wc3edit.net
https://forum.wc3edit.net/

Games
http://forum.wc3edit.net/bitch-bitch-bitch-f35/games-t5988.html		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Bartimaeus [ July 6th, 2008, 2:03 am ]
Post subject:  Games
Games today are sucking pretty badly. You want to know why? Mostly everything is relied on graphics, now, instead of actual GAME PLAY. Developers think they can cover up all the crap in their games by putting in some new shiny looking glass, or some cool looking armor, in the case of RPGs. Back in the NES and SNES days, everything was relied upon game play, not graphics. So there were a lot more fun games, and developers were forced to be creative, or not be developers at all. Especially with all the First Person Shooter clones coming out, as well as the Mario 64 and Zelda: Ocarina of Time clones. I mean, it gets sickening playing the same game, over and over and over, only with different graphics, and different story. And even with the story, it gets repetitive. I mean, look at Pokemon. Every other game is a clone of each other. You don't even have to figure out what to do, because you already KNOW what to do. What's the point of wasting fourty bucks on a game you've already played? MMORPGS, are another prime example. It's all the same to me. Go here, deliver this package, kill this guy, get this item...the list goes on and on and on...It gets boring, and to be frank, I have no wish to play any sort of MMORPG ever again, nor any First Person Shooters.

It frustrates me to no end.
Author:  Durchdringen [ July 6th, 2008, 11:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
I agree a bit, but I must also disagree. A lot of games do have the same things over and over, but that is your companies that are striving to keep in the business because they are running out of ideas and don't hire a team that really wants to improve the quality of the game.

Gears of Wars in my opinion was a horrible game. Don't get me wrong, it was fun, but the game play itself was terrible. What made it the worst is the story line and how long it was.

Halo 3 is the exact same way. It had a long story line, good amount of change, but the game play to me is just worthless on multiplayer. You play the same maps over and over, but if you want a new map you gotta fork over the money to get it? To me thats BS.

Call of Duty 4 was an excellent game however. The graphics and the gameplay is just stunning. Sure you play the same maps over and over but the gameplay makes up for it and the maps are so big you there's no need for newer maps. You get to upgrade your weapons and skills. Make your own custom arsenal list to take with you into battle.

Grand Theft Auto 4 was excellently revised. The graphics are absolutely amazing (as long as you have HD). The story line was long, fun, and kept you guessing. The game play is amazing because you can replay solo and choose your own path, or you can play multiplayer in various modes, or just play single player and blow the hell out of anyone or anything you wish.

I like fancy graphics in my games because I want it to look as real as it is, but also mainly because I don't click me the best entertainment equipment so I expect something thats shiny and glistens on the screen. However, I want the game play to be top notch too.

I'm waiting for the newer PC games to comeout and then we can see what Blizzard and Maxis has improved over a period of 5 years before their prior top releases. 8)
Author:  Bartimaeus [ July 6th, 2008, 11:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
Durchdringen wrote:
I agree a bit, but I must also disagree. A lot of games do have the same things over and over, but that is your companies that are striving to keep in the business because they are running out of ideas and don't hire a team that really wants to improve the quality of the game.

Gears of Wars in my opinion was a horrible game. Don't get me wrong, it was fun, but the game play itself was terrible. What made it the worst is the story line and how long it was.

Halo 3 is the exact same way. It had a long story line, good amount of change, but the game play to me is just worthless on multiplayer. You play the same maps over and over, but if you want a new map you gotta fork over the money to get it? To me thats BS.

Call of Duty 4 was an excellent game however. The graphics and the gameplay is just stunning. Sure you play the same maps over and over but the gameplay makes up for it and the maps are so big you there's no need for newer maps. You get to upgrade your weapons and skills. Make your own custom arsenal list to take with you into battle.

Grand Theft Auto 4 was excellently revised. The graphics are absolutely amazing (as long as you have HD). The story line was long, fun, and kept you guessing. The game play is amazing because you can replay solo and choose your own path, or you can play multiplayer in various modes, or just play single player and blow the hell out of anyone or anything you wish.

I like fancy graphics in my games because I want it to look as real as it is, but also mainly because I don't click me the best entertainment equipment so I expect something thats shiny and glistens on the screen. However, I want the game play to be top notch too.

I'm waiting for the newer PC games to comeout and then we can see what Blizzard and Maxis has improved over a period of 5 years before their prior top releases. 8)


Yeah. I hated Gears of War. Same with Halo. Very generic. Call of Duty 4, however, had some very different core changes to gameplay, so it was a fresh change from the other FPS. However, they mostly ruined it by putting in uber gay things that everyone uses, like Matyrdom, and some other things. Sort of wrecked the multiplayer experience for me.

I generally don't like GTA. But with all things you could do in GTA4, it was very big step up from the other games.

It's not that graphics are really the problem. It's just that, developers are relying on graphics TOO MUCH. What the hell do I care about graphics if the game play sucks? I'm not even going to bother to LOOK at the graphics. I mean, if you're going to make a game with good graphics, at least TRY to match it up with good game play.

That's what makes me angry. So little games interest me now.
Author:  Durchdringen [ July 6th, 2008, 11:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
Agreed.

Lol I had to laugh at martyrdom, because I'm one of the uber asses that uses it all the time :lol:
Author:  Bartimaeus [ July 6th, 2008, 11:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
Durchdringen wrote:
Agreed.

Lol I had to laugh at martyrdom, because I'm one of the uber asses that uses it all the time :lol:


Yeah. I was tempted myself. I was like, "You know what, faggots? YOU USE MATYRDOM, I USE MATYRDOM!"

That, as well as Last Stand.
Author:  Aero [ July 9th, 2008, 5:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
This is why World Editor = win.

It's the opposite; totally same graphics--different game play.

However, even then we still have some redundancy (Mauls that are copies of eachother with models changed around with a new name).
Author:  Vegas [ July 9th, 2008, 3:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
Aero wrote:

However, even then we still have some redundancy (Mauls that are copies of eachother with models changed around with a new name).



like Shopping Maul and Shopping Maul USA ? :D
Author:  DarkHacker [ July 9th, 2008, 6:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
I think Im the only one that likes Gears and Hates COD I mean... No offense to you guys, but It takes WAY more skill to play Gears, To many things 1 hit in COD I think a thing in first person shooter that makes them better is how hard they are to play, to kill someone, because if it was too easy (Like in halo, Half of a clip kills someone) it provides no challenge. Cod you die way to fast, along with the whole shoot through walls.

Thats just my input. (First person shooters is all I own, other than Diablo 2 and Wc3)
Author:  Bartimaeus [ July 9th, 2008, 8:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
DarkHacker wrote:
I think Im the only one that likes Gears and Hates COD I mean... No offense to you guys, but It takes WAY more skill to play Gears, To many things 1 hit in COD I think a thing in first person shooter that makes them better is how hard they are to play, to kill someone, because if it was too easy (Like in halo, Half of a clip kills someone) it provides no challenge. Cod you die way to fast, along with the whole shoot through walls.

Thats just my input. (First person shooters is all I own, other than Diablo 2 and Wc3)


I don't personally like CoD4. I like what they did, but it sort of makes it so ANYONE can play it. A somehow very casual FPS, :P But then again, I don't like FPS in general, anyhow. But then again, again :P, CoD4 is at least a thousand times better than Gears of War. One bullet can, indeed, very much kill you in real life. And shooting through walls is a VERY realistic thing, too.

As for Gears of War, I simply do not like it.
Author:  Kupownage [ July 10th, 2008, 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Games
If your looking for an original game, you should check out Arcanum. This is possibly one of my favorite RPGs. Sadly it is plagued by terrible AI (Save often, your allies WILL die on a regular basis). This combined with a somewhat automated feeling combat (You click and end up attacking very very very fast, often with little time to cast spells =/.). While annoying, it can be countered by pressing space, which activates a turn based combat mode. I easily rate this as one of my top 5 RPGs (somewhere below Planescape: Torment and Fallout). Before you play the game, I'd make sure to download the patch, it fixes several..... undesireable.... bugs.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/