Black Ops

[tibiazak]

Also, this discussion about war games makes me think about Six Days in Fallujah

Woulda been an awesome game, too bad it got canceled. =(

[Electro Tomato]

The problem with your guys' arguments is that, no, if they made original/different/innovative games, they wouldn't necessarily make the same amount of money. This is the reason that there is usually an inversely proportional relationship between quality and popularity with art.

[aander91]

This makes me not want to get the game.

The only part in the campaign that came even remotely close to getting me emotionally worked up was the part where you play Russian roulette, because that's something I could actually have seen happening to some POWs. But instead, they rush it and completely forget that some people like emotion and immersion in their games, and got you out of it as soon as it started so you could get back to the mindless shooting.
Also, for me the worst part of the game was when you were torturing that guy because it doesn't give you any setup, just throws you in right in the middle. As soon as I saw the words 'Press RT to punch' I set my controller down and said "Why the **** would I want to do that?"
I'm a pretty sympathetic guy, which is why good war games are so emotional to me, because they show what people have to do and the lives people have to destroy in order to survive. In this game, I kind of felt like I was supposed to kill everyone just because I flat out wanted to. Which pissed me off beyond measure, that a so called 'war game' could stoop that low.

While I liked the story in the Russian mission I still couldn't get past the fact that the game still expected you to want to slaughter every German who surrendered. I got all sympathetic, and ignored them, trying to be nice, but turned around to find my teammates gunning them down pointlessly. I get that it's supposed to represent the Russian mindset during WWII but it just didn't cut it for me. Didn't feel quite as realistic. I mean, in Finest Hour when the Russians started firing on their own troops, it was still supposed to be seen as something horrible and lacking in morals. In this game, it feels more like the Russians are doing it out of pure bloodlust. Which is unrealistic to me. Maybe one person here and there... but everyone?

Pulled from another forum.

[Heka Adonis 69]

I've had BO on my desk for days now... have been to busy to play.
Good thing is that it's gonna change this weekend... CoD-marathon, hell yeah.
I'll give you my opinion when I have finished the campaign.

[Rapt0r]

I like how Call of Duty went from being a gritty (semi)realistic interpretation of war to this Hollywood one man vs everyone bullpoop.

[thebocaj]

This makes me not want to get the game.

The only part in the campaign that came even remotely close to getting me emotionally worked up was the part where you play Russian roulette, because that's something I could actually have seen happening to some POWs. But instead, they rush it and completely forget that some people like emotion and immersion in their games, and got you out of it as soon as it started so you could get back to the mindless shooting.
Also, for me the worst part of the game was when you were torturing that guy because it doesn't give you any setup, just throws you in right in the middle. As soon as I saw the words 'Press RT to punch' I set my controller down and said "Why the **** would I want to do that?"
I'm a pretty sympathetic guy, which is why good war games are so emotional to me, because they show what people have to do and the lives people have to destroy in order to survive. In this game, I kind of felt like I was supposed to kill everyone just because I flat out wanted to. Which pissed me off beyond measure, that a so called 'war game' could stoop that low.

While I liked the story in the Russian mission I still couldn't get past the fact that the game still expected you to want to slaughter every German who surrendered. I got all sympathetic, and ignored them, trying to be nice, but turned around to find my teammates gunning them down pointlessly. I get that it's supposed to represent the Russian mindset during WWII but it just didn't cut it for me. Didn't feel quite as realistic. I mean, in Finest Hour when the Russians started firing on their own troops, it was still supposed to be seen as something horrible and lacking in morals. In this game, it feels more like the Russians are doing it out of pure bloodlust. Which is unrealistic to me. Maybe one person here and there... but everyone?

Pulled from another forum.

Wow. The quality of the campaign was going to be what decides whether I bother getting the game. Ah well, just means more free space on my christmas wish list.

[amak11]

I wouldnt go be reviews on this. Hell, even if a game has pulled a bad review and i find it interesting, ill play it. But im only speakling for 360 players on this. For the PS3, until that version gets patched (again), and we get the features that 360 has, DONT BUY IT. My opinion on it. If you are going to pay 73.50 (what my bro payed which is same as the 360 price here) for an infirior game then why pay at all. Not to mention PS3 players get a false 1080p. Actually, a lot of my rants atm are fueled from a news article calling all PS3 players to boycott Black ops by getting a refund. to list he PS3 issues that are wide spread

- constant disconntions
- MAJOR frame rate issues
- crashing/freezing
- terrible matchmaking (in the words of my freind)

http://news.softpedia.com/news/PS3-Call ... 8616.shtml source for some of my complaining

[mitch951]

I wouldnt go be reviews on this. Hell, even if a game has pulled a bad review and i find it interesting, ill play it. But im only speakling for 360 players on this. For the PS3, until that version gets patched (again), and we get the features that 360 has, DONT BUY IT. My opinion on it. If you are going to pay 73.50 (what my bro payed which is same as the 360 price here) for an infirior game then why pay at all. Not to mention PS3 players get a false 1080p. Actually, a lot of my rants atm are fueled from a news article calling all PS3 players to boycott Black ops by getting a refund. to list he PS3 issues that are wide spread

- constant disconntions
- MAJOR frame rate issues
- crashing/freezing
- terrible matchmaking (in the words of my freind)

http://news.softpedia.com/news/PS3-Call ... 8616.shtml source for some of my complaining

It's cause you bought a PS3.

[aander91]

Oh please. The PS3 has much better hardware than the 360 and should be able to provide and equal if not BETTER experience, especially in the graphical department. It's the developer's fault.

[Lysdestic]

Dey see him trollin'

dey hatin'

[Rapt0r]

Oh please. The PS3 has much better hardware than the 360 and should be able to provide and equal if not BETTER experience, especially in the graphical department. It's the developer's fault.

False. Every (almost) game on both 360 and PS3 has had inferior version on the PS3. I always thought it was just developers but NOPE. GT5 looks like ass (undeniably worse than Forza 3) and still has framerate drops (while the 360 has none).



This game has been development for 5ish years and this is the best they could do?

[amak11]

Oh please. The PS3 has much better hardware than the 360 and should be able to provide and equal if not BETTER experience, especially in the graphical department. It's the developer's fault.

False. Every (almost) game on both 360 and PS3 has had inferior version on the PS3. I always thought it was just developers but NOPE. GT5 looks like ass (undeniably worse than Forza 3) and still has framerate drops (while the 360 has none).

*removed youtube tag *

This game has been development for 5ish years and this is the best they could do?

Other then the fact you are being a 360 fanboy atm, the PS3 hardware is up to par with the 360. Most developers havent used the PS3 to its fullest potiential, including Polphoney. Also, look at MW2 on PS3 and 360, their is minor differences.
> Saying you know what ass looks like.

Oh and dont tell me 360 doesnt drop frames. Fable 2 drops a hell of a lot of frames.

*** edit ***

I read aanders post as a crap loads of sarcasm. Im a hardware geek, the only thing that makes the PS3 less powerful is the gfx chip they used in it. An ideal game on PS3 is something that uses 100% of the cell broadband processor.

[aander91]

But...how? There's loads more room on Blu-Rays than DVDs. Does the rest of the hardware lack that much?

[thebocaj]

Just did some research on 360 vs PS3 specs and stuff, and it sounds like it's certainly the developers' (or more likely, MS's, but definitely not the PS3's) fault to me.

And here's a hardware comparison: http://uk.gear.ign.com/articles/111/1116182p1.html

[Rapt0r]

Other then the fact you are being a 360 fanboy atm

Nope. I hate both 360 and PS3. Both run games like ass and look like poop. It's 2010. How can consoles not be able to use AA in all games yet or even run games at HD resolutions (most games DO NOT run at even 720p, only upscaled)?

Most developers havent used the PS3 to its fullest potiential, including Polphoney.

I'll believe it when I see it. This has been said for years.

> Saying you know what ass looks like.

>implying I don't have an ass and a mirror to see said ass

Oh and dont tell me 360 doesnt drop frames. Fable 2 drops a hell of a lot of frames.

I never said the 360 doesn't. I merely used Forza 3 as an example as it's a similar game to GT5. I honestly am surprised the game ran at a constant 60fps the whole time.