Quote:
Originally Posted by RVCA
@MW2: Trust me, I have been in SO many games where the opposing teams gets a lucky AC130 from a carepackage and wins because of it. Or, games where the opposing team has 3 or 4 people doing nothing but noob tubing. Or, games where the opposing team uses nothing but UMPs and ACRs. Or games where they're all camping in corners with heart beat sensors. Or games where they're all MLC knifing. If these kids who think they're good at MW2 hop into Counterstrike or even Halo, they get murdered, because those games don't have all these unbalanced, unfair, and frankly plain random events.
|
So you're telling me it's a terrible game simply because of how people choose to abuse it?
I played online and people weren't like this at all, everytime I died it was usually the result of a planned and well executed kill. Yeah people do the noob tubing but these people don't last long when up against skilled players. Overall it's less fun to noob tube and camp and enough people actually play the game for fun. That's why I played it and wouldn't you know, I had fun because I was playing with other people who were having fun.
If some dumbass abuses it and ruins it for everyone, that's his fault and not the programmers'. They put a lot of effort into making this game and it's rather insulting to completely write off the effort that went into it just because you're incapable of finding someone to play matches with that isn't retarded.
Quote:
@Mario: I guess my main problem wasn't really that it's so linear, it's that the levels STINK. Nearly every single level involves landing on a slightly large asteroid, and then finding the star launcher onto the next asteroid, and then launching onto the next asteroid, etc. It's as if Nintendo gets a free pass as far as level design goes.
"Hey guys, I can't think of any ways to expand or improve the current portion of this level."
"So just launch Mario onto another floating rock and start from scratch"
|
This is f*cking stupid, you are making ridiculous simplifications about a game that has a lot more depth and variety than that. You're simplying describing the basic premise of the game. You can apply this kind of "criticism" to every kind of game.
"Platformers suck all you do is go from left to right jumping on stuff"
"First Person Shooters suck all you do is shoot sh*t"
"RPGs suck all you do is buy stuff, fight turn based battles and level up and start over"
"Racing games suck all you do is race"
Please stop.
Quote:
|
I just miss Delfino Plaza and the Peach's Castle, where the world map itself was grounds for exploration. Then you could pick a level to enter and do an entirely new set of exploration while the level dynamically changed as you acquired more stars.
|
I admit that I wish the overworld in Galaxy was bigger and more explorable. But the level design is without a doubt some of the best I've ever seen in a 3D platformer and if Galaxy 2 continues the same formula I won't be disappointed.
Quote:
|
I don't understand why Sunshine 2 has an aggregate score of 96 (or whatever) on Metacritic; it honestly feels sloppy and unimaginative, especially since it's almost a direct replica, in quite a lot of ways, of the previous game. It even has the same "cleaning robot" minigame where you have to destroy X amount of boxes in X seconds.
|
Sunshine 2?
Actually merging the Gameplay of Galaxy and Sunshine is a great concept. If it's really a sequel to BOTH of those games then that's even better.
Quote:
|
Maybe I just need to play it more.
|
I still need a copy so you could just give me yours if you don't want it.