well its like interesting but still kinda drudges like going back and forth between the two its supposed to start getting better in a few hours tho
what games do you wish never existed
- Thread starter ICanBreakTheseCuffs
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd like to thank my aunt once again for getting me the godawful abomination of a game only rivaled by Superman 64, Glover. Play it sometime, see why it's the only game I've ever given away.
well its like interesting but still kinda drudges like going back and forth between the two its supposed to start getting better in a few hours thoLordNue said:
I wouldnt say that...seeing as if you would look up the highest selling games, they would all be Nintendo games...DeathSnipa1992 said:
Wii Play, Nintendogs, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii, and New Super Mario Bros are the top 5 (excluding the sold with console games, like Super Mario Bros and Tetris)...all of them with around 20 million sold..the only one coming any where close is MW2 coming up with about 14 million, and then Halo 3 at 8 million...statistics aside..
I do kind of get annoyed at CoD a bit, it's hard trying to explain stuff like Dynasty Warriors, JRPGs, and Devil May Cry to people when all they have ever played and think is good is MW2..
Just a quick question. What part, exactly, made you think that Halo: Reach is trying to be CoD? If it was the loadout system, I'd like to at least point out that you can't customize said loadouts (and therefore break them with ridiculous invisible shotty sniper combos).D.L.390 said:
Of course, if it's just that you don't like loadouts at all, I can respect that. It may be something different for you entirely, but that's the only CoD similarity I can honestly think of.
Jedi academy is what Force Unleashed could have been, but it is sad it never was...Insanum said:
Mine would have to be the same.
Sorry, I was pretty vague on that bit.Miles Tormani said:
Halo's basic principles are that it's close and long range combat focused, with a few grenades and LOTS of melee. That's the formula that worked for it.
If they simply started a new series for Reach, I'd have been kinder to it.
But it's how slowly your shields recharge, how all the guns are pathetic, how you have unnecessary loadouts that simply break the game and it's way more frustrating than it ever was.
But yeah, that's how I reckon Reach is copying the CoD series, like every game and its dog.
Of couse, all this is IMO, but yeah.
I believe they're tuning up the guns in some way (DMR will have more ammo, for instance), and the shields are going to be tweaked as well. The loadouts, however, are there to stay. I personally felt they worked better than being forced to spawn with a specific weapon. It certainly ended the AR/BR gametype argument for all but the Super-MLG-Pro-Legit-Hardcore crowd, by allowing you to choose which one you wanted. Without allowing you to, say, spawn with a rocket launcher in a Grifball game.D.L.390 said:
But, hey. This is just me talking as a fanboy. I really can't argue any of the things you dislike about it. If you hate it, you hate it. I can respect that.
(Least you didn't claim that armor abilities make it more like CoD, since, well... I don't remember CoD having jetpacks.
)
Fanboy of...?Miles Tormani said:I believe they're tuning up the guns in some way (DMR will have more ammo, for instance), and the shields are going to be tweaked as well. The loadouts, however, are there to stay. I personally felt they worked better than being forced to spawn with a specific weapon. It certainly ended the AR/BR gametype argument for all but the Super-MLG-Pro-Legit-Hardcore crowd, by allowing you to choose which one you wanted. Without allowing you to, say, spawn with a rocket launcher in a Grifball game.D.L.390 said:
But, hey. This is just me talking as a fanboy. I really can't argue any of the things you dislike about it. If you hate it, you hate it. I can respect that.
(Least you didn't claim that armor abilities make it more like CoD, since, well... I don't remember CoD having jetpacks.
I don't think there is any game that shouldn't have been made, because some are enjoyably bad, while others we need to have so we can make fun of and/or learn how not to make a game. The big franchises being named don't deserve all the hate directed at them, though i'm not much of a fan of the big FPS games.
I don't think any of the original Call of Duty games (up to 3) influenced the industry that much to ruin your FPS gaming experience forever. They added to the planet-sized pile of WWII games, sure, but Call of Duty 4 was the one that really shaped the FPS industry for better or for worse. All I know is that now a lot of it is gun porn mixed with explosions.D.L.390 said:
Although Halo: Combat Evolved did a similar thing by setting the space marine and regenerating health trend for the next goddamn decade, making your complaints about Call of Duty's influence and not the influence of the Halo series oddly specific.
While I do agree that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare/2/World at War has extremely unbalanced multiplayer with its perks/weapons unlocks, claiming that it should be the other way around for new players is silly. So I should have a chance of beating Serena Williams the first time I play tennis? Right.
And if every Call of Duty game released was a colossal disappointment, why do you keep buying or playing them? Surely after eight iterations of the series you'd give up on it.
