masterpinky2000's forum posts

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#1 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts
Sure, it's fairly casual. But I don't see that as an insult, that makes it an incredibly popular game and also very fun to play (tons of people online, a lot of fairly normal people as well--although you do get those 8 year olds...).
Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#2 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

By the same token, you got ripped off when you bought Halo 2 after getting Halo. Almost all the same weapons, gameplay mechanics, etc.

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#3 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

Halo: CE was definitely innovative, much in the way GeoW was--small changes to gameplay mechanics that worked very well. The rechargable health system (albeit only partial) w/ the shields was pretty new, as was the limited weapons stash, the good collection of playable vehicles that actually were interesting to use, etc. The storyline was also very compelling.

Compared to that, Halo 2 had basically no innovation, just different weapons, maps, worse storyline. Halo 3 hopefully improves on the storyline part, giving us a truly epic conclusion to the series. But it probably won't have too many gameplay innovations, since we would have heard about them by now.

That being said, Crysis just seems like Far Cry w/ much much better graphics (it's not an innovation to say you can cut down trees w/ your gun and drop them on your enemies). Bioshock looks fairly innovative with the small collection of distinct entities that have their own behavior that you can manipulate to your advantage (getting Big Daddies to fight the splicers or vice versa, for instance).

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#4 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

I realize that both the NFL and the NFLPA would never allow this in a million years, but how funny would it be if there was a CHAR rating for character/off-field behavior in Madden games? And if you had a guy w/ really really low CHAR, it would be like having low INJ--except his problems would crop up off the field instead of on it, a la Chris Henry, Pacman Jones or Michael Vick.

The rating could also affect player progress to a certain extent, if it incorporates some notion of work ethic. For instance, Vick, who has perhaps the most raw physical talent of any NFL quarterback in the past 20 years (incredible speed, once in a generation, combined with arguably the strongest arm in the league), somehow has never managed to actually be a decent, consistent 60% completion percentage passer. A lot of that has to do w/ him being too arrogant to bother practicing hard and learning his playbook and mastering the small details of his position. He was content to simply get by on natural athleticism, particularly the ability to scramble out of the pocket when his primary receiver wasn't open (god knows he sucked at reading progressions).

And now we learn that he actually fought dogs during the NFL season, traveling around the country to do it--compared to guys like Manning, who spend their time in the film room, Vick is ridiculous. It's no wonder why he couldn't fulfill his potential now.

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#5 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

This game looked very old-school Splinter-Cell-ish to me, kind of like what they were going for in the African levels in Double Agent.

That being said, there were some cool parts. I like in the very beginning how he pretends to be part of the statue, that's a nice, subtle touch.

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#6 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

Looking at KZ2 and some of these other games coming out, it's hard to argue against that. Although I will say that MGS4 doesn't look noticeably better than GeoW, and that Uncharted is one of those games that really gets overhyped on graphics.

Still, w/ KZ 2 and GT5, I think it's pretty clear that PS3 does have the most raw hardware power.

The problem is that multiplats will still generally look better on the 360, which is easier to program for...those companies aren't going to bother doing all the complicated coding to bring all the same effects to PS3, which would involve using more of the SPU's for special tasks.

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#7 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

This is fairly good for the 360 actually, there's already going to be a huge glut of the console's biggest titles coming out in the fall.

Starting with Bioshock in August, you have Blue Dragon, Halo 3, Mass Effect, Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed, Eternal Sonata...

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#8 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

I think COD4 has largely won b/c graphics isn't just pure technical stuff like shaders, polygons pushed, etc.

COD 4 has a lot of pretty cool effects (every site I've read has raved about the night vision in COD 4) and also seems to throw a lot of fighters on screen at any one time w/ ridiculous explosions from grenades, missile launchers, mortars, etc.

It's not Gamespot being crazy, b/c I believe IGN backed them up. Also, Gametrailers declared COD 4 the winner in best graphics, you can see their video where they explain why.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/22585.html

Avatar image for masterpinky2000
masterpinky2000

1955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

310

Followers

Reviews: 95

User Lists: 0

#9 masterpinky2000
Member since 2004 • 1955 Posts

It sounds like developing for the PS3 is quite difficult, which means that many multi-plat games are essentially developed for 360 w/ parts being rewritten for PS3. Developers often cut corners on the PS3 b/c it's just too hard to get all that content back into the PS3 version; they have to really recode how the graphics work in terms of the extra SPU pipelines.

I think this is a trend we'll see in this gen. A lot of the multi-plats that aren't specifically made for PS3 will have some corners cut compared to the 360, whereas the true PS3 exclusives built from the ground-up for PS3 will look better than 360 games.