The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Killzone'.
Still looks promising, read a few reviews this morning, watched the IGN video review, average score is around 80%. The game clearly has massive short comings but as I have said, so did Halo.
For Gorilla to step up with their first game with Sony, try to take on a project that was ambitious from the start with all the retarded PS2 magazines calling it a 'Halo killer' instead of just letting the game run its course and then see from the end.
Sounds like Sony and Gorilla have taken on too much for the PS2 hardware but I like the idea of a developer trying to push the hardware to the limits instead of sitting back and holdings ideas back.
IGN's review is very inconsistent, they talk about the short comings and then as usual go on to say that it is a very solid game that yes you should buy.
The main criticisms are AI related and occasional slowdown but even Halo, Half Life and a host of other games before it have suffered from these problems to one degree or another.
I am still really looking forward to it, it looks a hell of a lot of fun to play and will still remain up there with my Christmas purchase list.
For Gorilla to step up with their first game with Sony, try to take on a project that was ambitious from the start with all the retarded PS2 magazines calling it a 'Halo killer' instead of just letting the game run its course and then see from the end.
Sounds like Sony and Gorilla have taken on too much for the PS2 hardware but I like the idea of a developer trying to push the hardware to the limits instead of sitting back and holdings ideas back.
IGN's review is very inconsistent, they talk about the short comings and then as usual go on to say that it is a very solid game that yes you should buy.
The main criticisms are AI related and occasional slowdown but even Halo, Half Life and a host of other games before it have suffered from these problems to one degree or another.
I am still really looking forward to it, it looks a hell of a lot of fun to play and will still remain up there with my Christmas purchase list.
Page:
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> How the hell do you figure that a game designed with both on and
> offline modes in equal quantities (Halo 2) is more of an online game
> than a game which solely concentrates with online play in mind?
>
> It doesn't make any sense at all.
I was just saying that Halo 2 was made with online play in mind. Halo was just splitscreen/LAN.
> How the hell do you figure that a game designed with both on and
> offline modes in equal quantities (Halo 2) is more of an online game
> than a game which solely concentrates with online play in mind?
>
> It doesn't make any sense at all.
I was just saying that Halo 2 was made with online play in mind. Halo was just splitscreen/LAN.
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> For Gorilla to step up with their first game with Sony,
Gorilla? They don't make games...
> For Gorilla to step up with their first game with Sony,
Gorilla? They don't make games...
I'm really looing forward to this, any idea of its release?
eye'Aoe wrote:
> Halo 2 was designed for online play, so therefore, it'll be
> better :D
You can't really tell because it hadn't been released yet. And there is a possibility that it would be better than cs, but still, there is cs:source. You can't compare anything to Halo 2 untill it is released, and in the beggining when I said cs is better, I was talking about Halo 1.
> Halo 2 was designed for online play, so therefore, it'll be
> better :D
You can't really tell because it hadn't been released yet. And there is a possibility that it would be better than cs, but still, there is cs:source. You can't compare anything to Halo 2 untill it is released, and in the beggining when I said cs is better, I was talking about Halo 1.
eye'Aoe wrote:
> Halo 2 was designed for online play, so therefore, it'll be
> better :D
not true..the fact that bungie and MS wont allow any single player spoilers out means its a big part of the game
> Halo 2 was designed for online play, so therefore, it'll be
> better :D
not true..the fact that bungie and MS wont allow any single player spoilers out means its a big part of the game
How the hell do you figure that a game designed with both on and offline modes in equal quantities (Halo 2) is more of an online game than a game which solely concentrates with online play in mind?
It doesn't make any sense at all.
It doesn't make any sense at all.
Halo 2 was designed for online play, so therefore, it'll be better :D
Well according to this, then CS will be better than the online mode in Halo 2.
homosh wrote:
> eye'Aoe wrote:
> homosh wrote:
> Counter Strike is still the best, try spending several hours on an
> internet server, it's just gaming heaven, and I already know that
> offline is rubish, but that would also apply on Goldeneye and
> Timesplitters 2. First person shooters are meant to be online, so
> counter strike is the best.
>
> And considering Halo was funking brilliant without online... Halo 2
> is going to completely destroy CS then?
> Halo for PC had online mode, and it was a complete joke if compared
> to counter strike. Counter Strike has hell of a lot more servers, and
> can work on any PC. Besides, it's also more enjoyable than halo. A
> lot more enjoyable.
But Halo wasn't designed for online play, in the same way CS wasn't made for offline play.
> eye'Aoe wrote:
> homosh wrote:
> Counter Strike is still the best, try spending several hours on an
> internet server, it's just gaming heaven, and I already know that
> offline is rubish, but that would also apply on Goldeneye and
> Timesplitters 2. First person shooters are meant to be online, so
> counter strike is the best.
>
> And considering Halo was funking brilliant without online... Halo 2
> is going to completely destroy CS then?
> Halo for PC had online mode, and it was a complete joke if compared
> to counter strike. Counter Strike has hell of a lot more servers, and
> can work on any PC. Besides, it's also more enjoyable than halo. A
> lot more enjoyable.
But Halo wasn't designed for online play, in the same way CS wasn't made for offline play.
Clazon wrote:
> thebestbit wrote:
>
> its poor as hell dont think ive
> played it since the day i got it! sucked big time.
>
> lakers...
>
> It's good. Very good. The fact that this half wit calls it a rubbish
> game without even playing it proves nothing. Perhaps not the best
> ever game of its type, but it is certainly worth buying.
when did this come out?? 2 years ago?i got it the day it came out it was only ever put in my console once! it sucked that bad.
> thebestbit wrote:
>
> its poor as hell dont think ive
> played it since the day i got it! sucked big time.
>
> lakers...
>
> It's good. Very good. The fact that this half wit calls it a rubbish
> game without even playing it proves nothing. Perhaps not the best
> ever game of its type, but it is certainly worth buying.
when did this come out?? 2 years ago?i got it the day it came out it was only ever put in my console once! it sucked that bad.
Page: