groowagon's forum posts

#1 Edited by groowagon (2806 posts) -

320kbps MP3 file doesn't sound bad, even with studio grade audio hardware. confirmation bias in action right here. if i would pull double-blind test on you with FLAC and MP3, i'm 100% sure you would fail it miserably.

#2 Posted by groowagon (2806 posts) -

@groowagon said:

@saintsatan said:

@FelipeInside said:
@saintsatan said:
@groowagon said:

@saintsatan said:

I love both games but Half-Life 2 is just another FPS with good production values.

in what shooter were you able to have so much fun with physics back then? i recall zero.

Moving boxes/bricks for dumb puzzles was it's main focus and that was an absolute bore. If you want to use a good example of PC physics at least use a good example like Portal or Garys Mod.

There was like 2 or 3 moving boxes puzzles in the whole game. The gravity gun also let you pick up things and throw them at enemies etc.

What you seem to miss is that FPS games up until HL2 were just about running down a corridor and shooting things. Half Life 2 introduced interactivity, story-telling, character progression, exploration, different types of gameplay to the genre... and it did it so well that every FPS after it followed suit. It single handily created a new FPS genre (or new type of FPS).

Uh no. Deus Ex? System Shock? If anything HL2 was the one to follow suit.

Also there were WAY more than 2 or 3 box puzzles.

why don't you throw in Daggerfall there too while you're at it? they are more RPGs than shooters.

it's definetly not the puzzles that stood out in HL2's physics. it was the interaction with enemies. mainly gravity gun in all it's epicness. Portal and Gary's mod were released way after HL2 and you know it.

They're FPS with RPG elements, not an RPG with FPS elements. What does release date have to do with anything?

you obviously rate the game when it's released, and wont compare it to future games...

#3 Posted by groowagon (2806 posts) -

@FelipeInside said:
@saintsatan said:
@groowagon said:

@saintsatan said:

I love both games but Half-Life 2 is just another FPS with good production values.

in what shooter were you able to have so much fun with physics back then? i recall zero.

Moving boxes/bricks for dumb puzzles was it's main focus and that was an absolute bore. If you want to use a good example of PC physics at least use a good example like Portal or Garys Mod.

There was like 2 or 3 moving boxes puzzles in the whole game. The gravity gun also let you pick up things and throw them at enemies etc.

What you seem to miss is that FPS games up until HL2 were just about running down a corridor and shooting things. Half Life 2 introduced interactivity, story-telling, character progression, exploration, different types of gameplay to the genre... and it did it so well that every FPS after it followed suit. It single handily created a new FPS genre (or new type of FPS).

Uh no. Deus Ex? System Shock? If anything HL2 was the one to follow suit.

Also there were WAY more than 2 or 3 box puzzles.

why don't you throw in Daggerfall there too while you're at it? they are more RPGs than shooters.

it's definetly not the puzzles that stood out in HL2's physics. it was the interaction with enemies. mainly gravity gun in all it's epicness. Portal and Gary's mod were released way after HL2 and you know it.

#4 Edited by groowagon (2806 posts) -

you don't have the correct poll answer in there, wich is "I used to love them to death, until better shooters (mainly BF) came along".

i mean i loved Quake and UT very much, but they are way too boring today. that's also the reason UT3 failed. it was too same-old-same-old.

e: some purist will definetly rage about that "better shooters" part. this is my opinion. keep your purist-rage away. more fun > more competetive.

#5 Posted by groowagon (2806 posts) -

I love both games but Half-Life 2 is just another FPS with good production values.

in what shooter were you able to have so much fun with physics back then? i recall zero.

#6 Edited by groowagon (2806 posts) -

@quakke said:

@saintsatan said:

@Lulu_Lulu: Delusional PC fanboys will praise them but they really have never made anything that great. Even their best and most well known game, Duke Nukem 3D, was outclassed by BLOOD in every imaginable way possible.

I'm so happy that you don't seem to know the fact that Blood started as an 3D Realms development. So technically it's also an 3D Realms game..

3D Realms never developed it. get your facts straight. it was started by Q Studios, wich was only funded by 3D Realms.

but yeah, they have a lot to prove here. i mean... the CEO of the new 3DR is the composer from the old team. great. Scott Miller is listed only as an advisor. i'm not expecting much.

#8 Posted by groowagon (2806 posts) -

no, i don't regret it (i'm barely at $1K, maybe a hint lower). i don't buy PC for gaming only, obviously. i mean, even console gamers have PCs at home. it's just the amount of money i put on the GPU that counts as a gaming expense for me. in other words, it's $300-$400 to buy a modern mid-high range GPU. add the fact that PC games cost a LOT less, so it's close to being a bargain. then add the fact that games are the best looking on any system, and it becomes a no-brainer.

#9 Edited by groowagon (2806 posts) -

Wireless, but im not sure if it works yet on pc. I checked about a month ago and MS didnt have drivers for pc "yet". You might also need an approprietary reciever for it (included in the wireless pc version).

#10 Edited by groowagon (2806 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@groowagon: You seem to be confused. Grab a dictionary. The word "misbelief" is not what I'm talking about. Religion is as simple as belief about the nature, cause, answer purpose of the universe . The fact that some religions take it further doesn't change that.

you don't have to be a very big genius to realize that religions offer some... well... second-hand explanations about our universe. and to realize that these explanations are indeed redicilously primitive. hence, misbelief.