Post by: Majexto on December 19, 2003, 04:31:48 PM
Btw - I put this in here cuz it seemed better fit. I dunno why..
Post by: dee kay on December 19, 2003, 07:29:49 PM
Post by: joeamis on December 20, 2003, 05:15:36 PM
anyways in the video, you have to run through one of the boats on pearl harbor and there are many other allies running through the boat and talking/yelling/ and doing different things, one guy you can help put out a fire to help him get out.
so it does seem its full of action and other men in a chaos of war, i don't know how much you interact with npcs though, but frontline had some good npc areas, so i would think RS does too. also the game has two player cooperative for the whole single quest.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on December 21, 2003, 03:40:41 AM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on December 24, 2003, 05:27:48 PM
The pearl harbor battle is short cause your always a gunner on a ship taking down Japanese bomber and Kamikaze bombers. The rest of the missions are more island hopping.
Overall this is just a average shooter and you can find plety of better games. The 49.99 price tag isnt really worth it IMO.
Post by: Ymeegod on December 28, 2003, 03:48:53 AM
It's not bad for a rental, but $50 for 6 hours of gameplay isn't the best choice.
Post by: Guitar Smasher on December 28, 2003, 03:45:24 PM
Post by: Majexto on December 28, 2003, 05:51:13 PM
Post by: Ymeegod on December 30, 2003, 07:15:13 AM
Saddly, it was on normal, then on hard and they still react nearly the same minus the fact they do more damage.
There's tons more issues about the game--clipping for one. Counted 1/2 dozen times when the AI was able to damage me through coners of walls or glass yet I couldn't hit them. Also quite a few times when you exploded a barrel next to them and yet they come out unharmed yet other times it kills them.
Also the AI has a bad habbit of running towards you then doing a 180 and face the other direction--talk about a glitch in their programming.
-----------------------------------
Frontlines was alot more polished than this.
Post by: SearanoX on December 30, 2003, 07:49:47 AM
Pacific Assault on the PC seems much better. The AI looks better, the graphics are great (and make use of Havok 2.0 physics), and the missions are almost completely different, minus a few levels like Pearl Harbor. I highly recommend checking out the technology videos on the EA page - looking very good so far.
Post by: Majexto on December 30, 2003, 08:04:25 AM
Post by: SearanoX on December 30, 2003, 08:42:57 AM
Post by: thecubedcanuck on December 30, 2003, 08:57:42 AM
Post by: SearanoX on December 30, 2003, 09:32:42 AM
I don't mean to flame, but simply put, PC games (in most cases) are superior to their console counterparts. A PC allows for greater customization, patches, modding, better graphics and sound capabilities, more precise control, and overall, a more complex game than what you could find on a console.
Take the recently released Deus Ex: Invisible War. The original was an amazingly unique RPG/FPS blend that was considered the best game of it's time. With the sequel, we find it has been dumbed down - no reloading, no skill levels, unified ammo types, smaller levels, arguably worse graphics than the original, and an out-of-whack physics system. The only thing that remains at the same level is the plot, but that hardly has anything to do with using a console or not.
Now, I'm not saying that console games are bad, or not as good as PC games. Many games work much better on consoles - RPGs, platformers and games like Metal Gear Solid, for instance. However, a PC simply allows for far more customization, replayability (thanks to online multiplayer), and modability. Try playing Starcraft 64 and then Starcraft on the PC and you'll see what I mean. Same goes for the PSX and PC versions of Diablo.
Tell me, what is better? The PC or XBox version of Halo? The PC version has a much-enhanced multiplayer mode, better and more precise controls (no auto-aim here), better graphics, and everything else that the XBox version has. You can't exactly argue that the PC version is inferior, though the console version certainly has it's advantages in that the game is somewhat more user-friendly, you don't need a supercomputer to run it, and the animation of characters looks nicer on a TV.
As for Call of Duty, well, it's an amazing game on the PC, and the console version looks just as good - albeit with slightly worse graphics, auto-aim due to more imprecise controls and a multiplayer mode that doesn't compare to the PC version. Sorry, you won't be finding 64-player games here.
Post by: thecubedcanuck on December 30, 2003, 01:58:11 PM
Enjoy your PC games, I will take consoles anyday.
Post by: SearanoX on December 30, 2003, 02:12:04 PM
If it's the couch and TV that you like so much, then listen to then I'll tell you that computer video cards can be hooked up to a television (and sound system) in order to use your computer on your TV, just like a monitor. You can use a wireless keyboard/mouse to do all your stuff from your couch.
You obviously have enough money lying around, so what's stopping you from enjoying PC games apart from your ego? You have yet to give any single good reason why consoles are better.
And if PCs are so horrible, why are you using one right now?
Again, I don't mean to flame, but you're acting unnecessarily harsh and giving abosolutely no reason for it. If you can come up with some better reasons, then my respect for you might grown, but until them, you just seem like a spoiled teenager who acts like he's too good for everybody else.
Post by: Mario on December 30, 2003, 02:20:17 PM
As for Medal of Honor, never liked it, but its a casual gamers wet dream.
Post by: Majexto on December 30, 2003, 05:20:50 PM
Post by: joeamis on January 03, 2004, 01:49:39 PM
I could return the game since it was still open and buy it at Best Buy for 37.99, so I did that
and used my coupon from the ps2 coupon book and got it for 34 bucks after taxes, I hope its
better than what people here are saying, I'll be happy with a short game for once, as I just finished Xenosaga at 50 some hours, and Tactics Ogre hovering in at 40 hrs right now,
majexto have u tried it online with voice chat yet?
Post by: Majexto on January 03, 2004, 08:51:37 PM
This game would be really cool online though, I just got time splitters two the AI is alot better but the enviroments are better on Rising Sun.
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on January 03, 2004, 10:05:03 PM
Post by: joeamis on January 04, 2004, 12:14:47 AM
so online gaming it is... (different games are good for different people)
Post by: Mario on January 05, 2004, 02:49:46 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Majexto
If you love your tv so much use it as a monitor with a video input on your graphics card.
Too hard.
Quote
PC games will almost always be superior on the fact you can update them with ease to get better graphics, the larger variety of games, and the ease of play using a mouse.
It's not a fact that PC games are superior, i hate using a mouse and keyboard, which makes it very uncomfortable for me to play PC games. I have more fun playing games on consoles than on PC, the end.
Post by: thecubedcanuck on January 05, 2004, 03:48:03 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 05, 2004, 04:57:39 AM
Post by: SearanoX on January 05, 2004, 10:45:53 AM
Quote
Too hard.
It's not hard. Just plug a cable from the back of your computer to the back of your TV, and boom, you have TV-out.
Quote
It's not a fact that PC games are superior, i hate using a mouse and keyboard, which makes it very uncomfortable for me to play PC games. I have more fun playing games on consoles than on PC, the end.
Well, that's you're opinion. Personally, I prefer using a mouse and keyboard due to more precise control. In shooters and RTS games, skill can be compromised by things like auto-aim and too few buttons. I know that auto-aim works in some games, but really, it makes them too easy.
Of course, there's the comfort issues...I don't find a PC uncomfortable, but I know some people do. If you want, you can always use a game pad with your PC.
Quote
BTW, I switched from PC to GC due to lacking variety in games...
The PC generally has less variety, true, but the replay value of games is generally better thanks to multiplayer, and tech support is better. There are also many less failures when it comes to PC games, so you're generally safe when you buy something, mostly because PC gamers are generally more critical of games, and companies that make bad games are either forced to improve, or go out of business.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 05, 2004, 10:12:57 PM
The replay value is raised by the fact that you can mod most PC games (or at least put your own characters in them), but few games get good mods and online/LAN multiplayer isn't enough variety from the standard gameplay (not to mention that I haven't noticed a difference between online and bot play).
Post by: Majexto on January 26, 2004, 06:02:35 PM
Pc games there is a bigger of a choice if you ask me. For RPG's what beats a MMORPG, much more satisfying than playin a rpg on a console alone. Also when it comes to FPS the aiming is far superior and you can always get a controller if you dont like using a mouse. More of a selection. There is alos alot more GOOD pc only games than console games. You also have to factor in the amount of good flight sims etc type of games that are less seen on consoles. The only downside to a PC is the fact yo constantly have to upgrade it and put a ton of money into keeping it updated. Once again sorry for bringing up this old topic
