Great. The greediest publisher, and the most arrogant developer team up to create the best selling game in recent history.
What's wrong with the world :(
[QUOTE=solid_jake;19616955]ITT: War of the Fanboys.
I personally think they should atleast make a sale.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://nathansavington.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/sidewaysbobbyexcited.jpg[/img]
[b]"PREPOSTEROUS! Do you know HOW MUCH money we would lose if we make our prices fair for those disgusting people called 'gamers"?! My diamond studded toilet doesn't pay for itself you know, I NEED my constant flow of Jew Gold!"[/b]
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19616892]
7 hours?! Sure, if you prone the entire way through. I cleared it my first try in barely 4, on [B]normal[/B].
And Portal wasn't $60, which is already higher than the average PC game price.[/QUOTE]
Theres your problem. On Veteran you can't just rambo through it like Halo, you have to take cover constantly and move with your teammates.
Portal didn't have a gigantic multiplayer experience, co-operative experience or longer singleplayer. We can argue the worth of those till the cows come home but I was making the point that quality matters in a campaign more than quantity.
[QUOTE=tankkiller;19616968]Do you even know what Portal is?[/QUOTE]
i didn't even think it was possible to misinterpret my message. i was saying i'd rather have mw2 be 4 hours, with cinematic moments and varying environments than some drawn out 10-hour repetitive shooting gallery.
[editline]12:48AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19616999][img]http://nathansavington.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/sidewaysbobbyexcited.jpg[/img]
[b]"PREPOSTEROUS! Do you know HOW MUCH money we would lose if we make our prices fair for those disgusting people called 'gamers"?! My diamond studded toilet doesn't pay for itself you know, I NEED my constant flow of Jew Gold!"[/b][/QUOTE]
yeah man how dare those guys disrespect my GAMING profession. i am a special breed of person and those corporate bastards better appease my every whim. gosh, i'm off to start an internet boycott!
So hows about you donate a couple of million to help those people in Haiti IW?
[QUOTE=Owner3;19617011]yeah man how dare those guys disrespect my GAMING profession. i am a special breed of person and those corporate bastards better appease my every whim. gosh, i'm off to start an internet boycott![/QUOTE]
So you're saying you wouldn't mind if more companies followed Activision's actions are started charging you $80 to buy a game, $15 a month to play said game online, $20 for DLC packs, and no support for community of said game at all?
Jesus.
[QUOTE=Xereno;19617053]So hows about you donate a couple of million to help those people in Haiti IW?[/QUOTE]
I agree, I own a house in the Dominican Republic by the capitol.
I would like full blown protection
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19617076]So you're saying you wouldn't mind if more companies followed Activision's actions are started charging you $80 to buy a game, $15 a month to play said game online, $20 for DLC packs, and no support for community of said game at all?
Jesus.[/QUOTE]
that isn't what i implied at all but okay
[QUOTE=Neckbeard;19615884]$10 for a movie ticket... $60 for a game... Hmmm...[/QUOTE]
So you can go to the movie 6 times, or 3 dates with a someone for the price of the game.
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19617076]So you're saying you wouldn't mind if more companies followed Activision's actions are started charging you $80 to buy a game, $15 a month to play said game online, $20 for DLC packs, and no support for community of said game at all?
Jesus.[/QUOTE]
No he didn't say that
and make up your mind. first, mw2 is a terrible game and now you're whining about activision being a terrible publisher? make up your mind already
[QUOTE=Owner3;19616878]1) kept it sane? that's debatable. hell, any mission where you mowed through dozens of enemy soldiers without dying could be considered "crazy". mw2 wasn't any less "sane" than its predecessor.
2) now you're just being ridiculous. "each episode acts something new to the franchise as a whole", and you're basically implying mw2 didn't do that? mw2 really fleshed out price's character and it gave soap a personality. and it of course, expanded modern warfare's timeline. are you seriously saying every gun in hl2 had some sort of in depth purpose that mw2 lacked? i pretty much used the overwatch AR rifle throughout while i constantly found myself swapping weapons in mw2.
3) i like the numbers. unless you have ADD, i don't see how they're annoying. it's satisfying to see i gained 50 xp after a kill
4) a few tweaks? have you compared mw2 on highest settings to mw1 on higher settings? there's quite a difference. you might as well say the goldsource engine is just the quake engine with a few tweaks.[/QUOTE]
1) Jesus fucking Christ, why the Hell were the Russians wearing red-camo in the suburbs? Also snowmobile with auto-glock firing one handed, sideways? Grenades that stick to people? Task Force 141? It was like a goddamn action movie, not well thought out and unecessary shit to attract more people.
2) Yes, storytelling was horrible along with horrible story along with generic badasses being generic.
3) Meh, I didn't mind that too much either
4) No. It was the same fucking thing, albeit modified, nothing to get bitchy about, but nothing to get excited about either.
Some of the maps are absolutely, positively horrendous.
Campaign took me 3-4 hours on veteran and don't pull Portal into this, portal wasn't your average first person shooter, it didn't cost 60 dollars either. Campaign's quality doesn't make up for it's lack of quality.
Killstreaks are definitely unbalanced as fuck, along with a shitload of stuff they added to the multiplayer. It's a series of crap they added so the gameplay wouldn't get redundant and I admire them for that, but Jeez they forgot to balance it.
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19615915]It is a dark time for gaming. A dark time indeed.[/QUOTE]
what the fuck how can you say that when games are outselling movies today?
[QUOTE=Billiam;19617174]
Killstreaks are definitely unbalanced as fuck, along with a shitload of stuff they added to the multiplayer. It's a series of crap they added so the gameplay wouldn't get redundant and I admire them for that, but Jeez they forgot to balance it.[/QUOTE]
Okay I'm so sick of that shit. Use a Stinger you moron. Have you ever tried using the weapon designed to destroy killstreaks? Its not that fucking hard.
[QUOTE=Owner3;19617161]and make up your mind. first, mw2 is a terrible game and now you're whining about activision being a terrible publisher? make up your mind already[/QUOTE]
IW is apparently to blame for the lack of dedicated servers while Activision is to blame for, well, everything else including price, DLC timed exclusivity, and a cock of a CEO.
[QUOTE=combine487;19616134]No it's bad, EP1 was great, EP2 is horrible, they didn't even try to add anything original just copy pasted everything from the first game, changed the story, and added no new weapons.
Its a sequel retard.[/QUOTE]
EP2 wasn't 60 bucks.
[QUOTE=Owner3;19617161]and make up your mind. first, mw2 is a terrible game and now you're whining about activision being a terrible publisher? make up your mind already[/QUOTE]
Both.
And I'm done, I can't stand anymore casuals who will bring the ultimate downfall of the industry. I'll be in my bunker with my tin-foil hat which deflects Bobby Kotick's indoctrination rays.
[QUOTE=Owner3;19617011]yeah man how dare those guys disrespect my GAMING profession. i am a special breed of person and those corporate bastards better appease my every whim. gosh, i'm off to start an internet boycott![/QUOTE]
Developers have tended to their gamers for awhile now, I'm not asking them to personally invite me to beta-test, but I would've been happier if they put making a great game a little bit above making a gigantic profit.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;19617239]EP2 wasn't 60 bucks.[/QUOTE]
Read up before making that argument again
[QUOTE=Owner3;19616878]1) kept it sane? that's debatable. hell, any mission where you mowed through dozens of enemy soldiers without dying could be considered "crazy". mw2 wasn't any less "sane" than its predecessor.
2) now you're just being ridiculous. "each episode acts something new to the franchise as a whole", and you're basically implying mw2 didn't do that? mw2 really fleshed out price's character and it gave soap a personality. and it of course, expanded modern warfare's timeline. are you seriously saying every gun in hl2 had some sort of in depth purpose that mw2 lacked? i pretty much used the overwatch AR rifle throughout while i constantly found myself swapping weapons in mw2.
3) i like the numbers. unless you have ADD, i don't see how they're annoying. it's satisfying to see i gained 50 xp after a kill
4) a few tweaks? have you compared mw2 on highest settings to mw1 on higher settings? there's quite a difference. you might as well say the goldsource engine is just the quake engine with a few tweaks.[/QUOTE]
1. I'm not saying "realistic", I'm saying "sane". There is no balance with realism and fun, of course. I'm talking about setpieces and plot devices. I felt that the Russian invasion was only constructed to give some half-baked meaning to the proceedings (The US has been invaded? That [i]never[/i] happens!), which makes the setting unfeasible. MW1's setting, with the coup and the Russian civil war, was interesting and had room to be explored.
In MW2, you mow down civilians in an airport for shock value and hijack a nuclear submarine and nuke the Eastern Seaboard, for christsake.
2. And then it's ripped from him in the final few levels. I didn't feel Price's character was properly fleshed out at all. I liked him, sure, but he's still only as deep as he was in MW1, save he gained a bit of a renegade side.
And yes, every gun in HL2 does have a set purpose. Everyone plays the game differently, of course, but it's easy to see where each one fits. Crowbar is better for headcrabs, shotgun for zombies and close enemies, SMG for close-by soldiers, AR2 for further-away soldiers, .357 for emergency one-hit-kills, crossbow for sniping (etc), but I digress.
3. It's an unnecessary addition to a simple system. I made a post on this a while ago.
4. The differences are minimal at best. Funnily enough, the IW 4.0 engine is just an unnamed id-tech engine with a few tweaks, but that's mostly irrelevant.
[QUOTE=Billiam;19617174]1) Jesus fucking Christ, why the Hell were the Russians wearing red-camo in the suburbs? Also snowmobile with auto-glock firing one handed, sideways? Grenades that stick to people? Task Force 141? It was like a goddamn action movie, not well thought out and unecessary shit to attract more people.
2) Yes, storytelling was horrible along with horrible story along with generic badasses being generic.
3) Meh, I didn't mind that too much either
4) No. It was the same fucking thing, albeit modified, nothing to get bitchy about, but nothing to get excited about either.
Some of the maps are absolutely, positively horrendous.
Campaign took me 3-4 hours on veteran and don't pull Portal into this, portal wasn't your average first person shooter, it didn't cost 60 dollars either. Campaign's quality doesn't make up for it's lack of quality.
Killstreaks are definitely unbalanced as fuck, along with a shitload of stuff they added to the multiplayer. It's a series of crap they added so the gameplay wouldn't get redundant and I admire them for that, but Jeez they forgot to balance it.[/QUOTE]
1) most likely a developer oversight, but that dosn't make a game bad. and would you have rather had no weapon while riding the snow mobile? they balanced fun over realism. and what's wrong with playing an action movie? it was fairly well thought out, especially shepherd's backstory and why he did what he did.
2) storytelling wasn't bad. you got plenty of story through the cutscenes before each mission and throughout the levels. and generic badasses? try almost every single fps ever created.
3) great
4) i still disagree, it seems like there's more to it. but there's no source code or anything so it's really just up for debate.
as for portal, i didn't bring it up in the first place.
and killstreaks unbalanced? use a launcher and the cold blooded perk. easy.
[QUOTE=combine487;19617280]Read up before making that argument again[/QUOTE]
The Orange Box was $60 on the consoles. Episode 2 by itself was $20.
[QUOTE=Snuffy;19617354]1. I'm not saying "realistic", I'm saying "sane". There is no balance with realism and fun, of course. I'm talking about setpieces and plot devices. I felt that the Russian invasion was only constructed to give some half-baked meaning to the proceedings (The US has been invaded? That [I]never[/I] happens!), which makes the setting unfeasible. MW1's setting, with the coup and the Russian civil war, was interesting and had room to be explored.
[B]In MW2, you mow down civilians in an airport for shock value and hijack a nuclear submarine and nuke the Eastern Seaboard, for christsake. [/B]
[/QUOTE]
I stopped reading there.
This is proof you've never played the game.
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19617246]Both.
And I'm done, I can't stand anymore casuals who will bring the ultimate downfall of the industry. I'll be in my bunker with my tin-foil hat which deflects Bobby Kotick's indoctrination rays.[/QUOTE]
you go do that you H@RDCOR3 G@M3R.
[QUOTE=SA Spyder;19617405]I stopped reading there.
This is proof you've never played the game.[/QUOTE]
No Russian was mostly to shock the player, like the Nuke in COD4.
Price hijacks a submarine.
Price launches a nuke at the Eastern seaboard to set off an EMP.
These all happen in the game.
[QUOTE=SA Spyder;19617405]I stopped reading there.
This is proof you've never played the game.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19617429]No Russian was mostly to shock the player, like the Nuke in COD4.
Price hijacks a submarine.
Price launches a nuke at the Eastern seaboard to set off an EMP.
These all happen in the game.[/QUOTE]
^
[QUOTE=tankkiller;19615964]No it's bad, MW1 was great, MW2 is horrible, they didn't even try to add anything original they just copy pasted everything from the first game, changed a few (very few) things, and added some new weapons.[/QUOTE]
sup l4d2
[QUOTE=tankkiller;19615810]It isn't a good game though, it's just Modern Warfare 1 with better graphics and new weapons, oh and tactic00l nukes.[/QUOTE]
Technically you could say that about L4D2, minus the nukes
[editline]08:13PM[/editline]
God damn pteradactyl
[QUOTE=markfu;19617486]Technically you could say that about L4D2, minus the nukes[/QUOTE]
Except L4D2 didn't have it's price raised and everything that makes a PC game a PC game removed from it.
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;19617429]No Russian was mostly to shock the player, like the Nuke in COD4.[/quote]
That mission wasn't just made to shock people, it gave the reason to the entire war. The Russians used American weapons and spoke English, not to mention leaving an American's body to be found at the airport to make it look like a terrorist attack. That's what got Russia invading America. It wasn't a random "HURR LET'S FUCK SHIT UP" mission.
[quote]Price launches a nuke at the Eastern seaboard to set off an EMP.[/quote]
He made it explode in space. It wasn't even inside the atmosphere.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.