» Login to reply to this

mr.wielder (1416)    May 29, 2009 - 02:18 pm

Return to Castle Wolfensten was released in 2001 on the Quake 3 engine. It's been 8 years. It's not like they're remaking that same exact game. They haven't even come close to CoD/war games level of repetition. Since 2001 we've come a long way and I'm really looking forward to this one. Or, why don't you send your game ideas to id Software, since you have so many better ideas(?) as to what they should be working on. » Login to reply to this  FSgeeK (574)   May 30, 2009 - 04:08 pm What do you care wolfenstein and all of it's iterations pretty much blew/blow anyways, save your breath for something worth arguing over » Login to reply to this  FSgeeK (574)    Jun 02, 2009 - 09:37 am For the PC at the time i didnt have a PC so i bought it for the xbox fruitcake » Login to reply to this  Anonymous (-) Jun 01, 2009 - 10:01 pm xbox? XBOX?!?!? WTF? GTFO! RTCW was awesome AND it was free. » Login to reply to this  FSgeeK (574)    Jun 01, 2009 - 06:56 am I had return to castle wolfenstein on the xbox there was nothing great about it. » Login to reply to this  mr.wielder (1416)    May 30, 2009 - 05:11 pm Look up Return to Castle Wolfenstein on Metacritic. Read the reviews. I never go solely by critic reviews but it's pretty obvious they did a good job on that game. I mean I could tell you that I enjoyed it personally, but you wouldn't care. Anyway, it certainly didn't/doesn't "blew/blow". Not to mention it was the birth of Enemy Territory! » Login to reply to this  inspectrex (331)   May 29, 2009 - 02:35 pm | Edited on May 29, 2009 - 02:40 pm 1. Never said I had better ideas (not my job). My 'job' is to pay my hard earned money for something new and exciting. It's their job to come up with the new product. 2. When I get a truly new take (hint, Bioshock, Portal) I (and others) buy and laud. Otherwise I abstain and complain. Simple. Also to really get your flames going by your logic the only criteria for a redo is its been X number of years since Y game came out. Doesn't compute in gaming, or any other media. Sometimes a masterpiece is a masterpiece and should be left alone. I am aware some would claim there haven't been any real new ideas since the 1600's, but I digress... » Login to reply to this  mr.wielder (1416)    May 29, 2009 - 04:11 pm Haha, oh, yea. Flames are really going now! I didn't say time between sequels was a criteria (let alone the only criteria) for a "redo", merely pointing out how long it's been since the last iteration in the series. You were supposed to extrapolate from this that technical capabilities and gaming standards have evolved since 2001, which arguably they have. If a Wolfenstein game came out last year, or even two years ago, there probably wouldn't be as good a reason for a sequel. Bioshock is ironically a great example of what you're bitching about. It's System Shock with a different name and a different skin (with Pipe Dream somehow inserted in there). Plus, Bioshock was pretty fucking horrible, but I digress. Games can be masterpieces, true. Hell, I still play Quake 3 (Live now) on a nightly basis and I'm in no hurry for a replacement. But yea, I could deal with a Wolfenstein update. If you're such a FF buff, why in god's name are you trolling a Wolfenstein news post complaining about sequels? You know they made like fucking 15 Final Fantasies and they are all pretty formulaic. » Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

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