Originally posted by: DPmaster
Well I found Riddick more entertaining than HL2. There were some parts in HL2 that were just plain dull...the boat level and the citadel come to mind. I was just waiting for those levels to end so I could continue on with the game and see what's next. I never had that feeling with Riddick. With Riddick I felt like I was in a movie. HL2 just felt like a game to me (a really good one though). Riddick was fun all the way through.
Well HL2 was NEVER boring to me. It's the FPS that almost reaches perfection in my book and I will compare everything with it, until I see a better FPS out there... Under any circumstances I can compare it with HL2 taking into account basic FPS criteria...
Originally posted by: Apoppin
t's just your wording that i objected to . . . . i think "extremely identical" needs to be replaced with "similar" since the game engines are not related in in way. similarities yes.
You'll have to excuse my language sometimes since it's not my native.
anyway, i think interactivity is just not needed for this particular game . . . . i believe Doom iii's engine and this Starbreeze one have "room" for it . . . HL2's forte is it's interactivity and physics engine . . . . i don't think any game can have it all - yet . . . . you'll get something like Duke Nukem FOREVER.
Don't you mean Duke Nukem NEVER? :laugh: Nevertheless if they had watched some parts of the game that I mentioned more IMO, we could be talking now for a five star title...
anyway, i'd like to hear what you think when you are finished (other than 'it's too short') . . . . our opinions are not so far apart about this game . . . . i think i like it a little more then you do.
Ok.. :clock:
