By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
binary solo said:
GribbleGrunger said:
binary solo said:
I want to want this, but really I'm not sure improved visual performance is enough to convince me to buy this series for a second time. Perhaps I will pick it up again at the right price.

It's not just visual improvements though, the gameplay has been improved too.

Yeah, but I never had any gripes with the original gameplay, even though some people who are shooter pros crapped on the shooting mechanics I personally had no issues with it. I managed to get my headshots trophy really early on in the games, and it playing on insanity I never felt like the mechanics of the game let me down. Maybe if I play the PS3 version of UC:DF again I'll think the mechanics are really bad but for now I don't feel like I needed to see gameplay improvement improvement when I was playing the original series.

I notice how that Yahtzee criticised the Gears Remaster for running back the same cover mechanics and not improving on it. I wonder if the UC collection has tweaked the cover mechanics. Though not sure if Yahtzee is necessarily the best baromenter for critiquing cover mechanics. Personally I think cover based shooting is actually realistic. In a real gun battle you are hiding behind stuff and truying to time your pop up to shoot at someone when there's an opening, and it should be somewhat of a grind. Indeed I'd actually prefer games go even further putting fewer enemies in the field but making it harder to kill them (not as in take more shots, but smarter AI and more difficult to catch them out of cover, but basically still one head shot or 2-3 body shots for a kill) and making it easier for them to kill you (again smarter AI, not fewer hits to kill you). Indeed what I think was a compensation for limitation on AI was putting more enemies up for you to kill, and I think the way gaming needs to go is to use some of that computing power to really smarten up AI and reduce the enemies on screen and make it a challenege of skill rather than just throwing bodies at you.

Glad to see a lot of people here haven't played the series before and want to give it a run. For the money it's hard to go wrong even if you end up thinking it's a merely a good series not a great series.

this harder to kill and easier to be killed is tensing me on alien



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."