i don't put down games' quality because of sales data. that's a separate hobby for me. jeez, i pretty much subsist on games that are on the line or below it for getting localized because sales are so poor.
admittedly, i don't play as much as i did a couple years ago, but that's what two jobs and a family will get ya.
Somebody missed the joke.
whatever your reason is, the end result is that you have positive things to say about pretty much everything you play. that's perhaps a good thing, but for people who are perhaps not as tolerant of shortcomings as you, your word on a game doesn't mean that much.
No.
I point out shortcomings too. All I said was
"Killzone is awesome." I'm not writing a review here. I'll be glad to list the negatives if someone wants to know. It's a little annoying that you have constantly brought up what I said about CoD last year, especially when you misinterpreted it. Stop attacking my credibility. :'(
He praised Black Ops declassified? Hmmm
so did i - and i still will.
The game has a ton of short comings : there's no true story mode - everything is done as short, arcade-style -one kill and you are out- missions with three levels of difficulty.
"YOU CAN FINISH IT IN 1 HOUR!" yup - you can - on easy. But as a pick up and play through on the harder difficulties and then playing it arcade style? It's fine - infact, it's better than fine - i'd say it's good* <--- but note, there's a star!
Online is disappointing in number of players and it has a serious issue with spawn control, but the map size meant you were in the thick of the action. Again - it was good for what it was but a big downgrade from a "full COD experience"
and that's where it all fell apart - people expected the full experience. I actually agree with the design choices that the devs took for single player and it gives the game replayability. The online though is only passable and the * point was the price. This needed to be a budget release for what it delivered - it needed either that-single-player-story-that-everyone wanted -or- a whole host more missions and a more fleshed out multiplayer to command the price it did.
However, game play wise ? it's plays like a good FPS. If you see it in the bargain bins? Go for it - you might be surprised if you go in with , say, $5-$10 expectations.
I couldn't even tell you about the single player, other than it IS garbage. I only played multiplayer -I never play single player in CoD games- and that's the only thing I was talking about.
Is Killzone better? so far i've only played the opening single player segment - seems okay. Had to up the sensitivity, had to ignore the "furrr hig bersted!" character.
Upping the sensitivity to max or near-max is definitely recommended. I moved mine up to have four bars remaining. Seems to work pretty well and still gives some weight to the weapons.
well, sure... if i remember back, the bone of contention was that bork felt it was the best handheld fps ever, and i felt the modern combat games on iOS were better and offered more content at less than a fifth of the price. there's value in anything if the price is low enough or money doesn't matter to a person.
How many times do I have to say this?
I said
"it's the best multiplayer handheld FPS ever made, but that isn't saying much."I found the Modern Combat games I tried unplayable due to the touch screen controls, so CoD is automatically better than those games because of it in my book. The Modern Combat games are certainly way more impressive and offer a lot more content, so it's a shame that they're brought down by touch crap. I see that Gameloft has actually released a controller for these games. Maybe it's a decent accessory and makes things better. I don't know if it works with iPhone and wouldn't buy it just to play a few games with anyway.
Vita deserved a better CoD than that. There's no damn reason why it wasn't better. The friggin' Wii managed a decent version.
Yes, absolutely. I don't think anyone is arguing against this.
right, but even you say the right price for it is around $10ish. people were expecting a $50 experience for their $50. it was a hugely hyped release that should have had a lot of development time and a decent budget. instead, activision dragged their feet and cut every corner, like a child trying to squirm out of a promise to help with the chores. i won't argue that given the time/money the developers were given that they did their best. the fault goes solely to activision for creating that situation. but the end result was a game that failed to meet pretty much any reasonable expectations for a full-price, major SKU.
This too.
I'm not 100% sure because my iPhone 4 won't run it, but I think the single-player only CoD that dropped last week on the App Store might be based on the Vita's single player mode.
No, it's not. The new CoD is a brand-new entry that uses a combination of real time FPS game play combined with overhead "RTS" style game play for commanding your squad. It has an actual campaign mode with a story. There's also a survival mode with increasingly-difficult waves of enemies. I might try it out, but am hesitant because of the controls. I know that they've changed a few things and added a lock-on feature to make aiming easier.
