Jump to content
N-Europe

Recommended Posts

Posted
Come on guys! Single player? Really!!??

 

That is the main reason I buy games - even Call of Duty (and why I haven't got one since the first Black Ops, due to the terrible single-player).

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

everytime someone goes on about not needing a single player inan FPS i like to remind them of Goldeneye, Perfect Dark etc etc that had both awesome multiplayer and single player.

Just because some games are more of a multiplayer party game with a tacked on single player doesn't mean they all can or should be, it would be nice if developers put some effort in and created games like they used to

Posted

Indeed. I don't really buy games to play multiplayer which is why I'm always a bit "meh" when obvious single-player titles have that tacked on multiplayer (Tomb Raider, Batman: AO etc.). Also, look at Bioshock. No multiplayer, great single-player.

Posted
everytime someone goes on about not needing a single player inan FPS i like to remind them of Goldeneye, Perfect Dark etc etc that had both awesome multiplayer and single player.

Just because some games are more of a multiplayer party game with a tacked on single player doesn't mean they all can or should be, it would be nice if developers put some effort in and created games like they used to

 

What I'm saying is that if the game is primarily single player orientated, why tack on a half arsed multi-player component?

 

I mean look at the new Batman game, does it really need multi-player? No, it doesn't. They are tacking it on to tick boxes so the marketing department can add it to the press release.

 

The same goes for Battlefield, those games are ALL about the multi-player, the campaign was a tacked on after thought.

 

I'm all for games that manage to balance both - Goldeneye and Perfect Dark being two perfect examples. But just shoving something into a game in a half arsed way so the publisher can tick off a box on a check sheet is pretty pointless to me.

Posted
What I'm saying is that if the game is primarily single player orientated, why tack on a half arsed multi-player component?

 

I mean look at the new Batman game, does it really need multi-player? No, it doesn't. They are tacking it on to tick boxes so the marketing department can add it to the press release.

 

The same goes for Battlefield, those games are ALL about the multi-player, the campaign was a tacked on after thought.

 

I'm all for games that manage to balance both - Goldeneye and Perfect Dark being two perfect examples. But just shoving something into a game in a half arsed way so the publisher can tick off a box on a check sheet is pretty pointless to me.

 

I can totally agree on this effort to tack on multiplayer, i just think we can be disapointed they didn't try and produce a singleplayer with this, because it could have been epic

 

but then MS don't like good games else they'd actually let Rare make something other than kinect games, its akin to having a world renound chef making beans on toast at a hostel

Posted
I can totally agree on this effort to tack on multiplayer, i just think we can be disapointed they didn't try and produce a singleplayer with this, because it could have been epic

 

but then MS don't like good games else they'd actually let Rare make something other than kinect games, its akin to having a world renound chef making beans on toast at a hostel

 

I think two things can be said about Rare:

 

1) When Microsoft acquired them they were past their best. A lot of key talent had left and they certainly were not the studio they were in the N64 days. What's more, they kinda skipped a whole generation, with only two new games coming out from them in the GC/XBOX/PS2 era. That seemed to take its toll as when new games did emerge they weren't on the cutting edge anymore.

 

2) Rare's output was tailored to Nintendo's audience. Nintendo and Rare were a perfect match. I just don't think Rare's output fits the MS audience. As much as I love Rare's output, I just don't see it fitting in on the XBOX.

 

Hence when things didn't sell and the partnership wasn't working out, MS shifted their output to lesser things.

Posted

I wish Nintendo could buy them back....i'd love perfect dark on WiiU it seems a nice fit, imagine the briefcase submachine gun/turret gun that is controlled via the tablet as you take cover.....

 

*sigh* i can dream

Posted (edited)

2 Dutch hands-on previews (from GamesCom) got me hyped for this game (too bad I probably can’t play it anytime soon). The double jumping and wall jumping (and wall running, hello War Frame) look awesome. Even though it’s multiplayer, there are campaign missions, where you get treated to some cutscenes and story. What really got me enthusiastic was one guy telling about his playtime, he was in his titan, which was on the verge of being destroyed from behind by another titan, so he ejected, which sends you soaring through the air. From way up there, he looked down to get an overview from the battlefield, looking for who assaulted him, when he realised that his assaulter didn’t notice him ejecting. He landed on top of the enemy titan, and killed the pilot within. Both previews compared the pace of the game with oldskool shooters like Quake 3. Really looking forward to this.

 

Edit:

Oh, also cool, that same guy was telling: when your team loses (probably only in those campaign missions, that doesn’t immediately end the game. Losers had to evacuate, and get to their ship.. He and his teammates got aboard, sighed of relief, except one person who didn’t realise what to do, so he was left behind, and well, executed.

Edited by Sméagol
Posted

The whole narrative-multiplayer aspect is very daring but I'm extremely hopeful the minds behind CoD can make it work. From a pure gameplay perspective this absolutely looks like the multiplayer shooter I want to play with the heavy v. ultra-light dynamic playing out at a quick but not exhausting pace. Call of Duty with a faint dash of TF2-style interplay.

Posted
The 360 one I think!

 

Not PC then? There's all the "Xbox exclusive" being chucked around as a reason to get the xb1 but honestly I see most high def seekers hitting a good PC rig for this. Price is comparable, games are easy to port so likely to turn up. Also going to be £10 cheaper on average.

  • 2 months later...
Posted (edited)

Fair play that is one awesome statue!

 

 

 

That surely must be a £150 Collectors Edition or something?!

 

EDIT: Yeah it's $250 ;p

 

EDIT:

We are taking this initial deposit in US Dollars, but when you come back to pay the balance (and shipping charges) we will translate that deposit into your local currency. The retail price in the currencies we will support are €299.99 EUR, £249.99 GBP, and $399.99 AUD.
lol! Get outta here! Edited by Retro_Link
Posted

I'm actually seriously questioning how much difference there will be between the Xbox 360 and XBone versions of this, the only platform I'll be buying it on is the 360... and I'm not even sure if I want it? ::shrug:

 

I mean obviously I do... but not that much, assuming this is out on XBone day, 22nd November then, I'll be playing Zelda on my 3DS so, meh. :p

 

I'll probably wait. ;)

 

 

ANNNND I've just remembered this isn't even a launch title.

 

lol

 

But the way they have been hyping it for XBone would make you assume that it is... no?

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
Posted

Lots of info with the closed-ish beta going out tomorrow.

as ever had a straight forward but extensive look at the actual gameplay. I love the apparent fluidity of it. I'd buy a PS4 tomorrow if it was coming out on that platform. Could potentially get it for my laptop if my nerve doesn't hold.

 

 

Beta trailer:

 

Posted

Will get the 360 version of this I think if it's supposed to be the same game, when I get my One I'll prob pick this up hopefully cheaper so be good to have a vague idea of what I'm doing before I get destroyed by seasoned Titan'ers!

 

All these previews and videos sure do look good!


×
×
  • Create New...