CentricStorm's forum posts

Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
Most feature packed shooter ever I guess, let alone on consoles.Birdy09
Shame that a lot of the features add nothing to the overall experience.
RTS bots play nothing like players.... they just pre-define build orders and send stuff into your base for the *most* part.Birdy09
Last time I checked, building stuff and sending units in to the enemy base was all RTS games were about. Sure, some RTS games might need a little improvement to their AI, but at least they actually bother to include AI unlike the incredibly lazy FPS developers we now have. Even Crysis has no multiplayer bots, although this is forgivable considering that the Power Struggle mode is one of the most advanced FPS game modes ever made. Anyway, I think you will find that in most RTS games the AI plays no differently to a real player. Command & Conquer 3 and Age of Mythology are two examples of this.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
[QUOTE="CentricStorm"]No multiplayer bots = failed AI that wasn't good enough to simulate real players. Especially considering how simplified Halo's gameplay is.siddhu33
Bots don't simulate real players at all. I have played most of the games with bots, and at higher difficulties, they are more cheap than challenging.

This is exactly why the FPS genre is not advancing as it should. Almost every RTS game ever made has bots, and they play exactly like a real player would. In their review Gamespot themselves specifically mentioned Section 8's multiplayer bots as one of the game's best points. Counter Strike: Source also has some good quality multiplayer AI but it isn't outstanding. Star Wars Battlefront II had bots which were good at the time, and in fact they still are way above average seeing as almost every FPS game has no multiplayer bots.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
Halo is not like your KZs and CoDs which just upgrade their graphicsBURSTIIIFIRE
What graphics? When I look at console Killzone or Call of Duty all I see is an unplayable mess of aliased, undefined colour.
PC shooters may be better than Halo, but that's also kinda subjectivesiddhu33
Exactly. If you like aiming, you will like PC shooters, whereas if you like your console aiming for you, play on a console.
The AI is good, but so is Halo's (The enemy AI, at least). Played Legendary Solo on Halo 1-3? Thought sosiddhu33
No multiplayer bots = failed AI that wasn't good enough to simulate real players. Especially considering how simplified Halo's gameplay is.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
[QUOTE="_Matt_"]Shame that the PC versions of Dirt 2 and GRID completely decimate their rival console racing games._Matt_
"decimate" hmm, I disagree. On full AA, settings, DX11 etc, and with 1920 x 1080 the visuals will be better; but not by a long long way. Sure, you can increase the resolutions byond that but I still wouldnt use the word decimate. But thank you for agreeing that the visuals are unmatched for console racing games :P

I have no problem with speaking the truth - of course the visuals in Gran Turismo will be a great achievement considering the console hardware limitations of the PS3. Sorry about the wording error, I'll correct the sentence: Shame that the PC versions of Dirt 2 and GRID absolutely obliterate their rival console racing games. Only joking. 8) But seriously, the graphics in the PC versions of GRID and Dirt 2 will look significantly better than any current-generation console racing game.
It boggles the mind how picky ppl can be about graphics.silentkill62696
I played Crysis. Since then almost all console games have been pushed to the verge of unplayability.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
Seriously, ppl are arguing about the graphics of trees? I swear trees are more interesting to watch than this argument. At least they Grow up and Mature.silentkill62696
Trees significantly help towards the overall level of visual realism. Being a natural type of object and non-static they are also very difficult to accurately represent in a game environment. Of course, Crysis was photorealistic and did that perfectly, but that game is in another league to everything ever made.

[QUOTE="coltgames"]am i missing something or am i just easy to pls or im reading sarcasm because those screen shots look incredible forza is a very good looking game but gt5 just took it to snother lvl_Matt_

I think the majority of PS3 and 360 gamers would agree with you there. Lots of pc gamers however may not be so agreeable

Gran Turismo 5 is definitely going to be a whole level above Forza 3. Shame that the PC versions of Dirt 2 and GRID completely decimate their rival console racing games.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
GRID and Dirt 2, the two best racing gaming this generation, are both available on PC, and are both superior on PC. Go on, make the switch to PC gaming.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
It's pathetic that these consoles were designed with such an incredibly poor level of backwards compatibility, but I guess that's expected when taking in to account the overall low standards of consoles in general. Make the switch to PC gaming, and support the development of gaming in to the future whilst keeping perfect backwards compatibility with your entire collection of past games. With an Xbox 360 or PS3 you're hardly supporting the development of gaming...mostly supporting Sony and Microsoft's bank balance.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
Excellent, Dirt 2 confirmed as best looking racing game, and seeing as the PC version of Dirt 2 looks by far the best, we can confirm that PC gaming still has the most visually impressive racing game (not that there was ever a realistic chance of the consoles having the best graphics anyway).
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts
No music and random colors missing (Hint: Lumas are yellow, not clear). Music is a major part of SMG2, without it the experience is lost. Sooo if anything this video confirms my idea that the PC emulator of SMG2 is trash.oldkingallant
Nice. Always good to see someone completely slating someone's efforts. A working Wii emulator with minor glitches is 'trash'? Just saying that it seems more like a huge achievement to me, especially considering the short development time.
And major slowdown in places. I'd rather play the perfectly running version on my Wii... and I did.SaltyMeatballs
Only a matter of time. Not long and every Wii game is running at full speed with no glitches. Wasn't long ago and no games even ran...1-2 years of development and now all major games are functioning at almost full speed with only small glitches.
Avatar image for CentricStorm
CentricStorm

337

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 CentricStorm
Member since 2010 • 337 Posts

[QUOTE="CentricStorm"]Reduced armour and drastically reduced recoil were the main problems.Ondoval

This was to make the game more "soft" to rookies: as harder is to kill in a game as big is the leap between the starting players and veteran ones. This isn't mandatory bad -the game still had strafe and some other aspects to master fpr the "pro" gamers- due if you make a game scary to new players you'll find your servers empty in a short time.

The main difference with the current most successful multiplayer fps (COD, BC 2, Halo 3) was the lack of a global ranking system and stuff to gradually unlock.

Of course Crysis Wars was better for the majority, because the majority of gamers are casuals. These changes made it a worse game for most of the original fans though. Yes, Crysis Wars does still have strafe jumping, although in a slightly more limited state, but wall-jumping was completely removed. The high armour in the original Crysis was perfect for competitive play - unlike most modern games, whoever shoots first doesn't necessarily win. The original still catered to less skilled players because of the gauss rifle, grenade launcher and vehicles/tanks/aircraft as well as the C4 and claymore/mines. The original Crysis struck a perfect balance, satisfying both good and bad players, but unfortunately its multiplayer was nowhere near as successful as it should have been because of the obscenely high system requirements for 2007 and the glitches that were initially there. Crysis Wars showed a poor move with Crytek attempting to copy Call of Duty 4 and ultimately failing. Crysis Wars was only successful because the game ran slightly faster, people had by then bought more powerful computers, and there were fewer glitches at launch. It's a shame but Crysis 2 is likely going to be another casual-based game just like Crysis Wars, perhaps even worse with the consoles' limitations and the new urban setting. It won't capture the greatness of the original Crysis' Power Struggle mode, but it still could be excellent just in a completely different form. With Crytek UK on the job there's hope at least.