Try 7405, at time of writing: http://archive.gamespy.com/stats/

That's an impressive figure!

Plus, with UT2004 you have to take into account that most people who own it and play it regularly play offline with the fantastic Bots. No need to find servers and deal with lag when the bots behave just like humans - humans that actually know what they're doing...and who don't bitch you out for lagging their server with you're 56k modem :). I play Instagib matches against Godlike Bots daily, and it doesn't get old.

Yeah the interception was nice, but, I mean, hasn't Payton thrown more interceptions to our defense than touchdowns to his receivers in his seven previous games against us?

And don't worry about the .500 thing, we'll be 12-4 by the playoffs.

Oh well, as Jim said, our fundamentals were good with this game. We just got beat by a better team. We'll still probably win the Super Bowl, regardless.

Ugh. Tom Brady must be pretty pissed off at his defense by now. Him and his offence are doing fine, but the Colts are just running all over the defense. Hopefully the Pats will get one last TD with this final drive, and leave the game with a little less lingering bitterness....

Just for the record Blue, this is the ninth time you've started a news post using some variation of "X to be Unreal" as the title. I'd say that qualifies as excessive punnage. You may want to think of using some alternate phrasing before you hit the double-digits.

Teddy, I think it's because they didn't include pixel shader 1.3 support.

And about singleplayer, clearly that's thier stance, I'm just saying their stance is wrong.

Hey, and are you the Teddy that did all the original maps for UT2004?

space captain, It definitely is sour grapes, I know - mixed in with some legitimate gripes.

I probably wouldn't have posted this if it wasn't for the fact that they have bots that are capable of playing on the larger maps, they've said so in an interview, just not as coherently as on the small maps. That's what irks me, it seems like they've poorly thought some things through, by not wanting anyone to play their game at anything less then optimal conditions, they've naïvely cut off a lot of their potential customers. That’s what’s getting to me.

And Creston, somebody in my head told me I wasn’t being jaded gamer bitch, as you can see with my brief discussion with myself, so I’m just going to go with that. My second personality knows what he’s talking about most of the time.

I think DICE might be surprised at how poorly this sells, or at least the amount of returns retail stores report. This is the sequel to one of the most widely popular games among casual gamers, and they have effectively cut off most of these gamers. Firstly, by making the game completely unplayable online with a modem, even though the original played fine with one. Secondly, by limiting the singleplayer into little more then a control and graphics tune-up for the multiplayer. I think they hugely underestimated how many people loved loading up a score of the stupid bots on the huge maps and just ass-raping them with planes and tanks and jeeps. Finally, they've made it way more exclusive then it needs to be by not taking the time to include Geforce 4 support, one of the most used cards by casual gamers, and a card that can play the likes of Half-Life 2 of Doom decently.

The biggest thing for me, though, is the limited singleplayer. I fuckin' love in El Alamein (SP) in DC, flying my chopper and dominating everything. So much damn fun. And I was thinking the 64 player maps in BF2 might even be able to top this unadulterated feeling of power. Hearing that only the 16 player map versions will be available in the singleplayer game has instantly turned this from my most anticipated buys, into only a possible buy. If a patch or a mod enables the larger maps with bots at least as incompetent as in 1942 I might pick this up. I hope.

Shit, I haven't turned into one of those jaded gamer bitches have I? No? Good.

Yeah, that Boiling Point review on EuroGamer was very likely the best review of anything I've yet to read.

Taking it a step further, what truly defines a PC game or a console game?

- Prez

You know you're a geek if you start sounding philosophical about the nature of different types of video games.

But really, you made some good points. Consoles really just are computers.

I think the main problem with consoles is their controllers. They constrict the types of games that can be played on the system, and force developers to greatly simply their controls schemes. And this leads sometimes to awkward feeling games, if the developers don't put enough time into cross-platform development - like, for instance, in BiA where there is one button that does like five different things. But worst of all it slightly narrows the kinds of games many developers are able to make, so you get less originality.

"'Duke Nukem.. Whatever. This pretty much fills that void.'

Duke Nukem IS a void." - Dagok

Yes, that's what he said. A void that Serious Sam fills.

This comment was edited on Apr 20, 18:37.

"Oh yeah, any chance these comments can institute an 'ignore' feature someday." - Ratty

Yeah, then Cheese might get his wish of no one ever responding to him....

(What the fuck Cheese, "dont talk to me unless i address you first"? You're on a discussion board, no one needs anyone's permission to reply to anyone here.)

Fix your punctuation, Blue. You're killing me.

J-Bird, try turning off Refresh Rate Override in the Geforce properities - that is, if you have it on. Some of the recent nVidia drivers have been having problems with extremely low frame rates with it on in some programs (I think the ones that try to set the refresh rate themselves, but I'm not sure). Worth a shot, atleast.
This comment was edited on Dec 3, 00:39.

ReDeeMeR, it's just his opinion, he likes the game more on the Xbox - you don't need to go attacking him as though Microsoft paid him to say that or anything. But yeah, PC all the way!

Warmth, so, how about a demo? I'd seriously consider buying it from overseas (US here, too) if it's as good as it looks.

If that's the way you look at it, then I'll give up now...I guess you'll just never understand the stroke of genius which is Deer Hunter 2005.

Most of the time I would agree with you Professional, but every once in a while I want a slow paced and highly relaxed game like this. Though, on the other hand if you've been tracking a deer through the woods for twenty minutes with a bolt action rifle, and you finally come out to a clearing and have your one clear shot, and you need to make it count, it can be pretty intense. Or you can just hop on a quad and sling a shotgun around your back and go hunting squirrels, skunks, raccoons, and just have a good 'ol redneck time.

So, how many of you have actually played the demo? I thought it was real fun, I love the slow paced realism of it all, the assortment of weapons and gadgets are sweet and feel authentic and polished (after all the versions of this game they've gone through, I'm sure they are), the complete freedom in the realistically plotted maps is awesome, and last but not least the graphics are pretty damn good. I can understand if you played it and it wasn't your taste, but I really get the feeling that none of you know what you're talking about. I'm very likely going to pick this up this weekend.

I've been waiting for a game set in this era for a long time, I just hope it doesn't suck too badly.... But if it does, I hope you guys keep at it until it doesn't :).

I agree with allot of what you said TimothyB, but as far as I can tell, your post is the closest this thread has gotten to a Half-Life versus Doom 'war' so far. Only one guy casually mentioned that he was looking forward to Doom 3 more then Half-Life 2, but he even said he was getting both anyways....