Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Haven't played ODST, but read the guide inside and out. Looks like an interesting concept(flashback portions) because it somewhat explains the debris that you discover. For example the helmet in the console really isn't explained just the fact that a person who wore the helmet did exist.
If I recall resistance had a similar health system. I say similar because there was limited health regeneration in that game. You had four boxes for health, if you lost half a box it could refill if you didn't take any damage in a period of time. If you lost 1 and a half boxes of health, only that half could refill, the completely empty box required a med kit.
And Bah to your medkits, 007 goldeneye denied the existence of such. Oh and another thing, if James Bond can carry a rocket launcher, grenades, throwing knives, more than several pistols/ machine guns/ shotguns, and a sniper rifle how come the Superhuman Master Chief can't?
IG_urban wrote:what, you going to say "cool story, bro", again?
Nah, I was going to point out that you can only carry two weapons because it's a) more realistic, and b) it adds a layer of strategy that comes from not being able to bring the ideal weapon for every fight.
CSB is reserved for posts that boil down to "I like X but I don't like Y, therefore X is good and Y is bad".
I was one of those guys who started my HALO journey at ODST. It was okay, nothing great, I actually picked it up for the firefight stuff and the HALO 3 stuff so it served that purpose well. I am looking forward to both Reach and Black Ops but I have to think that Reach will most definitely be the bigger of the 2.
The black rage is within us all. Lies offer no shield against the inevitable. You speak of donning the black of duty for the red of brotherhood; but it is the black of rage you shall wear when the darkness comes for you.
Reach because bungie don't go "oh, you've not bought our overpriced DLC... BUY IT! BUY IT! BUY IT!" like COD does. They simply don't let you in that playlist and they have a fairly even amount of DLC/non DLC playlists.
FM Ninja 048 wrote:Reach because bungie don't go "oh, you've not bought our overpriced DLC... BUY IT! BUY IT! BUY IT!" like COD does. They simply don't let you in that playlist and they have a fairly even amount of DLC/non DLC playlists.
Reach, as you just know it's gonna make it's way into the Red vs. Blue series at some stage.
I am looking forward to both, though.
Melissia wrote:Stopping power IS a deterrent. The bigger a hole you put in them the more deterred they are.
Waaagh! Gorskar = 2050pts
Iron Warriors VII Company = 1850pts
Fjälnir Ironfist's Great Company = 1800pts
Guflag's Mercenary Ogres = 2000pts
its said that there aint gonna be no sniper in black ops
in reach however...
I have yet to see anything that has said Black Ops will lack a sniper rifle. In reach however, sniper rifles leave a little trail that says "Hey! Shoot me!".
And halo being more realistic because a super human can't carry more than two guns? I can understand CoD having that, but if my guy can jump 10+ feet in the air and kick a bomb in space so that it hits an enemy ship, and has gear that augments his strength and whatnot he had better be able to carry more than two guns. Its not realistic, that's rubbish strategy or not.
Can you imagine what it was like when the scientists pitched that idea.
Scientist: We have plans for a suit that will augment the user's strength, agility, and power. He will jump great heights, complete feets of daring, and save our world.
Military Guy: Excellent, are there any drawbacks though?
Scientist: Well, the user will be unable to carry more than two weapons at a time, maybe three if they are small enough.
I must say that i think halo reach will take it, atleast with me. The reason being is ive been through CoD Mw2s leveling system 6 times and now im very board of CoD where as on halo 3 I have REACHed the max level and still play it and have tons of fun.
TheCyben: Seriously though, I'm not advocating GW to model any Boosh characters. If they have to pick one, it would have to be Tony Harrisson... but that would be an outrage.
its said that there aint gonna be no sniper in black ops
in reach however...
I have yet to see anything that has said Black Ops will lack a sniper rifle. In reach however, sniper rifles leave a little trail that says "Hey! Shoot me!".
And halo being more realistic because a super human can't carry more than two guns? I can understand CoD having that, but if my guy can jump 10+ feet in the air and kick a bomb in space so that it hits an enemy ship, and has gear that augments his strength and whatnot he had better be able to carry more than two guns. Its not realistic, that's rubbish strategy or not.
Can you imagine what it was like when the scientists pitched that idea.
Scientist: We have plans for a suit that will augment the user's strength, agility, and power. He will jump great heights, complete feets of daring, and save our world.
Military Guy: Excellent, are there any drawbacks though?
Scientist: Well, the user will be unable to carry more than two weapons at a time, maybe three if they are small enough.
Military Guy: Seriously, and why is that?
Scientist: Strategy.
Well,the 2 gun thing makes sense from a certain perspective. He's carrying one weapon(or two small ones),and has one slung. Sneaking,running,and/or jumping 10 ft in the air would very clumsy if you had 5 guns on slings clanking around,even though you easily have the strength to carry them. You'd be adjusting slings constantly,getting snagged on stuff repeatadley,and the metal on metal clanking would give away your position. Not to mention you have to carry AMMO for all those different weapons,too,and the logistics for reloading would be a nightmare. "Uhhh...ok,is this my SMG ammo? No. That's Assault Rifle. Is this it? Nope,that's for the Battle Rifle. No,those are shotgun shells. Ahhh...here it is. Now,are these my full clips,or my partially spent ones?"
Still, what is the difference if he is carrying a rocket launcher and a fuel-rod launcher thing?
THose are two very heavy, very unwieldy weapons yet he can carry both and sneak around with them. Now, if it was that you carried a rocket launcher and could only carry a smg or pistol then I would agree with you there. However, that isn't going to happen in anything outside of Battlefield.
Also, it is hard for me to believe that a person who is 7ft, weighs about 1,000 pounds, and wears a suit made out of metal is going to be stealthy.
Its not more realistic at all, not saying that call of duty is realistic though(getting shot in the upper chest by a sniper doesn't kill you?).
If you want realistic, stick with Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six(the originals on the PC) and maybe batlefield.
The original Rainbow Six's were punishment. There was a healthbar, but you didn't heal. A shot from a pistol could kill you, and you laid out plans with a team of people. Your kit was simple to manage(one main, one side, special equipment) and you could choose armor types and ammo type(shotgun:slug, shot, or rubber? submachine gun: FMJ or hollowpoint?).
Seriously... your basis for the game being silly is that... you can only carry two guns? It's a video game. I'd love to be a walking armory as much as he next guy but that kind of throws game balance out the window.
Both games have their fans. They're both arcade shooters in different lights. Halo will likely win, as there is a lot of sour taste still around from the MW2 fiasco, and Treyarch games have never been of the same quality as Infinity Ward and lets face it Infinity Ward's quality is gone forever. Everyone who mattered quit!
CoD is dead and we can all see it. Halo will likely die once Bungie leaves unless the new developers are of sufficient ability in the "is this fun yet" department.
I've never heard of Crytek, but I'd buy a Ubisoft CoD in an instant. Mind you, I guess Ghost Recon will always be there for me. Hmm... On second thought, I'll just stick with Ghost Recon
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/09 22:38:32
IG_urban wrote:Crytek Frankfurt and Ubisoft need to pick up CoD.
QFT. A CoD made by Ubisoft would renew my faith in the franchise. Gawd damn, do they ever make good stuff.
Yeah. That new DRM is spectacular. /end sarcasm
Crytek is horribly overrated. Their games have always been a mountain of eye candy and no nutritional value.
You.....I......I don't even know where to begin with you. Explain yourself.
metallifan wrote:I've never heard of Crytek, but I'd buy a Ubisoft CoD in an instant. Mind you, I guess Ghost Recon will always be there for me. Hmm... On second thought, I'll just stick with Ghost Recon
Crytek made Far Cry, Crysis, Farcry 2, and Crysis: Warhead. Ubisoft develops, Crytek does the graphics, they already have a partnership...now they just need to do it.
metallifan wrote:I've never heard of Crytek, but I'd buy a Ubisoft CoD in an instant. Mind you, I guess Ghost Recon will always be there for me. Hmm... On second thought, I'll just stick with Ghost Recon
Are you talking about the original Ghost Recon series... or Advanced Warfighter? I always wanted to try the original series... I've only tried Advanced Warfighter 2 but thought it was pretty dang good.
metallifan wrote:So... Does Crytek -have- to put part of their name in the titles of all of their products? That seems extremely amateurish...
I don't know about all that...
I think if they make games as awesome and beautiful as they do, they can do whatever the feth they want. Besides...they're foreign, they can be weird to you and get away with it.
I don't think it's amateurish. It's a style thing. A lot of studios have some sort of trade mark they include in everything. Bungie's Marathon logo for example or Epic Games' constant inclusion of extremely macho men with arms the size of tree trunks.
Urban do you mean Ubisoft's horrible DRM or Crytek?
THe DRM sucks and I refuse to buy any Ubisoft games so long as they use it.
As for Crytek, I think that their games are visually appealing by in terms of being a game have never really been that great. The first Far Cry had a lot of nice ideas, but some technical glitches and bad AI kept the game from shining, not to mention the lame story line. Far Cry 2 was horrible. Crysis while a step in the right direction imo, was not a very good game, suffering again from AI glitches, bad level design, and technical glitches.
Graphically their the best, but there are developers that I think make funner games.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/10 00:02:25
I've never played any of their games. I skipped Crysis after several reviews and players agreed that it wasn't much more than flashy graphics, and from what I've heard of Farcry, it's just Elder Scrolls meets GTA meets Tropico which is all good and fun, but for some reason it seems to get pretty mediocre reviews.
And yea, really, amateurish. Just seems to me like any company that has to put it's name in the title of all it's games just to remind you who made it isn't really all that. If you can provide an insight into the games I'll likely change my tune, but right now I'm going off of what the majority opinion seems to be
metallifan wrote:Farcry, it's just Elder Scrolls meets GTA meets Tropico which is all good and fun, but for some reason it seems to get pretty mediocre reviews.
That's pretty much all of Crytek's games, but poor coded, unbalanced, and with massive levels that don't really mean anything because enemies are always in the same places. Not to mention their freak'n XRAY VISION granted to the by Superman so that they can see through miles of jungle and snipe you with their shotguns.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/10 00:08:35
You need to patch your games, man. I agree on Farcry 2, it was huge, and when I beat it was just like, "well! you did it!". Farcry, I thought, for it's time, was great, coming off Half Life's wake of pwn, though, it could not stand up. Crysis however, is fantastic. I have played through the entire game on hard and Delta difficulties. Everytime you die, the enemies are in new formations, in different areas of the map. I'll admit there are issues...but come ON!!! the Nano Suit?!?!? fething amazing! I got scary good with it, and you can do such awesome gak, like, run at a humvee speeding at you, jump over it, and shoot the spare gas can on the back before you land. Pick up big sheets of steel and throw them at a group of enemies, leap up in the air, grab a guy in midair, throw him at another dude before you land, etc....I dunno...I think that is so cool....
You said it yourself, the graphics are the absolute best, no company can do it all.... Valve made half life 2, one of the greatest story lines and games of all time, but the graphics could have been way better, etc...
I say between the Nano Suit, almost entirely destroyable environments! (you can shoot down a tree and have it fall on a truck full of troops!!!), and the graphics, Crysis is pretty damn cool.
although, there are the people that just want to be able to shoot gak and pwn n00bs, so I guess that wouldn't be for them...
I just think an FPS where you can kill everyone without firing a single shot is AWESOME!
PLUS!! the weapon mods??? soo cool! You basically have a modular weapon system. The ak you get can be a sniper, assault, CQC, etc....
People are like dice, a certain Frenchman said that. You throw yourself in the direction of your own choosing. People are free because they can do that. Everyone's circumstances are different, but no matter how small the choice, at the very least, you can throw yourself. It's not chance or fate. It's the choice you made.
LordofHats wrote:Treyarch games have never been of the same quality as Infinity Ward
I would just point out that when Treyarch was working on World at War, they were also working on James Bond:Quantum of Solace and Spider-Man: Web of Shadows, they've said that they are putting 100% of their resources into Black-Ops, meaning that it will be much, much better than World at War.
They haven't been working on anything other than Black-Ops since 2008.
Waaagh! Gorskar = 2050pts
Iron Warriors VII Company = 1850pts
Fjälnir Ironfist's Great Company = 1800pts
Guflag's Mercenary Ogres = 2000pts
