Author Topic: EAT LEAD thread (Read 3438 times)

Costanza · « **on:** February 25, 2009, 08:55:11 PM »

I can't wait.

demi · « **Reply #1 on:** February 25, 2009, 08:55:54 PM »

I got this on gamefly too. Agh I hope they send it instead of Dead Rising Wii... lol

G The Resurrected · « **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2009, 08:58:01 PM »

gamefly too they just got back fear 2 (pos) so I hope it goes out tomorrow.

Third · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:14:39 PM »

Eat Lead?

Never heard of it. But it definitely sounds interesting, that's for sure.

pilonv1 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:15:32 PM »

Not out here for a month. But will get it when it is.

Will Arnett and NPH

demi · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:18:16 PM »

Quote from: Third on February 25, 2009, 09:14:39 PM

Eat Lead?

Never heard of it. But it definitely sounds interesting, that's for sure.

It's a parody game, it's hard to describe. It plays itself like it was the next game in a popular series, when the series in fact never existed.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:29:33 PM »

I'm actually kind of surprised that no developers sued over copyright infringement (since the game makes fun of shooter stereotypes so much). The gameplay looked a little wonky but hopefully it's fun.

tiesto · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:06:19 PM »

The RPG boss looked cool, wonder how the actual game plays though?

archie4208 · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:09:56 PM »

The gameplay looks like a mediocre Gears clone.

bork · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:32:21 PM »

I'm really interested, but want to wait and see what people think first. Is this a PS3 and 360 release?

Mr. Gundam · « **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:36:10 PM »

Quote from: the lyte edge on February 25, 2009, 10:32:21 PM

I'm really interested, but want to wait and see what people think first. Is this a PS3 and 360 release?

Yep. Multiplatform.

Costanza · « **Reply #11 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:00:53 PM »

LAME

GS didn't get it in today.

duckman2000 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:02:43 PM »

I can't even afford real games, no way I'm paying full price for a parody of unknown quality. Should be a fun budget game, though.

Mr. Gundam · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2009, 02:24:18 PM »

It's only $49.99.

It's sad that I just said "it's only $49.99."

Costanza · « **Reply #14 on:** February 27, 2009, 01:42:02 PM »

just got it

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #15 on:** February 27, 2009, 02:59:29 PM »

Quote from: Green Man on February 26, 2009, 03:21:28 PM

I'm going to pick this up when the XBLA version comes out. $50 for the American equivalent of the simple series isn't exactly appealing to my pokemon: the movie wallet.

the XBLA and PSN versions are a brand new retrogame in the Matt Hazard series, ala Megaman 9/Retro Game Challenge. I'm looking forward to it, but I don't know what to expect exactly.

Costanza · « **Reply #16 on:** February 27, 2009, 03:13:56 PM »

Played the first couple of levels, up to the

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Russian boss.

[close]

The gameplay is pretty standard 3rd person shooter stuff, but it's fun and technically solid. Hilarious writing, too.

I'm quite impressed.

WrikaWrek · « **Reply #17 on:** February 27, 2009, 06:34:42 PM »

More impressions!?

Costanza · « **Reply #18 on:** February 27, 2009, 06:40:34 PM »

Quote from: WrikaWrek on February 27, 2009, 06:34:42 PM

More impressions!?

gonna play some more right now...

Costanza · « **Reply #19 on:** February 27, 2009, 07:59:32 PM »

I fucking love this game.

WrikaWrek · « **Reply #20 on:** February 27, 2009, 10:55:12 PM »

B level game at best from what i played.

ManaByte · « **Reply #21 on:** February 28, 2009, 01:09:11 PM »

Quote from: WrikaWrek on February 27, 2009, 10:55:12 PM

B level game at best from what i played.

So it's better than Killzone 2?

Costanza · « **Reply #22 on:** February 28, 2009, 01:33:06 PM »

it actually is

Costanza · « **Reply #23 on:** February 28, 2009, 02:42:46 PM »

Quote from: Green Man on February 28, 2009, 02:20:53 PM

The shooting mechanics looked terrible.

Nah, it plays fine. Doesn't do anything special, but it plays fine.

Game is all about the funny.

dammitmattt · « **Reply #24 on:** March 01, 2009, 11:43:16 AM »

50 Cent or Eat Lead???

chronovore · « **Reply #25 on:** March 02, 2009, 12:55:45 AM »

So... Eat Lead, by a huge margin?

demi · « **Reply #26 on:** March 02, 2009, 01:03:41 AM »

How about no

brawndolicious · « **Reply #27 on:** March 02, 2009, 01:06:29 AM »

...homo.

dark1x · « **Reply #28 on:** March 02, 2009, 08:07:37 AM »

Quote

Oh and multiplayer. Coulda used that too.

Why? Who exactly would bother with it? I hate when developers feel the need to include multiplayer in a game that is unlikely to attract a large audience. You end up with empty rooms just a week after release. It's even worse when achievements are tied into multiplayer but you are unable to obtain them due to the fact that nobody is playing the game.

dark1x · « **Reply #29 on:** March 02, 2009, 08:52:01 AM »

Quote from: Green Man on March 02, 2009, 08:35:52 AM

I just like when its there. Makes me feel better about dropping the cash when there might be some more enjoyment after I finish the single player.

Still, I think creating a multiplayer mode for a game that will most likely never have a multiplayer audience is a waste of development resources that could be better used in polishing the single player experience. There are so many games with half-assed multiplayer components that demonstrate this.

On the other hand, I would LOVE to see single player focused games like this include co-op play.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #30 on:** March 02, 2009, 09:13:29 AM »

Green Man is distinguished mentally-challenged and the reason why we get half-assed multiplayer in games that could've used more single player polish.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #31 on:** March 02, 2009, 10:26:11 AM »

That argument is ridiculously stupid. So instead of spending resources to refine gameplay, you want them to use it on a useless multiplayer that you'll probably never use so you get "more bang for your buck"?

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #32 on:** March 02, 2009, 10:32:16 AM »

That is stupid.

chronovore · « **Reply #33 on:** March 02, 2009, 06:34:07 PM »

Quote from: dark1x on March 02, 2009, 08:52:01 AM

Quote from: Green Man on March 02, 2009, 08:35:52 AM
I just like when its there. Makes me feel better about dropping the cash when there might be some more enjoyment after I finish the single player.
Still, I think creating a multiplayer mode for a game that will most likely never have a multiplayer audience is a waste of development resources that could be better used in polishing the single player experience. There are so many games with half-assed multiplayer components that demonstrate this.

On the other hand, I would LOVE to see single player focused games like this include co-op play.

I like the cut of your jib.

Though co-op is also going to be a big use of dev resources, it's almost certainly going to be easier to tune than taking a singleplayer game and trying to strap on a head-to-head multiplayer game.

demi · « **Reply #34 on:** March 02, 2009, 06:45:06 PM »

I'm pretty sure Green Man is to blame for Condemned 2 being a complete piece of shit

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #35 on:** March 02, 2009, 06:47:35 PM »

I've got a stack of games with absolutely barren multiplayer communities. To this day I've never used the MP modes in a large portion of my games just because there's never been anybody to play them with online, never ever. This man said it best.

Quote from: Some Dude Who's Working on the Wanted Game

"For the most part, we waste our money and our time building multiplayer levels," Wanat said. "And why do we do this? Because a couple years ago the press was all about saying, 'This game has to have multiplayer, there's no replayability.' F*** that. That's a bad joke."

chronovore · « **Reply #36 on:** March 02, 2009, 07:38:19 PM »

Oh, and played some more SR2 the other night; there appears to be some serious issues with co-op Diversions. Sho Nuff and I tried the BASE Jumping previously, and it would not allow him to keep his parachute open in the game. Then we did Firefighter and Tow Truck, but the non-initiating player gets NOTHING onscreen to tell them what's going on, and the co-op partner gets nothing with which to extinguish fires.

...So, even co-op is hard, apparently.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #37 on:** March 02, 2009, 07:33:19 PM »

Multiplayer mode is a whole other set of challenges than a campaign. 99% of the time, it doesn't make sense to want a game to be good at both. Even for "AAA" games, it's really rare to have a solid multiplayer component with a great campaign.

GM, you need to just appreciate the games more for what they do actually (try) do well.

Jansen · « **Reply #38 on:** March 04, 2009, 11:55:26 PM »

what a shitty game. at least the suffering was over in a matter of hours

News:

Author Topic: EAT LEAD thread (Read 3438 times)