just fine. So long as it's balanced out and your AI partner isn't basically aimbotting everything in the area, a partner or two actually being competent is never inherently bad. Call of Duty games (and the Battlefield 3 and 4 campaigns by association) just do it so the player feels like a Rambo action hero so they seem super badass. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing either, but it does get ridiculous by that logic that a hyperactive supersoldier that might as well be a coked up regenerating squirrel with a gun renders the near entirety of their allied forces (besides aerial support so long as they're not a chopper that gets shot down) completely obsolete.[/QUOTE] Except that HL2 and mil shooters are very different games In HL2 you have limited ammo and can run out, so it'd be helpful for your partner to take some of the load off In mil shooters you either have enough ammo to last the mission with the same gun or there are easily accessible resupply caches And in HL2 most of the time you're running around by yourself and occasionally with a partner, but in CoD and the like you're going to be with a squad of 4+ If they were all like Alyx you'd just walk through the level without shooting anything and then you'd complain about that
Maybe mil shooters should not give us so much ammo
[QUOTE=cdr248;46097351]Maybe mil shooters should not give us so much ammo[/QUOTE] In the WaW campaign, your starting weapon runs out of ammo fast, unless you pick up an enemy's weapon, then you can replenish ammo from every dead enemy whom was carrying that weapon. :v:
[QUOTE=Jund;46094197]No it's not If your teammates were competent then you wouldn't have anything to shoot Even when you can control them like in Mass Effect you're still killing 90% of the enemies yourself[/QUOTE] As that is a valid point its still no excuse for your teammates to be nothing but set pieces just there to look cool.
[QUOTE=gunguy765;46098150]In the WaW campaign, your starting weapon runs out of ammo fast, unless you pick up an enemy's weapon, then you can replenish ammo from every dead enemy whom was carrying that weapon. :v:[/QUOTE] In Call of Duty 1 I was totally able to continue using Allied weapons from start to finish. I feel like Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway did a decent job when it came to ammo. You were given more than plenty of ammo but you were constantly encouraged to chew through it for suppression purposes, but it still had the problem where picking up enemy weapons essentially meant you had infinite ammo.
[QUOTE=gunguy765;46098150]In the WaW campaign, your starting weapon runs out of ammo fast, unless you pick up an enemy's weapon, then you can replenish ammo from every dead enemy whom was carrying that weapon. :v:[/QUOTE] I actually beat the WaW campaign using nothing but my bayonet (except in sections where you have to shoot) on normal difficulty. Was really fun and challenging, but doing it on the hardest difficulty was impossible.
[b]RECKER YOU SMELL NICE RECKER YOU LOOK PRETTY TODAY DRAW ME LIKE ONE OF YOUR FRENCH GIRLS RECKER[/b] [thumb]http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140417194320/battlefield/images/9/92/Kimble_Graves.png[/thumb] [editline]28th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=cardfan212;46102138]I actually beat the WaW campaign using nothing but my bayonet (except in sections where you have to shoot) on normal difficulty. Was really fun and challenging, but doing it on the hardest difficulty was impossible.[/QUOTE] Fucking Nazis and their fucking grenade spamming
[QUOTE=zombays;46102199][b]RECKER YOU SMELL NICE RECKER YOU LOOK PRETTY TODAY DRAW ME LIKE ONE OF YOUR FRENCH GIRLS RECKER[/b] [thumb]http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140417194320/battlefield/images/9/92/Kimble_Graves.png[/thumb][/QUOTE] dammit omar i told you, i ain't into you like that
[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;46090334][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky5UkN8Mxtk[/media][/QUOTE] The funny thing about this video is it showed me how much better it would've been if they didn't play the "silent protagonist" bullshit with FPS games. Like without Bioshock Infinite, it was great hearing Booker say stuff all the time and his witty retorts. I really think the whole SP thing is really overplayed in general, and is an excuse for not making lines for a character.
took me a while to realise that it was the person who made the video that was responding (I haven't played the BF4 campaign)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.