By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
S.T.A.G.E. on 29 April 2009
Edit Thread
Euphoria14 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
waron said:
personally
gameplay>graphics
i'm more worried that this game will be unplayable thanks to maps were you will be killed 2 seconds after respawn by stray bullet or campers(this game can end up as a "run to the nearest safe spot and kill everything that respawns/move wit sniper rifle" campers game).
i don't care about the graphics as long as it have stellar framerate, won't have glitches and will be "clean"(no bad textures, models etc. and everything at the same level).
for me even first gen 360 games like Perfect Dark Zero looks good.

 

EXACTLY! A shooter that requires 256 players also requires little skill to have many kills!

What would require more skill to consistently come out on top? A 1 vs 1, 10 player DM, 32 player DM or a 8 vs 8 x 16 TDM?

I wouldn't know, but I am hoping someone else does. All I know is that I won't touch a game like this with a 10-foot pole. Killzone 2 was way too intense for me and it was 32 players. This game would make me rip my hair out.

 

A one vs one is too obvious that one person will win. 32 player DM sounds about right. It's the truth man, i've been playing FPS for years and with 256 players on the map its going to be a spawn kill fest. I'm not saying don't buy it, i'm just giving my opinion from experience. KZ2 had the right amount of players, which is why everything turned out well. You can have players who are valued on your team by true skill. The battlefields are wide enough and that is a plus for KZ2. MAG is going to be a gigantic clusterfuck. Question though....how was KZ2 too intense? Man if that was intense you would've hated the old Call of Duty games lol.