I am just curious why people think MGS4's graphics look so good? I will admit the gamplay looks fun, and the story is probably good. Yet all i hear is how good it looks?? Am i the only one who thinks it looks boring bland, and greenish?? The animations look good, but the textures seem terrible and the whole game just looks bland??I am not bashing the game, i think it looks amazing!! I just don't understand what the big deal is with the graphics??Please enlighten me!Whats the Hoopla on MGS4?
I won't comment on the environments, but I will say that the character designs look really good, . . . . . IMO of course.Whats the Hoopla on MGS4?
there are games out there that look better than MGS4. Kojima himself said that he is not satisifed with the graphics. MGS4 is taking up all the blu ray disc, so they have to cut down the quality of the graphics to fit everything.
50GB!!!Really though, I haven't heard much about the graphics in a while (prettier things have come along since it's heyday as being hyped the graphics king). Aside from the graphics (which are still good, just not earth-shattering), it's got a good pedigree and they seem to be doing the series justice in this iteration. The chances of it not being a great game are very low.
It's not really being hyped for it's visuals. the badass stealth gameplay is the biggest draw.
MGS4 will be one of the best looking games out there when it comes out, just like all MGS games before it
I agree that the graphics are ok, but not that great!My other question is What could they possibly be filing the 50GB! of space with??? I am really curious? If great long games can still fit on a DVD, and probably will still fit for years to come! Then what is Kojima doing with the game??
[QUOTE=''pDbOy_26'']I agree that the graphics are ok, but not that great!My other question is What could they possibly be filing the 50GB! of space with??? I am really curious? If great long games can still fit on a DVD, and probably will still fit for years to come! Then what is Kojima doing with the game??[/QUOTE]Audio.
[QUOTE=''liquidsnake1987'']there are games out there that look better than MGS4. Kojima himself said that he is not satisifed with the graphics. MGS4 is taking up all the blu ray disc, so they have to cut down the quality of the graphics to fit everything.[/QUOTE]the disk space isn't affecting the visuals.
[QUOTE=''pDbOy_26'']I agree that the graphics are ok, but not that great!My other question is What could they possibly be filing the 50GB! of space with??? I am really curious? If great long games can still fit on a DVD, and probably will still fit for years to come! Then what is Kojima doing with the game??[/QUOTE] Rumor has it uncompressed sound. That can take a large chunk of data.Also, they didn't say it took up 50GB of data - they said they couldn't fit the game with the Japanese and English languages on the same 50GB disc.
In terms of realism, MGS4 looks amazing compared to many console games, along with art style. The game is going to be quite good imo.
MGS games always push consoles, even MGS PO pushes the psp, it looks pretty good on it.Plus uncompressed audio probably takes up lots of space.
Friday, April 16, 2010
clearly gears beats uncharted graphicall ...
just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.clearly gears beats uncharted graphicall ...
Noclearly gears beats uncharted graphicall ...
just your 360 has better graphics? lol
[QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE]With that kind of scientific analysis and comparison, I can't imagine how anyone can disagree...but I do. Completely. And yes, I've played both games. Uncharted is better graphically.
[QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE] they feel better saying that gears is overrated!! unsecure ppl
Graphic comparisons fail without pictures.
@PAL360 - so so very trueand tbh graphics dont really matter, because we all know that gears beats any ps3 game to date.
[QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE]It's the fanboy googles.
[QUOTE=''chikenfriedrice'']just your 360 has better graphics? lol[/QUOTE] No, that's not what he means ha ha. just worded real. it's probably a Nvidia/ATI comparison. some things just look better to some people. I personally think gears looks better myself, but I usually think that the 360 looks better because somewhere inside, even though I only got my ps3 for FF (which I thought would be out in 08 when I got it), my mind may ''want'' it to. just like sony fans ''want'' uncharted to be the best. we always look at what we want to lol I wish more fanboys could realize that
You must be smoking something if you think Mass Effect looks better than Uncharted.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''DarkCloud79''] [QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE] It's the fanboy googles.[/QUOTE] fan boy googles, im sure google havent got a clue what ur talking about!:
|Here is what reviewers say about Uncharted vs GearsRipten review: http://www.ripten.com/2007/12/01/uncharted-drakes-fortune-review/''Uncharted has great textures. So what? Well Gears of War is lauded as a graphical show piece mainly due to both its artistic vision and its high resolution textures. Uncharted, however, trumps Gears of War.''''Uncharted also has the best graphics you've ever seen on consoles''Eurogamer review: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=87533%26page=2
''Talking of environments, it's hard to think of a single game that's ever included such lush and staggeringly detailed gaming environment. As much as Gears of War provided a stunning next-generation shooter setting, the moody greys and browns made it a harsh, dark, hostile, and monochromatic place to be. In Uncharted, it's not just superior to Gears in terms of out and out detail, but brings a feel-good factor with the sheer level of environmental variety on offer.''''Truly, Uncharted is the first game I've seen to date that makes me wonder if it could be done on the Xbox 360, and as a huge admirer of the software line-up on Microsoft's system, that's saying a lot.'' Gamespy: http://goty.gamespy.com/2007/ps3/10.html''We can confidently say that after playing Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, it is a game that could only be done on the PlayStation 3. Between the amazing vistas that stretch out over the horizon, rich foliage, and the sheer amount of data that pushes the limits of Blu-ray's storage capacity, Naughty Dog's incredibly rich visual splendor is something to behold.''
[QUOTE=''kolocescevo'']@PAL360 - so so very trueand tbh graphics dont really matter, because we all know that gears beats any ps3 game to date.[/QUOTE]thats my point. in fact to all those who think im lying im typing this on my ps3 right now. GeOW looks better than any ps3 game rleased.
[QUOTE=''VulcanMage119''][QUOTE=''chikenfriedrice'']just your 360 has better graphics? lol[/QUOTE] No, that's not what he means ha ha. just worded real. it's probably a Nvidia/ATI comparison. some things just look better to some people. I personally think gears looks better myself, but I usually think that the 360 looks better because somewhere inside, even though I only got my ps3 for FF (which I thought would be out in 08 when I got it), my mind may ''want'' it to. just like sony fans ''want'' uncharted to be the best. we always look at what we want to lol I wish more fanboys could realize that [/QUOTE]lol you got your PS3 thinking the next FF would be out this year Face Palm....Mate what the hell it took 4 years to make the last FF the dev Kits for the PS3 have been out for what a year or 2 now keep waiting mate i predict summer 2010 maybe 2009 if we are lucky!As for this Topic i have no idea i have Uncharted but i have not played it yet Gears is good looking mind so what ever.....
As a owner of both, I think Uncharted is a fantastic looking game -- better than Gears of War.
there has been heaps of polls on this and uncharted won everytime so take ur fanboy glasses off its amazing wat they do
[QUOTE=''akuma303x''][QUOTE=''kolocescevo'']@PAL360 - so so very trueand tbh graphics dont really matter, because we all know that gears beats any ps3 game to date.[/QUOTE]thats my point. in fact to all those who think im lying im typing this on my ps3 right now. GeOW looks better than any ps3 game rleased. [/QUOTE]Unreal Tournament 3 is Epics current showcase game and is graphically superior to Gears and Uncharted is better than that.Mark Rein has said himself UT3 has bigger environments, more characters onscreen, more polygons, more explosions, more of just about everything.
And the above critical reviews don't even mention the amount of tiny little details in uncharted that really make the game feel real. Just the way your characters face changes to match the situation. The way he twitches or cringes if a bullet gets too close, or hits a wall right by him. Or the way he will hesistantly enter a doorway by putting his hand on the wall and sort of creeping into the next room. This also tied into the animation which was great. Or the water/wet effects. THESE are part of graphics too and while they may seem small and less obvious than textures, they are what really MAKE a game and put it over the top graphically. These little details are what take true talent to make.
you have a special 360?stop blackheads
Noclearly gears beats uncharted graphicall ...
just your 360 has better graphics? lol
[QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE]With that kind of scientific analysis and comparison, I can't imagine how anyone can disagree...but I do. Completely. And yes, I've played both games. Uncharted is better graphically.
[QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE] they feel better saying that gears is overrated!! unsecure ppl
Graphic comparisons fail without pictures.
@PAL360 - so so very trueand tbh graphics dont really matter, because we all know that gears beats any ps3 game to date.
[QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE]It's the fanboy googles.
[QUOTE=''chikenfriedrice'']just your 360 has better graphics? lol[/QUOTE] No, that's not what he means ha ha. just worded real. it's probably a Nvidia/ATI comparison. some things just look better to some people. I personally think gears looks better myself, but I usually think that the 360 looks better because somewhere inside, even though I only got my ps3 for FF (which I thought would be out in 08 when I got it), my mind may ''want'' it to. just like sony fans ''want'' uncharted to be the best. we always look at what we want to lol I wish more fanboys could realize that
You must be smoking something if you think Mass Effect looks better than Uncharted.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''DarkCloud79''] [QUOTE=''akuma303x'']just beat uncharted last night. after playing both gears of war 1 really does still look better. i believed the hype. but it is pure fanboy bs. even mass effect beats it. and call of duty 4. this is just keeping it real. the truth is my 360 has something about the graphics that just look better. i do use vga for the 360 and hdmj for my ps3 but the 360 is winning in graphics thus far. my opinion.[/QUOTE] It's the fanboy googles.[/QUOTE] fan boy googles, im sure google havent got a clue what ur talking about!:
|Here is what reviewers say about Uncharted vs GearsRipten review: http://www.ripten.com/2007/12/01/uncharted-drakes-fortune-review/''Uncharted has great textures. So what? Well Gears of War is lauded as a graphical show piece mainly due to both its artistic vision and its high resolution textures. Uncharted, however, trumps Gears of War.''''Uncharted also has the best graphics you've ever seen on consoles''Eurogamer review: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=87533%26page=2
''Talking of environments, it's hard to think of a single game that's ever included such lush and staggeringly detailed gaming environment. As much as Gears of War provided a stunning next-generation shooter setting, the moody greys and browns made it a harsh, dark, hostile, and monochromatic place to be. In Uncharted, it's not just superior to Gears in terms of out and out detail, but brings a feel-good factor with the sheer level of environmental variety on offer.''''Truly, Uncharted is the first game I've seen to date that makes me wonder if it could be done on the Xbox 360, and as a huge admirer of the software line-up on Microsoft's system, that's saying a lot.'' Gamespy: http://goty.gamespy.com/2007/ps3/10.html''We can confidently say that after playing Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, it is a game that could only be done on the PlayStation 3. Between the amazing vistas that stretch out over the horizon, rich foliage, and the sheer amount of data that pushes the limits of Blu-ray's storage capacity, Naughty Dog's incredibly rich visual splendor is something to behold.''
[QUOTE=''kolocescevo'']@PAL360 - so so very trueand tbh graphics dont really matter, because we all know that gears beats any ps3 game to date.[/QUOTE]thats my point. in fact to all those who think im lying im typing this on my ps3 right now. GeOW looks better than any ps3 game rleased.
[QUOTE=''VulcanMage119''][QUOTE=''chikenfriedrice'']just your 360 has better graphics? lol[/QUOTE] No, that's not what he means ha ha. just worded real. it's probably a Nvidia/ATI comparison. some things just look better to some people. I personally think gears looks better myself, but I usually think that the 360 looks better because somewhere inside, even though I only got my ps3 for FF (which I thought would be out in 08 when I got it), my mind may ''want'' it to. just like sony fans ''want'' uncharted to be the best. we always look at what we want to lol I wish more fanboys could realize that [/QUOTE]lol you got your PS3 thinking the next FF would be out this year Face Palm....Mate what the hell it took 4 years to make the last FF the dev Kits for the PS3 have been out for what a year or 2 now keep waiting mate i predict summer 2010 maybe 2009 if we are lucky!As for this Topic i have no idea i have Uncharted but i have not played it yet Gears is good looking mind so what ever.....
As a owner of both, I think Uncharted is a fantastic looking game -- better than Gears of War.
there has been heaps of polls on this and uncharted won everytime so take ur fanboy glasses off its amazing wat they do
[QUOTE=''akuma303x''][QUOTE=''kolocescevo'']@PAL360 - so so very trueand tbh graphics dont really matter, because we all know that gears beats any ps3 game to date.[/QUOTE]thats my point. in fact to all those who think im lying im typing this on my ps3 right now. GeOW looks better than any ps3 game rleased. [/QUOTE]Unreal Tournament 3 is Epics current showcase game and is graphically superior to Gears and Uncharted is better than that.Mark Rein has said himself UT3 has bigger environments, more characters onscreen, more polygons, more explosions, more of just about everything.
And the above critical reviews don't even mention the amount of tiny little details in uncharted that really make the game feel real. Just the way your characters face changes to match the situation. The way he twitches or cringes if a bullet gets too close, or hits a wall right by him. Or the way he will hesistantly enter a doorway by putting his hand on the wall and sort of creeping into the next room. This also tied into the animation which was great. Or the water/wet effects. THESE are part of graphics too and while they may seem small and less obvious than textures, they are what really MAKE a game and put it over the top graphically. These little details are what take true talent to make.
you have a special 360?
Nintendo's Prize Pig Does NOT Prefer The ...
I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?Nintendo's Prize Pig Does NOT Prefer The ...
Let's not base a controller on a button masher.Nintendo's Prize Pig Does NOT Prefer The ...
[QUOTE=''Demetri_OS'']I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?[/QUOTE]in mario galaxy, metroid prime, z%26w,wii sport and all the other games that uses the wii moteend of story
it's a fighting game. motion controls wouldnt work well with it anyway. go play mario galaxy or mercury meltdown or any other games like those to experience the greatness of the wiimote
[QUOTE=''Demetri_OS'']I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?[/QUOTE]It depends on who the person is, cause I know ALOT of people who use the classic controler or Wii-mote and nunchuck. I dont blame them either cause it works out great.WHen devs start using all of Bluray and the cells power though tell me.
not every game is going to take advantage of the Wii Remote/Nunchuck. People fail to realize this.
[QUOTE=''Jaysonguy'']Let's not base a controller on a button masher.[/QUOTE]Wow.
You failed when you thought SSBB was better than SMG :3
That's not to say that the Wiimote isn't bad. SSB was designed for the N64 controller, then perfected with the gamecube controller. Most people mastered their skills on GC controller and hence that carries over to please these fans.I perfer the GC controller, but that isn't to say that it doesn't work on any of the other options (2nd best I'd say is Nunchuck+wiimote combo). If the game was designed from the ground up as a new IP for Wii, people wouldn't have this preference.Also, Mario Kart Wii supports the same number of control options but I can see more people going for the Classic Controller or Motion control over the GC controller (I'm going with classic since it's like the SNES controller)
''prize pig'' I like that :lol:The Wii mote is good for mini-games like picking boogers out of nostrils in WarioWare and mimicking the hammer movement like Whack A Mole.
If you want to pretend to balance something and stab something the Wii-mote provides plenty of that. It's the absolute best in immersion like I can't even believe it. I feel like I'm really in the game.But other than that, Mariio Kart Wii and SSBB prove that Wii-mote sucks with these genres. When you want REAL precision turning where you can feel every subtle turn and dig in the road, you dont want the Wii-mote. It's floaty and loose like a bimbo. For fighting games wihere you need quickness and split-second accuracy, you dont want the Wii-mote. It's laggy and annoying and wasteful in energy.So basically the Wii-mote is good for balancing blocks onscreen and stabbing and picking noses -- you know, careful slow movements. Immersive.But the Wii-mote sucks for quick motions, complext motions, and delicate racing motions.
[QUOTE=''air_wolf_cubed'']it's a fighting game. motion controls wouldnt work well with it anyway. go play mario galaxy or mercury meltdown or any other games like those to experience the greatness of the wiimote[/QUOTE]I liked the way Mortal Kombat used motion control.
I play Brawl with the Wii remote, and it plays exactly like a Gamecube controller with a split design and different button plament - no motion is necessary.That is the strength of the Wii remote - flexibility. If a game warrants a more standard control option it's available. If a game like Zach and Wiki, Wii sports, or any FPS benefits from a pointer or motion capabilities it's there for developers to use.
[QUOTE=''Demetri_OS'']I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?[/QUOTE]
Does the 9.5 really hurt that bad? ;)
On another note, I know plenty of people that use the Wiimote/nunchuck control scheme. You fail.
[QUOTE=''TacoJelly''][QUOTE=''air_wolf_cubed'']it's a fighting game. motion controls wouldnt work well with it anyway. go play mario galaxy or mercury meltdown or any other games like those to experience the greatness of the wiimote[/QUOTE]I liked the way Mortal Kombat used motion control.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but its MUCH easier to play with a the Gamecube/C lassic controller.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''Jaysonguy'']Let's not base a controller on a button masher.[/QUOTE] FAIL for calling Smash Bros. a button masher.
Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, No More Heroes, Trauma Center, Zack and Wikki all use the controls in an effective way.
The Wii-mote, like the DS Touch Screen, is better than a traditional controller for certain types of games, and worse for other types of games. Nintendo realises this and uses motion sensing controls only when it adds to the experience, not when it's just a gimmick.
[QUOTE=''jg4xchamp''][QUOTE=''Jaysonguy'']Let's not base a controller on a button masher.[/QUOTE] FAIL for calling Smash Bros. a button masher.[/QUOTE]
Don't even bother.
''Jaysonguy'' has either never played Smash Bros. or is terrible at it.
We've known very well that Wii motes are bad for fighters. Any fighter in general. Fightes are something that require split second timing, and button presses are the quickest link to timing and perfecting frames in any fighting game, or at least compared to the Wii remote. The time it would take you to pull off an attack through swipes of the Wii remote will be disasterous on your end, not to mention ruining many things.Firstly you'll likely send the Wii remote all haywire and it would just become confused through the different motions, then likely it's the fact that with a fighter you would dumb it down completely like GG on Wii.
Let's not base a controller on a button masher.Nintendo's Prize Pig Does NOT Prefer The ...
[QUOTE=''Demetri_OS'']I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?[/QUOTE]in mario galaxy, metroid prime, z%26w,wii sport and all the other games that uses the wii moteend of story
it's a fighting game. motion controls wouldnt work well with it anyway. go play mario galaxy or mercury meltdown or any other games like those to experience the greatness of the wiimote
[QUOTE=''Demetri_OS'']I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?[/QUOTE]It depends on who the person is, cause I know ALOT of people who use the classic controler or Wii-mote and nunchuck. I dont blame them either cause it works out great.WHen devs start using all of Bluray and the cells power though tell me.
not every game is going to take advantage of the Wii Remote/Nunchuck. People fail to realize this.
[QUOTE=''Jaysonguy'']Let's not base a controller on a button masher.[/QUOTE]Wow.
You failed when you thought SSBB was better than SMG :3
That's not to say that the Wiimote isn't bad. SSB was designed for the N64 controller, then perfected with the gamecube controller. Most people mastered their skills on GC controller and hence that carries over to please these fans.I perfer the GC controller, but that isn't to say that it doesn't work on any of the other options (2nd best I'd say is Nunchuck+wiimote combo). If the game was designed from the ground up as a new IP for Wii, people wouldn't have this preference.Also, Mario Kart Wii supports the same number of control options but I can see more people going for the Classic Controller or Motion control over the GC controller (I'm going with classic since it's like the SNES controller)
''prize pig'' I like that :lol:The Wii mote is good for mini-games like picking boogers out of nostrils in WarioWare and mimicking the hammer movement like Whack A Mole.
If you want to pretend to balance something and stab something the Wii-mote provides plenty of that. It's the absolute best in immersion like I can't even believe it. I feel like I'm really in the game.But other than that, Mariio Kart Wii and SSBB prove that Wii-mote sucks with these genres. When you want REAL precision turning where you can feel every subtle turn and dig in the road, you dont want the Wii-mote. It's floaty and loose like a bimbo. For fighting games wihere you need quickness and split-second accuracy, you dont want the Wii-mote. It's laggy and annoying and wasteful in energy.So basically the Wii-mote is good for balancing blocks onscreen and stabbing and picking noses -- you know, careful slow movements. Immersive.But the Wii-mote sucks for quick motions, complext motions, and delicate racing motions.
[QUOTE=''air_wolf_cubed'']it's a fighting game. motion controls wouldnt work well with it anyway. go play mario galaxy or mercury meltdown or any other games like those to experience the greatness of the wiimote[/QUOTE]I liked the way Mortal Kombat used motion control.
I play Brawl with the Wii remote, and it plays exactly like a Gamecube controller with a split design and different button plament - no motion is necessary.That is the strength of the Wii remote - flexibility. If a game warrants a more standard control option it's available. If a game like Zach and Wiki, Wii sports, or any FPS benefits from a pointer or motion capabilities it's there for developers to use.
[QUOTE=''Demetri_OS'']I thought the Wiimote was the end all and be all of controllers.Instead, people prefer the Gamecube controller when playing Brawl - Nintendo's Prize Pig.Where is the greatness of the Wiimote now?[/QUOTE]
Does the 9.5 really hurt that bad? ;)
On another note, I know plenty of people that use the Wiimote/nunchuck control scheme. You fail.
[QUOTE=''TacoJelly''][QUOTE=''air_wolf_cubed'']it's a fighting game. motion controls wouldnt work well with it anyway. go play mario galaxy or mercury meltdown or any other games like those to experience the greatness of the wiimote[/QUOTE]I liked the way Mortal Kombat used motion control.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but its MUCH easier to play with a the Gamecube/C lassic controller.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''Jaysonguy'']Let's not base a controller on a button masher.[/QUOTE] FAIL for calling Smash Bros. a button masher.
Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, Medal of Honor Heroes 2, No More Heroes, Trauma Center, Zack and Wikki all use the controls in an effective way.
The Wii-mote, like the DS Touch Screen, is better than a traditional controller for certain types of games, and worse for other types of games. Nintendo realises this and uses motion sensing controls only when it adds to the experience, not when it's just a gimmick.
[QUOTE=''jg4xchamp''][QUOTE=''Jaysonguy'']Let's not base a controller on a button masher.[/QUOTE] FAIL for calling Smash Bros. a button masher.[/QUOTE]
Don't even bother.
''Jaysonguy'' has either never played Smash Bros. or is terrible at it.
We've known very well that Wii motes are bad for fighters. Any fighter in general. Fightes are something that require split second timing, and button presses are the quickest link to timing and perfecting frames in any fighting game, or at least compared to the Wii remote. The time it would take you to pull off an attack through swipes of the Wii remote will be disasterous on your end, not to mention ruining many things.Firstly you'll likely send the Wii remote all haywire and it would just become confused through the different motions, then likely it's the fact that with a fighter you would dumb it down completely like GG on Wii.
This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...
Ok, people here on GameSpot seem to routinely hate Jeff Gerstmann. There are also, however, people that seem to stick up for him and say that his opinion is his own and it should be respected. Often when there is rebuttal from the opposing side, the Jeff Gerstmann-fans respond with ''Oh, you're a fanboy'', or ''Sheep are still stingy about the Zelda review''. I'm here today to say that his journalism is God-Awful. This isn't because I hate him for giving Zelda: Twilight Princess a bad score, or because I'm just a Wii-owner. The man just doesn't give solid reasons on why he gave games less-than phenomenal reviews. He is extremely nit-picky and often at times he gives games less-than favorable reviews just because of such tiny things like ''the music is too dated'' or ''this game is short''. Let me bring you up to speed here: In 1998, Mr. Gerstmann reviewed Metal Gear Solid for the Playstation. Metal Gear Solid was considered by critics and fans alike as the greatest PS1 game of all time, if not one of the best games ever. When Jeff reviewed it, he gave the game the score of an 8.5. Now, this isn't bad at all, but why didn't Jeff give the game a 9.0 at least? ''Oh, it's too short'' he says. ''Once you skip the cutscenes and know exactly what to do, you can run through the game in three hours or less'', the front-page review comment says. Note that he says ''Once you know exactly what to do''. This implies you have played the game before; ''Once you skip the cutscenes'', he says, and the cutscenes are major part of the game (as with all Metal Gear titles). If you're playing through the game once, cutscenes and all, you're going to be looking at more than twelve hours of game time. This is how long it took me to beat the game, even on Normal mode. Instead of praising what the game is, Jeff bashes it because a pro can run through it in a short amount of time. Later, in 2001, Mr. Gerstmann reviews Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 for the Playstation 2. All-around, it was a pretty solid PS2 title in the always-good Tony Hawk series. When Jeff reviewed it, he gave the game a perfect 10. This was the last game in GameSpot history to recieve a perfect score. When Jeff cited that Metal Gear Solid was a game that was short in length, he gives a Tony Hawk game, which is fairly short with repetitive objectives such as ''collect all the letters'' or the like, a gleaming review for being a game that will last you forever. It is utterly ridiculous that Mr. Gerstmann thinks that a next-generation offering of the PS1 Hawks is of more quality than Metal Gear Solid, a game that was favored for blending cinematic quality with great gameplay. It's easy to sum up Jeff's opinion on Hawk as ''ridiculous''.Fast-forward five years to the launch of the Wii. One title stood out as being a must-have (and possibly one of the best launch titles ever): The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. Since its inital revealing in 2005, the gaming world was full of excitement when they learned that the game would feature a darker, more edgy feel and an Ocarina of Time-style adult Link. Better yet, the game would take full advantage of the Wii's motion sensing controls, so for the first time ever, you really could slay moblins with your controller. When Jeff picked up the game, he instead talked about how the game's presentation felt ''stuck in the past'', where the music is too nostalgic, to the point of being ''dated''. Did he ever feel that Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3's presentation felt ''stuck in the past'', that it was simply a retread of the past Hawk franchises? Nope. He even mentions that the motion controls are innacurate, whereas critic and player testimonies can confirm that this isn't so. I own a Wii and Twilight Princess, and I for one can assure you that the motion controls work well, and are used more often in games like Super Mario Galaxy. Jeff also complains about how the game has no voice acting, but instead text-based dialogue. I will get back to this point later. The end-result was an 8.8, which was considered the most massive flop of this generation of gaming.When Mr. Gerstmann reviewed Warioware: Smooth Moves, he gave it a glowing review, citing how it utilizes the Wii Remote's motion sensing abilites in fun and wacky ways. The score he awarded the game was a 9.1, and considering that essentially the Warioware series is comprised of small little mini-games, it's extremely embarrassing that he would think that mini-games are more impressive than full-fledged adventure titles. Not only that, but there is no solid voice-acting in Warioware. He whines about how Zelda has no voice acting, but here in Warioware, it's ok because these games are full of whimsy? Talk about unfair.Soon after, Jeff left GameSpot for good. Some say it was because of his review of Kane and Lynch: Dead Men for the PS3 and Xbox 360, in which he gave the game a very poor score. GameSpot assures us that it had nothing to do with the review. Whatever the case may be, I for one am glad that Jeff Gerstmann is gone. He simply was an incompetent reviewer that focused more on what game could have been instead of what it is. His nitpicking tendencies have now headed to his new site, Giant Bomb, where he and Ryan Davis review games alone. I'm not a Sheep that hates him for giving a Zelda game a bad review. I simply disregard his opinion because it is often nonsensical and nitpicky to an unfair extreme. His journalistic integrity is brought into question when he chooses to award skating games perfect scores, and decides that mini-games are more important than epic action-adventure titles. Jeff Gerstmann's dismissal was the best thing that happened to GameSpot in a long time.Sorry about this wall of text rant, and if you read this whole thing, well, thanks, I guess. Any thoughts or comments?This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...
disregard a review? a.k.a. opinion?
Well I disregard your post, it's utter rubbish.
This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...
1. This should be in a blog
2. It Jeff's opinion about the games, and you dont have to believe him.
3. You really shouldnt judge a game by its numerical score but rather what the reviewer wrote about it. that has more value that the numerical rating.
So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?
This is why I disregard your opinion:I generally disregard all opinions that aren't my own.
Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?
Twilight Princess was the worst zelda. Not counting the CDI games. It deserved a 9.0 tops. If anything he was the only one that gave a good review on it. It was the definition of rehahs. I usually defend Nintendo but come on TP was so dissappointing.
Well Jeff disregards your post because he doesn't even know you exist.
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp''] Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE]Bitter much?
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp''] Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE] What? that game was as good if not better than OOT. OOT seemed more polished though and was more jawdropping at the time.
ITs way better than TP.
GOd I want a proper Majoras Mask sequal.
[QUOTE=''Lionheart08'']So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?[/QUOTE]No, I tend to bash on him because his reviews are nonsensical, nitpicky, and ridiculous. I have read all of the reviews of the games I talked about, and all of them don't give a solid reason as to why the game recieved the score it recieved.
a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp'']Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE]I, too, think that Majora's Mask is an underrated Zelda game and is a better Zelda than OoT.
[QUOTE=''warmaster670'']a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?[/QUOTE]Metal Gear Solid isn't short at all on your first play-through.
[QUOTE=''7CloudStrife7'']Well Jeff disregards your post because he doesn't even know you exist.[/QUOTE]And because he is a famous gaming journalist doesn't mean I can't write this post? I have no right to openly disagree with his ridiculous reviews?
i think he's very reasonable in his OPINION.
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] [QUOTE=''Lionheart08'']So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?[/QUOTE]No, I tend to bash on him because his reviews are nonsensical, nitpicky, and ridiculous. I have read all of the reviews of the games I talked about, and all of them don't give a solid reason as to why the game recieved the score it recieved.[/QUOTE]Why should one man's opinion bother you so much though? Yeah I agree, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 getting a perfect score is laughable, but he does tend to give pretty accurate reviews. Personally, I prefer a more stricter reviewer, than a pushover who throws at AAA's just because it's a big name franchise.
And I disregard your opinion about Jeff's opinion, should I make a new topic about it?
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] [QUOTE=''warmaster670'']a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?[/QUOTE]Metal Gear Solid isn't short at all on your first play-through.[/QUOTE] Its not a hard game and is very linear. It takes 6-8 hours tops.
I agree, his reviews were awful. I think it's just that there was a large number of Gertsmann fans whom were in love with the 'character' he played on this site.
disregard a review? a.k.a. opinion?
Well I disregard your post, it's utter rubbish.
This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...
1. This should be in a blog
2. It Jeff's opinion about the games, and you dont have to believe him.
3. You really shouldnt judge a game by its numerical score but rather what the reviewer wrote about it. that has more value that the numerical rating.
So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?
This is why I disregard your opinion:I generally disregard all opinions that aren't my own.
Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?
Twilight Princess was the worst zelda. Not counting the CDI games. It deserved a 9.0 tops. If anything he was the only one that gave a good review on it. It was the definition of rehahs. I usually defend Nintendo but come on TP was so dissappointing.
Well Jeff disregards your post because he doesn't even know you exist.
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp''] Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE]Bitter much?
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp''] Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE] What? that game was as good if not better than OOT. OOT seemed more polished though and was more jawdropping at the time.
ITs way better than TP.
GOd I want a proper Majoras Mask sequal.
[QUOTE=''Lionheart08'']So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?[/QUOTE]No, I tend to bash on him because his reviews are nonsensical, nitpicky, and ridiculous. I have read all of the reviews of the games I talked about, and all of them don't give a solid reason as to why the game recieved the score it recieved.
a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp'']Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE]I, too, think that Majora's Mask is an underrated Zelda game and is a better Zelda than OoT.
[QUOTE=''warmaster670'']a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?[/QUOTE]Metal Gear Solid isn't short at all on your first play-through.
[QUOTE=''7CloudStrife7'']Well Jeff disregards your post because he doesn't even know you exist.[/QUOTE]And because he is a famous gaming journalist doesn't mean I can't write this post? I have no right to openly disagree with his ridiculous reviews?
i think he's very reasonable in his OPINION.
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] [QUOTE=''Lionheart08'']So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?[/QUOTE]No, I tend to bash on him because his reviews are nonsensical, nitpicky, and ridiculous. I have read all of the reviews of the games I talked about, and all of them don't give a solid reason as to why the game recieved the score it recieved.[/QUOTE]Why should one man's opinion bother you so much though? Yeah I agree, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 getting a perfect score is laughable, but he does tend to give pretty accurate reviews. Personally, I prefer a more stricter reviewer, than a pushover who throws at AAA's just because it's a big name franchise.
And I disregard your opinion about Jeff's opinion, should I make a new topic about it?
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] [QUOTE=''warmaster670'']a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?[/QUOTE]Metal Gear Solid isn't short at all on your first play-through.[/QUOTE] Its not a hard game and is very linear. It takes 6-8 hours tops.
I agree, his reviews were awful. I think it's just that there was a large number of Gertsmann fans whom were in love with the 'character' he played on this site.
HAZE Hands on Impressions
At Play.com LIVE 2 demos of the upcoming PlayStation 3 exclusive HAZE were on display in playable form and I spent a while trying out this new FPS for the PS3.I will Start by saying that the clerk at the event I was speaking to stated that these are playable builds from a few months ago, he also went on to state that Friday 23rd May is the target release date for HAZE in the UK and also that Rumble will be used in HAZE, however I'm unable to comment on that, since the stands used Sixaxis controllers.Both Demos which I played had you placed as a Mantel Trooper. In the first demo had you set in a forest, the environments were lush with sharp visuals in most areas (however the clerk assured me that the not so sharp areas will be touched up by the time is released), which are a large improvement of previous screens of the game we have seen and have no doubt that the new screens recently released are in-game and can be achieved by Free Radical. I will also add that both demos I played had a solid framerate throughout which will come as great news to most. Now, onto the gameplay. This short 7/8minute demo was more than enough time to leave me feeling that this game will be successful and could easily become a solid franchise for Free Radical and Ubisoft. While the controls do take a few minutes to get the hang of (those who have played a lot of COD4 like I have to find it hard to adjust to begin with) they do work successfully with L2 being used to give yourself a nectar boost and Circle being used to crouch. The Pace of the demo varied throughout at some point you will be just walking, enjoying the views whereas 5 Seconds later you will have bullets being fired at you from left, right and centre. The health system works similar to the likes of Call of Duty 4 and Gears of War where the screen goes red as you are getting hurt. The short but sweet cutscenes really help the storyline, but also helps you get pumped up as well, one scene sees you hearing out one of you fellow mantel troopers speaking during his last moments, I won't say what he said but it really did help me to really get into the demo and was disappointed when it ended.The second demo had a completely different approach to gameplay with you driving while your friendly AI takes out your rivals. You drive by using R1 %26 L1 plus the analogue sticks which takes a lot of getting used to, if you are used to the likes of Motorstorm where you use R2 %26 L2 instead. I did find that the Ai of your targets was impressive during this demo and weren't that easy to take out. I'm afraid that's all I had time for this demo due to time constraints. However the short time I played it left me with a positive feeling about the game.Overall however I can now safely say that this will be a solid title for the PlayStation 3 and will feel the gap nicely between this and Killzone 2 and could and should be a sleeper hit. There are a few complaints however, I found the analogue sticks to be that little bit too loose and could do with some tweaking. I also found that the friendly Ai really wasn't that great, but saying that I was unaware on what difficulty I was playing it on which may have had an effect, plus also Free Radical are focusing on Co-op so I'm sure this game will benefit you completing it with mates rather than by yourself. Also take into account that the Ai will be improved before it's released. My final comment will be is that I enjoyed the short time I've spent on the game and judging on reactions of others playing around me, they did as well. I for one will be getting this game on day 1 and suggest all FPS fans at least consider it, that is providing something doesn't go wrong between now and May.SourceHAZE Hands on Impressions
Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. HAZE Hands on Impressions
I dont know 7/8 mintue demo....Im still skeptical of the game, I guess it'll be a pleasent surprise if the game really does turn out good.
[QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE]Did you read the text? No, its not like the guy went out and said ''OMG THIS GAME IS INCREDIBLE! AAA TITLE FOR SURE....THE FPS TO OWN THIS YEAR!!!!!''
[QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE] Funny how lemmings don't care about this game but you just had to be the first person to make a negative comment about it. The Playstatin damage control is just getting sad now that lemmings really have no ammo and have almost lost everything.
[QUOTE=''xTHExJUICEx''] [QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE]Did you read the text? No, its not like the guy went out and said ''OMG THIS GAME IS INCREDIBLE! AAA TITLE FOR SURE....THE FPS TO OWN THIS YEAR!!!!!'' [/QUOTE] Yes i read it, at the same time it isnt a reliable source that isnt bias in some way.
Not saying Gamespot, IGN, Gameinformer, Etc cant be bias, just that specific website is questionable at best.
i really hope this game turns out well
[QUOTE=''-Renegade''] [QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE] Funny how lemmings don't care about this game but you just had to be the first person to make a negative comment about it. The Playstatin damage control is just getting sad now that lemmings really have no ammo and have almost lost everything.[/QUOTE] Yes ofcourse me having a negative opinion on this game makes me a lemming.
Yep i dont have a wii.
I never said Mario Galaxy was my GOTY for 07.
Im not buying a PS3 for Metal Gear SOlid 4.
Unlike you reneagade i actually am not bias to one platform and ready to suck sony off.
This game looks uninteresting and there are far better games coming out.
ALso when did i make a negative comment. I question the source. Not the game.
Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. HAZE Hands on Impressions
I dont know 7/8 mintue demo....Im still skeptical of the game, I guess it'll be a pleasent surprise if the game really does turn out good.
[QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE]Did you read the text? No, its not like the guy went out and said ''OMG THIS GAME IS INCREDIBLE! AAA TITLE FOR SURE....THE FPS TO OWN THIS YEAR!!!!!''
[QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE] Funny how lemmings don't care about this game but you just had to be the first person to make a negative comment about it. The Playstatin damage control is just getting sad now that lemmings really have no ammo and have almost lost everything.
[QUOTE=''xTHExJUICEx''] [QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE]Did you read the text? No, its not like the guy went out and said ''OMG THIS GAME IS INCREDIBLE! AAA TITLE FOR SURE....THE FPS TO OWN THIS YEAR!!!!!'' [/QUOTE] Yes i read it, at the same time it isnt a reliable source that isnt bias in some way.
Not saying Gamespot, IGN, Gameinformer, Etc cant be bias, just that specific website is questionable at best.
i really hope this game turns out well
[QUOTE=''-Renegade''] [QUOTE=''jg4xchamp'']Playstation legion as a credible source.
Good i guess now we can use OXM and Nintendo Power.
SOny Defense FOrce should be valid as well. [/QUOTE] Funny how lemmings don't care about this game but you just had to be the first person to make a negative comment about it. The Playstatin damage control is just getting sad now that lemmings really have no ammo and have almost lost everything.[/QUOTE] Yes ofcourse me having a negative opinion on this game makes me a lemming.
Yep i dont have a wii.
I never said Mario Galaxy was my GOTY for 07.
Im not buying a PS3 for Metal Gear SOlid 4.
Unlike you reneagade i actually am not bias to one platform and ready to suck sony off.
This game looks uninteresting and there are far better games coming out.
ALso when did i make a negative comment. I question the source. Not the game.
Will Starcraft 2 sell more copies than S ...
I choose these 2 games because SSBB is arguable the biggest game on the Wii and pretty much EVERY Wii owner is going to own the game at some point, and I choose Starcraft 2 for pretty much the same reasons, which game do you think is going to sell the most worldwide when all is said and done?Will Starcraft 2 sell more copies than S ...
Probably Starcraft II. Attach rate SSBB will win hands down, but for overall product sold, I vote Starcraft II.Will Starcraft 2 sell more copies than S ...
In an indefinite period of time, starcraft 2. But for the first couple of months, SSBB.
Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.
[QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr''][QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?[/QUOTE] every wii owner wont buy brawl, not even close
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr''][QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?[/QUOTE]I dont think every owners gonna buy it
Going to go with Starcraft on the long run. People are still playing the first one.
SSBB intially, consoles are great for burst sales. However SC2 will undoubtly take the lead over time. I think SC1 is at around 15mil sells and still selling.
Starcraft2 will probably sell over 10 million. My guess is the sole reason the orignal hasn't sold far more is piracy in asian countries. Brawl will probably hit 7.5mil or so.
Okay TC, by your logic than SC2 HAS to outsell SSBB both initially and in the long run. While there are people who own wii's, a little over 20 million worldwide, all people in all gaming markets own PC's or Mac's. Hell there are people who would never pick up a console who play Blizzard games just because they are Blizzard games. And while SSBB is selling really well in its areas where it is released, it didn't sell an extreme amount at launch. It hasn't even put up Halo 3 numbers. Trust me, SC2 blows SSBB outta the water sales wise.
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr'']I choose these 2 games because SSBB is arguable the biggest game on the Wii and pretty much EVERY Wii owner is going to own the game at some point, and I choose Starcraft 2 for pretty much the same reasons, which game do you think is going to sell the most worldwide when all is said and done?[/QUOTE]Most likely. Starcraft is a worldwide phenominom. How many millions did the first Starcraft sell.
we'll never know....
Starcraft 2 sales are going to be huge, much more than SSBB
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr''][QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?[/QUOTE]every wii owner wont buy brawl. probably 4 million at the most...
SC 2 will probably sell more copies because every single person in Korea will buy a copy.
[QUOTE=''zero9167'']every wii owner wont buy brawl. probably 4 million at the most...[/QUOTE]you're joking right.....
[QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Melee sold over 6 million copies all together on the Gamecube . If Brawl doesn't out do Melee by a pretty large margin with the way Wii is selling, it should be considered a disappointment. But as far as Brawl vs. Starcraft....*shrugs*
Starcraft 2 will sell more copies in South Korea than SSBB does worldwide.
[QUOTE=''Newsboy'']Starcraft 2 will sell more copies in South Korea than SSBB does worldwide.[/QUOTE]:lol: yea every man, woman and children in korea will buy an sc2 copy.
Probably Starcraft II. Attach rate SSBB will win hands down, but for overall product sold, I vote Starcraft II.Will Starcraft 2 sell more copies than S ...
In an indefinite period of time, starcraft 2. But for the first couple of months, SSBB.
Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.
[QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr''][QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?[/QUOTE] every wii owner wont buy brawl, not even close
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr''][QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?[/QUOTE]I dont think every owners gonna buy it
Going to go with Starcraft on the long run. People are still playing the first one.
SSBB intially, consoles are great for burst sales. However SC2 will undoubtly take the lead over time. I think SC1 is at around 15mil sells and still selling.
Starcraft2 will probably sell over 10 million. My guess is the sole reason the orignal hasn't sold far more is piracy in asian countries. Brawl will probably hit 7.5mil or so.
Okay TC, by your logic than SC2 HAS to outsell SSBB both initially and in the long run. While there are people who own wii's, a little over 20 million worldwide, all people in all gaming markets own PC's or Mac's. Hell there are people who would never pick up a console who play Blizzard games just because they are Blizzard games. And while SSBB is selling really well in its areas where it is released, it didn't sell an extreme amount at launch. It hasn't even put up Halo 3 numbers. Trust me, SC2 blows SSBB outta the water sales wise.
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr'']I choose these 2 games because SSBB is arguable the biggest game on the Wii and pretty much EVERY Wii owner is going to own the game at some point, and I choose Starcraft 2 for pretty much the same reasons, which game do you think is going to sell the most worldwide when all is said and done?[/QUOTE]Most likely. Starcraft is a worldwide phenominom. How many millions did the first Starcraft sell.
we'll never know....
Starcraft 2 sales are going to be huge, much more than SSBB
[QUOTE=''catlin_czirr''][QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Ok, but say SC2 doesn't sell as many as SC1 did, aren't there more than 9 million Wii's currently in peoples homes? Say that EVERY Wii owner buys Brawl (not even including future buyers) won't brawl sell more than SC2?[/QUOTE]every wii owner wont buy brawl. probably 4 million at the most...
SC 2 will probably sell more copies because every single person in Korea will buy a copy.
[QUOTE=''zero9167'']every wii owner wont buy brawl. probably 4 million at the most...[/QUOTE]you're joking right.....
[QUOTE=''Shensolidus'']Starcraft 2, at launch, EASILY. Mind you up to date, Starcraft 1 has sold 9.4 MILLION copies worldwide. Everyone has the capacity for PC gaming, especially SC2 since the game will ship with the PC and Mac version on the same disc. Also, it is one of the biggest games to be announced ever. You really can't compare this to SSBB. And i'm a gamer who LOVES SSBB, just two different leagues my friend.[/QUOTE]Melee sold over 6 million copies all together on the Gamecube . If Brawl doesn't out do Melee by a pretty large margin with the way Wii is selling, it should be considered a disappointment. But as far as Brawl vs. Starcraft....*shrugs*
Starcraft 2 will sell more copies in South Korea than SSBB does worldwide.
[QUOTE=''Newsboy'']Starcraft 2 will sell more copies in South Korea than SSBB does worldwide.[/QUOTE]:lol: yea every man, woman and children in korea will buy an sc2 copy.
Gulity Gear worst fighter ever?
I would think so. Put on your black trench coats and black make-up for this game because it's just for you. You want to play a real fighter I suggest Street Fighter 3 or KOFXI. Please stay away from GG it's not a good game.Gulity Gear worst fighter ever?
It doesn't amaze me, but the over-the-top nature of the game is entertaining.Gulity Gear worst fighter ever?
1) No.2) Wrong forum3) Your troll-fu is horrible.
[QUOTE=''Velocitas8''] 1) No.2) Wrong forum3) Your troll-fu is horrible.[/QUOTE] lol troll-fu...Anyways, I'm just here telling the truth. Guilty Gear is a horrible game.
i think it is pretty fun and i don't really play fighters except maybe the old mortal kombats and soul calibers
![]()
Sorry Shungo but once again you are wrong.
It's fun to play and it makes your eyes sparkle.
No Gundam: Battle Assault was a really horrible fighter... all the characters had the same exact movelist just different animations!
Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.
[QUOTE=''spinecaton'']No Gundam: Battle Assault was a really horrible fighter... all the characters had the same exact movelist just different animations![/QUOTE] Oh yeah, I agree with that. It's a universal fact that game is garbage, so no need to bring it up.
Wow. Just wow
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.
[QUOTE=''Akumasoul''][QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.[/QUOTE] Part of a 2D fighters appeal is the animations and designs of its charicters. In fact it's a pretty big part.
I don't know much about Guilty Gear, so I'm not going to say it's amazing or anything. But the fact that you're overlooking the tons of legitimately terrible fighting games (like, say, any Xbox exclusive fighting game not called Dead or Alive) means that you're either really overexaggerating, or you're bringing a fanboyish level of hate to a fighting game that probably just isn't your style.
[QUOTE=''Akumasoul''][QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.[/QUOTE]Well, considering Brawl is a phenomenal AAA fighting game that beats whatever the hell you play, you shouldn't be talking.Guilty Gear's graphics are a big part of its gameplay. Street Fighter switched over to 3D, whereas Guilty Gear sticks with 2D animation and still looks far more beautiful than many 3D fighters on the market. Please go back to looking at Chun Li's legs before you get even more embarrassed.
Guilty Geaar isn't a bad fighting game. This is a bad fighting game.![]()
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''][QUOTE=''Akumasoul''][QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.[/QUOTE]Well, considering Brawl is a phenomenal AAA fighting game that beats whatever the hell you play, you shouldn't be talking.Guilty Gear's graphics are a big part of its gameplay. Street Fighter switched over to 3D, whereas Guilty Gear sticks with 2D animation and still looks far more beautiful than many 3D fighters on the market. Please go back to looking at Chun Li's legs before you get even more embarrassed.[/QUOTE] also, even though i haven't played it yet, i seen lots of gameplay videos and it looks etremely deep and fun
Nope. Its actualy in my top 5. I love the music,art,characters and gameplay.
its just takes from getting use to. pulling off combos in gulity gear is actually alot more fun then other 2d fighters
It doesn't amaze me, but the over-the-top nature of the game is entertaining.Gulity Gear worst fighter ever?
1) No.2) Wrong forum3) Your troll-fu is horrible.
[QUOTE=''Velocitas8''] 1) No.2) Wrong forum3) Your troll-fu is horrible.[/QUOTE] lol troll-fu...Anyways, I'm just here telling the truth. Guilty Gear is a horrible game.
i think it is pretty fun and i don't really play fighters except maybe the old mortal kombats and soul calibers
It's fun to play and it makes your eyes sparkle.
No Gundam: Battle Assault was a really horrible fighter... all the characters had the same exact movelist just different animations!
Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.
[QUOTE=''spinecaton'']No Gundam: Battle Assault was a really horrible fighter... all the characters had the same exact movelist just different animations![/QUOTE] Oh yeah, I agree with that. It's a universal fact that game is garbage, so no need to bring it up.
Wow. Just wow
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.
[QUOTE=''Akumasoul''][QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.[/QUOTE] Part of a 2D fighters appeal is the animations and designs of its charicters. In fact it's a pretty big part.
I don't know much about Guilty Gear, so I'm not going to say it's amazing or anything. But the fact that you're overlooking the tons of legitimately terrible fighting games (like, say, any Xbox exclusive fighting game not called Dead or Alive) means that you're either really overexaggerating, or you're bringing a fanboyish level of hate to a fighting game that probably just isn't your style.
[QUOTE=''Akumasoul''][QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.[/QUOTE]Well, considering Brawl is a phenomenal AAA fighting game that beats whatever the hell you play, you shouldn't be talking.Guilty Gear's graphics are a big part of its gameplay. Street Fighter switched over to 3D, whereas Guilty Gear sticks with 2D animation and still looks far more beautiful than many 3D fighters on the market. Please go back to looking at Chun Li's legs before you get even more embarrassed.
Guilty Geaar isn't a bad fighting game. This is a bad fighting game.
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''][QUOTE=''Akumasoul''][QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] Just because it's the most beautiful hand-drawn 2D fighter around doesn't make it a bad game.And just because the action is too intense for you and isn't some slow, tactical 3D fighter crap doesn't mean it's god-awful.You fail.[/QUOTE] Yeah, like hand-drawn graphics makes it a great fighter. :roll:You want over-the-top? Play Marvel vs. Capcom 2.Please go back to you Smash before you get embarrass.[/QUOTE]Well, considering Brawl is a phenomenal AAA fighting game that beats whatever the hell you play, you shouldn't be talking.Guilty Gear's graphics are a big part of its gameplay. Street Fighter switched over to 3D, whereas Guilty Gear sticks with 2D animation and still looks far more beautiful than many 3D fighters on the market. Please go back to looking at Chun Li's legs before you get even more embarrassed.[/QUOTE] also, even though i haven't played it yet, i seen lots of gameplay videos and it looks etremely deep and fun
Nope. Its actualy in my top 5. I love the music,art,characters and gameplay.
its just takes from getting use to. pulling off combos in gulity gear is actually alot more fun then other 2d fighters
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)