Son, Uncharted 2 has 5 vs. 5 multiplayer...

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

Why must threads always be started based on what fanboys said, it's always a bad idea.

The argument was at least from no blinf fanboys was that, R2 multiplayer gives you the option to have up to 30 v 30. Only someone who doesn't knwo what they are talking about or is just a fanboy or hasn't played the game would say the 360 can't handle 30 v 30. its not the system its the devs! why do people always try to blame or give credit to systems when its the devs that dictate everything that happens?

So we can expect a 3-4 hour long SP campaign, then?

People are not bashing that gears has 5 vs 5... People have just been saying that xbox360 multiplayer is very limited, in terms of large game battles...

So we can expect a 3-4 hour long SP campaign, then?

svetzenlether

The devs, mentioned that the multiplayer will not affect the sp..

[QUOTE="svetzenlether"]

So we can expect a 3-4 hour long SP campaign, then?

-Melix-

The devs, mentioned that the multiplayer will not affect the sp..

People are not bashing that gears has 5 vs 5... People have just been saying that xbox360 multiplayer is very limited, in terms of large game battles...

-Melix-

Likely sub par multiplayer spoiling my single player :(. I don't really care though. I just hope the SP is still great.

I would think that games have a multiplayer that is coherent to the rest of the game.

Having uncharted with 16v16 just would not make any sense.

That being said, i'm hoping this turns out to be quite good, but i'm not getting excited.

[QUOTE="-Melix-"]

[QUOTE="svetzenlether"]

So we can expect a 3-4 hour long SP campaign, then?

SpruceCaboose

The devs, mentioned that the multiplayer will not affect the sp..

Thats why you have seperate division working on different parts...

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="-Melix-"]

The devs, mentioned that the multiplayer will not affect the sp..

-Melix-

Thats why you have seperate division working on different parts...

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

Ambli

[QUOTE="Ambli"]

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

SilverChimera

Yup, it's the pure hypocrisy of fanboyism at work. I don't want Uncharted or Gears with 40-60 players. That'd blow chunks.

[QUOTE="SilverChimera"][QUOTE="Ambli"]

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

NYrockinlegend

[QUOTE="Ambli"]

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

SilverChimera

It's supposed to be tactical...GodofBigMacs

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...lawlessx

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...Couth_

It doesn't matter what ones opinion of said game is, but what the actual fact is.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/g/gearsofwar/20061201-onlinestrategy.htm

It's a game about tactical-based cover.

I personally dislike when there are too many people in one game. It needs to be balanced. GeOW is fine the way it is. It allows for good team coordination. How often will you see a team of 10+ random players play well together as a team? Rarely...JunkTrap

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...lawlessx

Nope, Gears was bashed not because it was a tactical game but it was a rather lag fest with only 5vs5..

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

Ambli

[QUOTE="Couth_"][QUOTE="lawlessx"] didn't stop cows from ripping the hell out of gears of war 1-2 :wink:BioShockOwnz

It doesn't matter what ones opinion of said game is, but what the actual fact is.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/g/gearsofwar/20061201-onlinestrategy.htm

It's a game about tactical-based cover.

[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...-Melix-

Nope, Gears was bashed not because it was a tactical game but it was a rather lag fest with only 5vs5..

I had no issues with Gears. It's P2P, so you should join a room with a host that has a better connection.

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...lawlessx

[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...rorskarch

you mean like gears of war? :|

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="Couth_"]Neither of them are tactical. They are just cover based, and slower paced. A bunch of slow Cogs running around with chainsaws wouldn't work, neither would thisCouth_

It doesn't matter what ones opinion of said game is, but what the actual fact is.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/g/gearsofwar/20061201-onlinestrategy.htm

It's a game about tactical-based cover.

It's pretty clear it's more of a tactical game, or else cover wouldn't be such an integral part to the gameplay. If you use cover or not is your own decision, but you'll be more successful with it, thus using tactics to be better at the game. This is no Halo or Unreal.

[QUOTE="Couth_"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

It doesn't matter what ones opinion of said game is, but what the actual fact is.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/g/gearsofwar/20061201-onlinestrategy.htm

It's a game about tactical-based cover.

BioShockOwnz

It's pretty clear it's more of a tactical game, or else cover wouldn't be such an integral part to the gameplay. If you use cover or not is your own decision, but you'll be more successful with it, thus using tactics to be better at the game. This is no Halo or Unreal.

[QUOTE="Ambli"]

Wasn't there a thread here nto to long ago bashing Gears of War 2 for not being able to handle mroe then 5 on 5 and how the Ps3 is better?

So, do you think 5 vs. 5 is a good move? or should they expand it?

rorskarch

[QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...lawlessx

The game lagged horribly with only 10 players ingame. Perfect reason to bash.:)

[QUOTE="lawlessx"][QUOTE="GodofBigMacs"]It's supposed to be tactical...Ultramarine777

The game lagged horribly with only 10 players ingame. Perfect reason to bash.:)

More people on screen means more kills for me. Mycomfort zone is more 8v8 but thats just me.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

[QUOTE="Couth_"]That would also be the opinion of who wrote that article...Couth_

It's pretty clear it's more of a tactical game, or else cover wouldn't be such an integral part to the gameplay. If you use cover or not is your own decision, but you'll be more successful with it, thus using tactics to be better at the game. This is no Halo or Unreal.

Yeah, obviously. I only use facts, though. I'm not trying to diminish your opinion or anything. Everyone is free to have that.

[QUOTE="-Melix-"]

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"] Yup. You can work on MP for free and with no man hours of work.SpruceCaboose

Thats why you have seperate division working on different parts...

People are not bashing that gears has 5 vs 5... People have just been saying that xbox360 multiplayer is very limited, in terms of large game battles...

-Melix-

[QUOTE="rorskarch"][QUOTE="lawlessx"] didn't stop cows from ripping the hell out of gears of war 1-2 :wink:lawlessx

you mean like gears of war? :|