Orguss999's forum posts

  • 20 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts

Sof was one of my first online shooters. Was way into. Sof 2, same thing, awesome game, i still wonder why games can't do hit detection as well as that game did like 6 or more years ago.

But hey guys, you know this game is being made by the guys that did deer hunter? It's supposively being made as a walmart title. Raven, the original guys aren't doing this game at all. From what i gather it's a budget title. I and others fear this is going to not be the john mullens we remember. To add to that note, i don't even think you play as mullens in this one. :(

Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts

don't know if these count, gonna say them, cause it's like noone cares they aren't making more to the series.

Tribes

Homeworld

Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts
I hadn't known that about the patch. I can say i put in a fair share of hours into both games. I just felt that i had a more frustrating experience with mulitplayer than coh. Both games are good games, i really enjoyed supcom alot. I was really put off when they kept saying they were going to release a version of the map editor and community map access. I realize there is an editor out, and you can download the maps alot easier now right through supcom. But they gave dates and never followed up on it correctly. The more games i play, the more i dislike companys that put things on the back burner after the games out. Obiviously they have the expansion pack they are working on, but i felt they needed to really get supcom's kinks out first. Which your saying they have as of resently, i'll have to log back in and see whats up.
Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts
i get some pretty horrible speeds of gamespot, i hope this demo goes up all over. Not sure i'd be to happy with a 50k a sec download speed.
Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts

i've played them both and both are different then each other by quite a bit for rts games. Do you want to play ww2, or future wars. Do you want alot of units or less with more management. Do you want large battles veiewed from afar or close tight battles viewed up close? Both games have good graphics. Enviroments are totatally different, you have air land water for supcom, and city and field type battles in coh.

It should come down to your machine. If you don't have dual core, forget supcom. Which brings me to the last thing you need to think about. In my opinion supcom has the lesser of support, promises made and what not and not followed through with in patches. While i had dual core cpu, alot of people didn't. I couldn't begin to tell you how many terrible multiplayer games I wasted up to and over an hour on. Supcom's multiplayer is fun if everyone playing has good computers, but if just one guy doesn't, the game makes up for him by making time go by really slow, or just disconnecting altogether. In my opinion supcom multiplayer was ruined by this. When i was into it, around and after release, there would be less then 15 games, usually less then 10 up at a time to join. On the other hand company of heroes seems to have a pretty strong multiplayer community base. Both games are fun, and have their own unique plus's. Over all though for replayablity and single player, company of heroes would take it.

Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts

[

they're optional fees. if you play for free, you get a similar experience to what diablo 2 gave us online.

yeah but it's a dumb down version of the game. If you read about what you get with the monthly fee, and what you get without it. If your gonna play the game your gonna want the full package. I just don't see 50 + (15x12)=230 a yr. Now wow i have to admit has loads and loads of content, runs great, little if any at all bugs and i still have a hard time wanting to keep my membership. I played guildwars for 2 yrs, never did they ask for extra money and delivered new content on top of that.

Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts

fees

50bucks + 15 a month. I realize there's server cost for these games, but i have to admit i was super syked for this game, as soon as i heard the monthly fees, less you want to play some half ass version, i'm not sure i'm going to even get this game. Guess it'll come down to wether or not there is any other games to play during it's release. As of right now, the pc game market sucks if your looking for something new to play.

Avatar image for Orguss999
Orguss999

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Orguss999
Member since 2004 • 55 Posts
wow people just love to say they disliked something just because they think they sound cool saying that.  Doom 3 was great.  Good graphics, good smooth non glitchy game play, and it last more then 4 hours.  It's a solid game and if you find it on sale it's definitly worth grabbing.  Most of the games that have been coming out last you a max of like 6 hours of gameplay.  Doom 3 was one that will last you for a while, you end up traveling all over the facitilty. 
  • 20 results
  • 1
  • 2