Beamer wrote on May 20, 2011, 14:14:

You apparently think that high poly most mean production values "A biillion times higher"

You obviously don't know what production values are.

eunichron wrote on May 20, 2011, 14:39:

Jerykk wrote on May 20, 2011, 04:27:
It seems to me that the primary distinction between the games is that ArmA is much more realistic than CoD/BF. When you say ArmA is not realistic, do you mean it is not realistic at all or it just isn't a perfect representation of reality?

The primary distinction is intent. CoD/BF try to be realistic in aesthetics only, ArmA tries to be a good representation of reality (I'm not going to say perfect because short of virtual reality that would just be impossible anyway). ArmA's problem is that in its attempt to be as close of a representation as possible, it misses the mark entirely and becomes unrealistic. It's exacerbated by the civilian players who think it is a perfect representation of reality, because they saw on the Military channel once that the Army uses the same technology to train (because obviously, when you're dealing with life and death situations you want to use video games to prepare [that's sarcasm btw]).

I'm not going to say it's impossible for a game to be a good representation of reality, but ArmA is not it.

Beamer wrote on May 20, 2011, 07:54:

$15-19 Serious Sam Pricing or so.

The production level is about a billion times higher than Serious Sam.

I'd say $30 is the perfect sweet spot for what was the last very entertaining FPS I've played.

I'm trying out Medal of Honor right now, as I got it within your "$15-$19 Serious Sam Pricing" and will probably get 3 or 4 hours out of it before I'm bored enough to go back to an older game.

Jerykk wrote on May 20, 2011, 02:46:
On a side note, the official EA Store is selling Bulletstorm for $30. I think that's a fair price for the game. I also got free shipping, even though the banner says free shipping only counts on orders $39.99 or higher.

EA Store

Darks wrote on May 19, 2011, 21:19:

eunichron wrote on May 19, 2011, 18:50:
Having been an infantryman, my biggest gripe with ARMA isn't the AI or the weapons, but the scale of the battles. In the ARMA II demo it was just a squad, taking on an entire village, no one else. This is totally bullshit. Instead of just making the engine look pretty, they should make it able to handle 1-2 battalion sized elements on the map at any given time, plus support elements (close air support, mortars, artillery, etc.).

And get rid of the fucking robotic commo responses.

Hey Dog, Former Marine here too. lol I feel your pain. I really do. the voice overs are horrid.

Enemy......... far...........left............target.......

Talisorn wrote on May 17, 2011, 17:13:
Fable III? That's a console conversion I couldn't give a ray's arse about. Now RDR ... when are we getting that?

DangerDog wrote on May 16, 2011, 18:12:

OldScho0l wrote on May 16, 2011, 17:36:
Is the game any good? I haven't looked at it at all.

It's a one month wonder, wait for a discount (>$25) and then make sure there are still enough people playing to make it worth while.

Wildone wrote on May 6, 2011, 20:08:
PC gamer preview didn't inspire much hope. Blurry textures and the feel of the mouse is just like a joypad controller wtf..Im sure it runs a lot deeper too, this is a console kiddies title thru & thru..

Verno wrote on May 5, 2011, 13:25:

Jdrez wrote on May 5, 2011, 13:20:
Another cash-in expansion pack sequel. Meh.

Spoken like someone who has never played them. AC2 and Brotherhood have ridiculous amounts of content and are by no means cash-in.

Chazix wrote on May 3, 2011, 18:54:

ventry wrote on May 3, 2011, 18:06:
Gameplay OVER GFX EVERY single time.
I couldn't care less if the gfx were DX8 as long as the game was fun to play.
Grow up you spoiled brats.

Yawn

tuddies wrote on May 2, 2011, 22:47:
Arma3 with Euphoria and havok please! Just keep improving this peerless Milsim -

craby wrote on Apr 27, 2011, 02:17:
This was already done back in the Win95 days with Trespasser.

It also could have been good, but the systems at the time just didn't have the horsepower to play it. It wasn't until a few years later that it was anything other than a slideshow, and unfortunately, it was basically just an arm and hand simulator i.e. all you did was manipulate objects with a rubbery arm.

http://www.justgamesretro.com/PC/trespasser.html

Some screens here:-

http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/trespasser-jurassic-park/screenshots

The real world physics were cool for the time, as was the size of the game area.

regards,

craby