naznatips said:
Cursayer2 said:
naznatips said:
I'm not telling you your stupid for being disappointed. Andir name one adventure game with good multiplayer. You people can believe what you want, but you simply know nothing about the games. The only type of multiplayer that could POSSIBLY work is co-op, and even that is overkill. It's not the same as being disappointed because of Halo not having multiplayer. THIS ISN'T HALO. It's not a Halo competitor, it's not even the same GENRE. For the love of god people know what you are dealing with. This game is closer to Zelda than Halo. Much closer. You wanna link me to the next Bioshock having multiplayer ckmlb? You people are attacking a game based on a feature it should never have had in the first place. OMG Halo and Metal Gear Solid suck cause the don't have Mini-games! I like mini-games and even though they have nothing to do with Halo and Metal Gear and do not fit in the play style it should have them! Do you see how sutpid an argument this is yet? You are talking about adding a feature that has nothing to do with the game's play style. Some online features would be nice like maybe scoreboards, achievement sytle things, downloadable weapons and armor, but the actual gameplay is not meant for online multiplayer.
Now please, move on to the next game you haven't played to bitch about like it's the end of the world and the doom of Nintendo and how much they suck at making games. I'm tired of listening to this crap from people who really just don't understand what they are talking about (Crono thought Hunters was successful and well recieved rofl). Since you people need more examples: Uncharted sucks cause it's not multiplayer, Tomb Raider sucks cause it doesn't have multiplayer, Lair sucks cause it doesn't have multiplayer (actually, this one really does suck lol, it should have had multiplayer). |
Excellent flaming, heavily implied opinions, and superiority complex! |
So, rather than contribute to the discussion, you would prefer to attack the post itself and the poster individually? Thank you for being an intelligent and reasonable debater. What will you do next? Call me a poopy head and tell on me? If you have nothing to say, why post? |
Is it not reasonable for you to flame people because they think differently from you? You're not anymore reasonable than I am. Read your own posts. Oh, and by the way:
http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/920760.asp
85% ranking is an unsuccessful game? Try and do a little bit of research before bashing a game and mocking someone else. People aren't "bitching" about games. They're not rabidly complaining about the lack of multiplayer. All they're doing is expressing their disappointment over the lack of it, and you choose to attack them because of it. The only person I see here that's bitching is you because people don't agree with your views.
Oh, here's a good contradiction. You say that multiplayer does not fit with the adventure genre and that it should not be included in them, and then go on to say the same about mini-games and how they SHOULD be in an FPS like Halo or Metal Gear. Clearly you're angry over people disagreeing with your opinion. You can't say that they know "nothing" about the games because they disagree with your views.
