The attention Warhawk is getting...
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I am excited about the game, quite frankly. The fact that several different publications have compared it to Battlefield is very compelling to me. I am a competitive BF2 player on the PC and any game that follows in that tradition on the PS3 has gained my support. Online battlefield gaming FTWBrendruis
i agree, even though i cant play BF2 anymore, stupid computer. im disappointed about no single player, but with the way its looking i dont think it'll change my decision to buy it, online still looks fun
I like what I've seen, but I really wish I could try it out before buying it. I tend to like only tactical, round-based shooters (SOCOM) but I ended up liking Resistance online, so maybe this will work for me too.shady_825I think it is safe to assume that they will put out a map for everyone to try out before its release.
Â
Glad to see people agree. In all honesty, this and Ratchet and Clank could be that fall/early christmas combo that pushes PS3 like Gears of War pushed the 360's butt through Santa's season.
The premise is good, but am I the only one who thought the graphics were incredibly cartoon-ish?jshigashiNo, you're not. But so what? I don't think this game needs to look hyper-realistic.
IMO, WarHawk should've kept to solely flying combat. The ground combat only makes it look more...I dunno....average? And it dilutes the appeal of WarHawk in the first place.magus-21I disagree. Okay, I have never played the original. But the fact that there's combat in the air and on the ground makes things just much more interesting. 32 people flying through the air shooting each other? Yeah, that's fun for a bit. 32 people flying in planes, running through city streets, driving in jeeps and tanks, now that sounds like much more fun. It's gonna be more interesting since there will be much more going on in many ways, not just planes chasing each other.
[QUOTE="jshigashi"]The premise is good, but am I the only one who thought the graphics were incredibly cartoon-ish?Nightflash28No, you're not. But so what? I don't think this game needs to look hyper-realistic. I agree... gameplay is what's important. But in a war/shooter type game... I like realism as well. As long as the gameplay and maps are good, I won't mind... but I'd like to have the best of both worlds if possible.
[QUOTE="magus-21"]IMO, WarHawk should've kept to solely flying combat. The ground combat only makes it look more...I dunno....average? And it dilutes the appeal of WarHawk in the first place.Nightflash28I disagree. Okay, I have never played the original. But the fact that there's combat in the air and on the ground makes things just much more interesting. 32 people flying through the air shooting each other? Yeah, that's fun for a bit. 32 people flying in planes, running through city streets, driving in jeeps and tanks, now that sounds like much more fun. It's gonna be more interesting since there will be much more going on in many ways, not just planes chasing each other. Well, I did play the original, and what made that game fun was launching dozens of missiles and watching them swarm over dozens of targets while rolling and spinning and banking to avoid enemy missiles. Fighting on the ground in a WarHawk game, being able to wield only one dinky infantry weapon at a time, will feel like being forced to play FPSes in the old Wolfenstein 3D style (with just arrow keys) after having played them with keyboard and mouse.
[QUOTE="Nightflash28"][QUOTE="magus-21"]IMO, WarHawk should've kept to solely flying combat. The ground combat only makes it look more...I dunno....average? And it dilutes the appeal of WarHawk in the first place.magus-21I disagree. Okay, I have never played the original. But the fact that there's combat in the air and on the ground makes things just much more interesting. 32 people flying through the air shooting each other? Yeah, that's fun for a bit. 32 people flying in planes, running through city streets, driving in jeeps and tanks, now that sounds like much more fun. It's gonna be more interesting since there will be much more going on in many ways, not just planes chasing each other. Well, I did play the original, and what made that game fun was launching dozens of missiles and watching them swarm over dozens of targets while rolling and spinning and banking to avoid enemy missiles. Fighting on the ground in a WarHawk game, being able to wield only one dinky infantry weapon at a time, will feel like being forced to play FPSes in the old Wolfenstein 3D style (with just arrow keys) after having played them with keyboard and mouse. don't compare this ps3 Warhawk with the old one. that's just stupid. the original warhawk was for the ps1 while this warhawk is for the ps3. its like comparing metal gear for the nes with metal gear solid for the ps1, a dumb comparision. its a different generation, different better technology. the game needs to change with the times. BTW, i played the original warhawk for the ps1 and loved it but i like the changes the dev team made with this ps3 ver of warhawk. this new warhawk looks like its going to rock.
[QUOTE="Nightflash28"][QUOTE="magus-21"]IMO, WarHawk should've kept to solely flying combat. The ground combat only makes it look more...I dunno....average? And it dilutes the appeal of WarHawk in the first place.magus-21I disagree. Okay, I have never played the original. But the fact that there's combat in the air and on the ground makes things just much more interesting. 32 people flying through the air shooting each other? Yeah, that's fun for a bit. 32 people flying in planes, running through city streets, driving in jeeps and tanks, now that sounds like much more fun. It's gonna be more interesting since there will be much more going on in many ways, not just planes chasing each other. Well, I did play the original, and what made that game fun was launching dozens of missiles and watching them swarm over dozens of targets while rolling and spinning and banking to avoid enemy missiles. Fighting on the ground in a WarHawk game, being able to wield only one dinky infantry weapon at a time, will feel like being forced to play FPSes in the old Wolfenstein 3D style (with just arrow keys) after having played them with keyboard and mouse. Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information? Well, I still disagree. Don't get me wrong. Even though I have never played Warhawk on the PS1, I was still already hooked to the game when they first introduced the PS3 version in the very beginning. Flying only looked great to me and if the game would've been the way it first was announced, and if it had been a launch title like it was originally planned, I would have gotten it. Still, giving people the possibility to step out of the jet and run or use other ground vehicles simply opens up much more opportunities. No offense to anyone, but generally, people always ask for more. People always say how they don't want to be limited in a game. When Warhawk was first announced, people said: "so, you're just flying around? meh". So now you can do whatever you want to do, and there'll be people going "we have the choice to fly, drive and run? meh." The clips show people using bazookas to take down Warhawks, jeeps to run over enemies, Warhakws filling the sky with smoking debris of hostile planes. Everywhere you look, something's going on. Perhaps it's a matter of opinion if you prefer flying only or the possibility to do more than just that. Fact is: it adds a new dimension to the game and many more opportunities for action, fun and tactics.
[QUOTE="Nightflash28"][QUOTE="magus-21"]IMO, WarHawk should've kept to solely flying combat. The ground combat only makes it look more...I dunno....average? And it dilutes the appeal of WarHawk in the first place.magus-21I disagree. Okay, I have never played the original. But the fact that there's combat in the air and on the ground makes things just much more interesting. 32 people flying through the air shooting each other? Yeah, that's fun for a bit. 32 people flying in planes, running through city streets, driving in jeeps and tanks, now that sounds like much more fun. It's gonna be more interesting since there will be much more going on in many ways, not just planes chasing each other. Well, I did play the original, and what made that game fun was launching dozens of missiles and watching them swarm over dozens of targets while rolling and spinning and banking to avoid enemy missiles. Fighting on the ground in a WarHawk game, being able to wield only one dinky infantry weapon at a time, will feel like being forced to play FPSes in the old Wolfenstein 3D style (with just arrow keys) after having played them with keyboard and mouse. btw, u ***DO** know that in this warhawk game u can set up games where there's warhawks only (ie no ground combat) right? because in the 1up preview they said u can do this.
[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="Nightflash28"][QUOTE="magus-21"]IMO, WarHawk should've kept to solely flying combat. The ground combat only makes it look more...I dunno....average? And it dilutes the appeal of WarHawk in the first place.xuimodI disagree. Okay, I have never played the original. But the fact that there's combat in the air and on the ground makes things just much more interesting. 32 people flying through the air shooting each other? Yeah, that's fun for a bit. 32 people flying in planes, running through city streets, driving in jeeps and tanks, now that sounds like much more fun. It's gonna be more interesting since there will be much more going on in many ways, not just planes chasing each other. Well, I did play the original, and what made that game fun was launching dozens of missiles and watching them swarm over dozens of targets while rolling and spinning and banking to avoid enemy missiles. Fighting on the ground in a WarHawk game, being able to wield only one dinky infantry weapon at a time, will feel like being forced to play FPSes in the old Wolfenstein 3D style (with just arrow keys) after having played them with keyboard and mouse. don't compare this ps3 Warhawk with the old one. that's just stupid. the original warhawk was for the ps1 while this warhawk is for the ps3. its like comparing metal gear for the nes with metal gear solid for the ps1, a dumb comparision. its a different generation, different better technology. the game needs to change with the times. BTW, i played the original warhawk for the ps1 and loved it but i like the changes the dev team made with this ps3 ver of warhawk. this new warhawk looks like its going to rock. IMO, a game should enhance its core gameplay with time, not branch off into unnecessary tangents. And it's not like comparing Metal Gear NES with MGS1. It's more like playing Half-Life, then finding out that Half-Life 2 is half-FPS and half-RTS.
Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?Nightflash28Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.
The clips show people using bazookas to take down Warhawks, jeeps to run over enemies, Warhakws filling the sky with smoking debris of hostile planes. Everywhere you look, something's going on. Perhaps it's a matter of opinion if you prefer flying only or the possibility to do more than just that. Fact is: it adds a new dimension to the game and many more opportunities for action, fun and tactics. Nightflash28I'm just saying, it dilutes the game. The flying aspect will probably be as fun as the original WarHawk, but the fact that there's a whole other half of the game that isn't as fun and isn't as dynamic will be niggling the back of my mind. Hell, I'd be willing to bet that the ground combat will be almost entirely ignored by gamers. And WarHawk wasn't about tactics. It was about balls-to-the-wall, so-many-missiles-coming-at-me-I-can't-dodge-them-all-OMG-I-just-did-this-rawks! action. I just can't see how the ground combat could duplicate the adrenaline rush of the air combat, because there is just so little going on in the ground combat compared to the air combat.
[QUOTE="Nightflash28"]Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?magus-21Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.
OMG, u have no idea what ur talking about. swarming missles was ONE weapon in the original. it was only one type of weapon. a type of missle that fires all fancy and crap. and this new warhawk will have swarming missles as well. God, u like to b!tch about tiny crap don't u?
Â
Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="Nightflash28"]Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?xuimod
OMG, u have no idea what ur talking about. swarming missles was ONE weapon in the original. it was only one type of weapon. a type of missle that fires all fancy and crap. and this new warhawk will have swarming missles as well. God, u like to b!tch about tiny crap don't u?
*sigh* What I mean is, unless a footsoldier in the new WarHawk gets similar kinds of unique, high-octane weapons and not just the standard rifles, shotguns, and rockets, the ground combat will pale in comparison to the aerial combat. And how is this "tiny crap"? They're taking WarHawk, a game renowned for its near-perfect implementation of pure action, arcade-style gameplay, and tacking on slow, realistic, team-based tactics. It would be just as bad as taking Battlefield 2 and giving the infantry in that game Crackdown-style superpowers but not making any changes to the vehicles.[QUOTE="xuimod"]Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="Nightflash28"]Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?magus-21
OMG, u have no idea what ur talking about. swarming missles was ONE weapon in the original. it was only one type of weapon. a type of missle that fires all fancy and crap. and this new warhawk will have swarming missles as well. God, u like to b!tch about tiny crap don't u?
*sigh* What I mean is, unless a footsoldier in the new WarHawk gets similar kinds of unique, high-octane weapons and not just the standard rifles, shotguns, and rockets, the ground combat will pale in comparison to the aerial combat. And how is this "tiny crap"? They're taking WarHawk, a game renowned for its near-perfect implementation of pure action, arcade-style gameplay, and tacking on slow, realistic, team-based tactics. It would be just as bad as taking Battlefield 2 and giving the infantry in that game Crackdown-style superpowers but not making any changes to the vehicles. dude, ur like totally uninformed. have u even watched the 1up video preview? i don't think u have. if so, tell me what they say about turrets? turrets are ground weapons. warhawk? a game renowned? there's only been 1 warhawk game. man ur reasoning is so bad. watch the 1up video preview and THEN tell me what u think. u don't know much if u don't watch that preview.[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="xuimod"]Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="Nightflash28"]Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?xuimod
OMG, u have no idea what ur talking about. swarming missles was ONE weapon in the original. it was only one type of weapon. a type of missle that fires all fancy and crap. and this new warhawk will have swarming missles as well. God, u like to b!tch about tiny crap don't u?
*sigh* What I mean is, unless a footsoldier in the new WarHawk gets similar kinds of unique, high-octane weapons and not just the standard rifles, shotguns, and rockets, the ground combat will pale in comparison to the aerial combat. And how is this "tiny crap"? They're taking WarHawk, a game renowned for its near-perfect implementation of pure action, arcade-style gameplay, and tacking on slow, realistic, team-based tactics. It would be just as bad as taking Battlefield 2 and giving the infantry in that game Crackdown-style superpowers but not making any changes to the vehicles. dude, ur like totally uninformed. have u even watched the 1up video preview? i don't think u have. if so, tell me what they say about turrets? turrets are ground weapons. warhawk? a game renowned? there's only been 1 warhawk game. man ur reasoning is so bad. watch the 1up video preview and THEN tell me what u think. u don't know much if u don't watch that preview. btw, why do i get the feeeling i'm arguing with a 15 or 16 year old who has little else better to do with his time? why do i even bother informing the uninformed. its like the special olympics.....[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="xuimod"]Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="Nightflash28"]Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?xuimod
OMG, u have no idea what ur talking about. swarming missles was ONE weapon in the original. it was only one type of weapon. a type of missle that fires all fancy and crap. and this new warhawk will have swarming missles as well. God, u like to b!tch about tiny crap don't u?
*sigh* What I mean is, unless a footsoldier in the new WarHawk gets similar kinds of unique, high-octane weapons and not just the standard rifles, shotguns, and rockets, the ground combat will pale in comparison to the aerial combat. And how is this "tiny crap"? They're taking WarHawk, a game renowned for its near-perfect implementation of pure action, arcade-style gameplay, and tacking on slow, realistic, team-based tactics. It would be just as bad as taking Battlefield 2 and giving the infantry in that game Crackdown-style superpowers but not making any changes to the vehicles. dude, ur like totally uninformed. have u even watched the 1up video preview? i don't think u have. if so, tell me what they say about turrets? turrets are ground weapons. warhawk? a game renowned? there's only been 1 warhawk game. man ur reasoning is so bad. watch the 1up video preview and THEN tell me what u think. u don't know much if u don't watch that preview. Yes, a game renowned. It doesn't matter that there's been only one game, it was one of the best games on the original PS1 that (undeservedly) never got a sequel until now. Now it gets a sequel, and I won't be able to soar in between formations of enemy fighters while avoiding dozens of missile fire. So yeah, I'm a bit pissed that the best feature of WarHawk was eliminated for the sake of an arcadey version of Battlefield 2. I'll probably still get it, but I'm a lot less happy now than when I was when I first heard WarHawk was coming.[QUOTE="xuimod"][QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="xuimod"]Unless a foot soldier can launch eight missiles at once while firing two gatling guns, I think I'm right in saying that you can only use one weapon at a time.[QUOTE="magus-21"][QUOTE="Nightflash28"]Only one weapon at a time? Where did you get this information?magus-21
OMG, u have no idea what ur talking about. swarming missles was ONE weapon in the original. it was only one type of weapon. a type of missle that fires all fancy and crap. and this new warhawk will have swarming missles as well. God, u like to b!tch about tiny crap don't u?
*sigh* What I mean is, unless a footsoldier in the new WarHawk gets similar kinds of unique, high-octane weapons and not just the standard rifles, shotguns, and rockets, the ground combat will pale in comparison to the aerial combat. And how is this "tiny crap"? They're taking WarHawk, a game renowned for its near-perfect implementation of pure action, arcade-style gameplay, and tacking on slow, realistic, team-based tactics. It would be just as bad as taking Battlefield 2 and giving the infantry in that game Crackdown-style superpowers but not making any changes to the vehicles. dude, ur like totally uninformed. have u even watched the 1up video preview? i don't think u have. if so, tell me what they say about turrets? turrets are ground weapons. warhawk? a game renowned? there's only been 1 warhawk game. man ur reasoning is so bad. watch the 1up video preview and THEN tell me what u think. u don't know much if u don't watch that preview. Yes, a game renowned. It doesn't matter that there's been only one game, it was one of the best games on the original PS1 that (undeservedly) never got a sequel until now. Now it gets a sequel, and I won't be able to soar in between formations of enemy fighters while avoiding dozens of missile fire. So yeah, I'm a bit pissed that the best feature of WarHawk was eliminated for the sake of an arcadey version of Battlefield 2. I'll probably still get it, but I'm a lot less happy now than when I was when I first heard WarHawk was coming. a game renowned...ur opinion.... one of the best games for the ps1...ur opinion... i won't be able to soar in bt formations of enemy fighters....never confirmed...just YOUR speculation...just ur hopes....(just b/c it was in a trailer doesn't mean it was confirmed for single player) try basing ur arguments on confirmed facts. its pointless arguing with a person like u who bases everyting he/she sais on their opinion and speculation and very little in the way of facts. FACTS...say it with me...FACTS.[QUOTE="Nightflash28"][QUOTE="magus-21"] And how is this "tiny crap"? They're taking WarHawk, a game renowned for its near-perfect implementation of pure action, arcade-style gameplay, and tacking on slow, realistic, team-based tactics. It would be just as bad as taking Battlefield 2 and giving the infantry in that game Crackdown-style superpowers but not making any changes to the vehicles.magus-21Well, I'm starting to think you mave have a wrong image about the ground action. It's not slow-paced, it's not tactics driven like BT2 or CS. The game play still is very acrade-like. It's still about fast action, it's still about lots of explosions, about tense fights, etc etc. It's just that there'll be this kind of stuff on the ground as well. I understand that you may not like the changes made to the original since you really seem to love it for what it was. I'd say wait and see what the new game will have to offer. So far, all the clips I've seen looked like great fun and I even had some LOL moments just watching those videos. I'm still positive that the addition of ground combat only further enhances the experience. Compared to the aerial combat originally advertised for Warhawk? It is definitely slow paced. They completely sacrificed the epic intensity of the original Warhawk for a game that is infinitely more generic and which will probably be overshadowed and forgotten when UT3 comes out.
Winner^^ I am sorry but we have Unreal 2k7, Quake Wars(True Quake 3 sucessor), and Battlefield Bad Company. Warhawks is just going to look like childs play.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment