» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

CodE-E (312)    Jan 04, 2007 - 12:11 am

You're forgetting that you won't just be buying HL2: Episode 2, but Team Fortress 2 and Portal at the same time, too! I already bought HL2: Episode 1, and even if I didn't and some day some episode bundle would come out, there's no way I'd wait that long since I really want TF2 and Portal! :P » Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

BubbaT (160)   Jan 03, 2007 - 04:55 pm

Spore and Hellgate London, then Bioshock. I agree on the concerns for Crysis. It seems similar to the Quake 3 situation, where I had more fun playing later games that used the Q3 engine than I did playing Q3 itself. Still, I liked FarCry, so they get the benefit of the doubt until there's a reason they shouldn't. » Login to reply to this  xephyris (155)   Jan 05, 2007 - 05:44 am Seconded, HG:L and Spore are great. The most anticipated MMO to me is WAR, considering it's attempting a break from EQ/WoW's PvE with PVP slapped on top. » Login to reply to this

jacobvandy (956)    Jan 03, 2007 - 04:35 pm

i could care less if a game has multiplayer if the singleplayer lasts 50 hours. a lot of games i've played lately don't last 8-10. i've not seen crysis billed as the next big multiplayer game, either; i think you're expectations are in the wrong place in that regard. » Login to reply to this  Pastuch (23)   Jan 03, 2007 - 05:08 pm Single Player Summary: Jacob the real question is how can ANY single player FPS keep anyones attention for more than 20 hours? Farcry kept me going for about 15, got bored and quit. Doom 3 kept me going for 8 hours, got bored and quit. Every single room had 2-3 monsters and *gasp* a secret door behind you revealing another monster. (The flash light is the only original thing in that whole POS game) Fear: The game is about as deep as a kiddy pool. 10 hours and quit. Half Life 2: At least they tried to make it interesting but frankly the linear game play and rudimentary problem solving got boring after 15 hours of play. Multiplayer Summary: Counterstrike and CS Source: Each of these games has given me thousands of hours of entertainment. I wouldnt be surprised if I spent 2 months of real time in a single year playing the original CS Battlefield Series: Despite being made by EA these games created a whole new sub-genre of vehical based PFS. BF2 is responsible for a huge number of new flight sim fans. The Jets are monstrously powerful and incredibly fun providing you have a joystick. World of Warcraft PVP: While wow is considered an MMO I always argue that the Battleground PVP is closer to an FPS than an mmo. There are piles of pure PVP guilds out there, its not just boring dragon killing against non-human opponents. Multiplayer is everything. » Login to reply to this  Terra (4)   Jan 07, 2007 - 11:13 am "Jacob the real question is how can ANY single player FPS keep anyones attention for more than 20 hours?" Sounds like you never gamed the first Unreal. Just because most games today are made for kids and is all about eye-candy, dosn't mean that singlepalyer games can't be better than online FPS...with loads of kids and "+30 hits before you die" games...far from it actually. Butthen again, looking at your games list, itseems you are not to old, might be the answer... » Login to reply to this  Stan_Marsh (19)   Jan 03, 2007 - 11:01 pm Eh, I'm exactly the opposite. I've about lost all interest in PC multiplayer gaming. It takes way too much of a time commitment to be competitive anymore and I don't care about any game that much. If I just play a multiplayer game every now and then, the best I can hope for is a couple of lucky kills and it's not any fun. Of the single player games you mentioned, I own and finished Doom 3 (and RoE) and Half-Life 2. Both were long and kept me very entertained until the end. I had enough of Far Cry and Fear after playing the demos. » Login to reply to this

» Note: You need to be logged in to write a comment!