Gears 2 online, it was the first game I bought cause of all the great things I heard on this forum, I bought it expecting an addicting fun online experience... Boy was I wrong.
I know a lot will diss me because of the last choice, but it disappointed me. Doesn't make it a bad game. Heck, it's GOTY at a lot of places, but just a personal disappointment for me.
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]GTA4...I could have been so much more :(majadamus
I agree. It seems they've taken away instead of added for this game. If you were able to buy/sell property, run drug houses that sort of stuff, the game would have been SOOOOOO much more addicting.
[QUOTE="majadamus"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]GTA4...I could have been so much more :(Eddie-Vedder
I agree. It seems they've taken away instead of added for this game. If you were able to buy/sell property, run drug houses that sort of stuff, the game would have been SOOOOOO much more addicting. tell me about it. I don't know if its because they ran out of time or something, but they missed out on so very obvious things in this GTA. They acted like San Andreas and Vice City didnt exist at all. They completely removed all the progress those games made. GTA4 is a true sequel to GTA3 rather than a sequel to GTA:SA, and thats what's wrong with it. It completely omits all the progress made by SA and VC. If SA and VC didnt exist, GTA4 would have been a great sequel, but the fact that SA and VC exist on inferior platforms yet have so much more content? well, that just makes GTA4 look bad :(
How can ANYONE have high hopes for 99% of most multiplats? Those are usually the suckiest games on the market. Force Unleashed? I knew that was going to be bad the minute I saw the gameplay.
[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"][QUOTE="majadamus"] I agree. It seems they've taken away instead of added for this game. II_Seraphim_II
If you were able to buy/sell property, run drug houses that sort of stuff, the game would have been SOOOOOO much more addicting. tell me about it. I don't know if its because they ran out of time or something, but they missed out on so very obvious things in this GTA. They acted like San Andreas and Vice City didnt exist at all. They completely removed all the progress those games made. GTA4 is a true sequel to GTA3 rather than a sequel to GTA:SA, and thats what's wrong with it. It completely omits all the progress made by SA and VC. If SA and VC didnt exist, GTA4 would have been a great sequel, but the fact that SA and VC exist on inferior platforms yet have so much more content? well, that just makes GTA4 look bad :( I hated the stuff in GTA:SA. Eating? working out? 20 mile drive to a mission? No thanks.
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"][QUOTE="majadamus"] I agree. It seems they've taken away instead of added for this game. If you were able to buy/sell property, run drug houses that sort of stuff, the game would have been SOOOOOO much more addicting. tell me about it. I don't know if its because they ran out of time or something, but they missed out on so very obvious things in this GTA. They acted like San Andreas and Vice City didnt exist at all. They completely removed all the progress those games made. GTA4 is a true sequel to GTA3 rather than a sequel to GTA:SA, and thats what's wrong with it. It completely omits all the progress made by SA and VC. If SA and VC didnt exist, GTA4 would have been a great sequel, but the fact that SA and VC exist on inferior platforms yet have so much more content? well, that just makes GTA4 look bad :( The only thing I miss is the ability to buy properties. Eating, working out, leveling up? Good riddance.
[QUOTE="Saturos3091"][QUOTE="Legendaryscmt"]While not the game itself, Gears of War 2's story. There was more, it just wasn't really all that great.Legendaryscmt
It was an improvement over the previous games'. Try the online, now that's a disappointment.
A vast improvement, still didn't make it that good though.
That's true. I wasn't really expecting much, maybe a bit more since they said it was the focus this time around. The story was just generic shooter fanfare that tried to take emotional stabs at you with character's deaths but failed since they weren't built up at all.
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"] If you were able to buy/sell property, run drug houses that sort of stuff, the game would have been SOOOOOO much more addicting. Bread_or_Decide
tell me about it. I don't know if its because they ran out of time or something, but they missed out on so very obvious things in this GTA. They acted like San Andreas and Vice City didnt exist at all. They completely removed all the progress those games made. GTA4 is a true sequel to GTA3 rather than a sequel to GTA:SA, and thats what's wrong with it. It completely omits all the progress made by SA and VC. If SA and VC didnt exist, GTA4 would have been a great sequel, but the fact that SA and VC exist on inferior platforms yet have so much more content? well, that just makes GTA4 look bad :( I hated the stuff in GTA:SA. Eating? working out? 20 mile drive to a mission? No thanks. GTA SA had some bad things, but it also had some great things. Would it have been too hard for them to add the fun side missions?
SOCOM Confrontation. It's not even close It's an online only game that for the first 2 weeks you couldn't play online. You had features that were missing from the game that were not only advertised, but were labeled in the manual and on the back of the box. Add a 2 hour install time and you got yourself a big gigantic turd on your hands. Oh well I only played $10 for it when I got my $50 dollar headset.
For me this year was Gears 2, I played it aboot as long as I played Halo 3- two weeks. Don't get me wrong, I liked the SP but MP is what keeps you coming back and they royally effed it up.
[QUOTE="Saturos3091"] It was an improvement over the previous games'. Try the online, now that's a disappointment.Saturos3091
A vast improvement, still didn't make it that good though.
That's true. I wasn't really expecting much, maybe a bit more since they said it was the focus this time around. The story was just generic shooter fanfare that tried to take emotional stabs at you with character's deaths but failed since they weren't built up at all.
My biggest problem with the story was that they gave you something new, such as the Sires, but then once that was done and over with, they just completely ignored it. While some might say "They'll explain it in the sequel", that doesn't mean that they just had to give it to you without any information in this one.
My biggest dissapointment was Metal Gear Online. Downloading the patch and the underwhelming multiplayer itself was too dissapointing. Bread_or_Decide
Oh tell it! Seriously, MGO had some great potential...I mean a lot of potential but Konami screwed it up. They got too greedy with their whole Konami ID system, and the fact that its practically (not literally, but practically) impossible to buy any new Gear in that game without the expansion. What type of BS is that? You get something like 50 reward points for every day logged on, and thats the only way to get them without the expansion. It wouldnt be a problem if the average price for gear in that game is 5000 RP :x And then the whole "pay for a second character aspect..." WTF!? This isnt a freaking MMO! And like thats not bad enough, you would think with all this drama you gotta go through to play the game, they would have dedicated servers, but nope! Crappy lag-infested games are the norm!
All this and we haven't even gotten to the gameplay! A lot of the gameplay mechanics that make the single play portion so great are terribly implemented in multiplayer. The Playboy Magazine is freaking Imba. A sniper can just climb up a ladder to a building and put a PB mag at the top. he will never get killed because your moronic guy will climb the ladder and spend 3hrs reading the damn magazine! And with the way the game is set up with 1 hit head shots with any gun, lag really doesnt help the matter...The controls also feel rather clunky in a MP scenario where the game is much more fast paced. Sure you can full the enemy AI with OctoCam, but its not as easy with a human player....
They acted like San Andreas and Vice City didnt exist at all. II_Seraphim_II
That was the point. That's kind of what a reboot of a franchise is all about: Going in a different direction. If they had done the same thing as SA or VC then people would be whining about how little they changed the game. In this situation Rockstar simply cannot win.
I'm glad they decided to do their own thing.I loved the original games and I really liked what they did with GTA 4. They couldn't please everybody, but I feel the their version of Liberty City is unmatched in it's attention to detail and in it's scale. People who want to spray feces on people can go play Saint's Row 2. It's a hoot.
fable 2 definitely. it was a good game an all but it has like ZERO replayability. AND mark molyneaux did it again wit the overhyping. example: the dog in the game.
Log in to comment