And for this he must die.TheHecatomb post=6.72937.778047 said:You're late.
Nice use of first post btw. Very constructive/supportive. Let me try:
Its'a review.
And for this he must die.TheHecatomb post=6.72937.778047 said:You're late.
The big to-do over the original Half Life was the fact that wounded enemies would not just stand there and take abuse, but run around a corner and ambush you. This was not in the original doom... nor was the level of interaction with the environment, emphasis on mobility and jumping, vehicle sections, a workable and mildly intiguing storyline, secondary damage effects....OuroborosChoked post=6.72937.782367 said:*waits outside for Yahtzee*
At least I can finish Bionic Commando, Ben.
I'd like to see how he would try to defend his position on first-person shooters. The only things that have changed since the days of Doom are:
- fully 3D character models
- speech
- physics engines that consist of more than just a gravity variable.
- enhanced lighting techniques
- the ability to aim in all directions
Apart from those five things (three of which are basically cosmetic), first-person shooters are basically the SAME games they have been since Doom. You still have to solve puzzles / find keys to progress. You still have to fight nigh endless hordes of carbon-copy malevolent forces. Hardly anything has changed. It's almost like FPS game developers are afraid of even nudging the envelope... lest they shatter the formula that has proven successful since *gasp* the days of DOOM.
People talk about HL2 as if it was a revolution in gaming. It wasn't. It was a standard-fare shooter with a good physics engine and up-to-date graphics, now dated, trying to be HL1 (which, while unique in a sea of Doom clones, was still not "revolutionary" as the basic gameplay stayed EXACTLY the same). There are other FPSs with gameplay that's more in depth and flexible, such as Deus Ex, Thief, and Metroid Prime, to name three off the top of my head, and it's a shame that so much praise is showered on the HL series when there are much better games out there...
TFU is one of the easiest games to rip into in a long time..Vromnir post=6.72937.781936 said:I dont think that would stop him from doing a review, becouse if you remember his orange box and phyconauts reviews, he really liked those games and the rewiew was still just as good as any other ones.Shiuz91 post=6.72937.778119 said:I think i figured out why Yahtee hasn't reviewed SW:TFU. He must have enjoyed it and he can't think of any funny big problems with the game. Also this review was awesome.
*sigh* I never wanted to be exposed to this kind of idiocy on the escapist. People like you are the reason that all games must now have a brown tint.bigWilly post=6.72937.784336 said:you've got to try pouring lemon juice and salt into your eyes coz thats what merc's 2 graphics engine does to yo eyeballs cuzzzzElephantGuts post=6.72937.779126 said:You've got to try coop.
Clumsy AI like that makes for great stories years down the road when reminiscing about games of ole. Joking with friends about funny things that have happened in games is one reason why I secretly enjoy playing poorly-made games. You just can't get comedy like that from a good game.Heroic One post=6.72937.778580 said:It... it actually WALKED OFF the building? Wow.
That's damn impressive AI.
Why? It seems good to me.Aurora219 post=6.72937.784893 said:I think Mercenaries are a good addition to the world of gaming.
Storyline THATAWAY >>>
<<< Depth THATAWAY
Blowing shit up here. Stay or move on, s'up to you.
TFU is one of the easiest games to rip into in a long time..Vromnir post=6.72937.781936 said:I dont think that would stop him from doing a review, becouse if you remember his orange box and phyconauts reviews, he really liked those games and the rewiew was still just as good as any other ones.Shiuz91 post=6.72937.778119 said:I think i figured out why Yahtee hasn't reviewed SW:TFU. He must have enjoyed it and he can't think of any funny big problems with the game. Also this review was awesome.
Just because a weapon is nuclear does not mean it's high-yield. Especially when you're trying to hit a target that might be within a city, you don't want a lot of collateral damage (in theory), thus most of the blast is really channeled through underground and will take out a lot of the surrounding area but not reduce it to a nuclear smoking crater.The Iron Ninja post=6.72937.782734 said:Honestly I don't think he was hard enough on this game. Mercenaries 2 was one of the most pretentious, broken and depressingly short games I've played in quite a while.
You get hold of these things called "Nuclear Bunker Busters" at the end, before I used them I was trying to find a vantage point ages away from my target, thinking "well it's Nuclear, I doubt standing thirty metres away from it is going to be very healthy."
But unfortunately the range of the laser designator is only thirty metres, so I had to stand right next to it. And I wasn't hurt, my Swedish guy just covered his eyes and said "oh bother, this bright nuclear explosion is really quite an annoyance, I sure hope it dissipates soon." When I could actually see again the bunker in question was slightly cracked, but for some reason all the surrounding trees (which can be destroyed by wayward cars veering off the road) were all still standing. This supposedly Nuclear weapon has a damage radius of about twenty metres. Couple that with the very short range from which you can call one in, and you end up with having the exact same thing happen each time.
Bomb comes down, big flash of light, sometimes able to see the outline of a mushroom cloud through the brightness, and then your vision returns and you see that only the building you targeted is damaged, the others (in a tightly packed city street) are all fine.
When I heard that you could get nukes I figured that meant I could stand on a far away hill and watch as a ,mushroom cloud signalled the defeat on an entire city. Not only is the damage it causes pathetic, but I can't even see what little damage it is doing due to the (inescapable) bright light.
Now my only fear is that if I continue bad mouth this most heinous of games in the other forums, that I will automatically be seen as blindly picking up Yahtzee's banner of scorn and dancing around like a sheep.
I should go back and bookmark all the previous posts I have made about this game... just in case, then I can shove them (and more importantly the date of said posts) in whoever's face it is needed to be shoved.
I don't think "Nuclear explosions hurt things" is really considered 'hard science.'AceDiamond post=6.72937.789311 said:Just because a weapon is nuclear does not mean it's high-yield. Especially when you're trying to hit a target that might be within a city, you don't want a lot of collateral damage (in theory), thus most of the blast is really channeled through underground and will take out a lot of the surrounding area but not reduce it to a nuclear smoking crater.
Of course there's the other, simpler way to say it, which goes something like this: "You're hijacking helicopters with a grappling hook gun and taking down whole armored divisions armed only with a pistol and a couple grenades and the most unrealistic thing you could think about in this game was the capabilities of a tactical nuclear weapon? It's a game, it doesn't have to be steeped in hard science."
That's the thing though, it doesn't take out a lot of the surounding area, at most it can take out two buildings (if they're placed close enough to each other. Soldiers caught in the blast often walk out of it unscathed.you said:most of the blast is really channeled through underground and will take out a lot of the surrounding area but not reduce it to a nuclear smoking crater.