By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
MontanaHatchet on 27 July 2009
Edit Thread
disolitude said:
MontanaHatchet said:

This game obviously wasn't a commercial success, and there's nothing to indicate that the cover system was a big part of gameplay. Even if it featured this, it means nothing if it's just a passive feature. I haven't played Kill.Switch, but Gears has an almost perfect cover system, and it's the focus of the game.

The PS2 was not mediocre, it just so happened that it was the most popular console at the time and Sega couldn't keep up. Sony made one of the greatest consoles ever (the PS1), and its sequel did well. Sega made a console that disappointed on so many levels, and its sequel suffered. Sega killed Sega, Sony shouldn't be blamed for being a competitor. I hate when people let their fanboyism take over and say things like that.


Im sorry...but had you played headhunter you'd know that cover is the vital part of gameplay. it is not used as in Gears(hide behind rock till you shoot everything) but instead it is used as a stealth tool and for when the firefight gets intense. Worse of all...the game has a roll feature...cover and roll, wasn't that the #1 innovation that Gears gets credit for. Don't get me wrong, I own both gears games, but its sad when a game and its features get overlooked in history by pretty much everyone...no matter how rare it is.

Also, in 2001 PS2 was mediocre...it was an amazing console overall when everything was said and done, but a 2000 and 2001 gamer was much happier with the dreamcast than ps2.

Well, throughout that whole gameplay video, it was only used for a couple seconds. So you can understand why I might think it's not an important feature (and is it really the first game to use cover as a stealthy feature?). Gears of War 2 got credit for its cover feature because it simply worked. And it worked well. Obviously few people are the first to anything, but that doesn't stop them from doing something very well. LittleBigPlanet is far from the first game with level editing as a primary focus, but it gets praise for its innovation. Same stuff.

The reason for the Dreamcast's quality in its early years was due to the fact that Sega felt they had to bring all they could at the system's start to ensure its success (and it certainly didn't work). Sony felt secure in their market position, and that's why they waited until developers were secure with the PS2's architecture.

By the end of 2001, PS2 owners could play Zone of the Enders, Dark Cloud, Crazy Taxi, Twisted Metal: Black, Gran Turismo 3, ICO, Silent Hill 2, Grand Theft Auto III, Devil May Cry, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3, Ace Combat 4, Burnout, Metal Gear Solid 2, Final Fantasy X, and a bunch of EA titles you'd never find on the Dreamcast. The last thing I want to do is start an endless and annoying games war, but the point is that the PS2 had plenty to offer as well.