rafichamp said: @koweniki wait for Killzone 3, then tell me what the best FPS is |
wait for Modern Warfare 3, then tell me what the best FPS is.
rafichamp said: @koweniki wait for Killzone 3, then tell me what the best FPS is |
wait for Modern Warfare 3, then tell me what the best FPS is.
eurogamerpt gave 10 to killzone 2 and resistance 2, 9 to gears2 ...
so did everybody stop waiting on the IGN review?
can't wait for Track Season 2009/2010, guna beast out!
Travis Touchdown ERECTION CONFIRMED!
HOLY CRAP!!!
Eurogamer didn't give it a 7/10 ??!?! Shun the none seveners shun!
KylieDog said:
You are posting opinion and calling it fact for the first two, to anyone who bought those maps this just makes them have wasted money, , your last 'fact' is false also. A website or two is not the whole of Europe. |
Acyually Halo ODST in UK is £34.99. And thats not a deal but the preorder price. Games normally release at £39.99 or £44.99. PS3 games for instance all release at £49.99 or £54.99. So ODST is great value here in UK.
thismeintiel said:
I wasn't really comparing Haze to Halo, at least gameplay wise. I was comparing the reaction to Haze to the reaction to ODST. When Haze was released it's graphics weren't spectacular, not the worst but definitely not the best. Gamplay wasn't too bad, nothing original though. And there were some flaws in the AI. But because people had gotten their own hype machine going for the game, when it was released people trashed it. I believe IGN gave it a 4.5, when games just as bad or worse have gotten higher scores. Gamespot was one of the few who actually reviewed without their unfulfilled hype clouding the review. They gave it a 6, not great but average. I was just pointing out that if this game did not have the Halo name attached to it, it would have been recieved in a like manner. I'm sure it would have gotten at least a 7, but none of these unjustified 9's or above. Again because graphics and some flaws in the AI are supposed to count against you. It is a review after all. And games that aren't polished as much as others have no business getting scores just as high. And as far as your gameplay comment goes. What you list are weapons. Yes they do change the gameplay slightly and make it more fun taking down enemies. But in the end, the gameplay is still nothing revolutionary. Run. Shoot. Get from Point A to Point B. Open door. Run. Shoot. From Point B to Point C. Blow something up. Drive to Point D. Level over. It's all been done before. The original Halo just polished it further than most had. Which isn't a bad thing. I just don't see why people make it this revolutionary title that forever changed the FPS genre. |
wait a second how is a flare a weapon...these are more like strategies. A needler tracks therefore you don't need to see your enemy to kill him. Bubble shield won't kill but with the right weapon and position a player can dominate. It's with these many different combinations of well balanced strategies that creates Halo's gameplay. Content is king and the game has many types of matchmaking modes, weapons, and a deep rock vs paper system. Laser beats Warthog, Brute Shot can counter a Sword, etc etc. Although I'll agree with you on not taking review scores too seriously, some of my favorite games have been 7s or 8s. The biggest reason I play Halo though is definitely the excellent matchmaking no other console game I've played yet matches it in speed or ease of use. ODST is still a heavily multiplayer driven game, I don't know why you would buy the game if you don't play on Xbox Live it comes with 20 dollars worth of maps (I guess you could play them at home like 2v2..) I'm sure the reviewers themselves feel that way as well.