pugnate's forum posts

  • 31 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts

[QUOTE="debusentel"]Well I do agree its getting expensive but you can get a PC that will be considered Great for at least 3 years for Under $1000.Sliverwarrior

Where? Because I spend 900$ on my current computer a year and a half ago and I can't run any new games...

Bullcrap. You can still run the latest, just not at max settings. How does that make it worse than having a console? While you may have to lower the settings, the visuals would still look on par with a console, if not better. Stop posting this crap all over the internet.

Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
Vampire Bloodlines was great! I think it is probably getting more exposure because of STEAM?
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
I see these sort of threads on other forums, and thought we could use it here. Post here and let everyone know what you are playing, and what you've finished recently.

I've been playing Bioshock, which I am loving. Great game, dripping with atmosphere. UT3 is a lot fun online... the kind of fun that has you cussing out loud in pure joy mixed with disbelief.

I find myself returning to Oblivion after six months of hiatus. I still haven't finished it, and with the tons of great mods available on the PC, the experience has transformed into something that looks far more gorgeous, and plays with a lot more balance.

Last game I finished was Portal, and I found the length to be perfect. There was only so much they could do with that mechanic, and I thought it was a great title overall.
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts

Been checking around in case I am crazy or something.

Just about everyone confirms. In HALF AN HOUR... Crysis and UT3 lost 75% of their votes, while COD4 SUDDENLY GAINED 75%.

WTF?

Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
While it could explain why the votes for Crysis and UT3 were suddenly LOST... it does NOT explain how in this period of adjustment, the votes of COD4 just went UP.
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts

[QUOTE="pugnate"]

What the?

http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/?om_act=convert&om_clk=multimodule&tag=multimodule;picks;title;1

All the votes for Crysis and UT3 are gone? Someone explain that.Ironfungus

What do you expect? Only the hardcore, worthy gamers who actually have skill in the First Person Shooter genre vote for Crysis and UT3. What do you seriously expect? OF course CoD 4 would be on the top when it comes to voting. The game was completely designed for the sole satisfaction of noobs to FPS games.

That and not a lot of people have the PCs for Crysis. I do, but I just never got around to buying Crysis (yet...?). I never really expected Unreal to be very popular at all. The Unreal Tournament series has always been that of an online sport. Not just anybody can play it. It takes time (a hell of a lot of time) and an enormous amount of practice to be able to really master Unreal Tournament.

It's obvious that people wouldn't vote for it because the majority of gamers out there suck at Unreal Tournament -- that and Crysis (most likely), but I've never played it.

OK dude try to understand someone's point before you go on a rant making yourself look like a total ass.

Crysis and UT3 had near 20k votes and COD4 had 10k vots less. In a few hours COD4 has gained 10k votes while Crysis and UT3 have lost 10-15k votes. So wtf?

Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
What doesn't make sense is how COD4 could gain 10,000 votes while Crysis could lose 10,000 in the matter of hours. WTF indeed?
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#8 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
What the?

http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/?om_act=convert&om_clk=multimodule&tag=multimodule;picks;title;1

All the votes for Crysis and UT3 are gone? Someone explain that.
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/alleged-gamespot-employee-spills-guts-on-valleywag-328797.php
Avatar image for pugnate
pugnate

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10 pugnate
Member since 2005 • 37 Posts
So there is absolutely no doubt now, the reviewer was fired for being overly negative.

What pisses me off is the whole "I knew they sold out because they gave Crysis/Bioshock/Witcher/Halo 3 etc a good score." The funny thing is that whenever someone makes a ridiculous comment like that, someone always responds with something like,"Hey of those you mentioned, XYZ was a good game, but you are right, ABC and EFG were way overrated, and surely because of the reviewers accepting bribes."

And then some other genius will respond with,"HEY YOU KNOW WHAT? ABC WAS A GOOD GAME! But you guys are right, XYZ and EFG actually sucked and the reviewer definitely was on the publisher's payroll.

This will go on, until you realize that all these conspiracy theory nut jobs are unable to agree on the scores themselves. Yet they won't even consider that, and the only thing that will make sense to them is any review that they differ with, is naturally written by someone on the payroll. These guys really need to wake up.

For every moron who thinks Bioshock bought its way into the high scores, there is a guy who loved that game, but instead thinks it was Halo 3 that got a good score because of bribes, and vice versa.

My point is that it is human to have a different opinion. I just don't understand that why it is OK for their fellow posters to differ greatly in opinions, yet isn't for reviewers. Why is it that any time some reviewer has a different opinion, it is because of the worst possible reason. Most of these so called writers may write with an ability that makes a fourth grade teacher cry (stares at IGN), but I bet most of these very "writers" take pride in their honesty.

Just take a look at what happens when their bosses try to bend the rules. Gerstmann has been fired, and two of his coworkers have apparently resigned with him. His ex co workers are rallying around him, and making their disapproval known.
  • 31 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4