The only thing more annoying than people who act all snooty and superior because they believe in God are the people who act all snooty and superior because they don't believe in God.
I'm not acting snooty, I'm just glad that I have found a perfect arguement against those that choose to argue against me. A way to make them see what if feels like.
Proof positive I have ADD...... I couldn't handle Silent Hills because of that first 30 minutes and lost interest in it. Now I've lost disc 2 of the game and can't reinstall it. Same with Morrowind, too much plodding around trying to get a clue as to what I was suppose to do.
Morrowind is so much different, because Silent Hill is linear. There is only one way to go, you just have to find it.
What will really bust your hump is that even after you beat the game, you still won't really know what the game was about. There is much thinking to be done within that game to find out the entire story. Same with the others.
Well, I just spent a ton of money to upgrade my system to handle the latest crop of predictable computer games because at least I'm still interested in the direction of greater graphics sophistication. I haven't bought Doom 3 yet because I'm trying to get done with Far cry (got that damnn valcano in sight so it won't be long...) and I have Painkiller on the back burner. I don't feel like I've got to rush out and buy it after reading this thread - it can wait.
Painkiller is the biggest POS I have ever encountered. The game lacks story and emmersion. It has graphics and monsters. Only reason it was given such a high score was that while you were killing monsters, you can collect souls and stuff. F collecting. Reminds me of Mario64 where I had to collect 100 coins just to get a star. How annoying is that. I can't believe someone actually made a game of that too. Nice graphics though.
just hope one day that a game will come out that strives for artistic merrit
I am so sad then, that you have left Silent Hill out of your life. One of the best series ever.
Was there anyone who did not kill that first tech when you get the gun?
I felt like it, but I didn't. Didn't want to ruin the game by reminding myself that it was.
Dooming Conclusion
So, Doom III is finally here. It makes positive impression, but those, who played the original Doom 10 years ago may just be too old for this kind of action, while the guys and gals who spent months played Counter Strike and FarCry pretty recently may just find the new Doom a little bit monotonous? Frankly speaking, the gameplay is pretty primitive: linear passing-through and very trivial solutions along with the amount of killings is definitely not something that today?s games deliver. Doom III would look good in 2001, 2002. But not in 2004.
Seems like MOH:AA gameplay style, which was F-ing fun and lasted a while, but not anymore. It makes sense since they started like 5 years ago with the game.
Hmm. No, the more I play, the less impressed I am. While the visuals are incredible and the audio is fantastic, it seems ID spent more effort on atmosphere than gameplay.
Duh, that's what the game was supposed to be. All atmosphere. And as proven before with HL, atmosphere can make or break a game.
If the game wasn't called "Doom 3" and the developers weren't "id" (or however you want to capitalize it), I wonder what kind of impressions/reviews we'd be getting here today.
It would be another HL.
The game has a horrifying atmosphere, challenges around every corner, and immerses you in its world. I found myself wasting ammo is places shooting into dark corners because I heard my own footsteps after switching from my PDA.
lol
The gameplay is severely lacking. Don't get me wrong; it's good, but they could have done better.
Further proof that these guys produce great engines and lackluster games.
The only proof of that was Quake II's single player. Maybe you should wait and finish the game before you start giving it a bad name.
That's the problem: You experience the same events over and over and over again.
Factor out improved visuals and audio, and you essentially have the very same game as the original - from 1993!
Walking through corridors, finding PDA's (read: key cards), fighting demons in hidden closets behind you, and collecting random piles of ammunition and health.
It's the same game! Having had years to come out with this product, one expects evolved gameplay. Other companies have produced FPS games featuring evolved gameplay, why can't ID, the father of the genre.
I never thought that I would ever use this: Same Sh|t, Different Smell. The gameplay was cool back then and it still is now to a certain degree. But now you have all this other stuff to immerse you in the game. It makes you feel more like you're inside and actually experience, thereby providing a new experience for you.
You talking about gameplay. GAMEPLAY NEVER CHANGES. Since 1993, we've been shooting things. So, it's fun. Movies, never change. 99% of the time, there is a bad guy and a good guy and the good guy wins. So tell me again why you go see a movie. We still laugh at the same slapstick comedy that has been broadcasted for years with Looney Tunes and The Three Stooges. What's the difference, a different way of presenting the same material.
MOH was one of the coolest games around in my opinion. Why was it so good? to me, ATMOSPHERE and nothing else. The game would have been such CRAP if atmosphere was not present. Cause the gameplay is frustrating, craptacular, non-realistic, easy, retarded...etc. The gameplay sucked for MOH:AA. You don't believe me, go back and play it again. In each expansion pack, they do the same type of formula as before, but there are 3 of them. 3 expansions doing the same type of gameplay, but they sell so well.
Think about it. We all find fun in doing repetitive things presented to us in a different way.
Facebook
Twitter