Fuck Kaos and THQ for trying to ship four hours for 60 dollars. That shows a fundamental disrespect for gamers and I'd encourage all of you to refrain from buying this product.
But hey, thanks I guess for saving me money. I'll put it towards Crysis 2 next week.
I made it to chapter 4 and I'm 3 hours into the single player. Once I realized rob was doing our review though I switched to multi. I'm only an average FPS player but I expect to get another 3 hours out of the single player campaign.
Really though I look at most FPSs as multiplayer shoot mans titles. 4 hours 6 hours 8 hours .... Meh who cares how long single player is if I'm going to be putting thousands of hours into mp. Not everyone is like me though so I understand your concerns about campaign length. Really though I think you don't get why people buy these games. For many (I would argue the majority) it ain't about single player although a good single player is appreciated.
With that said the single player campaign so far has had some pretty poignant moments at least for me. Ymmv
Forget the people who buy these games. Obviously people are going to buy it. I'm not buying it. I'm tired of this stuff, and that's all that I'm here to say.
You want a long campaign? You don't buy an FPS man. It's that simple to me.
FPS games are all about their Multi. That should be known and obvious. Although! 4 hours is extremely short. I will say even for a single play FPS game it should be around 6 hours or some such. But then the reviews I read said to play on Hard for a good challenge and around 6 - 8 hours. Although see, and here's what's funny to me. I actually enjoy short games these days what with always working. I'm actually able to finish those short ones and I like that. I rarely finish anything past 8 hours nowadays and it sucks.
mastrius on
"You're like a kitten! A kitten who doesn't speak Japanese." ~ Juliet Starling
Fuck Kaos and THQ for trying to ship four hours for 60 dollars. That shows a fundamental disrespect for gamers and I'd encourage all of you to refrain from buying this product.
But hey, thanks I guess for saving me money. I'll put it towards Crysis 2 next week.
Did you know there's this lovely thing called Xbox Live Gold which allows you to play online with friends or complete strangers? Used heavily in FPS games?
Fuck Kaos and THQ for trying to ship four hours for 60 dollars. That shows a fundamental disrespect for gamers and I'd encourage all of you to refrain from buying this product.
But hey, thanks I guess for saving me money. I'll put it towards Crysis 2 next week.
Did you know there's this lovely thing called Xbox Live Gold which allows you to play online with friends or complete strangers? Used heavily in FPS games?
I was interested in Homefront because of its Milius-penned singleplayer campaign. What does multiplayer have to do with that?
I'm kinda with the guys that are underwhelmed by a 4-hour campaign. By no means do I expect a Fallout 3 experience, but at what point do people just stop pretending they care about single player campaigns? Just ship a multiplayer game. Knock the price down if you're going to barely care about a major chunk of the game, or at least do the other part REALLY well.
All of this "OH YES WE HAVE MILIUS" marketing and then a 4-hour campaign? It seems like downright trickery to steal $60 from people that still play single-player campaigns. I'd rent it just to piss them off, if I were a single-player only guy.
Im not against having a 4 hour campaign per-se, I just expect those 4 hours to be absolutely mind blowing, open and present new and dynamic scenarios, possibly with lots of alternate paths.
Bad Company 2 spoiled me when it comes to FPSs and bulidings.
I'm watching the multiplayer videos and everytime I see dudes up in the bulidings I'm wishing that those bulidings could be leveled and the surrounding area turned to glass.
Espcally if some dude is one of those 5star badasses and I got to hunt him down. I mean I'm not going to go waltzing into the buliding where this guy is! That's probably how he got the 5 stars! I'm going to launch air strike after air strike untill the area he's in is a nice smoking crater.
What is this crap people are spewing? All Kaos and THQ has done is focus on the coolness of the idea/setting, the story is written by the Red Dawn guy and NORTH KOREA IS EVIL!
There's nothing wrong with a focus on multiplayer. After all, Tribes and Battlefield didn't show up because there wasn't an audience. If you're going to pretend there's a campaign, then it better damn be a good one. This is why the CoD series has been bunk for awhile. They insist on throwing in these scraps for no reason. Might as well put the entire budget to MP, if that's the only legitimate reason to play something.
FPS are not "about multiplayer only".
"You want a long campaign, don't buy a FPS?"
What? What the hell happened to Deus Ex, Half-life, or even recent titles like S.T.A.L.K.E.R.? Even Doom 3 had a 15+ hour campaign (and fantastic modability, lending a longer life span)! This prevailing attitude that the FPS doesn't exist for anything other than teabagging your buddies is the exact reason why FPS games have had lame campaigns for the last 5 or so years.
Yeah, despite thinking the ideas behind the story are completely stupid, I found myself becoming increasingly interested in the action movie idea with "oh no, Koreans and futuretech!", then the 5 hour campaign comes to light, and just like Modern Warfare 2 or Black Ops, I'm not laying down a penny until the price reflects the value.
I'm hearing Homefront got 5/10 from EDGE. That in itself isn't enough to put me off, as even though I read EDGE religiously I often disagree with their scores, I find GamesTM to be on the ball more often. I'm still very keen to see the text of the article, and hopefully more reviews and hands on impressions from you guys before Friday, particularly regarding the multiplayer.
Actually if anyone is in a position to know I'd appreciate if you could answer some of my questions;
Can drop into a game mid-way (COD style) or not (Halo style)?
Regarding the 360 version, are all games 32 players max? I know I saw a video where it looked like only 24.
Any details on the number and location of dedicated servers for the console versions? Are they all hosted by Kaos / the publisher?
I'm assuming it uses the typical obfuscated matchmaking system rather than a PC style server browser?
AngryPuppy on
PSN: AngryPuppyEsq
0
Options
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
dudes, I only just finished CoD4's campaign like 3 months ago. I finished Modern Warfare 2 a week and a half before BLOPS came out, and I'm relatively certain I will never finish BLOPS. I have over 60 hours of game time clocked in each of those games, and I'm pretty sure I represent the drunken frat bros demographic which happens to have the best overlap in the target audience for FPS game marketing.
You really shouldn't fault one game for doing what the whole industry is guilty of, and if you're going to do it anyway, you should fault the biggest game from the biggest publisher because it sets the pace for all other products in the market.
Reviews so far saying the SP campaign isn't bad at all just short so that keeps me interested. So yeah combo of THQ and PC should make this a great canidate for Steam Holiday Sale impulse buy!
Reviews so far saying the SP campaign isn't bad at all just short so that keeps me interested. So yeah combo of THQ and PC should make this a great canidate for Steam Holiday Sale impulse buy!
Reviews so far saying the SP campaign isn't bad at all just short so that keeps me interested. So yeah combo of THQ and PC should make this a great canidate for Steam Holiday Sale impulse buy!
They are lies, the campaign is mediocre at best.
I tend to enjoy a lot of mediocre FPS campaigns. Bad Company 2 I actually thought was real good. I loved Quantum of Solace which I have played through multiple times. I even beat the campaign in Star Wars Battlefront 2 which is just instant action strung together with voiceover! So yeah give me a FPS where I shoot AI dudes and I'll go through it.
I've tried going through the BC2 campaign twice, I always play 2 or 3 hours and then just never go back to it.
Why? Because after playing multiplayer, you can never see awesome moments like that in the SP portion that aren't scripted. Then the AI will never be as fun as a human opponent. Try this on the BC2 SP: See an enemy soldier, let him fire his initial volley, and run up to him as fast as you can. He will stand there, and just look at you. He is waiting for his "do not fire at the player" cooldown to finish.
Even if the story were great, the gameplay is not at all engaging compared to the multiplayer experience. Shooting galleries stopped being fun a long time ago.
No thanks. Getting tired of this short as shit campaign. Eight to twelve hours is a fair length. Even 6-8 has its place. But four? How can you even tell more than a shitty story with that?
Borderlands, now that had a good storyline. A great campaign. Maybe Duke Nukem will have a good length and entertaining story.
Steam unlocked at 9pm, so I got in about 3 hours of multiplayer last night.
Someone described it above as COD on bigger maps with vehicles. Imo pretty accurate. You kill people FAST, and you die FAST. There's a lot of snipers or scoped campers, but I noticed they rarely got above one star wanted so they must not be killing all that much. It's a bit annoying to be sneaking around a building, stalking another guy, and then killed through an open window from a guy laying in the bushes a quarter mile away. But you're back in the action fast, and once we learn the maps we'll better know where we're safe and not.
Too early for real impressions, honestly. I was struggling with some performance issues too. I have an i7 and 5870 and my FPS was all over the place. Usually it was 50-60+ and the control was very smooth, but then somewhat randomly it would be in the high 20s for a while and the mouse control felt terrible (almost like acceleration was introduced). One area of a map would produce high fps one time, and later in that same area it would be sluggish. I messed around with the settings somewhat, but couldn't figure out what graphic aspect was causing the issues.
Anyhow, I picked up the game to play with a buddy. Altho we are steam friends and set the same clan name it almost never put us on the same side, and switching sides nearly never worked. All in all I think we'll have fun with the game, it brings a few new and interesting features, but it's not blowing my mind like BC2 originally did.
There's no way in hell PRNK could conquer SK and Japan AND get an invasion force across the largest body of water in the fucking world when they can't feed their people or keep the power on. That's like having Zimbabwe conquer western europe.
Homefront 2 enemy confirmed.
Well look at it this way, at least it isn't Russia again. They should have went with Mexico as its a little easier to believe.
No, no, the plot for Homefront 2 is North Korea (population 24 million) conquering the whole world (population estimated 6.91 billion).
Russia will then conquer the whole world, Mars, and large portions of the Crab Nebula.
Synthesis on
0
Options
WarcryI'm getting my shit pushed in here!AustraliaRegistered Userregular
There's no way in hell PRNK could conquer SK and Japan AND get an invasion force across the largest body of water in the fucking world when they can't feed their people or keep the power on. That's like having Zimbabwe conquer western europe.
Homefront 2 enemy confirmed.
Well look at it this way, at least it isn't Russia again. They should have went with Mexico as its a little easier to believe.
No, no, the plot for Homefront 2 is North Korea (population 24 million) conquering the whole world (population estimated 6.91 billion).
Russia will then conquer the whole world, Mars, and large portions of the Crab Nebula.
and then America EMPs the whole fucking lot and then nukes it again
Borderlands, now that had a good storyline. A great campaign. Maybe Duke Nukem will have a good length and entertaining story.
But at least the games with short campaigns actually have multiplayer (that's not co-op).
Not that borderlands wasn't awesome, but still. I think they're just different types of games. One (borderlands) seems to be from the long lost awesome days of yore where a single player FPS was engaging and fun. The other is from the modern era, where a FPS is basically an online frat house.
Boogdud on
0
Options
HawkstoneDon't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things. Somewhere outside of BarstowRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
Meh, count me in the group who is buying this exclusively for the multiplayer. I never finished blops and MW's campaigns I alwasy kind of slogged through. I have pretty much resigned myself to the fact I buy millitary style shooters for the multi...If I want story and a great single player experience from a shooter I reach for something with a more engaging genre. I am actually really excited to pick up my preorder when I get out of work...word around the campfire is the mulit is pretty bangin'. I got pressured into buying it by regular online cohorts, but from what I am hearing I wont regret making the switch, we need something new and this might just fill the bill until the new Battlefield comes out.
Borderlands, now that had a good storyline. A great campaign. Maybe Duke Nukem will have a good length and entertaining story.
But at least the games with short campaigns actually have multiplayer (that's not co-op).
Not that borderlands wasn't awesome, but still. I think they're just different types of games. One (borderlands) seems to be from the long lost awesome days of yore where a single player FPS was engaging and fun. The other is from the modern era, where a FPS is basically an online frat house.
I actually hated Borderlands, I thought the campaign in that was terrible felt like just a closed in MMO the entire time I played it.
I just picked up Homefront from gamestop, won't get to crack it open and play till after my last two classes though so I'll post an impression later today, or early tomorrow.
Same here, if I buy this, it will be for multiplayer. CoD-ish with big maps sounds good to me.
Hiryu02 on
Sev: Your gameplay is the most heavily yomi based around. Usually you look for characters that allow you to force guessing situations for big dmg. Even if the guess is mathematically nowhere near in your favor lol. You're happiest when you have either a 50/50, 33/33/33 or even a 75/25 situation to go crazy with. And you will take big risks to force those situations to come up.
There's no way in hell PRNK could conquer SK and Japan AND get an invasion force across the largest body of water in the fucking world when they can't feed their people or keep the power on. That's like having Zimbabwe conquer western europe.
Homefront 2 enemy confirmed.
Well look at it this way, at least it isn't Russia again. They should have went with Mexico as its a little easier to believe.
No, no, the plot for Homefront 2 is North Korea (population 24 million) conquering the whole world (population estimated 6.91 billion).
Russia will then conquer the whole world, Mars, and large portions of the Crab Nebula.
and then America EMPs the whole fucking lot and then nukes it again
You've got to have a setup for Homefront 4, when Cuba (population 11 million) conquers the four dimensions we exist in, and then some of the fifth.
Sev: Your gameplay is the most heavily yomi based around. Usually you look for characters that allow you to force guessing situations for big dmg. Even if the guess is mathematically nowhere near in your favor lol. You're happiest when you have either a 50/50, 33/33/33 or even a 75/25 situation to go crazy with. And you will take big risks to force those situations to come up.
Reading some stuff and impressions that are negative tend to concentrate on the campaign, at least that I've noticed. However, those that do speak about MP tend to be positive. I'm cautiously optimistic about this, I don't care that the graphics may not be the best, as long as the feel is good during actual combat. MP is 99% of my gametime in FPS's anyway, so as long as that's good with decent numbers of people playing I can see a purchase.
Hiryu02 on
Sev: Your gameplay is the most heavily yomi based around. Usually you look for characters that allow you to force guessing situations for big dmg. Even if the guess is mathematically nowhere near in your favor lol. You're happiest when you have either a 50/50, 33/33/33 or even a 75/25 situation to go crazy with. And you will take big risks to force those situations to come up.
After a couple of tries trying to connect to an online game, it tells me the servers are down...
Masked_Mullet on
0
Options
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
god damn it. I swear to god the delivery driver at Purolator hates me. It's like he parks around the corner, fills out the packing slip with bullshit data and waits for me to leave, then speeds up, sprints to the door, sticks the little sticker thing on my door, sprints back to his truck and makes a mad fucking getaway, tires squealing and other packages flying out the back cackling all the while over how efficiently he avoided the work of bringing the package to me and letting me sign for it.
Can't connect to a game on 360. Anyone else having a problem besides Masked Mullet? Hopefully after I go out for some delicious chicken shawarma I'll be able to come back and shoot some stuff up. Gamertag is Fattronicus if anyone wants to add me and play eventually.
I've been able to play, so...I'm not sure what the difficulty is.
Just unlocked battle commander.
First impressions of the x360 multi so far:
*Graphics wise, it reminds me of MAG on the PS3. Not that that's a bad thing, that's just the first thing that pops to mind.
*The controls are similar to COD (B crouches/prone, right stick click-in knife, LSB & RSB grenades, etc..).
*I do like that there isn't really kill streaks, but accumulation of points instead which persist through death.
*Map size so far is nice, as I hated the small maps of COD. Not quite BF:BC2 size, about a good middle between the two.
*I've unlocked a few things so far, but that spotting drone is great help for the team.
*It is not a run-gun game like COD. The maps are too big for that and you don't move fast enough.
*Ground Control is my favorite mode so far, definitely like that it goes back and forth between spots based on who's winning a round.
*I do enjoy that it's 16 vs 16 for GC, absolutely love the bigger numbers.
Overall, I'm having a lot of fun so far. The gun play is fairly tight, it's pretty easy to get used to and into, so all in all, I'm happy. Especially since I traded in BLOPS for this.
It's a good distraction while I wait for BF3. If anyone wants to play, 360 tag: Evigilant .
Evigilant on
XBL\PSN\Steam\Origin: Evigilant
0
Options
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
Yeah, the multi really isn't as bad as all the doom-mongering in this thread lead me to believe. It's quite fun.
The game does keep freezing my PS3 though.
MalReynolds on
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
I'll have to try playing again later, but I wasn't exactly impressed. Game froze the fist time I tried playing single player, then I ran into quite a few glitches just playing through the first part (AI companions not opening doors when they should, forcing me to restart). All kinds of problems traversing the environment, getting stuck on stuff, or just getting stuck on flat ground like you're walking through molasses.
I only played a few matches of multi, and I probably won't play too much more because of their silly online pass type shenanigans. The rounds I did play weren't all that fun, since it was basically me and a bunch of other new guys getting spawn camped by an entire team of snipers. Who then got helicopters. That went on for a few rounds on a few different maps. It wasn't pretty.
Basically they took the worst part of battlefield (huge open maps for snipers) and the worst part of CoD (giving the winning team all kinds of goodies so they can uh..win harder, I guess?) and put them in a mixer, then made the controls and graphics worse. Then they decided it'd be a good idea to give each team only two spawn points out in the open. I've been getting back into BC2 lately, and that game looks and sounds so much better. The grenade throwing animation is particularly laughable (and you can't see where the hell you threw it), and the rest of the animations aren't much better. If you think BC2's controls are sluggish, just walk away now.
I'll give it another shot at some point, since I have the game for a bit, maybe I just got in a bad match, I don't know. I haven't tried all of the maps yet, maybe there are some decent ones. All I know is that what I've played so far has been pretty bad. Reminds me of blacklight tango down, which is not a good thing.
Posts
Forget the people who buy these games. Obviously people are going to buy it. I'm not buying it. I'm tired of this stuff, and that's all that I'm here to say.
You want a long campaign? You don't buy an FPS man. It's that simple to me.
FPS games are all about their Multi. That should be known and obvious. Although! 4 hours is extremely short. I will say even for a single play FPS game it should be around 6 hours or some such. But then the reviews I read said to play on Hard for a good challenge and around 6 - 8 hours. Although see, and here's what's funny to me. I actually enjoy short games these days what with always working. I'm actually able to finish those short ones and I like that. I rarely finish anything past 8 hours nowadays and it sucks.
Did you know there's this lovely thing called Xbox Live Gold which allows you to play online with friends or complete strangers? Used heavily in FPS games?
I was interested in Homefront because of its Milius-penned singleplayer campaign. What does multiplayer have to do with that?
All of this "OH YES WE HAVE MILIUS" marketing and then a 4-hour campaign? It seems like downright trickery to steal $60 from people that still play single-player campaigns. I'd rent it just to piss them off, if I were a single-player only guy.
And I doubt Homefront has that.
I'm watching the multiplayer videos and everytime I see dudes up in the bulidings I'm wishing that those bulidings could be leveled and the surrounding area turned to glass.
Espcally if some dude is one of those 5star badasses and I got to hunt him down. I mean I'm not going to go waltzing into the buliding where this guy is! That's probably how he got the 5 stars! I'm going to launch air strike after air strike untill the area he's in is a nice smoking crater.
It's gonna have to be some sort of middleware solution before you see it widespread in games. Otherwise, it'll probably be too much work.
EDIT: Also, just remembered something from watching that youtube playthrough... the game has serious Unreal 3 texture pop-in issues.
There's nothing wrong with a focus on multiplayer. After all, Tribes and Battlefield didn't show up because there wasn't an audience. If you're going to pretend there's a campaign, then it better damn be a good one. This is why the CoD series has been bunk for awhile. They insist on throwing in these scraps for no reason. Might as well put the entire budget to MP, if that's the only legitimate reason to play something.
FPS are not "about multiplayer only".
"You want a long campaign, don't buy a FPS?"
What? What the hell happened to Deus Ex, Half-life, or even recent titles like S.T.A.L.K.E.R.? Even Doom 3 had a 15+ hour campaign (and fantastic modability, lending a longer life span)! This prevailing attitude that the FPS doesn't exist for anything other than teabagging your buddies is the exact reason why FPS games have had lame campaigns for the last 5 or so years.
Yeah, despite thinking the ideas behind the story are completely stupid, I found myself becoming increasingly interested in the action movie idea with "oh no, Koreans and futuretech!", then the 5 hour campaign comes to light, and just like Modern Warfare 2 or Black Ops, I'm not laying down a penny until the price reflects the value.
/rant
Actually if anyone is in a position to know I'd appreciate if you could answer some of my questions;
You really shouldn't fault one game for doing what the whole industry is guilty of, and if you're going to do it anyway, you should fault the biggest game from the biggest publisher because it sets the pace for all other products in the market.
Currently playing: GW2 and TSW
They are lies, the campaign is mediocre at best.
You didn't miss much. It was also just about as long as Homefront's SP.
I tend to enjoy a lot of mediocre FPS campaigns. Bad Company 2 I actually thought was real good. I loved Quantum of Solace which I have played through multiple times. I even beat the campaign in Star Wars Battlefront 2 which is just instant action strung together with voiceover! So yeah give me a FPS where I shoot AI dudes and I'll go through it.
Why? Because after playing multiplayer, you can never see awesome moments like that in the SP portion that aren't scripted. Then the AI will never be as fun as a human opponent. Try this on the BC2 SP: See an enemy soldier, let him fire his initial volley, and run up to him as fast as you can. He will stand there, and just look at you. He is waiting for his "do not fire at the player" cooldown to finish.
Even if the story were great, the gameplay is not at all engaging compared to the multiplayer experience. Shooting galleries stopped being fun a long time ago.
No thanks. Getting tired of this short as shit campaign. Eight to twelve hours is a fair length. Even 6-8 has its place. But four? How can you even tell more than a shitty story with that?
Borderlands, now that had a good storyline. A great campaign. Maybe Duke Nukem will have a good length and entertaining story.
Someone described it above as COD on bigger maps with vehicles. Imo pretty accurate. You kill people FAST, and you die FAST. There's a lot of snipers or scoped campers, but I noticed they rarely got above one star wanted so they must not be killing all that much. It's a bit annoying to be sneaking around a building, stalking another guy, and then killed through an open window from a guy laying in the bushes a quarter mile away. But you're back in the action fast, and once we learn the maps we'll better know where we're safe and not.
Too early for real impressions, honestly. I was struggling with some performance issues too. I have an i7 and 5870 and my FPS was all over the place. Usually it was 50-60+ and the control was very smooth, but then somewhat randomly it would be in the high 20s for a while and the mouse control felt terrible (almost like acceleration was introduced). One area of a map would produce high fps one time, and later in that same area it would be sluggish. I messed around with the settings somewhat, but couldn't figure out what graphic aspect was causing the issues.
Anyhow, I picked up the game to play with a buddy. Altho we are steam friends and set the same clan name it almost never put us on the same side, and switching sides nearly never worked. All in all I think we'll have fun with the game, it brings a few new and interesting features, but it's not blowing my mind like BC2 originally did.
No, no, the plot for Homefront 2 is North Korea (population 24 million) conquering the whole world (population estimated 6.91 billion).
Russia will then conquer the whole world, Mars, and large portions of the Crab Nebula.
and then America EMPs the whole fucking lot and then nukes it again
But at least the games with short campaigns actually have multiplayer (that's not co-op).
Not that borderlands wasn't awesome, but still. I think they're just different types of games. One (borderlands) seems to be from the long lost awesome days of yore where a single player FPS was engaging and fun. The other is from the modern era, where a FPS is basically an online frat house.
I actually hated Borderlands, I thought the campaign in that was terrible felt like just a closed in MMO the entire time I played it.
I just picked up Homefront from gamestop, won't get to crack it open and play till after my last two classes though so I'll post an impression later today, or early tomorrow.
Until the ending. The ending was crap.
You've got to have a setup for Homefront 4, when Cuba (population 11 million) conquers the four dimensions we exist in, and then some of the fifth.
Just unlocked battle commander.
First impressions of the x360 multi so far:
*Graphics wise, it reminds me of MAG on the PS3. Not that that's a bad thing, that's just the first thing that pops to mind.
*The controls are similar to COD (B crouches/prone, right stick click-in knife, LSB & RSB grenades, etc..).
*I do like that there isn't really kill streaks, but accumulation of points instead which persist through death.
*Map size so far is nice, as I hated the small maps of COD. Not quite BF:BC2 size, about a good middle between the two.
*I've unlocked a few things so far, but that spotting drone is great help for the team.
*It is not a run-gun game like COD. The maps are too big for that and you don't move fast enough.
*Ground Control is my favorite mode so far, definitely like that it goes back and forth between spots based on who's winning a round.
*I do enjoy that it's 16 vs 16 for GC, absolutely love the bigger numbers.
Overall, I'm having a lot of fun so far. The gun play is fairly tight, it's pretty easy to get used to and into, so all in all, I'm happy. Especially since I traded in BLOPS for this.
It's a good distraction while I wait for BF3. If anyone wants to play, 360 tag: Evigilant .
The game does keep freezing my PS3 though.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
I only played a few matches of multi, and I probably won't play too much more because of their silly online pass type shenanigans. The rounds I did play weren't all that fun, since it was basically me and a bunch of other new guys getting spawn camped by an entire team of snipers. Who then got helicopters. That went on for a few rounds on a few different maps. It wasn't pretty.
Basically they took the worst part of battlefield (huge open maps for snipers) and the worst part of CoD (giving the winning team all kinds of goodies so they can uh..win harder, I guess?) and put them in a mixer, then made the controls and graphics worse. Then they decided it'd be a good idea to give each team only two spawn points out in the open. I've been getting back into BC2 lately, and that game looks and sounds so much better. The grenade throwing animation is particularly laughable (and you can't see where the hell you threw it), and the rest of the animations aren't much better. If you think BC2's controls are sluggish, just walk away now.
I'll give it another shot at some point, since I have the game for a bit, maybe I just got in a bad match, I don't know. I haven't tried all of the maps yet, maybe there are some decent ones. All I know is that what I've played so far has been pretty bad. Reminds me of blacklight tango down, which is not a good thing.