yes, they are. If you say that, you haven't played Mario 64 or Mario Sunshine. I'm not looking for Fallout 3 or Oblivion type worlds, just something that isn't a floating head on a world map with lines connecting each galaxy to one another.

i have played both, and exploration was a small facet. maybe you should play red dead redemption or gta or something.

nah, I love Mario games, but I'm just not impressed with Galaxy 2

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.

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.



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.

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.

I still need a copy so you could just give me yours if you don't want it.

Blah, I meant galaxy 2. I guess it just boils down to my personal preference. If this were "This album > that album"...

64 > Sunshine >>> Galaxy > Galaxy 2

64 is so dated though. much rather play some galaxy/sunshine.

When you're playing online, the game IS the people playing it. The developers might not have control of your gaming style, but what you're forgetting is that the developers have the control of content and ultimately the balance of the weapons in the game. If some weapons need to be nerfed so that everyone and their grandmothers don't spam certain guns because it's the most powerful in ALL situations and scenarios, then that's something the developers are expected to do if the majority of the people playing the game call for it.
The problem with MW2 and other similar games is that I don't think enough people are calling for it because it's easier to just join the dark-side to make it an even playing field by doing the same exact thing. That usually results in a very confined type of gameplay that, if you expect to win, you must disregard inferior weapons and spam the overkill weapons. At that point, there isn't even a reason to have any other weapons in the game other than few all-powerful weapons that everyone uses. It destroys the ability to choose situational tools in a tactical way, and detracts from the gameplay if you're in a squad and trying to complete an objective. The fun isn't in killing as many people as possible, and it's not in completing as many objectives as possible. The real fun is working as a team and having to THINK about what you do and use experience and the tools at your disposal to achieve the objective in a well-organized and effective way.
At least, most of the people who have complaints about unbalanced weapons and spammy gameplay think that way. I understand that people may have different definitions of what's fun in FPS, but it's difficult to play your style if someone is making it impossible. The main cause of this happens to be unbalanced weapons and inadequate developer foresight.

What I like most about Bad Company 2 is that buildings are destructible. You can see a camper sniping as many people as he can, completely ignoring any kind of objective defense... simply arbitrarily racking up kills, sitting behind a window in a top floor of a building... and with something as simple as a grenade launcher attachment, you can take out the wall he's behind with one shell and kill him. That's balance. It gives you, as a player, the chance to defend yourself while you're going for your team's objective, and it also changes the dynamic of camping. I can't speak for how fun it is to just sit in one spot and shoot random people in the head simply to achieve a high Kill/Death ratio to show off in the gaming forums, but at least if a person wants to do that, they'll have to actually defend themselves and put a little thought into it.

Oh, and you'd be surprised at what's actually planned and well executed kills. You have to remember that some of these people have been playing the maps for a long time and know all the choke points and best places to camp. You may just blindly run into their view and conveniently place yourself at the tip of their front-sight post like all the other noobs do, and you're dead before you even know what happened.
That's not strategy unless you're defending an objective. And I've heard enough complaints from the MW2 community to know that's usually not the case.

Thank you for typing out what I was too lazy to

Dude there were people pulling off multple kills using only a f*cking knife, and not simply through camping. I think it's easy to find people who are actually good at the game.

Is the game chaotic? But for multiplayer games I prefer chaos to ridiculously strict and controlled environments, call me a sadist.

While your criticisms have validity I don't think it makes it a terrible game. Overall the quality of the gameplay depends on how you cooperate with the other players and if you manage to set up team battles with as few dirty players as possible then there will be balance. This may require extra effort and regulation than the game you prefer, but it's not impossible and I still think it's unfair to dismiss the game for how some people choose to abuse it. It's pretty much impossible for a game not to be abused in some way.

There is no fun in abusing, but I think enough fans of the game realise that.

Galaxy > 64 > Sunshine

Love all three though.

1. The knife is the simplest, and one of the most effective, weapons to use in the game, thanks to Marathon, Lightweight, Commando, and the tac knife. As well as the cluster-**** maps and the awful spawn system.
2. Cooperation is almost non-existent in MW2, partly due to the compeltely arcade-y "chaos" that you see to like, but ALSO due to the ridiculous killstreak system.
3. Get real, people abuse the SH*T out of MW2. I can't play one game of Ground War without getting invited to 3 different 10th prestige hacked lobbies. Not kidding.

64 and Sunshine from the main gameplay formula of the Mario series and there's nothing wrong with Galaxy returning to a more linear approach. Because MOST platformers are linear, but it's my favorite gaming genre for the most part.

As great as Sunshine was I still prefer the 2D Mario games and a lot of platformers that are linear in design. Galaxy doesn't have less exploration than the 2D games did. It's not like Zelda where exploration is the main drawl, it's more like something on to the side because the main drawl of the Mario series is the platforming and obstacles.

Growing up on arcades I definitely prefer that chaotic element. It's a big reason I prefer Brawl to Melee.

Nowadays people use "fun" and "competition" like they mean the same thing but I never play games for competition really.

Anyway your criticisms are valid I'm sure. It's one reason I prefer retro games because people aren't satisfied with ANYTHING anymore, no matter how ridiculous the amount of effort put into a game people easily write it off as trash just because being such a complex game inevitably leaves loop holes, either things that noobs will abuse or minor flaws that people love hyperboling to f*cking death.

So I do prefer the simpler, less convoluted days of gaming for that reason.

boo boo have you played
http://www.petepaulos.com/images/gam...ros_wii-v2.jpg
it is awesome.

Hell yeah and it's f*cking awesome.

It's interesting to note how easy it is on single player but how HARD it is on multiplayer. It's a hell of a lot of fun either way but it's especially fun to antagonise your siblings and constantly impede their progress because you're the Mario master and they're not. http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...icons/smug.gif

Dude, the knife only takes one hit to kill. All someone has to do is basically run into you and press a button. It's "supposed" to be balanced because of the fact it's hard to sneak up on people to use it unless they're camping, but it's also really easy to dispense noobs with, and noobs are the targets most of the time because they're always the one's sitting in one spot for too long. I'm not just talking about MW2 either... BC2 is the same thing. While I'm not saying the knife needs to be nerfed, because it's certainly not spammed by anyone other than people hunting for dogtags (in BC2) and I agree that if you can get knife kills, you sorta deserve them, but don't mistake being knifed for being killed by a pro. Think of it as being killed by a knife because you were doing something very wrong.

Also, I never said MW2 was a terrible game. Nor is BC2 nor any other FPS I've played. The people that play it are what make the game what it is. All I'm saying is that if the developers made it harder for a specific style of playing to become the monopoly, the game would be enjoyed by more people. After all, everyone who's playing it paid for it. They should all have the same opportunities without having to spam an overpowered gun or resort to a specific type of play to achieve it.

I think you should play online FPS for a couple months and then get back to me about what you think. Having played it once isn't enough. Once you get over the initial "Oh this is cool" phase and actually start trying to make some achievements and establish a team that works well and devise strategies, you'll begin to see all the things I'm talking about and how they affect the overall gameplay.

Yeah FPSs are admittingly not a speciality of mine. Never played an online one before and you're right I quickly learned that standing in one place was the quickest and easiest way to get killed.

Fault Line
Fault Line - Nitrome - Play Free Games

pretty fun little flash game, it's a platformer/puzzle thing where you're able to connect little points in the levels and "fold" the level together to make new openings and get past obstacles. even though it's a game that uses the mouse together with the arrow keys, prompting you to navigate with your left hand, it feels surprisingly comfortable. only thing that was a let down was just how simple it was, got through the game in a really short time.

still, if you have time to kill this is a pretty good game

i dunno depends on how you play the multiplayer. i would play with my little brother and he would always try to stay behind me so he could rez me. it's way easier that way.

but i miss cs 1.6. in its heyday it was so good.

overclocked my gpu in starcraft 2 anticipation. already downloaded just have to install tomorrow. i'm ready to get destroyed in multiplayer. :)

I was in that beta and I think I'm going to pass.

First off, be prepped, its nothing like SC1 (it favors aggression over defense, save for the Terran).

Its also not as balanced as it should be. They take too much from the Koreans, which are a lopsided group (they generally don't play Terran). I'm giving it 2 months.

If you like to play as Terran's then my biggest piece of advice that I can give is to utilize the THOR unit to it's full capability. They are essentially overhauled Goliath's that can actually inflict some damage. They are a little on the pricey side, but well worth the cost.

Anyhow I broke out this old beast:

http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0...arth_large.jpg

Let me tell you... playing this stoned, with headphones and in the dark is one of the most eerie experiences I've ever had. The game already fu*ks around with the controls during various parts of the game, but because you're already fu*ked up you don't know if it's the game or you. Plus you catch a lot of the whispered dialogue, some of which is pretty disturbing, which only intensifies the game.

i didn't play the original so i will be really crappy for a while. last time i played an RTS was command and conquer generals. by the time i get decent hopefully they will have it balanced nicely.

sounds a bit like eternal darkness' insanity. that game was pretty cool too.

http://i717.photobucket.com/albums/w...mpi/Sm/RDR.jpg

Pretty sweet game. They critiqued a lot of the minor issues that GTA4 and put it in a western based game.

Sigh... I'd love to pick up SC2 but my wimpy laptop can barely run CSS. I'm shooting for a desktop for Christmas/Black Friday so maybe I'll pick it up around then.

I really, really can't wait for Diablo III.

this is dumb. retail purchasers of sc2 got to start playing at midnight. i have to wait until 1 pm. there is no question blizzard is making a lot more money from the digital downloads too(hell, is it 100% profit???). i have it installed and updated but i can't play.

Doesn't seem like a large price to play, but then again, considering a majority of the people likely to be playing... perhaps you're right.

the only logical reason i can guess is so their servers don't explode. buy more servers damnit.

Yea, if you launch a game with online capability, you need to be able to handle the demand.

when i played WoW the servers were always a struggle. it got somewhat better but not what you expect for $15 a month... the servers probably won't be that bad but on launch day its hard to tell.

why did i stop playing RTS's for 4+ years? starcraft 2 is really fun. and i suck really hard still. just wait till i get ok... also it runs perfect ultra settings. however my monitor only goes to 1280x1024. but my computer is also 3 years old. core 2 duo e8400 @ 3.4ghz, geforce 8800gts @ 755 core 2222 memory, 4gb ddr2 800 half broken ram at 800mhz(can't overvolt for OC, apparently they broke for everyone that overvolted them after a few months. i don't wanna sacrifice my pc for however long so i never sent them back for a replacement :(

I've been playing a lot of Morrowind lately, and god... this is a really really fun game. I'd previously never really played Morrowind all that seriously, just messing around with cheats and whatnot, but this time I actually made a character and I'm starting to realize that it's probably the best rpg I've ever played (though, I haven't played that many.)

And I plan on getting Star Craft 2 really soon.

My mate gifted me Gothic III on Steam but I haven't been able to get it to behave nicely on my computer despite trying all manner of patches, settings and ini tweaks... the random 5 second lag periods and general clunkiness make it unplayable. It's a shame because it looks like a great game otherwise.

So I've been playing Half Life 2 which another mate gave me on Steam. I completed it for the first time just now... I'm more of an RPG/RTS gamer as you can tell ;) Might start on Gothic II when I have a spare moment.

Umm, currently Lost Odyssey. I got super pissed at one of the last bosses though so probably wont be playing it for a while now.

I'm hopefully gonna get Alan Wake for m b-day and then I will probably be obsessed with that game.

I guess you can even consider me hooked on Fallout 3 still lol. Just waiting out the release for Fallout New Vegas.

Same here. I'm pumped for New Vegas.
I've been playing FO3 for so long it's just getting stale. Granted, I do download a lot of mods from Fallout3nexus, and that breathes new life into it. Or making your own mods.. that's fun, but extremely tedious and full of stumbling blocks.

You're not missing much. Apparently Gothic III is sh*t.

Lol I have FO3 for the 360 so I cant mod at all. I wanted to get FO3 for the PC, but my computer can't take the graphics. It has a super hard time managing The Sims 3 let alone something as complex as FO3. I'm also anxiously waiting for some news of an Elder Scrolls V. Don't think much luck on that though will be released.

really? i started playing the single player last night and i'm feeling like i'm just playing a graphical do-over for the most part. MP was never a big selling point for me though.


funny story. this past week, of all weeks, i get pegged for extra hours at work, can't really say no since i can use the cash. so i work until mid afternoon, get home then head to the store to collect my pre-order. get home again, start installing, then a buddy messages me and he's all like - DUDE! i just scored a free ticket to the Testament / Megadeth / Slayer show tonight!

ok, cool, congrats, i've got SC2 instead. so i figure he'll stop by on the way to the show to smoke a power up, and sure enough a few minutes later i get a buzz at the door and there he is.... did you get my last message? (msn has been flaky lately) so no i hadn't. he had two free tickets to the show.

so on the first day the game i waited 13 years to play, i got my groove on with Testament, sang along to Peace Sells with Mustaine, and had a great view of Lombardo just FLYING through the Abyss.

i do not at all regret not playing SC2 until the day after it finally came out.

http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/a...llout3xbox.jpg

I'm a real sucker for RPG's this is awesome.