GAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH
FUCKING COMPUTER STOPPED WORKING AGAIN
I SWEAR TO GOD I NEED TO GET A NEW MACHINE
AND MY XBL SUBSCRIPTION IS EXPIRED.
EH, MAYBE I CAN GET THE GERTZINATOR A BEST BUY CARD, TAKE JIMMY (YES, I NAMED MY COMPUTER) TO GEEK SQUAD, GET A YEAR OF XBL, AND PICK UP A COPY OF ACE COMBAT 6? IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE PLAYED A GOOD FLIGHT GAME AND I LOVED THE DEMO. PLUS, MULTIPLAYER DOGFIGHTS ARE MY IDEA OF A GOOD TIME. WISH I COULD USE A JOYSTICK THOUGH. WISH THE ONLY JOYSTICK IN THE HOUSE WASN'T FROM 1990-SOMETHING TOO.
ALSO EURO
FUCK
Also, since I'm too lazy to make a comment, my most wanted sequels:
Battlefield 3: I still play and love BF2 and these rumours are just too good.
World in Conflict 2/expansion: They can't just leave us hanging with that ending! Plus, naval battles would kick ass if they find a way to implement them effectively. More units would be welcome and I'm raring to kick me some Chinese ass.
CoD4 Expansion: Cause I'm not getting CoD5 if it's really gonna be WWII again. Plus, new weapons, maps and perks would totally be welcome, as well as more for the SP game.
Project Origin: Sequel to FEAR. Can't wait, these firefights are just fantastic and the AI is some of the best I've played in a while.
And finally, it's not a sequel but Major League Eating: The Game
18 comments:
You ARE aware that Battlefield: Bad Company is almost out...
And that it'll have 24 player multiplayer and dual analog.
Yes, I am.
Actually, I'll probably get it, but I really want another epic BF game with huge 64 player battles (apparently 80 in BF3) and another great unlock system (with apparently customizable characters). Anyone who's ever played a tour of duty through Karakand to Highway Tampa knows what I'm talking about.
I'm actually pretty positive about Battlefield: Bad Company. The Frostbite engine looks incredible, not to mention the graphics and sound are supposed to rival COD4 (which is, IMO, the benchmark for great performance military realism).
I know the 24 player thing is a bit of a disappointment, but my opinion is that as long as the player density is sufficient then it doesn't matter how big the map is. And as for dual analog... Eh, I've stopped caring so much. PC mice are great, but as long as the good ol' gamepad works then why complain?
My only concern is that the system will be dumbed down. Battlefield has always been a fundamentally straightforward game (run, shoot, get in vehicle, hilarity) but recent iterations have come with a lot of depth in rankings, awards, and upgrades. If all that is removed because DICE doesn't think console gamers can handle it, then I'll be quite disappointed.
Plus, I hate to say it, but the story mode seems really good. I know going to Battlefield for single player is like going to Idaho for carrots (thank you, Mr. Seinfeld) but I find myself fascinated by the characters.
Since when is Battlefield straightforward? It's actually about the sandboxiest MP game there is. Each class has a different role (not TF2 different of course) and specialization. One for all-in anti-infantry, one for taking out assets behind enemy lines, one for killing vehicles, etc. Then the way you can tackle objectives (get squad in Blackhawk, move from CP to CP, vehicle convoy, I've seen it happen on organized teams, squad leader snipes and serves as spawn point, members attack CP, etc) and the variety of what you can do are what makes it great.
But yeah, the graphics and sound seem like they can rival some of the best out there (I've always loved the real great feel you get from the weapons you get in the series).
And yeah, 24 players isn't bad at all (I regularly play with about that many in CoD4 and always have a great time), but the problem is that BF games have always been great because of how wide open they are, yet still fairly populated. It'll still be a great game no doubt, but it won't be quite the same with much smaller maps (as in, smaller than the 32p sizes of maps). Plus, fewer players equals fewer vehicles, and those frantic tank/APC battles are hella fun. Basically yeah, it will rock and I will play hours upon hours of it (shame it won't be with that Ryan Kindel and his PS3 though), but it just won't be the same.
And even though it is BF, the SP does intrigue me...
And as for dual analog, I'm not great at it, but it's tolerable. The real issues are : 1. Sniping is damn near impossible for me and 2. I just don't feel as good about the kill if aim assist is on, but I'll get my ass kicked if it's off. However, I am happy to see a return to iron sights after 2142's red dots on everything. I'm hoping that select fire will also make a return so that I can make those great M16 kills at borderline sniper range (well, snipers can shoot like half a mile in BF2 if they're really good, so maybe not).
So yeah, looks great and will no doubt have that BF charm plus a bonus single player game, but it won't be til BF3 that we get the same experience as previous PC installments.
Im thinkin for a sequel to Bioshock, it would be pretty badass to play the game the night of the actual crisis in Rapture. That would honestly make me shit my pants
In response to the game's high sales, Take-Two Chairman Strauss Zelnick revealed in a conference call to analysts that the company now considered the game as part of a franchise.[17] He also speculated on any follow-ups mimicking the development cycle of Grand Theft Auto, with a new release expected every two to three years.[107] No sequels have yet been announced, and none of the developers of BioShock have commented on the possibility of sequels.[108] However, industry rumors suggest that a prequel set during the fall of Rapture is in development for a 2009 release.[109] Additionally, similar industry rumors suggest a film adaptation of the game will also be made, utilizing similar green screen filming techniques as in the movie 300 to recreate the environments of Rapture.[110]
thank you wikipedia
Whoa whoa Chris. Easy.
When I said "straightforward" I meant it in the "simple" sense, not the "following a fixed line" sense. And that's not to say that the game is as simple as, say, Warhawk (very fun, very simplified). But it certainly isn't a Rainbow Six or GRAW or one of those other games that goes so far for military realism that playing them is like a kick to the crotch. (No offense to Rainbow Six/GRAW fans).
Also, I find myself VERY skeptical about Battlefield 3. I've been with the series (in a demo-y sort of way) pretty much since BF1942 back in '02, and the evolution from that game into BF2 was absolutely remarkable. Commanders, Squads, Mics, Rankings, and changeable map sizes were all quite impressive and since the release of BF2 they've become standards in many games. However, I find myself deeply concerned (and reading the press release does nothing to assuage that concern) that BF3 will just be the same game with slicker graphics, frostbite physics and more players. Not much to get excited about there.
Oh, and yeah, shame about the PS3 V. 360 platform difference. Unless EA announces a staggering and mind-blowing cross compatibility plan then we're not playing Bad Company together.
I guess I can play with Martin.
Max i just shat bracks at them comments of yours.
I know how fuckin sick is that stuff gonna be
If that Bioshock stuff is true I'll orgasm
bioshock 2 makes me wiggle my piggle
sam you make me LOL so hard sometimes
that comment made me vomit hard
in a good way or a bad way
suck it, faggots
good way of course
Post a Comment