holy shit it didnt get a 10?
still 8.5 is way to high.
Seemed a little more fair than another review I saw that gave the game a perfect score. I still think it should have gotten a lower score, no game series should be able to get away with changing so little with every new game every year, and still getting such praise.
It helps make Spec Ops a great destination for those seeking a challenge. (Shows player holding down trigger at hull of stationary helicopter to finish wave)
...great arena for speedy gunplay... (Shows guy walk out from behind a wall, shoot a guy in the face with a shotgun, and walk back behind another wall)
Those compelling for new concepts?
Pfffft how naive do you actually have to be to think that about activision's games
Bwahahahaha, I couldn't even get past the first fucking minute.
Man I remember how much fun I had with CoD4. 5 years later the game still looks like exactly same thing, EXACTLY.
5 hour campaign. What.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;33184340]5 hour campaign. What.[/QUOTE]
Par for the course. Not even that bad comparatively; I beat BF3 in 3 hours on the dot.
When rating a game, shouldn't you consider how innovative it is?
What the fuck, really?
[editline]8th November 2011[/editline]
They did, Lazore. They mentioned it several times.
[QUOTE=SPESS MEHRINE;33181956]no game series should be able to get away with changing so little with every new game every year, and still getting such praise.[/QUOTE]
Pokemon.
But at-least Pokemon is actually good and the formula shouldn't be changed unless something very innovative can be done.
[QUOTE=Katatonic717;33184662]Pokemon.
But at-least Pokemon is actually good and the formula shouldn't be changed unless something very innovative can be done.[/QUOTE]
Pokemon actually has significantly better graphics with each new generation
I saw some of my friend's friends talk about MW3 in Facebook and I decided to join into conversation.
According to them, Battlefield 3 is absolute shit and Modern Warfare 3 is a masterpiece. I'd like to tell them that they just have low standards and they are still buying game series which are recycled from the year 2007, but I can't bother to start a shitstorm about it with COD fanboys.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;33184687]Pokemon actually has significantly better graphics with each new generation[/QUOTE]
And at least 100 new pokemon and a bevy of new moves. They also adjust the meta-game each generation giving you newer strategies and ways to decimate opponents.
It went from Alakazam Spam to a highly statistical, very competetive game.
Pretty fair review, the only problem I had with it was when they said that multiplayer was streamlined rather than changed. It's not really streamlined at all, they've just add in new features and hud elements that clutter the game up.
[QUOTE=Wormy;33187009]This thread is now a pokemon thread.[/QUOTE]
Pokemon Stadium was the [B]shit[/B].
They gave this the same score IGN gave Sonic Generations. I think that's serviceable; while barely innovative and not attempting to take any unique risks whatsoever, the Call of Duty gameplay is still solid, just marred by its rehash reputation, community and Activision's meddling.
I'm just disappointed that the convenience of the sale takes priority over the convenience of the consumer, and a bit peeved about the mess of Black Ops on the PC last year, so it's really not worth buying this.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;33187505]Pokemon Stadium was the [B]shit[/B].[/QUOTE]
yeah, it was pretty shit alright.
I just saw the Model 1887
[QUOTE=Fofilolipop;33187727]yeah, it was pretty shit alright.[/QUOTE]
The minigames were worth the price of admission alone.
[QUOTE=Chickens!;33187756]I just saw the Model 1887[/QUOTE]
It has rails and a synthetic body this time.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184394]Par for the course. Not even that bad comparatively; I beat BF3 in 3 hours on the dot.[/QUOTE] Impossible.
[QUOTE=BlueYoshi;33187999]Impossible.[/QUOTE]
Ok I lied; 3 hours and 7 minutes.
And you can cut out 10 minutes of that from a quick time event that didn't work until I restarted the game.
There will always be a riverley (Man sp? holy shit) between the 2, CoD and BF are still on top.
Because war... war never changes.
[IMG]http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lg0rmadhfi1qgou2fo1_500.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;33184340]5 hour campaign. What.[/QUOTE]
Gamereactor.se said it was around 4 hours.
[QUOTE=Mark364;33181888]holy shit it didnt get a 10?
still 8.5 is way to high.[/QUOTE]
Did you even play the game
Whaaat, was that "kill confirmed" thingy really true? I saw some video of some guys promoting it but I thought it was some sort of spoof.
"Addicting leveling up!"
"A game that changed a generation!"
No. No.
I love how i thought it was mw2 at parts for comparison shots, looks like it wasn't.
5 hour campaing?
Hahahaha, dear god I don't know what to say.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
