I don't quite share his disdain for it, but it is a little silly to have to pay money for what is essentially a peer to peer multiplayer service rather than something with dedicated servers that also has P2P as an option, like pretty much every PC multiplayer system available (most of which are free).
If it were a free service I might be more forgiving, but it isn't, so even though it's the best console online service available right now I can't help but feel that for the price it could be a lot better and more reliable. It's a necessary evil for anyone to wants to have online console multiplayer worth a damn these days, though.
3.23 a month. Less than a lunch at Wendy's.
With a heavy heart I must say, besides GTA4, Fable 2 is the most dissapointing big name title for me this Gen (so far)
Did you play Fable 1? Were you around when it came out? You shouldn't have expected anything :P
Which is still more than equivalent services on PC cost, despite generally having fewer features (though some of the recent updates have been nice).
The complaint isn't that it costs too much, it's that compared to other services on the PC it's not worth paying for at all, which is why Games for Windows Live was a complete and utter flop and eventually made free just so it doesn't turn off customers. The only reason it's worth paying for is because there is literally no other option on the 360 platform.
Nope, I work for a very large technology company. I just don't think there is any way to excuse a 3 month delay. Nobody on my friends list even played Castle Crashers past the first weekend
Which is still more than equivalent services on PC cost, despite generally having fewer features (though some of the recent updates have been nice).
The complaint isn't that it costs too much, it's that compared to other services on the PC it's not worth paying for at all, which is why Games for Windows Live was a complete and utter flop and eventually made free just so it doesn't turn off customers. The only reason it's worth paying for is because there is literally no other option on the 360 platform.
Nah it has been done to death before, there are plenty of reasons to pay for XBL. Curious, what kind of experience do you have with XBL?
So... What're these bugs with CC? I've yet to run into any through my run in the game.
People having their game saves deleted, any MP with over 2 people is either a lagfest or just doesn't happen
Even with just two people it's nigh impossible. I haven't been able to play a single online game with anyone yet, nor have they been able to either. It's such a disappointment because the game is so bloody good and screams multiplayer.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
Which is still more than equivalent services on PC cost, despite generally having fewer features (though some of the recent updates have been nice).
The complaint isn't that it costs too much, it's that compared to other services on the PC it's not worth paying for at all, which is why Games for Windows Live was a complete and utter flop and eventually made free just so it doesn't turn off customers. The only reason it's worth paying for is because there is literally no other option on the 360 platform.
Nah it has been done to death before, there are plenty of reasons to pay for XBL. Curious, what kind of experience do you have with XBL?
XBL is a quality service, but it's not perfect. There are indeed reasons to pay for it, but chief among those seems to be that there are no real alternatives on other consoles. I too would rather it more closely emulated what can be found on PCs. Even so, I'm happy to pay if something like the wii's broken lack of an infrastructure is the alternative. I'm not sure how good the PS3's service is since I don't have one. I've heard it's decent and serviceable but still doesn't come close to Live.
Out of curiosity, is it with XBLA? I only say this because from everything I've heard, Microsoft is absolutely draconian with their certification process and takes forever to get things done. Vigilante 8 was in certification for, I believe, two months before it was actually approved for release.
The DLC for Grid has been held back by MS for about 2 months as well.
Which is still more than equivalent services on PC cost, despite generally having fewer features (though some of the recent updates have been nice).
The complaint isn't that it costs too much, it's that compared to other services on the PC it's not worth paying for at all, which is why Games for Windows Live was a complete and utter flop and eventually made free just so it doesn't turn off customers. The only reason it's worth paying for is because there is literally no other option on the 360 platform.
Nah it has been done to death before, there are plenty of reasons to pay for XBL. Curious, what kind of experience do you have with XBL?
It's mostly fine, but it's still much more unpredictable than dedicated servers since I never know who's going to actually be hosting the game until I join it.
Like I said, it's not a horrible service, but it's missing some basic things that PC equivalents have, and since it's a pay service while those are free it seems reasonable to expect that those bases would be covered. In a vacuum it's a fine service, and on the console front it's the best available, but when the exact same thing was ported to the PC it was found extremely lacking for a reason.
It's mostly fine, but it's still much more unpredictable than dedicated servers since I never know who's going to actually be hosting the game until I join it.
Somebody has to pay for dedicated services. Shit ain't free. Also have to pay for Ventrilo or teamspeak for the most part. Just sayin'.
It's mostly fine, but it's still much more unpredictable than dedicated servers since I never know who's going to actually be hosting the game until I join it.
Somebody has to pay for dedicated services. Shit ain't free. Also have to pay for Ventrilo or teamspeak for the most part. Just sayin'.
Damn I got beat'd like a baby by an au pair.
Yes, but just because I use those servers doesn't always mean I pay for it myself.
All kidding aside, the only thing I really want to see in console online is an alternative to matchmaking. I loath matchmaking. It's slow and, in the event that you find one, it makes it difficult to stay with a good group of players. However, I'm not sure how feasible this is on console without dedicated servers.
But you don't have to pay to play on them, most of the time.
True enough. But they still get paid for by someone somewhere. I myself used to host 3 dedicated Counter Strike Source servers and that wasn't cheap, nor was ventrilo and all that stuff. Of course, nowadays we mostly share the vent server costs but still - just because you dont pay for it doesnt mean noone does.
In fact, the vast majority of PC games I play are P2P anyways. Other than FPS games nearly everything is done by peers.
It's mostly fine, but it's still much more unpredictable than dedicated servers since I never know who's going to actually be hosting the game until I join it.
Somebody has to pay for dedicated services. Shit ain't free. Also have to pay for Ventrilo or teamspeak for the most part. Just sayin'.
Damn I got beat'd like a baby by an au pair.
Yes, but just because I use those servers doesn't always mean I pay for it myself.
All kidding aside, the only thing I really want to see in console online is an alternative to matchmaking. I loath matchmaking. It's slow and, in the event that you find one, it makes it difficult to stay with a good group of players. However, I'm not sure how feasible this is on console without dedicated servers.
Really? I'm actually of the opinion that matchmaking is one of the better things that has been introduced by live. It offers much more balanced games via the trueskill system. Along with far greater diversity in maps and gametypes played. Finding a full game is far quicker then sitting in a server lobby as well. I'm honestly not sure if I could go back. Anyway if you want a customised private game most games have a 'custom game' option.
I don't quite share his disdain for it, but it is a little silly to have to pay money for what is essentially a peer to peer multiplayer service rather than something with dedicated servers that also has P2P as an option, like pretty much every PC multiplayer system available (most of which are free).
If it were a free service I might be more forgiving, but it isn't, so even though it's the best console online service available right now I can't help but feel that for the price it could be a lot better and more reliable. It's a necessary evil for anyone to wants to have online console multiplayer worth a damn these days, though.
3.23 a month. Less than a lunch at Wendy's.
With a heavy heart I must say, besides GTA4, Fable 2 is the most dissapointing big name title for me this Gen (so far)
Did you play Fable 1? Were you around when it came out? You shouldn't have expected anything :P
I played Fable 1 to death, and felt just as bad about that, however I am the eternal optimist it seems
This year's biggest letdowns for me are Spore, Fable 2, Too Human and Force Unleashed. All had supreme hype machines behind them and all felt utterly mediocre. Though I recognise from a critical standpoint that Fable and Spore especially are well made and good games, I wont be touching them ever again. The latter 2 were prime examples of hype elevating shit to ungodly heights.
I'm still playing Farcry 2 30-45 minutes a day, I've found its actually pretty fun that way.
Until I beat it, I suppose.
Also I dont know what you are talking about because it takes about 4 bullet for my Mac-10 to kill someone, and one shot anywhere but the lower torso to kill them with any sniper rifle.
All on medium
Also the driving takes about 4-5 minutes, 2-3 if you use the buses.
It's not GOTY or anything, but I've enjoyed it and it was worth the 30$ I paid for it.
I promise you and with my friends in the room, I sniped a guy in the head and he barely flinched. The room was filled with one giant "What the hell?"
And no way it only takes 4 to 5 minutes. It is more like 5 to 10. Sometimes longer. Maybe if I didn't have to drive through 5 outpost full of Annie Oakleys made of adamantium every time or get chased down by random jeeps. Don't forget getting out to repair your vehicle 20 times. The buses are so spread out that there is no point is using them. I can recall one time my friend asked to see what it looked like when you heal yourself, so I drove 5 minutes to an outpost and in what seemed like the game mocking me, no one would hit me. The AI didn't respond. Point blank. One guy finally got on a turret and fired wildly at me and missed. Then they started killing each other. This game is broke.
Normally I am all for "to each his own." When I played GTA4, I was disappointed. It wasn't really fun to me, but it doesn't suck. I didn't like, but I understood why everyone else did. But no. Not Farcry 2. That game is evil. It is the Devils game. I haven't screamed at a game in a long time. I couldn't even try the multiplayer because it wouldn't let me. I enjoyed the first farcry very much. I beat that one. This game was not farcry to me. This game was hell.
The best thing to come out of this game was during a "why is this game so damn terrible" rant to myself, I decided to find animals after reading the wiki about them being in the game. I only ever saw goat. So about 20 minutes driving around looking for wildlife a deer or something comes out of no where and I run over it by accident. I laughed, but that was it. On a game that is supposed to be super realistic, why was there hardly any wildlife. You would think in a game like that they would give you something to explore. No. The jungle is full of nothing but trees, until you hear the sound of a blinking green light informing you a diamond worth 2 credits or whatever is nearby.
Man, aaron, what system are you playing on? I played it on PC and found the bugs to be few and far between, and usually bearable. The rest of your complaints are gameplay attributes pumped up with Hyperbolium, which, to each their own I guess, but I feel kinda bad that the game rubbed you the wrong way. I had an utterly pleasant experience with it. Not bad, not great, just pleasant and good.
Also, major disappointments?
Escape from Monkey Island
The first two games in the series are landmarks of the point-and-click adventure heydey, and Curse of Monkey Island still goes down as one of the most gorgeous, inventive, and funny games I've ever played in my life. So LucasArts goes and transitions into 3D with weak graphics and horrible tank controls for Escape. Wasn't particularly funny, either. I didn't bother finishing it
Posts
Did you play Fable 1? Were you around when it came out? You shouldn't have expected anything :P
Which is still more than equivalent services on PC cost, despite generally having fewer features (though some of the recent updates have been nice).
The complaint isn't that it costs too much, it's that compared to other services on the PC it's not worth paying for at all, which is why Games for Windows Live was a complete and utter flop and eventually made free just so it doesn't turn off customers. The only reason it's worth paying for is because there is literally no other option on the 360 platform.
Even with just two people it's nigh impossible. I haven't been able to play a single online game with anyone yet, nor have they been able to either. It's such a disappointment because the game is so bloody good and screams multiplayer.
Ahh. Is this a recent issue? I played it with 4 people at a consistent rate at release and didn't have problems.
XBL is a quality service, but it's not perfect. There are indeed reasons to pay for it, but chief among those seems to be that there are no real alternatives on other consoles. I too would rather it more closely emulated what can be found on PCs. Even so, I'm happy to pay if something like the wii's broken lack of an infrastructure is the alternative. I'm not sure how good the PS3's service is since I don't have one. I've heard it's decent and serviceable but still doesn't come close to Live.
The DLC for Grid has been held back by MS for about 2 months as well.
It's mostly fine, but it's still much more unpredictable than dedicated servers since I never know who's going to actually be hosting the game until I join it.
Like I said, it's not a horrible service, but it's missing some basic things that PC equivalents have, and since it's a pay service while those are free it seems reasonable to expect that those bases would be covered. In a vacuum it's a fine service, and on the console front it's the best available, but when the exact same thing was ported to the PC it was found extremely lacking for a reason.
Damn I got beat'd like a baby by an au pair.
But you don't have to pay to play on them, most of the time.
Yes, but just because I use those servers doesn't always mean I pay for it myself.
All kidding aside, the only thing I really want to see in console online is an alternative to matchmaking. I loath matchmaking. It's slow and, in the event that you find one, it makes it difficult to stay with a good group of players. However, I'm not sure how feasible this is on console without dedicated servers.
True enough. But they still get paid for by someone somewhere. I myself used to host 3 dedicated Counter Strike Source servers and that wasn't cheap, nor was ventrilo and all that stuff. Of course, nowadays we mostly share the vent server costs but still - just because you dont pay for it doesnt mean noone does.
In fact, the vast majority of PC games I play are P2P anyways. Other than FPS games nearly everything is done by peers.
Shit was cool for like 45 minutes.
Really? I'm actually of the opinion that matchmaking is one of the better things that has been introduced by live. It offers much more balanced games via the trueskill system. Along with far greater diversity in maps and gametypes played. Finding a full game is far quicker then sitting in a server lobby as well. I'm honestly not sure if I could go back. Anyway if you want a customised private game most games have a 'custom game' option.
I played Fable 1 to death, and felt just as bad about that, however I am the eternal optimist it seems
I promise you and with my friends in the room, I sniped a guy in the head and he barely flinched. The room was filled with one giant "What the hell?"
And no way it only takes 4 to 5 minutes. It is more like 5 to 10. Sometimes longer. Maybe if I didn't have to drive through 5 outpost full of Annie Oakleys made of adamantium every time or get chased down by random jeeps. Don't forget getting out to repair your vehicle 20 times. The buses are so spread out that there is no point is using them. I can recall one time my friend asked to see what it looked like when you heal yourself, so I drove 5 minutes to an outpost and in what seemed like the game mocking me, no one would hit me. The AI didn't respond. Point blank. One guy finally got on a turret and fired wildly at me and missed. Then they started killing each other. This game is broke.
Normally I am all for "to each his own." When I played GTA4, I was disappointed. It wasn't really fun to me, but it doesn't suck. I didn't like, but I understood why everyone else did. But no. Not Farcry 2. That game is evil. It is the Devils game. I haven't screamed at a game in a long time. I couldn't even try the multiplayer because it wouldn't let me. I enjoyed the first farcry very much. I beat that one. This game was not farcry to me. This game was hell.
The best thing to come out of this game was during a "why is this game so damn terrible" rant to myself, I decided to find animals after reading the wiki about them being in the game. I only ever saw goat. So about 20 minutes driving around looking for wildlife a deer or something comes out of no where and I run over it by accident. I laughed, but that was it. On a game that is supposed to be super realistic, why was there hardly any wildlife. You would think in a game like that they would give you something to explore. No. The jungle is full of nothing but trees, until you hear the sound of a blinking green light informing you a diamond worth 2 credits or whatever is nearby.
Also, major disappointments?
Escape from Monkey Island
The first two games in the series are landmarks of the point-and-click adventure heydey, and Curse of Monkey Island still goes down as one of the most gorgeous, inventive, and funny games I've ever played in my life. So LucasArts goes and transitions into 3D with weak graphics and horrible tank controls for Escape. Wasn't particularly funny, either. I didn't bother finishing it
I really enjoyed playing the first one's campaign co-op with my little brother. I bought the second one thinking I'd be able to do the same.
No deal. Instead there's some shitty co-op missions which suck ass.
PSN = Wicker86 ________ Gamertag = Wicker86