Page 28 of 125
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:30 am
by Burning Oasis
Retlaw83 wrote:I'll probably get crucified for owning up to this, but I got an Xbox 360 recently and I've been playing Halo: Reach. It's nothing ground breaking, but it's solid and has a few surprises in the single player campaign.
I think the best way to describe the game is cinematic; it feels like you're fighting in the middle of a real war, instead of most games where they tell you it's a war and you just wander around killing one or two enemies at a time.
My only complaint about it is it's sometimes not clear what your next objective is, because they're usually radioed to you in the middle of a fire fight or an awesome scripted event that takes up your attention.
Ah. Bought it too. It looked a lot better than the other Halo's to me (Other than #1. That was superb.) It's been alright so far, but more excited for Dead Rising 2 to come out! Gonna be fantastic.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:54 am
by Stalagmite
Retlaw83 wrote:I'll probably get crucified for owning up to this, but I got an Xbox 360 recently and I've been playing Halo: Reach. It's nothing ground breaking, but it's solid and has a few surprises in the single player campaign.
I think the best way to describe the game is cinematic; it feels like you're fighting in the middle of a real war, instead of most games where they tell you it's a war and you just wander around killing one or two enemies at a time.
My only complaint about it is it's sometimes not clear what your next objective is, because they're usually radioed to you in the middle of a fire fight or an awesome scripted event that takes up your attention.
God I hate Halo, and there's a long story behind it. Mostly it has to do with the developers and selling themselves to Microsoft when you consider the Myth games they made before it. That, and the general fanbase who are obsessed with Halo are the most annoying tards on the planet.
It's not so much your playing it Retlaw, you strike me as someone waaaaay cooler than a Halo fanboy, it's the fact that you're supporting them by purchasing it, even if it is pretty not bad.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:00 am
by Retlaw83
Burning Oasis wrote:Ah. Bought it too. It looked a lot better than the other Halo's to me (Other than #1. That was superb.)
My feelings exactly.
The real clincher for me was the $20 gift card if you pre-ordered from Best Buy; going to use that for New Vegas.
Stalagmite wrote:It's not so much your playing it Retlaw, you strike me as someone waaaaay cooler than a Halo fanboy, it's the fact that you're supporting them by purchasing it, even if it is pretty not bad.
I was pissy about that too, but it doesn't change the fact the original Halo and Reach are both quality titles. Plus it's been 10 years; Reach is the last game Bungie has to do exclusively for Microsoft.
An interesting thing to note is Halo is the spiritual successor of Marathon, which was the big Bungie franchise before Myth. Marathon was as impactful for Apple users as Doom was for PC users, and Halo was the equivalent for consoles.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:37 am
by Manoil
Insane story, final point is that my girlfriend found a copy of Reach lying on the ground and now owns it.
I'm playing this weekend
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:20 am
by SenisterDenister
My friends are all going apeshit over Civilization V. I don't see what the big deal is. I'm probably gonna snag it when an expansion pack comes out in a gold edition.
Haven't finished Amnesia yet - I play it at night before I go to bed but lately I've had a lot of homework and haven't been able to get any time in.
Fun story, it got to one part where I started to breathe heavy and started muttering "Oh god, oh no" and things like that, and my room mate had a worried look on his face and asked me if I was jerkin mah gerkin. I told him it was the game and we both laughed heartily.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 1:52 pm
by Retlaw83
Civ V? I wasn't even aware that there was a Civ IV. I'm still playing Civ III, Windows 7 seems to hate it.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 2:14 pm
by Kashluk
Retlaw83 wrote:Civ V? I wasn't even aware that there was a Civ IV. I'm still playing Civ III, Windows 7 seems to hate it.
I loved II, played quite a lot of III, but despised the fourth. Civ IV was this (abomination in my opinion):
AFAIK CIV V's all about eye-candy and over-simplifying the already simple game mechanics - even more so than IV.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 2:38 pm
by Blargh
Do spearmen still ruin tanks in
V ? If so, it is not a
Civ game.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:54 pm
by Frater Perdurabo
Kashluk wrote:Retlaw83 wrote:Civ V? I wasn't even aware that there was a Civ IV. I'm still playing Civ III, Windows 7 seems to hate it.
I loved II, played quite a lot of III, but despised the fourth. Civ IV was this (abomination in my opinion):
AFAIK CIV V's all about eye-candy and over-simplifying the already simple game mechanics - even more so than IV.
QFE - I found IV to be utter shit.
III always has and still does it for me.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:34 pm
by Stalagmite
Civ II was the best in the series. Of course I've never been any kind of pro at fucking RTS's but I've palyed all the Civ's (besides V) and II was definitely the most addictive.
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:17 pm
by Frater Perdurabo
RTS - Real-Time Strategy
TBS - Turn-Based Strategy
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:35 pm
by Stalagmite
Chess or Starcraft, all strategy to me but yeah fucking typo whoop de doo.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:05 pm
by Stainless
Civ 1, because nothing equals the rage of losing your veteran battleship to a fucking settler.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:53 pm
by VasikkA
I'm waiting for an expert DAC review of Civ V before making any acquisition decisions.
I was quite a mapmaker in Civ II and III.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:19 pm
by Username
I tend to agree with Civ 4 criticism but it wasn't that bad. Just wait for the 5th:
Greatly shortened tech tree, no espionage, no religion ( a cool thing from Civ 4 admittedly), mega killer robots in the future age - first to get one wins.
And I'm not kidding. It's called something like "mega killer robot", it's not an easter egg and there won't be a off-option. It will cost alot of cash (shields) but its not like you don't have a city at end game which can produce this badboy anyway.
And it will own absolutely everything by a far margin.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:28 pm
by Username
Retlaw83 wrote:
I was pissy about that too, but it doesn't change the fact the original Halo and Reach are both quality titles. Plus it's been 10 years; Reach is the last game Bungie has to do exclusively for Microsoft.
An interesting thing to note is Halo is the spiritual successor of Marathon, which was the big Bungie franchise before Myth. Marathon was as impactful for Apple users as Doom was for PC users, and Halo was the equivalent for consoles.
Hell no they ain't. Now I haven't played alot of Halo singleplayer (and from what I hear the story is shitty) but I played alot of Halo multiplayer and while it was fun to be a bunch of mates sitting around a TV and owning each other playing it online or against bots must seem like the biggest waste of time ever.
It's so bland, it's so uninteresting. The phrases and the characters and the weapons are for example not nearly as interesting as Unreal Tournament. Actually the whole game seems like a cheap ripoff of UT without its interesting maps and the multitude of mods. (Such as a pretty good Air Combat game with strategic elements)
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:54 pm
by PiP
I played them all and liked them all (CIVs). I like the unit upgrades of IV. As regards story and mechanics SMAC beats all, regardless.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:03 pm
by Username
Had to google that :p seriously who calls Alpha Centauri "Sid Meiers" Alpha Centauri? I think he had less to do with it than the Civ games to.
Anyway yeah, Alpha Centauri is the best, the AI is kinda bad there though as it has trouble with all the mechanisms but its not very good in the other games neither. I wish they could make an AC 2...it was really customizable.
edit: I guess I'm wrong, it seems to be called SMAC on alot of places, my bad. Kinda weird though. Don't know what he did on that game tbh.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:28 pm
by Retlaw83
Username wrote:It's so bland, it's so uninteresting. The phrases and the characters and the weapons are for example not nearly as interesting as Unreal Tournament. Actually the whole game seems like a cheap ripoff of UT without its interesting maps and the multitude of mods. (Such as a pretty good Air Combat game with strategic elements)
You misunderstood me. I'm not declaring it the best game of all time, and I agree with most of your criticisms about the multiplayer. Single-player was a mixed bag; I lost interest when the Flood showed up because I'd fought enough headcrabs in Half-Life.
However, the original Halo was the equivalent of Doom for consoles in that it popularized first person shooters and was one of the first competently executed ones. You have to keep in mind people who owned consoles exclusively had never seen things like Unreal Tournament before.
Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:36 pm
by Stalagmite
I have to say, my prejudice attitude is gonna be the death of me. Mafia 2 has actually one of the best stories I've come across in a long long time. It actually molds together with the first game in an instance, very nicely done.