Prototype, riddick: athena, RE5, star ocean, halo wars, Dragon age, GH: Metallica, FREE L4D content. You got a lot a choices bro you just gotta now where to look.
[QUOTE="NoBullPunk138"]COD:WAW fails not because of game mechanics or hype. You guys are basically paying $60 dollars for an expansion pack or a mod. The funny thing is that it's worse than CoD: 4. There's no difference in perks, ranking system, guns(except for bolt-actions, but those are trash and poorly designed anyways so they're fckng useless). So to all you fools that bought this game, the game doesn't fail, YOU DO. fckng $60 expansion pack.RebornInFlames
Lol that's why I got it used for 40. Oh and the bolt actions are great, you must just be garbage with anything that isn't full auto.
I dunno, I just think it's garbage when you shoot someone in the chest with it and he doesn't die, then when you are loading a new round he shoots you with his fully automatic gun and kills you instantly. BTW I actually prefer precision rather than firepower. I'm sort of the practical sniper rather than the gung ho assault type.
I truthfully have no idea and I'm not really concerned. I like my 360 for now and I know more can be pulled out of it . . . I'll look forward to thrid Xbox probably later next year, but thanks for the thread though.ace070590
I hope capcom has changed the controls so that you can walk while aiming.. or at least the possibility to aim with the right analog stick.. i think its akward to control the aim with the left analog stick. what do you guys think?big_
Do you know right from left? I'm pretty sure that the controls are taken from RE4, and that you aim with the right stick by default. PR from capcom said in an interview, I think on inside xbox, that you will be able to change to a shooter-stile control scheme that does in fact let you move while aiming, though. He said it was "to cater more to the Gears of War and COD players." But they didn't implement it in the demo, so I'm not sure exactly how it's going to work.
If you see someone trying to chainsaw you from 30 feet away, and you can't stun him, if not down him, then you sir, are a straight N00B. Let me clear something up. The chainsaw is meant to be a melee attack that defends you against anyone who would try to go into a close quarters offensive with you. It is also meant to be a one and done flank measure to take care of an enemy who is firing at your teammates. If you're in a game and you see someone with a lancer, you must automatically assume that he will chainsaw you given half the chance. What you need to do (if you are indeed a skilled player) is set yourself up so that you have enough distance to divert your enemies' attempt at the chainsaw. Gears 2 is perfectly set up for this because of the stopping effect. Also, epic made chainsaw battles, so if you enjoy using the lancer you should always at least have the chance to chainsaw your enemies back. If you are so cowardly or are just so over-zealous with the shotgun to just let someone waltz right up to you and let him rev his chainsaw all up against your nog, then by god you deserve to get chainsawed.
And for another record you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT COMPARE OR CONTRAST HALO 3 TO COD4, THEY ARE TOO DISPARATE OF GAMES TO DO SO. HALO 3 AND COD4 ARE BOTH EXCELLENT GAMES THAT I PLAY NORMALLY. THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH COD4 IS THAT EVERY SINGLE GUN HAS THE SAME EXACT ATTACHMENTS. THAT IS NOT RIGHT, YOU CANNOT PUT A SILENCER ON AN AK47, YOU CANNOT PUT A GRENADE LAUNCHER ON AN M-14, YOU CANNOT PUT AN ACOG SCOPE ON AN SMG, AND YOU CANNOT SNIPE PEOPLE WITH LIGHTMACHINE GUNS, EVEN THO COD4 IS GREAT, INFINITY WARD SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LAZY WITH THE GUN MECHANICS AND THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE THOUROUGH RESARCH INTO FIREARMS BEFORE MAKING THIS GAME.
There is no doubt that Halo was overly responsible for bringing the shooter genre to consoles (but I think Goldeneye and Perfect Dark had a much higher impact). However there is no denying the fact that Halo itself is a very Mediocre Shooter when compared to FPS gaming history when the PC has a history that goes back into the 80's.
Important to Console History - Yes
Important to FPS overall - No
Zemus
It has to be important to FPS overall. It revolutionized shooters on consoles, introduced a brand new health system to shooters in general, and revolutionized multiplayer gameplay. You say Goldeneye and perfect dark had more of an impact? I beg to disagree. I have never seen any privately practiced LAN parties ever before halo. PC points are void in refution to this. Point made. 'Mediocre shooter' ? I think not. Halo was the first game to utilize visceral immersion in a game. Halo was the first game I have played that actually made me forget that I was playing a videogame and made me think I was really a genetically engineered cyborg destined to save the universe, and it blew my mind while doing so. Half-life? not so much. Goldeneye? Not so much. Perfect Dark? not so much. Your entry = COMPLETELY REFUTED. And for the record: Halo 3 was the BIGGEST ENTERTAINMENT RELEASE IN WORLD HISTORY. Before the release date, Halo 3 sold more copies that most major motion pictures do in 3 days! HALO 3 MADE MORE MONEY IN ONE HOUR THAN SPIDERMAN 3 DID IN 72 HOURS. HOWS THAT FOR A COMPARISON.
You wanna know why H3 is a GREAT GAME? 1.) Halo 3 = BIGGEST ENTERTAINMENT RELEASE IN WORLD HISTORY. 2.) You knew generally how Halo 3 was gonna be, You bash the hell out of it and guess what: THEY STILL GOT YOU FOR YOUR MONEY.
PS. Only n00bs run in straight lines, shoot and melee for every kill, play a match against me, You'll still be shooting when you die thinking you're still alive. nub.
Log in to comment